| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "PERILS OBEDIENCE STANFORD PRISON EXPERIMENT": |
|
|
"The Perils of Obedience? and the ?Stanford Prison Experiment?, 2002.
A paper which draws comparisons between the books "The Perils of Obedience? by Stanley Milgram and the ?Stanford Prison Experiment? by Philip Zimbardo.
700 words (approx. 2.8 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 24.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper shows that both ?The Perils of Obedience? by Stanley Milgram and the ?Stanford Prison Experiment? by Philip Zimbardo essentially demonstrate the potential for ?evil? in ordinary citizens when placed in situations where stark authority is pitted against the individual?s own moral imperatives (Milgram) or when deindividuated potential perpetrators are given total power over powerless victims (Zimbardo). The paper shows that although the experiments differed vastly in design and methodology, the point of both experiments was to observe how far an individual would go in inflicting increasing pain on a victim.
From the Paper
"There were several common ethical issues thrown up by both experiments. As Zimbardo says, ?The line between Good and Evil lies in the center of every human heart?not in some abstract moral, celestial space?? (Sonoma State University Web site) Similarly, Milgram observes, ?Conservative philosophers argue that the very fabric of society is threatened by disobedience, while humanists stress the primacy of the individual conscience.? (Vanguard University Web site) Therefore, the same issue of ethics as in ?the individual conscience? is at the heart of both experiments on human psychology."
| |
|
The Stanford Prison Experiment, 2004.
A critical analysis of the Stanford Prison Experiment.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents a critical analysis of an experiment, known as the Stanford Prison Experiment, that was conducted in order to study the psychological mechanisms relevant to human aggression. The paper explains that the study involved a single treatment variable and random assignment to either a guard or prisoner.
From the Paper
In Zimbardo, Haney and Banks conducted the Stanford Prison Experiment or the Zimbardo experiment. For this study an experimental design was used. The experiment involved a single treatment variable and random assignment to either a guard or prisoner condition. The purpose of the research was to investigate the influence of factors that are situational on the behavior of participants. Specifically, the experiment was designed to study psychological mechanisms that underlie human aggression."
| |
|
The Stanford Prison Experiment, 2008.
This paper provides a critique of the prison experiment at the Stanford university.
1,011 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 2 sources, APA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses a study on the psychological effects of being a prisoner as well as a prison guard that was conducted at Stanford University. The paper relates that although in theory the experiment of the Stanford Prison held much promise to find what the psychological effects of being a prison inmate and guard would be like, it severely failed at several levels. The paper explains that this was due to the independent variables as well as the inappropriate relationship of the main researcher participating in the actual experiment.
Outline:
Introduction
Independent Variable
Dependant Variable
Sampling
Reliability of Experiment
Validity of Experiment
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The independent variable for the Stanford Prison research study were the male college students that were chosen to participate in the study. Twenty-Four males out of seventy applicants comprised of local Stanford University students as well as other college students that were in the area were carefully screened and chosen to participate in the study.
"During the screening process for the experiment applicants that had a history of criminal behavior or criminal record as well as any mental illness or psychological disorder were immediately eliminated from participating in the study."
| |
|
State Prisons Vs. Private Prisons, 2005.
This paper compares and contrasts the state prison and the private prison systems.
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 4 sources, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is a brief comparison/contrast of state versus private prisons. As should become apparent, there are many problems afflicting the state prison system in the United States of America. That being said, the writer notes there are no guarantees that a private system will be the panacea some have felt it could and can be. In any event, the writer concludes that a conflation of the two might the best answer for America's woes.
| |
|
Civil Obedience.
This paper discusses that there is a fine line between civil obedience and blind obedience to authority.
1,780 words (approx. 7.1 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 57.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that people who cannot distinguish between civil obedience and blind obedience to authority can have a huge negative impact on society. The author points out that, when people do not obey the laws, anarchy is created and there is a total lack of organization and control. The paper relates that sometimes obeying authority can get out of hand and become too much, such as a police state, when a country's government uses police to exercise strict or oppressive control over the population, denying citizens their civil freedom as in the case of Germany during Hitler.
