Experimental Social Psychology

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online: 17 April 2024
  • Cite this living reference work entry

experimental social psychology

  • Wang Hui 2 ,
  • Shen Decan 3 &
  • Wu Mingzheng 4  

Experimental social psychology is a branch of social psychology researching social psychological phenomena through experimental methods.

Brief History

Since German psychologist Wilhelm Wundt founded psychological laboratory at Leipzig University in 1879, many psychologists have brought issues related to social psychology into laboratories and gradually developed experimental social psychology. American psychologists Gardner Murphy and Lois Barclay Murphy were among the first who have adopted the concept of experimental social psychology. They wrote in the book Experimental Social Psychology (1931) that social psychologists have adopted various experimental methods to collect materials in an effort to establish social psychology as an experimental science.

Research Contents

The earliest social psychology experiments can be traced back to 1898 by the American psychologist Norman Triplett’s research on the influence of the presence of others and competition on individual behavior, known...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Further Reading

Aronson E, Wilson TD, Akert RM (2014) Social psychology, 8th edn. Pearson India Education Services, Chennai

Google Scholar  

Yue G-A (2013) Social psychology, 2nd edn. China Renmin University Press, Beijing

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Guanghua School of Management, Peking University, Beijing, China

School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China

Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Hangzhou, China

Wu Mingzheng

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wu Mingzheng .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Hui, W., Decan, S., Mingzheng, W. (2024). Experimental Social Psychology. In: The ECPH Encyclopedia of Psychology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6000-2_754-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6000-2_754-1

Received : 23 March 2024

Accepted : 25 March 2024

Published : 17 April 2024

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-99-6000-2

Online ISBN : 978-981-99-6000-2

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Behavioral Science and Psychology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

  • Publish with us

Policies and ethics

  • Find a journal
  • Track your research

Unfortunately we don't fully support your browser. If you have the option to, please upgrade to a newer version or use Mozilla Firefox , Microsoft Edge , Google Chrome , or Safari 14 or newer. If you are unable to, and need support, please send us your feedback .

We'd appreciate your feedback. Tell us what you think!   opens in new tab/window

Advances in Experimental Social Psychology

Aim & scope.

Advances in Experimental Social Psychology is one of the most sought after and most often cited series in this field. It contains contributions of major empirical and theoretical interest and represents the best and the brightest in research, theory and practice in social psychology.

Award winning articles include:

Mark J. Brandt, Jarret T. Crawford (2020) Worldview conflict and prejudice, Volume 61, pp. 1-66: Received the 2021 Daniel M. Wegner Theoretical Innovation Prize from the Society for Personality and Social Psychology.

Christian Unkelbach, Hans Alves, Alex Koch (2020) Negativity bias, positivity bias, and valence asymmetries: Explaining the differential processing of positive and negative information, Volume 62, pp. 115-187: Received the 2021 Best Social Cognition Paper Award from the International Social Cognition Network.

Sample cover of Advances in Experimental Social Psychology

K. Kawakami, D.M. Amodio, K. Hugenberg (2017) Intergroup Perception and Cognition: An Integrative Framework for Understanding the Causes and Consequences of Social Categorization, Volume 55, pp 1-80: Received the 2018 Gordon Allport Intergroup Relations Prize from The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues.

Andrea E. Abele, Bogdan Wojciszke (2014) Communal and Agentic Content in Social Cognition: A Dual Perspective Model, Volume 50, pp 195-255: Received the Serge Moscovici Medal from the European Association of Social Psychology in 2017. Serial Editor as of 2020: Bertram Gawronski, University of Texas, USA

Serial Editor: Bertram Gawronski, University of Texas, USA

Impact Factor 2021: 7.263 (Copyright ISI Journal Citation Report)

To view individual chapters for Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, please visit  Science Direct   opens in new tab/window .

Praise for the Series:

For the past two decades, the series has served a special function for social psychology--one that has not been filled as well by any other single publication. The articles are more focused than handbook chapters and less cursory than annual review chapters.

- CONTEMPORARY PSYCHOLOGY

For information on how to prepare a proposal for a potential AESP contribution, please contact the Serial Editor Dr. Bertram Gawronski at  ( [email protected]   opens in new tab/window ).

Series Volumes

advances-in-experimental-social-psychology-volume-banner

Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 41   opens in new tab/window

Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 44   opens in new tab/window

Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 51   opens in new tab/window

Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 45   opens in new tab/window

Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 38   opens in new tab/window

Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 40   opens in new tab/window

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Volume 6 • Issue 6

  • ISSN: 0022-1031

Editor-In-Chief: Nicholas Rule

  • 5 Year impact factor: 4.1
  • Impact factor: 3.2
  • Journal metrics

The Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (JESP) aims to publish articles that extend or create conceptual advances in social psychology. As the title of the journal indicates… Read more

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Subscription options

Institutional subscription on sciencedirect.

The Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (JESP) aims to publish articles that extend or create conceptual advances in social psychology. As the title of the journal indicates, we are focused on publishing primary reports of research in social psychology that use experimental or quasi-experimental methods, although not every study in an article needs to be experimental. We also would like to encourage submissions explaining methodological or statistical considerations that are relevant to the kind of research published here, and that are usable by the typical person who carries out and evaluates social psychology research. Finally, we encourage authors to submit reports of replication studies in experimental social psychology that meet the high standards at JESP (for guidance, see Brandt, IJzerman et al., 2014).

Before submitting your paper please review the guidelines here

The aim of these guidelines is to share with you some criteria that the journal?s editors employ when evaluating manuscripts. The guidelines cannot address all substantive issues, but we do want to emphasize that, unless its methods, theory and evidence are all exceptionally strong, typically one research study leaves many questions unanswered and this is an important reason why papers that include more than one study are preferred by JESP editors.

JESP editors start from an attitude that is positive about efforts to advance the field, but rigorous in terms of evaluating evidence supporting a submitted paper?s conclusions. With this attitude in mind the following points may help authors to decide what points to address when preparing their manuscripts for JESP .

The guidelines also reflect the editors? experiences with having to reject papers, or engage authors in lengthy and uncertain revisions, for the reasons mentioned below. Thus, the guidelines aim to spell out some basics in order to let authors know what kind of methods and reporting choices will give them the best chance at a favourable evaluation at JESP .

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology values inclusion and diversity across research, through its various lenses, be it authorship, reviewers, or editors. We are committed to maintaining gender inclusion, whilst additionally working to ensure the journal accurately reflects the geography, race & ethnicity, and age diversity of members of the field in which it sits. This commitment is in line with Elsevier's broader ongoing inclusion & diversity efforts. Equity and inclusion in publishing is critically important for scientific excellence and innovation. The Editors believe passionately in the power of an inclusive publishing environment as it enriches us all.

PsyBlog

Social Psychology Experiments: 10 Of The Most Famous Studies

Ten of the most influential social psychology experiments explain why we sometimes do dumb or irrational things. 

social psychology experiments

Ten of the most influential social psychology experiments explain why we sometimes do dumb or irrational things.

