Author Archives: Marisa Daugherty

Stanford prison experiment

I think that experiments like this are really interesting. It is fascinating to see how people will respond to power, both having it and not having it. The fact that the guards got so violent and aggressive so quickly is baffling to me. Since we cannot redo this experiment, because it turned out badly last time, we must look at other examples of situations like this. During my junior year of high school, I took a psych class and we talked about this also. My teacher said that something like this happened in real life in a US military prison in the middle east. I don’t remember the name of the prison but situations like this arise more then I expected when I first learned about it.

The psychology behind things like this is really interesting to learn about. Just watching how people respond differently to different situations is fun for me. All of the cognitive and chemical reactions that go into making choices and responding to stimuli in the world around you, and how tiny changes in those things can change your whole outlook on life. It’s also interesting how we define heroes and villains. There was the prisoner who went on a hunger strike could have been seen as a hero but instead was seen as making a fuss.

Response 3/23

Honestly, I thought both of these readings were dry and somewhat boring. I think they had a lot of good information though. After reading the second article, I was confused about the interaction between different types of observation and leadership in small scale societies. After thinking about it a little more about the topics, I came to the conclusion that in order to evaluate the effectiveness of leadership in SSSs and subsequently LSSs, one must know how to observe those societies. I did not know that there were so many different kinds of observation and how informal some of them are. I don’t really think about how I am observing the world when I am going about my life.

I thought it was interesting how in the first article it talks about naturalistic observation. I interpreted this as just being aware of what is going on around you. The phrase naturalistic observation sounds so formal but it really just means paying attention to the world. Its interesting to think about how we are always observing even if we don’t think we are. I would be interested to know what the most used form of observation is in the leadership studies world. I think it would be mostly retrospective case studies but I think there is a lot to be learned by studying what is going on right now also so Im not sure.

Game Theory response

I honestly thought that this reading was boring. I didn’t find it super engaging but it did make me think a lot about compromise. It talked a lot about finding the Nash equilibrium and how both parties have to want similar things. I think this ties in a lot with the idea of compromise. Is the idea situation one where everyone is happy or where no one is happy. I think that the answer is when no one is happy. It’s nice to think that humans are able to find solutions that make everyone happy but we are just not. It’s not in our nature, especially on a large scale. I believe that when people are actually compromising they are giving up things on both sides. This is very important for things like politics and stuff because people need to be willing to give up some things to achieve anything. I think this is why rock paper scissors makes us so happy. It makes us feel like anyone can win and has a fair shot at winning. It makes us feel like we are not losing even though there is a 50% chance that we don’t get what we want.

Reading response

I don’t agree with the first article at all. I agree with the fact that sometimes medical professionals may not recommend what the patient wants, but there is a reason why we trust their opinions. Medical doctors have been to medical school and they are extremely knowledgeable about medicine. In the article, there is an example about Danny who wants insulin but his doctor recommends diet and exercise. In this example, I believe that Danny should have a conversation with his doctor. I think that doctors want what is best for the patient and if you really want something different then the doctor is initially recommending, talk to them about your options.

I do agree with the second article on the other hand. I think if a law is blatantly unjust and discriminatory that citizens have the obligation to not listen to that law. Just because it is a law doesn’t always mean that it is morally just. I generally tend to not trust politicians to make decisions that are best for their constituents. Of course, there are exceptions, but in general, politicians are bought by organizations with the financial resources to fund their campaign. The NRA for example, has given a lot of money to certain politicians and I think that that means that they are no longer making choices that have the best interest of the people in mind. In this situation I believe that the people have an obligation to disobey those laws.

Reading response paragraph

I thought these articles were really interesting. In the first article it talks about how women are surprised that they have the women=family and men=career bias. I talked about that in my response paragraph to the implicit association test that we had to take cause I was genuinely surprised. I thought it was really interesting how it wasn’t just me that was surprised by that result. I was a little but confused by the section that was telling us how to change our implicit associations because they didn’t really give a solution. I know that these implicit biases are the result of cultural norms but I feel like there has to be a way to change them in order to create a society that is not focused around white people. I thought it was really interesting when they gave the example of that woman who donated equally to her college and to an African American college fund and how that did not get rid of the mindbug it just neutralized the issue.

Implicit association test

I took the test about women and careers. It showed that I have an implicit association to put men and work and women to home life. I was surprised by these results because I don’t think that women have to be homemakers and men have to work. I felt while I was taking the test that the test itself was associating certain things with men and when you said something different it would say it was wrong. In the end, it said that it was time-based which made more sense but I was still surprised that I had that implicit association seeing as I am a woman with goals for myself and my career.

Reading response

I thought these readings were really interesting. I have always found the idea of moral arguments fascinating. These articles, the first one specifically, showed me some things about moral issues that I didn’t know before. I did not know that there were so many different kinds of moral arguments. I just think its really interesting how scientific it makes moral arguments. Their methods take some of the moral emotions out of the arguments. When people talk about moral issues often times it results in an extremely emotional conversation instead of a rational, calm argument. This article helps negate that issue a little bit. By calling It action A it makes it sound more scientific and less like an emotional issue. I thought the second article was also interesting to read. I’ve never heard of optical allusions and stuff like that being called mind bugs and I thought was a new way for me to look at stuff like that.

Outside event

I went to the race talks in with Dr. Crutcher THC. They were really fascinating to hear everyone’s stories and different experiences. Though I  am personally a white student and these acts don’t immediately impact me, they still shook me to my core. The fact that people on this campus had the audacity to write those actually astounds and disgusts me. I was really moved while listening to all of the stories because I realized that I have so much to learn. As a white person, I need to be an ally, and that doesn’t mean just not committing racist acts myself but standing up and speaking out. I have to learn how to be a better ally to people of color and how to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again. Hearing the anger and the disappointment in the stories really helped me realize that this is not just a person of color problem, this is a campus-wide problem that we all must do our part in because that is the only way that anything will ever change on this campus. All I can hope for at this moment in time is that I learn how to be better and that every other white person on this campus learns how to be better so that we can support the people on this campus who are fighting for change. 

This ties into what we are talking about in class not only because we talked about these events, but also because when we think of leaders we often think of white men. Throughout my leadership and the humanities course we often came back to the same issue of societal norms. As a country we have decided that the quintessential leader is a tall, white, goodlooking, man. Which is detrimental to everyone who does not fit that mold. I want to use the advantage that I was born with to learn about and try to support people who were not born with the same advantages. I’m not sure how to do that and I am just starting to learn but I believe that if everyone just tries to learn about different experiences and use that knowledge to become an ally, then the United States may become a better place for people of color because right now we are not doing good enough.