Who would study psychology unless they had some issues?!
Chapter 377 - 371 [Cognition Integration]_2

Chapter 377: Chapter 371 [Cognition Integration]_2

"And that professor, I mean, he is a professor. How could he not understand the severity of the situation? Why didn’t he stop it?"

Zhang Zihao summarized, "To be honest, if it weren’t for you, Teacher, showing the documentary and saying it’s a real experiment done by Americans, I’d have thought it was some story you made up—it completely lacks logic."

There’s a saying—novels need logic, but reality doesn’t.

In the Stanford Prison Experiment, the performance of the volunteers and the professor indeed went against the logic of popular cognition to some extent.

Zhang Zihao’s words were full of aggression, and his expression was also aggressive.

...

Nan Zhubin looked at Zhang Zihao’s stance, but he was only pleased in his heart.

The verbal aggression Zhang Zihao was exhibiting at that moment was also a form of [defense].

But it was infinitely better than the [defense] of saying nothing at all like Zhang Zihao had just done.

In psychological interventions, a "bad reaction" is better than "no reaction."

And Zhang Zihao’s current reaction was not necessarily "bad" for Nan Zhubin.

You know, the recent Wang Rui incident also kind of defied the so-called logic. In reality, don’t even mention something like what happened recently, there are even more exaggerated things than those.

Zhang Zihao’s verbal aggression would soon turn into a boomerang, transforming into the motivation for his own cognitive correction and thought growth.

At the same time, what intrigued Nan Zhubin more was another point—was Zhang Zihao’s current aggression really only targeted at the video, classmates, or the teacher?

Is it possible that, subconsciously, he knew that he himself was also within the scope of his own attacks?

...

After Zhang Zihao finished speaking, two other students similar to him also shared their thoughts step by step.

"My thoughts are pretty much the same as Zihao’s. I also think this experiment is absurd."

"Me too. I don’t have any other feelings or emotions, and it’s hard to give it a score. Overall, I just find it unbelievable."

Nan Zhubin nodded, expressing encouragement to each student as usual, regardless of the feelings shared.

"Alright, you guys have raised many questions about this video. I know everyone is curious about what this experiment in the video is all about."

Nan Zhubin glanced around the room.

As expected, everyone once again showed curious expressions.

Each step of the Group Counseling has its own significance.

Nan Zhubin intentionally let everyone share their feelings first after the video was played.

And then came the explanation and discussion about the video.

It’s like high school students going through exercises with answers. Teachers often remind students, "Try solving it yourself first, then check the answers."

Some students even directly copy the answers, then memorize them, thinking it would achieve the same outcome. But in fact, when they reach the exam room, even if they see the exact original questions, students may not be able to respond effectively.

On the contrary, if they truly tried, made mistakes, and then learned from the answers, even when faced with similar variations, they could solve them better.

This involves a fundamental research aspect of [depth of processing], which we will not discuss in detail for now.

In short, after watching the video, Nan Zhubin let the students feel, share, and then explain the video. This process is similar to attempting problems, making mistakes, and then correcting them.

In fact, this process is even better than the so-called "checking answers," because checking answers only deepens the understanding of "wrong problems"—whereas "feelings" are not about right or wrong!

So, when Nan Zhubin revealed the "answers," every student, regardless of their feelings after watching the video, would think, "So that’s how it is, my feelings actually align with these psychological scientific principles," further deepening their insights and fostering growth.

And once they grow from this experimental study,

they can proceed to the next stage—[cognitive integration].

Integrating what they learned from this story into their own experiences.

This is why Nan Zhubin carefully selected the Stanford Prison Experiment as Group Counseling material. Although the events in the experiment slightly differ from the Wang Rui incident, practically every NPC in the experiment can find a counterpart in the recent events.

It seems the students are studying the video, learning from the experiment; in reality, they are dissecting themselves alongside Nan Zhubin, growing internally.

"The Stanford Prison Experiment is a landmark study in the history of psychology, with its core revealing the vulnerability of human nature under specific circumstances. Subsequent researchers, based on the results of this experiment, developed many later effects in Management Psychology and Social Psychology."

"Many of the questions you raised can also be explained using these effects."

Nan Zhubin looked at the students.

"First, there’s the [Situational Power Theory]. The experiment shows—environment and roles have a greater influence on shaping human behavior than individual traits. Even if the volunteers are psychologically healthy university students, once assigned the roles of guards or ’prisoners’, their behavior quickly becomes different: guards abuse power, prisoners passively comply."

"This theory confirms a point—human nature is not dominated by individual inner traits. The environment also plays an important, if not primary, role."

Teacher Xiao Zhao was the quickest to react—because she knew the purpose of this Group Counseling session from the beginning.

She fell into deep thought and began connecting what Nan Zhubin was saying to previous events.

"Secondly, there’s [de-individualization] and [identity engulfment]."

"[De-individualization], through anonymity and role labeling, the individual’s self-awareness gets weakened, making behaviors more easily governed by group norms."

"[Identity engulfment] is a severe consequence following [de-individualization], where volunteers’ [identity engulfment] means their self-cognition is completely destroyed. In the experiment, they internalized the ’guilty’ label and began to think they were truly prisoners."

"It’s not just the effect of the experiment... even so."

Nan Zhubin meaningfully said, "When the prison priest appeared, although he expressed willingness to get the volunteers a lawyer—it was precisely the way to treat a prisoner, wasn’t it? His actions instead made the volunteers more convinced of their prisoner identity."

Teacher Xiao Zhao was taken aback. After matching this segment with a certain pass in reality, she suddenly began to sweat.

"Then there is [systemic complicity]: the silence of bystanders, including Professor Zimbardo, allowed the wicked acts to spread. In this experiment, Professor Zimbardo himself also got lost. He didn’t realize he had fallen into the role of ’prison warden’ until other professors reminded him, and he suddenly realized, stopping the experiment."

"Others include [group polarization], [herd effect], [Lucifer effect], etc..."

The students listened and nodded repeatedly, their eyes shining.

Once again, it’s that aspect of psychology where the analysis of human nature can really impress non-experts every single time.

"The Stanford Prison Experiment has had a profound impact on later times, promoting the development of psychology, even in our Group Counseling today."

"It has many beneficial functions. It can be said that if a scientific discipline wants to develop, then such experiments seem ’necessary’. But—"

Nan Zhubin turned his tone: "This experiment is also one of the most notorious experiments in psychological research, nearly on par with John Watson’s Little Albert Experiment."

"This experiment also promoted the development of two things—[ethical scrutiny] and [research norms] in psychology!"