“I have been primarily interested in how and why ordinary people do unusual things, things that seem alien to their natures. Why do good people sometimes act evil? Why do smart people sometimes do dumb or irrational things?” –Philip Zimbardo

Like famous social psychologist Professor Philip Zimbardo (author of The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil ), I’m also obsessed with why we do dumb or irrational things.

The answer quite often is because of other people — something social psychologists have comprehensively shown.

Each of the 10 brilliant social psychology experiments below tells a unique, insightful story relevant to all our lives, every day.

Click the link in each social psychology experiment to get the full description and explanation of each phenomenon.

1. Social Psychology Experiments: The Halo Effect

The halo effect is a finding from a famous social psychology experiment.

It is the idea that global evaluations about a person (e.g. she is likeable) bleed over into judgements about their specific traits (e.g. she is intelligent).

It is sometimes called the “what is beautiful is good” principle, or the “physical attractiveness stereotype”.

It is called the halo effect because a halo was often used in religious art to show that a person is good.

2. Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort people feel when trying to hold two conflicting beliefs in their mind.

People resolve this discomfort by changing their thoughts to align with one of conflicting beliefs and rejecting the other.

The study provides a central insight into the stories we tell ourselves about why we think and behave the way we do.

3. Robbers Cave Experiment: How Group Conflicts Develop

The Robbers Cave experiment was a famous social psychology experiment on how prejudice and conflict emerged between two group of boys.

It shows how groups naturally develop their own cultures, status structures and boundaries — and then come into conflict with each other.

For example, each country has its own culture, its government, legal system and it draws boundaries to differentiate itself from neighbouring countries.

One of the reasons the became so famous is that it appeared to show how groups could be reconciled, how peace could flourish.

The key was the focus on superordinate goals, those stretching beyond the boundaries of the group itself.

4. Social Psychology Experiments: The Stanford Prison Experiment

The Stanford prison experiment was run to find out how people would react to being made a prisoner or prison guard.

The psychologist Philip Zimbardo, who led the Stanford prison experiment, thought ordinary, healthy people would come to behave cruelly, like prison guards, if they were put in that situation, even if it was against their personality.

It has since become a classic social psychology experiment, studied by generations of students and recently coming under a lot of criticism.

5. The Milgram Social Psychology Experiment

The Milgram experiment , led by the well-known psychologist Stanley Milgram in the 1960s, aimed to test people’s obedience to authority.

The results of Milgram’s social psychology experiment, sometimes known as the Milgram obedience study, continue to be both thought-provoking and controversial.

The Milgram experiment discovered people are much more obedient than you might imagine.

Fully 63 percent of the participants continued administering what appeared like electric shocks to another person while they screamed in agony, begged to stop and eventually fell silent — just because they were told to.

6. The False Consensus Effect

The false consensus effect is a famous social psychological finding that people tend to assume that others agree with them.

It could apply to opinions, values, beliefs or behaviours, but people assume others think and act in the same way as they do.

It is hard for many people to believe the false consensus effect exists because they quite naturally believe they are good ‘intuitive psychologists’, thinking it is relatively easy to predict other people’s attitudes and behaviours.

In reality, people show a number of predictable biases, such as the false consensus effect, when estimating other people’s behaviour and its causes.

7. Social Psychology Experiments: Social Identity Theory

Social identity theory helps to explain why people’s behaviour in groups is fascinating and sometimes disturbing.

People gain part of their self from the groups they belong to and that is at the heart of social identity theory.

The famous theory explains why as soon as humans are bunched together in groups we start to do odd things: copy other members of our group, favour members of own group over others, look for a leader to worship and fight other groups.

8. Negotiation: 2 Psychological Strategies That Matter Most

Negotiation is one of those activities we often engage in without quite realising it.

Negotiation doesn’t just happen in the boardroom, or when we ask our boss for a raise or down at the market, it happens every time we want to reach an agreement with someone.

In a classic, award-winning series of social psychology experiments, Morgan Deutsch and Robert Krauss investigated two central factors in negotiation: how we communicate with each other and how we use threats.

9. Bystander Effect And The Diffusion Of Responsibility

The bystander effect in social psychology is the surprising finding that the mere presence of other people inhibits our own helping behaviours in an emergency.

The bystander effect social psychology experiments are mentioned in every psychology textbook and often dubbed ‘seminal’.

This famous social psychology experiment on the bystander effect was inspired by the highly publicised murder of Kitty Genovese in 1964.

It found that in some circumstances, the presence of others inhibits people’s helping behaviours — partly because of a phenomenon called diffusion of responsibility.

10. Asch Conformity Experiment: The Power Of Social Pressure

The Asch conformity experiments — some of the most famous every done — were a series of social psychology experiments carried out by noted psychologist Solomon Asch.

The Asch conformity experiment reveals how strongly a person’s opinions are affected by people around them.

In fact, the Asch conformity experiment shows that many of us will deny our own senses just to conform with others.

' data-src=

Author: Dr Jeremy Dean

Psychologist, Jeremy Dean, PhD is the founder and author of PsyBlog. He holds a doctorate in psychology from University College London and two other advanced degrees in psychology. He has been writing about scientific research on PsyBlog since 2004. View all posts by Dr Jeremy Dean

experimental social psychology

Join the free PsyBlog mailing list. No spam, ever.

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

experimental social psychology

Subject Area and Category

  • Social Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science

Academic Press Inc.

Publication type

00221031, 10960465

Information

How to publish in this journal

experimental social psychology

The set of journals have been ranked according to their SJR and divided into four equal groups, four quartiles. Q1 (green) comprises the quarter of the journals with the highest values, Q2 (yellow) the second highest values, Q3 (orange) the third highest values and Q4 (red) the lowest values.

CategoryYearQuartile
Social Psychology1999Q1
Social Psychology2000Q1
Social Psychology2001Q1
Social Psychology2002Q1
Social Psychology2003Q1
Social Psychology2004Q1
Social Psychology2005Q1
Social Psychology2006Q1
Social Psychology2007Q1
Social Psychology2008Q1
Social Psychology2009Q1
Social Psychology2010Q1
Social Psychology2011Q1
Social Psychology2012Q1
Social Psychology2013Q1
Social Psychology2014Q1
Social Psychology2015Q1
Social Psychology2016Q1
Social Psychology2017Q1
Social Psychology2018Q1
Social Psychology2019Q1
Social Psychology2020Q1
Social Psychology2021Q1
Social Psychology2022Q1
Social Psychology2023Q1
Sociology and Political Science1999Q1
Sociology and Political Science2000Q1
Sociology and Political Science2001Q1
Sociology and Political Science2002Q1
Sociology and Political Science2003Q1
Sociology and Political Science2004Q1
Sociology and Political Science2005Q1
Sociology and Political Science2006Q1
Sociology and Political Science2007Q1
Sociology and Political Science2008Q1
Sociology and Political Science2009Q1
Sociology and Political Science2010Q1
Sociology and Political Science2011Q1
Sociology and Political Science2012Q1
Sociology and Political Science2013Q1
Sociology and Political Science2014Q1
Sociology and Political Science2015Q1
Sociology and Political Science2016Q1
Sociology and Political Science2017Q1
Sociology and Political Science2018Q1
Sociology and Political Science2019Q1
Sociology and Political Science2020Q1
Sociology and Political Science2021Q1
Sociology and Political Science2022Q1
Sociology and Political Science2023Q1

The SJR is a size-independent prestige indicator that ranks journals by their 'average prestige per article'. It is based on the idea that 'all citations are not created equal'. SJR is a measure of scientific influence of journals that accounts for both the number of citations received by a journal and the importance or prestige of the journals where such citations come from It measures the scientific influence of the average article in a journal, it expresses how central to the global scientific discussion an average article of the journal is.

