When a textbook is recommended for a class, you expect that you’ll be able to turn to it for definitive answers, don’t you? Maybe you shouldn’t.
Famous studies that got it wrong
In the field of social psychology, many of the ‘classic’ studies of the field are being critically re-evaluated in light of fresh evidence and archival research. Recent reviews of classic studies such as the Kitty Genovese case, the Stanford Prison Experiment and Milgram’s obedience experiments reveal both serious methodological flaws and erroneous conclusions.
So how long does it take for textbooks and textbook writers to catch up? And how do writers of social psychology textbooks respond?
For Peter Gray it was a simple matter of ignoring an experiment others regard as a classic. Gray argues that the Stanford Prison experiment was poorly planned and wrongly interpreted. His solution? He’s left it out of his textbook.
Uniform worn during Stanford Prison 'Experiment'.
Richard Griggs advocates including flawed studies like Zimbardo’s in textbooks to encourage students to develop a more critical attitude to research.
Textbooks as propaganda
Carol Tavris, another social psychology textbook writer, argues that classic studies, despite their shortcomings, offer ‘social and psychological lessons’ that are worth holding onto and need to be passed on. This argument frames textbooks as a form of propaganda, a way of teaching moral lessons to readers.
For textbooks writers who’ve committed to these kinds of studies it can be hard to admit you’re wrong.
And then there’s the commercial imperative. Writing popular textbooks can be lucrative and there’s money to be made with texts that tell compelling stories full of dramatic narratives and counterintuitive results.
But when the results of a ‘classic’ experiment are equivocal or ambiguous, then issues of right and wrong, truth and accuracy become just as blurred. The textbook, rather than reflecting the facts and findings of the discipline, can become a vehicle for the writer to highlight his or her moral view of the universe. Subjective? You bet.
When I was writing my book about Milgram’s research, I went back to the textbook that had first introduced me to the obedience studies. It was Harlow, McGaugh and Thompson’s Social Psychology. When I re-read the section that described the obedience studies I was struck by two things.
One was the factual errors in the description. Clearly the authors hadn’t read the original research and had relied on second-hand accounts. Their description of the experiment and the results was plain wrong.
Secondly the textbook read like a tribute to the discipline rather than a practical guide to encourage critical thinking.
Readers owed the full story
Celebratory social psychology textbooks that continue to peddle myths about ‘classic studies’ cheat both their readers and the discipline they are trying to promote.
Students of social psychology deserve textbooks that favour fact over fiction.
Successful social psychology textbooks – those worth buying and keeping – are those that will encourage enquiry instead of promoting propaganda. They’ll tell the full story – one full of failures and flaws as well as surprises and success.
Comments are closed.