1.4: Conformity to social roles and Philip Zimbardo (1973) Flashcards
Social roles
Social roles are the parts individuals play as members of a social group that meet the expectations of that situation
Each social situation has its own social norms, expected ways for individuals to behave, which will what from situation to situation?
Each social situation has its own social norms, expected ways for individuals to behave, which will vary from situation to situation
Each social situation has its own social norms, expected ways for individuals to behave, which will vary from situation to situation.
Example
For example, joining the back of a queue when arriving at the till in a shop
Each social situation has its own social norms, expected ways for individuals to behave, which will vary from situation to situation.
For example, joining the back of a queue when arriving at the till in a shop.
Individuals learn how to behave by doing what?
Individuals learn how to behave by:
- Looking at the social roles other people play in such situations
- Then conforming to them
Each social situation has its own social norms, expected ways for individuals to behave, which will vary from situation to situation.
For example, joining the back of a queue when arriving at the till in a shop.
Individuals learn how to behave by looking at the social roles other people play in such situations and then conforming to them.
These learned social roles become like what?
These learned social roles become like internal mental scripts
Each social situation has its own social norms, expected ways for individuals to behave, which will vary from situation to situation.
For example, joining the back of a queue when arriving at the till in a shop.
Individuals learn how to behave by looking at the social roles other people play in such situations and then conforming to them.
These learned social roles become like internal mental scripts, allowing individuals to do what in different settings?
These learned social roles become like internal mental scripts, allowing individuals to behave appropriately in different settings
Each social situation has its own social norms, expected ways for individuals to behave, which will vary from situation to situation.
For example, joining the back of a queue when arriving at the till in a shop.
Individuals learn how to behave by looking at the social roles other people play in such situations and then conforming to them.
These learned social roles become like internal mental scripts, allowing individuals to behave appropriately in different settings.
Conformity to social roles therefore involves what?
Conformity to social roles therefore involves identification
Each social situation has its own social norms, expected ways for individuals to behave, which will vary from situation to situation.
For example, joining the back of a queue when arriving at the till in a shop.
Individuals learn how to behave by looking at the social roles other people play in such situations and then conforming to them.
These learned social roles become like internal mental scripts, allowing individuals to behave appropriately in different settings.
Conformity to social roles therefore involves identification, which is stronger than compliance, involving both what of the behaviour and attitudes exhibited?
Conformity to social roles therefore involves identification, which is stronger than compliance, involving both:
1. Public
2. Private
acceptance of the behaviour and attitudes exhibited
Conformity to social roles therefore involves identification, which is stronger than compliance, involving both public and private acceptance of the behaviour and attitudes exhibited.
Conformity to social roles isn’t as strong as internalisation though, because individuals do what and only conform to what when?
Conformity to social roles isn’t as strong as internalisation though, because individuals:
- Adopt different roles for different social situations
- Only conform to particular roles whilst in those particular social situations
Conformity to social roles therefore involves identification, which is stronger than compliance, involving both public and private acceptance of the behaviour and attitudes exhibited.
Conformity to social roles isn’t as strong as internalisation though, because individuals adopt different roles for different social situations and only conform to particular roles whilst in those particular social situations.
With each social role adopted, behaviour does what?
With each social role adopted, behaviour changes
Conformity to social roles therefore involves identification, which is stronger than compliance, involving both public and private acceptance of the behaviour and attitudes exhibited.
Conformity to social roles isn’t as strong as internalisation though, because individuals adopt different roles for different social situations and only conform to particular roles whilst in those particular social situations.
With each social role adopted, behaviour changes to do what?
With each social role adopted, behaviour changes to fit the social norms of that situation
With each social role adopted, behaviour changes to fit the social norms of that situation, so as an individual moves to another social situation, what will happen?
With each social role adopted, behaviour changes to fit the social norms of that situation, so as an individual moves to another social situation, their behaviour will change to suit the new social norms
With each social role adopted, behaviour changes to fit the social norms of that situation, so as an individual moves to another social situation, their behaviour will change to suit the new social norms, played out through a different what?
With each social role adopted, behaviour changes to fit the social norms of that situation, so as an individual moves to another social situation, their behaviour will change to suit the new social norms, played out through a different social role
With each social role adopted, behaviour changes to fit the social norms of that situation, so as an individual moves to another social situation, their behaviour will change to suit the new social norms, played out through a different social role.
Conformity to social roles is therefore a useful way of doing what?
Conformity to social roles is therefore a useful way of:
1. Understanding
2. Predicting
social behaviour
With each social role adopted, behaviour changes to fit the social norms of that situation, so as an individual moves to another social situation, their behaviour will change to suit the new social norms, played out through a different social role.
