1. Adolf Eichmann War criminal WWII Nazi Germany WWII Tiananmen Square China, 1989

2. Term Test 4 Thursday March 4 in class, 12:00 - 1:50 30 to 40 multiple choice questions 10% of course grade Topics covered –class material: Jan 27 - Mar 2 –assigned readings: see lectures web page –Language and Nonverbal Communication (Ch. 11 & a bit of 10) –Cognitive Development (Ch. 11) –Social Development (Ch. 12) –Social Perception (Ch. 13) –Social Influence (Ch. 14) This was missing from the earlier list

3. Names to Know for Term Test 4 Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas Noam Chomsky B.F. Skinner Kanzi, Washoe, Alex Pepperberg Jean Piaget Niccolo Machiavelli Erik Erikson Harry Harlow Solomon Asch Kitty Genovese Stanley Milgram Adolf Eichmann Hannah Arendt

4. Three Minute Review SOCIAL INFLUENCE –How do we make others do what we want? –Conformity essential to well-functioning society but not always a good thing Asch’s line judgment experiment –Group decisions Group polarization Groupthink –Bay of Pigs Invasion –Space Shuttle, then and now –how can you minimize groupthink? –Social facilitation –Social interference similar to “optimal level of arousal” (Yerkes-Dodson law)

5. Social loafing Deindividuation Bystander apathy –The murder of Kitty Genovese why didn’t any of 38 neighbor witnesses help her?!!! –diffusion of responsibility –frequently demonstrated in field studies and lab experiments –even “Good Samaritans” fail Persuasion –reciprocity –lowballing –door-in-the-face –foot-in-the-door –four walls technique (text) How can Social Impact Theory account for many social influence phenomena?

6. Test Yourself Which persuasion technique is most likely being used in this “survey”? NB -- Just to cover the political spectrum… I also received another “survey” from the Alliance using a similar technique. It went something like this: (1) “I believe that marriage is only between a man and a woman”; (2) “I believe the Alliance will protect the sanctity of marriage better than other parties.”

7. Extreme Obedience Jonestown, Guyana, 1978 Jim Jones, cult leader of The People’s Temple, persuaded his followers to drink Kool-Aid laced with cyanide 913 died, including >200 children poisoned by their parents Factors cult members felt alienated from American society cult members were in an isolated location Jones was very charismatic Jones promised life “in a better place” Waco Texas, USA, 1993 David Koresh, cult leader of the Branch Davidians, maintained an armed standoff with the government for 51 days until he and cult members died in a fire of unknown origin over 80 adults and children died

8. Extreme Obedience Cambodia (Asia) 1975-1979 4,000,000 An estimated 210 million people were killed by genocide in 20 th century. Nazi Holocaust Germany & Poland (Europe) 1941-1945 6,000,000 Rwanda (Africa) 1994 800,000

9. Are the people who commit such acts inherently evil? Adolf Eichmann supervised the deportation of 6,000,000 Jews to Nazi gas chambers Were Germans generally evil? Was Eichmann an evil sadist or merely a cog in the wheel? How would you have behaved in his situation?

10. Milgram Video: Questions How did Milgram make the situation seem realistic? What was the task for the learner and for the teacher? How did the learner protest? What sorts of things did the experimenter say to encourage the teacher to obey? What made the experimenter seem like an authority? How far did subjects go before stopping? Did the real subjects enjoy shocking the learner? Were they sadists? Did the subjects obey just because Yale researchers had legitimate authority? … and a few things to think about… Was the study ethical? Were the results worth it? Why did so many people obey? What would you have done in that situation?

