Name: _____________
Unit 1 Revision Pack
Social Psychology
 Research Methods
 Theories
o Social Identity Theory
o Milgram’s Agency Theory
 Studies
o Milgram
o Meeus and Raaijmakers
o Hofling et al
o Reicher and Haslam
 Key Issue
o Abu Ghraib – obedience in a prison setting
Cognitive Psychology
 Research Methods
 Theories
o Levels of Processing (Memory)
o Reconstructive Memory (Memory)
o Cue Dependent Forgetting (Forgetting)
o Interference Theory (Forgetting)
 Studies
o Godden and Baddeley
o Peterson and Peterson
 Key Issue
o Are EWTs reliable?
Exam Date:
Target grade:
1|Page
What is Social Psychology?
Study of how behaviour is influenced by the presence,
attitudes and actions of other people.
Effect of culture, effect of joining groups, why we help
others.
History: prominent in mid 20th century (earliest study by
Norman Triplett, 1898)
Obedience, prejudice, effects of authority.
Methodology
Hypothesis: a prediction
about the outcome of
the study
Null hypothesis: there
will be no difference….
Types of Questions
Alternative hypothesis:
there will be a
difference…
Open question (Qualitative data)
Closed Question (Quantitative data)
Types of Data
One tailed/directional:
describes exactly what
the difference will be
Qualitative (words etc)
Strengths
Weaknesses
Gives more in depth
Difficult to draw
analysis
comparisons
Increased validity
Decreased reliability
Quantitative (numbers etc)
Strengths
Easier to compare
More reliable
Weaknesses
Reduces thought and
feelings
Lacks validity
Two tailed/nondirectional: does not
specify the difference
Gathering data
Interview: Unstructured, semi-structured or structured
Questionnaire: Little flexibility, can be done on a Likert
Scale (Strongly agree, agree, neither agree or disagree,
disagree, strongly disagree)
Sampling methods Remember we want our sample to be representative of the target population
Method
Random
sampling
Stratified
sampling
Opportunity
sampling
Volunteer/selfsampling
2|Page
Procedure
Every member of population has
equal chance of selection
Sample is proportional
breakdown of target population
Whoever is available at the time
Strengths
Less bias
Weaknesses
Very hard to do
Representative (if done
properly)
Easy quick and ethical
Time consuming and
difficult
Not very representative
Participants select themselves
e.g. advertisement
Motivated pps and
variety of pps
Motivation may make
them behave differently
Informed
consent
• Must be given at start of research
• Needs to be fully informed
Debriefed
• At the end of study
• Told full details of study and then can ask questions/withdraw if wanted
Deception
• Participants should not be lied to where possible
• If deception occurs then full debrief must also occur
Right to
withdraw
Competence
Protection
from harm
• Participant is allowed to withdraw during the study
• They are also allowed to remove their data after the study
• Researcher must be fully qualified to conduct study
• Researcher must also be fully qualified to draw conclusions from study
• Participants should not be harmed in any physical, emotional,
psychological way and should be fully debriefed to ensure this.
Evaluating surveys
Interviews
Questionnaires
3|Page
Strengths
 Face to face leads to high validity
– truthful and natural behaviour
 Can get rich detailed data
 Structured interviews have
reliability
 Less time consuming
 Can get large sample size
 Open questions can provide
qualitative data
 Closed questions can provide
quantitative data – easy to analyse
Weaknesses
 Time consuming
 Training might be needed – costly
 Unstructured interviews less reliable



Lacking in validity – could have lied to
show social desirability.
If volunteer sampling – similar types of
people
Closed questions lack thought and insight
to person
Theories in Social Psychology
Milgrams AGENCY THEORY
Tajfel’s SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY
Natural to obey a person in authority
It is an automatic process to put ourselves in
groups – this causes PREJUDICE
Autonomous State: Acting on your own free
will
Agentic State: Following orders; acting as an
agent for somebody
Explains moral strain: when you do something
because you are told to, even though it goes
against your morals/beliefs
Milgram believed we switch between the two
depending of the situation
1. Social Categorisation: Putting ourselves
into groups (in group = us, out-group =
them)
2. Social Identification: Absorbing the
culture, norms and values of in group
3. Social Comparison: act of comparing
groups to raise self esteem
a. In group favouritism
b. Out group denigration
Evaluating the theories
Agency Theory
S
O
D
A
Milgram’s study (65% obeyed and killed another)
Hofling et al (21/22 nurses)
Meeus and Raaijmakers (96%)
(although this research is quite unethical and
some lacks ecological validity)
More about groupings e.g. Reicher and Haslam
(authority ignored, overruled, self-governing
commune also collapsed)
We follow other people within our group instead
of those in authority (Social identity Theory)
Helps to explain moral strain and real life
behaviour such as the Nazis, Kadafi (Libya) etc.
