Category: Human behavior

The Similarities Of Nazi And Everyday People In Stanford Prison Experiment

The Holocaust was the mass murder of six million Jews, carried out by the Nazi regime during World War II. Today we use this event to analyze how humans launched and participated in one of the most tragic and inhumane occurrence documented. As we look back at this haunting segment of our history, nearly everyone without hesitation will declare that they would have contributed to rendering assistance to the Jews, regardless of the fact that if caught aiding they would be punished by death. However, recent social experiment has provided extensive proof that today’s humans are just as monstrous, naive, and easily persuadable as those who took part in the cruel killing of women, children, and men.

Social experiments play a significant contribution in allowing us to test human responses to common situations. One of the elements we have learned about human nature is that when given an excessive degree of power it can corrupt our morals and allow cruel judgments to influence ones behavior. For instance, the Stanford social experiment was led by psychologist Philip Zimbardo, who wanted to understand how participants would react when placed in a prison environment. The study paid $15 a day to 24 volunteer male college students in compensation for their corporation. Zimbardo put together a mock prison in the basement of Stanford University’s psychology building. The participants were randomly chosen to be either inmates or guards. Those who were chosen to be prisoners were arrested by police and taken to the prison where they would spend 24 hours a day. The guards were told to do “whatever they thought was necessary to maintain law and order in the prison and to command the respect of the prisoners.” It did not take long for the experiment to take a turn for the worst, the guards began enforcing rules aggressively, along with verbally and physically abuse among the inmates. As a result the prisoners showed signs of phycological suffering. One of the most shocking aspects of this experiment was when the priest visited the jail the prisoners addressed themselves to the priest as their number instead of their name, which demonstrated that they had completely lost a sense of their identity, even though they were not real prisoners. The experiment was scheduled to last 14 days, but was stopped after only six days. When the experiment was over, the guards were interviewed, and many were shocked by how differently they behaved from their usual selves. The experiment showed that when ordinary people were given powerful roles, they acted in ways that they had never seen before. However, the experiment did not show how well they could act, it revealed the evil that lied deep within themselves, grasping at the opportunity to be in control.

In addition, social experiments reveal that people easily give into peer pressure when having different opinions among other people, allowing groups of individuals to persuade ones decisions, resulting to one conforming even when they do not agree. For example, in the Asch conformity experiment there were a number of subjects seated at a table. However, only one participant was a real subject, and the remaining were actors who were instructed to select certain answers. Each participant was shown a line, then asked to select the corresponding line from an assembly of lines of different lengths. The experiment proved that in order to avoid discomfort of standing out from the group, a majority of the subjects would change their answer. However, when a subject saw an individual share a different opinion from the group, it allowed the subject to also be comfortable in having a different answer then the other participants. This demonstrated that when an individual did not feel alone, it created a difference in how the person responded to the questions.

Last, but certainly not least, the social experiment indicated that people are hesitant to question authority, therefore focusing obedient towards authority instead of listening to their consciousness. The experiment included the volunteer being paired with another person, who was actually an actor. They drew sticks to determine who would be the teacher and who would be the learner. However, in the experiment the volunteer would always be the teacher, and the fake participant would always be the learner. First the participants were taken to the room where the learner would be hooked up electrodes, so that the teacher would believe the experiment was real. Next, the teacher was taken to a room with an electric shock generator with volts that ranged from 15 all the way to 450 volts. The learner would be given a list of words that had pairs, the teacher was to test the individual, if the learner got the pair wrong he would be electrically shocked, an each time the electric shock would increase. The learner always answered with the wrong answer on purpose, when given the electric shock an audio of a scream would be played. When the teacher would question the experiment to the scientists, he would simply tell them that they must continue. As a result, a majority of the participants followed the experimenters orders when told to do so, even when the learner was shocked to up to 450 volts, leaving the learner unresponsive, which in reality could lead to possible death. This experiment demonstrated that when people are given orders by authority figures who have a higher position legally, those people are seen “morally” right.

In conclusion, it is truly difficult to distinguish the Nazis from everyday people. It is not until our morals are put to the test to see who we truly are as individuals. Although experiments are merely test, they bring to light the true colors of human nature, which shows that a majority of people are simply evil in one way or another.

Psychological Concept And Ethics Of Stanford Prison Experiment

Psychological concept of the experiment

The mental idea of the Stanford Prison investigation was that Zimbardo and his partners were keen on seeing whether the mercilessness among gatekeepers in America and penitentiaries was because of the twisted characters of the watchmen or had more to do with the jail condition. (Bartels, 2018) It can be seen that detainees and gatekeepers may have character which struggle unavoidable, with detainees lacking appreciation for peace and watchmen being overbearing and forceful. It very well may be seen that detainees and watchmen may act in an unfriendly way because of the inflexible power structure of the social condition in penitentiaries. Zimbardo anticipated the circumstance made individuals act the manner in which they do instead of their air. (McLeod, 2018)

How the psychological concept was measured of the experiment

The examination was led in a storm cellar of the Stanford University brain science constructing that was then taunted into a jail. Zimbardo publicized and requested that volunteers take an interest in an investigation of the mental impacts of jail life. (Cherry, 2019) There were 75 male applicants and they were given diagnostic gatherings and character tests to take out competitors with mental issues, restorative debilitations, or that has a past loaded up with bad behavior or medicine/alcohol abuse. Only 24 of the 75 up-and-comers were settled on a choice to be dynamically physical and reasonably enduring, progressively create and the least connected with held practices were picked to participate in the preliminary. (Cherry, 2019) The individuals didn’t have any colleague with each other before the examination and were paid 15 dollars consistently to share in the investigation. The individuals were arbitrarily relegated to either the job as a detainee or gatekeeper in a recreated correctional facility condition.

There were two stores and one of the members dropped out, which by then lead to ten detainees and eleven gatekeepers. The detainees were managed the way wherein every criminal was managed. Which was being caught at their homes out of the blue and taken to the police central station, and they were furthermore fingerprinted, shot and booked. They were blindfolded and went to the brain science branch of Stanford University, where the storm cellar was set out just like a real correctional facility with banned windows and passages, revealed dividers and little cells; this is then furthermore where the individuation system began. (Cherry, 2019)

The detainees had all their very own assets emptied and shot away when they arrived at the prison and were given correctional facility pieces of clothing and bedding. The detainees’ correctional facility pieces of clothing were a given uniform and the watchmen just suggested them by number. The detainees’ number or ID number was a way to deal with make the detainees feel obscure; each detainee had their own one of a kind number. The detainees were simply allowed to insinuate themselves by their numbers and distinctive detainee’s numbers.

Prisoners

The crucial bit of the uniform that the detainees wore was a dress, which each detainee wore reliably with no underclothes. On the dress in front and at the back was their correctional facility recognizing verification number. (McLeod, 2018) On each detainee right lower leg was a staggering chain that was dashed on and worn reliably. Elastic shoes were their footwear, and each detainee protected their hair with a stocking top which was delivered utilizing a woman’s nylon stacking.

