Thursday, June 30, 2011

Summer Assignment for 2011-2012 - Part 1 Due July 20th

Go to this link about the Ten Most Revealing Psychology Experiments and read through the summaries of all ten of them.

Select one of the experiments that you think is interesting. Click on the link in the summary to start your research about that experiment. (the link to #3 is broken, but you can use this link to get started.) Read through the information and seek out other information online. There may be good YouTube videos or other sources you should investigate. You can also look up some of the experiments or the experimenters in your textbook.

In your comment to THIS BLOG POST please do the following to complete the assignment:

1. Summarize the experiment. Include who did it, when they did it, where they did it, and what they did.
2. Explain the importance of the experiment to our understanding of human behavior. Why do you think the experiment is considered a valuable insight into the way people think and/or act?
3. Give one example of how the experiment can be applied to everyday life. You can use yourself or someone you know in the example, or make up an example that you think the experiment might apply to in normal life.
4. At the end of your post include all sources (full URLs, please) and sign the post with your first name and just the initial letter of your last name (for example: Phillip D.)
5. To send your comment please click the "Name/URL" option and put your first name and last initial in the "Name" box. Don't fill in the URL box. 

I suggest that you write your comment in Word or other program first so you can check your spelling etc. and then just paste it into the comments at the end of this post.

Your post should be 3 to 5 paragraphs long and should demonstrate some original thinking on your part. Do not cut-and-paste or copy any text directly.

Your comment will not show up on the blog until close to the due-date, as I want everyone to approach the project without being biased by seeing the posted work of others in the class. If you aren't sure if your comment went through you may e-mail me and I'll let you know. 

If you have any questions please e-mail me. I usually reply to e-mails within a day or two. Before sending me an e-mail, please read my "How to email a teacher" post from my biology blog ... really.


Mr. Cantor said...

Post your assignment here by hitting the "post a comment" link below!

Julian A. said...

The milgram experiment was conducted in 1963 by social psychologist Stanley Milgram. In this experiment Stanley recruited random subjects and used an actor. The random people that volunteered for this experiment were offered a money reward for their services. This experiment involve two roles; one being the teacher (a subject), and the other being a learner (an actor). In one room the learner was strapped down to a chair that conducts electric shocks. The subject tested out a small amount of shock to prove that the shocks are real. But the truth is that only a 45 volts shock was real and those other levels of shocks aren’t. In the other room the subject was told to give the learner questions and if answered wrong to shock him. The shocks became higher as the questions moved on. The actor was asked to scream, agonize, and beg for it to stop, which only the subject could decide to continue or stop.
Stanley’s main reason for this experiment was to study the effect of authority on obedience. This experiment is such of an importance to understanding of human behavior. Due to the fact that it proves that people could be force to act against their own will. I believe this experiment is of valuable insight into the way people act and do. Due to the results given; authority is now the main way to make others obey. In other words people think that by being demanding it would lead to others to act as if no other choice, but as well brought a point to my mind. The point is that in the experiment Stanley offered a cash reward for their participation that probably went as far as they went due to the money.
Stanley’s experiment led to a whole new way of people especially high authority to get what is needed. An example of an everyday life situation, I believe is when police interrogate a suspect. The police use high demanding voice and use lots of pressure to make a suspect talk. All this might have been inspired by Stanley’s experiment, which prove that the majority of people under pressure do what they are told doing that that what they do is against their will/believe.
(Julian, A.)

Edgar R. said...

