Psychology Essay

Outline and assess the use of experiments in social psychology drawing on the cognitive social perspective and one of the other three perspectives in the module (discursive psychological, phenomenological or social psychoanalytic). This essay will provide a description of the experimental method for both the cognitive social perspective and social psychoanalytic perspective. A compare and contrast will be given for the two perspectives in a critical evaluation as an approach to doing research in social psychology. The cognitive social perspective ontology is that, researchers view the person as a thinker in society. Thought processes are believed to have been shaped by and help create the world in which they live in. This perspective has to offer two approaches in the mainstream, social cognition and social identity. Social cognition views the person to be a cognitive miser thereby, being a social thinker and information processing. As a result forms limited opinions based on categorizing and prejudices. Social identity traditions gives emphasis to the socialised thinker whereby, ones’ cognitions are structured by group memberships located in a particular social system. The cognitive social approach follows a statistical methodology by which, researchers gather their results in the form of quantitative data to analyse. This is an experimental, social psychometric method. Researchers conduct studies in which they collect quantitative data and test theory based hypothesis using standard statistical techniques. The researcher’s primary tool is the laboratory – based experiment not confined to the field, such as, the classroom, work place, the crowd. The various techniques include, survey, questionnaires, case studies, and observational methods. As psychology takes part within the individual, this is the primary unit of analysis. The individual’s psychology is significantly affected by the social context. For example, attention to group memberships, inter group relations, a broader social structure that impinge on the individual. The approach is interactionist, which analyse the individual’s cognitions but, also appreciate the way in which these are structured by the social world they inhibit and helped to create. The social psychoanalytic perspective ontology is that, identity is formed psychically and socially in dynamic and inter-subjective relations with others. Human behaviour and consciousness are partly shaped by unconscious motivations. These unconscious motivations are frequently in conflict with conscious thoughts and intensions. Conflict is provoked by unconscious anxiety which is defended against through unconscious defence mechanisms. These defences play an important part in the construction of the individual, social, institutional, cultural lives. The social psychoanalytic approach follows a qualitative and interpretative methodology with the assumption that to understand social life, we need to understand how language is used and how the meaning is constructed. It also takes from psychoanalysis the notion that people are never consciously aware of what unconsciously motivates them or all the meaning of what they say and do. People are viewed as having unique biographies and identity that are made up of psychic defences that are partly developed from their social context. Many researchers explore the methods that people use to make sense of everyday life. For example, the use of narrative interviews because this allows research subjects to talk at length and freely as possible. Researchers seek to analyse contradictions and conflicts that arise from unconscious desires, anxiety and demands of the outside world. This is taken from applications such as, projection, splitting, and projective identification. The focus of analysis is the interconnections between the internal world of the psyche and ones’ understanding of their responses to the actions and on their external world. Meanings can only be understood in relation to a larger whole and a psychoanalysis is informed by the whole interview plus all other data collected in relation to the case, such as, the researchers field notes. There is no established psychoanalytic method because psychoanalysis is a clinical method and not a research method. Stanley Milgram 1963, (cited in Wendy Hollway, Helen Lucey, and Ann Phoenix) a pioneer in social psychology in the research of obedience to authority. Milgram ran a series of studies under different conditions to determine†¦ Milgram lead his subjects to believe that the studies were investigating the ffects of punishment on learning. The experimental subjects had to administer electric shocks to people whom they were unaware were actually his accomplices. The subjects were ordered to increase the voltage whenever the learner made a mistake. They were completely unaware that the electric shocks were not delivered, and that they were only lead to believe so. The subjects level of obedience were measured against a 30-point incremental scale of intensity of electric shocks delivered. The subjects received an ‘obedient’ status if they managed to deliver shocks throughout the experiment without refusal. However, if the reverse was true and refusal was encountered earlier on in the experiment, a ‘disobeyed’ status was granted. Results showed that even as subjects objected to administering the shocks as they heard pleas of distress, they still carried on after stern and insistent instructions were made. Milgram found that more than 60 per cent continued to administer the shocks at the higher end of the scale. As controversial as this type of research is especially of what is ethically acceptable today, Milgram found that the subjects were not negatively affected. He not only interviewed and debriefed the participants but, also introduced a follow up questionnaire a year later. The questionnaire confirmed Milgram’s assumptions that the participants felt positively toward the experiment (Milgram, 1974, cited in Wendy Hollway, Helen Lucey, and Ann Phoenix). By carrying out this type of research, Milgram has attached scientific authority to the phenomenon, ‘obedience to authority’. His research clearly demonstrates that people will obey authority even when they are aware of the distress and cruelty it may cause. Kurt Danziger, 1985 (cited in Wendy Hollway, Helen Lucey, and Ann Phoenix) agrees to a certain point that statistical methodology is effective in discovering a solution to problem areas. His argument is that statistical methodology is effective but limited. This is given that the context of a specific practical problem requires an unambiguous solution within limited confines. For example, in an experiment to investigate whether the surrounding of an individual interferes with their performance in the completion of a given task. The surrounding environment can be manipulated and the participant’s performance on the task can be recorded. The conclusion of the experiment is limited to the confines of the experiment and does not apply to any given situation outside of that. The experimental approach is useful in instances where it is difficult to find out what the true feelings of a given subject are. Colin Leach, 2005 (cited in Wendy Hollway, Helen Lucey, and Ann Phoenix ) conducted research into this area, in particular on the topic of Schadenfreude: pleasure felt at another’s failure. Schadenfreude is not openly expressed and can be difficult to detect. In this case, the experiment revealed hidden feelings by exposing causal relations and meaningful patterns among variables. Experiments allow the researcher to develop a model of the proposed processes and to test the implications of theories. This reveals what lies beneath the surface either what one does not wish to admit to, or is unaware of their unconscious thoughts and feelings which motivate their behaviour. The social psychoanalytic approach keeps the person more holistic rather than contextual. Therefore, techniques such as free association allow for the individual to uncover their deepest thoughts without restrictions or confines. For this reason, this type of approach is less intrusive compared with social cognitive approach in finding out what motivates an individual. The analysis of data, thereafter involve breaking down the material into themes and recognising a pattern. Hereby, is a chance to recognise any underlying motivations or unconscious thoughts and fears that is influencing the current behaviour. The social cognitive approach by comparison could be criticised for unethical considerations in their application to uncover the same data being unconscious motivations/thoughts. To conclude, the two approaches show how different perspectives will produce different knowledge due to the difference in which they frame their object of analysis. Experiments are good at revealing thoughts and feelings people do not wish to reveal or are unable to.