Download
1 / 14
140 likes | 275 Views
Self and Other Obedience Estimates: Biases and Moderators. Glenn Geher State University of New York at New Paltz Kathleen P. Bauman (now Kathy Geher!) University of Maine (now SUNY New Paltz!) Sara Elizabeth Kay Hubbard Southern Oregon University Jared Richard Legare Husson College
E N D
Self and Other Obedience Estimates:Biases and Moderators Glenn GeherState University of New York at New Paltz Kathleen P. Bauman (now Kathy Geher!) University of Maine (now SUNY New Paltz!) Sara Elizabeth Kay Hubbard Southern Oregon University Jared Richard Legare Husson College PowerPoint created by: Katherine Savod (SUNY New Paltz) –Kat was the winner of the Experimental Psychology “Make a slideshow for Glenn’s Research” competition (2005) – congrats Kat!
Introduction • Milgram -one’s behavior is defined by the situation he or she is in -studies on obedience and authority • Pietromonaco and Nisbett -influence of situational variables
The Issue • Social psychology’s effect on participant’s behavior while in a study • Allport (1924) and Social Projection • False Uniqueness • Social Psychological biases and social influence research
Study 1 • Fundamental Attribution Error • The self-other bias and the false uniqueness effect • Social Projection • Effects on of social psychological knowledge on these biases
The Research: Study 1 • 111 Participants (85 women, 17 men, 9 no report) • No exposure to Milgram • Questionnaire • Volts: participant versus other students
Procedure: Study 1 • Informed consent • 2 (gender) x 3 (class) x 2 (target: self vs. others) • ANOVA • Correlation analysis
Results: Study 1 • Self-other bias • False-uniqueness effect • Social projection: anchoring and adjusting heuristic
Study 2 • Blind obedience was necessary • “Serve and protect” orientation
The Research: Study 2 • 51 criminal justice students (29 men, 22 women, 3 no report) • Same self-report questionnaire
Procedure: Study 2 • 2 (gender) x 2 (major) x 2 (knowledge) x 2(target: self vs. other) • Mixed ANOVAS • Notable discrepancy between own and others’ voltage estimates? • Correlational analysis for social projection
Voltage Estimate Self Other Class M SD M SD n Criminal Justice 192.06 170.55 230.88 149.88 51 Women 97.50 125.59 170.45 149.61 22 Men 263.79 166.04 276.72 135.21 29 Non-criminal Justice 79.44 114.73 163.55 153.00 62* Women 47.79 72.99 130.81 139.23 43 Men 159.44 156.17 250.83 157.64 18 Total 130.27 156.72 193.94 155.17 113 *Total ns do not necessarily correspond to ns for given genders because not all participants reported gender
Results: Study 2 • Criminal- justice majors ratings versus non- criminal- justice majors • Self-other discrepancy was significantly smaller for majors, than non-majors
Discussion • Knowledge of psychological effects and people’s ability to use such knowledge • Demonstration of self-other biases among different groups • Study 2 replicated study 1, mostly • Strength of social psychological biases is underscored as a result of this study