It might be seen that they were endeavouring to make a useful recreation of a jail and not a strict jail. Veritable male detainees don’t wear dresses; anyway real male detainees do feel embarrassed and do feel emasculated. It will in general be seen that their goal was to make relative effects quickly by putting men in a dress with no underclothes. Without a doubt, when a segment of the detainees were put in these outfits they began to walk and to sit in a surprising manner, and to hold themselves in a sudden way – more like a woman than like a man. (McLeod, 2018)

The chain on their foot, which additionally is exceptional in many detainment facilities, was utilized so as to help detainees to remember the abusiveness of their condition. Notwithstanding when detainees were snoozing, they couldn’t get away from the environment of abuse. At the point when a detainee turned over, the chain would hit his other foot, awakening him and advising him that he was still in jail, unfit to escape even in his fantasies.

The stocking top on their head filled in for having the detainee’s hair shaved off. The way toward having one’s head shaved, which happens in many jails just as in the military, is structured to some degree to limit every individual’s independence, since certain individuals express their uniqueness through haircut or length. It is likewise a method for getting individuals to start consenting to the self-assertive, coercive guidelines of the foundation.

Ethics

The study has gotten numerous moral reactions, including absence of completely educated assent by members as Zimbardo himself didn’t have the foggiest idea what might occur in the analysis (it was unusual). Likewise, the prisoners didn’t agree to being ‘captured’ at home. The prisoners were not told incompletely in light of the fact that last endorsement from the police wasn’t given until minutes before the members chose to partake, and somewhat on the grounds that the scientists needed the captures to come as an amazement. (McLeod, 2018)

However, this was a break of the morals of Zimbardo claim contract that the majority of the members had marked. Members assuming the job of prisoners were not shielded from mental damage, encountering episodes of embarrassment and misery. (McLeod, 2018) For instance, one prisoner must be discharged following 36 hours in light of wild blasts of shouting, crying and outrage.

Be that as it may, in Zimbardo guard, the enthusiastic trouble experienced by the prisoners couldn’t have been anticipated from the beginning. Endorsement for the examination was given by the Office of Naval Research, the Psychology Department and the University Committee of Human Experimentation.

This Committee additionally didn’t envision the prisoners’ outrageous responses that were to pursue. Elective techniques were seen which would make less trouble the members and yet give the ideal data, yet nothing reasonable could be found. Broad gathering and individual questioning sessions were held, and all members returned post-exploratory polls half a month, at that point a while later, at that point at yearly interims. Zimbardo finished up there were no enduring negative impacts.

Zimbardo additionally unequivocally contends that the advantages increased about our comprehension of human conduct and how we can improve society ought to out parity the pain brought about by the examination. (McLeod, 2018) However, it has been recommended that the US Navy was less keen on making detainment facilities increasingly human and were, actually, progressively keen on utilizing the investigation to prepare individuals in the equipped administrations to adapt to the worries of imprisonment. (McLeod, 2018)

A quality of the examination is that the hurtful treatment of the members prompted the conventional acknowledgment of moral rules by the American Psychological Association. Concentrates should now experience a broad survey by an institutional audit board (US) or morals advisory group (UK) before they are executed. (McLeod, 2018)

Conclusion

It might be seen that people will instantly conform to the social jobs they are depended upon to play, especially if the jobs are as unequivocally stereotyped as those of the correctional facility ensures. The ‘prison’ condition was a critical factor in making the gatekeepers serious direct (none of the individuals who went about as watchmen showed savage tendencies before the assessment).

In this manner, the revelations support the situational explanation of direct rather than the dispositional one. Zimbardo suggested that two methodology can explain the detainee’s ‘last convenience. Deindividuation may explain the direct of the individuals; especially the gatekeepers. This is a state when you ended up being so doused in the benchmarks of the social affair that you lose your sentiment of character and good commitment.

The watchman may have been so brutal because they didn’t feel what happened was down to them before long – it was a social occasion standard. They in like manner may have lost their sentiment of individual character by virtue of the uniform they wore. Also, insightful shortcoming could reveal the detainee’s settlement to the watchman. The detainees found that whatever they did had little effect on what befallen them. In the phony correctional facility the flighty decisions of the gatekeeper drove the detainees to stop any falsification of responding. (McLeod, 2018)

After the prison preliminary finished, Zimbardo met the individuals. Here’s a bit: ‘A huge part of the individuals said they had felt included and submitted. The assessment had felt ‘authentic’ to them. (Materson, 2018) One gatekeepers expressed, ‘I was surprised at myself. I caused them to think of each as different names and wipe the toilets out with their revealed hands. I in every way that really matters considered the detainees steers and I kept thinking I expected to watch out for them if they tried something.’

Another watchmen said ‘Acting completely can be charming. Power can be a phenomenal enjoyment.’ And another: ‘… during the examination I went to Cell Two to disorder up a bed which a detainee had as of late made and he got me, yelling that he had as of late made it and that he was not going to allow me to decimate it. He grabbed me by the throat and in spite of the way that he was chuckling I was truly alarmed. I lashed out with my stick and hit him on the jaw notwithstanding the way that not astoundingly hard, and when I freed myself I lost control.” (McLeod, 2018)

Most of the watchmen believed that it was difficult to acknowledge that they had acted in the brutalizing ways that they had. Many said they hadn’t known this side of them existed or that they had the option to do such things. The detainees, also, could barely envision how they had responded in the agreeable, flinching, subordinate way they had. A couple of pronounced to be insistent sorts normally. Exactly when gotten some data about the watchman, they portrayed the run of the mill three speculations that can be found in any prison: a couple of watchmen were incredible, some were outrageous yet sensible, and some were savage. (Materson, 2018)

The Idea Of The Stanford Prison Experiment

This trial is about existence in jail and how it impacts an individual’s life. In ‘ The Stanford Prison Experiment’ is about a lot of children from Standford that being engaged with this test of jail. They were placed in a circumstance like how individuals do their time in jail. They were getting treated simply like the genuine detainees and getting constrained by the officials.

The explanation for this test was the means by which would the understudy respond in that circumstance and furthermore observe the logical investigation of the human personality and its capacities impact on the understudies. It featured how they act in jail while being constrained by the officials. This investigation was held by Phillip Zimbardo, who was a social brain research teacher at Standford. Doing his initial years he for the most part centers around thirst and craving. It was not until his during his mid-profession when he chose to concentrate on brain research issues. His examination on jail demonstrated how an individual can change in a flash contingent upon what circumstance they are being presented to. Since they are attempting to fit in that condition. At the point when chosen to do this examination, he picked individuals who were living fair lives, the majority of them were caucasian. Initially, they were given an errand to do after that they were taken in for some made-up wrongdoing. To cause the circumstance as genuine as it to can be, Zimbardo chosen to ensure the watchmen were wearing cop garments and the jail had each and every detail that a genuine does. Following a couple of days, it began to feel like the genuine situations and the gatekeepers were by and large extremely unforgiving. They made a few limitations on the jail, for example, not giving them a chance to utilize the restrooms at whatever point they needed to. Which made the detainees utilize whatever they had in their cell for washroom use.

