1. Influence 3-3-18 11 am CST Scientistmel.com Patreon.com/scientistmel
Twitter.com/scientistmel
am CST

2. Influence
Experiments
Confirmation Bias
Manipulation Tactics

3. Experiments Milgram Experiment Stanford Prison Experiment
Just following orders
Stanford Prison Experiment
Societal roles

4. Milgram Exp
IN 1963 Stanley Milgram wanted to investigate justification for the genocide performed by the millions of Germans during WW2. This was sparked by the Adolf Eichmann wat criminal trial in 1961where the defense “I was just following orders” was used.
Milgram wanted to answer the question “Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?”
He wanted to investigate if Germans were particularly obedient to authority figures or if this is everyone. He designed an experiment to see just how far ordinary people would go if they had the knowledge that what they were doing could potentially harm and possibly kill another human.
An ad was placed in the newspaper and subjects were given $4.50 just for showing up. There were 40 males aged between 20 and 50 with varying jobs

5. Milgram Exp.
*Describe each person’s role – learner, teacher, experimenter
Describe drawing straws
Describe administering shocks for each wrong answer
Describe increase of voltage and the “authority figure”
Describe prods: Prod 1: Please continue.
Prod 2: The experiment requires you to continue.
Prod 3: It is absolutely essential that you continue.
Prod 4: You have no other choice but to continue.

6. Milgram Exp.

7. Milgram Exp
65% (two-thirds) of participants (i.e., teachers) continued to the highest level of 450 volts. All the participants continued to 300 volts.
Milgram did more than one experiment – he carried out 18 variations of his study. 
Ordinary people are likely to follow orders given by an authority figure, even to the extent of killing an innocent human being.  Obedience to authority is ingrained in us all from the way we are brought up.
People tend to obey orders from other people if they recognize their authority as morally right and/or legally based. This response to legitimate authority is learned in a variety of situations, for example in the family, school, and workplace.

8. Milgram Exp. Agency Theory Autonomous People direct their own actions
Agentic
People allow others to direct them

9. Milgram Exp. Agentic State
Person giving orders is perceived as qualified to do so
Person being ordered believes authority will accept responsibility

10. Milgram Exp Milgram had 18 variations of his study.
Change of location building matters…more prestigious obedience increases
Uniform – clothing matters…lab coats increase qualification and obedience
Two teachers instead of one…more teachers means responsibility is shared
Peer pressure from teachers who refused to obey dropped the electrical shocks
Experimenter not in the room…obedience drops

11. Milgram Exp. Perils of Obedience
I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist.
Stark authority was pitted against the subjects’ [participants’] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects’ [participants’] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not.
The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation.'

12. Stanford Prison Exp.
In 1973, Zimbardo wanted to investigate how readily people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner in a role-playing exercise that simulated prison life.
This was sparked from the reports of brutality among guards in US prisons. He wanted to see if it was due to the sadistic personalities of the guards (i.e., dispositional) or had more to do with the prison environment (i.e., situational).
For example, prisoners and guards may have personalities making aggressive interactions inevitable…prisoners lacking respect for law and guards being domineering. Alternatively, prisoners and guards may act hostile due to the rigid power structure environment in prisons.
If the prisoners and guards behaved without aggression, this would support the personality hypothesis, or if they behave the same way as people do in real prisons, this would support the environment explanation.

13. Stanford Prison Single Blind Most Common
Reviewer anonymity allows impartial decisions
Authors may have concern reviewers delay publication in order to publish first
Reviewers may use anonymity as justification for being overly critical and harsh
Double Blind
Author anonymity prevents reviewer bias
Content considered over prestige of author
Reviewers can identify author through writing style/subject matter/self citation
Open Review
Believed to be best to prevent malicious comments/plagiarism/pushing agendas
Encourages open and honest reviewing
Some see it as a less honest process where politeness or fear of retribution causes reviewer to withhold criticism

14. Stanford Prison Exp.
More than 70 applicants answered the ad and were given diagnostic interviews and personality tests to eliminate candidates with psychological problems, medical disabilities, or a history of crime or drug abuse. The study comprised 24 male college students (chosen from 75 volunteers) who were paid $15 per day to take part in the experiment.
Participants were randomly assigned to either the role of prisoner or guard in a simulated prison environment. There were two reserves, and one dropped out, finally leaving ten prisoners and 11 guards. The guards worked in sets of three (being replaced after an 8-hour shift), and the prisoners were housed three to a room. There was also a solitary confinement cell for prisoners who 'misbehaved.' The prison simulation was kept as “real life” as possible.
The environment was maintained to look like a prison even down to the guards clothing and schedule.

15. Stanford Prison Prisoners Guards Rumors of revolt and escape
Punished – physically and emotionally
Suffered emotional damage
Guards
Harassed prisoners
Punished and rewarded prisoners
Fell into the roles easily
Within hours both prisoners and guards settled into their new roles. The abuse became so incredible that the experiment was cut short at 6 days and not carrying onto the fortnight that was the initial time frame

16. Stanford Prison Exp.
People easily conform to the social roles they are expected to play
This is also reinforced if the roles are as strongly stereotyped as those of the prison guards.
The “prison” environment was an important in generating the guards’ brutality (none of the guards showed sadistic tendencies before the study).
Findings support the situational/environmental explanation of behavior rather than the dispositional/personality one.

17. Confirmation Bias
Listening only to evidence that reinforces your beliefs/perspectives.

18. Confirmation Bias Confirmation bias Alleviates fear
Encourages bandwagon bias

19. Confirmaiton Bias
People feel comfortable in being part of a group of individuals
These belief systems help them in their “survival instincts”
People ignore facts that contradict their belief system as it threatens this “survival instinct”
This is why we see people stand firm in their own belief systems and band together with others who think like they do…it alleviates fear associated with new information that challenges their core beliefs.
In order to overcome that, you have to convince the person you are presenting new info to that you are not a threat to them or their beliefs.
Confirmation bias is largely why we have people quick to believe false information on the internet and in turn fuels the propaganda machine…ie: Russian propaganda bots and the last election.

20. Manipulation Gaslighting Projection Impossible Arguments
Home Court Advantage
Misrepresenting Your Thoughts
Moving Goal Posts
Manipulation of Facts
Overwhelm with Facts
Overwhelm with Red Tape
Smear Campaigns
Negative Surprises
Guilt-Baiting
Aggressive Jab Jokes
Shaming
VictimHood

21. Influence
Experiments
Confirmation Bias
Manipulation Tactics

22. Sources
signs-psychological-and-emotional-manipulation
biases-vs-common-sense
confirmation-bias

23. Thank you to my Patrons Toni James Lauren Jenn Carl Melanie Patrick
Daniel
Paola
Tim
Keri
Circa
Keith
Zachary
Tony
Graham
Tristen
Jennifer
Corey

24. You can find me… ScientistMel.com Patreon.com/scientistmel
Pscp.tv.com/scientistmel
Youtube.com/scientistmel
Facebook.com/scientistmel

25. Influence 3-3-18 11 am CST Scientistmel.com Patreon.com/scientistmel
Twitter.com/scientistmel
am CST