AICE Psychology Midterm

AICE AS Level Psychology Review

Obedience

Compliance with the request of an authority.

Situational factors

External influences that may affect an individual's behavior.

Dispositional factors

Internal characteristics or traits that influence behavior.

Milgram's experiment

A study investigating obedience to authority, involved participants administering shocks to others.

Deception in research

Misleading or not fully informing participants about the study's true aim.

Informed consent

The process of obtaining agreement from participants with full knowledge of the study.

Cognitive dissonance

The mental discomfort experienced when holding contradictory beliefs or values.

Ethical issues

Concerns about the moral implications of conducting research.

Internal validity

The degree to which an experiment accurately establishes a causal relationship.

Generalization of findings

The extent to which research results apply to broader populations beyond the sample studied.

Right to withdraw

The participant's ability to leave the study at any point.

Quantitative data

Numerical information that can be measured and analyzed statistically.

Qualitative data

Descriptive information that provides deeper understanding but is not easily measured.

Demand characteristics

Cues that can lead participants to guess the purpose of a study, potentially influencing their behavior.

Confederate

A person who is aware of the experiment's true aim and acts in a particular role.

Obedience to authority

A key theme in social psychology examining how individuals comply with instructions given by perceived authority figures.

The role of authority in Milgram's experiment

In Milgram's study, the authoritative figure (the experimenter) commanded participants to administer shocks, highlighting the power dynamics in obedience.

Participant deception in Milgram's experiment

Participants were misled about the true nature of the experiment, believing they were helping to study learning and memory.

Emotional impact on participants (Psychological Harm)

Many participants experienced significant stress and moral conflict while administering shocks, showcasing the psychological toll of obedience.

Ethical considerations in psychological experiments

Studies like Milgram's raise questions about participant welfare, informed consent, and the extent of deception used.

Replication of Milgram's study

Various replications of Milgram's experiment have been conducted, providing insights into the consistency of obedience across different contexts.

What was the aim of Milgram's experiment?

To study the willingness of individuals to obey an authority figure even when asked to do something that conflicts with their personal conscience.

Sample in Milgram's original study

There were 40 male participants in the original study.

Maximum shock level in Milgram's experiment

The maximum shock level was 450 volts.

How did participants react to administering shocks?

Many participants showed signs of extreme stress and discomfort while administering shocks to the learners.

What influences obedience in Milgram's experiment?

Factors such as proximity to the authority figure, distance from the victim, and the legitimacy of the authority influence obedience.

What ethical guidelines were violated in Milgram's study?

Participants were not adequately informed about the nature of the study, leading to issues with informed consent and participant welfare.

What is the importance of Milgram's experiment in psychology?

It highlighted the power of authority and situational factors in influencing behavior, sparking discussions about ethics in psychological research.

What was the result of the debriefing in Milgram's study?

Debriefing helped to alleviate some of the participants' distress by explaining the true purpose of the experiment and ensuring their well-being.

What procedure was used in Milgram's experiment?

Participants were asked to administer increasingly severe shocks to a learner for wrong answers, under the instruction of an authority figure.

How did Milgram ensure participants believed they were actually administering shocks?

He used realistic equipment and a confederate acting as the learner who pretended to be shocked.

What concept did Milgram's experiment primarily illuminate?

The concept of obedience to authority, demonstrating how ordinary individuals can follow orders even to the extent of causing harm.

How does Milgram's experiment relate to real-world events?

It provides insights into behaviors observed in historical events, such as war crimes, where individuals follow orders that conflict with their morals.

What was a key finding of Milgram's experiment?

A significant proportion of participants were willing to administer the highest shock level despite expressing discomfort.

What role did the physical environment play in Milgram’s study?

The study was conducted in a controlled setting, which contributed to the perceived legitimacy of the authority figure.

What effect did variations in the study's context have on obedience rates?

Changes such as the presence or absence of authority figures and the setting impacted how much participants obeyed commands.

What ethical safeguards were lacking in Milgram's experiment?

There was insufficient emphasis on participant well-being and psychological safety throughout the research.

What is meant by the term 'agentic state' in the context of Milgram's findings?

It refers to a condition where individuals see themselves as agents of an authority, absolving them of personal responsibility for their actions.

What legacy did Milgram's experiment leave for future psychological research?

