Mobile version
spiked plus
About spiked
What is spiked?
Support spiked
spiked shop
Contact us
Summer school
Top issues
Arab uprisings
British politics
Child abuse panic
For Europe, Against the EU
Free speech
Jimmy Savile scandal
Parents and kids
View all issues...
special feature
The Counter-Leveson Inquiry
other sections
 Review of Books
 Monthly archive
selected authors
Duleep Allirajah
Daniel Ben-Ami
Tim Black
Jennie Bristow
Sean Collins
Dr Michael Fitzpatrick
Frank Furedi
Helene Guldberg
Patrick Hayes
Mick Hume
Rob Lyons
Brendan O’Neill
Nathalie Rothschild
James Woudhuysen
more authors...
RSS feed

abc def ghi jkl mno pqrs tuv wxyz index
Survey home
Survey responses
RSS feed
Anjana Ahuja
Julian Baggini
Philip Ball
Marlene Oscar Berman
Gustav VR Born
K Eric Drexler
Marcus Du Sautoy
Edmond H Fischer
John Hall
Tim Hunt
Wolfgang Ketterle
Leon Lederman
Matt Ridley
Raymond Tallis
Frank Wilczek
Lewis Wolpert
Dr Stuart Derbyshire
senior lecturer University of Birmingham School of Psychology.

It is tempting to suggest that the advent of technology to peer directly at the working human brain, especially functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), is the most important innovation of psychological science. Psychology is a young science and many argue that it should not be classified as a science at all; fMRI provides a seemingly undeniable hi-tech rebuttal to such nay-sayers.

Unfortunately, fMRI is really an innovation in physics, and perhaps more importantly, peering at the human brain, by itself, doesn’t actually tell us anything about psychology. So I plump for the development of procedures to illustrate conformity. In 1958, Solomon Asch demonstrated that when asked how long is a piece of string, most people will state that the piece of string is as long as everyone else says it is, even when it is evidently shorter or longer. In the early 1960s, Stanley Milgram demonstrated that ordinary people will shock to death a man they just met because a scientist tells them to.

More recently, Elizabeth Loftus has demonstrated that asking a witness questions such as, ‘How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?’, will produce answers that conform with the structure of the question rather than the structure of events. These psychological experiments reveal an important lesson: often it is not so much the personality of individuals which matters as the circumstances in which they are placed and the manner in which information is delivered or requested that determine behaviour.