BUT too reductionist – humans are more complex
– individual differences
Social Identity Theory
Reicher and Haslam support the forming of
groups
Tajfel’s own study
Sherif – robbers cave study
(field studies – lack reliability)
Milgram’s study – 65% people follow orders of
authority figure NOT just their group behaviour
(lab experiment – lacks validity)
Agency theory – our behaviour is determined by
which state we are in (autonomous and agentic)
Applies to real world behaviour (e.g. football
hooliganism, prejudice and discrimination)
Reductionist
Biased towards specific cultures
Studies in Social Psychology
You need to be able to describe and evaluate four studies in Social Psychology. These are Milgram, Meeus
and Raaijmakers, Hofling et al., and Reicher and Haslam.
4|Page
MILGRAM (1963) Study of obedience to malevolent authority
Aim: to establish a baseline measure of how obedient naïve
participants would be when ordered to administer increasingly
intense shocks to an innocent victim.
Procedure: 40 male Pps – newspaper advert ($4 + car fare)
Pp and a confederate (Mr Wallace) “picked” to be teacher and
learner. Shown generator and learner being strapped in.
15V –
450V
Read word pairs then test – if wrong/silent = electric shocks
Results: Survey before – believed all pps would stop at 140V (asks to be released)
Actual: 100% went to at least 300V, 65% go to 450V (and essentially kill human being)
Conclusions: Social setting is a powerful determinant of beh – we are socialised to recognise and obey auth.
Evaluation
Variations
G: only 40 males from one area – lacks
generalizability
Setting: when conducted in an inner city office (more
realistic) = 48% (dropped but still high)
R: highly controlled lab experiment = high reliability.
Has been replicated with similar results
Touch proximity: Have to hold down to receive shock
– drops to 30%
A: Applicable to real world behaviour (e.g. Nazis) and
can support Agency Theory
Proximity: learner in same room as teacher – drops to
40%
V: artificial environment (ecological validity) and
artificial task (construct validity) limited sample
(population validity)
Two Peers Rebel: two confederates join as teachers
and refuse to comply – drops to 10%
E: protection, fully informed consent, extreme stress,
thorough debrief, deception.
Remote Authority: instructions from researcher
received over the phone – dropped to 21%
Meeus and Raaijmakers (1985) Carrying out orders to use psychological–administrative violence
Aim: to study obedience in a
more up to date way than
Milgram, using Psychological
violence in a more liberal culture
Procedure: based on MIlgram’s paradigm. Pps (39 men and women)
ordered to harass job applicant (confederate) to make him nervous while
sitting a test to determine if he would get the job.
Told this was context of a research project.
Findings:
Criticisms
92% of participants obeyed and harassed
confederate – thought it was unfair to do so.
G: mixed genders but small sample in one area
96% believed it was a real life study
Conclusions
Even in a more liberal culture people obeyed an
authority figure and went against better nature to do
something designed to harm another (moral strain)
5|Page
R: controlled environment – high reliability
A: applicable to interviews, supports Agency Theory
V: construct validity higher, but lacks ecological
E: More ethical than Milgram but still a level of
deception
A
P
F
C
C
Hofling et al., 1966
Reicher and Haslam (2006)
 Investigate aspects of nurse-physician
relationship – what happens when a nurse is
ordered to do something against professional
standards
 Field study (midwest USA)
 Questionnaire: would you obey in this situation
– majority say no
 Study: nurses on night duty called by ‘Dr Smith’
(unknown) and asked to give 20mg (twice daily
dose) of Astroten (not allowed on ward) to Mr
Jones
 Call ended when nurse goes to get drug,
becomes upset, seeks advice or 10 mins+
 Questionnaire: 10/12 and all 22 nurses asked in
questionnaire said no
 21/22 nurses in actual study went to administer
the drug
 Calls generally brief with little resistance
 Only 11 said they were aware of dosage
 All admitted they shouldn’t have, but it was a
common occurrence.
