Social Psychology
Reductionism
A reductionist approach is when something More scientific - by focusing on 1 unit of explan,
complex has been reduced to 1 small aspect + variables can be isolated & other variables
so many important factors may have been controlled, allowing for cause & effect to be
ignored + explan are partial. determined.
AT - when ordered by authority we switch into Reductionist - reduces complex issue of
an agentic state where we see ourselves as obedience to 1 factor of agentic shift + only a
agents of others, mindlessly accepting orders of partial explan + ignores other factors affecting
another person who we see has authority. obedience including ID, eg. personality.
SImT - obedience is due to how others impact Less reductionist - acknowledges diff factors as
us & takes into acc no + strength + immediacy of it looks at social forces of strength + immediacy
external sources & person being impacted = + no + acknowledges more influences.
source + person influencing = target.
SIdT - prejudice caused by having diff groups in Reductionist - only focuses on competition +
society: in-group (group we belong to) + out- partial explan + ignores dispositional explan of
group. prejudice, eg. an authoritarian personality may
mean you are more likely to be prejudice.
RCT - prejudice arises from inter-group conflict Reductionist - only focuses on competition +
(real conflict experienced between diff groups) + partial explan + research suggests that those
groups can be fighting over a conflict of interest/ with high scores on the F-scale are more likely
competition over resources. to be prejudice, but this is not acknowledged in
RCT.
Holism - ‘the whole is more than the sum of its Often too many variables to control for to make
parts’ + looking at diff angles is important to look valid conc + difficult to investigate human
at all the diff factors & how they interact with 1 behaviour without 1st isolating the variables &
another. therefore taking a reductionist approach is better
in social psych.
Ethics
Milgram ‘63 - PPs suffered from psychological Unethical - PPs were not fully protected + not
stress, eg. sweating/nervous laughter + when given RTW option.
hesitated they were prompted to continue by the
experimenter.
Milgram ‘63 - PPs were paid $4.50 for Less unethical - although pressure can be seen
participation which could be seen as adding as psychological harm, they were thoroughly
pressure for them to continue. debriefed + seen by psychiatrists.
Research into prejudice - often designed to Unethical - has potential to cause physical +
divide people into groups + create conflict, eg. psychological harm.
Sherif ‘54 - hostility arose + boys became
aggressive.
Sherif ‘54 - 22 PPs carefully selected based on Unethical - boys didn’t have RTW as they didn't
interviews with parents + teachers, so parents know they were in a study + breaks ethical
had given consent, not the boys + parents also guideline of deception, ie. boys unaware they
incentivised $25 to not visit them. were doing this to study effect of in-group + out-
group.
, Reicher & Haslam ‘06 - aim was to simulate an Ethical - approved by the ethics committee
institution that reinforce inequality between (BPS) + a range of safeguards were used, eg.
groups + to investigate whether inequalities monitored by clinical psychologists.
were accepted/resisted.
Reicher & Haslam ‘06 - found that scores on Ethical - stopped study as soon as they believed
depression increased for the guards after they PPs were at possible risk of harm, showing their
failed to keep order + were challenged by the competency.
prisoner & researchers stopped study on day 8.
Practical Issues in the design and implementation of research
Reicher & Haslam ‘06 - PPs knew they were in May have guessed that they were expected to
an exp so may have displayed DC. rebel against the regime, this reduces exp val.
Sherif ‘54 - field exp of boys taking part in High eco val - conducted in natural setting, PPs
normal everyday activities, eg. tug of war in a behaviour is realistic so can be applied to real
summer camp environment. life + has mundane realism.
Sherif ‘54 - as it was a field exp, it meant it was Harder to replicate + test for reliability.
difficult to control EV, eg. what boys were doing
24/7.
Milgram ‘63 - went to some lengths to make Study is realistic so high exp val.
study seem real, eg. use of rigged draw/electric
shocks/cries of pain/confederate as a
learner/false aim.
Questionnaires - often used when researching SDB - tendency for people to respond in a way
prejudice + uses closed qs. that makes them ‘look better’ + reduces val as
true behaviour/attitudes of PPs is not being
measured.
Thematic analysis - used in social psych + Unscientific - material is interpreted by a
involves reviewing & identifying themes in ql researcher so the themes identified can be
data. subjective + open to interpretation.
Psychology as a Science
Reductionist approach - eg. studies on prejudice Scientific - variables can be isolated whilst
(RCT) tend to focus on 1 aspect, eg. carefully controlling other variables, allowing for
competition. cause & effect to be more easily identified.
Milgram ‘63 - lab exp + electric shocks Less scientific - lacks eco val as task of giving
administered to PPs. shocks doesn’t occur in real life + lab is an
artificial setting.
Field exp - manipulate an IV to see effect on DV, Scientific - he carefully controlled the selection
eg. Sherif ‘54 who manipulated IV (before +after of PPs & intro of competition & other planned
competition) to see effect on DV (children’s interventions, to try and identify cause & effect.
behaviour).
Reicher & Haslam ‘06 - PPs matched (5 groups Less scientific - many ID exist between humans
of 3 initially) + difficult to ensure no ID between + we are affected by our cultural surroundings +
prisoners & guards so situational influence may variables can never be truly isolated/controlled.
not be the only explanation for level of
Reductionism
A reductionist approach is when something More scientific - by focusing on 1 unit of explan,
complex has been reduced to 1 small aspect + variables can be isolated & other variables
so many important factors may have been controlled, allowing for cause & effect to be
ignored + explan are partial. determined.
