Category: Human behavior

Have you at any point encountered the Mandela Effect? The Mandela Effect is a marvel experienced by a huge gathering of people who accept that they have ‘shared bogus recollections of past occasions’. Many have likewise theorized that this sensation is brought about by a parallel universe gushing into our own, though others portray it as a non-satisfaction of aggregate memory. This ‘hypothesis’ came to be the point at which various individuals approached expressing that they were sure they could review the passing of Mandela, thinking back to the ’80s. Despite what many ‘think’ or ‘thought,’ Mandela’s passing was on December 5, 2013, in insubordination of many guaranteeing they had seen broadcast clasps of his memorial service. Have you at any point felt like you’ve been someplace previously? Or then again perhaps you’ve had a feeling that you’ve carried on a minute but couldn’t put your finger on it. Keep perusing to more readily comprehend this wonder.

Psychologists call the marvel confabulation. The term is utilized clinically to allude to memory absconds experienced by patients with mind endangerment, and to portray regular marvels like decorating reality when relating occasions and developing certainties on the fly to fill in holes in memory. We’ve all done these things one after another or another, however, we’re infrequently aware of it when we do. Human memory is an impossible-to-miss thing, on the double shocking in its degree and control and alarming in its uncertainty. There’s a lot of we don’t think about how memory functions, yet get the job done and state, it isn’t great. Especially vexing is the wonder of bogus recollections, wrong or unwittingly manufactured memories of past occasions that vibe so genuine and genuine that individuals who experience them won’t acknowledge proof despite what might be expected.

A main mental hypothesis holds that memory is productive, not regenerative according to “David Emery, ‘s The Mandela Effect” the mind assembles recollections out of different odds and ends of data on the fly instead of playing them back like a chronicle. Recollections aren’t unadulterated. They can be misshaped by any number of elements, including predisposition, affiliation, creative mind, and companion pressure. One hypothesis dependent on standards of quantum mechanics holds that individuals who experience the Mandela Effect may have ‘slid’ between parallel substances In the wake of experiencing childhood in a universe where it was ‘Berenstein’ Bears, for instance, a few people one day woke up to end up in an imaginary world with ‘Berenstain’ Bears.

How about we start with the explanation we’re all here for? Nelson Mandela, whom this hypothesis is named after, was found dead in 2013. Be that as it may, incalculable individuals particularly recall him dying in jail during the 1980s. They had recollections of Nelson Mandela’s burial service in the late twentieth century. Numerous individuals recalled almost indistinguishable details of that memorial service including on American, Canadian, and British TV. None of us could clarify that incident or coincidence. His passing isn’t the main cause of the Mandela Effect. We have been off base about such a significant number of dates, subtleties, and then some. Prop up for all the more generally misremembered crossroads in history. These were the first recorded ‘false memories’ an individual experienced.

Going back on this subject one of the most notorious outbreaks for this phenomenon was about “The Berenstain Bears”. Formally known by everyone as “The Berenstein Bears” but was never given a double take until now. Many acquire the remembrance of these cartoons we all watched growing up named a certain way, but a few individuals began to be attracted to the idea that this was not how they remembered their beloved cartoon. The creepiest part is the fact that if you google the way you remembered the name of this cartoon, you get autocorrected and receive no sign of another source with its name spelled like so. Many people came across their copies of these tapes, as if time didn’t influence all the content.

These short-term memory theories don’t stop there. In the previous paragraph, we concluded our thoughts on “The Berenstain Bears”. As we continue down the dark path that this theory holds, we can start to picture some other things that have begun to drastically change throughout the years without us even knowing. Another phenomenon that was brought up was about the Monopoly man and how we recall him using a monocle on his eye while other pictures state that he never had it to begin with. Although these phenomena are pretty absurd, we can’t process the thought of multiple realities or even time travel.

No single case of the Mandela Effect has created more online buzz than that of the kids’ book arrangement and energized TV show The Berenstain Bears. Many individuals who grew up with the arrangement, it turns out, recall the title being The Berenstein Bears, with the name finishing off with ‘ein’ rather than ‘ain’.