Philip G. Zimbardo conducted The Stanford Prison Experiment: Power Corrupts. He conducted it in the summer of 1971 at Stanford University, first he put an ad on a newspaper looking for volunteers in a study of the psychological effects in prison life. He set up the basement of Stanford’s psychology department building as a prison by boarding up each end of the corridor. Corridor is a gallery or passage connecting parts of a building; hallway. The corridor was considered “the yard” like in a prison. It was the only place the prisoners could go out into the open and workout. To make it feel like a real prison Philip Zimbardo replaced the doors of some laboratory rooms with specially made doors with bars and cell numbers.
Philip Zimbardo set up cameras, and a solitary confinement, which was a small closet. He secretly bugged the cells to listen to everything that was going on. Then he put these volunteers, or prisoners in suppose jail to see “what happens when you put people in an evil place, Does humanity win over evel, or does evil triumph. The importance of the experiment to our understanding of human behavior is that with this experiment we found out what prison life does to us humans. Also how we respond to an evil environment. I think this experiment is considered a valuable insight into the way people think and/or act, because it shows how humans connect to their emotions through their environment we live in. How an environment effects and shapes us.
The experiment can be applied to everything life because we all live in different environments.We see peoples actions effected by the environment they live in. For example if someone lives in a gang banging neighborhood, the kids get influenced by that and also want to become gang members. The kids try to act like them mean and ignorant. Another example is criminals that go to prison, many come out more angry at life and more violant because of their prison life.
Zimbardo, Philip G. "Stanford Prison Experiment." The Stanford Prison Experiment: A Simulation Study of the Psychology of Imprisonment. Web. 15 July 2011. .
Edgar R.

Carranza, D said...

Has it ever occur to you that your memory has been manipulated? The topic from the psychology experiments I have chosen is memory manipulation the experiment was created by Loftus and Palmer in 1974, this experiment was done in a laboratory. They did two experiments the first one was by getting 45 students from the University of Washington to test there memory manipulation, they were shown seven clips of traffic accidents then they were split into 9 students each for the same question only a different word was replace which was “ How fast was the cars going when they hit, smashed, contacted, collide, bumped into each other?”

There second experiment involved 150 people in which they shown them a video once again and ask them 50 of them “ How fast was the cars going when they hit each other?” the other 50 were ask “ How fast was the cars going when they smashed into each other?” and the other 50 weren’t ask no question. But it this experiment a week later the people can back and were ask another question which was “If they seen any broken glass?”

I believe that is good to know about the experiment and its importance to the human behavior because knowing this helps us to realize how easily a word can change our thinking and the way we respond. Us humans have short term memory and long term memory in which each other can be the cause of our way of responding and thinking. We might not know it in that moment that our memory has been manipulate because we might not pay to much attention to what’s going on. I know this because in one of the resources I found a you tube video in which Loftus took a memory test to the lady from the show and her memory and mine was manipulated easily by showing a picture of persons those were the control and then comparing them to others that weren’t shown and then another picture of them looking older at that moment you don’t know because at first I never though that it was a test so I really didn’t pay to much attention so I didn’t know which picture was the correct. This is the reason I say is important to know about this.

The experiment can applied to everyday life for many things but one of the things it applies is to when there is a crime scene. In crime scene there are people that are witnessed they get interrogated by the police to find out the information needed to continue with the investigation. They might ask you “Did the robber have a weapon?” “Can you describe the weapon he or she had?” or if its like for example you are the criminal they can ask you “Did you commit the crime?” “Where were you during this time to this time?“ or there may be a questions to trick you, when it comes to this your memory plays with you even the your feelings specially if your under pressure.

Carranza, D

Bryan M said...