Everything was getting so hard for the cellmates that it prompted them finishing this analysis path before the time. It accepted that there were a great deal of musings on why this analysis didn’t succeed how they would have preferred to. They believed that individuals began to live in their jobs as though they were truly carrying on with that life which had figuring how might that toward the end in the jail for such a long time. Overwhelming the gatekeepers was not a smart thought since they felt like on the off chance that they were divine beings and can do anything to their detainees. During their time in jail, it demonstrated that cellmates were being influenced physically and rationally.

Stanford Prison Experiment: The Ethical Issues

In the Stanford prison project, they took a group and made some guards and some prisoners. The guards began to abuse and verbally torture the prisoners. The university students participated willingly with no use of force. These students signed contracts that listed instructions for what was expected of them. The experiment lasted for two weeks and they were paid for their time. The guard participants were told physical aggression and punishment was not allowed. The plan was to study how guards and prisoners reacted to their situations. Each prisoner was arrested and blind folded to the jail. The prisoners were strip searched and chained. The first prisoner to be arrested was outraged at the way he was treated. The guards were issued mirrored sunglasses and a night stick. They were assigned to an individual prisoner and had to do line-ups daily. The guards had total control over the prisoners. Everything was video recorded in the prison. Each participant was interviewed by the researchers throughout the experiment to see their reactions. They ended up stopping the experiment early because the guards were abusing power and the prisoners were rebelling in return. Five prisoner participants had to be released early because of acute anxiety due to their severe treatment. The guards were pugnacious towards the prisoners without reason. The guards were disappointed when the experiment ended early. I was appalled at the way the guards took things to extremes on their own accord.

There were many ethical issues with this experiment. The prisoners did not agree to being arrested at home. The guards were told to increase the voltage for every wrong answer and didn’t stop when the prisoners begged them to. These were regular people torturing an innocent participant. Zimbardo Stanford was in control of the guards. This was unethical because it was his experiment. The guards punished one of the prisoners for rebelling by putting him in the hole. They even started waking them up in the middle of the night to do grit work. They also talked the leader of the rebellion to be a snitch and lie to the other prisoners. The situation was supposed to be an experiment, but the guards took it to an unreal level. No one was making the guards mistreat the prisoners. The torturous treatment was done of their free will. Another ethical issue was that there were know actual rules for the guards or prisoners. These men really believed they were unable to get out. The prisoners were accepting whatever the guards told them was reality. The guards treated these men like animals and had not a second thought about it. The prisoners were mentally berated and made to do things no one should be subjected to. The students had to clean toilets with their bare hands. These normal students were willing to torture human beings the same way the Nazis did. During the seventies there were no guidelines on how to treat a prisoner. Social Psychology tells us that in adverse situations normal people will react in chaotic ways. This experiment proved the point but was biased by negative incentives. I fail to see how the results can be accurate. The prisoners were aware that it wasn’t a real prison, but ended up believing what the guards said to be true.

The ethical issues with the prison system can be addressed by setting up guidelines for the guards to adhere to. The guards should have consequences for breaking the rules. The experiment should have had stricter rules for the guards. The study did not contain a control group or an independent variable, which is needed in any experiment. So there was no baseline for comparison to achieve quality results. The biggest problem was the treatment of the prisoner participants. The guards could do what they deemed necessary. The lack human rights for the prisoners was an issue also. They were referred to by a number, like they were no better than prisoners of war. The results of this experiment forced new regulations on study proposals to make certain that they meet the ethical standards set forth by the American Psychological Association. The fact that anyone would torture another human being for $15.00 an hour is beyond any human decency. The prison systems need stricter rules for guard to keep abuse of prisoners from happening. This experiment seemed like a way for Zimbardo to see his sick fantasy played out. It defied the process of the scientific method and went against medical standards also. This reminded me of a mad scientist movie from the seventies. Abuse in the prison system is an issue still today. Zimbardo just showed us a glimpse of the chaos that really happens in prisons. The participants in the experiment were volunteers, I can only imagine the horror of what really happens to prisoners. This study was so influential that it is used in psychology and criminal justice classes. Today this study would have been considered unethical and invalid for research. This was a wakeup call for the fight for fair treatment of prisoners. The students who participated in the experiment were normal people who let Phillip Zimbardo get into their head.

The Murder Of Piggy: The Pyramid Of Hate And The Stanford Prison Experiment

Into:

Barbarism prevailed over civilization in a series of events that resulted in the tragic death of Piggy when Roger released a boulder on him in William Golding’s novel Lord of the Flies. Although Roger was influenced by Jack to act savagely, his own actions warrant a first degree murder charge for the death of Piggy because of his willfulness, deliberation, and premeditation to hurt Piggy. Roger always had a destructive nature and a clear motive to kill. The Pyramid of Hate and the Stanford Prison Experiment further explain why Roger is guilty. Some argue that Roger was influenced and just wanted to have fun with games, but this is not true as evidence from the beginning of the book reveals his true self.

Support/Evidence:

Roger’s bad nature slowly got worse as time passed, and when the opportunity presented itself to cause severe destruction, he made use of it. Roger is introduced as “a slight, furtive boy whom no one knew, who kept to himself with an inner intensity of avoidance and secrecy” (22). Golding describes Roger with a dark tone isolated from everyone else which makes the reader wonder what dark secret Roger holds. Later on, it is clear that his secret is his destructive nature. One day as Roger is exiting the forest, he “led the way straight through the castles, kicking them over, burying the flowers, scattering the chosen stones … The three littluns paused in their game and looked up” (60). Golding presents vivid imagery to show how Roger intends to cause havoc, in this case destroying the littluns sandcastles, even in a time of peace. This is not the only time where Roger exerts this behavior; just after the sandcastle incident, Roger “gathered a handful of stones and began to throw them [at another boy]” (62). This is all for no reason and shows his willfulness to cause harm to anyone. Eventually, Roger’s demeanor turns from wanting to harm to his desire to kill. After a while, the boys start to attack another boy like the boy is a pig. Jack “had him [the boy] by the hair and was brandishing his knife. Behind him was Roger, fighting to get close” (114). As all of the fighting is happening, Golding chooses to describe Roger “fighting to get close” to show how Roger wants to deliver that final death strike. Although it was a group effort that got carried away in the killing, Godling sends a message that Roger desires to kill. Roger finally gets his moment to kill when he has the chance to release a boulder on Piggy. Previously, Roger came across the boulder and found out what it was for. A boy told him “The chief [Jack] said we got the challenge everyone” and showed Roger “a log that had been jammed under the topmost rock and another level under that … A full effort would send the rock thundering down to the neck of the land. Roger admired” (159). By Roger learning about and admiring the rocks capabilities, it shows that the group was planning on releasing the boulder. Jack had instructed everyone to eliminate any threats, and Roger wasn’t going to miss out on any opportunity. Finally, the time comes when Piggy is in reach of the boulder’s path. Roger “with a sense of delirious abandonment, leaned all his weight on the lever” (180), causing the boulder to fall and strike and kill Piggy. Roger clearly expressed deliberation as he leaned all his weight while also enjoying it. All in all, Roger expressed willfulness to kill Piggy with his nature to kill, premeditation when learning about the boulder, and deliberation when he delivered the final blow.