It paved the way for discussions about ethics in experiments and the importance of protecting participant welfare.

What is an example of a situational factor influencing obedience?

The presence of a legitimate authority figure can increase the likelihood of obedience.

What ethical principle involves informing participants about risks?

Debriefing, which allows participants to understand what they went through and any potential risks involved.

What was a major criticism of the participant pool in Milgram's study?

The study primarily involved male participants, raising questions about the generalizability of the findings to other demographics.

What is the significance of the 'learner' role in Milgram's experiment?

The learner, who was actually a confederate, was crucial in creating the tension between the participants' morals and their obedience to authority.

What was the primary ethical concern regarding participant stress in Milgram's study?

Participants experienced significant psychological stress, leading to debates about the acceptable limits of distress for research purposes.

How did Milgram's experiment influence modern ethics in psychology?

It led to stricter ethical standards and guidelines to ensure participant safety and informed consent.

Interpersonal distance

The area around the body that individuals maintain between and during social interaction

- differs from culture to culture

- if space violated, people feel threatened

Social anxiety

Can have an effect and make people prefer further IDPs

empathy

Ability to understand and share the feelings of others

Comprehend one's emotions, thoughts, perspective and social cures

Social hormones

Oxytocin is a hormone that functions as a neurotransmitter by regulating emotional responses and encouraging pro social behaviour

-trust, empathy, bonding cures

- released during social gaze, contact and extreme temps

Acts as a volume dial amplifying brain activity and relocating to whatever some is experiencing

IRI

Psychometric tool - interpersonal reactivity index

David 1980

28 item self report

4 sub categories with 7 items

- perspective taking

-empathetic concern

- fantasy

-empathetic distress

Hall et al (1966)

Four zones of interpersonal distance

-intimate (all sense involved, no space)

- personal (everyday, social interactions, touch-see-smell)

-social distance (eye gaze, loud voice, formal)

- public distance (loud voice, body movements)

Amygdala

Part of the brain that plays a role in preference IPD

More discomfort with IPD that's too close = higher amygdala activity

Lesions to amygdala dramatically reduce need for IPD

Social salience hypothesis

- oxytocin increases attention to social cues and affects how a person responds to social cues and processes

One person may feel more relaxed in a social setting another feels stressed in

-OT increases preferred IPD (opposite consequences)

The aim of the study

To investigate whether OT has a differential effect on preferred IPD

-the effect of individual empathy (high vs. low)

- uses one previously tested paradigm and one new

Differential effect

Different outcome to same stimuli

Interaction effect

Effect of 2 or more IV when combined is greater or less than once variable on its own

Hypothesis

Highly empathetic individuals would prefer closer distances following OT administration whereas less empathetic individuals would show an opposite effect

The OT may promote closeness with known figures but not with ball or stranger

Sample

54 male Ps

Undergraduate students at uni of Haifa

19-32yrs old with a mean of 25.3

Exchange for course credit or payment

5ps were left handed

Interview

Screen interview

No history of psychiatric disorders

Normal vision

High IRI

equal or greater than 40

Mean age of 24

Low IRI

Equal or lower than 33

Mean age of 26

Research method

Lab experiment

Research design

Mixed design

- individual (high and low)

Repeated (tasks) counterbalanced

Sampling method

Volunteer

Experiment 1 IV

Empathy (high/low)

Treatment (OT/Placebo)

condition (AF,ball,stranger,friend)

Experiment 1 DV

Preferred IPD measure using CID on a scale of 0-100

0=both touching 100=furtherst

Experiment 2 IV

Empathy

Treatment

Condition

- experiment / position of chairs

- control /position of table and plant

Experiment 2 DV

Choosing rooms task

Mean avg. IPD between chairs in cm

Mean avg. preffered angle of chairs in degrees

Experiment 1 controls

Fixation point

8 radii, 3 times

Timing of screen

Experiment 2 controls

Fixation point

Timing

Distances or angles

Before study

- participants invited to come twice, 1 week apart on same day and time

- signed informed consent

OT administration

Randomly given;

- solution of 24 internal units 250ml internasal OT

- sterile saline solution (placebo)

Given each time they came

Self administered in presence of experimenter

3 drops to each nostril

Double blind technique (neither P or E know if it was placebo)

