Persuasion:
According to the theories on persuasion we are inclined to think deeply about an argument if the issue is one that is relevant and important to us. Unfortunately, we become distracted easily by how the information is presented or by other outside influences, thus lowering our level of scrutiny. The recruits did not start out being violent people right away, as soon as they were brought into the program. They went through an intense training. According to the article "The Education of a Torturer", the recruits went through a program that came as close to torture as the trainers could get. The recruits were beaten, humiliated, and as one person put it, "they learned to love pain."
The use of fear was a powerful incentive to be receptive to the ideas that were being taught to them. The recruits lived in a constant fear of their superiors and of each other. If fellow recruits suspected a member as not agreeing with the methods or going easy on a prisoner, that member took the place of the prisoner in the beatings.
With the fear motivating the recruits to do better, the credibility of the communicator shot up very high. The more credibility that a person has, the high power of persuasion is utilized. If the recruits had been instructed by a sloppy person off of the streets, there is no way they would have been afraid or impressed by him. In the army, the men in the highest positions had an almost god-like appearance. They wore their uniforms and had utmost authority. They had the power to inflict painful punishment and the ability and right to humiliate a recruit for any reason they alone deemed worthy. As the credibility of the superior increased, so did the attractiveness of their position. Men who had lots of power and metals on their uniforms for their performance in battles, gave the recruits an image of something to aspire too. The recruits would be willing to believe and act out anything that the superior commanded them to do. If there is a person that one looks up too, the willingness to listen to them and imitate them sky-rockets.
Another factor in persuasion is a one-sided argument. This theory has to do with how only hearing one side of an argument can lead to a higher level of persuasion. As the recruits were being instructed by a superior with an extremely high level of credibility and an attractive image that they can aspire to, they are not going to question whether or not they are being told both sides of a story. The recruits were not given other options or arguments on the ethics of torturing the prisoners. As a result the message given to them was not diluted with thoughts that might make their actions controversial. What the recruits were told was, to them, the only argument.
Back to Social Conformity and Influence
Social Cognition:
Social Cognition is the way that we make sense of our social world. We attempt to do this task hundreds of times a day.
One part of social cognition is priming. Priming is a procedure based on the notion that ideas that have been recently encountered or frequently activated are more likely to come to mind and will be used in interpreting events. The recruits were not give time off to think through their education or actions, so when the time came for them to carry out a violent aciton, what they have been taught to do day and night will be the only thing that comes to mind. Also, the training program has drilled into them how much the prisoners need to be punished and shown no mercy.
In addition to the priming, the theory of framing is at work. Framing is a factor influencing how we construct a decision, whether a problem or decision is presented in a way so that it appears to represent the potential for a loss or for a gain. When the situation came down to being violent, if a recruit had second thoughts, the fear of looking sympathetic to the prisoners was enough to make any other decision represent the potential for a very painful loss. Where as if the recruit did what he was instructed, the potential for a gain was obvious by the special rights given to men in superior positions.
Thinking through a situation could be costly for a recruit so judgmental heuristics might have been used. A judgmental heuristic is a mental shortcut, a simple rule or strategy for solving a problem. A class of judgmental heuristics that applies to the recruits is representative heuristic. This involves focusing on the similarity of one subject to another to infer that the first object acts like the second one. This concept relates to how the recruits dealt with the prisoners. With the heavy cognitive load that the recruits were constantly under, it is no surprise that they would seek the easiest way to fix a problem. For the recruit, a prisoner represents something bad that goes against the well-being of our country. The similarity that all of the people in prison have committed a crime might cause a torturer to see them in a single category of "bad" people that all deserve the punishment that they receive.
This can also include the concept of attitude accessibility. This refers to the strength of the association between a subject and an evaluation of it. For example, when the recruits thought of a prisoner, they most likely immediately thought "bad, dangerous" because that is what they have been taught. There is considerable evidence to support the theory that highly accessible attitudes guide behavior. Thus, the recruits were able to respond quickly to the prisoners and not hesitate in their violent proceedings.