Similarly to evidence from the book, The Pyramid of Hate and the Stanford Prison Experiment also show that Roger is guilty of murdering Piggy. Roger and the other boys singled out Piggy for being fat from the beginning after barley meeting him, which caused Roger and the others to get annoyed at Piggy. According to The Pyramid of Hate, these small acts of prejudice can escalate, and in this case, become Roger’s motive to kill Piggy. The Stanford Prison Experiment was an experiment that divided two groups into prisoners and guards. The result was the guards taking the job very seriously and behaving in a destructively towards the prisoners. This relates to Roger went on pig hunts and took it seriously as well and shows that Roger’s destructive behavior is normal and no fluke. This means that Roger acted under his own conscious when he decided to kill Piggy.

Counters and Rebuttals:

Roger’s demeanor clearly shows that he is guilty of the murder of Piggy, but some skeptics still disagree. Some skeptics argue that Jack, not Roger, should be at fault since Jack heavily influenced Roger, however they don’t realize that it was still Roger’s actions and intent to kill. Also, Jack only influenced him when the boys split up, and numerous incidents such as the sandcastle one show that he was always bad natured before that. Jack only wants power, while Roger wants terror.

Although all the evidence points to Roger being a psychopath, some still argue that Roger is an innocent young boy. They state that Roger just wants to have fun with no intention to harm, as shown when he throws rocks at a boy while aiming to miss. They don’t realize that the reason he misses is not that he doesn’t want to cause harm. When he was throwing the rocks, his arm “was conditioned by a civilization” (62). He threw the rocks because the sense of civilization was still affecting him. If the did throw the rocks directly at the boy, he would have gotten in trouble back home. Later on in the book, when it is clear that civilization is not present, it is clear to Roger that he can do what he wants with no consequences.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, Roger showed willfulness, deliberation, and premeditation to hurt Piggy, which displays why he should be deemed guilty of first degree murder. His bad nature got the best of him, and an innocent boy paid the price. This relates to us, the readers, as it shows how a sense of civilization can disappear very quickly if there is no one to enforce any rules. The consequence of this is that terror can rise quickly if there is no outside force to prevent it.

Stanford Prison Experiment: Conformity Theory Annotated Bibliography

My essay will be highlighting the conformity theory and how it negatively affects youth. Conformity theory is where a person changes their behaviour and or their beliefs in order to feel accepted by a social group, this can be displayed in 3 stages: compliance, identification, and internalisation. I will be focusing on how each stage of conformity has carried out negatively using examples such as a negative high school experience, the Stanford Prison Experiment and the Manson Family. These three components can be applied to adolescents need to change their attitudes because of social influences.

Stage 1: Compliance

Sowden, S., Koletsi, S., Lymberopoulos, E., Militaru, E., Catmur, C., & Bird, G. (2018). Quantifying compliance and acceptance through public and private social conformity. Consciousness and Cognition, 65, 359–367. (Found using PsycArticles)

This journal article discusses how compliance occurs when an individual conforms in public. A person in the compliance stage of the conformity theory will change their public beliefs by what they say or how they act, but in secret, will maintain their own private beliefs. This journal was written April 2018 but revised July 2018 making it the most current source; written by Sofia Koletsi, Eva Lymberopoulos, Elisabeta Militaru, and Caroline Catmur are apart of the Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience at King’s College London, UK. As well Sophie Sowden and Geoffrey Bird whom are both involved in the department of psychology in addition to social, genetic and developmental psychiatry centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience at King’s College London, UK. In the article the authors explain how acceptance occurs when a group’s influences is internalized (Sowden et al., 2018) and when exposure to outside attitudes and beliefs can alter the individual’s behaviours and beliefs in order to “fit in” with the group.

I chose this article because of its recent outlook on how the compliance stage and how it reflects with adolescents adjusting their behaviours in order to conform to a certain group would benefit my argument.

Stage 2: Identification

Falomir Pichastor, J. M., Gabarrot, F., & Mugny, G. (2009). Conformity and identity threat: The role of group identification. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.DBAAA33F&site=eds-live (Found using PyscArticles)

This article focuses on an experiment about the threat to ingroup identification. It talks about pro vs. anti- discriminatory ingroup norms against outside foreigners. Identification is normally the result of normative social influence. When a person changes their public behaviours, just like compliance stage, however they also change their private beliefs, but only when the group is present. The main author is Juan M. Falomir-Pichastor, the University of Geneva and can be reached at Juan.Falomir@unige.ch. The purpose of this experiment was to prove that group members do not conform blindly to group norms, rather they carefully follow the norms that are in agreement with their own personal motivations, beliefs and values. A better known example of the identification stage is The Stanford Prison Experiment, in 1971, the students took on their roles as abusive prison guards or as submissive prisoners in an experiment to understand the development of norms and the effects of roles, labels, and social expectations.

I chose this article because they had the same findings in their experiment as the Stanford Prison Experiment and provided an in depth view on the identification stage.

Stage 3: Internalisation

Altman, R. (2015). Sympathy for the Devil: Charles Mansons Exploitation of … Retrieved October 18, 2019, from https://scholar.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2017&context=honr_theses. (Found using Google Search Engine)

This academic journal looks at the Mason family and how Charles Mason manipulate his followers to commit sinister acts by creating a “family” to fulfill his followers basic needs. Internalisation is the strongest form of conformity and is when an individual wants to be accepted so badly that they change their beliefs and adapt to an entirely different behavior. When an insecure and vulnerable person is trying to conform to a certain group they are likely to get taken advantage of and are easily taken in by low life personalities. Charles Masnon was a prime example of someone who would take advantage of vulnerable people. Manson was a cult leader in the 1960s’ whom is famous for preying on a vulnerable young people by becoming a crucial part of their identity and self esteem. He went on to create the “Manson Family”, a group of loyal followers who eventually committed murders of 7 people. Robin Altman, University of Colorado is the author of this academic paper and wrote the paper for his bachelor of arts in history with honours in april of 2015.