The Robbers Cave experiment is a study of prejudice and conflict. In 1954, Muzafer and Carolyn Sherif established this experiment, which originated the study of prejudice in social groups. Twenty-four 12 year-old boys were taken to a summer camp in Robbers Cave State Park, Oklahoma, not knowing they were being used for this experiment. Before the trip the boys were randomly divided into two groups. Two buses carrying 12 boys each picked them up. Neither group knew of the other's existence. This Experiment was broken into three phases: 1. The In-Group Formation phase (Splitting of both groups) 2. The Friction Phase (The first contact between groups in activities such as sports) 3. The Integration Phase (The lessening of friction among both groups)
This experiment is important to understanding our human behavior, and should be valued as one of the most important experiments in history. This project was able to show both sides on mankind. As humans, the nature to be violent has been installed in us since the beginning of time. When we are categorized or labeled as; blacks or Hispanics, middle class or high class, Citizen or immigrant, our nature is to defend that honor even if its something as little as “The Rattlers” or “The Eagles.” Even though we as humans are violent, the instinct of survival has also been integrated in us. And we would rather stand united and work together accomplished this, than to be ignorant of others and do things selfishly. This experiment demonstrated that when The Rattlers and The Eagles has no water supply. They both worked together by going to the source and fixing the problem. And after the problem was fixed both teams learned to appreciate each other.
From the experiences of my everyday life and surroundings, gangs are a prime example of this experiment. Gangs are groups that are divided by “Territory.” When looking at Gang in general, they tend to dress the same way and listen to the same music. Even smoke weed from the same source. The only thing that separates one gang from another is a main street or a park, therefore they see other gangs as a threat because they are defending their territory.

Bryan M.

Jacob H said...


This experiment that I chose it really interesting to learn about it, I had being thinking different, and got to understand better what is cognitive dissonance. Going through this experiment I got understand why some people react the way they do and how they being lying to them self even other`s. according to “Wikipedia- cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling cause by holding conflict ideas simultaneously”, and it occurs “when an attitude that contradict other attitude or behavior- psychwiki”.
Knowing about this experiment, I got to read one experiment of Fesstinger and Carlsmith in 1959, they were student at Stanford University; they both agree to be in an experiment, where they had to be in a room with the spools and pegs. At the beginning fesstinger think it was boring but then he got ask to help them and they were going to pay him only a $1, he say yes and he have to tell the other one that where going to do the experiment he just did that it was an interesting experiment, for him he was lying about he knew it was boring. At the end of the experiment they gave him his money and he left, walking with one of his friend that just did the same experiment he did, told him” it was a boring experiment” and he got pay $20. He then tells his friend that it was not a boring experiment that it was interesting. They both think different and got pay different amount, and my question at the end was why would he thing it was an interesting experiment after he got pay 1$, at the end it tell you why. They were lying to himself about the experiment since he got only a 1$, he tries to make it seeing to himself that it wasn’t boring.
People these days have being lying to them self or letting other laying to them. Most of this happens in marketing surveys they always try to confuse you by trying to make you thing it right but they are not. Another example on where we can see this is at church, preachers use cognitive dissonance to convince other, I found this interesting video on how they do it (


Odalis C. said...

In 1971, psychologist Philip Zimbardo conducted an experiment known as the Stanford prison experiment. This experiment took place in Stanford University. For his mock prison Zimbardo used the basement of Stanford's Psychology building. This experiment was done to show the power of authority and to see what would happen if good people were placed in bad environments. Zimbardo was convinced that bad environments affect the people placed in them. In this experiment 24 male students were chosen, from 75 volunteers, for two weeks. Half of the students were prisoners and the other half were guards. The prisoners were taken to their "new home" which was very prison-like. The prisoners received no special treatment. They were limited to their food and time outside their so called cells. The guards were not trained in any way and were basically free. They were allowed to do what they thought would bring order. Because the experiment had gone too extreme Zimbardo decided it was time to end it early after only six days.

The Stanford prison experiment proved a lot about people can react to a prison environment but Zimbardo proved more than just that. He proved that the environment that people live in affects them completely. It is interesting to know how this experiment revealed the type of change someone can go through because of their negative environment. The students that took part in this experiment were students that were free of any criminal records and were known as good people. Although they were good students it was clear that the harsh treatment of the temporary guards and their prison like environment turned them to their bad side. This proves that the way humans think isn’t exactly the same way they would when they would live in a bad environment.

This experiment could be applied to the everyday life of humans since this could happen to just about anyone. Changes in the way people think due to their bad environments has happened. People have gone from thinking positive to thinking negative. For example, a good innocent person was proven guilty in a crime and then the consequence is to serve many years behind bars. There is a chance that his/her attitude could change after that experience. A situation like this could happen and sadly, has happened. The change in the way someone acts because of their bad environment could happen as well.

