Rethinking the Psychology of Tyranny and The Persistence of False Beliefs

This article compares and contrasts two research papers: 'Rethinking the Psychology of Tyranny' and 'The Persistence of False Beliefs'. The first paper explores how individuals condone tyranny, while the second paper examines the persistence of false beliefs. The aim, methodology, and subjects differ between the two papers.

Time Constrained
Assessment

Table of Contents
SECTION 1: SHORT ANSWER QUESTIONS.........................................................................3
1. Adorno, T.W., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D.J., & Sanford, R.N. (1950). The
authoritarian personality..............................................................................................................3
2. Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A.M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a “theory of
mind”?..........................................................................................................................................3
3. Freud, S. (1909). The original report by Freud is available in Three Essays on the Theory of
Sexuality – The Case of Little Hans. Reprinted 2011 by Martino Fine books or as one of the
case histories: Analysis of a phobia of a five year old boy.........................................................4
4. Blackmore, S. (1988). Visions from the dying brain: Near death experiences may tell us
more about consciousness and the brain than about what lies beyond the grave........................4
5) Thigpen, C.H., & Cleckley, H. (1954). A case of multiple personality..................................5
Section B..........................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................13

SECTION 1: SHORT ANSWER QUESTIONS
1. Adorno, T.W., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D.J., & Sanford, R.N. (1950). The
authoritarian personality.
a) Define the term fascism and explain it in the context of the Adorno study.
Fascism can be defied as a kind of far- right form of government in which most of the
country’s power is held by one ruler. They are normally authoritarian one- party state. In context
of Adorno study Fascism has been used to explain the Authoritarianism personality. Adorno has
used this tern to explain personality traits like neo-Fascist or white pride style organizations and
as an adage to their supposed historical underpinnings to represent modern day
authoritarianism.Author says that subjects with some religious affiliation are more prejudiced
than those without affiliation.
b) Describe the qualitative methods adopted by Adorno et al in their studies?
Qualitative methods adopted by Adorno in his study were clinical interview and
administration of the Thematic Apperception test. For coding the interview techniques of
content analysis was used. Author used this method for analysing qualitatively prejudice,
political and economic ideas, religious ideology and syndromes among high and low scorers
2. Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A.M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a “theory of
mind”?
a) Describe how Baron-Cohen used the ‘Sally-Anne’ test to investigate the concept of a theory
of mind
Baron-Cohen used the ‘Sally-Anne’ test to investigate the concept of a theory of mind in
following way: Sally and Anne were two doll protagonists. First of all, he checked that children
know which doll was which. Sally first of all, placed a marble in her basket and left. Then Anne
transferred the marble and hid it in her box. When Sally returned, experimenter asked whether
Sally will look for her marble? If the children pointed towards previous box then they passed the
belief question and appreciated doll’s now false belief. But on the other hand if they pointed
towards current location then they fail as they did not taken into account doll’s belief. Both of
these conclusions were warranted only if two questions were answered correctly that are: where
is the marble and where the marble was in beginning.According to Author Autistic children does

have theory of mind and can succeed at Sally-Anne test despite their language, attention and
memory difficulties
b) Identify the participants who took part in the Baron-Cohen study. Explain why each of the
different groups of participants were used in the study.
Separate group of children participated in the study. He used different group of participants
to explain that child have their own belief which is completely different from someone else
belief. Not only this, he took different groups to explain that different people have different
belief in one situation.
3. Freud, S. (1909). The original report by Freud is available in Three Essays on the Theory of
Sexuality – The Case of Little Hans. Reprinted 2011 by Martino Fine books or as one of
the case histories: Analysis of a phobia of a five year old boy.
a) Explain how Freud interpretated of at least two of the defence mechanisms that were used by
Little Hans?
Freud interpretated mechanisms of displacement and externalization that were used by
Little Hans in a proper and appropriate manner. He explains that when Hans explained his death
wishes towards his sister.This was because birth of his sister heightened the conflict as she too
was seen by Hans to be a rival for his mother's attention and affection. Repression of his
aggressive impulses towards his father strengthened his castration anxiety that further forced him
through mechanism of displacement and externalization that further created a phobic object that
could have been avoided.
b) Identify ONE of the events reported to Freud by Little Han’s father. Describe how Freud
interpreted your chosen event
One of the events reported to Freud by Little Han’s father was his son (Little Hans)
interest in sexual matters, his curiosity about his body and the bodies of others which was an
interest that centred especially upon anatomical differences between the sexes. This suddenly
developed a phobia in Little Hans. Freud explained that this anatomical differences between the
sexes developed a Phobia within him because of which he refused to leave the house and go to
streets for fear of being bitten by a horse. This was majorly because of development of partial
dissolution of the neurotic conflicts because of which phobic symptom originated.