Many believe we came across time travelers who began to disarrange our past and automatically began a domino effect that completely altered our reality now by changing the smallest thing in the past. A little like the “Butterfly Effect” where a Butterfly flaps its wings and can easily cause a hurricane somewhere else.

Extraordinary amounts of people have grown fascinated with the phenomena of shared false memories, recently more frequently referred to as The Mandela Effect. When most supporters first learn about the effect it seems as if the evidence is extremely solid and infinite in size. When scrutinized more closely, the reasoning and so-called evidence don’t seem very reliable. Although the supporters of the effect try to make sound reasoning for their case, they fail to prove its legitimacy and make a foolproof argument.

The first flaw in the argument of proving the Mandela Effect is a result of multiple realities is the logic behind this theory. The idea is that just because a large group of people share an incorrect memory, does not mean that memory is real. These false memories can be explained through a little basic knowledge of how memories are made and stored and the errors that our brains can make. Many errors are due to a term known as confabulation. When the brain recalls some information, but cannot remember small bits and pieces, it fills in the gaps with information suggested after the memory was created. During this entire process, the brain never allows one to know that it does not remember correctly.

Errors that are reported time and time again can misinform the general public. Today’s world with the audience that has access to the internet only magnifies this misinformation effect.

For example, a widely reported example of the Mandela Effect is Princess Diana getting in a car crash on television. While in reality film from a re-enactment was circulated widely over the internet which led to confusion among large groups of people. The public then had the incorrect memory of watching real footage of the incident. In this way, many false memories can be attributed to misinformation or confusion among many. The fact that most examples of the Effect are not related to important cases only supports the idea that it is due to faulty reasoning or selective attention.

Science although backing the multiverse theory in some ways, also gives good reason to believe these memories can be explained through psychology. There have been countless studies done to investigate the malleability of memories in the brain and how easy it is to manipulate a person’s memories. Although not disproving the multiverse theory, these studies only bolster the argument for simple psychological reasoning behind the Mandela Effect. One such study, titled: Planting misinformation in the human mind: A 30-year investigation of the malleability of memory, by Elizabeth Loftus. Loftus is an expert on the subject and in an excerpt from the study she states,

“The misinformation effect refers to the impairment in memory for the past that arises after exposure to misleading information. The phenomenon has been investigated for at least 30 years, as investigators have addressed several issues…The misinformation effect has been observed in a variety of human and nonhuman species. And some groups of individuals are more susceptible than others. At a more theoretical level, investigators have explored the fate of the original memory traces after exposure to misinformation appears to have made them inaccessible…people come to believe falsely that they experienced rich complex events that never, in fact, occurred.”

The consensus around the world among those who study memory is that the brain although unbelievably impressive, does allow memories to be constantly changing, and is not the most reliable source of information, especially for inconsequential facts or tidbits (Loftus).

Finally, a major point in disproving this theory is by taking a look at the sources that support the multiverse theory. Fiona Broome, the leading expert on the Mandela Effect is a self-proclaimed “Paranormal Activity Enthusiast” (Broome). The evidence that she based her initial theory on was a mere conversation between herself and a group of friends at a conference known as “Dragon Con”. On Dragon Con’s website, they describe themselves with the statement, “ We are the largest multi-media, popular culture convention focusing on science fiction and fantasy, gaming, comics, literature, art, music and film in the universe” (“Home Page | Dragoncon”). This does not give the people who started this gigantic movement much ethos to speak about theories that could hold such magnitude as this. With little to no substantial evidence, Mrs. Broome has even become discouraged in proving this theory. In a post on her website, as recent as 2018,

Broome herself digresses the inconsistent data, along with a lack of credible sources has proven fatal in concluding support of alternate timelines.

This does not completely discount the theory of more than one reality it is supported by the work of quantum physicists such as Erwin Schrödinger. Although this theory is exciting and for lack of better wording, fun to think about, until there is hard evidence about the existence of these multiple realities, psychological explanations seem much more plausible.

