The Human Behavior Experiments and “The Menace Within” Psychology QuestionsAnswer each of the following questions in complete sentences, citing specific evidence or examples from the videoor article to support your response.1. What does Stanley Milgram’s shock experiment, or the horrifying McDonald’s strip search incidents, revealabout humans’ behavior, particularly their obedience to authority?Stanley Milgram's shock experiment and the McDonald's strip search incidents show that humans will obey someone and do anything they request if that someone is seen as an authoritative figure to them. This happens because the humans will place the blame on the authoritative figure, so in their mind they aren't at fault and aren't the wrongdoers, but the authoritative figure is.2. How do psychologists explain a person’s (or people’s) inaction to help another person in distress or life threatening situation? Use your understanding of the Kitty Genovese murder, Matthew Carrington death, the “smoke under the door” experiment, or any other event discussed in the film to support your explanation. Psychologists explain people's inaction to help another person in distress as either they don't have to do it since someone else will, or they don't fully recognize that the person is in distress. For example, in the Kitty Genovese murder, no one helped her even though she was clearly in distress because everyone thought that someone else would help her, and therefore no one called the cops until itwas too late. However, if that person is the only one witnessing the person in distress, than they will call for help. In the "smoke under the door" experiment, no one called for help when there were three people, as they all thought that nothing was wrong since no one else went for help. But when there was only one person, he wentand called for help, as there was no one else witnessing the smoke and to expect to call for help.3. How can one’s perceived, or actual assigned, role in a given social construct or environment affect one’s behavior, either positively or negatively? Again, cite an example from the video or the reading on The Stanford Prison Study to support your reasoning. Humans will often act or impersonate their assigned or actual role in a given social environment. For example, in the Stanford Prison Study, twelve humans were assigned the role of being a prison guard, and they eventually started to act like they were actual prison guards and brutally harassed the prisoners, even though the prisoners didn't do anything wrong and everyone was aware that they were in a mock environment. In this case, their assigned role had a huge negative effect on their behavior, as it made them act more brutal and harsh than they thought was possible. However, one's assigned role can also have a positive effect on their behavior. For example, if they were assigned the role of police officer, they would feel more inclined to help people in distress than if they weren't a police officer.4. Define Cognitive Dissonance Theory and explain how this theory is relevant to one of the experiments in the video. Cognitive Dissonance Theory is the theory that when someone has two or more contradictory ideas that causes that person mental stress, they will perform an action in an attempt to convince themselves that one of the ideas is better than the other idea. Humans do this in order to relieve stress and feel better, even if the action they perform isn't morally right or correct. 5. Thinking specifically about the Abu Ghraib interrogation scandal, who would social psychologists say is responsible for allowing these inhumane and illegal practices to happen? Why? Social psychologists would say that it was the people who told the prison guards to break the prisoners that were responsible. It was those people that assigned the role of a harsh, brutal prison guard to the guards and told them to break the prisoners. By assigning them that role, it lead to them practicing inhumane and illegal techniques on the prisoners. It wasn't the guards' fault, as they were only following orders and doing what they were told, but rather the people who told the guards to act in that manner who are to blame.6. Zimbardo states that psychological experiments and real-life situations of obedience toward authority reveal that most people would behave the same and enter the “dark side” of human behavior if put in similar situations as those in Milgram’s shock experiment, for instance. How can you, and society as a whole, use this information to prevent such atrocities from occurring in the future? Using the information that it is normal and expected for humans to not help people in distress andto walk right on by as if nothing is wrong, I can be the one to help the said person in distress since I know that no one else will. If society knew this, than atrocities such as the Holocaust will not be able to be performed again, as people will realize that something is wrong and that it is human nature to ignore that wrong thing, and will therefore look past their human nature and stand up against the atrocity together. Events like the Matthew Carrington death and the McDonald strip searches will never happen again if society knew the information that I know because they will look past their human nature and realize that something is wrong and something must be done to stop