YearSJR
19993.564
20003.422
20012.785
20022.791
20032.814
20042.927
20052.686
20063.096
20072.929
20083.027
20092.550
20102.685
20112.424
20122.794
20132.376
20142.501
20152.574
20162.089
20172.068
20182.165
20192.488
20202.401
20211.825
20221.596
20231.841

Evolution of the number of published documents. All types of documents are considered, including citable and non citable documents.

YearDocuments
199926
200032
200148
200259
200361
200481
200562
200677
2007108
2008176
2009204
2010176
2011187
2012206
2013168
2014131
2015113
201685
2017149
2018156
2019130
2020112
2021116
2022127
202375

This indicator counts the number of citations received by documents from a journal and divides them by the total number of documents published in that journal. The chart shows the evolution of the average number of times documents published in a journal in the past two, three and four years have been cited in the current year. The two years line is equivalent to journal impact factor ™ (Thomson Reuters) metric.

Cites per documentYearValue
Cites / Doc. (4 years)19991.700
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20002.934
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20012.884
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20022.477
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20033.430
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20042.995
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20052.759
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20063.076
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20073.313
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20083.332
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20093.180
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20103.372
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20113.863
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20124.116
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20133.670
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20143.674
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20153.737
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20163.835
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20174.103
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20183.776
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20194.002
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20204.300
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20214.578
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20224.846
Cites / Doc. (4 years)20234.103
Cites / Doc. (3 years)19991.700
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20002.700
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20012.310
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20022.575
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20032.899
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20042.887
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20052.463
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20062.809
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20073.009
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20083.130
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20092.981
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20103.127
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20113.464
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20123.721
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20133.237
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20143.289
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20153.693
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20163.367
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20173.465
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20183.530
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20194.049
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20203.791
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20213.907
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20223.852
Cites / Doc. (3 years)20234.039
Cites / Doc. (2 years)19991.630
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20001.788
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20012.534
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20022.200
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20032.645
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20042.225
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20051.986
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20062.469
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20072.482
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20082.908
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20092.525
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20102.647
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20113.071
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20123.124
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20132.651
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20143.059
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20153.117
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20162.779
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20173.066
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20183.547
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20193.538
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20203.129
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20212.888
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20223.728
Cites / Doc. (2 years)20233.667

Evolution of the total number of citations and journal's self-citations received by a journal's published documents during the three previous years. Journal Self-citation is defined as the number of citation from a journal citing article to articles published by the same journal.

CitesYearValue
Self Cites19996
Self Cites200014
Self Cites200114
Self Cites200226
Self Cites200328
Self Cites200433
Self Cites200529
Self Cites200641
Self Cites200734
Self Cites200879
Self Cites200992
Self Cites2010132
Self Cites2011149
Self Cites2012154
Self Cites2013110
Self Cites201498
Self Cites201555
Self Cites201634
Self Cites201762
Self Cites201867
Self Cites201968
Self Cites202081
Self Cites202170
Self Cites202250
Self Cites202335
Total Cites1999136
Total Cites2000216
Total Cites2001194
Total Cites2002273
Total Cites2003403
Total Cites2004485
Total Cites2005495
Total Cites2006573
Total Cites2007662
Total Cites2008773
Total Cites20091076
Total Cites20101526
Total Cites20111926
Total Cites20122110
Total Cites20131842
Total Cites20141845
Total Cites20151865
Total Cites20161387
Total Cites20171140
Total Cites20181225
Total Cites20191579
Total Cites20201649
Total Cites20211555
Total Cites20221379
Total Cites20231434

Evolution of the number of total citation per document and external citation per document (i.e. journal self-citations removed) received by a journal's published documents during the three previous years. External citations are calculated by subtracting the number of self-citations from the total number of citations received by the journal’s documents.

CitesYearValue
External Cites per document19991.625
External Cites per document20002.525
External Cites per document20012.143
External Cites per document20022.330
External Cites per document20032.698
External Cites per document20042.690
External Cites per document20052.318
External Cites per document20062.608
External Cites per document20072.855
External Cites per document20082.810
External Cites per document20092.726
External Cites per document20102.857
External Cites per document20113.196
External Cites per document20123.450
External Cites per document20133.044
External Cites per document20143.114
External Cites per document20153.584
External Cites per document20163.284
External Cites per document20173.277
External Cites per document20183.337
External Cites per document20193.874
External Cites per document20203.605
External Cites per document20213.731
External Cites per document20223.712
External Cites per document20233.941
Cites per document19991.700
Cites per document20002.700
Cites per document20012.310
Cites per document20022.575
Cites per document20032.899
Cites per document20042.887
Cites per document20052.463
Cites per document20062.809
Cites per document20073.009
Cites per document20083.130
Cites per document20092.981
Cites per document20103.127
Cites per document20113.464
Cites per document20123.721
Cites per document20133.237
Cites per document20143.289
Cites per document20153.693
Cites per document20163.367
Cites per document20173.465
Cites per document20183.530
Cites per document20194.049
Cites per document20203.791
Cites per document20213.907
Cites per document20223.852
Cites per document20234.039

International Collaboration accounts for the articles that have been produced by researchers from several countries. The chart shows the ratio of a journal's documents signed by researchers from more than one country; that is including more than one country address.

YearInternational Collaboration
19997.69
200021.88
200125.00
200225.42
200319.67
200422.22
200533.87
200629.87
200725.00
200828.98
200926.96
201025.00
201128.88
201229.13
201333.33
201433.59
201531.86
201630.59
201739.60
201834.62
201937.69
202047.32
202142.24
202238.58
202329.33

Not every article in a journal is considered primary research and therefore "citable", this chart shows the ratio of a journal's articles including substantial research (research articles, conference papers and reviews) in three year windows vs. those documents other than research articles, reviews and conference papers.

DocumentsYearValue
Non-citable documents19990
Non-citable documents20000
Non-citable documents20010
Non-citable documents20020
Non-citable documents20030
Non-citable documents20040
Non-citable documents20052
Non-citable documents20063
Non-citable documents20073
Non-citable documents20084
Non-citable documents20094
Non-citable documents20106
Non-citable documents20113
Non-citable documents20122
Non-citable documents20130
Non-citable documents20142
Non-citable documents20152
Non-citable documents20162
Non-citable documents201710
Non-citable documents201810
Non-citable documents201910
Non-citable documents20202
Non-citable documents20215
Non-citable documents20225
Non-citable documents20236
Citable documents199980
Citable documents200080
Citable documents200184
Citable documents2002106
Citable documents2003139
Citable documents2004168
Citable documents2005199
Citable documents2006201
Citable documents2007217
Citable documents2008243
Citable documents2009357
Citable documents2010482
Citable documents2011553
Citable documents2012565
Citable documents2013569
Citable documents2014559
Citable documents2015503
Citable documents2016410
Citable documents2017319
Citable documents2018337
Citable documents2019380
Citable documents2020433
Citable documents2021393
Citable documents2022353
Citable documents2023349

Ratio of a journal's items, grouped in three years windows, that have been cited at least once vs. those not cited during the following year.

