100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
PYC4803 Assignment 2 2024 (785738) - DUE 26 July 2024 R50,00   Add to cart

Exam (elaborations)

PYC4803 Assignment 2 2024 (785738) - DUE 26 July 2024

 3 views  0 purchase

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS PYC4803 Assignment 2 2024 (785738) - DUE 26 July 2024

Preview 3 out of 16  pages

  • July 10, 2024
  • 16
  • 2023/2024
  • Exam (elaborations)
  • Questions & answers
All documents for this subject (4)
avatar-seller
mulah11
PYC4803 Assignment 2
2024 (785738) - DUE 26
July 2024




[Company address]

,PYC4803 Assignment 2 2024 (785738) - DUE 26 July 2024

(A) Give your own example of destructive obedience that occurred in your
society and explain possible reasons as to the underlying reasons why people
comply with this form of social influence. (20 marks)
Example of Destructive Obedience
One example of destructive obedience in society is the obedience to authority
figures that occurred during the Stanford prison experiment conducted by Philip
Zimbardo in 1971. In this psychological study, participants were assigned to the
roles of guards and prisoners in a mock prison environment. The "guards" quickly
began to exhibit abusive behavior towards the "prisoners," leading to severe
psychological distress. Despite knowing they were part of an experiment, the
participants playing guards adhered to their roles and orders to the point of causing
real harm.
Possible Underlying Reasons for Compliance
1. Authority Influence:
o Legitimacy of Authority: Participants perceived Zimbardo as a
legitimate authority figure. His role as the principal investigator gave
him the power to dictate the experiment’s rules, and the guards
followed his implicit instructions to maintain order.
o Institutional Context: The experiment took place in a prestigious
academic setting, lending credibility to Zimbardo’s authority and the
experiment itself.
2. Situational Factors:
o Role Expectations: Participants were assigned specific roles (guards
or prisoners) with clear expectations. The guards felt compelled to act
according to the perceived expectations of their role, leading to an
escalation of abusive behavior.
o Deindividuation: The uniforms and mirrored sunglasses worn by the
guards contributed to a loss of personal identity, reducing their sense
of personal responsibility for their actions.
3. Conformity to Group Norms:

, o Group Dynamics: Within the group of guards, certain individuals
took the lead in establishing norms of behavior. As some guards
began to act abusively, others followed suit to conform to the
emerging group norm.
o Fear of Judgment: Guards may have feared judgment or ostracism
from their peers if they did not conform to the aggressive behaviors
exhibited by others in their group.
4. Psychological Distance:
o Lack of Personal Connection: The guards and prisoners had no prior
relationships, making it easier for guards to dehumanize prisoners and
treat them harshly.
o Anonymity: The anonymity provided by the guards' uniforms and the
prisoners' numbers (instead of names) further contributed to a sense of
psychological distance, reducing empathy and increasing the
likelihood of abusive behavior.
5. Gradual Escalation:
o Foot-in-the-Door Phenomenon: Initially, the guards' abusive actions
were minor. As these actions were tolerated, they gradually escalated
in severity, leading to more extreme behaviors.
o Desensitization: Repeated exposure to and participation in abusive
behaviors reduced the guards' sensitivity to the harm they were
inflicting, normalizing their actions over time.
6. Moral Disengagement:
o Justification of Actions: The guards might have rationalized their
actions by believing they were maintaining order or that the prisoners
deserved harsh treatment due to their behavior.
o Diffusion of Responsibility: The presence of multiple guards allowed
individuals to diffuse responsibility for their actions, believing that
others were equally or more responsible.
Conclusion

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through EFT, credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying this summary from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller mulah11. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy this summary for R50,00. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

73243 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy summaries for 14 years now

Start selling
R50,00
  • (0)
  Buy now