Works Cited

1. Broome, Fiona, et al. “Author and Paranormal Researcher.” Fiona Broome, fionabroome.com/.
2. “Home Page | Dragoncon.” Dragoncon, www.dragoncon.org/.
3. Loftus, Elizabeth. Planting Misinformation in the Human Mind: A 30-Year Investigation of the Malleability of Memory. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2013, static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/1468080/25884894/1421967454047/Loftus-2005.pdf? token=gogrZKTSyInosW2Lc17nTfg72k0%3D.

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 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)

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.

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.

Introduction:

Bird watching and jazz are two distinct forms of artistic expression that seemingly have little in common at first glance. However, upon deeper exploration, one can uncover surprising connections between these seemingly unrelated realms. This critical essay aims to delve into the shared elements of bird watching and jazz, examining how both activities tap into human emotions, evoke a sense of improvisation and spontaneity, and create a deep connection with the natural world.

Emotional Connection:

Bird watching and jazz both elicit a profound emotional response in their respective audiences. Bird watchers often describe a sense of wonder and awe when observing birds in their natural habitats. The fleeting moments of spotting a rare species or witnessing a unique behavior evoke a deep sense of joy and fascination. Similarly, jazz music has the power to stir emotions within listeners. The melodic improvisations, complex harmonies, and rhythmic variations create a range of emotions, from melancholy to excitement, mirroring the diverse array of bird species and their behaviors.

Improvisation and Spontaneity:

Both bird watching and jazz embrace the spirit of improvisation and spontaneity. Bird behavior in the wild is unpredictable, and bird watchers must be adaptable, ready to adjust their focus and follow the birds’ movements. Similarly, jazz musicians thrive on improvisation, creating unique melodies and solos in the moment, responding to the energy and dynamics of the music. The parallel between the improvisational nature of bird watching and jazz highlights the inherent beauty found in embracing the unexpected and being present in the moment.

Connection with Nature:

Bird watching is inherently linked to the natural world, as enthusiasts venture into forests, wetlands, and other habitats to observe avian species in their native environments. This immersion in nature fosters a sense of connection and appreciation for the environment, leading to increased environmental consciousness and conservation efforts. Similarly, jazz often draws inspiration from nature, with musicians using sounds and rhythms reminiscent of natural phenomena. Jazz compositions often reflect the ebb and flow of the natural world, capturing the essence of rivers, wind, and birdsong. Through this connection with nature, both bird watching and jazz serve as reminders of the importance of preserving and protecting our natural surroundings.

Influence and Inspiration:

Birds have long served as a source of inspiration for artists across various disciplines, including music. Jazz musicians, such as Charlie Parker, known as “Bird,” drew inspiration from the fluidity and freedom of bird flight in their compositions. Parker’s virtuosic improvisations mirrored the agility and grace of birds in flight, establishing him as one of the greatest jazz innovators. The influence of birds on jazz highlights the interplay between the natural world and musical expression, demonstrating how the observation of birds can shape and inform artistic creation.

Conclusion:

Bird watching and jazz may appear worlds apart, but they share an intrinsic connection through their ability to evoke emotions, embrace improvisation, foster a connection with nature, and inspire artistic expression. The critical exploration of these seemingly unrelated realms reveals the profound impact of nature on human creativity and the shared elements that bridge the gap between bird watching and jazz.

By recognizing the parallels between the observation of birds in their natural habitats and the improvisational nature of jazz music, we gain a deeper appreciation for the interconnectedness of art, music, and the natural world. Bird watching and jazz serve as reminders of the beauty and inspiration that can be found in our surroundings, encouraging us to engage with the world around us, embrace spontaneity, and express our creativity in unique and unexpected ways.

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.

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.

In order to understand the meaning and study of social psychology, it is crucial to identify the questions that social psychology seeks to answer. The ultimate goal of this discipline is to analyze how people think about, influence, and relate to one another. This study of our social interactions is a complex one; involving endless trails of concepts, theories, and studies that help better shape the subject itself. Myers notes within the text that we react differently because we all think differently, and with the help of social psychology we are better able to examine the reasons for this.