DocumentsYearValue
Uncited documents199926
Uncited documents200019
Uncited documents200122
Uncited documents200229
Uncited documents200328
Uncited documents200433
Uncited documents200554
Uncited documents200642
Uncited documents200741
Uncited documents200843
Uncited documents200962
Uncited documents201094
Uncited documents201192
Uncited documents201273
Uncited documents2013112
Uncited documents201488
Uncited documents201573
Uncited documents201668
Uncited documents201751
Uncited documents201868
Uncited documents201969
Uncited documents202079
Uncited documents202165
Uncited documents202250
Uncited documents202365
Cited documents199954
Cited documents200061
Cited documents200162
Cited documents200277
Cited documents2003111
Cited documents2004135
Cited documents2005147
Cited documents2006162
Cited documents2007179
Cited documents2008204
Cited documents2009299
Cited documents2010394
Cited documents2011464
Cited documents2012494
Cited documents2013457
Cited documents2014473
Cited documents2015432
Cited documents2016344
Cited documents2017278
Cited documents2018279
Cited documents2019321
Cited documents2020356
Cited documents2021333
Cited documents2022308
Cited documents2023290

Evolution of the percentage of female authors.

YearFemale Percent
199934.78
200034.57
200126.98
200236.30
200334.93
200438.17
200536.87
200635.27
200734.21
200835.49
200940.08
201041.91
201136.83
201242.91
201342.98
201447.65
201546.27
201639.02
201741.81
201841.42
201951.63
202045.09
202141.12
202238.61
202350.22

Evolution of the number of documents cited by public policy documents according to Overton database.

DocumentsYearValue
Overton19999
Overton20007
Overton200114
Overton200212
Overton20030
Overton200417
Overton200518
Overton200620
Overton200727
Overton200842
Overton200945
Overton201040
Overton201120
Overton201242
Overton201328
Overton201416
Overton201518
Overton201615
Overton201724
Overton201818
Overton20199
Overton20206
Overton202110
Overton20223
Overton20233

Evoution of the number of documents related to Sustainable Development Goals defined by United Nations. Available from 2018 onwards.

DocumentsYearValue
SDG201818
SDG201916
SDG202016
SDG202117
SDG202225
SDG202315

Scimago Journal & Country Rank

Leave a comment

Name * Required

Email (will not be published) * Required

* Required Cancel

The users of Scimago Journal & Country Rank have the possibility to dialogue through comments linked to a specific journal. The purpose is to have a forum in which general doubts about the processes of publication in the journal, experiences and other issues derived from the publication of papers are resolved. For topics on particular articles, maintain the dialogue through the usual channels with your editor.

Scimago Lab

Follow us on @ScimagoJR Scimago Lab , Copyright 2007-2024. Data Source: Scopus®

experimental social psychology

Cookie settings

Cookie Policy

Legal Notice

Privacy Policy

  • Bipolar Disorder
  • Therapy Center
  • When To See a Therapist
  • Types of Therapy
  • Best Online Therapy
  • Best Couples Therapy
  • Managing Stress
  • Sleep and Dreaming
  • Understanding Emotions
  • Self-Improvement
  • Healthy Relationships
  • Student Resources
  • Personality Types
  • Sweepstakes
  • Guided Meditations
  • Verywell Mind Insights
  • 2024 Verywell Mind 25
  • Mental Health in the Classroom
  • Editorial Process
  • Meet Our Review Board
  • Crisis Support

8 Famous Social Experiments

A social experiment is a type of research performed in psychology to investigate how people respond in certain social situations. 

In many of these experiments, the experimenters will include confederates who are people who act like regular participants but who are actually acting the part. Such experiments are often used to gain insight into social psychology phenomena.

Do people really stop to appreciate the beauty of the world? How can society encourage people to engage in healthy behaviors? Is there anything that can be done to bring peace to rival groups?

Social psychologists have been tackling questions like these for decades, and some of the results of their experiments just might surprise you.

Robbers Cave Social Experiment

Why do conflicts tend to occur between different groups? According to psychologist Muzafer Sherif, intergroup conflicts tend to arise from competition for resources, stereotypes, and prejudices. In a controversial experiment, the researchers placed 22 boys between the ages of 11 and 12 in two groups at a camp in the Robbers Cave Park in Oklahoma.

The boys were separated into two groups and spent the first week of the experiment bonding with their other group members. It wasn't until the second phase of the experiment that the children learned that there was another group, at which point the experimenters placed the two groups in direct competition with each other.

This led to considerable discord, as the boys clearly favored their own group members while they disparaged the members of the other group. In the final phase, the researchers staged tasks that required the two groups to work together. These shared tasks helped the boys get to know members of the other group and eventually led to a truce between the rivals.  

The 'Violinist in the Metro' Social Experiment

In 2007, acclaimed violinist Josh Bell posed as a street musician at a busy Washington, D.C. subway station. Bell had just sold out a concert with an average ticket price of $100 each.

He is one of the most renowned musicians in the world and was playing on a handcrafted violin worth more than $3.5 million. Yet most people scurried on their way without stopping to listen to the music. When children would occasionally stop to listen, their parents would grab them and quickly usher them on their way.

The experiment raised some interesting questions about how we not only value beauty but whether we truly stop to appreciate the remarkable works of beauty that are around us.

The Piano Stairs Social Experiment

How can you get people to change their daily behavior and make healthier choices? In one social experiment sponsored by Volkswagen as part of their Fun Theory initiative, making even the most mundane activities fun can inspire people to change their behavior.

In the experiment, a set of stairs was transformed into a giant working keyboard. Right next to the stairs was an escalator, so people were able to choose between taking the stairs or taking the escalator. The results revealed that 66% more people took the stairs instead of the escalator.  

Adding an element of fun can inspire people to change their behavior and choose the healthier alternative.

The Marshmallow Test Social Experiment

During the late 1960s and early 1970s, a psychologist named Walter Mischel led a series of experiments on delayed gratification. Mischel was interested in learning whether the ability to delay gratification might be a predictor of future life success.

In the experiments, children between the ages of 3 and 5 were placed in a room with a treat (often a marshmallow or cookie). Before leaving the room, the experimenter told each child that they would receive a second treat if the first treat was still on the table after 15 minutes.  

Follow-up studies conducted years later found that the children who were able to delay gratification did better in a variety of areas, including academically. Those who had been able to wait the 15 minutes for the second treat tended to have higher SAT scores and more academic success (according to parent surveys).  

The results suggest that this ability to wait for gratification is not only an essential skill for success but also something that forms early on and lasts throughout life.

The Smoky Room Social Experiment

If you saw someone in trouble, do you think you would try to help? Psychologists have found that the answer to this question is highly dependent on the number of other people present. We are much more likely to help when we are the only witness but much less likely to lend a hand when we are part of a crowd.