From the Paper
"As a free thinking society, we also learn when we should not obey authority. The idea of having to obey authority is ingrained in our minds at a very young age. We were always taught to obey and respect our parents, teachers, and other family members. If you want to show them respect and show them that you care, you behave in accordance with their rules and regulations. Learning to show respect to those of a higher authority at such a young age is how we develop into respectful adults. A parent's failure to teach the values of obedience and respect for others is failure on their part to help us grow up to be respectful, obedient people. This can lead to negative results in our future when we have to start being sociable and work with others in school, in the work force, and all other aspects of our everyday lives."
| |
|
The Stanley Obedience Study, 2004.
A discussion on the significance of psychologist Stanley Milgram?s Obedience Study in the context of social psychology under the behaviorist tradition.
1,769 words (approx. 7.1 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 57.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at how experimentation as a primary research method for determining human behavior is specifically utilized in psychologist Stanley Milgram?s research on the nature of obedience among humans, popularly known as the ?Behavioral Study of Obedience? and also known as the "Stanley Obedience Study". It analyzes the study in terms of its importance in studying the relationship between the individual and society, as well as critiques raised about the psychologist?s research.
From the Paper
"In order to better analyze Milgram?s obedience study, specific details about the research must be noted. This study, conducted during the 1960s, was an experiment conducted in Yale University. The objective of the research was to determine at what conditions the subjects (units of analysis of the study) were more likely to develop destructive obedience. Thus, Milgram designed the experiment in such a way where the subjects under study were told to punish the victim (an accomplice) when s/he commits an error during the experiment. The activity that the subjects participate is a word-pair test, where errors committed by the victim/learner is correspondingly punished with electric shocks that increases in intensity as the victim increases his/her errors in the test. Through the experiment, Milgram concluded that ?[m]ore people do what they are told to do as long as they perceive that the command comes from a legitimate authority? (Santrock, 2000:563)."
| |
|
Danger of Obedience, 2001.
A look at adolescent obedience and social influences on their behavior.
855 words (approx. 3.4 pages), 2 sources, $ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An analysis of the dangers of obedience in younger generations. The author discusses the influences on obedience from adults and peers and the issues and controversial debates about adolescent obedience.
From the Paper
"Everyone in the country of the United States of America faces authority and obedience everyday of their life. Adults come upon authority and obedience every day whether it be from a boss or being the boss with their children, teens and adolescents look to other teens and peers for their guidance and their sense of obedience. Adolescents find their authority and obedience in groups which can be healthy but can also be dangerous depending upon what groups they choose. Church groups, school clubs, and after-school clubs are considered by the public to be positive groups to join during adolescent. Gangs or groups who do drugs, have sex, and listen to hard-core music are considered by the public to be negative groups to join during adolescents."
| |
|
Stanley Milgram's "Obedience to Authority", 2005.
This paper discusses Stanley Milgram's research about obedience to authority.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 7 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper relates that Stanley Milgram was a pioneer researcher on obedience to authority. The author points out that his ground-breaking and shocking studies conducted at Yale in the 1960s are still relevant today. The paper provides historical background on Professor Milgram, a full description of the obedience studies, their results and their applications to society and humanity.
From the Paper
"Written in 1974, Stanley Milgram's Obedience to Authority revealed shocking truths about human nature--particularly with respect to how easily people could be manipulated to perform horrible acts on innocents when induced by a perceived legitimate authority figure. "...the most fundamental lesson of our study: ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process." (Stanley Milgram, 1974, as quoted in Blass, 2004, xvii). While his groundbreaking research was conducted in the 1960s, his findings are relevant today in the field of psychology and in many other fields. His work continues to be studied and applied (Blass, 2004). Just what were these experiments, and what did they find?"
| |
|
Civil Obedience in the "Crito", 2006.
A discussion as to the validity of Socrates' argument for civil obedience as stated by him in "Crito".
1,734 words (approx. 6.9 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 56.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is a criticism of Socrates' argument for civil obedience, as presented in the "Crito". The paper attempts to disprove Socrates' points that one should never do wrong and that it is always wrong to disobey the state. The paper concludes that Socrates does not provide solid or reasonable evidence to support the claims he makes in "Crito", and therefore, his argument for civil obedience invalid.
