1
Content Summary
Social Psychology Article
Christopher Theriault
Department of Psychology, Liberty University
PSY 512: Social Psychology
Dr. Snyder
August 20, 2025
2
Content Summary
Introduction
Human beings are built to interact and are fundamentally dependent on one another to
improve individual chances of survival. Each person’s behavior is shaped by their environment
as they seek to determine what is considered appropriate within that context. Once interactions
develop into relationships, they become interdependent, with each individual contributing in
ways that benefit the group. The labels assigned to both the group and its members can
strongly influence and dictate the behaviors expected within that group.
The Need to Interact
God created human beings to socialize, and survival becomes extremely difficult in the
face of isolation. Scripture highlights this design: “Every day they continued to meet together in
the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere
hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people” (New International Version,
2011/1978, Acts 2:46–47). Human happiness reflects this truth, as loneliness makes joy difficult
and people are naturally wired to seek the company of others.
Research in social psychology supports this biblical principle. Studies have found that
initiating conversations with others often turns out better than expected and can increase
overall happiness (Kassin et al., 2025, p. 5). These findings demonstrate that humans are
interdependent and thrive in relationships. As another study notes, “Interdependence is at the
heart of most human interactions; it is our dependence on one another for outcomes, whether
tangible or intangible” (Chadee, 2022, p. 250). Cooperation is central to human behavior
because it benefits both the individual and the group.
The tendency to avoid harming others also reflects this natural design. God did not
create humans to cause pain, yet the famous Milgram obedience study shows how authority
can override this inclination: “The study proceeded until the participant expressed resistance to
3
each of four increasingly demanding prods by the experimenter” (Burger, 2009, p.1). The results
suggest that while humans generally resist harming others, under the pressure of authority they
may act against their natural wiring for cooperation.
Cooperation
Once interaction and relationships are established, it is generally in people’s best interest
to maintain them for both individual and group benefit. As Lewin suggested, “human behavior is
the result of the interaction between an individual and his/her characteristics and social
context” (Chadee, 2022, p.253). People often evaluate relationships based on costs and
rewards, with positive and mutually beneficial relationships tending to last longer. Conversely,
negative relationships usually lead individuals to seek out more rewarding and supportive
connections elsewhere. This is because “individuals perceive and derive meaning from their
world in ways profoundly influenced by the beliefs, norms, and practices of the people and
institutions around them” (Kassin et al., 2025, p.13). Shared values, familiarity, and proximity
typically strengthen interdependence and reduce the likelihood of leaving a relationship. When
relationships instead become harmful, people generally want to exit, as seen in the Milgram
experiment where “the 330-volt switch, the learner yelled in pain and demanded to be released
after each shock” (Burger, 2009, p.1). Although both the learner and the participant wanted to
end the painful situation, the authority figure’s pressure forced continuation, demonstrating
how cooperation can break down when external forces override natural human tendencies for
beneficial and compassionate interaction.
Labels
Even in simulated environments, people adopt labels and act according to their
internalized expectations of how someone with that label should behave. For example,
“ordinary college students randomly assigned the role of guards in a simulated prison study
slipped into the role of tough guards, displaying increasingly oppressive and hostile behavior
4
towards fellow college students randomly assigned the role of prisoners” (Bartels, 2009). This
shows how people’s understanding of the roles or labels they are given can strongly influence
their behavior.
As noted in the text, “culture may be thought of as a system of enduring meanings,
beliefs, values, assumptions, institutions, and practices shared by a large group of people”
(Kassin et al., 2025, p. 13). When individuals internalize what it means to be a prison guard,
even in a simulation, their behavior toward prisoners is shaped by cultural assumptions and
expectations about authority and discipline. Additionally, “one individual’s dependence on a
relationship is related to the other individual’s power in the interdependent situation” (Chadee,
2022, p. 255). Because prisoners depend on guards for their most basic needs, guards often
hold disproportionate power. This imbalance can lead to the abuse of authority and, ultimately,
a lower quality of life for those dependent on the institution.
Conclusion
Human beings are wired for connections and seek relationships that contribute to a
better quality of life. From a Christian perspective, people are created in God’s image and are
called to follow His way. Because of this, the relationships and labels individuals take on play a
crucial role in shaping behavior and overall well-being. When guided by Christian values, these
relationships and roles can foster a higher quality of life and strengthen communities. “In
everything set them an example by doing what is good. In your teaching show integrity,
seriousness and soundness of speech that cannot be condemned, so that those who oppose
you may be ashamed because they have nothing bad to say about us” (New International
Version,
2011/1978, Titus 2:7-8)
5
References
Bartels, J. (2019). Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment, again: Examining demand
characteristics in the guard orientation. The Journal of Social Psychology, 159(6), 780–
790. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2019.1596058
Burger, J. M. (2009). Replicating Milgram: Would people still obey today? American
Psychologist, 64(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0010932
Chadee, D. (2022). Theories in social psychology. John Wiley & Sons.
Kassin, S. M., Fein, S., & Markus, H. R. (2025). Social psychology. SAGE.
The Holy Bible, New International Version. (2011). Zondervan. (Original work published 1978)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