Odalis C.

Mr. Cantor said...

The posts are looking good so far. When the year begins I'd like to have a brief conference with each of you to discuss the comment you posted and help you work on improving your writing.

Valerie R said...

Milgram’s Experiment on Obedience to Authority:
In 1961 psychologist Stanley Milgram began to conduct experiments at the University of California, in which his subjects felt coerced to endure pain on others, all in an attempt to see how far one can be pushed when put into a position of authority. The experiment went as follows. There would be two people a student and a teacher. The teacher would ask the student a variety of questions and the student would answer to the best of his ability. If the student answered the question incorrectly he would be shocked with a small voltage. For every question the student answered wrong the voltage would be raised to a greater intensity. Subjects volunteered to take part in the experiment under the impression that they would randomly be assigned the role of “student” or “teacher” however Milgram rigged the experiment so that his subjects only played the role of the “teacher”, in every test the student was played by an actor and was not really harmed.
As the experiment went on the student repeatedly complained about pain and discomfort and at one point in time he even asked to be released. Although some of the teachers did seem concerned and hesitant towards moving forward with the experiment, many of the teachers ignored the cries for help and proceeded to go on with the experiment even moving the voltage past the “xxx” mark which was over 450 volts. Even after the student had complained about heart pains. At the very beginning of the article Brown mentioned that he believes that anyone in supervisory or management positions be exposed to this experiment. I agree with this statement because I a lot of people do strive for power in their lives especially in the work force. I feel that as someone who is in a higher position, it is important to know your limits and keep a conscious idea of how you are treating others who are blew you and have a sense of vulnerability.
Milgram’s experiment is a more violent and graphic example of a situation that can happen to anyone. It reminds me of that classic movie plot, in which there is a merciless boss and an overworked employee. The boss tends to give ridiculous sometimes even unprofessional and inappropriate requests, to which the employee always follows through. The sense of undeniable power is evident in both this the experiment and the plot we’ve seen countless times. Overall I think the reason Milgrams experiment became so popular is because it separates the thought process of the morals that we all hope to have and keep in mind when handling daily conflicts. And the actual logic and human mature that comes through in real life situations.

Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View. New York: Harper and Row. An excellent presentation of Milgram’s work is also found in Brown, R. (1986). Social Forces in Obedience and Rebellion. Social Psychology: The Second Edition. New York: The Free Press.

Kenia [Nenny) said...

We’ve all heard about peer pressure, what it is and its consequences. However, we don’t actually tend to realize up to what extent peer pressure forms a part of our decisions. For that matter, many psychological experiments were conducted to analyze the way “peer pressure” affects human behavior. Within those experiments are The Good Samaritan, Bystander Apathy, The Stanford Prison, The Milgram, and a very well known one: The Asch Experiment.

The Asch experiment was named after its conductor, “a pioneer in social psychology,” (WikiPedia) Solomon Eliot Asch. Asch was a psychology professor at Swarthmore College. His career led him to a new task: creating an experiment. This experiment not only made him become famous, but it also showed how peer pressure and conformity link together. Professor Asch carried out this experiment with his very own students at Swarthmore College during the 1950s (The Era of Conformity). The individuals who participated in the experiment were told that they were forming part of a vision test. This experiment followed the same guidelines as any other test. Students were seated in a classroom and a paper with multiple choice questions was handed out to them. The questions were very basic and simple such as: “what line is bigger A or B?” or “Which line is wider?” etc. However, answers were not written in paper, responses were asked to be said out loud. Of course, the trick here was that there was only one individual being tested, everyone else was part of the “confederates” (individuals who knew what was happening and were used as a variable in the experiment). The confederates at first answered the questions correctly, but as the test proceeded their answers became irrelevant. The purpose of this task was to observe one’s reaction based on everyone else’s response.