Back to Social Conformity and Influence
Conformity:
Conformity can be defined as a change in a person's behavior or opinions as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or a group of people. From the article "The Education of a Torturer" the pressure being placed on the recruits by army officials was vividly real. That pressure included the beatings and humiliating situations.
The army knew that the level of a person's self-esteem can effect how easily they will bend to conform. The recruits were brought into the program in the first place because of the high self-esteem that they had. Right away the beatings and humiliation shattered that high self-esteem, bringing the recruits down to a level where conformity would be relatively painless.
As individual esteem was lowered, group esteem was highly rewarded. They had group building activities such as swearing allegiance to an common object, an "in-group" language and having nicknames, being touted as "elite", and getting benefits. The strong group identity increases the recruits wanting to conform to stay part of that group and belong.
The first level of conformity with in the groups was compliance. This describes the behavior of a person who is motivated by a desire to gain a reward or avoid punishment. It comes to no surprise that the recruits would learn to comply immediately, once they realized that they would receive less punishment for doing exactly what they are commanded to do. But this level of conformity is fickle, once the punishment is removed the recruits would have stopped obeying.
This is were the second level of conformity came in, identification. This is a response to influence brought about by an individual's desire to be like the influencer. The recruits clearly saw that the officers superior to them received extra benefits like going off base more frequently and other privileges. The recruits conformed to fit the image that was before them. If they did well in their training then one day they too would be in a position of power.
Back to Social Conformity and Influence
Aggression:
An aggressive action is an intentional behavior aimed at causing either physical or psychological pain. The recruits were intentionally beaten by their superiors to break them down physically and mentally.
From there, the recruits learned hostile aggression. This is an act of aggression stemming from a feeling of anger and aimed at inflicting pain or injury. A violent action stems from the pure anger and single minded goal of inflicting pain or injury on a person or group of people. The recruits were trained to act instinctively with anger. The aggressive energy was so encouraged during training that it was allowed to build and build within a recruit and at some point the energy needed to be released.
This is Freud's notion can best be characterized as a hydraulic theory. Although, recent studies have shown that the hydraulic theory is not a good way to use pent up emotion. Often one episode does not take the anger and negative emotion away.
The recruits also blamed the victim. Somehow they convinced themselves, or more likely, were convinced by their superiors, that the victims deserved the negative events to which he or she has subjected. To the violent person, the fact that a person was a prisoner, no questions needed to be asked about whether or not that prisoner deserved to be tortured. To a recruit, the prisoner would not be there in the first place if they had been better citizens.
In addition to feeling like the victim deserved the punishment, the recruits and were surrounded by aggressive stimulus. Aggressive stimulus is the mere presence of an object associated with aggression that can act as an aggressive cue. In this case, the actual setting of a dreary prison could have been an aggressive stimuli. In the training the recruits learned first hand how weapons were used to cause maximum pain, often because they were the ones being beaten.
As the recruits learned more about performing violent acts, they were able to be comforted by the fact that they were part of a larger group, either their own "in-group" or even the army as a whole. They could find a certain peace from anonymity. This is called deindividuation. It did not matter who the recruit was. There was a certain role for them to play in the violence and it could be as mindless as they could make it. This was easier for them because of the feeling that they were faceless to the outside world. This line that each one of them acted out is called a script. That script told them what to do and did not require them to think through the action.
Back to Social Conformity and Influence
Conclusions:
All of the areas of violence are combined to form one violent person. As each of the different aspects that come into play have been explored, the question is asked about who is to blame for actions. There is no one person or thing to blame. The controversy is whether to hold the violent person accountable for their actions or not. They were brought in as recruits and from their they were shaped and molded to become torturers. The army seems to be the one to blame but then society has been the once to form the need for an army that commits acts such as these. Another influence is the power of the situation. The person does have control of his actions but the pressure he feels coming from his superiors and environment can influence him in ways otherwise impossible. Even with all of the psychological problems bearing down on the violent person, in the end they have the ultimate choice of whether or not they participate in the violent action.