11. Milgram’s Obedience Experiment Stanley Milgram 1933-1984

12. We do what we’re told “We do what we’re told. We do what we’re told. Told to do.” -- lyrics to “Milgram’s 37” by Peter Gabriel Psychologists’ predictions (Milgram, 1974)

13. Factors that affect obedience 1.Remoteness of the victim –teacher and learner in separate rooms: 65% obedience –teacher and learner in same room: 40% obedience –teacher and learner in physical contact (teacher had to put learners hand on apparatus): 30% obedience 2.Closeness and legitimacy of authority figure –“ordinary person” confederate instead of experimenter: 20% obedience 3.Cog in a Wheel –“another subject” confederate does the dirty work and real subject assists: 93% obedience –“another subject” confederate disobeys: 10% obedience –subjects told they are responsible for learner’s welfare: 0% obedience 4.Personal characteristics –no significant differences based on sex (though women reported feeling more guilty), politics, religion, occupation, education, military service, or psychological characteristics

14. The Banality of Evil From Eichmann in Jerusalem, 1963 [Eichmann] remembered perfectly well that he would have had a bad conscience only if he had not done what he had been ordered to do -- to ship millions of men, women, and children to their death with great zeal and the most meticulous care. Half a dozen psychiatrists had certified him as “normal” -- ‘more normal, at any rate, than I am after having examined him,’ one of them was said to have exclaimed, while another had found that his whole psychological outlook, his attitude toward his wife and children, mother and father, brothers, sisters, and friends, was ‘not only normal but most desirable.’ It was though in those last minutes [of Eichmann’s life] he was summing up the lesson that this long course in human wickedness had taught us -- the lesson of the fearsome, word-and-thought-defying banality of evil. Hannah Arendt 1906-1975

15. Stanford Prison Experiment (Zimbardo, 1975) How did Zimbardo make the roles of prisoner and guard realistic? What happened? How did prisoners react? How did guards react? Was the experiment ethical? Why did it finish earlier than planned? Were there any negative long-term effects? How did subjects feel years later about their participation?

16. Why Genocide? Psychology of Genocide (Ervin Staub, 1989, 2000) 1.starting point: severely difficulty life conditions harsh economic circumstances, political upheaval example: Germany was struggling greatly after WWI defeat counter-example: US Marshall plan after WWII –economic contributions to post-WWII Europe helped prevent repeat 2.in- vs. out-group definitions become particularly strong out-groups become scapegoats for society’s ills example: Germans blamed Jews for their economic hardships 3.violence begins against out-group; people believe that the out-group deserved it belief in a just world, “blaming the victim” example: Germans believed the Jews deserved their fate 4.violence comes to justify itself stopping would be admitting it was wrong to begin with –counter-example: Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa lack of opposition from allies strengthens resolve –example: lack of opposition to massacres in Yugoslavia in 1991 condoned action

17. It’s a Small World After All Stanley Milgram also did other cool, more optimistic experiments Milgram (1967) -- If you pick any two people at random, how many intermediate acquaintances does it take to establish a link between them? Joe Smith Omaha, Neb. Timothy Kuhn Boston, Mass.

18. Six Degrees of Separation Stanley Milgram (1967) –sent 300 letters to randomly-selected people in Omaha Nebraska –asked them to have the letters relayed to a specific person in Boston whose name, age, location (but not their specific address) and occupation was specified –the original person was asked to send the letter to someone they thought would be closer to the target and then to get that someone to follow the same instructions “If you do not know the target-person on a first-name basis, then pass the document folder on to one friend that you feel is most likely to know the target. That friend must be someone you know on a first-name basis."

19. Six Degrees of Separation Milgram followed the sequence of transmissions –On average, it took 5.5 (rounded up to 6) intermediate people –Conclusion: Any two people are connected by “six degrees of separation”

20. Six Degrees of Separation But… –Milgram recruited only “particularly sociable” people –only 30% of the letters arrived –success rate was much lower for low income participants –sociologists suggest than, on average, most people know about 300 people on a first-name basis, but there is likely wide variability in this number –some argue that Milgram’s number was too large because there were probably other shorter routes unknown to the participants

21. Links

22. Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon In Hollywood, there are ~3 degrees

23. Hubs

24. 10 most connected actors in Hollywood

25. Internet nodes in 1998: 800 million Average degrees of separation: 19 Hubs

26. Sex Degrees of Copulation Matthew Perry HIV/AIDS hub “Patient Zero”: Gaetan Dugas Canadian flight attendant 250 partners/year 40 of 248 people diagnosed with AIDS in 1982 had had sex with him or someone who had

27. 9-11 Terrorist Links

28. Brain Connections amygdala appears to be a hub