Thank you SO MUCH for your videos. As someone deeply interested in behaviour, but my disability stops me from seeking formal education, your stuff just gets me so fired up! Are definitions essentially what Zimbardo was trying to assess in his Stanford Prison Experiment? As in definitions derive from an initial value, but that value is up for trade dependent upon the circumstances (as you went over). I feel like that, and other experiments like it (Milgram), are trying to touch on that very topic. How far can a value be pushed before it's bent or broken, and where did that value come from in the first place?
That's an interesting perspective! Scholars haven't made that connection, but it makes a lot of sense. Milgram and Zimbardo were both interested in what people would do in certain circumstances. They had their own ideas about WHY people did those things. Akers, on the other hand, was focused on the WHY and didn't worry as much about what specific things people did. Thanks for sharing your insights! Very interesting!
@@daniellemaccartney ok so just for my clarity, Akers is looking at the trigger, and Milgram et al, are looking how the trigger is fired off? Thanks for your time 🙏
![⭐ฮิตในTikTok!! ( หมูเด้ง MooDeng ) Ver. แดนซ์โจ๊ะๆ ReMix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3krsyfWUeHU/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you SO MUCH for your videos. As someone deeply interested in behaviour, but my disability stops me from seeking formal education, your stuff just gets me so fired up! Are definitions essentially what Zimbardo was trying to assess in his Stanford Prison Experiment? As in definitions derive from an initial value, but that value is up for trade dependent upon the circumstances (as you went over). I feel like that, and other experiments like it (Milgram), are trying to touch on that very topic. How far can a value be pushed before it's bent or broken, and where did that value come from in the first place?
That's an interesting perspective! Scholars haven't made that connection, but it makes a lot of sense. Milgram and Zimbardo were both interested in what people would do in certain circumstances. They had their own ideas about WHY people did those things. Akers, on the other hand, was focused on the WHY and didn't worry as much about what specific things people did. Thanks for sharing your insights! Very interesting!
@@daniellemaccartney ok so just for my clarity, Akers is looking at the trigger, and Milgram et al, are looking how the trigger is fired off? Thanks for your time 🙏
@@aroset I'm not sure either group would phrase it that way, but it's a good interpretation.