4. Blackmore, S. (1988). Visions from the dying brain: Near death experiences may tell us more
about consciousness and the brain than about what lies beyond the grave.
a) Describe the research method that was used by Blackmore in this study?
Blackmore in this study used qualitative research methods in which he focused upon
reviewing an article. He focuses upon reviewing all the near-death experience articles that
provided evidence of life after death. This review further allowed him to get some scientific
explanations that allow testable prediction to be made by him so that it further make sense to
people who have near death experience. He further said that article reviewed by him is not an
evidence of a specific research.
b) Identify ONE experience that is commonly reported after a near death experience (NDE).
How was your chosen experience explained by Blackmore?
One experience that is commonly reported after a near death experience explained by
Blackmore was out of body experienced. out of body experienced was one of the main
experience that was reported commonly after near death experience.Blackmore explained this
experience with the help of noting down experience of a women. Women explained that fourth
day after operation she went into shock and felt unconscious. She explained that he was lying
above her body totally free of pain and floating peacefully. She said that she was going
elsewhere towards dark but not frightened and with total peace. Then suddenly she was slammed
back to her body aware of her pain. He took account of this near death experience o a women
and compared it with experience of others.
5) Thigpen, C.H., & Cleckley, H. (1954). A case of multiple personality.
a) What qualitative and quantitative data was collected in the Thigpen and Cleckley study.
Qualitative and quantitative data was collected in the Thigpen and Cleckley study was
collected from the treatment of ‘Eve’ who complained of ‘severe and blinding headaches’
followed by blackouts. Psychiatrists collected information about her for approximately 14
months where detailed interview with Eve, her parents and husband was conducted. Further they
collected administered projective tests, psychometric test, and physiological tests data with the
help of EEG machine. Other than this psychiatrist also used hypnosis as a psychological strategy
so that other personalities within her can be brought out and at this time her behaviour was
observed that further helped them in distinguish between Eve black, Eve White and Jane.

b) What are the advantages of the case study method? Provide examples of these advantages in
the context of this research.
Some of the main advantages of the case study method are:
 Provide detailed qualitative information. Example: detailed interview with Eve
 Provide insight of future research. Example: provide information about other
personalities within Eve
 Permit investigation of unethical situations. Example: hypnosis heled in distinguish three
personalities that were Jane, Eve while and Eve black.
 It further helped in investigating topic in much more detailed manner that can further help
in shedding some light upon human thinking and behaviour that can be unethical and
impractical to be studied in other manner.
Section B
For this section two papers that have been selected are ‘Rethinking the psychology of
tyranny: The BBC Prison Study and ‘The persistence of false beliefs’.
Rethinking the psychology of tyranny: The BBC Prison Study is one of the paper selected for
comparison and contrast. In this paper, findings from BBC have been presented. This is an
experimental case study in which men were randomly divided into two groups of prisoners in a
institution that was specially developed to examine consequences of the study. In this guards
failed to identify their whereas prisoners did not. This means that guards did not wanted to do
their duty because they were not sure whether it is right or not. Because of this guards were
overcome by prisoners. Participants in this experiment then established an egalitarian social
system and when the social system proved to beunsustainable then actions were taken to impose
tyrannical regime with weakening resistance (HOONG, 2006). In this paper the question that
was emphasised mainly in this paper was how individuals come to condone tyranny of others
and if not then they act tyrannically themselves.
Another paper being selected is The Persistence of False Beliefs. As the title of the paper
this paper is also based on the question that Do false belief last. To explore this question in this
study false beliefs and memories of a childhood experience were created with asparagus. It was
found that false beliefs had consequences for subjects when assessed directly after the suggestive

manipulation. Also subjects were brought back two weeks later to see of their false beliefs
persisted and lasted. However, after two weeks confidence of subject in their new memories and
the consequences of those memories got diminished, but they did not extinguished.
This suggests that concepts and grounds of both these papers are completely different. In
this one study has focus on identifying how people condone tyranny or how they act tyrannically.
Another paper is completely different and works on identifying persistence of false beliefs.
Aim
Concerned with aim of the paper both the papers have clarity of what they want to
achieve through the paper and experiments that they are doing. However, in second paper which
is Persistence of false beliefs question of paper have been critically linked with different areas of
discussion regarding question and this is why questions are more clear and in different parts of
paper this question have been outlined (Laney and et.al., 2008). This suggests how researchers
are working on identifying answer of the question in the paper. However, this is not so in case of
first paper, in that paper main question of the paper have been widely linked with discussion that
was being carried out paper. Aim of the first paper was to rethink the psychology of tyranny
whereas aim of second paper was to explore and identify whether false belief lasts. This means
that both these papers aim to understand two completely different aspects of psychology and are
not connected or related in any way.
Method
Methodology is the way how research is carried out and paper is developed for the
research. This is very important for overall success of research and this outline how research will
be carried out
In the first paper study was designed hierarchical society was created in which people are
required to live for 10 days. This experiment was conducted within institutional environment and
this environment was constructed within Elstree Film Studios in north London. In this research a
lockable 3 person cell was allocated to prisoners and these prisons also have showers and off a
central atrium. However, other than prison guards in the experiment were given quarters and
prisons and quarters were separated by lockable steel mesh fence. In this research male