The phenomenon came to the public's attention after the gruesome murder of a young woman named Kitty Genovese. According to the classic tale, while multiple people may have witnessed her attack, no one called for help until it was much too late.

This behavior was identified as an example of the bystander effect , or the failure of people to take action when there are other people present. (In reality, several witnesses did immediately call 911, so the real Genovese case was not a perfect example of the bystander effect.)  

In one classic experiment, researchers had participants sit in a room to fill out questionnaires. Suddenly, the room began to fill with smoke. In some cases the participant was alone, in some there were three unsuspecting participants in the room, and in the final condition, there was one participant and two confederates.

In the situation involving the two confederates who were in on the experiment, these actors ignored the smoke and went on filling out their questionnaires. When the participants were alone, about three-quarters of the participants left the room calmly to report the smoke to the researchers.

In the condition with three real participants, only 38% reported the smoke. In the final condition where the two confederates ignored the smoke, a mere 10% of participants left to report the smoke.   The experiment is a great example of how much people rely on the responses of others to guide their actions.

When something is happening, but no one seems to be responding, people tend to take their cues from the group and assume that a response is not required.

Carlsberg Social Experiment

Have you ever felt like people have judged you unfairly based on your appearance? Or have you ever gotten the wrong first impression of someone based on how they looked? Unfortunately, people are all too quick to base their decisions on snap judgments made when they first meet people.

These impressions based on what's on the outside sometimes cause people to overlook the characteristics and qualities that lie on the inside. In one rather amusing social experiment, which actually started out as an advertisement , unsuspecting couples walked into a crowded movie theater.

All but two of the 150 seats were already full. The twist is that the 148 already-filled seats were taken by a bunch of rather rugged and scary-looking male bikers. What would you do in this situation? Would you take one of the available seats and enjoy the movie, or would you feel intimidated and leave?

In the informal experiment, not all of the couples ended up taking a seat, but those who eventually did were rewarded with cheers from the crowd and a round of free Carlsberg beers.

The exercise served as a great example of why people shouldn't always judge a book by its cover.

Halo Effect Social Experiment

In an experiment described in a paper published in 1920, psychologist Edward Thorndike asked commanding officers in the military to give ratings of various characteristics of their subordinates.

Thorndike was interested in learning how impressions of one quality, such as intelligence, bled over onto perceptions of other personal characteristics, such as leadership, loyalty, and professional skill.   Thorndike discovered that when people hold a good impression of one characteristic, those good feelings tend to affect perceptions of other qualities.

For example, thinking someone is attractive can create a halo effect that leads people also to believe that a person is kind, smart, and funny.   The opposite effect is also true. Negative feelings about one characteristic lead to negative impressions of an individual's other features.

When people have a good impression of one characteristic, those good feelings tend to affect perceptions of other qualities.

False Consensus Social Experiment

During the late 1970s, researcher Lee Ross and his colleagues performed some eye-opening experiments.   In one experiment, the researchers had participants choose a way to respond to an imagined conflict and then estimate how many people would also select the same resolution.

They found that no matter which option the respondents chose, they tended to believe that the vast majority of other people would also choose the same option. In another study, the experimenters asked students on campus to walk around carrying a large advertisement that read "Eat at Joe's."

The researchers then asked the students to estimate how many other people would agree to wear the advertisement. They found that those who agreed to carry the sign believed that the majority of people would also agree to carry the sign. Those who refused felt that the majority of people would refuse as well.

The results of these experiments demonstrate what is known in psychology as the false consensus effect .

No matter what our beliefs, options, or behaviors, we tend to believe that the majority of other people also agree with us and act the same way we do.

A Word From Verywell

Social psychology is a rich and varied field that offers fascinating insights into how people behave in groups and how behavior is influenced by social pressures. Exploring some of these classic social psychology experiments can provide a glimpse at some of the fascinating research that has emerged from this field of study.

Frequently Asked Questions

An example of a social experiment might be one that investigates the halo effect, a phenomenon in which people make global evaluations of other people based on single traits. An experimenter might have participants interact with people who are either average looking or very beautiful, and then ask the respondents to rate the individual on unrelated qualities such as intelligence, skill, and kindness. The purpose of this social experiment would be to seek if more attractive people are also seen as being smarter, more capable, and nicer.

The Milgram obedience experiment is one of the most famous social experiments ever performed. In the experiment, researchers instructed participants to deliver what they believed was a painful or even dangerous electrical shock to another person. In reality, the person pretending to be shocked was an actor and the electrical shocks were simply pretend. Milgram's results suggested that as many as 65% of participants would deliver a dangerous electrical shock because they were ordered to do so by an authority figure.

A social experiment is defined by its purpose and methods. Such experiments are designed to study human behavior in a social context. They often involved placing participants in a controlled situation in order to observe how they respond to certain situation or events. 

A few ideas for simple social experiments might involve:

  • Stand in a crowd and stare at a random spot on the ground to see if other people will stop to also look
  • Copy someone's body language and see how they respond
  • Stand next to someone in an elevator even if there is plenty of space to stand elsewhere
  • Smile at people in public and see how many smile back
  • Give random strangers a small prize and see how they respond

Sherif M. Superordinate goals in the reduction of intergroup conflict . American Journal of Sociology . 1958;63(4):349-356. doi:10.1086/222258

Peeters M, Megens C, van den Hoven E, Hummels C, Brombacher A. Social Stairs: Taking the Piano Staircase towards long-term behavioral change . In: Berkovsky S, Freyne J, eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science . Vol 7822. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg; 2013. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-37157-8_21

Mischel W, Ebbeson EB, Zeiss A. Cognitive and attentional mechanisms in delay of gratification . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1972;21(2):204–218. doi:10.1037/h0032198

Mischel W, Shoda Y, Peake PK. Predicting adolescent cognitive and self-regulatory competencies from preschool delay of gratification: Identifying diagnostic conditions . Developmental Psychology. 1990;26(6):978-986. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.26.6.978

Benderly, BL. Psychology's tall tales . gradPSYCH Magazine . 2012;9:20.

Latane B, Darley JM. Group inhibition of bystander intervention in emergencies . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1968;10(3):215-221. doi:10.1037/h0026570

Thorndike EL. A constant error in psychological ratings . Journal of Applied Psychology. 1920;4(1):25-29. doi:10.1037/h0071663

Talamas SN, Mayor KI, Perrett DI.  Blinded by beauty: Attractiveness bias and accurate perceptions of academic performance.   PLoS One . 2016;11(2):e0148284. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148284

Ross, L, Greene, D, & House, P. The "false consensus effect": An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology . 1977;13(3):279-301. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-X

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Social Psychology: Definition, Theories, Scope, & Examples

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

Social psychology is the scientific study of how people’s thoughts, feelings, beliefs, intentions, and goals are constructed within a social context by the actual or imagined interactions with others.

It, therefore, looks at human behavior as influenced by other people and the conditions under which social behavior and feelings occur.

Baron, Byrne, and Suls (1989) define social psychology as “the scientific field that seeks to understand the nature and causes of individual behavior in social situations” (p. 6).

