10 psychological Experiments that show so much that you can’t go wrong when judging a person

Between centuries XIX and XXl, the development of psychology in general and experimental psychology in particular allowed to study the complex biological processes of the human brain to explore their emotions, behaviour and reactions. This information helped us to understand the basic concepts of our actions and simplified greatly the life of those who want to lead or sell with success. Do we not believe?

Then look at the 10 psychological experiments that Great.guru has put together for you. Not only does it help you understand the essence of the society, but also will make you look inside yourself, and very probably also get surprised.

Experiment Carlsberg: “even a small child can have a knife behind your back”

Type of experiment: imagine a movie theater filled with 148 bikers, tattooed, with just 2 seats free in the centre, that corresponds to your tickets. How you would sit or you’d go? This was the experiment that made the company Carlsberg.

Result: those who eventually went on to occupy the free seats, they were greeted with applause and, of course, with beer for the man cheerful and friendly. The experiment showed that you should not judge a person by their appearance.

The effect of conformity Solomon Asch: “I’ll show you in agreement with all, I don’t want to be a black sheep”

Series of experiments: Solomon Asch wanted to demonstrate the power of conformity in groups, i.e. the change in the behavior of a person under the pressure of another, even if his opinion is erroneous. The participants of the experiment were asked to estimate the length of lines on cards and determine which ones were the same; naming the color of a pyramid and even say your own name. In all the experiments, all participants but one were accomplices of the researchers and the unique participant real always answered last.

Result: in 75 percent of the cases, the subject of the experiment was the opinion of the majority, even when I saw clearly that he was giving a wrong answer. And those who expressed their own opinion, experienced great discomfort. By the way, in the cases in which one of the fake participants expressed a contrary opinion to the majority, the subjects responded correctly more easily.

Effect of false consensus: “if you think different, then you’re wrong.”

Type of experiment: professor at Stanford University Lee Ross offered to the shareholders of the test a problematic situation with two response options. Asked to choose one of the options and guess how they would respond to other subjects, and also describe those who would choose the first and the second version.
Result: the experiment showed that the vast majority of the people thought that the rest of the participants would respond the same way to them, and described negatively to the fact that they chose the other option.

Effect observer and the diffusion of responsibility: “not my problem” or “isn’t there someone besides me?”

Type of experiment: after the notorious murder of Kitty Genovese, in which none of the witnesses helped the victim, the scientists John Darley and Bibb Latané conducted a series of experiments on the reaction in these cases.

Result: it showed that people respond much more quickly in an emergency situation and try to help another person, if acting alone. If there are a lot of people, most of them hesitate and think that surely someone else will act in his place. Later, this phenomenon became to be investigated. Here is an experiment demonstrative: “Room of smoke”. The people who were in the room alone and saw the smoke, they reported the problem much faster than those who were in the presence of other people that did not do anything about it.

8 hours without electronic devices: “my son can’t be bad and think of the worst”

Type of experiment: the family psychologist Katerina Murashova formulated the hypothesis that modern children are too entertaining and are afraid to remain alone with themselves. Katerina invited the children who participated in the experiment to stop using the phone, the computer and the tv for 8 hours, although they were allowed to draw, read, walk and perform other simple activities.

The result: of 68 adolescents between 12 and 18 years, only three completed the experiment and seven held more than 5 hours. The others ceased the experiment, claiming attacks of nausea, hand tremor, pains in the chest and stomach, fever and chills, three even thought of suicide! Parents, think about it! Later, Katerina performed another experiment, whose results can be found here.

Spontaneous expressions and obedience: “I am not guilty, have compelled me!”

Type of experiment: the original goal of the experiment Carney Landis was to identify the general patterns of the functioning of the facial muscles is characteristic in the expression of strong emotions. To facilitate the monitoring of the movement of the muscles, they drew lines in the face of the subject. Then they were given to smell ammonia, they showed compromising pictures, made to touch frogs and, in the end, they were asked to behead a live rat.

Result: the general patterns of the muscle work is not revealed, but the great majority of the people showed an amazing willingness to obey and made under pressure, which in real life would not have done of their own volition.

Effect Ringelmann: “I will just stay here standing, you strive”

Type of experiment: Maximilien Ringelmann formulated the hypothesis that people put far less effort in a common cause, if they are working next to one another. We performed various experiments in groups of different number of people on the action of pulling a rope and lifting weights, in which were recorded the results of each participant.
The result: it was discovered that the personal achievements of a person exceed the efforts that you put in a collective cause. The scientist explained with the loss of individual motivation in a group.

Effect of social facilitation and inhibition: “look how well I do!”

Type of experiment: one day, the psychologist Norman Triplett noticed that a person works much better if someone watched with interest. During testing with cyclists, and the winding of fishing reels, it turned out that the presence of witnesses, disinterested, on the contrary, reduced the effectiveness of the actions.

The result: Robert Zaionz continued the studies and formulated the theory of the activation. According to the same, a person achieves a better result in the work if you must perform mechanical actions common to an observer. And the opposite effect, in which the work was getting worse, happening if the person was to find something or to solve new intellectual problems.

Hawthorne effect: “my boss loves me and appreciated me!”

Type of experiment: in the company “Western Electric” fell the productivity of the assembled relay. The psychologist Elton Mayo was invited to investigate the influence of lighting and the environment in the labour productivity. However, in the course of the experiment it was discovered that the improvement of the working conditions and their absence had the same beneficial effect on women workers.

The conclusion was simple: the workers felt involved in something important, they realized that the authorities were concerned for them and started to work better. It would be good to, at least occasionally, our superiors make use of this data, right?

“Foot in the door: “give me water, I feel very hungry and have no where to sleep”

Type of experiment: psychologists Jonathan Friedman and Scott Fraser conducted a series of studies trying to discover how a person will respond to requests serious, if it increases their sense of participation in the process. Subsequently, Patricia Pliner supplemented its research.

The result: a small grant significantly increases the chances of consents increased in the future. For example, at the request of donating money to a foundation that fights against the cancer, only accepted 46 percent of the people. But when people are first asked to just use the pin from the foundation, the percentage of donations was almost two times higher.
Attention! This method is not only used by successful salespeople and managers, but also by scammers.

What experiments you found most valuable? Have you found something akin to your way of thinking? Maybe you’ve done some sort of experiment, or want to do so in the future. Let’s discuss this topic in the comments.

Feel free to leave any comments here at Coolest-hacks.com