The concept of the self-fulfilling prophecy is centered on the idea that if we think or expect something to happen, then those expectations will happen. This concept, while sounding superstitious, has been found to actually occur. Numerous psychological research has shown that the concept of “self-fulfilling prophecy” actually occurs. An example of this is the psychological experiment that focused on effect of expectancy and biases conducted by Robert Rosenthal (1966). In this study some of the students had been told that the mice that they would be using had been especially bred for high intelligence and the other half of the students were told that they had rats bred for “dullness”. What resulted was that the students who had been told that
…show more content…
The difference in test scores between the controlled and experimental groups were not that present within the older grades. Rosenthal and Jacobson found four primary reason that could explain this. One reason was that younger children are seen as being more malleable or shapeable. Rosenthal and Jacobson argued that the younger children in the experimental group simply showed more intellectual growth when compared with older students in the experimental group because they are more easily changeable. Another reasoning Rosenthal and Jacobson mentioned was that since younger students have less established reputations, they are more likely to be less known to teachers. Since teacher do not have a cemented idea about the younger children learning capacities, the teacher’s expectancies are more powerful because they assume the child will be easily changeable. Rosenthal and Jacobson also argued that younger children might have been more easily influenced or affected by the subtle or crafty methods the teachers might use to encourage students to meet their expectancies. An example might be a younger student performance in class, who the teacher has high expectancies for intellectual growth, would be more affected by a pat on the head or a ruffling of the hair by a teacher versus an older student receiving the same treatment. Lastly, Rosenthal and Jacobson argued that it might simply just be because of different teaching methods. The teachers in younger classes might have methods that could connect their expectancies better with
The difference in test scores between the controlled and experimental groups were not that present within the older grades. Rosenthal and Jacobson found four primary reason that could explain this. One reason was that younger children are seen as being more malleable or shapeable. Rosenthal and Jacobson argued that the younger children in the experimental group simply showed more intellectual growth when compared with older students in the experimental group because they are more easily changeable. Another reasoning Rosenthal and Jacobson mentioned was that since younger students have less established reputations, they are more likely to be less known to teachers. Since teacher do not have a cemented idea about the younger children learning capacities, the teacher’s expectancies are more powerful because they assume the child will be easily changeable. Rosenthal and Jacobson also argued that younger children might have been more easily influenced or affected by the subtle or crafty methods the teachers might use to encourage students to meet their expectancies. An example might be a younger student performance in class, who the teacher has high expectancies for intellectual growth, would be more affected by a pat on the head or a ruffling of the hair by a teacher versus an older student receiving the same treatment. Lastly, Rosenthal and Jacobson argued that it might simply just be because of different teaching methods. The teachers in younger classes might have methods that could connect their expectancies better with