2. 职称英语
  3. In the 1960s and 1970s, classic social psychological studies were conducted

In the 1960s and 1970s, classic social psychological studies were conducted

游客2024-03-07  35
问题     In the 1960s and 1970s, classic social psychological studies were conducted that provided evidence that even normal, decent people can engage in acts of extreme cruelty when instructed to do so by others. However, in an essay published November 20 in the open access journal PLOS Biology, Professors Alex Haslam and Stephen Reicher revisit these studies’ conclusions and explain how awful acts involve not just obedience, but enthusiasm too—challenging the long-held belief that human beings are "programmed" for conformity.
    This belief can be traced back to two landmark empirical research (实证研究) programs conducted by Stanley Milgram and Philip Zimbardo in the 1960s and early 1970s. Milgram’s "Obedience to Authority" research is widely believed to show that people blindly conform to the instructions of an authority figure, and Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) is commonly understood to show that people will take on abusive roles uncritically.
    However, Professor Haslam, from the University of Queensland, argues that tyranny does not result from blind conformity to rules and roles. Rather, it is a creative act of followership, resulting from identifying with authorities who represent vicious (恶意的) acts as virtuous (善良的).
    "Decent people participate in horrific acts not because they become passive, mindless functionaries (公职人员) who do not know what they are doing, but rather because they come to believe—typically under the influence of those in authority—that what they are doing is right," Professor Haslam explained.
    Professor Reicher, of the University of St Andrews, added that it is not that they were blind to the evil acts they were committing, but rather that they knew what they were doing, and believed it to be right.
    These conclusions were partly informed by Professors Haslam and Reicher’s own prison experiment, conducted in 2002 in collaboration with the BBC. The study generated three findings. First, participants did not conform automatically to their assigned role; second, they only acted in terms of group membership to the extent that they identified with the group; and finally, group identity did not mean that people simply accepted their assigned position—it also empowered them to resist it.
    Although Zimbardo and Milgram’s findings remain highly influential, Professor Haslam argues that their conclusions do not hold up well under close empirical scrutiny.
    Professor Reicher concludes that tyranny does not flourish because offenders are helpless and ignorant; it flourishes because they are convinced that they are doing something worthy. [br] Which is wrong about the three findings of the experiment?
选项 A、Participants did not conform to their assigned role mindlessly.
B、Participants only act in groups to prove that they are a team.
C、Group identity empowers participants to reject their roles.
D、Group identity can be achieved when participants accomplish a task.
答案 D
解析 细节题。根据题干中的three findings可定位到原文第六段。对比原文，第一个发现说参与者并非机械地顺从他们被分配的角色，故A选项说法正确；第二个发现说他们仅以小组身份行动，认同自己属于小组成员，B选项正确；第三个发现说小组身份并非意味着他们仅仅接受所分配的职位——还允许他们排斥分配，C选项正确，只有D选项并未提到，故选D。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3513759.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)