 Nurses will knowingly break hospital rules in a
situation where a doctor tells them to, even if it
could endanger a patient’s life.
 To investigate the effects on behaviour of putting
pps in groups unequal in terms of power
G: high population validity – real nurses BUT likely to
obey (USA: not long after war)
R: standardised script– ran 22 times with similar
results (test re-test R) – hard to control extraneous
A: supports Agency theory
V: high ecological – nurses unaware = natural
E: consent, fully debriefed



Field study – broadcasted on BBC
15 men – simulated prison
5 guards, 10 prisoners – told after 3 days
promotion to guard possible (selected by guards)
 Guards: draw up rules, access to surveillance,
trappings and better conditions
 Prisoners: arrived one at a time and told rules
 6 days in: told no real difference (-) prisoners and
guards – too late to make a difference
 @ first prisoners adjusted to get promotion
 When promotion removed – showed strong social
identity & tried to change system
 Guards showed no social identity & did not exert
authority – could not deal with confrontation &
gave in to demands on day 4
 Day 6: system had collapsed – self-governing
commune – day 8 this collapsed - END
 When groups are formed with strong Social
Identity (shared norms and values) the members
work together and become strong
 Tyranny arises because of failed groups, rather
than the tyranny of the group itself
G: small sample and only males
R: hard to replicate due to individual differences
(were the prisoners just more dominating?)
A: can support Tajfel’s theory of S.I.T
V: ecological validity lacking – TV broadcast = demand
chars
E: some distress/violence/confrontation - deception
Key Issue: Soldiers in Abu Ghraib
2004 – photos emerged of prisoners in a US run Iraqi prison being abused, tortured and humiliated by US Military
personnel.
Soldiers are GUILTY
Soldiers are INNOCENT









‘corrupt cops’ acting in autonomous state
Tormented prisoners for fun
In and out groups (in group has the power)
Identify with in group and mistreat out group
Supported by Tajfel and Sherif’s study
Little evidence of direct orders to carry out
this behaviour
Not every guard engaged in the behaviour –
the whistle was ‘blown’ by Joe Darby who
released photos.
6|Page




Only obeying orders from senior officers
Not bad people – situation led to their
behaviour
Supported by Milgram’s study
Operating in agentic state – on behalf of their
seniors
Explained by Moral Strain
Responsibility lays with senior officers and
not soldiers.
Cognitive Psychology
Cognition = mental processes needed to make sense of the world
Information Processing Approach
Memory
Used by the cognitive approach to explain how we
receive, interpret and respond to information.
Encoding: changing a sensory input into memory
trace
Input ProcessOutput
3 storage systems: Sensory store (info from
environment), short term memory (lasts 15-20 secs,
holds 7±2 items), long term memory (unlimited
capacity and duration)
Links to the processes of a computer
Methods
Laboratory Experiment
 Tightly controlled env
 IV manipulated and DV
measured
 Ps randomly allocated to a
group
Advantages
 Can control extraneous
variables
 Can establish cause and effect
Disadvantages
 Highly artificial – lacks
ecological validity
 Demand chars
 Experimenter effects
Field Experiment
 Carried out in natural
environment
 Less control over extraneous
variables
 IV still manipulated and DV
measured
Advantages
 Ps might not be aware BUT
more natural
 Ecological validity
Disadvantages
 No control over setting –
extraneous variables
 Time consuming to set up
 Possible ethical issues
Natural Experiment
 Conducted in natural
environment
 IV is not manipulated by
researcher but is naturally
occurring
 E.g. Charlton et al
Advantages
 Ecological validity
 Less demand characteristics
Disadvantages
 Lack of control over extraneous,
participant variables
 Tends to be unique – hard to
find (e.g. Money)
Hypotheses: predictions about research
Experimental hypothesis = statement made about the predicted outcome of study.