General psychology attempts to study the mind and its behaviors, focusing more on mental development and the habits of the human mind. This study of general psychology paves the way for every other subtopic, each of them diving deeper into more specific studies. Branching off of the main topic of psychology we see disciplines such as clinical psychology, criminal psychology, child psychology, etc. Each and every one is important and focuses on a different set of questions that people are interested in finding the answers to. Although all of these types of psychology fall under the same category, they differ in practice and study. Social psychology is unique because it takes the external factors of our world and helps link them to our behaviors and attitudes. Myers allows readers to gain insight on how the principles of social psychology are applicable in everyday life by explaining that “Social psychology has the potential to make visible the subtle influences that guide your thinking and acting.”(Myers, 2016) This real life applicability is unique to only some forms of psychology. In context but they differ due to the fact sociology deals more with specific groups within society, rather than the individual within society. The starting point for every category of psychology is different and they’ve all developed at different paces. By examining how we think and feel about ourselves and others, we are able to see why social psychology is so significant. The influence of our situations is in large part a reason for much of what we do. This idea is brought to light by disciplines such as social psychology and can help explain our actions and feelings as individuals in relation to our surroundings.

One major influence of any psychology is research. Research is vital to the process of studying social psychology as it seeks to take more large scale ideas of society and minimize them into different variables that are able to be observed or tested. The research aspect of this discipline is critical because although we can form theories, they can only be credible if backed by concrete evidence in research. There are many steps that precede research and this is where differing values come into play. One of these steps is the embrace of a research method, the research method determines the strategic plan of gathering information. Research methods allow social psychology to function properly and with organization. Our behavior as humans is often hard to observe within a worldly scope. In order to eliminate this difficulty, social psychologists narrow down the context of the behavior. Often times studies are done to detect the natural associations of our actions, seeing what type of behaviors occur organically and which do not. Other times the research is much more controlled and the environment of the study has more impact on the result. Myers quotes French scientist Jules Henri Poincaré as saying, “Science is built up with facts, as a house is with stones, but a collection of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house.”(Myers, 2016) This quote goes to show that the science of social psychology doesn’t mean much if there is an absence of research based facts and vice versa. Research often seeks to find how two different factors correlate, such as measuring levels of happiness in relation to exercise habits. By connecting the dots in social psychology we are more equipped to see how we relate with and are influenced by our environments. The different variables involved in research yield varying conclusions. For example, correlational research and experimental research seek to answer different questions and in doing so they involve different methods and factors. Myers defines correlational research as focusing more on the natural association of two or more factors. Experimental research pertaining more towards the manipulation one variable in order to measure its impact on another. Research, although very helpful, can raise questions of ethics among social psychologists. Things like random assignment assist in the output of accurate and unbiased research results by making the chances of exposure to a certain variable equal among the population. By manipulating a variable in research social psychologists can see how an alteration influences the experiment. Both types of research methods attempt to show how we as humans react to our subjective situations, often times contradicting popular beliefs about our self-awareness.

Looking more specifically into the lasting impact of research on social psychology, we are able to see first hand how experiments, like the ones conducted by Solomon Asch, leave lasting ideas on the subject. The conditions one is vulnerable to during research studies differ, but all conditions yield different findings. Solomon Asch, like many others, was attempting to answer the question of groups and how they socially influence our behavior. Group conformity is the idea that we alter our beliefs and actions in order to better fit in with the larger group at hand. This is not an uncommon idea and can be examined closely in everyday situations. Asch conducted a research study that aimed to identify the extent of which an individual could be pressured into conformity by a group. Myers informs readers that unlike Sherif’s darkened-room autokinetic experiments, Asch considered a less ambiguous reality than Sherif. (Myers, 2016) By creating a controlled experiment, Asch is able to view first hand how the common idea of a group with predisposed knowledge of the experiment, influences a single individual within that same group but lacking the knowledge of the circumstance.