Deck 13: A: Social Psychology

Question 1

You have been given a group assignment to complete.Your instructor has partnered you with three totally unmotivated students whom you suspect will do very little work.How could you minimize the chance of social loafing occurring?

Answer 1

There are two things you might do to insure that each student does his or her part in completing the group assignment.First,each student should work on an integral part of the project.It should be clear as to which student has responsibility for a particular aspect of the project.Each part should involve approximately the same amount of work and effort.
The second step that should be followed is that the project should be evaluated by each part.In this way each student will get an individual grade for his or her participation in the project.When the project is presented,each student should present his or her part.In this way,the instructor can reward the individuals who participated.Social loafers would get their just due.

Question 2

Suppose you identify some prejudice in your classroom.Outline some techniques to combat the effects of prejudice.

Answer 2

Answers may vary but should include mention of the Robbers Cave experiment in Oklahoma and the jigsaw problem.
ROBBERS CAVE STUDY.We can find some clues in a study that Muzafer Sherif and his colleagues conducted in Robbers Cave,Oklahoma (so named because robbers once used the caves there to hide from law enforcement authorities).Sherif split 22 well-adjusted grade 5 students into two groups,the Eagles and the Rattlers,and sent them packing to summer camp.After giving the boys within each group the chance to form strong bonds,Sherif introduced the groups to each other and engaged them in a four-day sports and games tournament.When he did,pandemonium ensued.The Eagles and Rattlers displayed intense animosity toward one another,eventually manifesting in name-calling,food throwing,and fistfights.
Sherif next wanted to find out whether he could "cure" the prejudice he'd helped to create.His treatment was simple: Engage the groups in activities that required them to co-operate to achieve an overarching goal.For example,he arranged a series of mishaps,such as a breakdown of a truck carrying food supplies,that forced the Eagles and Rattlers to work together.Sure enough,such co-operation toward a shared goal produced a dramatic decrease in hostility between the groups (Sherif et al. ,1961).The Robbers Cave study imparts a valuable lesson: One means of reducing prejudice is to encourage people to work toward a shared higher purpose.By doing so,they can feel that they're no longer members of completely separate groups,but part of a larger and more inclusive group: "We're all in this together" (Fiske,2000).
JIGSAW CLASSROOMS.Elliott Aronson (Aronson et al. ,1978)incorporated the lessons of the Robbers Cave study into his educational work on jigsaw classrooms,in which teachers assign children separate tasks that need to be fitted together to complete a project.A teacher might give each student in a class a different piece of history to investigate regarding the perspective of each province on bilingualism.One might present on Alberta's perspective,the other on Quebec's or New Brunswick's,still another on the territories',and so on.The students then co-operate to assemble the pieces into an integrated lesson.Numerous studies reveal that jigsaw classrooms result in significant decreases in racial prejudice (Aronson,2004;Slavin & Cooper,1999).

Question 3

Can the Milgram obedience study and the Zimbardo prison study be considered ethical? Could they be conducted today?

Answer 3

Both the Milgram obedience study and the Zimbardo prison study were unethical by today's APA standards.Both studies did not protect the subjects from physical or psychological harm.In both studies psychological harm could have easily occurred.Subjects needed to be debriefed after the studies and told the nature of the study.Every attempt should have been made to reduce any harmful psychological effects from participating in the study.Also,subjects were forced to continue in the study whether they wished to or not.When subjects tried to stop,they were strongly told to continue.Today's ethics allow for subjects to stop at anytime.They do not have to complete the study.This was not allowed in either of the studies.
The studies could be conducted today if safeguards were put in place.Subjects should be allowed to stop at any time during the study.At the end of their participation,subjects should be thoroughly debriefed to minimize any psychological harm.