The Field of Social Psychology

Friday, April 30, 2010

The Autism Ribbon and What It Means:

The Autism ribbon is made up of a puzzle of different colors and of many pieces.

According to the autism society many pieces stands for the large number of children living with the disorder. The wide variety of colors stands for hope. The hope is that there will one day be a cure and if there is not a cure then there will be new ways delveloped so that it can be easier for autistic people to live as close to a normal life as possible. And lastly the puzzle stands for how complex autism is as well as its mystery as to why and how it starts.

Sites from the information given:

Citation page:

http://www.webmd.com/

Autism in relation to social development

Autism is a disorder that effects so many children around the world. In fact 3 to 6 out of every 1000 children that come into this world are born with autism. That's quite a few in numbers. Doctors have not yet been able to pinpoint an exact cause of autism although there have been theories as to why autism exists. One theory is based on consumption of Aspartame during the prenatal period. According to Dr.Lewis Mahl-Madrona, parents believe that this is why their children develop autism. He says that it does this by, "triggering the auto immune response"(pg.1). Usually symptoms of autism show up within the early stages of life (birth to about 3 years of age). As far as the social problems go , children are more or less withdrawn depending on the severity of their diagnosis. It has been reported that a significant amount of these autisic children don't even get to developthe kind of language tools that they need in order to communicate. So instead of speaking they may use hand gestures, or partial speech to communicate exactly what they need. Or at least make an attempt. It may be difficult for the caregiver to provide the child with his or her needs due their lack of communication.

People often have misconceptions about what Schizophrenia is and how it works. Although it seems as though the person has split personalities it is a bit more complex than that. I listed the symptoms previously of the disorder. But we wanted to show a clip from a film called "Me Myself and Irene " starring Jim Carey. It takes some of the symptoms of the disorder and exaggerates them in a comedic way. I set a link to the trailer for the movie. It's an old flick but if you haven't seen it then you may be interested and if you have then it's just a comedic reminder! Enjoy!

Here's the link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G7PgdMdirio

Want more information on social psychology?

Find the rest of the most popular social psychology studies HERE!

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Robbers Cave Experiment

This study provides interesting information about group dynamics and also human nature. The overwhelming result of the study was that people have a powerful desire to be a part of a group, and also have their group be better than other groups. The study was carried out by Muzafer Sherif and took place three times, each with different results. The study consists of two groups of 11-year-old boys taken to a summer camp. The two groups were kept separate from each other and given their own group names and time to bond with their teammates. When they were brought together, experimenters tried to instigate conflict by offering a series of competitions. As the experimenters expected, the groups turned on one another and went as far as not even eating in the same room as the other team. Then, the experimenters introduced a few issues, including saying that the drinking water had been contaminated by vandals. These issues were for the purpose of examining whether or not they would make up with each other and fix the problems. This is the point in the study where the results began to differ...

In experiment one, the two groups joined together against a common enemy.

In experiment two, they joined up against the experimenters themselves.

In experiment three, they made peace with each other.

Although the three tries of the experiment had vastly different findings, all showed how people have a need to be a part of a group, and also that they want their group to be the best. Psychologists say that we identify ourselves by the groups that we put ourselves into, so it is natural that people would want their group to be the best. A group does not like to be weaker than another, which is what this study proved. There are many ways to go about gaining the same power as another group, hence the three different results.

This study reminded me of the experiment where five monkeys were put into a room with a ladder ascending to a ripe banana with a spray bottle pointed at it. When a monkey went for the banana, it got sprayed. When a new monkey was introduced and one removed, the remaining monkeys beat the new monkey for trying to get the banana. Eventually all the monkeys were replaced and the beatings continued. All of these new monkeys did not know why they were beating up the other monkeys, but it continued because none of the monkeys wanted to go against the group behavior because then they would be weak and vulnerable.

When people are a part of a group, it is a dangerous thing. One group will always emerge as more powerful, and the other will then somehow combat this, fairly or not.

http://voreblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/lordofthefliesbwcrop.jpg

For more information, visit this website!

Thursday, April 15, 2010

Milgram's Experiment on Obedience to Authoirty

In this experiment, Milgram wanted to know how far a human being would go if he/she was ordered to harm another human being. He was interested in how the Germans in World War II were capable of killing millions of people, most claiming that they just followed orders. To test how obedience affected people's behaviors, he set up an experiment. The participant was given the role of being the "teacher" while the other person, who is actually a confederate (an actor), was given the role of being the student. While the "student" was strapped to a chair in a separate room, the experimenter told the participant that he/she was to ask the "student" a set of questions. For every wrong answer, the participant would press a lever to deliver shocks of progressively higher voltages to the student. The voltage ranged from 15 volts to 450 volts, which is high enough to kill a person. When reaching high voltages, the actor was told to scream in agony and plead the participant to stop. When the participant reached the deadly 450 volts, the actor was told to be ominously silent, as if he/she was dead. In reality, no shocks were actually delivered, but participants were not informed of this until the end of the experiment. Many participants considered stopping, but when urged by the experimenter in the room to continue, many continued. Theoretically, the experimenters predicted that most participants would stop the experiment before reaching the dangerous amount of voltage. Surprisingly, 63% of the participants were obedient enough to continue til the end.

