5: Individual and Group Influence - Part 2 Flashcards
Intrapersonal factors affecting conformity
Status- Strodtbeck ‘mock juries’ high status are more influential; correltion between pre-opinion and final decision of jury= 0.5 high status, 0.02 low status.
Gender- US juries didn’t include women as believed incorrectly that women couldn’t hold fast to their private views or influence others.’
Eagley- identified flaws.
Personality- psychometric tests; valuing individuality and control helps resist pressure to conform.
Group factors affecting conformity
Size of minority- lone individual stands little chance of resisting pressure to conform.
Size of majority- Asch- larger the majority, greater the rate of conformity; each person adds to majorities impact (social impact theory).
Cohesiveness- as cohesion increases, conformity increases.
Group size- as size increases, conformity increases.
Cross cultural factors affecting conformity
Smith & Bond- meta analysis to explore steady decline in conformity since 1950s.
Collectivist vs individualistic.
Students vs non students.
Social facilitation
Faster when others co-acting.
Schmitt et al- evidence against importance of evaluation apprehension.
Zajonc- found performance on simple task improved in the presence of others; declined on difficult tasks.
Drive theory- presence of others increases arousal and drive increasing probability that individuals will produce dominant responses.
Social loafing
Reduction in individuals effort when working in a group.
LAtane, Williams & Harkins- reduction of 29% of noise produced per person in groups.
Karau & William- loafing in 80% of 78 group studies.
Limited by identifying individuals inputs; control diffusion of responsibility.
Recently- loafing reduced when students communicate in online seminars.
De-individuation theory
Le-Bon- crowd behaviour dependent on ‘submergence.’
Festinger, Pepitone & Newcombe- loss of identifiability=weakened social norms.
Zimbardo- anonymity produced extreme violence.
Applications of theory- usually associated with mob violence; also personal (religious ceremonies etc).
Three component theory
1) Situational input
- Originally=visual anonymity.
- Submergence in dark room (Gergen et al).
- Loss of individual identity using hoods; overalls; name tags etc.
2) Internal state
- Less perceived individual responsibility (Diener).
- Less self conscious/self awareness.
3) Behavioural consequences
- Anti social behaviour demonstrate loss of restraints: uttering obscene words; electric shocks; negative comments about parents etc.