Although Asch hypothesized that students wouldn’t go along with the confederates’ responses due to how easy the questions were, his prediction was wrong. Students tended to answer incorrectly just like the confederates; they conformed. Though, it can be judged that many students answered just like the confederates because if 6 people have the same answer and you’re the only one with a different answer then one might think that they’re wrong. Of course, students should’ve voiced their own opinion but in a scenario like this it’s understandable why many agreed with the confederates. Students might have thought that the majority was right, they might have not even looked at the question and simply said what the others said, or they might have been afraid to be the only one who was wrong. Inversely, however, when there were no confederates and every student simply answered what they believed was correct the results to the experiment changed. Under this circumstance it was stated that only one student out of thirty-five answered incorrect, while there were 75% incorrect answers when confederates were present. This then leads me to say that conformity is present when one is under pressure.

Kenia [Nenny) said...

The results of this experiment give us a clear understanding of the way the mind works under certain circumstances, and it also shows when peer pressure begins to affect one’s opinions. The Asch experiment proved that when there were 3 or more confederates conformity became visible, and conformity continued to increase as the number of confederates increased. This situation is relevant to our everyday lives, and without noticing we experience something similar. For example: in styles, if you see 6 people wearing skinny jeans and one person wearing regular fit jeans, which trend are you most likely to follow? One would follow the one with the most people, in this case skinny jeans. Throughout this I’ve wondered if the results of this experiment play a role in the way the elections work. Would there be an impact in decision making if one was able to see how many votes were given to a certain candidate before casting their ballot? In my opinion and in regards to The Asch Experiment, minds and votes could be manipulated if results were visible.

From what I’ve learned from this experiment, and from what is seen in humanity, it can be said that one needs social support in order to avoid conformity. This statement not only applies to The Asch Experiment but it also applies to individuality. In other words, being “different” or “standing out of the crowd” only occurs once one has reached a comfort zone. The discoveries from this experiment are very valuable, for not only do they give us an insight to the way our mind works but also about society as a whole.

Kenia R.

JOan N said...

"Manipulated after the Fact"
In 1974 psycologist Loftus,E.F and palmer conduct an experiment between the corelation of language and memory. On this experiment Lotus and Palmer demostrate that memory is not a factual recording of an event that the memories can be twist by other information which happen after the event. The meaning of this experiment is how information supplied ater an event, influence a person's memory for that event.
45 students of the University of Washington are put to the test .They were shown 7 film-clips of many traffic accidents .After each clip each student were asked to write an account of the accident they have seen. The tricky question that was ask,was what was the speed of the car involved in the collision.
What made the difference was that the wording of the question that control the students mind to answer different.For example :About how fast were the cars going when they (Smashed) into each other?.Another question was about how fast were the cars going when they collied into each other.The students were asked the same question but with the wording bumped,hit,and contact.The results were that the word with the higest mean estimate of speed was (smashed) with 40.8mph
39.3 mph
38.1 mph
34.0 mph
31.8 mph
I could really see how just a single word can manipulate one's memory,I belive this is kind of method can be use to interogate witness of a crime scene.

joan n said...

"Manipulated after the Fact"
In 1974 psycologist Loftus,E.F and palmer conduct an experiment between the corelation of language and memory. On this experiment Lotus and Palmer demostrate that memory is not a factual recording of an event that the memories can be twist by other information which happen after the event. The meaning of this experiment is how information supplied ater an event, influence a person's memory for that event.
45 students of the University of Washington are put to the test .They were shown 7 film-clips of many traffic accidents .After each clip each student were asked to write an account of the accident they have seen. The tricky question that was ask,was what was the speed of the car involved in the collision.
What made the difference was that the wording of the question that control the students mind to answer different.For example :About how fast were the cars going when they (Smashed) into each other?.Another question was about how fast were the cars going when they collied into each other.The students were asked the same question but with the wording bumped,hit,and contact.The results were that the word with the higest mean estimate of speed was (smashed) with 40.8mph
39.3 mph
38.1 mph
34.0 mph
31.8 mph
I could really see how just a single word can manipulate one's memory,I belive this is kind of method can be use to interogate witness of a crime scene.