Topics examined in social psychology include the self-concept , social cognition, attribution theory , social influence, group processes, prejudice and discrimination , interpersonal processes, aggression, attitudes , and stereotypes .

Social psychology operates on several foundational assumptions. These fundamental beliefs provide a framework for theories, research, and interpretations.
  • Individual and Society Interplay : Social psychologists assume an interplay exists between individual minds and the broader social context. An individual’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are continuously shaped by social interactions, and in turn, individuals influence the societies they are a part of.
  • Behavior is Contextual : One core assumption is that behavior can vary significantly based on the situation or context. While personal traits and dispositions matter, the circumstances or social environment often play a decisive role in determining behavior.
  • Objective Reality is Difficult to Attain : Our perceptions of reality are influenced by personal beliefs, societal norms, and past experiences. Therefore, our understanding of “reality” is subjective and can be biased or distorted.
  • Social Reality is Constructed : Social psychologists believe that individuals actively construct their social world . Through processes like social categorization, attribution, and cognitive biases, people create their understanding of others and societal norms.
  • People are Social Beings with a Need to Belong : A fundamental assumption is the inherent social nature of humans. People have an innate need to connect with others, form relationships, and belong to groups. This need influences a wide range of behaviors and emotions.
  • Attitudes Influence Behavior : While this might seem straightforward, it’s a foundational belief that our attitudes (combinations of beliefs and feelings) can and often do drive our actions. However, it’s also understood that this relationship can be complex and bidirectional.
  • People Desire Cognitive Consistency : This is the belief that people are motivated to maintain consistency in their beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. Cognitive dissonance theory , which posits that people feel discomfort when holding conflicting beliefs and are motivated to resolve this, is based on this assumption.
  • People are Motivated to See Themselves in a Positive Light : The self plays a central role in social psychology. It’s assumed that individuals are generally motivated to maintain and enhance a positive self-view.
  • Behavior Can be Predicted and Understood : An underlying assumption of any science, including social psychology, is that phenomena (in this case, human behavior in social contexts) can be studied, understood, predicted, and potentially influenced.
  • Cultural and Biological Factors are Integral : Though earlier social psychology might have been criticized for neglecting these factors, contemporary social psychology acknowledges the roles of both biology (genes, hormones, brain processes) and culture (norms, values, traditions) in shaping social behavior.

Early Influences

Aristotle believed that humans were naturally sociable, a necessity that allows us to live together (an individual-centered approach), whilst Plato felt that the state controlled the individual and encouraged social responsibility through social context (a socio-centered approach).

Hegel (1770–1831) introduced the concept that society has inevitable links with the development of the social mind. This led to the idea of a group mind, which is important in the study of social psychology.

Lazarus & Steinthal wrote about Anglo-European influences in 1860. “Volkerpsychologie” emerged, which focused on the idea of a collective mind.

It emphasized the notion that personality develops because of cultural and community influences, especially through language, which is both a social product of the community as well as a means of encouraging particular social thought in the individual. Therefore Wundt (1900–1920) encouraged the methodological study of language and its influence on the social being.

Early Texts

Texts focusing on social psychology first emerged in the 20th century. McDougall published the first notable book in English in 1908 (An Introduction to Social Psychology), which included chapters on emotion and sentiment, morality, character, and religion, quite different from those incorporated in the field today.

He believed social behavior was innate/instinctive and, therefore, individual, hence his choice of topics.  This belief is not the principle upheld in modern social psychology, however.

Allport’s work (1924) underpins current thinking to a greater degree, as he acknowledged that social behavior results from interactions between people.

He also took a methodological approach, discussing actual research and emphasizing that the field was a “science … which studies the behavior of the individual in so far as his behavior stimulates other individuals, or is itself a reaction to this behavior” (1942: p. 12).

His book also dealt with topics still evident today, such as emotion, conformity, and the effects of an audience on others.

Murchison (1935) published The first handbook on social psychology was published by Murchison in 1935.  Murphy & Murphy (1931/37) produced a book summarizing the findings of 1,000 studies in social psychology.  A text by Klineberg (1940) looked at the interaction between social context and personality development. By the 1950s, several texts were available on the subject.

Journal Development

• 1950s – Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology

• 1963 – Journal of Personality, British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology

• 1965 – Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

• 1971 – Journal of Applied Social Psychology, European Journal of Social Psychology

• 1975 – Social Psychology Quarterly, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

• 1982 – Social Cognition

• 1984 – Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

Early Experiments

There is some disagreement about the first true experiment, but the following are certainly among some of the most important.

Triplett (1898) applied the experimental method to investigate the performance of cyclists and schoolchildren on how the presence of others influences overall performance – thus, how individuals are affected and behave in the social context.

By 1935, the study of social norms had developed, looking at how individuals behave according to the rules of society. This was conducted by Sherif (1935).

Lewin et al. then began experimental research into leadership and group processes by 1939, looking at effective work ethics under different leadership styles.

Later Developments

Much of the key research in social psychology developed following World War II, when people became interested in the behavior of individuals when grouped together and in social situations. Key studies were carried out in several areas.

Some studies focused on how attitudes are formed, changed by the social context, and measured to ascertain whether a change has occurred.

Amongst some of the most famous works in social psychology is that on obedience conducted by Milgram in his “electric shock” study, which looked at the role an authority figure plays in shaping behavior.  Similarly,  Zimbardo’s prison simulation notably demonstrated conformity to given roles in the social world.

Wider topics then began to emerge, such as social perception, aggression, relationships, decision-making, pro-social behavior, and attribution, many of which are central to today’s topics and will be discussed throughout this website.

Thus, the growth years of social psychology occurred during the decades following the 1940s.

The scope of social psychology is vast, reflecting the myriad ways social factors intertwine with individual cognition and behavior.

Its principles and findings resonate in virtually every area of human interaction, making it a vital field for understanding and improving the human experience.

  • Interpersonal Relationships : This covers attraction, love, jealousy, friendship, and group dynamics. Understanding how and why relationships form and the factors that contribute to their maintenance or dissolution is central to this domain.
  • Attitude Formation and Change : How do individuals form opinions and attitudes? What methods can effectively change them? This scope includes the study of persuasion, propaganda, and cognitive dissonance.
  • Social Cognition : This examines how people process, store, and apply information about others. Areas include social perception, heuristics, stereotypes, and attribution theories.
  • Social Influence : The study of conformity, compliance, obedience, and the myriad ways individuals influence one another falls within this domain.
  • Group Dynamics : This entails studying group behavior, intergroup relations, group decision-making processes, leadership, and more. Concepts like groupthink and group polarization emerge from this area.
  • Prejudice and Discrimination : Understanding the roots of bias, racism, sexism, and other forms of prejudice, as well as exploring interventions to reduce them, is a significant focus.
  • Self and Identity : Investigating self-concept, self-esteem, self-presentation, and the social construction of identity are all part of this realm.
  • Prosocial Behavior and Altruism : Why do individuals sometimes help others, even at a cost to themselves? This area delves into the motivations and conditions that foster cooperative and altruistic behavior.
  • Aggression : From understanding the underlying causes of aggressive behavior to studying societal factors that exacerbate or mitigate aggression, this topic seeks to dissect the nature of hostile actions.
  • Cultural and Cross-cultural Dimensions : As societies become more interconnected, understanding cultural influences on behavior, cognition, and emotion is crucial. This area compares and contrasts behaviors across different cultures and societal groups.
  • Environmental and Applied Settings : Social psychology principles find application in health psychology, environmental behavior, organizational behavior, consumer behavior, and more.
  • Social Issues : Social psychologists might study the impact of societal structures on individual behavior, exploring topics like poverty, urban stress, and crime.
  • Education : Principles of social psychology enhance teaching methods, address issues of classroom dynamics, and promote effective learning.
  • Media and Technology : In the digital age, understanding the effects of media consumption, the dynamics of online communication, and the formation of online communities is increasingly relevant.
  • Law : Insights from social psychology inform areas such as jury decision-making, eyewitness testimony, and legal procedures.
  • Health : Concepts from social psychology are employed to promote health behaviors, understand doctor-patient dynamics, and tackle issues like addiction.

