Study Guides (248,655)
Canada (121,665)
Psychology (531)
PSYC 363 (4)

final study guide

13 Pages

Course Code
PSYC 363
Michael Schmitt

This preview shows pages 1,2,3. Sign up to view the full 13 pages of the document.
Study Guides for Readings Prior to Midterm Reicher S. & Haslam S.A. (2006). Rethinking the psychology of tyranny: The BBC prison study. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 1-40. According to the authors, how have recent psychological approaches tended to explain tyranny? - Nature of group processes which can induce most inoffensive of individuals to commit most offensive act - Group level psychology of tyranny unequal social system involving the arbitrary or oppressive use of power by one group or its agents over another - De-individuation submergence in the crowd individuals lose their individual identity and sense of responsibility therefore become capable of barbaric acts; anonymity within a group What is the typical lesson (interpretation) drawn from the Stanford Prison Experiment, especially by the researchers who conducted it? How do Reicher and Haslam argue against this idea? - SPE people quickly assume roles According to Reicher and Haslam, in what ways is the Stanford Prison Experiment itself inconsistent with the typical interpretation of the Stanford Prison Experiment? In what ways do Reicher and Haslams data challenge the usual interpretation of the Stanford Prison Experiment? - Different system of intergroup inequality - SPE = role acceptance In social identity theory, what is meant by permeability of group boundaries and cognitive alternatives? Across the course of the BBC prison study, with particular regard for how they influence the behavior of subordinate groups (prisoners)? How did these aspects of intergroup relations affect social identification, compliance with prison rules, and depression? - Permeability of group boundaries beliefs about ones ability to advance through social system despite ones group membership - - cognitive alternatives Why were the guards so bad at maintaining their position of dominance? - Not a collective group Some people might critique the BBC study, saying that its not anything close to the conditions in a real prison. How would Reicher and Haslam respond to this? www.notesolution.comWhat type of social system emerged after the guards regime fell? How did this new system perform early on, and how did it affect participants behavior? What lead to the failure of this new regime? - Authoritarianism of guards in the vaunted new regime declined overtime whereas the other participants as increasing - Results: first phase guards failed to identify with each other as a group but the prisoners did and they worked collectively to change the guards prisoner-guard system According to Reicher and Haslam, what kind of social contexts lead to tyranny? - Breakdown of groups and powerlessness that creates conditions under which tyranny can triumph - Failing group s= host of problems for own and other members people cant create a social system for themselves they will more readily accept extreme solutions proposed by others Reicher and Haslam address four critiques of their work. What are these critiques and how do they address them? 1. Behavior of participants was determine by fact they knew they were being observed by television forgot theres camera 2. Effects observed were a product of their personalities so study dont say bout group processes matched individual differences to tyranny 3. Failed to create real power differences or meaningful inequalities between groups so study dont say much about power or inequality 4. Variables which predictions focused were not responsible for effects obtained so group and power processes were at play cannot be sure what they are Make sure you understand the different interventions by the experimenters (Permeasbility-Impermeability, Cognitive alernatives), their consequences, and their theoretical significance. - Shift from permeability to impermeability of group boundaries had strong impact on prisoner identification promotion Johnson Chapters 1-2 In chapters 1 and 2 Johnson addresses a common explanation for intergroup conflict the assumption that human nature leads us to be afraid of the unfamiliar and different. How does Johnson counter that argument? - Were afraid of what we think we know - Problem is our ideas about what we dont know - Difference and diversity as reasons for fear and occasions for trouble, weve learned to think about them in ways that make for fear and trouble
More Less
Unlock Document

Only pages 1,2,3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.