“the psychology of evil”
DESCRIPTION
“The Psychology Of Evil”. Questions to be Addressed. Can good, ordinary people be transformed into monsters or perpetrators of evil? Are there certain psychological factors that can help facilitate this transformation?. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
“The Psychology Of Evil”
![Page 2: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Questions to be Addressed
Can good, ordinary people be transformed into monsters or perpetrators of evil?
Are there certain psychological factors that can help facilitate this transformation?
![Page 3: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Sabrina Harman-student that graduated from Fairfax County Public Schools who took AP Psychology.
![Page 4: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Warm Up
Get out HW After quiz, clear your desk and get a
marker or colored pencil
![Page 5: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Dispositional vs. Situational Fundamental Attribution Error: social
psychological theory that maintains people explain others behavior by overestimating the impact of internal disposition and underestimating the impact of situational influences.
Dispositional Example: those who took part in the Abu Ghraib abuse were sadists or prone to abusive tendencies.
Situational Example: external influences and the social environment mostly explains the abuse that took place at Abu Ghraib.
![Page 6: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Social Thinking How we explain someone’s behavior affects how we react to it
Negative behavior
Situational attribution“Maybe that driver is ill.”
Dispositional attribution“Crazy driver!”
Tolerant reaction(proceed cautiously, allowdriver a wide berth)
Unfavorable reaction(speed up and race past theother driver, give a dirty look)
![Page 7: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Diffusion of Responsibility Diffusion of Responsibility is a social phenomenon which tends to occur in groups of people above a certain critical size when responsibility is not explicitly assigned.
Examples: Bystander Apathy: less likely to help
emergency victim when many people around.
“Just following orders”—happens in hierarchy
Firing Squads: only one has bullet.
![Page 8: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Group Pressure and Conformity
Conformity: means to adjust your behavior to fit in with a group.
Solomon’s Asch’s study illustrated the power of group influence and conformity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYIh4MkcfJA&safety_mode=true&persist_safety_mode=1&safe=active
![Page 9: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Obedience to Authority
Stanley Milgram’s study is most famous for illustrating the powerful situational influence of authority.
Study completed in 1963. Milgram created the study in part because of his Jewish heritage.
“If Hitler asked you, would you execute a stranger?”
![Page 10: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Milgram’s Obediance Study Participants are told they are
participating in a study based on the effects of punishment on learning behavior.
3 Basic People in Study: Participant: teacher who will read word
pairs to the “student.” Student: actor that will be shocked if
answers incorrectly. Experimenter: authority figure in lab coat
that instructs the participant what to do.
![Page 11: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Milgram’s Experimental Design The range of electrical shocks had 30
variables ranging from mild shock (15 volts) to Danger Severe Shock and XXX (450 Volts).
![Page 12: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Milgram’s Obedience Study Major Question: how many people would
inflict the maximum voltage on the “learner?”
Prior to the experiment, psychologists believed fewer than 1% would inflict maximum damage.
Actual Results: 65% of participants gave “learner”
maximum shock despite feelings of discomfort, no participant stopped prior to 300 volt level.
In studies compliance was as high as 90% and as low as 10% depending on the variables used.
![Page 13: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
The Power of Obedience: How?
1. Start with an Ideology---purpose is to help science find better ways of learning.
2. Use authority to legitimate ideology---Yale experimenter.
3. Give people desirable roles with meaningful status---teacher
4. Have rules that channel behavioral options and agree to them before “game” begins---explanation of experiment and purpose.
5. Have initial harmful act be minimal and subsequent acts escalate gradually---moves from slight shock gradually to severe…foot in the door phenomenon.
![Page 14: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
The Power of Obedience: How?
6. Displace responsibility for consequences on authority---Experimenter explains he is liable to the “teacher.”
7. Put Actors in a novel setting they are not used to---laboratory
8. Don’t allow usual forms of dissent to lead to disobedience---encouraged to follow agreement. “It is absolutely essential that you continue.”
![Page 15: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Factors which Influenced Compliance in Milgram’s Study
Obedience highest when:-person giving orders is close
at hand.-authority figure is supported
by prestigious institution.-victim is depersonalized and
in another room.-there are no role models for
defiance.
![Page 16: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Deindividuation Deindividuation: the loss of
self-awareness and self-restraint occurring in group situations that foster arousal and anonymity. Women dressed in
depersonalizing outfits or masks delivered higher levels of shocks than those who were identifiable.
Some argue the process involved in creating soldiers in the military involves deindividuation.
![Page 17: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Dehumanization
Dehumanization: the ability to view the victims of violence as somehow less than human. Humans find it
easier to inflict and rationalize violence against victims who seem less than human.
![Page 18: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Bandura’s Dehumanization Experiments Group of college students were to help
train other visiting college students using shocks when they erred.
Participants overhear 1 of 3 statements:1. Neutral: the subjects from the other
school are here.2. Humanized: the subjects from the other
school are here and they seem nice.3. Dehumanized: the subjects from the
other school are here and they seem like animals.
Results: escalated aggression toward dehumanized labeled individuals.
![Page 19: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment
Ordinary college students were randomly divided into groups of “prisoners” and “guards.”
“Prisoners” were “arrested” in their homes by real policemen, strip searched, deloused and put into a “jail” created in the basement of the Stanford Psychology Department.
![Page 20: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Deindividuation and Dehumanization In Stanford Prison Experiment
Prisoners: Referred to only as a number Wore ill-fitting smocks
without underwear Wore nylon panty-hose over
head to simulate shaved head.
Wore small chain around ankle to remind them of their imprisonoment.
![Page 21: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Deindividuation and Dehumanization in Stanford Prison Experiments
Guards: Wore military style
uniform, carried wooden baton
Given reflective sunglasses to avoid eye contact.
Only referred to prisoners by their numbers.
![Page 22: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Results of Experiment Role Playing affected both groups
attitudes. After a revolt on the 2nd day, “Prison
Guards” became more and more sadistic in enforcing the law.
“Prisoners” broke down and became more obedient.
“Guards” most sadistic when thought experimenters were not watching them.
Experiment eventually had to be ended early.
![Page 23: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Modern Comparison? US soldiers involvement in Abu Ghraib
![Page 24: “The Psychology Of Evil”](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816490550346895dd6621e/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
How might social factors have influenced “ordinary” perpetrators in Nazi Germany?