Reference: Gibson, J.T. & Haritos-Fatouros, M. (1986, November). The education of a torturer. Psychology Today, 50-58.
Persuasion:
According to the theories on persuasion we are inclined to think deeply about an argument if the issue is one that is relevant and important to us. Unfortunately, we become distracted easily by how the information is presented or by other outside influences, thus lowering our level of scrutiny. The recruits did not start out being violent people right away, as soon as they were brought into the program. They went through an intense training. According to the article "The Education of a Torturer", the recruits went through a program that came as close to torture as the trainers could get. The recruits were beaten, humiliated, and as one person put it, "they learned to love pain."
The use of fear was a powerful incentive to be receptive to the ideas that were being taught to them. The recruits lived in a constant fear of their superiors and of each other. If fellow recruits suspected a member as not agreeing with the methods or going easy on a prisoner, that member took the place of the prisoner in the beatings.
With the fear motivating the recruits to do better, the credibility of the communicator shot up very high. The more credibility that a person has, the high power of persuasion is utilized. If the recruits had been instructed by a sloppy person off of the streets, there is no way they would have been afraid or impressed by him. In the army, the men in the highest positions had an almost god-like appearance. They wore their uniforms and had utmost authority. They had the power to inflict painful punishment and the ability and right to humiliate a recruit for any reason they alone deemed worthy. As the credibility of the superior increased, so did the attractiveness of their position. Men who had lots of power and metals on their uniforms for their performance in battles, gave the recruits an image of something to aspire too. The recruits would be willing to believe and act out anything that the superior commanded them to do. If there is a person that one looks up too, the willingness to listen to them and imitate them sky-rockets.
Another factor in persuasion is a one-sided argument. This theory has to do with how only hearing one side of an argument can lead to a higher level of persuasion. As the recruits were being instructed by a superior with an extremely high level of credibility and an attractive image that they can aspire to, they are not going to question whether or not they are being told both sides of a story. The recruits were not given other options or arguments on the ethics of torturing the prisoners. As a result the message given to them was not diluted with thoughts that might make their actions controversial. What the recruits were told was, to them, the only argument.
Back to Social Conformity and Influence
Social Cognition:
Social Cognition is the way that we make sense of our social world. We attempt to do this task hundreds of times a day.
One part of social cognition is priming. Priming is a procedure based on the notion that ideas that have been recently encountered or frequently activated are more likely to come to mind and will be used in interpreting events. The recruits were not give time off to think through their education or actions, so when the time came for them to carry out a violent aciton, what they have been taught to do day and night will be the only thing that comes to mind. Also, the training program has drilled into them how much the prisoners need to be punished and shown no mercy.
In addition to the priming, the theory of framing is at work. Framing is a factor influencing how we construct a decision, whether a problem or decision is presented in a way so that it appears to represent the potential for a loss or for a gain. When the situation came down to being violent, if a recruit had second thoughts, the fear of looking sympathetic to the prisoners was enough to make any other decision represent the potential for a very painful loss. Where as if the recruit did what he was instructed, the potential for a gain was obvious by the special rights given to men in superior positions.
Thinking through a situation could be costly for a recruit so judgmental heuristics might have been used. A judgmental heuristic is a mental shortcut, a simple rule or strategy for solving a problem. A class of judgmental heuristics that applies to the recruits is representative heuristic. This involves focusing on the similarity of one subject to another to infer that the first object acts like the second one. This concept relates to how the recruits dealt with the prisoners. With the heavy cognitive load that the recruits were constantly under, it is no surprise that they would seek the easiest way to fix a problem. For the recruit, a prisoner represents something bad that goes against the well-being of our country. The similarity that all of the people in prison have committed a crime might cause a torturer to see them in a single category of "bad" people that all deserve the punishment that they receive.
This can also include the concept of attitude accessibility. This refers to the strength of the association between a subject and an evaluation of it. For example, when the recruits thought of a prisoner, they most likely immediately thought "bad, dangerous" because that is what they have been taught. There is considerable evidence to support the theory that highly accessible attitudes guide behavior. Thus, the recruits were able to respond quickly to the prisoners and not hesitate in their violent proceedings.