Example Theories

Allport (1920) – social facilitation.

Allport introduced the notion that the presence of others (the social group) can facilitate certain behavior.

It was found that an audience would improve an actor’s performance in well-learned/easy tasks but leads to a decrease in performance on newly learned/difficult tasks due to social inhibition.

Bandura (1963) Social Learning Theory

Bandura introduced the notion that behavior in the social world could be modeled. Three groups of children watched a video where an adult was aggressive towards a ‘bobo doll,’ and the adult was either just seen to be doing this, was rewarded by another adult for their behavior, or was punished for it.

Children who had seen the adult rewarded were found to be more likely to copy such behavior.

Festinger (1950) –  Cognitive Dissonance

Festinger, Schacter, and Black brought up the idea that when we hold beliefs, attitudes, or cognitions which are different, then we experience dissonance – this is an inconsistency that causes discomfort.

We are motivated to reduce this by either changing one of our thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes or selectively attending to information that supports one of our beliefs and ignores the other (selective exposure hypothesis).

Dissonance occurs when there are difficult choices or decisions or when people participate in behavior that is contrary to their attitude. Dissonance is thus brought about by effort justification (when aiming to reach a modest goal), induced compliance (when people are forced to comply contrary to their attitude), and free choice (when weighing up decisions).

Tajfel (1971) –  Social Identity Theory

When divided into artificial (minimal) groups, prejudice results simply from the awareness that there is an “out-group” (the other group).

When the boys were asked to allocate points to others (which might be converted into rewards) who were either part of their own group or the out-group, they displayed a strong in-group preference. That is, they allocated more points on the set task to boys who they believed to be in the same group as themselves.

This can be accounted for by Tajfel & Turner’s social identity theory, which states that individuals need to maintain a positive sense of personal and social identity: this is partly achieved by emphasizing the desirability of one’s own group, focusing on distinctions between other “lesser” groups.

Weiner (1986) – Attribution Theory

Weiner was interested in the attributions made for experiences of success and failure and introduced the idea that we look for explanations of behavior in the social world.

He believed that these were made based on three areas: locus, which could be internal or external; stability, which is whether the cause is stable or changes over time: and controllability.

Milgram (1963) – Shock Experiment

Participants were told that they were taking part in a study on learning but always acted as the teacher when they were then responsible for going over paired associate learning tasks.

When the learner (a stooge) got the answer wrong, they were told by a scientist that they had to deliver an electric shock. This did not actually happen, although the participant was unaware of this as they had themselves a sample (real!) shock at the start of the experiment.

They were encouraged to increase the voltage given after each incorrect answer up to a maximum voltage, and it was found that all participants gave shocks up to 300v, with 65 percent reaching the highest level of 450v.

It seems that obedience is most likely to occur in an unfamiliar environment and in the presence of an authority figure, especially when covert pressure is put upon people to obey. It is also possible that it occurs because the participant felt that someone other than themselves was responsible for their actions.

Haney, Banks, Zimbardo (1973) – Stanford Prison Experiment

Volunteers took part in a simulation where they were randomly assigned the role of a prisoner or guard and taken to a converted university basement resembling a prison environment. There was some basic loss of rights for the prisoners, who were unexpectedly arrested, and given a uniform and an identification number (they were therefore deindividuated).

The study showed that conformity to social roles occurred as part of the social interaction, as both groups displayed more negative emotions, and hostility and dehumanization became apparent.

Prisoners became passive, whilst the guards assumed an active, brutal, and dominant role. Although normative and informational social influence played a role here, deindividuation/the loss of a sense of identity seemed most likely to lead to conformity.

Both this and Milgram’s study introduced the notion of social influence and the ways in which this could be observed/tested.

Provides Clear Predictions

As a scientific discipline, social psychology prioritizes formulating clear and testable hypotheses. This clarity facilitates empirical testing, ensuring the field’s findings are based on observable and quantifiable phenomena.

The Asch conformity experiments hypothesized that individuals would conform to a group’s incorrect judgment.

The clear prediction allowed for controlled experimentation to determine the extent and conditions of such conformity.

Emphasizes Objective Measurement

Social psychology leans heavily on empirical methods, emphasizing objectivity. This means that results are less influenced by biases or subjective interpretations.

Double-blind procedures , controlled settings, and standardized measures in many social psychology experiments ensure that results are replicable and less prone to experimenter bias.

Empirical Evidence

Over the years, a multitude of experiments in social psychology have bolstered the credibility of its theories. This experimental validation lends weight to its findings and claims.

The robust body of experimental evidence supporting cognitive dissonance theory, from Festinger’s initial studies to more recent replications, showcases the theory’s enduring strength and relevance.

Limitations

Underestimates individual differences.

While social psychology often looks at broad trends and general behaviors, it can sometimes gloss over individual differences.

Not everyone conforms, obeys, or reacts in the same way, and these nuanced differences can be critical.

While Milgram’s obedience experiments showcased a startling rate of compliance to authority, there were still participants who resisted, and their reasons and characteristics are equally important to understand.

Ignores Biology

While social psychology focuses on the social environment’s impact on behavior, early theories sometimes neglect the biological underpinnings that play a role.

Hormones, genetics, and neurological factors can influence behavior and might intersect with social factors in complex ways.

The role of testosterone in aggressive behavior is a clear instance where biology intersects with the social. Ignoring such biological components can lead to an incomplete understanding.

Member Login

Welcome to sesp.

The Society of Experimental Social Psychology (SESP) is a scientific organization dedicated to the advancement of social psychology. Our members typically have Ph.D.s in social psychology or related fields and hold academic positions or appointments in applied settings. SESP holds a conference each autumn. In 2022, the conference will be in Philadelphia, PA from October 13-15.