Directional or One-Tailed hypothesis
The direction of the results is predicted
Variables
Independent Variable: manipulated by the researcher
Dependent Variable: measured by the researcher
7|Page
Non-Directional or Two-Tailed hypothesis
A change or difference is predicted, but not
the direction it will go in.
Operationalisation: how will you measure the DV and alter the conditions of the IV
Participant Designs
Independent
Groups
Same group of Pps in
each experimental
condition
Repeated
Measures
One group of participants per
experimental condition
Matched
Pairs
Similar to IG, but Pps
matched on a
characteristic
important to the study
Experimental Control
Order effects: in repeated measures design, need to counterbalance (swap the order around for each participant) or
randomise (Ps allocated randomly to an order of conditions) to ensure order effects do not take place.
Extraneous Variables: any variable (apart from IV) that can affect your results. A confounding variable is one that has
had an effect on your results.
Situational Variables: an extraneous variable found in the environment
Participant Variables: participants can affect the study (mood, intelligence, experience, age etc)
Experimenter effects: the effects the researcher can have on the results – e.g. attitude, build, gender, subtle clues
Ecological Validity: if the study represents natural situation – if lacking can lead to demand chars (unnatural
behaviour)
Reliability and Validity
Word
Reliability
Test-retest
reliability
Inter-rater
reliability
Validity
8|Page
Definition
When a study is repeated and similar
results are found
Can the study be repeated to get same
results?
Do two researchers come to the same
conclusions?
How well something measures what it is
supposed to measure
Word
Ecological
Validity
Construct
Validity
Population
validity
Concurrent
validity
Definition
How well the study reflects natural
situation
How well the task reflects a real life
task
Does the sample reflect the
population?
Do the results match the results of
similar studies?
Theories in Cognitive Psychology
You have to learn two theories of memory and two theories of forgetting. DO NOT get these mixed up, it can cause
disasters in your exam.
Theories of Memory
Levels of Processing
Reconstructive Memory
Theories of Forgetting
Cue Dependent Forgetting
Interference Theory
Levels of Processing – Craik and Lockhart (1972)
2 different types of rehearsal:
Evaluation
1. Maintenance rehearsal: rehearse info to
preserve it for a short time – not a strong
memory
2. Elaborative rehearsal: give info meaning –
deeper consideration = stronger memory
 Hyde and Jenkins (1973) found that processing
the meaning of words (rated for pleasantness)
increased the memorability of the word
We have a central processor – handles all kinds and
quantities or perceptual info and determines how it
is processed:
 Applications are wide – used to enhance
revision and memory and can be applied to
learning lang and reading.
Meaningless info = shallow processing
Distinctive relevant info = deeper processing
 Accounts for diversity of memories that we
store – Multi Store Model (different theory)
does not account for weak and strong
memories.
Memory is a by-product of info processing
 LOP explains difference in memory durability.
Craik and Tulving: 3 types of processing
1. Structural – what it looks like
2. Phonetic – what it sounds like
3. Semantic – what it means (best memory)
 Depth of processing could be a variety of
things, not just meaning of information (e.g.
time spent, amount of elaboration etc.)
Reconstructive Memory - Bartlett
Memory is not like a tape recorder – it is not perfectly encoded, perfectly
processed and perfectly recalled.
Bartlett started by thinking that past and current experiences of the individual
reflect how an event is remembered. He notes that there would be input, which
is the perception of the event. This is followed by the processing, which includes
the perception and interpretation of the event; this involves previous
experiences and schemata.
9|Page
The memory of an event derives from information from specific memory
traces which were encoded at the time of the event, and ideas that a person
has from knowledge, expectations, beliefs and attitudes. Remembering
involves retrieving knowledge that has been altered to fit with knowledge
that the person already has.
Bartlett’s research : War of the Ghosts
Theory based on Chinese whispers – came up with a study to test it.
Schema
An internal mental
representation of the world
(e.g. a “going to the cinema”
or “in a lesson” script) which
outlines the expectations of
that situation.
Used a Native American folk story called War of the Ghosts (unfamiliar to pps
– does not fit into usual schemata.
Bartlett reads story to Pps and they repeat back to him – different accounts given.
Met Pps on several other occasions and asked them to recall story – got shorter and shorter each time. BUT it made
more and more sense to Pps whereas the original story made no sense to them. After 6 recall sessions average
stories had shortened from 330 words to 180 words. Bartlett noticed that people had rationalised the story in parts
that made no sense to them, and filled in their memories so that what they were recalling seemed sensible to them.
This means that the participants had reconstructed their memories of the story. Bartlett hereby concluded that
memory is reconstructive, not reproductive.
Rationalisation
Example of a schema (Cohen, 1995)
Altering something so that it
makes sense to you
Confabulation
Making up certain parts to
fill in a memory to help it
make sense
Cohen pointed out five ways in which schemata can help influence memory –
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
providing or aiding selection and storage
abstraction
integration and interpretation
normalisation
retrieval.
Schemata enable us to store the central meaning or gist of new information without necessarily remembering the
precise details (abstraction, selection and storage)
Schemata also help us to understand new information more readily (integration and interpretation, normalisation),
or fill in or guess missing parts of it using default values (retrieval). This makes the world more coherent and
predictable.
10 | P a g e
Evaluation of reconstructive memory
 Backed by much research (Bartlett, Loftus and
Palmer – leading questions)
 Applicable to real life memories – we often
remember central information and not peripheral
 Helps to explain unreliability of eye witness
testimonies
 Easy to test using experimental method – IV can be
easily manipulated
 War of the ghosts made no sense to the Pps so they
could have altered it to simply make sense of it
 Lab experiments used to test this lack ecological and
construct validity and could have demand
characteristics
 Does not explain how the memory is reconstructive
– is a theory of description, not explanation.
Theories of FORGETTING
Cue Dependent Forgetting
We forget because we are not in the same situation as we were when we remembered the information. Based on
Tulving’s (1974) encoding specificity principle.
“The greater the similarity between the encoding event and retrieval event, the greater the likelihood of recalling the
original memory”
Context Dependent Forgetting
Context: situation
Explains why revisiting a place after many years triggers
memories of being there = context dependent.
Godden and Baddeley (1975)
Recall in same environment as learning = better recall
Smith (1985)
Recall to similar music in environment as learning
environment = better recall
Grant and Bredahl et al (1998)
Info learnt in noisy conditions was recalled best in noisy
conditions vs. quiet ones
Schab (1990)
Smell of chocolate can be a strong aid to recall
Herz (1997)
Peppermint, osmanthus and pine all gave good recall
when scents present in learn and recall conditions.
State Dependent Forgetting
State: emotional and physical state
When happy we recall more happy memories, and vice
versa when sad = state dependent.
Duka et al. (2000)
Recall better when alcohol-alcohol versus alcoholplacebo conditions
Miles and Hardman (1998)
Aerobic exercise had a positive effect on recall when
used as a state cue
Lang et al (2001)
Fear was a powerful state cue and improved recall when
fear was induced.
Evaluation of CDF
 Lots of empirical support (see above table) who are
we to argue?
 Meta-analysis (Smith and Vela, 2001) on 75 CDF
supported the idea that reinstatement of context =
better recall
 Explains ‘tip of the tongue’ phenomenon (Brown and
McNeill, 1966)
11 | P a g e
 Empirical evidence uses word lists and unfamiliar or
unusual cues – lacks construct validity
 Lab experiments can lead to demand characteristics
 Hard to define cues – music can be a context and
state cue – what are we really testing
 Anecdotal examples hard to measure
Interference Theory
Interference theory states that forgetting occurs because memories interfere with and disrupt one another, in other
words forgetting occurs because of interference from other memories (Baddeley, 1999). There are two ways in
which interference can cause forgetting:
1. Proactive interference (pro=forward) occurs when you cannot learn a new task because of an old task that had
been learnt. When what we already know interferes with what we are currently learning – where old memories
disrupt new memories.
2. Retroactive interference (retro=backward) occurs when you forget a previously learnt task due to the learning of
a new task. In other words, later learning interferes with earlier learning - where new memories disrupt old
memories.
Proactive and retroactive Interference is thought to be more likely to occur where the memories are similar, for
example: confusing old and new telephone numbers. Chandler (1989) stated that students who study similar
subjects at the same time often experience interference.