AT - when ordered by authority we switch into Reductionist - reduces complex issue of
an agentic state where we see ourselves as obedience to 1 factor of agentic shift + only a
agents of others, mindlessly accepting orders of partial explan + ignores other factors affecting
another person who we see has authority. obedience including ID, eg. personality.
SImT - obedience is due to how others impact Less reductionist - acknowledges diff factors as
us & takes into acc no + strength + immediacy of it looks at social forces of strength + immediacy
external sources & person being impacted = + no + acknowledges more influences.
source + person influencing = target.
SIdT - prejudice caused by having diff groups in Reductionist - only focuses on competition +
society: in-group (group we belong to) + out- partial explan + ignores dispositional explan of
group. prejudice, eg. an authoritarian personality may
mean you are more likely to be prejudice.
RCT - prejudice arises from inter-group conflict Reductionist - only focuses on competition +
(real conflict experienced between diff groups) + partial explan + research suggests that those
groups can be fighting over a conflict of interest/ with high scores on the F-scale are more likely
competition over resources. to be prejudice, but this is not acknowledged in
RCT.
Holism - ‘the whole is more than the sum of its Often too many variables to control for to make
parts’ + looking at diff angles is important to look valid conc + difficult to investigate human
at all the diff factors & how they interact with 1 behaviour without 1st isolating the variables &
another. therefore taking a reductionist approach is better
in social psych.
Ethics
Milgram ‘63 - PPs suffered from psychological Unethical - PPs were not fully protected + not
stress, eg. sweating/nervous laughter + when given RTW option.
hesitated they were prompted to continue by the
experimenter.
Milgram ‘63 - PPs were paid $4.50 for Less unethical - although pressure can be seen
participation which could be seen as adding as psychological harm, they were thoroughly
pressure for them to continue. debriefed + seen by psychiatrists.
Research into prejudice - often designed to Unethical - has potential to cause physical +
divide people into groups + create conflict, eg. psychological harm.
Sherif ‘54 - hostility arose + boys became
aggressive.
Sherif ‘54 - 22 PPs carefully selected based on Unethical - boys didn’t have RTW as they didn't
interviews with parents + teachers, so parents know they were in a study + breaks ethical
had given consent, not the boys + parents also guideline of deception, ie. boys unaware they
incentivised $25 to not visit them. were doing this to study effect of in-group + out-
group.
, Reicher & Haslam ‘06 - aim was to simulate an Ethical - approved by the ethics committee
institution that reinforce inequality between (BPS) + a range of safeguards were used, eg.
groups + to investigate whether inequalities monitored by clinical psychologists.
were accepted/resisted.
Reicher & Haslam ‘06 - found that scores on Ethical - stopped study as soon as they believed
depression increased for the guards after they PPs were at possible risk of harm, showing their
failed to keep order + were challenged by the competency.
prisoner & researchers stopped study on day 8.
Practical Issues in the design and implementation of research
Reicher & Haslam ‘06 - PPs knew they were in May have guessed that they were expected to
an exp so may have displayed DC. rebel against the regime, this reduces exp val.
Sherif ‘54 - field exp of boys taking part in High eco val - conducted in natural setting, PPs
normal everyday activities, eg. tug of war in a behaviour is realistic so can be applied to real
summer camp environment. life + has mundane realism.
Sherif ‘54 - as it was a field exp, it meant it was Harder to replicate + test for reliability.
difficult to control EV, eg. what boys were doing
24/7.
Milgram ‘63 - went to some lengths to make Study is realistic so high exp val.
study seem real, eg. use of rigged draw/electric
shocks/cries of pain/confederate as a
learner/false aim.
Questionnaires - often used when researching SDB - tendency for people to respond in a way
prejudice + uses closed qs. that makes them ‘look better’ + reduces val as
true behaviour/attitudes of PPs is not being
measured.
Thematic analysis - used in social psych + Unscientific - material is interpreted by a
involves reviewing & identifying themes in ql researcher so the themes identified can be
data. subjective + open to interpretation.
Psychology as a Science
Reductionist approach - eg. studies on prejudice Scientific - variables can be isolated whilst
(RCT) tend to focus on 1 aspect, eg. carefully controlling other variables, allowing for
competition. cause & effect to be more easily identified.
Milgram ‘63 - lab exp + electric shocks Less scientific - lacks eco val as task of giving
administered to PPs. shocks doesn’t occur in real life + lab is an
artificial setting.
Field exp - manipulate an IV to see effect on DV, Scientific - he carefully controlled the selection
eg. Sherif ‘54 who manipulated IV (before +after of PPs & intro of competition & other planned
competition) to see effect on DV (children’s interventions, to try and identify cause & effect.
behaviour).
Reicher & Haslam ‘06 - PPs matched (5 groups Less scientific - many ID exist between humans
of 3 initially) + difficult to ensure no ID between + we are affected by our cultural surroundings +
prisoners & guards so situational influence may variables can never be truly isolated/controlled.
not be the only explanation for level of