SESP co-owns Social Psychological and Personality Science (published by Sage). All SESP members receive online access to this journals as part of their annual dues. SESP’s mission is to provide opportunities for direct and personal scientific exchange and collaboration among social and personality psychological scientists through its annual meeting. We invite all faculty and principal investigators (PIs) to join SESP at their earliest eligibility and attend our annual meeting. SESP aims to support faculty at all stages of development, beginning with the transition to a faculty position (e.g., among “future” members) and continuing across all subsequent career stages. SESP prioritizes principles of inclusion, diversity, and equity. Membership in the society is available to all social psychologists (post-5 yrs Ph.D.) regardless of their background (e.g., race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual preference, language, culture, nationality, religion, or physical ability). SESP values diversity and actively seeks to increase the inclusion of individuals from underrepresented and historically excluded groups. SESP aims to ensure equity by maintaining fair and transparent procedures and providing equal opportunities for all to engage with their colleagues. 

Currently, SESP globally has more than 1000 members. Membership is by nomination and election, and is open to any self-identified social psychologist, regardless of disciplinary affiliation. Because of the selective process for admission to the society, all members have Fellow status in SESP. For more information, please email us at: [email protected]

  • MSc/MRes Psychological Research Methods

Psychological Research Methods MRes / MSc

  • Level(s) of Study: Postgraduate taught / Postgraduate research
  • Start Date(s): September 2024
  • Duration: One year full-time / two years part-time
  • Study Mode(s): Full-time / Part-time
  • Campus: City Campus
  • Entry Requirements: More information

Find us on:

  • Connect through Twitter

Introduction:

This postgraduate degree is designed to prepare graduates in Psychology or related disciplines for a PhD, for research related careers in academic or applied psychological disciplines, or for careers in which data handling and analytic skills are of relevance.

You will be equipped with advanced skills in statistics, psychometrics, qualitative research methodologies, structural equation modelling, and observational methods. You’ll also develop skills in experimental and qualitative research design alongside the opportunity for practical experience using experiment generators, image and sound editing, and some of latest technological tools (e.g. EEG, eye-tracking, body motion capture) in Psychology.

What you’ll study

Students undertaking this course have the choice between two qualifications – an MSc (Master of Science) or an MRes (Master of Research). Both awards are equivalent in their level of study, but have slightly different structures that allow students to focus on breadth of methods skills (MSc) or depth of research experience (MRes).

If you’re unsure of which route would suit you best, because of the shared first term we recommend applying to the MSc route, and then requesting a switch of award at the end of term 1, in consultation with your course leader and teaching team. A switch from MRes to MSc at the end of Term 1, is also possible.

In term one, both groups of students study the same core modules.

In term two MSc students study five taught modules, alongside a research project. MRes students study fewer taught modules in term two, and instead focus on a more substantial research project, that is aligned with new and ongoing projects in the department.

If you are a part-time student, we will negotiate which modules you will study in year one and year two when you arrive. You will need to have completed the majority of your taught modules before you can begin your project in term two, of year two.

Advanced Statistics One

This module examines the theoretical and philosophical underpinnings of statistics used in experimental research (e.g., statistical inference, power and effect size). The framework for the module is a regression / GLM approach to statistics that focuses on the relationship between multiple linear regression, ANOVA and ANCOVA. The module also covers the application of these concepts in widely available computer software such as R. These include the relationship between different experimental designs (e.g., factorial designs, multi-stage sampling, RCTs, cross-sectional designs, longitudinal designs or single-case studies) and statistical issues such as power and generalizability. Practical issues such as dealing with violations of statistical assumptions or missing data are also considered.

Psychometrics One: Developing Psychometric Scales in Research and Practice

This module will provide you with a basic knowledge of psychometric theory and how this theory can be applied to the different stages of test development. More specifically, the module aims to demonstrate the process of test development through practical application of theory, whereby you will work to produce your own psychometric scale.

Qualitative Research Design and Analysis One

Qualitative research is concerned with the subjective world and aims to investigate human experience in order to understand peoples’ opinions, motivations and feelings. As you explore this fascinating topic, qualitative research is not just one method but a constellation of designs and methods, each offering a unique perspective on a chosen research topic. You will learn how to evaluate qualitative research, as well as how to manage, handle, report and present the qualitative data you are working with.

Observational Methods

This module equips you with a knowledge of, and practical skills in, observational methods. You will work with other students on a collective observational analysis of video-taped material to build up your skills so that you will graduate from the module competent to use structured observational methods in your own research studies.

Psychological Experiments: Tools and Methodologies

The module provides you with a better understanding of experimental design and methodology in Psychology. You will gain practical skills in building experiments using specialist software to run them and collect data. You will also gain a better understanding and practical experience of the how to generate or manipulate stimuli for your experimental needs. You will also explore open science in Psychology and issues of replicability. Many of these skills will be practical and transferable in other areas.

Advanced Statistics Two

Advanced Statistics Two uses the regression framework adopted in Advanced Statistics One and introduces additional advanced statistical topics such as logistic regression, Poisson regression, meta-analysis and multilevel modelling. The module builds on practical topics introduced in Advanced Experimentation and Statistics (One) such as dealing with violations of assumptions and the limitations of standard research designs for real world data (e.g., handling unbalanced or missing data in repeated measures analyses).The module is taught using R.

Psychometrics Two: Using Psychometric Scales in Research and Practice

Psychometrics Two builds on the understanding and skills you developed in Psychometrics One, advancing them to considers how scales are used in research and practice. It also considers other forms of psychometrics beyond just surveys and questionnaires and you will tackle a range of problem based scenarios drawn from real world situations.

Qualitative Research Design and Analysis Two

This module will provide you with both the theoretical underpinnings and analytic practice of conversation analysis (CA), membership categorisation (MCA), and discursive psychology (DP). The module includes lectures on theory / method combined with seminars looking at data and perform analysis.

Structural Equation Modelling (SEM)

On this module, you will be introduced to the theoretical and philosophical underpinnings of structural equation modelling (SEM) and equipped with the skills, and understanding, to appropriately construct, analyse, and interpret theoretical path analytic CFA, and SEM models.

Technological Tools in Psychology

In this module, you'll be introduced to some of the technologically informed tools (e.g., EEG, bio-packs, eye-tracking, TMS) and associated methods of contemporary psychology. This module will provide you with practical hands-on experience of a range of cutting-edge psychological research tools and the data they produce. You'll also learn about and critically consider a range of issues in and around the theory, methodology, and application of these tools and approaches.

Psychology Research Project

Your project is an independent piece of work that is supervised by a member of staff who will guide and support you as you work towards producing a final report for assessment. This will be the main opportunity for you to carry out an extensive piece of independent research of your own choosing and for you to demonstrate that you have the skills to devise, conduct, analyse, present and report an empirical study to postgraduate level.

We will negotiate which modules you will study in year one and year two when you arrive. You will need to have completed the majority of your taught modules before you can begin your project in term two, of year two.

Don’t just take our word for it, hear from our students themselves

Student profiles, nóra bajcsi.

Psychological Research Methods

I absolutely love this course. The lecturers are very passionate about their topics, and they make their classes engaging and interesting. It is undeniably an intense course, but I have gained new knowledge from a great range of fields, which has already proven useful.

Harriet Broadbent

The support offered by NTU is second to none in my opinion and the responses from previous postgraduate students were what really stood out when deciding to stay at NTU.

No results were found

Take a look at our Psychology Labs

Video Icon

Hear from-->