Conformity to social roles is therefore a useful way of understanding and predicting social behaviour, which brings a reassuring sense of what to what?
Conformity to social roles is therefore a useful way of:
1. Understanding
2. Predicting
social behaviour
,which brings a reassuring sense of order to our social interactions
What perfectly illustrates the role of social roles in conformity?
Philip Zimbardo’s study of:
1. Prisoners
2. Guards
in a simulated prison (1973) perfectly illustrates the role of social roles in conformity
Philip Zimbardo’s study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison (1973):
Zimbardo’s study was an attempt to understand what?
Zimbardo’s study was an attempt to understand the brutal and dehumanising behaviour:
- Found in prisons
- Reported on a regular basis in the American media
Philip Zimbardo’s study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison (1973):
Zimbardo’s study was an attempt to understand the brutal and dehumanising behaviour found in prisons and reported on a regular basis in the American media.
What were to be explored?
2 widely differing explanations were to be explored
Philip Zimbardo’s study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison (1973):
Zimbardo’s study was an attempt to understand the brutal and dehumanising behaviour found in prisons and reported on a regular basis in the American media.
2 widely differing explanations were to be explored.
Firstly, there was the what hypothesis that the violence and degradation of prisons was due to what?
Firstly, there was the dispositional hypothesis that the:
1. Violence
2. Degradation of prisons
was due to the ‘nature’ of the people found within the prison system
Philip Zimbardo’s study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison (1973):
Zimbardo’s study was an attempt to understand the brutal and dehumanising behaviour found in prisons and reported on a regular basis in the American media.
2 widely differing explanations were to be explored.
Firstly, there was the dispositional hypothesis that the violence and degradation of prisons was due to the ‘nature’ of the people found within the prison system.
This meant that both guards and prisoners were what?
This meant that both:
1. Guards
2. Prisoners
were ‘bad seeds’ possessed of sadistic, aggressive characteristics
Philip Zimbardo’s study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison (1973):
Zimbardo’s study was an attempt to understand the brutal and dehumanising behaviour found in prisons and reported on a regular basis in the American media.
2 widely differing explanations were to be explored.
Firstly, there was the dispositional hypothesis that the violence and degradation of prisons was due to the ‘nature’ of the people found within the prison system.
This meant that both guards and prisoners were ‘bad seeds’ possessed of sadistic, aggressive characteristics, which naturally led to what?
This meant that both:
1. Guards
2. Prisoners
were ‘bad seeds’ possessed of sadistic, aggressive characteristics, which naturally led to endless brutality
Philip Zimbardo’s study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison (1973):
Zimbardo’s study was an attempt to understand the brutal and dehumanising behaviour found in prisons and reported on a regular basis in the American media.
2 widely differing explanations were to be explored.
Firstly, there was the dispositional hypothesis that the violence and degradation of prisons was due to the ‘nature’ of the people found within the prison system.
This meant that both guards and prisoners were ‘bad seeds’ possessed of sadistic, aggressive characteristics, which naturally led to endless brutality.
Secondly, there was the what hypothesis that saw violence and degradation as what?
Secondly, there was the situational hypothesis that saw:
1. Violence
2. Degradation
as a product of the ‘prison soil’
Philip Zimbardo’s study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison (1973):
Zimbardo’s study was an attempt to understand the brutal and dehumanising behaviour found in prisons and reported on a regular basis in the American media.
2 widely differing explanations were to be explored.
Firstly, there was the dispositional hypothesis that the violence and degradation of prisons was due to the ‘nature’ of the people found within the prison system.
This meant that both guards and prisoners were ‘bad seeds’ possessed of sadistic, aggressive characteristics, which naturally led to endless brutality.
Secondly, there was the situational hypothesis that saw violence and degradation as a product of the ‘prison soil,’ which is what?
Secondly, there was the situational hypothesis that saw:
1. Violence
2. Degradation
as a product of the ‘prison soil,’ which is the interactions between environmental factors that supported such behaviour
Philip Zimbardo’s study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison (1973):
Zimbardo’s study was an attempt to understand the brutal and dehumanising behaviour found in prisons and reported on a regular basis in the American media.
2 widely differing explanations were to be explored.
Firstly, there was the dispositional hypothesis that the violence and degradation of prisons was due to the ‘nature’ of the people found within the prison system.
This meant that both guards and prisoners were ‘bad seeds’ possessed of sadistic, aggressive characteristics, which naturally led to endless brutality.
Secondly, there was the situational hypothesis that saw violence and degradation as a product of the ‘prison soil,’ which is the interactions between environmental factors that supported such behaviour.
This situational hypothesis means what?
This situational hypothesis means that the:
1. Brutalising
2. Dehumanising
conditions of prison led to the brutal behaviour of all concerned