I chose to research and include the Manson Family in my theory of conformity paper because this cult showcased how conformity at its strongest form can function in such a negative way and in this case killing to satisfy the groups leader.

Stanford Prison Experiment And The Era of Unethical Research

The malpractice and distrust of physicians, Doctors, and clinical researchers has caused for uneasiness on both sides of the argument on medicine and clinical research. The topic of malpractice is not limited to practicing medicine, of course. Many researchers conduct experiments in order to attain the wealth of knowledge; however, this different path may not always dissuade them from any type of malpractice. There have been many studies that have been subject to different types of malpractice and unethical research on humans. Such studies have included the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male, the Little Albert Experiment, and the Stanford Prison Experiment. The full ramifications of these experiments were not fully disclosed to the participants, along with the lack of unbiased consent being given; therefore, many of these participants were either injured, killed, or abused both physically and mentally during the experiments. Clinical research of high magnitude that involves human test subjects should be overseen by a type of health and wellness agency throughout the entire experiment, regardless of an increase in tax rate, to ensure their physical and emotional safety, along with making sure that they are aware of the risks that come with experimentation.

Medical malpractice is defined as any act or omission by a medical professional that deviates from the accepted medical standard of care, where the act of negligence is usually the main cause of malpractice.[footnoteRef:0] Over the past 30 years, medical malpractice has become one of the most difficult healthcare issues in the United States since medical malpractice premiums total more than $5 billion each year.[footnoteRef:1] For cases to be considered as medical malpractice, these three characteristics must be examined: violations of standard care, injuries caused by negligence, and injuries that resulted in significant damages.[footnoteRef:2] A violation of standard care can stem from a patient having the belief that their personal health care professional did not deliver care that was consistent with the certain medical standards that are upheld by the law.[footnoteRef:3] A patient’s claim for negligence from a healthcare professional is not enough for the majority of medical malpractice lawsuits to be filed; therefore, the patient must be able to provide evidence of injury that was caused from the negligence of the professional in order to have a favorable chance of success.[footnoteRef:4] The negative aspect of a patient wanting to file a medical malpractice lawsuit against their health care provider are the significant amount of damages that accrue. Medical malpractice lawsuits are commonly known to be very expensive, and in most cases, the costs of filing and going through the case will eventually become more costly than the total amount of the recovery itself.[footnoteRef:5] This is why the patient must provide enough evidence of how their injury resulted in significant damages that outweigh the cost of the case (disability, loss of income, medical bills, etc).[footnoteRef:6] Medical malpractice was prominent in the era where researchers abused their participants in the experiments by exploiting them to dangers that satisfy the characteristics, since it was done onto underserved populations who did not know that they were going to be abused during experimentation. [0: ] [1: ] [2: ] [3: ] [4: ] [5: ] [6: ]

Although having to report the entirety of the experiment to a health and wellness agency, such as a revised form of an Institutional Review Board (IRB) would enforce research requiring human test subjects to be ethical, additional funding would need to be provided in order to have these types of agencies in place. Therefore, this would ultimately cause for an increase in tax rate for U.S citizens, thus contradicting these health and wellness agencies overseeing research experiments. Having health and wellness agencies in order to ensure that researchers are staying within ethical standards does not come without a price. The agencies could either be government-funded or private, funded by an outside party. These private agencies would have to become accredited by the state in order to supervise research experiments. While the main motive of these private groups would be to fund research they believe in, they would have to ensure that the research stays ethical by taking on the same role as a government-funded agency; however, these outside parties must avoid providing input into the experiment since it would cause a bias to negatively affect the experiment. If they choose to not avoid bias, then they may feel obligated to withdraw their funding, which would cause for the researchers of the experiment to look for another private agency that would provide both funding and an ethical policy that the researchers must abide to. Essentially, if an experiment is being funded by a private agency, they cannot work or review any of the experiments being conducted since it would prove that a bias has been formed.

Having the private agencies take a step back in their direct involvement of experimentation is one tough aspect, but actually finding a private agency to fund an experiment where they cannot even put the slightest bit of input is even tougher. Besides the point of trying to attain either a government or private agency to oversee these research experiments, maybe the researchers do need to “stretch the limits” of their research in order to attain the wealth of knowledge necessary to make an impact on the medical community. While the increase in tax rate would be a problem that would not suit well with U.S citizens, having ethical research matters more. The cons of an increase in tax dollars do not outweigh the health and wellness of humans. If there is still a pushback, identifying certain non-profit organizations that simply believe in the research should able to fund the research along with making sure that the researchers stay within their ethical boundaries by instilling their own form of an IRB and looking after the board. In essence, the lives and well-being of any human along with maintaining one’s rights trump any increase in monetary value whatsoever.

The value of trust is emphasized highly in this world since it enables reassurance in one another. The African-Americans that participated in the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male were lied to about their present illness and were even deceived to participate in experimentation so that physicians and other researchers could be led on the path of finding a cure to syphilis for as cheap as possible.[footnoteRef:7] This caused for the African-Americans that participated to experience physical distress throughout the entirety of the experiment. The way the United States Public Health Service conducted the Tuskegee Study started the era of suspicion and distrust in physicians.[footnoteRef:8] When a series of sampling showed that 35% of the black population were infected with syphilis, the United States Public Health Service started a program that would diagnose and treat 10,000 African Americans with the disease; however, funding for this program was scarce, with only about 1,400 African-Americans receiving any type of treatment.[footnoteRef:9] The same organization that started on this project ended up taking a proposal that would involve the deception of their human test subjects, where the nature of their illness would not be known.[footnoteRef:10] When the research with syphilis first was conducted, racism was still a major issue. Initially, these researchers believed that blacks tolerated syphilis better and were less harmed by it than whites with no predetermined evidence to support this opinion.[footnoteRef:11] This widely held opinion with no factual evidence shows how a bias was initiated before experimentation, and how this group of innocent African-Americans was majorly harmed, proving as to why this study was unethical. This project was under no other supervision, as there were no other precautions to follow from an outside source. Instead, they performed this type of research on an underserved minority population at their own will. Overhead supervision from another agency keeping “tabs” on the research being performed could have prevented any type of malpractice on this underserved group. About 10 years after the study had started, Penicillin became readily available in order to cure the syphilis, but this treatment was not considered since the researchers did not want to skew the results of the experiment.[footnoteRef:12] This study has done nothing but provide a lack of trust between the African-American and medical community. Even today, there are still some African-Americans that do not like going to see their physician since they believe that they will not receive proper treatment and care. [7: ] [8: ] [9: ] [10: ] [11: ] [12: ]

Emotional distress can sometimes become more harmful than physical distress since psychological impairment can last a lifetime. Related to the subject of psychology, classical conditioning is a method where one learns through association by having two stimuli that are interlinked together in order to produce a newly learned response.[footnoteRef:13] John Watson was a renowned psychologist who began to use classical conditioning as a research tool that became necessary for psychological research experiments.[footnoteRef:14] The goal of Watson’s experiment was to instill a type of conditioned response in a child in order to develop a fear or phobia towards an outside stimulus.[footnoteRef:15] The method that this experiment stated it would undergo would not become approved for study in today’s world; however, this experiment took place in the 1920s, where experiments were not being screened for ethical purposes as they are today.[footnoteRef:16] Little Albert’s mother was an employee at the hospital where the research was going to be conducted.[footnoteRef:17] This allowed for representatives of the research experiment to consult with her about having her son participate due to the convenience of having him on site, along with the fact that Albert was known to be an unemotional child who rarely cried.[footnoteRef:18] The researchers were impressed by Albert’s ability to experience “relatively little harm” during the entire experiment; however, this decision backfired.[footnoteRef:19] Albert’s mother was reluctant of letting him participate until the representatives coerced her into making him into a participant.[footnoteRef:20] The amount of money that Albert’s mother would be receiving for having him participate along with the fear of losing her job swayed her into agreeing. The experiment required for Albert, who was 11-months old at the time, to become conditioned to fear a white laboratory rat.[footnoteRef:21] While instilling a certain phobia in a child was already harmful enough, the researchers of the experiment did not consider the life-altering effects that Albert would have after the experiment had been completed. The main criticism for this experiment stems from the fact that Watson failed to decondition Albert to the white laboratory rat when he originally planned to do so in order to further aid his research to show that a conditioned stimulus could eventually be removed if necessary.[footnoteRef:22] Instead, Albert left the experiment with a harmful phobia that he did not have before he began to participate in the experiment. The fact that Watson and his fellow researchers did not even attempt to abolish Albert’s phobia shows that they were negligent of the phobia that they caused Albert to develop. This experiment was not ethical to begin with since the main objective of the experiment was to instill emotional distress in a child that could impair the child for the rest of his/her life. Supervision from an agency would have never allowed for this type of research to be conducted, especially on a young child. The experiment on Albert has now caused for more caution on research involving any type of neurological experimentation, thus furthering the stigma around mental health disorders such as PTSD and anxiety. [13: ] [14: ] [15: ] [16: ] [17: ] [18: ] [19: ] [20: ] [21: ] [22: ]

Newly gained power must not be abused so that there may be a sense of balance and peace between people. Unfortunately, this was not the case in the Stanford Prison Experiment. The participants in this experiment included college males, who ended up experiencing both physical and emotional distress throughout the experiment. This is a famous experiment that had the initial motive of showing how powerful social situations can cause for young men to behave in a vicious manner.[footnoteRef:23] The experiment required for normal college males to become divided into two random groups: the prisoner group or the guard group.[footnoteRef:24] An ex-con named Carlos Prescott was even consulted by the research group in order to gain a realistic perspective of what the prison system was actually like.[footnoteRef:25] This was done to make sure that the male students participating felt as if they were apart of the prison system themselves. The overall goal of this experiment was to demonstrate the evil that good people can be pressured into committing onto other good people, due to their new sense of power and the amount of damage they can cause with it.[footnoteRef:26] This experiment took a turn for the worst, as the intended two-week study only lasted all of six days since the majority of the men participating began to behave in a pathological manner.[footnoteRef:27] The prisoners felt completely powerless and were abused by the guards in the experiment, which goes to show that the attitudes of people change when given power. This experiment was unethical from the start since verbal and physical abuse became utilized by the participants, who were still young and impressionable. While this experiment may have not been long-lasting, it still counts as a very abusive experiment under harsh conditions since it subjected the prisoners to a traumatic experience for seemingly no reason. A huge risk in the experiment was the violence of all the participants involved, due to the very abusive nature of the experiment. A superior health and wellness agency overseeing the experiment from start to finish would have immediately shut this project down simply due to the abusive nature the participants took on. [23: ] [24: ] [25: ] [26: ] [27: ]

All three of these experiments involving negligence from those conducting the experiments can be attributed to the lack of overhead supervision from a health and wellness agency, that work in tandem with an institution’s IRB if the research were to be conducted at an academic facility. The three research experiments discussed each should have utilized a type of health and wellness agency in order to oversee the research, regardless of whether it was government or privately funded. Specific laws set in place would have prevented discrimination and the abuse of an underserved population in the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male. Even in today’s research era, any type of clinical research involving test subjects with the same disease being tested should be subject to approval from the state in order to prevent any future harm onto these groups. As for the Little Albert and Stanford Prison Experiment, laws and regulations in place at the time would have prevented the acts of the both monetary and persuasive coercion, which may include both instilling a threat along with the use of “blackmail.”

Overall, maintaining the health and wellness of these patients is crucial in order to prevent traumatic experiences. The researchers that ran the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male, the Little Albert experiment, and the Stanford Prison Experiment all violated the rights of the patients involved in both physical and emotional aspects, while not ensuring that they were aware of the risks that came along with participating. The inclusion of the agencies would have protected each of the participants, and kept the researchers honest. Each of these experiments exposed them to trauma, which proved to be unethical. In conclusion, high magnitude clinical research studies involving human test subjects should be approved and overseen by a governing agency throughout the entirety of the experiment in order to meet ethical standards that satisfy confidentiality, protection, and consent.

Psychology of School Shooting Essay

This essay seeks to gather a more comprehensive perspective on how an individual could execute their peers and faculty in a mass school shooting. Focusing on the school shooting that took place in the town of Blacksburg, at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, on the 16th of April, 2007 (Virginia Tech Review Panel 2009). This academic piece will examine sociological and psychological attributes to gain some understanding as to why the shooter killed 32 fellow students. Followed by, a brief discussion on the damaging psychological effects it has on victims and the aim to recapture peace in American society. Investigating the tragedy of school shootings can be synthesized from various disciplines, while conducting academic studies in Sociology and Psychology and viewing all the available literature on crime and peace it became evident that this was the best avenue to approach. Although we will never know for certain Cho’s motivation behind this mass murder. It is human nature to ask “Why?” this horrendous crime happened? Tim Kaine, Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, organized the (Virginia Tech Review Panel 2009) this is used as a guide throughout ensuring all information used is correct.

(Costello 2010) Explains Hirschi’s 1969 theory of social control is comprised of four social bonds (1) attachment, (2) commitment, (3) involvement, and (4) beliefs. When the concreate of one or more of these four bonds crumbles we are more likely to subject ourselves to deviant and criminal acts. The first means of addressing this complex issue is Hirschi’s attachment bond. Attachment in psychology is a deep emotional bond that links people together. (Ainsworth, 1973). Mass shooters have no attachment to others, especially before and during the shootings. With a tendency to suppress their frustration and rage over an extended period before the incident. Show no remorse for human life and the terror they cause, fundamentally rationalizing their actions (Giddens 2011). In April 2007, Seung-Hui Cho, murdered 32 innocent victims, wounding 17 others, becoming the most malicious and devastating school shooting in US history (Virginia Tech Review Panel 2009). Using two semi-automatic pistols Cho fired recklessly into a large crowded area with no concern about who was killed or injured, showing clear psychological signs of intermittent explosive disorder and ineffective conflict resolution. In aiming to comprehend the complex and twisted logic behind Cho’s horrific outburst, could it be at one point or another was his attachment tarnished?

