Social Psychology.
Publié le 10/05/2013
Extrait du document
«
During the 1960s, American psychologist Stanley Milgram studied a form of social influence stronger than conformity: obedience to authority.
In a famous series ofexperiments that attracted controversy about human research ethics, Milgram put each of 1,000 subjects into a situation in which they were ordered by anexperimenter to administer painful electric shocks to a confederate (who did not actually receive any shocks).
The subjects in these studies were led to believe that theywere acting as 'teachers' in a study of the effects of punishment on learning.
Each time the 'learner' made a mistake on a memory test, the subject was supposed todeliver a shock.
The intensity of the shocks was to increase, beginning at 15 volts and continuing in 15-volt increments to 450 volts.
In most situations, the subjectscould not actually see the learner, but they could hear an audiotaped response that sounded increasingly serious with each successive shock.
The learner's protestswould begin with grunts of pain, progress to shouting and sometimes even complaints of heart trouble, and eventually turn to agonized screams of “Let me out ofhere!” After the teacher passed the 330-volt level, the learner would fall silent and give no further responses.
Yet at each step, an experimenter ordered the subject toraise the level of shock to the learner.
Many of the subjects in the experiment felt extreme anguish over the pain they thought they were inflicting.
They sweated, trembled, bit their lips, or broke into fits ofnervous laughter.
Despite their distress, an astonishing 65 percent of subjects in Milgram's initial study delivered the final punishment of 450 volts.
Other socialpsychologists conducting similar experiments later observed comparable levels of obedience among men and women all over the world.
Apparently, many otherwisedecent people will cause intense suffering to others rather than disobey authority.
Milgram designed this experiment in order to understand the obedience of Nazi soldiers and officials in killing millions of Jews and others during World War II.
Wheninterviewed after the experiment, many of Milgram’s subjects said that they had obeyed largely because they thought the experimenter would bear responsibility forany harm to the learner.
Similarly, Nazi death camp administrator Adolf Eichmann, when tried for murdering thousands of innocent people, attributed his behavior tothe fact that he was merely following the orders of his superiors.
A3 Attitudes and Persuasion
While many social psychologists study social influences on behavior, others focus on the changing of attitudes.
Attitudes are relatively enduring beliefs or opinions that predispose people to respond in a positive, negative, or ambivalent way to a person, object, or idea.
In particular, social scientists study how people are led to changetheir attitudes—the process known as persuasion .
Persuasion is an integral part of human social life.
Many people have a direct interest in knowing how to effectively persuade others: politicians trying to win votes, salespeople and advertisers hawking their products, religious leaders seeking converts, trial lawyers arguing before ajury, and fund-raisers seeking donations.
Persuasion is neither inherently good nor bad.
Whether we see it as beneficial or harmful to individuals depends on whetherwe approve of the message.
Persuasion can occur in two ways.
First, as you might expect, people often change their attitudes in response to strong and logical arguments.
However, research hasshown that people may also be influenced by a speaker's physical attractiveness, by the arousal of fear and other emotions, by the reactions of others in the audience,and by other superficial cues.
Researchers have identified three main factors that contribute to the effect of a persuasive communication: the source, the message, andthe audience.
In other words, what matters in persuasion is who says what to whom.
Sometimes people change their attitudes not in response to a persuasive communication but by convincing themselves, a process of self-persuasion.
In 1957 Americanpsychologist Leon Festinger proposed cognitive dissonance theory , which says that people often change their attitudes to justify their own actions.
According to this theory, people who behave in ways that contradict their own attitudes experience an unpleasant state of internal tension known as cognitive dissonance .
To reduce that tension, they adjust their attitudes to be consistent with their behavior.
In a classic test of this theory in 1959, Festinger and his colleague J.
Merrill Carlsmith asked college students to engage in an extremely boring, repetitive task for onehour.
Afterward, the experimenters offered the students either $1 or $20 to deceive a prospective subject in the experiment (actually a confederate) into thinking thatthe task ahead would be interesting.
Later, the students were asked to rate their enjoyment of the task.
Students who did not mislead a confederate admitted the taskwas boring.
So did those given $20—ample justification for their white lie to the confederate.
However, those paid only $1 rated the task as somewhat enjoyable.Having lied without a sufficient justification, these subjects felt internally pressured to view the task in more positive terms as a way to reconcile their behavior withtheir attitude and reduce their cognitive dissonance.
Also consistent with the theory, hundreds of more recent studies have shown that people change their attitudes tojustify their own investment of effort, money, or time.
Thus, we come to love what we strive for.
B Social Perception
A second core topic in social psychology is social perception, the process by which people come to know and evaluate one another.
Researchers in social perception study how we form impressions of each other, how we explain the causes of our own and other people’s behavior, and how we form stereotypes and prejudices towardsocial groups.
B1 Forming Impressions and Making Attributions
Research has shown that people form impressions of each other in two ways.
Sometimes people make quick and effortless judgments based on others' physicalappearance, facial expressions, or body language.
Studies have shown, for example, that people who are physically attractive are perceived to be happy, warm,friendly, successful, confident, and well-adjusted.
At other times, however, people form impressions based on a careful observation of a person’s behavior.
According tothis latter view, people act like amateur scientists, gathering and analyzing behavioral evidence before evaluating others.
The explanations for behavior that peoplecome up with are called attributions, and the theory that describes the process is called attribution theory .
Over the years, research into attribution has shown that when we explain the behavior of others, we tend to overestimate the role of personal factors andunderestimate the influence of situations.
This bias is so universal that it has been called the fundamental attribution error.
In one demonstration of the fundamental attribution error, experimenters randomly assigned subjects to participate in a quiz show in the role of either questioner or contestant.
Then in front of the contestantand an observer, the experimenters told the questioner to devise a set of difficult questions to ask the contestant.
Not surprisingly, many of the questions—createdfrom the questioner's own store of esoteric knowledge—stumped the contestant.
Yet when asked to rate the general knowledge of both participants, observersconsistently saw the questioners as more knowledgeable than the contestants.
The observers failed to take the situational roles into account and attributed the behaviorthey witnessed to each person’s level of knowledge.
In forming impressions of others, people are subject to other biases as well.
For example, a great deal of research shows that people are often slow to revise their firstimpressions of others even when those views are not supported by the evidence.
Part of the problem is that once we form an impression of someone, we tend tointerpret that person’s later behavior in ways that seem to fit our impression.
Another problem is that our first impression of someone may shape the way we treat thatperson—which, in turn, may influence his or her actual behavior.
This process is known as a self-fulfilling prophecy. In a classic illustration of this phenomenon, in 1968 American psychologists Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson told a group of elementary school teachers that certain students were on the verge of an intellectualgrowth spurt (in fact, these students were randomly chosen from their classes).
By the end of the school year, these designated students—who had received morepositive attention from the teachers—actually had higher average test scores than their peers..
»
↓↓↓ APERÇU DU DOCUMENT ↓↓↓
Liens utiles
- stratégie du marketing social
- Digital media management Social Media Management
- Commentaire de texte Du contrat social de Rousseau: Pourquoi la représentation du peuple est un frein à la souveraineté ?
- l'homme est-il un animal social ?
- Apontamentos sobre a noção de pessoa na antropologia social britânica e francesa