skip to Main Content
The smarter way
to do assignments.

Please note that this is just a preview of a school assignment posted on our website by one of our clients. If you need assistance with this question too, please click on the Order button at the bottom of the page to get started.

Discussion 2: Obedience
The intent of social psychology research has been and still is to explain how circumstances are more a power determinant of individual behavior than our own intuitions lead us to believe. Research on obedience and compliance is focused less on explaining why obedience can be a good thing—which it can—and more on explaining why people obey/comply with demands when they would likely prefer not to or when the demands compel them to do bad things (e.g., the classic Milgram and Stanford Prison studies).
Many are familiar with the experience of being tasked by someone in authority (e.g., a teacher, work supervisor, athletic coach) to do something of questionable value and which may be counterproductive. The demand itself appears to be arbitrary and may serve only to establish the authority of the person making it.
For this Discussion, you will share social conformity situations that you have experienced and apply social psychology theory to explain your actions in those situations.
To Prepare
Review the Learning Resources related to conformity and obedience and consider how they would apply to this Discussion.
Consider a time when you have experienced when compliance with a task was required, even when you believed that time could have been better spent doing something more productive. The task may have come from a teacher, supervisor, coach, or other authority figure.
If you complied with the order, reflect on why. If you did not, reflect on why you did not comply.
By Day 4
Post an example of a time when you complied with an authority person’s demand, despite thinking it was not a good use of your time. Please explain why you did. Then, give an example of a time when you refused to comply; explain why. Your post must be informed by social psychology theory and research.
Here are the required reading that you need to the paper as well as the reference page. Make sur to use the social psychology theory and follow the rubric for good grad.
Required Readings
Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., Akert, R. M., & Sommers, S. R. (Eds.). (2019). Social psychology (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Chapter 8, “Conformity and Obedience: Influencing Behavior”
Note: Viewing media and interactives embedded in the electronic version of this course text is not required for this course.
Aagerup, U. (2018). Accessible luxury fashion brand building via fat discrimination. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 22(1), 2–16.doi:10.1108/JFMM-12-2016-0116
Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N. J., Mortensen, C. R., Cialdini, R. B., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). Going along versus going alone: When fundamental motives facilitate strategic (non)conformity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(2), 281–294. http://dx.doi.org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.281
Doliński, D., Grzyb, T., Folwarczny, M., Grzybała, P., Krzyszycha, K., Martynowska, K., & Trojanowski, J. (2017). Would you deliver an electric shock in 2015? Obedience in the experimental paradigm developed by Stanley Milgram in the 50 years following the original studies. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(8), 927–933. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1177/1948550617693060
Required Media
eqivideos. (2007, December 22). Asch conformity experiment [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYIh4MkcfJA
Note: This media program is approximately 4 minutes.
Professor Ross. (2017, April 14). Brain games – conformity (Standing ovations) [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ft7mwyiPyIo
Here is the grading rubric:
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: PSYC_6245_Week7_Discussion2_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Discussion Posting Content (60% of possible points)
5 (50%) – 6 (60%)
Discussion posting demonstrates an excellent understanding of all of the concepts and key points presented in the text/s and Learning Resources. Posting provides significant detail including multiple relevant examples, evidence from the readings and other scholarly sources, and discerning ideas.
4.5 (45%) – 5 (50%)
Discussion posting demonstrates a good understanding of most of the concepts and key points presented in the text/s and Learning Resources. Posting provides moderate detail (including at least one pertinent example), evidence from the readings and other scholarly sources, and discerning ideas.
3.5 (35%) – 4.5 (45%)
Discussion posting demonstrates a fair understanding of the concepts and key points as presented in the text/s and Learning Resources. Posting may be lacking or incorrect in some area, or in detail and specificity, and/or may not include sufficient pertinent examples or provide sufficient evidence from the readings.
0 (0%) – 3 (30%)
Discussion posting demonstrates poor or no understanding of the concepts and key points of the text/s and Learning Resources. Posting is incorrect and/or shallow and/or does not include any pertinent examples or provide sufficient evidence from the readings.
Reply Post & Peer Interaction (20% of possible points)
2 (20%) – 2 (20%)
Student interacts frequently with peers. The feedback postings and responses to questions are excellent and fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, use of scholarly, empirical resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.
1.75 (17.5%) – 1.75 (17.5%)
Student interacts moderately with peers. The feedback postings and responses to questions are good but may not fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, use of scholarly, empirical resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.
1.5 (15%) – 1.5 (15%)
Student interacts minimally with peers or the feedback postings, and responses to questions only partially contribute to the quality of interaction by offering insufficient constructive critique or suggestions, shallow questions, or providing poor quality additional resources.
0 (0%) – 1 (10%)
Student does not interact with peers (0 points) or the feedback postings and responses to questions do not contribute to the quality of interaction by offering any constructive critique, suggestions, questions, or additional resources
Writing (20% of possible points)
2 (20%) – 2 (20%)
Postings are well organized, use scholarly tone, contain original writing and proper paraphrasing, follow APA style, contain very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and are fully consistent with graduate level writing style.
1.75 (17.5%) – 1.75 (17.5%)
Postings are mostly consistent with graduate level writing style. Postings may have some small organization, scholarly tone, writing, or APA style issues, and/or may contain a few writing and spelling errors.
1.5 (15%) – 1.5 (15%)
Postings are somewhat below graduate level writing style. Postings may be lacking in organization, scholarly tone, APA style, and/or contain many writing and/or spelling errors, or show moderate reliance on quoting vs. original writing and paraphrasing.
0 (0%) – 1 (10%)
Postings are well below graduate level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, APA style, and writing, or show heavy reliance on quoting.
Total Points: 10
Name: PSYC_6245_Week7_Discussion2_Rubric

GET HELP WITH THIS ASSIGNMENT TODAY

Clicking on this button will take you to our custom assignment page. Here you can fill out all the additional details for this particular paper (grading rubric, academic style, number of sources etc), after which your paper will get assigned to a course-specific writer. If you have any issues/concerns, please don’t hesitate to contact our live support team or email us right away.

How It Works        |        About Us       |       Contact Us

© 2018 | Intelli Essays Homework Service®

Back To Top