Back to Social Conformity and Influence
Conformity:
Conformity can be defined as a change in a person's behavior or opinions as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or a group of people. From the article "The Education of a Torturer" the pressure being placed on the recruits by army officials was vividly real. That pressure included the beatings and humiliating situations.
The army knew that the level of a person's self-esteem can effect how easily they will bend to conform. The recruits were brought into the program in the first place because of the high self-esteem that they had. Right away the beatings and humiliation shattered that high self-esteem, bringing the recruits down to a level where conformity would be relatively painless.
As individual esteem was lowered, group esteem was highly rewarded. They had group building activities such as swearing allegiance to an common object, an "in-group" language and having nicknames, being touted as "elite", and getting benefits. The strong group identity increases the recruits wanting to conform to stay part of that group and belong.
The first level of conformity with in the groups was compliance. This describes the behavior of a person who is motivated by a desire to gain a reward or avoid punishment. It comes to no surprise that the recruits would learn to comply immediately, once they realized that they would receive less punishment for doing exactly what they are commanded to do. But this level of conformity is fickle, once the punishment is removed the recruits would have stopped obeying.
This is were the second level of conformity came in, identification. This is a response to influence brought about by an individual's desire to be like the influencer. The recruits clearly saw that the officers superior to them received extra benefits like going off base more frequently and other privileges. The recruits conformed to fit the image that was before them. If they did well in their training then one day they too would be in a position of power.
Back to Social Conformity and Influence
Aggression:
An aggressive action is an intentional behavior aimed at causing either physical or psychological pain. The recruits were intentionally beaten by their superiors to break them down physically and mentally.
From there, the recruits learned hostile aggression. This is an act of aggression stemming from a feeling of anger and aimed at inflicting pain or injury. A violent action stems from the pure anger and single minded goal of inflicting pain or injury on a person or group of people. The recruits were trained to act instinctively with anger. The aggressive energy was so encouraged during training that it was allowed to build and build within a recruit and at some point the energy needed to be released.
This is Freud's notion can best be characterized as a hydraulic theory. Although, recent studies have shown that the hydraulic theory is not a good way to use pent up emotion. Often one episode does not take the anger and negative emotion away.
The recruits also blamed the victim. Somehow they convinced themselves, or more likely, were convinced by their superiors, that the victims deserved the negative events to which he or she has subjected. To the violent person, the fact that a person was a prisoner, no questions needed to be asked about whether or not that prisoner deserved to be tortured. To a recruit, the prisoner would not be there in the first place if they had been better citizens.
In addition to feeling like the victim deserved the punishment, the recruits and were surrounded by aggressive stimulus. Aggressive stimulus is the mere presence of an object associated with aggression that can act as an aggressive cue. In this case, the actual setting of a dreary prison could have been an aggressive stimuli. In the training the recruits learned first hand how weapons were used to cause maximum pain, often because they were the ones being beaten.
As the recruits learned more about performing violent acts, they were able to be comforted by the fact that they were part of a larger group, either their own "in-group" or even the army as a whole. They could find a certain peace from anonymity. This is called deindividuation. It did not matter who the recruit was. There was a certain role for them to play in the violence and it could be as mindless as they could make it. This was easier for them because of the feeling that they were faceless to the outside world. This line that each one of them acted out is called a script. That script told them what to do and did not require them to think through the action.
Back to Social Conformity and Influence
Conclusions:
All of the areas of violence are combined to form one violent person. As each of the different aspects that come into play have been explored, the question is asked about who is to blame for actions. There is no one person or thing to blame. The controversy is whether to hold the violent person accountable for their actions or not. They were brought in as recruits and from their they were shaped and molded to become torturers. The army seems to be the one to blame but then society has been the once to form the need for an army that commits acts such as these. Another influence is the power of the situation. The person does have control of his actions but the pressure he feels coming from his superiors and environment can influence him in ways otherwise impossible. Even with all of the psychological problems bearing down on the violent person, in the end they have the ultimate choice of whether or not they participate in the violent action.