From the Paper
"A similar inconsistency is seen when Socrates argues that the opinion of the many should be disregarded because the many do not know what is right or wrong, just or unjust, good or evil, or honorable and dishonorable. The problem is that Socrates is accepting the law as knowing what as best, without proving that the law is based on right and wrong. Since the law represents the opinion of the many, it is especially questionable that the law would know right from wrong. This is an idea asserted by Plato where he argued that the leaders of society do not know what it right or wrong or what is good. Based on this, he said that "the right sort of state cannot exist unless philosophers rule it" (Irwin 107). This shows that the law should not be accepted as right, but should be proven as being right before it is completely accepted. Socrates does not make this attempt, which represents a flaw in his thinking."
| |
|
Socrates, Obedience and the Law, 2003.
A look at Socrates' civil obedience from the "Apology" and the "Crito".
2,804 words (approx. 11.2 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 83.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how Socrates, born in 470 or 469 BC and executed at the age of 70, presents how one can act solely on the grounds of his belief and dedicate the life for the ultimate values. It discusses whether his refusal to obey the city?s orders were contradictory to his idea of obedience to the laws. Contrary to the view that sees Socrates as a defender of civil disobedience, it also argues that Socrates is a true defender of the laws who has dedicated the life for the active practice of the citizenship, using his acute reason and knowledge. It also shows how Socrates is different from conventional civil disobedients, such as Ghandi, and Martin Luther King Jr.
From the Paper
"Socrates? refusals to participate in the trial of the ten generals, and the arrest of Leon the Salaminian are in fact clear examples of Socrates? use of reason in political decision. During the time when Socrates served as a member of the Council because it was his tribe?s turn, the city ordered the presiding committee to form the body of the ten generals to rescue Athenian survivors in the naval battle (Apology 32a-b). Socrates reasoned that the city?s order was illegal, so voted against it (Apology 32b). The orators were ready to prosecute him, but he argued that he would risk the death, rather than follow the city?s order (Apology 32c). He also refused to obey the city?s order to bring Leon from Salamis in order to prosecute him. He reasoned that prosecuting Leon is illegal because his guilt was manipulated by the city. Some people might think that it is ironical to disobey the city?s order for the sake of the laws."
| |
|
"Avoid the Four Perils of CRM", 2007.
A review of the article "Avoid the Four Perils of CRM" by Darrell K. Rigby, Frederick F. Reichheld and Phil Schefter.
869 words (approx. 3.5 pages), 0 sources, $ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how, in the article, "Avoid the Four Perils of CRM" , authors Darrell K. Rigby, Frederick F. Reichheld and Phil Schefter provide insightful analysis and guidance from their collective experience advising companies on how to augment their marketing, selling and service strategies more effectively using customer relationship management (CRM) software. It looks at how the authors collectively concur that the need for companies to first define their strategies and the processes required to accomplish their goals is the first step to effectively layering in CRM as an IT investment.
From the Paper
"The four perils the authors mention include implementing CRM before creating a customer strategy, rolling out CRM before changing your organization to match, assuming the more CRM technology the better, and stalking, not wooing your customers. These four perils all either directly or indirectly relate to change management, a key lesson the authors expand upon in their examples of how CRM implementations can typically fail. An excellent insight from the article is that the mere automating of customer-facing processes does not guarantee success of a strategy; in fact this is another point of failure. "
| |
|
William E. Leuchtenburg's "The Perils of Prosperity", 2005.
This paper is a book report of William E. Leuchtenburg's "The Perils of Prosperity: 1914-1932".
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 0 sources, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that William E. Leuchtenburg's "The Perils of Prosperity: 1914-1932" traces the development of the United States through the so-called Roaring Twenties and into the early years of the 1930s. The author points out that this book about the 1920s, describes the economic, political, social and cultural elements that created one of the most "liberal" decades in American history. The paper relates that the book was written in the 1950s during perhaps one of the most moralistic decades in recent American history.
From the Paper
"This book was first published in 1958 as a look back on the infamous 1920s. Interestingly enough, the book was written in the 1950s, during perhaps one of the most moralistic decades in recent American history regarding the 1920s, which is arguably the decade in which morals figured very loosely. Nonetheless, Leuchtenburg makes a strong point of not over-moralizing the circumstances of the 1920s, instead choosing to analyze the decade within the context of the historical forces that had a direct hand in creating the social turbulence of which we are all aware. The intent of Leuchtenburg's text is to examine the "years between America's entrance into World War I and the end of postwar prosperity" (Leuchtenburg v)."
| |
|
Obedience and Conformity, 2005.
