Fundamental attribution error in explaining people’s behavior: Overestimating the power of personality traits and underestimating the power of social influence

Type :

Term papers

Pages :

4 pages

Format :

.doc

Published date :

03/18/2009

Category :

Social studies

Sub category :

Psychology

Oboulo.com selection criteria

$ 6.95 Add to cart

Summary :

Introduction
Milgram's experiments
1. The first situational variable Milgram manipulated
2. Manipulating the physical proximity of the experimenter to the subject
3. The manipulation of 'group effects'
4. The presence of another subject who delivered the shocks while the subject performed subsidiary functions
The issue of legitimate authority and the concept of institutional justification
Milgram's rejection of the notion that the behavior of the subjects in his experiments could be accounted for by personal dispositions
Conclusion
Bibliography

Abstract

Stanley Milgram (1963) demonstrated that the majority of the subjects in his studies on obedience (65 per cent) 'average, decent American citizens' (Milgram, 1963. p.5 ) who had volunteered for a Yale University experiment on learning would administer painful electric shocks up to 450 volts to another volunteer, despite the latter's protests. The findings of Milgram's studies are frequently cited as an example of the power of situational strengths in shaping behavior and of the tendency to underestimate social influence and instead attribute people's behavior to their dispositions or character, i.e. to commit the fundamental attribution error (e.g., Bierbrauer, 1979; Safer, 1980). With reference to the behavior of the subjects in Milgram's studies on obedience this essay critically explores the claim that we commit the fundamental attribution error when we overestimate the power of personality traits and underestimate the power of social influence. In this essay we begin by outlining Milgram's basic procedure.