Reference: Gibson, J.T. & Haritos-Fatouros, M. (1986, November). The education of a torturer. Psychology Today, 50-58.
The army knew that the level of a person's self-esteem can effect how easily they will bend to conform. The recruits were brought into the program in the first place because of the high self-esteem that they had. Right away the beatings and humiliation shattered that high self-esteem, bringing the recruits down to a level where conformity would be relatively painless.
As individual esteem was lowered, group esteem was highly rewarded. They had group building activities such as swearing allegiance to an common object, an "in-group" language and having nicknames, being touted as "elite", and getting benefits. The strong group identity increases the recruits wanting to conform to stay part of that group and belong.
The first level of conformity with in the groups was compliance. This describes the behavior of a person who is motivated by a desire to gain a reward or avoid punishment. It comes to no surprise that the recruits would learn to comply immediately, once they realized that they would receive less punishment for doing exactly what they are commanded to do. But this level of conformity is fickle, once the punishment is removed the recruits would have stopped obeying.
This is were the second level of conformity came in, identification. This is a response to influence brought about by an individual's desire to be like the influencer. The recruits clearly saw that the officers superior to them received extra benefits like going off base more frequently and other privileges. The recruits conformed to fit the image that was before them. If they did well in their training then one day they too would be in a position of power.
Back to Social Conformity and Influence
Aggression:
An aggressive action is an intentional behavior aimed at causing either physical or psychological pain. The recruits were intentionally beaten by their superiors to break them down physically and mentally.
From there, the recruits learned hostile aggression. This is an act of aggression stemming from a feeling of anger and aimed at inflicting pain or injury. A violent action stems from the pure anger and single minded goal of inflicting pain or injury on a person or group of people. The recruits were trained to act instinctively with anger. The aggressive energy was so encouraged during training that it was allowed to build and build within a recruit and at some point the energy needed to be released.
This is Freud's notion can best be characterized as a hydraulic theory. Although, recent studies have shown that the hydraulic theory is not a good way to use pent up emotion. Often one episode does not take the anger and negative emotion away.
The recruits also blamed the victim. Somehow they convinced themselves, or more likely, were convinced by their superiors, that the victims deserved the negative events to which he or she has subjected. To the violent person, the fact that a person was a prisoner, no questions needed to be asked about whether or not that prisoner deserved to be tortured. To a recruit, the prisoner would not be there in the first place if they had been better citizens.
In addition to feeling like the victim deserved the punishment, the recruits and were surrounded by aggressive stimulus. Aggressive stimulus is the mere presence of an object associated with aggression that can act as an aggressive cue. In this case, the actual setting of a dreary prison could have been an aggressive stimuli. In the training the recruits learned first hand how weapons were used to cause maximum pain, often because they were the ones being beaten.
As the recruits learned more about performing violent acts, they were able to be comforted by the fact that they were part of a larger group, either their own "in-group" or even the army as a whole. They could find a certain peace from anonymity. This is called deindividuation. It did not matter who the recruit was. There was a certain role for them to play in the violence and it could be as mindless as they could make it. This was easier for them because of the feeling that they were faceless to the outside world. This line that each one of them acted out is called a script. That script told them what to do and did not require them to think through the action.
Back to Social Conformity and Influence
Conclusions:
All of the areas of violence are combined to form one violent person. As each of the different aspects that come into play have been explored, the question is asked about who is to blame for actions. There is no one person or thing to blame. The controversy is whether to hold the violent person accountable for their actions or not. They were brought in as recruits and from their they were shaped and molded to become torturers. The army seems to be the one to blame but then society has been the once to form the need for an army that commits acts such as these. Another influence is the power of the situation. The person does have control of his actions but the pressure he feels coming from his superiors and environment can influence him in ways otherwise impossible. Even with all of the psychological problems bearing down on the violent person, in the end they have the ultimate choice of whether or not they participate in the violent action.
Reference: Gibson, J.T. & Haritos-Fatouros, M. (1986, November). The education of a torturer. Psychology Today, 50-58.