Social Psych- Essay Questions
Aron and Aron and Kipnis agree that the findings of social psychology can be used to solve practical problems. How do the two sets of authors differ in their identification of these problems?
Aron and Aron argue that social psychologist are clearly dedicated to promoting positive social change. Social psychology should have some practical and positive impact. Kipnis, who agrees that social psychology started off with the views held by aron and aron and the thought that social psych could help eliminate prejudice and other inhuman actions, argues that more recent social psychologist are aimed at promoting social technologies. These technologies are designed to serve those with power and thereby serve the status quo rather than promote social change. Starting in the 1950s one could find ever increasing number of research studies in social psychology that were not directly concerned with the founding fathers goals. These studies were focused on helping people who could help themselves, advertisers, managers, psychotherapists, labor mediators. Kipnis argues that now social psychologist look at situations and try to explain them at the individual psychological lever rather than in terms of changes in society. This new outlook on social psych helped people get what they wanted out of others who were less willing,in essense how to be more persuasive. This has resulted in people changing their behavior with or without their consent. These new behavioral technologies that are meant to help the powerless are eventually used by persons with power
3. Discuss "informed consent" from the perspectives of both Elms and Baumrind. With which author do you concur? Explain.
Elms- For Deception Elms argues that that Deception in informed consent should be allowed. The risk are minimal and the average person faces more stressful decisions in their everyday life. Informed consent was designed for medical experiments which had higher consequences but psychological research doesnt have that same high risk factors. Elms also points to the fact that he helped with the Milgram experiment, which is notorious as being one of the most unethical studies in psych, and interviewed them after the experiment. He claims that the participants had minimal harm inflicted on them given the intensity of the experiment. Finally, Elms highlights the fact that participants should be aware of ongoing consent in which participants have the option to quit at any time they want. Baumrind- Against Deception Baumrind's argument in my opinion is weak. He claims that a subject must never become a object for the experimenters.If deceit is used to obtain consent, by definition it cannot be informed. When deception is done to the subject it comes at a cost, Baumrind states that it: exhausts the pool of naive subjects, jeopardizes community support for the research enterprise, and undermines the commitment to truth of the researchers themselves. Baumrind claims that in a study 80% were glad they participated while the other 20% said they were not. The results showed that the minority had feelings of distrust and suspiciousness for the experimenters. He finally claims that there are viable alternatives to deception, like observation and self reflection. These are all weak arguments.
Discuss the distinction between "error" and "mistake," as viewed by Funder. How does this apply to scientific research in the field of social psychology?
Error according to Funder is a judgment of a laboratory stimulus that deviates from a model of how that judgment should be made. When this model is normative and rational, the error represents an incorrect judgment. A "mistake" by contrast, is an incorrect judgment in the real world, such as a misjudgment of a real person, and so must be determined by different criteria.
In your opinion, which author makes the stronger case, Festinger and Carlsmith or Bem? Explain.
I think Festinger and Carlsmith make the stronger case. The theory of cognitive dissonance carries more weight because the explanation they gave was so sound. Festinger and Carlsmith's theory makes more sense to the lay person because we have all experienced this. Bem's argument is interesting but does not fully explain human behavior. Bem argues that if a person in the 1 dollar group says that he enjoyed the task then they must have really enjoyed the task. I think this is false, Festinger and Carlsmith explain that there are processes that are occurring within an individual's psyche that account for this behavior. I think human behavior is complex and Bem's theory of self perception is too simplistic. It occurs occasionally, but on the whole, cognitive dissonance occurs more often.
In your opinion, have Taylor and Brown put forth adequate evidence to debunk the traditional concept of mental health, which asserts that well-adjusted individuals possess relatively accurate perception of themselves, their capacity to control important events in their lives, and their future?
I think Taylor and Brown presented adequate evidence to debunk the traditional concept of mental health.They brought up relevant research that points to the fact that healthy individuals have unrealistic views of themselves and their future. I think the most compelling evidence asserted by Taylor and Brown is the fact that depressed and individuals with low self esteem have more realistic views of themselves and of the current situation that they are in. I think that people already knew that being optimistic pays off in life but T and B were able to adequately articulate the issue.
Discuss DePaulo's experiment with attractiveness. What bearing does this have on her overall argument that people cannot accurately detect lies?
In DePaulo's experiment, she had attractive and unattractive judges watch tapes of individuals telling lies or truths about controversial issues. The individuals in the video were either expressing their opinion to an attractive individual or an unattractive individual. The attractive judges were more likely to detect lies when the person in the video was addressing someone who was also attractive. Unattractive judges were the same way when the individual in the video was addressing someone who was also unattractive. I think this helps DePaulo's argument because it helps show the inconsistency in the average person's lie detection ability. DePaulo's results show us that there are at least one external factor that helps a person to detect a lie. When someone (like a judge) is trying to detect a lie they cannot control whom they are talking to and how attractive they are or how attractive the individual perceives the judge. This helps show that human lie detection can be unreliable. DePaulo mentions one external factor that is detrimental to detecting lies, there may be many more and they may not be controllable by the lie detector.