participants were recruited and applicants went through three phases of screening. Environment
of prison was designed in such way that participants and their activities could be recorded in
video and audio format. Along with daily psychometric testing was also done.
In second paper pre-manipulated data was collected from the subjects and subjects were
told that on the basis of data, individualised profile will be created (Valsiner, Chaudhary and
Benetka, 2017). In second laboratory session of the paper and experiment subjects received false
feedback about loving or hating asparagus when they were children. Followed by this, researcher
assessed whether or not subjects who received false feedback developed false memories about
critical event. In this research 368 undergraduate students from the University of California,
Irvine. In this subjects were mostly female that is around 79.6% and their mean age was 20.3
years. In this four conditions were assigned randomly before they arrived in the lab. In these 111
participants loved asparagus and 114 hated asparagus.
This outlines that both the papers were based on experiments and specialised conditions
were created for experiment in both these papers. However, in these papers several things in
methodology were different and mainly data collection method was different and along with this
subjects to experiment were also different (Hamzé and Shaban, 2018). In first paper only male
subjects were included in experiment and in second paperboth male and female subjects were
also included. However, in first paper information about subjects and participants was not given
in detail and in second paper information about subjects was not given. Concerned with
method both the papers included highly specialised psychological experiments and through both
these experiments researcher worked on establishing psychological patterns in subjects.
Data
Data is concerned with how well data of different experiments and results of experiment
is outlined and described in the paper. It is very important to identify how experiments worked in
order to achieve answer of the paper and aim for which paper was developed and research was
carried out.
Concerned with data both these papers include information about phases of experiment in
the data and in second paper details about different sessions was included. In second paper
experiment was conducted in different parts and this is why data of sessions was included.

In first paper data of phase 1 was included and phase 1 was Rejecting Inequality and
phase 2 in the paper was Rejecting Inequality. In second paper session 1 included first visit to
laboratory and subjects first provided informed consent. Session 2 data is about second visit to
laboratory by subjects of research. Session 3 was final session in the experiment. In the final
session of the experiment, subjects completed series of questionnaire. In psychology all results
cannot be gathered in single attempt and this is why phase are important to be included in
experiments and this is why both the papers involved experiment in multiple phases.
Discussion
Discussion is concerned with how results and questions in the paper are linked with each
other and how well research, connectresearch and experiments.
First paper in this discussion included very clear and effective discussion and discussion
was done in a way that could be understood by anyone who is from different subject background
(Smarr and et.al., 2017). Discussion effectively linked results and findings of research with
questions of the research and research findings were effectively discussed under the heading of
discussion. Papers being based on experiment it is very important that discussion is developed
rightly so that paper and its concept can be understood easily. Discussion involved details of
paper, its concept and findings and the discussion involve all elements of the paper and
experiment together. In the discussion four critiques were included and their role was also
discussed. Role of television was included, role of personality was included, the reality of
inequality and power and the impact of interventions and key variables were discussed in paper.
This means that discussion outlined key elements of paper in the discussion.
Similarly, in second paper discussion was undertaken and outlined key points of all
findings of the research paper and experiment that was undertaken and completed in research.
Discussion in second paper outlined how findings of the paper link with aim and question of the
paper and also contribution of experiment in finding answers to the question. Results and
discussion outline that false memories for specific event and those memories have may have
immediate consequences for those who developed them.
Clarity