Xavier A said...

The Stanford Prison Experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment Research was done by the assistance of Carolyn Burkhart, David Gorchoff, Christina Maslach, Susan Phillips, Anne Reckon, Cathy Rosenfeld, Lee Ross, Rosanne Sausage, and head researcher Phillip Zimbardo. The Experiment was held in Stanford University From August 14-20, 1971. The Research began when civilians answered a news paper ad to make a few extra dollars. Applicants were first evaluated for psychiatric problems and were given personality test. Once the group of 24 healthy intelligent middle-class college students were left, the experiment began. The experiment was held in the Stanford Psychology corridor, where offices were turned into cells and closets were turned into an isolated cell for punishment.
This experiment was to test human behavior based on the amount of power given. The prisoners were to act and be treated like prisoners; and the guards were given power and to keep the place civilized without using excessive force (beating, hitting). This experiment was to go on for a week, where research was done on both the prisoners and the guards. They were evaluated based on how they acted and reacted day by day. Doing an experiment like this, can show the actions of people who are given power and might abuse it; and to show how people who are given no rights and power can rebel but overall feel powerless; and that’s what the results of The Stanford Prison Experiment showed.
Making an assumption from watching the movie The Experiment and doing research on The Stanford Prison Experiment, I believe when you keep people with power, and others with non locked in a room you get mayhem. Looking at the larger picture, you have a group with majority power: Global Government (USA, Russia, Mexico, etc., and others with minority power: the Common people (that’s us) stuck in one world we have chaos. Everyone craving enough power to take control, and once given that power it’s eventually abused. The Movie The Experiment showed me that’s how many people live on a day to day bases, going through non stop civil war.
Move- "The Experiment"

Cristelle O said...

The Stanford Prison Experiment: Power Corrupts

Philip Zimbardo, a psychologist and professor at Stanford University, wanted to prove that prisons demoralized human behavior and mental processing. These individuals, whether prison guards or convicts, behaved differently due to the environment they where in. Starting on a Sunday morning in August 1971 in Palo Alto, California, police began to arrest men (student volunteers) charged with felonies such as burglary and armed robbery. These students had volunteered to be part of the Stanford Prison Experiment which paid them $15 per day and all procedures of their arrest were identical to a real arrest. Philip Zimbardo set up a “mock prison” in the basement of Stanford University’s Psychology Department building. The cells and corridors were small, but capable to fit 24 volunteers. Prison guards and prisoners were chosen at random and they all wore their assigned uniforms. However, the prisoners went through humiliation and their names were changed to an id number. Further in this prison experiment, the prisoners and guards began to take their roles seriously as the prisoners began to misbehave, cause rebellions and curse at guards. In response, the guards harassed these prisoners by not giving them food, making them do push ups, stripping them naked, and making them clean toilet seats with their bare hands. This experiment not only showed that the subjects (volunteers) reacted to their position, but Philip Zimbardo was also integrating to this degrading experiment. During a rumored escape by the prisoners, instead of Zimbardo observing the escape, he assumed the responsibility of impending it. Not even a week had passed before the experiment was terminated due to the fact that prisoners and guards were mentally unstable.
This experiment proved that prisons do make “prison guards and convicts [slip] into predefined roles, behaving in a way that they thought was required, rather than using their own judgment and morals.” (Shuttleworth, M.) From this experiment, prison officials, and others, can see the cruelty that undergoes in these detention centers. We are now aware that these prisons are the main cause of the rebelled prisoners and high powered guards. However, we must keep in mine that the actual prisoners did commit real felonies and their state of mind might already have been degraded. (The entire slideshow)

Shuttleworth, Martyn (2008). Stanford Prison Experiment. Retrieved [Date of Retrieval] from Experiment Resources:

-- Olivares C.

manthonyorozco said...