Thus, shifting the sociological analysis to an individual’s socialization. Firstly this stems from family, as (Berger and Luckmann 2011) discuss primary socialization is the first social group an individual inherits as a child, subsequently becoming a member of society. Following secondary socialization, which broadens the individual “into new sectors of the objective world of his society” (Berger and Luckamann 2011 p.120). For example, Cho entered his English studies at Virginia Tech. Cho sent a proposal to a publisher with high ambitions. Which was then “rejected”. The Perpetrator was also accused of stalking two female students and was diagnosed with extreme anxiety disorder, mutism, and manic depressive disorder (Virginia Tech Review Panel 2009). Therefore, further tarnishing his secondary experience. As a consequence of his stalking through the process of Frank Tannenbaum’s labeling theory, society identifies Cho as a deviant. (Giddens and Sutton 2017). At further analysis is it evident that this flows into (Lemert 1972) explanation of social acts, how once a person commits a primary deviant act violating norms they inherit a deviant social role. In marginalizing deviant behavior an individual ultimately initiates secondary deviance, as they accept the deviant label as their master status consequently overriding their self-identity. Therefore leading to more deviant behavior. For Cho, this secondary deviant act ended in mass devastation. It is clear that Cho’s negative experience involving his undergraduate social group was expressed through the barrel of his guns’. Once more, this proves the argument that the shooter’s attachment towards his peers was non-existent and at some point damaged.

Looking through another avenue of sociology (Taylor et al 1973) drew on Marxist theory, disputing that deviance is knowingly selected and often political. Arguing against the idea of deviance being caused by, labeling, anomie and social disorganization, and biological reasoning. (Taylor et al 1973) expresses that one becomes deviant because of the inequalities of the capitalist system. Cho initially shot and murdered 2 victims in a female dormitory. After this violent act, Cho returned to his room, rearming and mailed a parcel to the NBC News containing, documents, 29 pictures of himself holding various weapons, and a digital video exclaiming: “You just loved crucifying me” “You loved inducing cancer in my head, terrorizing my heart and ripping my soul all the time” (Hauser 2007). Showing major signs of psychological damage, erratic aggression, and impulse control disorder. The perpetrator criticized materialism, fortune, and the privilege of others. Did Cho justify his criminal behavior through left realism as a form of rebellion? (Giddens 2017) Lived in a capitalistic society he felt economically excluded as he couldn’t afford what others could in this school. He stated in his video “You had everything you wanted. Your Mercedes wasn’t enough. Your vodka and cognac wasn’t enough. Your trust fund wasn’t enough. All your debaucheries weren’t enough.” (Hauser 2007). Even though graduation was just a couple of weeks away and Cho would fundamentally begin earning his own money, but all he had on his mind was vengeance.

In the United States, gun-related violence has dramatically amplified to an alarming rate. The atmosphere in any school is based around a safe environment for students and staff. When shootings occur that sense of security essentially becomes obsolete. Using the aid of both disciplines a ‘more enriched view of the issue, or topic at hand’ (Richards 1996, p125) could be formulated. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is one of the main psychological effects a student, teacher, or parent may face after a mass shooting. In particular, school plays a vital role in one’s psychological development. An overwhelming sense of depression, fear, inability to fulfill academic standards, grief, decline in trust, anxiety, loss of control, and nightmares are just some of the issues survivors can face (Keller 2019). With the overwhelming trauma and devastation shooters cause, an element of peace still prevails. “A Peace Plan for a Safer America” plans to stop this deadly epidemic of gun violence and rally for justice disregarding the American societal belief that guns can solve their problems. (March for Our Lives 2018). By examining the psychological impacts gun violence has on society this peace plan is a step in the right direction. The university rallied together forming prayer groups, and candlelight vigils where thousands gathered standing to honor the victims. Hundreds of volunteers filled the campus offering services to anyone affected. Governor Tim Kaine, President George Bush, University President Charles Steger, and many more addressed the world sharing their grief and offering peace among those affected. (Virginia Tech Review Panel 2009).

The real reason behind why this tragic and violent attack happened will never be truly known. However, by examining this through a theoretical interpretation an academic assumption could be conveyed, by using an interdisciplinary method of analysis looking at sociological theories, and their psychological attributes. Since the 1764 Pontiac Rebellion School Massacre was the earliest known school shooting in US history, school shootings are still a colossal issue in American society (Dixon 2005). Interpretations as to why the perpetrators carried out these attacks can aid in spotting red flags in other potential shooters. Interdisciplinary research requires looking at a complex issue from various viewpoints. Despite the fact this malicious and violent attack psychologically and physically damaged so many, an element of peace still shined through as Americans united from government agencies to volunteers to support the survivors and mourn the loss of life. “The world cannot be changed rationally unless it is interpreted adequately” (Corson, 1991, p. 223).

Reference List:

1. Ainsworth, M, D. S. (1973). The development of infant-mother attachment. Review of child development research (Vol. 3) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Becker, H. S (1963) Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press.
3. Corson, D., (1991). Bhaskar’s critical realism and educational knowledge. British Journal of Sociology of Education. 12(2):223-241.
4. Costello, B.C., (2010) Encyclopedia of Criminological Theory, SAGE Publications, Inc. [online], available: https://study.sagepub.com/system/files/Hirschi%2C_Travis_-_Social_Control_Theory.pdf [accessed 12 Nov 2019].
5. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
6. Dixon, D. (2005). Never come to peace again: Pontiac’s uprising and the fate of the British Empire in North America. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
7. Giddens, A. (2011) Sociology 6th edition, Malden: Polity Press.
8. Giddens, A. and Sutton, P. W. (2017) Sociology 8th edition, Malden: Polity Press.
9. Hauser, C. (2007) ‘Gunman Sent Photos, Video and Writings to NBC´ The New York Times, 18 April, available: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/18/us/18cnd-virginia.html?module=ArrowsNav&contentCollection=U.S.&action=keypress&region=FixedLeft&pgtype=article [accessed 13 Nov 2019].
10. Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press
11. Keller, J. (2019) ‘The psychological aftermath of surviving school shootings’ Pacific Standard [25 March], available: https://psmag.com/education/the-psychological-aftermath-of-surviving-school-shootings [accessed: 9th Nov 2019]
12. Lemert, E. (1972) Human Deviance, Social Problems, and Social Control. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall.
13. March for our lives (2018) ‘Peace Plan for a Safer America’, Overview [online], available: https://marchforourlives.com/peace-plan/ [accessed 11 Nov 2019].
14. Richards, D. G. (1996) ‘The Meaning and Relevance of Synthesis in Interdisciplinary Studies’, The Journal of Gen Ed, 45:114-28.
15. Taylor, I., Walton, P. and Young, J. (1973). The New Criminology: For a Social Theory of Deviance. International library of sociology: Routledge.
16. Virginia Tech Review Panel (2009) Mass Shootings at Virginia Tech Addendum to the Report of the Review Panel, Arlington: TriData Division, System Planning Corporation, available: https://web.archive.org/web/20131015082946/http://www.governor.virginia.gov/TempContent/techPanelReport-docs/VT_Addendum_12-2-2009.pdf [accessed 11 Nov 2019].