This is concerned with how clear everything is presented and described in paper and this
is very important for overall effectiveness of papers.
This paper and discussion and experiment in both papers were very clearly and were
recorded in detail. In addition to this, both papers were based on experiment and this is why it is
very important that how experiments were conducted and what these experiments resulted
(Batel, 2018). All sessions were discussed in details in both the papers. Clarity is very important
because it is not necessary that only those with knowledge of psychology read papers and this is
why papers were clear that anyone can read and understand them.
Use of previous research
This is concerned with in what extent research from previous papers were included and
their use and importance in completing research for the current papers. This is very important
part and element of the research papers and this is why involvement of previous researches and
research papers was very important. In first paper several previous researches and evidence were
used compared to second paper. This means that in second paper experiment was very important
and complete research was mainly based on the experiment that was carried out for the
purposeof this research. In first paper reference of previous research was also included in detail
and other papers were very important part of overall research paper and results of research paper.
Way of writing and structure: ways of writing of both the studies were completely different
from each other or it can be said that it was contorting. In ‘The persistence of false beliefs’ study
by Laney and et.al., 2008 author followed a proper structure in which author provided proper
abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, limitation and future direction with proper
heading as a structure. Whereas in ‘Rethinking the psychology of tyranny: The BBC prison
study’ by Reicher and Haslam, 2006, author did not follow a proper structure. In fact, in this
study findings from BBC were presented in a simple format. Author of this study did follow
paper structure but proper heading was not provided.
Conclusion: In ‘Rethinking the psychology of tyranny: The BBC prison study’ author did
provide proper conclusion of the study in which SPE findings were confirmed. Conclusion
drawn from this study was tyranny and conflict cannot be drawn by simply looking at an
individual but in fact it requires analysis of group processes and intergroup relations. Whereas, in

‘The persistence of false beliefs’ study author did not provide a proper conclusion with proper
heading and simply concluded within discussion that food avoidance for the critical food items
occurs, and subjects also show avoidance of related food. Both the studies are completely
contrasting and are not related to each other hence conclusion of both the studies cannot be
compared but conclusion of both the studies can be explained and way in which it has been
explained or written has been explained. Study by Reicher and Haslam, 2006 clearly concluded
and helped in achievement of main aim of the study but on the other hand, study by Laney and
et.al., 2008 do not conclude whole paper in a proper manner.
Scope for future research: in study of Laney and et.al., 2008, author has clearly provided
scope for future research by pro ding proper future directions by explaining main limitations of
this research that were not covered in this study. With the help of limitations of study author
explained a factors or points that author failed to cover in this study or boundaries of this
research because of which he was not able to answer other types of false memories, including
false memories for emotionally rich events. Lastly author has successfully helped in identify
future scope of the study that can be researched and explored in future. Whereas, on the other
hand in another study of Reicher and Haslam, 2006, author did not provide proper scope for
future research. He simply explained that scope of this study was too large and on the basis of set
data all presumptions cannot be made. He further explained that there were some complexities in
this studies but despite of those complexities it was largely true for SPE. Author in this study
had made a strong claim that had an enormous impact on public consciousness but further it led
to a debate that eventually closed off because further research was declared ethically
unacceptable.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Adorno, T.W., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D.J., & Sanford, R.N. (1950). The authoritarian
personality.
Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A.M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a “theory of
mind”?
Batel, S., 2018. A critical discussion of research on the social acceptance of renewable energy
generation and associated infrastructures and an agenda for the future. Journal of
environmental policy & planning. 20(3). pp.356-369.
Blackmore, S. (1988). Visions from the dying brain: Near death experiences may tell us more
about consciousness and the brain than about what lies beyond the grave.
Freud, S. (1909). The original report by Freud is available in Three Essays on the Theory of
Sexuality – The Case of Little Hans. Reprinted 2011 by Martino Fine books or as one
of the case histories: Analysis of a phobia of a five year old boy.
Hamzé, M. and Shaban, A., 2018. Conclusion and discussion. In The Litani River, Lebanon: An
Assessment and Current Challenges (pp. 161-171). Springer, Cham.
HOONG, N.W., 2006. Rethinking the psychology of tyranny: The BBC prison study.
Commentary and Authors' reply. LNG industry, (SPRING), pp.16-19.
Laney, C and et.al., 2008. The persistence of false beliefs. Acta Psychologica. 129(1). pp.190-
197.
Laney, C., Fowler, N.B., Nelson, K.J., Bernstein, D.M. and Loftus, E.F., 2008. The persistence
of false beliefs. Acta Psychologica, 129(1), pp.190-197.
Reicher, S. and Haslam, S.A., 2006. Rethinking the psychology of tyranny: The BBC prison
study. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(1), pp.1-40.
Smarr, M.M and et.al., 2017. Is human fecundity changing? A discussion of research and data
gaps precluding us from having an answer. Human Reproduction. 32(3). pp.499-504.
Thigpen, C.H., & Cleckley, H. (1954). A case of multiple personality.
Valsiner, J., Chaudhary, N. and Benetka, G., 2017. From methodology to methods in human
psychology. Cham: Springer International Publishing.