On October 30, 1938 the Columbia broadcasting system radio network broadcasted a narrated version of The War of the Worlds, which is a novel by H.G. Wells, as a Halloween episode: It was broadcasted by a man named Orson Welles. The story was about an alien invasion that was currently in progress: The first 40 min of the broadcast were a series of news bulletins. Many people believed that the broadcast was in fact a news broadcast and that there was an actual alien invasion occurring at the time. This caused about 3 million out of 6 million listeners to panic.
I believe that the importance of this experiment was to show how gullible humans can be and how we as humans rely too much on media; additionally, it shows how media can affect people world wide. I think this experiment is considered a valuable insight into the way people think/act by showing how media has a huge influence on human life and show it can control our emotions.
For example this experiment can be applied to everyday life by getting a couple of popular television stations and or news stations to broadcast a fictional story/show on how certain celebrities are aliens. I can guarantee that more that 50% of the viewers would believe it if they saw it on a popular/trustworthy television or news station like MTV or ABC News—even I would believe it. If they were to conduct an experiment like this millions of people would freak out and it might just create chaos.

-Manfred O.-

Adam L. said...

The Asch Experiments were led by Solomon Asch in the 1950's. The subject of the experiment was a single person out of eight people in the room; seven were in on the plan. The subject and the confederates, the ones part of the experiment, were put into a room and given a vision test. They were to make out which of three lines matched the length of a line on the other side. Although the subjects seemed like they were going to give the correct answer, because the rest of the group, which answered before them, all gave the same wrong answer, the subject conformed and gave the same wrong answer.
The purpose of the experiment was to display the natural tendency in humans to conform to groups and be "right" even if they have a feeling the group is wrong. It shows that humans never want to look wrong in front of their peers. Humans, on average, would do something they think is wrong just to be alike and not different.
This reminds me of class to some extent. Although some students either have the ability to answer a question or even the drive to figure one out, they will conform to the average slacking student and not even show that they are giving effort in school. As humans, we all want to fit in and not be different. Which is sort of ironic with most teenagers wanting to be trend setters and unique. The average teenager will try and be different by wearing bright clothes, piercings or even hair designs; but, they won't try and diverge from the norm and give an actual effort in school. It is funny to me.
Adam L.

izamarr123 said...

In 1974 an experiment was created to the people’s reliability of memory. To proceed the experiment 45 people had to participate, in this experiment the people had to watch a video clip of a car crash. Out of nine people the participants’ were asked about what they in the video. Then 4 other groups were asked the similar question, but instead of using the word “hit” the researchers used the words “smashed”, “collided”, “bumped”, and “contacted.”

Those who were asked which include the word “smashed” the car was going at 10mph faster than the group that had the word “contacted.” About a week later the participants were asked about the broken glass others didn’t remember about that detail, because they were too focused on the other details in the video. Only some remember the broken glass even though the film depicted none.

An example similar to this experiment could be done in a movie. If researchers send about 6 groups to watch a movie, then ask each group a question about the film that they have watched. For each group ask them the same question but switch up one or two words in the question and each group will answer in many different ways. People have different ways at looking at things; others may notice small details that probably others did not notice in the film. This happens because; people have selected minds and each focus on other details than the other groups. (Izamar R.)

Darriayan S said...

5. lying to ourselves
In this passage I’ve learned that in 1959, cognitve psychologist designed an experiment with level upon level of deceit to see just how much a person will ignore their own experience, even to the point of helping to convince someone else of something they know is not true. (psychologist, 2010). This experiment was applied because most people tends to lie and actual belive their lie. This is a valuable insight because most psycholgist researchers want to achieve in telling others that its not good to learning to belive in your own lies. This experiment can be used in a eveyday life because everyone in the word lie.most can lie so good they don’t even know that they believing in their own lie. For example, a man is on trial for killing his family.the man lie to get his ways out of the situation he began to make up things. The more the man constinatly tellhis lie (story) the more he actually forget about the truth of what really happens and then he start beliving in the lies that he telling.
Darriyan S.