The experimenters included the teachers in the direct assessments to ensure the validity of the research. In that case, the teachers ensured that the researchers collected that they were supposed to collect from the child participant. Jay sat on one of the desks previously described above with his teacher as the other students were engaged in typical classroom activities. The experimenters conducted functional analysis in the room that was equipped with a wide angled video camera. The video camera recorded Jay 's problem behavior such as head hitting, finger biting, loud vocalizations, tailbone hitting, hand clasping and elbow hitting which constituted the dependent variables.
1) Identify three course concepts and explain how they relate to the Cascade exercise? The Cascade experiential exercise required a group of people to come together in a fictional circumstance and decide what types of items are instrumental to their survival. The first concept that relates to the Cascade exercise is groupthink. Groupthink is a phenomenon where group pressure to conform to a group’s consensus overrides the group’s ability to critically appraise unpopular or alternative courses of action. If most of your group members believe a piece of equipment is not useful and you on the other hand believe it is vital to your survival groupthink might take over.
The Milgram experiment was conducted to analyze obedience to authority figures. The experiment was conducted on men from varying ages and varying levels of education. The participants were told that they would be teaching other participants to memorize a pair of words. They believed that this was an experiment that was being conducted to measure the effect that punishment has on learning, because of this they were told they had to electric shock the learner every time that they answered a question wrong. The experiment then sought out to measure with what willingness the participants obeyed the authority figure, even when they were instructed to commit actions which they seemed uncomfortable with.
The degree to which a person feels valued determines his interaction with authority. A person is more inclined to follow authority if he feels that his purpose in the state and his opinions are considered. If a person feels neglected by his state, then he is more inclined to disobey the authorities because he recognizes his actions as insignificant. A neglected individual desires respect from his authorities. The author Thoreau explicitly argues for this type of respect for the individual in his article, “Civil Disobedience,”; he states, “Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it” (as cited in Jacobus, 1849/1998, p. 128).
Alternatively, a group or individual displaying cognitive dissonance finds an individual has conflicting attitudes, beliefs or behaviours therefore, rationalises the situation to bring about cognitive balance to their situation in an effort to be more comfortable with their choice. In other studies such as Milgrims distance study, this study revealed that group participants acted with the greatest obedience when their instructor was of a close proximity to the teacher as opposed to being in another room suggesting an emotional factor is involved. There is an inherent drive for conformity in every individual whether they are required to comply or be obedient; it is just a matter of what the situation at hand requires
Summary In this essay, I will discuss on Stanley Milgram Obedience Study. This research represents a procedure for destructive obedience study in the laboratory. The setup consisted a learner (confederate), a teacher (true participant), and an experimenter (high school biological instructor or teacher). It comprises instructing a naïve S in administering maximum severe punishments on the victim in learning experiment context. The punishment is administered through shock generator means with switches grading to 30 that range from Sight Shock to Severe Shock: danger.
There were two groups in this experiment, the teachers and students. All of the volunteers to the experiments were the teachers and they had some actors play the students. The idea was to punish the students for their wrong answer through a shock treatment (http://nature.berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7article/article35.htm 1). Throughout the experiment, they began to realize that the “test subjects”
The learner was an on-screen character functioning as an associate of the experimenter. "Instructors" were requested that direct progressively extreme electric stuns to the "learner" when inquiries were addressed mistakenly. As a general rule, the main electric stuns conveyed in the trial were single 45-volt stun tests given to every educator. This was done to give educators an inclination for the shocks they thought they would be releasing. Stun levels were named from 15 to 450 volts.
Respond with a win-win structure 4. Follow-up A teacher will construct a consequence for the student based on the behavior and position the student is displaying at that moment. -A process The teacher has set consequences. The teacher will explain to the students the rules. When a rule is broken the student will already know what is the consequence for their misbehavior.
He developed 3 levels or 6 stages to analyze the basis for moral reasoning. The first level is preconventional level which is where moral reasoning is controlled mostly by obedience to authority as well as rewards and punishments. The first of two stages in preconventional level is obedience orientation. This is the notion that adults always know what’s right so a person does what the adult thinks is right so they avoid getting punished. The second stage is instrumental obedience.