No sig local or physical side effects observed in either group

Empathy assessment

Done post administration in 1st appointment

Participants asked to compete IRI

Asked to wait 45mins to ensure levels of OT in NS plateaued

During waiting time they sat in a quiet room and were given 3 issues of popular Israeli nature mag

Trying to keep social interaction to a minimum

Experiment 1 CID origin

-validated (CID) that was done by Duke and Nowicki 1972+1974

-OG version = circle on paper and mark point with pencil

- highly correlated with physical distance in actual real life interactions

Changes in CID

Computerised and animated

Extended conditions of ball, AF, stranger, friend

CID procedure

Showed name of object for 1 second

Fixation point shown for 0.5 second

Still pic and figure at 1 of 8 entrances for 1 second

Figure approaching center for 3 seconds

'Imagine you are at the Center'

Press the space bar when you feel uncomfortable

- four figures appeared 3 times each from each of the 8 angles

- 24 trials per fig and 96 in total

Data collection in CID

Result=percentage of remaining distance

0=approaching fig reaches inner circle

100=hasn't moved at all

Deception in experiment 2

Told that the next week they will be asked to sit in a room with another P and discuss personal topics

Showed rooms to help computer generate a room they would be confortable in

Stimuli in experiment 2

Coloured pics depicting similar rooms

- chairs, plant, table, closet, lamp, clock

- google sketch up with real distances

Differences in rooms

- distances between chairs (20-140cm with 20cm intervals)

- distances between table and plant (200-320cm int. 20cm)

- angle of chair, (0.45.90 degrees)

-angle of table and plant (0,45,90 degrees)

Only one variable differs at a time

Option and pairs in experiment 2

21 diff pairs of chair distances

21 diff pairs of table differences

3 opts for angles, repeated 7 times

84 pairs total, repeated twice, 168

Procedure in experiment 2

Fixation point 0.5s

Pair stimulus 2s

Screen prompting L, R choice

Computer 60cm from P

Visual angle 8x20

E prime used to present stimulus

Table - plant was control

E1 did oxytocin decrease the mean distance in high empathy group

Yes it did

Placebo 26.11 vs. OT 23.29

E1 did oxytocin decrease distance in low empathy group

No it increased it

Placebo 26.98 vs. oxytocin 30.20

In the high empathy group (placebo) what were the sig difference

IPD for friend, stranger, AF but not ball

When OT administered what were the p's more likely to be closer to

Ball than stranger or authority

E2 did high empathy chose closer chair distances in OT or placebo

Closer in OT

80.58cm vs. 78.07cm

E2 did low empathy chose closer or further chair distances in OT or placebo

OT - further distances

78.33cm with OT vs. 80..14cm

(Conclusion) oxytocin affects preferred IPD....

Dependent on empathy level, those with high empathy preferred closer IPD after OT compared to placebo but in contrast OT increased the IPD for those with low empathy compared to placebo

(Conclusion) oxytocin may only invoke....

Closeness in highly empathetic people for interactions with a less threatening nature as the effects more pronounced for a ball than stranger or AF

High reliability...

-high levels of standardisation

Ie. using a computer controlled timings, speed and visuals

Ie. each room was presented for 2 seconds

= easily replicable

High validity...

- valid paradigm used to investigate IPD

CID tested on variety of sex and age groups in pen and paper form

= valid measure

- double blind technique when administrating OT

Avoided influence on findings due to demand characteristics or researcher bias

- quantitative data such as percentage distances

Allowed researcher to objectively compare scores w/o bias

Good ethics...

Informed consent

Debrief about deception

Low generalisability

-only used male participants (androcentric)

- male and females respond differently to OT ie. positive social judgments and altruism vs. opposite on males ]

- lab setting/computer based = lack of eco validity

Animations may have not created the feelings of discomfort seen in real life situations

Low validity

Self report = participants categorised as high vs low empathy biased due to social desirability

Bad ethics

Deceived about meetings which may cause anxiety

Application to everyday life

- important implications that OT may not help individuals with social deficits (autism)

- previous research has suggested this Hollander et al (2007)

Situational factors

- Ot release effects behaviour

- increased in social situations

Eye contact

Gaze

Pets

Extreme temps

Individual factors

- Ot effect on personal behaviour differs high vs. low empathy

Nature

Those with social deficits such as autism may not be helped with OT administration