Discuss the areas of agreement and disagreement in the selections by DePaulo and Ekman and his colleagues. Which author presents the stronger case, in your opinion? Explain.
In my personal opinion I think Ekman and DePaulo agree on the fact that the average person is not very good at detecting lies. DePaulo's whole argument is based on the fact that most people are not good at detecting lies. At the end of Ekman's article he talks about only certain professionals being able to detect lies and even they are subject to error. I think that DePaulo argues that most people are not good at detecting lies but never explicitly says that some people cannot be good lie detectors. I think, between the two articles that I read, DePaulo presents a stronger argument. She is able to point to many different studies and show the inconsistencies that occur in lie detection. There are many factors that influence lie detection but there are no concrete rules that can be used in every case to detect when any individual is lying. So I think DePaulo wins the "argument" but I dont really think they disagree that much. Both articles talked about the average person being inconsistent in lie detection. But i think Ekman is trying to argue that it does in fact take a NON average individual to detect lies. Therefore, I would lean towards Ekmans side. I think specialized training can in fact improve lie detection but I think it will occur while on the job implicitly, there will not be any set rules as DePaulo stated in her article.
Distinguish between mundane realism and experimental realism, and explain the importance of each. Give one example of a social psychological study that is high in mundane realism, and give one example of a social psychological study that is high in experimental realism.
Mundane Realism- increases external validity, mirrors a real world situation. A good example of Mundane Realism is the Bloomers study by Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968. In this study teachers were told certain students were going to "bloom" this upcoming academic year. As a result of the researchers telling the teacher which students were going to bloom, those students actually did a lot better. This study has excellent external validity because it takes place in the real world with real world situations. Also the participants in this experiment (teachers) were able to act naturally during the experiment. This experiment can easily be generalized to other real world situations. Experimental Realism- The extent to which participants are engaged in the experiment and taken seriously. A great example of this the Stanford Prison Experiment. Participants took this study very seriously and as a result Zimbardo had to end the experiment early in fear of participants health.
Imagine that you encounter a new classmate who brushes off your greeting. What might you conclude about that person? What might Ross and Nesbitt and Funder have to say about your judgment?
Ross and Nesbitt would say that I am suffering from the dispositionalist bias, aka fundamental attribution error. His behavior according to Ross and Nesbitt, would be due to my predisposition or personality not the circumstances that he was in when i met the new classmate It also depends on the situation that we are in, how I look, and his personal situation. Ross and Nesbitt point to numerous experiments that indicate that people's perception of others are often inaccurate. Funder states that people perceptions of others are not usually mistaken. Funder tries to illustrate that although we may fail at laboratory experiments but our response in real life situations will be more accurate.
Offer an example of an experiment mentioned in the selections that involved deception and describe the probable outcome if the deception had been prematurely unveiled at any point in the experiment.
The Milgram Obedience study is a good example. If the participant was told prematurely that the individual was not actually being shocked it could have had massive repercussions. The participant may not have cared how high the shock levels were because they would not have really mattered, because they were not really shocking anyone. This would create a confound and would make Milgrams results from the study skewed, thus irrelevant.
Evaluate how well the problems of war and peace are addressed by Sherif's "summer camp" studies. Do you believe that his results could help solve some of the problems in the Middle East? Why, or why not?
The Robber's Cave Experiment shows that when groups develop in group versus out group mentality it can get violent very quickly. The experiment shows us that human behavior is stubborn and loyal to its in group. Luckily the experiment also shows us that there is a way to cure this in group vs. out group mindset. With superordinate goals, groups have to learn to cooperate with each other to achieve the goal. I think this idea of shared goals can improve the U.S's relations with the middle east. I think that there are already plenty of superordinate goals in place such as trading agreements with the Middle East. I think they definitely help but I do think a lot of the problems in the middle east are ideological and are rooted in tradition.
Explain the different rates of dissonance in Festinger and Carlsmith's $1 versus $20 conditions, as well as why these rates differed.
When the participants were asked to evaluate the experiment, the participants who were paid only $1 rated the tedious task as more fun and enjoyable than the participants who were paid $20 to lie. Being paid only $1 is not sufficient incentive for lying and so those who were paid $1 experienced dissonance. They could only overcome that dissonance by coming to believe that the tasks really were interesting and enjoyable. Being paid $20 provides a reason for turning pegs and there is therefore no dissonance.
Provide one practical example each of cognitive dissonance theory and self-perception theory.
having sex before marriage is against my religion. Start having sex with partner. Cognitive Dissonance occurs. Decide that religion is old and out of date, its not up with the times or stop having sex. When registering to vote for the first time and you need to pick a party to be apart of. Look at past behavior and circumstances to determine attitudes and which way to behave politically.