Positive Leadership Behavior In Planned Parenthood

A leader is someone that is able to effectively communicate with people in a way that inspires and motivates them (Ward, 2020). A leader must be personable for those to follow their lead and provide them with an example of how to hold ones themselves accountable for their individual work (Ward, 2020). My leader of choice is the Vice President of Health Services for Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio. She is very persuasive when it comes to getting others to do what is needed to keep the organization moving in the right direction. She has great communication skills and is willing to do what it takes to get the job done. She does not mind jumping in to help others learn and develop. She provides a personable and compassionate approach to the mission of the organization. She has held different roles within the organization, she has been with Planned Parenthood for over 25 years. She is very educated not only with her degrees, but within different departments of the organization. She does have subordinates that she is responsible for that hold different positions in different departments that help keep her informed of how things are going. These four to five subordinates cover the entire organization. From the time I have known her within the organization is she was the Director of Business Operations, and a few years ago she became the VP of Health Services.

Her positive attributes are empowerment, integrity, decision making skills, good communication skills, inspire others and confidence. She has every quality of a good leader; she can communicate well with all departments through different chains of communication. She gives us the tools that empower us as leaders under her to make good decisions and able to keep the business operational. She is trustworthy and shows integrity in all that she does. When it comes to working in a reproductive health care world that you have those that are for you and against you, you must be one tough cookie, and that she is. She has good decision-making skills, because she is always looking for ways to get new services off the ground. She is committed to the mission and driven to the work no matter what stacks up against her. When we had to do lay offs she was the one making tough decisions to do so and she stood in front of each one of those individuals and had these tough conversations, she did not leave this for someone else to communicate. She holds herself with the upmost confidence and uses her compassion to inspire others. She is highly respected and well liked. Overall, what makes her an ethical leader is her confidence, integrity, and her compassion for the mission. She is supportive of all employees and is without judgment.

How she models ethical leadership behavior to others is by jumping in and helping when things get tough. She does not leave hard work for us to deal with alone, she is always front and center. When it comes to meetings, she is always present and always providing her well educated opinions and decisions. She allows us to make our own decisions and if we do something that is wrong or incorrect, she can talk about it and turn things around opposed to accusing ill intentions. She trusts her leaders to lead without micromanaging them. I do try to follow in her footsteps to model positive, ethical leadership. How I would model positive ethical leadership is to lead by example. Do not do anything that I would not allow my team to do when it comes to their job. I back them up 100%, however, if they are wrong about something I have them fix the issue and learn from it. I have learned that as a leader it is okay to make a mistake, just admit and move on. I have learned that confidence goes a long way when providing feedback to an employee. I have learned that without compassion for the mission it is hard to do this work everyday with confidence and grace.

The three most important qualities in a leader that models positive, ethical leadership behavior is fairness, respect and leads by example. The reason that I feel these are the most important qualities to have are because of employees wants in needs in a career is someone that is fair, someone they can trust and respect them. A leader that leads by example encourages and inspires others to do what is right within the organization. Employees look up to that leader and want to be like them as they become more invested in the organization. This leads employees to want to do more for the organization and lead them to grow and develop into different roles.

References

1. Ward, S. (2020, 09 17). What is Leadership? Retrieved from The Balance Small Business: https://www.thebalancesmb.com/leadership-definition-2948275

McDonald’s Sociological Observation 

There are about sixty-nine million McDonald’s customers served each day. Many people don’t notice their social movements and interactions. Everyone uses them and carefully judges and analyzes other people. I went to a local McDonald’s and analyzed the location, their clothing options, and how they interacted with one another. With the information at McDonald’s, I will present a Sociological Observation.

The physical setting of the McDonald’s was very clean during my time there they wiped the seats and tables and swept and mopped the floor. Due to the fact, that McDonald’s is a fast food restaurant key objects are cash registers, tables, seats, and public restrooms. The mood of the McDonald’s was very calm and serene because there tended to be fewer customers in the afternoon around 5-10 pm. A mores is employees have to follow are being polite and having great customer service. Showing teamwork, respect, accountability, integrity, and innovation. According to McDonald’s website, “Workers should have ethical, truthful, and dependable and reflect through standards of business conduct.” In this particular McDonald’s the 3’s rule is enforced no shirt no shoes no service. During my stay, I saw a worker getting in trouble for violating the rules for talking to customers for non-related reasons to his job.

Most often customers just ordered their food and had limited interactions with the employees. Workers would interact more when there were no customers. During the observation, a total of 12 dyads, 3 single, a group of 4 men, and one family. customers showed up. Which meant most people came in with some other companion. Out of those groups, only 2 stayed to eat. People stayed no longer than 15 minutes. People tend to be louder when they are not alone. For example, a group of 4 men seemed to be louder than a man who came in by himself. Most often people interacted more with their group than with others because they knew themselves personally. (Chapter 5: Groups within society) Another observation was kids usually order more when their parents are present rather than alone. Two friends came in and knew what they were going to buy with the money they had. On the other hand, the children in the family took their time to decide what they were going to order. Customers mainly dressed very casually. Employees wore a uniform. (Chapter 2: Material culture)

Ascribed statuses are siblings, mother, father, male, and female. Examples of achieved statuses at McDonald’s are customers, cashiers, and managers. (Chapter 4: components of social structure) A cashier’s role is to take people’s orders and make sure the customer is satisfied. A customer’s role is to purchase an item. A manager’s role is to manage the worker’s tasks and avoid chaos. All of these statuses are at this location because it is a fast-food restaurant. People at McDonald’s are part of an aggregate group. There are other types of groups a family, for instance, would be a primary group. (Chapter 5: Groups within society) The leader of the McDonald’s workers is the manager and they are an instrumental leader and the style would be authoritarian. What I learned by observing McDonald’s sociologically is lots of people are afraid to break their comfort zones and stay within the boundaries they know of and why workers and customers act due to social and cultural norms.

To summarize, I observed customers and employees to give a sociological observation. Many different people visit McDonald’s every day. They all have a common factor the way they dress, how they interact, statuses, and roles. And most of it is influenced by social and cultural norms. “People act to the outside the way they feel on the inside.”- Tracy McMillan