Previous learning can sometimes interfere with new learning (e.g. difficulties we have with foreign currency when
travelling abroad). Also new learning can sometimes cause confusion with previous learning. (Starting French may
affect our memory of previously learned Spanish vocabulary). In the short term memory interference can occur in
the form of distractions so that we don’t get the chance to process the information properly in the first place. (e.g.
someone using a loud drill just outside the door of the classroom.)
Key study: Postman (1960) aimed to investigate how retroactive interference affects learning. In other words, to
investigate whether information you have recently received interferes with the ability to recall something you
learned earlier.
Found that control group who had no second list of words to learn had better recall of an original list of words than
the experimental group who had to learn two lists of words.
Evaluation of Interference Theory
 There is a lot of evidence that backs up the idea that
interference causes certain types of forgetting eg
Dallenbach 1924 and Peterson and Peterson 1959
 It is a credible theory because it is backed up by our
own everyday experience eg windscreen wipers if
they are on a different side to what you are used to,
or the watch example or trying to learn a 3rd
language
 Explains issues in EWT due to watching news
coverage of events – can interfere with existing
memories
12 | P a g e
 Tells us little about the cognitive processes
involved in forgetting
 Majority of evidence to support is in lab
experiments – lack ecological and construct validity
 Lab experiments generally use university students
– generalisability issues
 Baddeley (1990) states events in interference
theory studies are too close together and in real
life encoding and recall are more spaced out
Studies in Cognitive Psychology
A
P
F
C
C
Godden and Baddeley
Peterson and Peterson
To investigate whether a natural env. can act as a cue
for recall
18 pps members of dive club
Learnt list of 38 unrelated 2 or 3 syllable words
Randomly allocated to one of 4 conditions
1. Land-land
2. Land-water
3. Water-water
4. Water-land
Scotland over 4 days following scheduled dive (all
divers wet/cold = same condition)
Tested 2 at a time – heard words in blocks of 3, list
presented twice.
After 4 minute delay recalled words in any order
Recall was around 50% higher when it took place in
same environment as learning
Learn land
Learn water
Recall land
13.5
8.4
Recall water
8.6
11.4
Environment can act as a contextual cue for recall
To investigate how long information lasts in the STM
without rehearsal
Lab experiment
G – small sample of university divers
R – weather and conditions could not be controlled
and in fact had an impact on the schedule of
experiments
A – supports CDF and can be applied to EWTs
V – not a real life task or a real life environment
(specific to divers)
E – no harm to participants and all consented to take
part
Participants presented with a 3 letter nonsense
trigram (e.g. BKZ, TPS, MHR)
Then given a number to count backwards from in 3s
from a 3 digit number for a certain amount of time
(3, 6, 9, 12, 15 and 18 seconds)
Then asked to recall the trigram in the right order
After 3 seconds – 80% recall
After 6 seconds – 50% recall
After 9 seconds – 30% recall
After 18 seconds – 10% recall
STM lasts no longer than 18 seconds
Without rehearsal information will fade quickly
G – university students – not generalisable to wider
population
R – lab experiment – highly controlled theorefore
replicable. BUT could lead to demand characteristics
A – supports theory of trace decay and the limited
capacity of STM. Everyday distractions more complex
than counting backwards – not applicable.
V – use of nonsense trigrams not real life memory –
lacks construct validity. Artificial environment =
ecological validity
E – no ethical problems
Key Issue – are EWTs reliable?
EWT = recalled memory of a witness to a crime or incident. Recorded as police statement or given as verbal
testimony in court. There is controversy about the accuracy of EWT.
No
Yes
Bartlett – all memory is reconstructed based on
our schema
Loftus – leading questions research
Loftus et al.(1987) – time distortion of events
Clifford & Hollin (1981) – violent footage
recalled poorly compared to non-violent
Pickel (1998) – weapon focus can impact recall
Research is done in lab exps – difficult to
generalise, lack ecological validity, construct
validity – not the same state (CDF)
PPS could show demand chars
Smith & Elsworth (1987) – witness will not
succumb to leading questions as easily as
thought
13 | P a g e