To see this experiment in more detail, click here

part two
Part three
In the recent remake of this experiment, which took place in 2009, twelve participants are only told that they are involved in a simple memory test, not being aware of the real goal of the experiment. Both the student and the professor who's in charge of the experiment are actors. The experiment took place in UK, as a part of a BBC program called "How violent are you?"(video above) When the results came out, psychologists were shocked to see that in 2009, nearly 48 years after the original experiment, large number of participants were still willing to obey the experimenter and continue til the end (out of 12 participants, only 3 refused to go on). There was another partial remake in 2006 by Jerry M. Burger, who met all ethical needs of the experiment and received the approval from the IRB (Institutional Review Board). He found that even after meeting the ethical needs, the results were virtually identical to the original experiment that took place in 1961 (Wikipedia).

Sources: http://www.spring.org.uk, http://www.bbc.co.uk, www.wikipedia.com

The Stanford Prison Experiment

(1971) In this experiment, Zimbardo wanted to know how roles given to people can change their behaviors. The purpose was to find out how the prison environment affects the behavior of the guards and the prisoners. First, a group of 24 college students were separated into two and given a role of either a guard or a prisoner. When choosing these participants, they were carefully chosen to make sure they were both mentally and physically healthy. The "prisoners" were realistically arrested and booked by local police officers. They were also blindfolded, so they had no idea where they were being taken to. Then, heavy chains were placed on their right ankles and they were given prison uniforms. The chains were given to remind the prisoners the oppressiveness of their environment. "Guards" were given khaki uniforms, whistles, and nightsticks and given orders to protect the security of the prison. The experiment took place in the bottom floor of the psychology department of the university, where offices and a closet were turned into prison cells and a solitary confinement. There were no windows or clocks, which caused a time distorting experience in the cells. The hall was videotaped and it was made sure to record everything that went on in that hall. Many "prisoners" suffered from humiliation when they were striped naked and searched. The "guards" often practiced their authorities by waking the "prisoners" up early in the morning and exercise control over prisoners by commanding them what to do. On the second day of the experiment, there were small rebellions caused by the "prisoners", but the "guards" acted swiftly and brutally. "Prisoners" were harassed by the "guards", stuck in solitary confinement, and were not granted permission to even use the bathroom. By the sixth day of the experiment,many of the "prisoners" became too mentally unstable, therefore the experiment had to be terminated before the actual deadline of two weeks. Through this experiment, the psychologists learned that mentally stable, law abiding citizens can lose their sense of self, depending on certain situations. When people are given a specific role, people will conform and change their behavior to fit that role. Til this day, it is unclear on who had the influence in stopping the experiment: the "prisoners" who was involved in the experiment, or the psychologists who were in charge of the experiment.

To learn about this experiment in more detail, click here

Sources: http://www.prisonexp.org/, http://www.spring.org.uk

Asch Conformity Experiment

For the most part there are two different types of people, those who conform and those who do not. In the Asch Conformity Experiment, psychologist Solomon Asch conducted a series of tests measuring the powers of group conformity.

There are many different factors contributing to whether or not an individual will conform with the rest of a group. In the Asch Conformity Experiment, Asch had a group of people that were all actors with the exception of one test subject. The group was shown an image (shown below). The group had to match one line with another. The actors were told to give the wrong answer each time. This was to see if the actual test subject would give the correct answer, or go along with the group. Most subjects who had a different answer then the others, but had to say it out loud, would agree with the other subjects. The individual figured that if they were the only one stating a different answer, the individual must be incorrect.
However, when an individual was able to write down their answer, they were more likely to write down a different answer from all the other subjects.

http://www.experiment-resources.com/asch-experiment.html

This experiement was very interesting. I can think of many times in school, work, and even at home when I happen to be the only one thinking one way, and rather than arguing my point, I just go along with the rest of the group. My reasoning for this is simply to avoid conflict. I'm the type of person that does not enjoy confrontation, so rather than creating an argument, it's easier just to go along with the rest of the group. What type of person are you?

Psychologist Solomon Asch: