Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology > 1 - Social Psychology > Flashcards

1 - Social Psychology Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Psychology 101 flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards AP® Psychology flashcards
1
Q

What is GRAVE?

A 
Generalisability
Reliability
Application
Validity
Ethics
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What are the 5 ethical guidelines?

A 
Deception
Informed consent
Participant protection - physically and mentally
Candidate confidentiality
Right to withdraw
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is the difference between internal and external validity?

A

Internal - Internal factors, controlled environment
External - relation to real world
Lab - high internal, low external

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Name the 3 types of conformity

A

Compliance
Internalisation
Identification

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is compliance?

A

Publicly conforming to the behaviour of views of others but privately maintaining one’s own views. Likely results from NSI
(Drinking/Smoking)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is internalisation?

A

A conversion or true change of public and private views to match those of the group. Likely the result of ISI. Not dependant on the presence of the group.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is identification?

A

Adopting the views or behaviour of a group publicly and privately because one values membership of the group; depends on presence of the group.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Define conformity

A

“A change in behaviour or belief as a result of real or imagined group pressure” - David Myers, 1999
“A tendency for people to adopt the behaviour, attitudes and values of a reference group” - Zimbardo, 1995

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Give 2 reasons with explanations as to why people conform

A

Normative Social Influence (NSI):
The desire to be liked. We conform because we believe others will accept us and we gain social approval.
An emotional process
Informational Social Influence (ISI):
The desire to be right. We conform with those who we believe to be correct or have information, particularly in a new or ambiguous situation.
A cognitive approach

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Give 2 reasons with explanations as to why people do not conform

A

Independence:
Unresponsive to the norms of the group.
They aim to please themselves and don’t care/disregard about the group.
Anti-conformity:
A type of conformity - consistently opposing the norms of the group.
Still a type because their actions are determined by the norms of a group.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Give a piece of research support and an individual difference for NSI

A

RS - People deliberately gave wrong answers so they weren’t the odd one out. They feel self-conscious and fear disapproval.
Rates of conformity dropped when the answers were written down and private.
ID - Those who don’t care about being liked aren’t as affected as those who need to be liked - they are called nAffiliators.
High affiliation, high conformity - people respond differently

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Give a piece of research support and an individual difference for ISI

A

RS: People conform when questions are harder - they are less likely to not know the answer; they assume others know better and must be right
ID: Less conformity in more intelligent people

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What was the aim of Asch’s study?

A

To see if people would conform to a majority when given an unambiguous (simple/straightforward) situation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Describe Asch’s procedure

A

123 male American undergraduates
6-8 confederates, 1 participant.
Each participant shown 18 sets of lines, 12 of which confederates all gave the same wrong answer - the critical trials

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What were Asch’s findings?

A

On critical trials, 36.8% confirmed
25% participants didn’t conform once
75% confirmed at least once

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Evaluate Asch

A

+ Supports NSI and ISI - reliability.
+ Lab-controlled conditions - easier to replicate, but low external validity - high internal validity.
- Did the participants conform or did they genuinely get the question wrong? - validity.
- Ethical issues - deception
- Generalisability - only tested males; women conform more
- Demand characteristics - did some of them understand the real test and logically change their answer, making the results invalid
- Child of its time - 1956 historical bias, temporal validity
- External validity - can’t be applied to more complex tasks

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Explain 3 variations of Asch’s study and back them up with NSI and/or ISI

A

Unanimity - less conformity when one confederate didn’t conform.
NSI - someone to agree with; not an outsider
ISI - someone agrees with you; more likely to be right
Task difficulty - the harder the task, the higher the conformity
ISI - they agree with others as they believe they are right
Size of majority - more confeds, more conformity. Less people, less pressure
NSI - don’t want to be an outsider

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What are the 2 explanations of behaviour?

A

Dispositional - people act according to their individual personalities regardless of the situation
Situational - people act in a way they think is required by their social role

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What was Zimbardo’s aim?

A

To see if dispositional or situational was the real explanation of behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Describe the participants and procedure in the Stanford Prison Experiment

A

Male students, volunteers. $15 per day in the experiment.
24 of the most mentally stable were chosen.
Prisoners unexpectedly arrested at home, put through a delousing procedure, searched, given prison uniform.
They had certain right - toilet trips etc.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What were the results and the conclusion of the Stanford Prison Experiment?

A

Was supposed to last 2 weeks but lasted 6 days.
5 prisoners had to be released early with extreme depression.
The guards and prisoners confirmed to their social roles - situational explanation of behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Evaluate the Stanford Prison Experiment

A

+ Good application - similar to IRL - Abu Grhaib.
+ Prisoners were psychologically and physically unstable afterwards - shows the impacts on normal everyday people.
- Wasn’t a completely realistic environment. The BBC re-enacted the experiment and had completely different results.
- Haslam (2012) suggests Zimbardo guided the guards on how to act - it wasn’t their natural behaviours.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Define Obediance

A

Compliance with commands given by an authoritative figure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Outline Milgram’s experiment

A

40 male volunteers partnered with a confederate. Drew lots on who was student and teacher. Confederate was always student.
Had to administer electric shocks. Experimenter gave 4 prompts and then stopped.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What percent of participants went to the full 450V on Milgram’s experiment?

A

60-65%

26
Q

Evaluate Milgram

A

+ Good external validity - Milgram argues the lab reflected wider authority relationships IRL.
+ Supported by future replication - French TV 2010, results and behaviour reflect Milgram.
- Ethics - participant was deceived, but this was needed to get valid results and avoid demand characteristics. They believed they were harming the student
- Extreme emotional stress (biting nails, sweating etc.)
One participant even had a seizure due to stress

27
Q

What are the 3 variations for obedience?

A

Proximity
Location
Uniform

28
Q

Define Agentic State

A

Blaming the person giving the order for any negative consequences of one’s actions

29
Q

Define Autonomous State

A

The opposite of the agentic state - we feel a sense of responsibility for our own actions

30
Q

What is the transformation from the autonomous to the agentic state called?

A

Agentic Shift

31
Q

Why does a person remain in the agentic state?

A

Binding factors - aspects of the situation which allow the person to ignore or minimise the damages effect of their behaviour and thus reducing the “moral strain”

32
Q

Define Legitimacy of Authority

A

An explanation of obedience which suggests we are more likely to obey those who we believe to have authority over us.
This relates to social hierarchy.

33
Q

Evaluate legitimacy of authority

A

+ Cultural difference - people less obedient in Australia - 16% went to 450V, Germany was more obediant - 86%. Cultural difference increases validity.
+ Application - explains how obedience leads to real life war crimes.
Legitimate authority becomes destructive (Hitler etc.)
- Milgram showed this and went against participants’ conscious. Explains how obedience leads to war.
- People blindly follow orders - Battalion 101.

34
Q

Who created the F-Scale?

A

Adorno

35
Q

Define Authoritarian Personality

A

A type of personality that Adorno argues was susceptible to obeying people in authority.
They are submissive to higher status and dismissive to inferior

36
Q

Give 6 characteristics of an Authoritarian identified by Adorno

A

Extreme respect for authority.
Show contempt for people they perceive as having an inferior social status.
They have highly conventional attitudes towards sex, race and gender.
Society is “going to the dogs” - they believe they we need strong, powerful leaders to reinforce traditional values.
Believe in traditional values such as love of country, religion and family.
Inflexible outlook on life - no “grey areas” - everything is either right or wrong

37
Q

What is a Dispositional Explanation?

A

How someone’s personality affects obediance

38
Q

What was Adorno’s experiment?

A

1950.
He believed that a high level of obedience was basically a psychological disorder and tried to locate the causes of it in the person’s personality.
Studied more than 2,000 middle-class, white Americans and their unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups.
He creates the F-Scale. If you score highly you’re a strong Authoritarian.

39
Q

Give 5 aspects of parenting led by authoritarian personality

A 
Strict discipline
Impossible high standards
Conditional love - depends on child’s behaviour
An expectation of absolute loyalty
Severe criticisms of perceived failings
40
Q

Give 2 reasons people can resist pressures of social influence

A

Locus of control

Social support

41
Q

Evaluate authoritarian personality

A

+ Research supports the authoritarianism personality as an explanation
for obedience. Elms conducted interviews with a small sample of participants who had been obedient in Milgram’s study. They found higher levels of authoritarianism compared to those who did not obey. They saw Milgram as more admirable than the learner, which did not happen with those who did not obey. This suggests that those who obeyed in Milgram’s study were higher than authoritarianism traits. Reliability.
- This is a limited explanation of obedience as it cannot explain
obedience in the majority of a country’s population. In pre-war German, millions of people demonstrated racist and anti-semitic views despite the fact that there would have been multiple different personalities, it is extremely unlikely they would all possess the same personality. This is a limitation and it is better explained by social identity and an alternative explanation is more realistic. The majority of German people would identify with the anti-semitic Nazi state. Internal validity.
- There are issues regarding the methodology of the F scale as a measure of authoritarianism. Greenstein describes the F scale as comedy of methodological errors. For example, the scale has been criticised as they are all written in the same direction. Meaning you can get a higher score from just ticking the same line of boxes. This means that people who agree with the items on the scale are not necessarily authoritarianism. It is merely measuring people tendency to,agree with things. Internal validity.
- You cannot establish cause and effect with obedience and
authoritarianism based on Adorno’s research. The F scale questionnaire found a significant correlation between variables. For example, authoritarianism is strongly correlated with prejudice against minority groups. However, Adorno could not claim that authoritarianism is the cause of obedience as you cannot establish cause and effect with correlations. Validity.

42
Q

Who proposed the locus of control

A

Rotter

43
Q

What is the difference between internal and external locus of control?

A

Internal - the person believes their behaviour is caused primarily by their own personal decisions and efforts
External - the person believes their behaviour is caused primarily by fate, luck or other external circumstances

44
Q

Explain Holland’s research

A

He redid Milgram’s study
Internal people were less obedient - greater resistance to authority
37% or internals L.O.C didn’t complete the experiment
23% of external L.O.C didn’t complete it
This increases the validity of L.O.C explanation - explains resistance

45
Q

Explain Twenge et al’s research

A

They analysed over 40 years of data
It showed that people have become more external as well as resistant to obedience.
Challenges link between internal I.O.C and resistant behaviour.
This could be down to changing society where things are out of personal control.

46
Q

Evaluate Locus of Control

A

+ Higher internal L.O.C are less likely to conform or obey.
People are more self-confident, intelligent, achievement-orientated and have less need for social approval.
These traits lead to greater resistance to social influence.
- The role of L.O.C in resisting Social Influence is exaggerated.
Rotter (1982) says it only comes out in novel (out of the ordinary) situations and has little influence on usual/normal behaviour.
This point is often overlooked.

47
Q

How can social support help people to resist conformity?

A

Pressure to conform can be reduced if there are others not conforming. It enables the participant to be free to follow their own conscience.

48
Q

How can social support help people to resist obedience?

A

Pressure to obey can be reduced if there is another person seen to disobey. Rates dropped 55% when a participant was joined by a disobedient confederate.
They see them as a model - it frees the participant to act from his own conscience.

49
Q

Evaluate social support as a way of resisting social influence

A

+ research support - resistance to conformity.
Allen and Levine (1971) - conformity decreased when there is one dissenter in an Ash-type study. Even happened when descent towards thick glasses and said he had difficulty with vision. Reliability.
+ research support - resistance to obedience.
Gamson et al (1982) - dissenting peers showed more resistance than Milgrom study. This is probably because they were in groups. 29 out of 33 groups (88%) rebelled. Reliability.

50
Q

Define Minority Influence

A

A form of social influence in which a minority group of people influence others to adopt their beliefs, attitudes or behaviours. This leads to internalisation (ISI).

51
Q

What are the 3 processes involved in Minority Influence?

A

Commitment
Flexibility
Consistency

52
Q

Explain Moscovici’s study

A

Green-blue study
6 people, 2 were confederates giving the wrong answer.
On 8.4% of trials, participants gave the same wrong answer.
32% of participants gave the same wrong answer at least once

53
Q

Explain Synchronic and Diachronic Consistency

A

Synchronic Consistency - everyone in a minority saying the same thing
Diachronic Consistency - saying the same thing over time

54
Q

Explain how commitment affects minority influence and give an example

A

Doing daring things - risk taking for their cause - increases influence
As shown by Fathers 4 Justice

55
Q

Explain how flexibility affects minority influence and give an example

A

Nemeth (1986)
The more flexible you are to the majority, the more they will be influenced.
He created an experiment based on a mock injury and 4 people, 3 participants and needed to agree on a compensation amount for the victim.
The 4th one was the confederate and he had to persuade them on a low amount. The more he was flexible the more the others agreed (were influenced)

56
Q

What is the Augmentation Principle?

A

The more dangerous or rules broken by the minority, the more attention and publicity they receive.

57
Q

What is the Snowball Effect?

A

An increase in people shifting from majority to minority

58
Q

Define Social Cryptomnesia

A

When a population forgets how society changed to form what it is today, but they remember it used to be different

59
Q

Evaluate minority influence

A

Research support for consistency:
+ Moscovici - consistent minority report had a greater effect than inconsistent
+ Wood - meta-analysis showed Consistency is a major factor in M.I.
+ Research support for depth of thought:
Change to minority involves deeper idea processing than change to majority. Min to maj is more likely than maj to min.
Martin et al proved this.
Research support for internalisation:
Moscovici - Answers written down (private) - more people agreed with minority than when answers were public.
- Artificial tasks:
Moscovici’s study lacked external validity - they are limited in what they can tell about minority influence in real life situations.
Jury making/political campaigning etc. are more realistic.
- Limited real-world application:
Usually in society, minority groups are looked down upon as inferior.
Majority groups have status and power and see minority as hostile.

60
Q

Give 2 negative evaluation points for minority influence

A

Artificial tasks:
Moscovici’s study lacked external validity - they are limited in what they can tell about minority influence in real life situations.
Jury making/political campaigning etc. are more realistic.
Limited real-world application:
Usually in society, minority groups are looked down upon as inferior.
Majority groups have status and power and see minority as hostile.

61
Q

Describe the 6 steps in the process of social change

A

Drawing attention - demonstrating the problem, usually through stunts/marches; shows commitment
Consistency - emphasise the problem
Deeper processing - more people question/think about the problem
Augmentation principle - people pay attention to those who take risks
Snowball effect - gradual change; more join minority
Social cryptomnesia - everyone forgets how society changed

62
Q

How effective is minority influence in bringing about social change?

A

Nemeth argued social change happens slowly. He argued minority influence is likely to be indirect and delayed.
The majority is influenced on matters related to the issue, not the issue itself. (Eg: smoking damaging babies’ lungs compared to smoking itself.
It could be considered a limitation - it shows the effect are fragile and its role in social influence is very limited

Psychology (11 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions