Social Psychology

View mindmap
  • Social Psychology
    • Content
      • Theories of obidience
        • Agency Theory: 2 opposing states; agentic and autonomous
          • + Milgram and Burger did lots of research       + can warn those in power how much power their words/ideas have
          • - lacks ecological validity, not everyone obeys             - ignores other factors
        • Social Impact Theory: 3 principles that effect levels of influence; strength, immediacy and no.of sources
          • + helps to predict when people are most likely to obey
          • - no individual differences     - sees the individual as passive
      • Milgram's Studies
        • Experiment 5; baseline study; shock for incorrect word pairs, 65% went up to 450v and everyon eobeyed up to 300v
          • - was an all male group of participants    - stress was intentionally caused
          • + Milgram did variations of his studies    + other studies have found very similar results
        • Experiment 7; telephonic instructions, instuctions and prods given over the phone, 22.5% gave the 450v shock
        • Experiment 10; rundown office building, the same as experiment 5, sparsely furnished room, 48% gave 450v shock
        • Experiment 13; ordinary man gives instructions, the learner comes up with the idea of punishing with a shock, 20% gave 450v shock
      • Factors of obedience and dissent
        • Situational factors; immediacy of experimetor, physical location etc
        • Individual difference and personality; high external locus of control, authoritarian etc
        • Gender; women were more empathetic
        • Culture; ignores the way people were brought up, may explain some stereotypes
        • Theories of obidience
          • Agency Theory: 2 opposing states; agentic and autonomous
            • + Milgram and Burger did lots of research       + can warn those in power how much power their words/ideas have
            • - lacks ecological validity, not everyone obeys             - ignores other factors
          • Social Impact Theory: 3 principles that effect levels of influence; strength, immediacy and no.of sources
            • + helps to predict when people are most likely to obey
            • - no individual differences     - sees the individual as passive
      • Theories of prejudice
        • Social Identity Theory; 1st, categorisation (us and them), 2nd, identification (try to fit the group norms), 3rd, comparison (we put the other group down)
          • Tajfel et al. accurate/inaccurate and Klee and Kandinsky
          • - group focus   - doesn't explain how groups can live side-by-side for some time
          • + explains a wide range of real-life situations
        • Realistic Conflict Theory; when fighting for finite resources, negative prejudices occur, can be reduced by introducing a superordinate goal
          • + explains segregation  + explains how to possibly decrease the conflict
          • - ignores other factors of prejudice
          • Sherif et al. Robbers Cave
        • Factors effecting Prejudice
          • Individual differences and personality; authoritarian personality etc.
          • Culture; brought up in a mono-cultural society etc.
      • Factors effecting Prejudice
        • Individual differences and personality; authoritarian personality etc.
        • Culture; brought up in a mono-cultural society etc.
    • Methods
      • Questionnaires
        • Quantitative data; numerical data, good for exact comparison but results are limited
        • Qualitative data; information about qualities, provides depth and detail but less people can be studied
        • Open questions; no preset answers, allows participants to elaborate but much more difficult to answer
        • Closed questions; there are preset fixed answers, easy to analyse and answer but can only gather limited results
          • Fixed choice; yes or no
          • Likert scale; ranking an aswer with an unsure option
          • Ranked scale; rank a list of options
        • Issues; social desirability, give an answer they think is right and the questionnaire needs to not be too complicated
      • Interviews
        • Structired interview; typically uses closed questions, easy to administer but the data can be superficial and lack depth
        • Semi-structured interview; a set of questions that you aim to ask, allows respondent freedom to express their views much more but the open questions are hard to analyse
        • Unstructured interviews; has a loose research aim, provides detailed and valid results but hard to replicate and analyse
        • Researcher effects; interviewers characteristics may influence a respondent, you need to be careful who interviews who
      • Hypotheses
        • Alternative; a clear, precise statement predicting results
        • Null; a default prediction that the results are due to chance
      • Sampling techniques
        • Random; everyone has an equal chance of being selected, consent has to be given which can become unrepresentative
        • Stratified; dividing the target itno important subcategories, garuntees representative results
        • Oppurtunity sampling; selecting people that are available, limited control
        • Volunteer; people choose to partake in the study, no control over who volunteers
    • Studies
      • Contemporary Study
        • Evaluation
    • Key Question
      • Explanation
      • Discussion
    • Practical Investigation
      • Basics
        • To see if people who have an authoritarian personality are also 'agentic' in obeying an authority
        • "Participants who report themselves as authoritarian tend to see themselves as agentic" "There will be a difference between older participants (40+) and younger participants (16-35) in how much thye see themselves as authoritarian/agentic"
      • Procedure

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Social resources »