This paper examines the themes of obedience and conformity in society and in George Orwell's novel, "1984."
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An examination of how the themes of obedience and conformity are reflected in society, as well as in George Orwell's novel, "1984." The paper explains the nature of society's influence on the individual.
From the Paper
"In George Orwell's frightening account of a society not too far removed from our own we find ourselves considering the nature of society's influence upon the individual and how that might be affected via propaganda, rhetoric advertisement or authority. The same notions have been considered by psychologists for quite some time."
| |
|
The Role of Human Obedience, 2008.
This paper explores Stanley Milgram's studies of obedience and their implications for society at large.
1,683 words (approx. 6.7 pages), 7 sources, APA, $ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines Stanley Milgram's experiments that have provided insight into human capabilities and explain the role of human obedience in the Nazi atrocities perpetrated in Europe. The paper describes Milgram's experiments where a large percentage of persons, if ordered to do something they normally saw as reprehensible, would go forwards to do what was directed if the order was from a source seen as accountable or authoritative, or if told that a task was a necessary evil. The paper discusses the implications this has for society and concludes with the hope that this will lead to new thinking on the strongly authoritarian American society of the present.
Outline:
Introduction
Milgram and Psychology
Concluding Discussion
From the Paper
"The work of Stanley Milgram (1933-1984) remains much studied in psychology, his famous Yale University experiments having helped to push forwards our insight into human capability and seeming to confirm the role of human obedience in Nazi atrocities perpetrated in Europe, not so long before. (See Blass:2004) The concentration camps and the extremity of all other Nazi abuses were a shock to millions who once believed in European sophistication. Evil undertakings were often the work of educated, moral members of German and other societies once seen as bastions of civilization. There had to be an explanation as to how such deeds were committed by persons who could not be absolved on account of ignorance and Milgram's experiments seemed to provide an ample, disturbing rationale. Lauren Slater commented that no one learning of Milgram's findings could express what they meant to them, to previous ideas of humanity or what these findings "measured or predicted, or how much meaning to ascribe." (2004:56) With regard to views of the human being's conscience, informed choice or volition, Milgram's experiments caused a faltering of confidence in the self-directed moral being altogether that would cause a strong adjustment in the Psychology of his generation and beyond."
| |
|
Blind Obedience, 2002.
A discussion of why blind obedience to the law is not always justified.
2,022 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 64.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines leaders such as Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi and Henry David Thoreau who have questioned and even disobeyed certain laws for the good of a greater cause and who recognized the value of peaceful protest. It analyzes different types of protests and evaluates whether they are justified.
Outline
Introduction: Theories on the Origins and Nature of Protest
Violent Political Protest
Urban Riots
Assassinations
Revolutions
Terrorism
Peaceful Political Protest
Picketing
Sit-ins
Boycotts
History of Protest
Laws Against Protest
Peaceful Leaders
Martin Luther King
?I Have Been To The Mountaintop?
"Montgomery Bus Boycott" (Time Magazine)
"Civil Rights and Social Wrongs?? (AA Review)
Mahatma Gandhi
"The Story of My Experiments with Truth: An Autobiography?
?Community, Violence, and Peace?
Henry David Thoreau
Civil Disobedience
Definition
Applicability to Modern Society
Just Cause, Civil Protest and the Law
Theories on and Approaches to Conflict and its Resolution or Management
Evolution of the Concept of 'Just Cause'
Alternative Means for Achieving Social-Political Change
Non-violence
Is it Effective?
How has it evolved?
Civil disobedience
Legal/Constitutional Restrictions on Breaking the Law for ?Just Cause?
Conclusion
From the Paper
"While there is certainly no legal or moral justification for violent acts for the sake of change, there are legal and peaceful alternatives to questioning authority available, such as picketing, sit-ins and boycotts. One of the most famous boycotts in protest history was the Montgomery Bus Boycott, which constituted the official beginning of the Civil Rights movement. The protest occurred when the black community of Montgomery, Alabama decided that they would boycott the city buses until they were no longer required to give up their seats for whites."
|
|
|
