The Rosenthal And Jacobson Effect

He conducted 18 different variations of the original experiment. When changing different variables the obedience percentage dropped significantly. These variations showed that when the “authority” figure was wearing some sort of uniform the obedience levels would rise but when the participants question their authority they percentage decreased. In other variations the learner and the teacher were placed in the same room so the teacher can experience the pain the learner was going through. In this variation the obedience fell too. Throughout all of the variations the percentage of participants administering the maximum 450 volts decreased significantly when different variables were added to the

After learning more about the Pygmalion effect, it typically discusses how individuals often children or students may turn to live up to what’s expected of them, in which they perform better when someone sets high expectations for them. The Pygmalion effect was also called the Rosenthal effect based on the classic experiment by Rosenthal and Jacobson. During their experiment during the beginning of the school year, Rosenthal and Jacobson told the teachers that this test was to predict which students would bloom intellectually during the academic year. Both Rosenthal and Jacobson deceived the other teachers by telling them that the most intellect students have been tested by a new methodology which determines

Gladwell reveals that to excel in the world, one must be born with or introduced to the right tools. These tools may include being born into a high class home, when one is born, as well as being recognized early in school. When Lewis Terman, in 1921, conducted the Genetic Study of Genius observation, he only took into account the subjects I.Q. scores. It wasn’t until later, when he noticed the divergence of three different groups A, B, and C, did he realize that it wasn’t only about scores. The groups were separated by societal class, group A born from the high end of the scale while C was from the lower end. Group A, as well as most of B, did superb at the same time that group C fell out. Intelligence

Something that became very evident; however, was that it did not work as well when it came to the older children. The results were almost unanimous with the smaller children that the teachers’ expectations effected the children. The older children did not show a specific pattern like the smaller children. In the discussion of the study after the researchers studies the results, it was said that the reasoning behind why the smaller children showed an increase was because they are so young that they are still learning so much and that the teachers do not know enough about them to actually form the expectations about them that they were supposed to. As a result of this, they were able to grow at their own pace naturally without influence. When it comes to how the on the children list they were given showed growth, the researchers realized that there is different kind of treatment that those who are believed to be smarter than the rest get and that there is not going to be a change to this behavior until there is some sort of way to have zero bias in a classroom between the teachers and the students. Self-serving bias is something that is truly real. It can be more or less prevalent depending on the situation; however, it should always be taken into account with almost all

The Rosenthal and Jacobson experiment was conducted at Oak school with children of all ages. Children were given an IQ test to serve as a baseline for the experiment. The teachers where told which students were "ready to bloom" aka had optimal IQ's. This was a made up statement to lead the teachers to believe that some students scored higher on the test than others and thus labeled as smarter. After the period of time was over all of the students were retested for IQ. The students falsely labeled as "ready to bloom" saw the highest IQ gains. The highest gains were seen in the younger children. This experiment is a perfect example of a self-fulfilling prophecy where students were randomly labeled as smarter than other students and they ended

In 1968 Rosenthal and Jacobson visited an elementary school and gave IQ tests to all of the students. They ended up randomly picking 20% of the students in the school and identified them as having especially high potential for academic achievement. As the school year went on towards the end the students ended up getting retested. The students who were labeled as bright earlier in the year ended up scoring higher than their peers. The teachers had high expectations for these students which could have led to the students seeing different material which expected more from them. The children most likely acted different also after they found out what was expected from them. So, all of the expectations that everyone had for these children actually

This experiment used inductive. She started the experiment to observe how children treat the minority. She did not have a theory at that time. The range was the middle range theory. The reason is that the theory is used to try and explain a phenomenon. What was trying to be explained is how racism can still thrive in this modern day world. The experiments utilized macro-level theory. The experimenter was trying to test out an issue that is affecting the entire system of care the governmental systems have for minorities. Racism thrives in many communities. Jane Elliot was not experimenting individuals, but the community they live in.

The role of the environment was minimalized due to Burt’s (1909) theory, intelligence was viewed as a fixed inborn state that could neither be developed or changed (Parrington 1996). Burt’s (1909) influence came from his research through the years 1920 to 1970, when children were segregated by capability. This was noticeable during secondary education

This can be viewed as a self-fulfilling prophecy, but Millon mainly focuses on the experiment being affected by participant bias, as Rosenhan does not enforce blind controls (Millon, 1975). It should also be noted when looking at the above, that Rosenhan further reduces the validity of his experiment by involving himself as a participant, which shows experimenter bias, and also may be key to why the controls Millon looks at were not enforced with his participants.

The next step was the “social perception” test which asked participants to read an essay from a student who was participating in a debate. Repeating the conditions of the 1967 experiment, they told the participants either that the student wrote it of their own free will, or they were forced to take that position for the purposes of the debate. The topic was one of saliency at the time for Australians, regarding French nuclear testing in the South Pacific. The essays were not ambivalent, clearly stating a position

The Milgram experiment is probably one of the most well-known experiments of the psy-sciences. (De Vos, J. (2009). Stanley Milgram was a psychologist from Yale University. He conducted an experiment focusing on the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience. Milgram wanted to investigate whether Germans were particularly obedient to authority figures as this was a common explanation for the Nazi killings in World War II. Milgram selected people for his experiment by newspaper advertising. He looked for male participants to take part in a study of learning at Yale University.

Gladwell uses Terman’s study as an example. Terman collected over a thousand children with high IQs and followed them into adulthood. The results were not what he had expected. “They [Terman’s subjects] tended to earn good incomes—but not that good. The majority had careers that could only be considered ordinary, and a surprising number ended up with careers that even Terman considered failures.” “His fieldworkers actually tested two elementary students who went on to be Nobel laureates—William Shockley and Luis Alvarez—and rejected them both.” Gladwell uses this experiment to show having a higher IQ does not correspond to greater success.

Even academic achievement goes up when the children were in the superior group. When doing the card packs the first day the brown eyed children spent five and half minutes to go through the deck, while the superior blue eyed children spent only three minutes, the following day the superior group of brown eyed students took only two and a half minutes compared to the four minutes and eighteen seconds of the inferior blue eyed group.

During the second day of the experiment, the roles were reversed. The brown-eyed children being told and treated like they were the superior group (1985). The results of this experiment proved interesting as it revealed how quick and easily groups can be discriminated against based on differences alone. Not only did the in-groups and the out-groups start treating each other terribly, but the kids who were in the out-group developed low self-esteem which caused them to do worse on their class assignments, get temperamental, defensive and fought with the other group. The results during role reversal were the same. Jane Elliot later commented during the experiment she "… watched what had been marvelous, cooperative, wonderful, thoughtful children turn into nasty, vicious, discriminating, little third-graders in a space of fifteen minutes” (1985). The children’s academic performance greatly

The Milgram experiment was conducted in 1963 by Stanley Milgram in order to focus on the conflict between obedience to authority and to personal conscience. The experiment consisted of 40 males, aged between 20 and 50, and who’s jobs ranged from unskilled to professional. The roles of this experiment included a learner, teacher, and researcher. The participant was deemed the teacher and was in the same room as the researcher. The learner, who was also a paid actor, was put into the next room and strapped into an electric chair. The teacher administered a test to the learner, and for each question that was incorrect, the learner was to receive an electric shock by the teacher, increasing the level of shock each time. The shock generator ranged from