conformity to social roles Flashcards
What is a social role?
The parts individuals play as members of a social group. With each social role you adopt, behaviour changes to fit the expectations you and others have of that role in that situation. Each social role carries expected behaviours called norms.
Examples of social roles?
Student
Teacher
Customer
Son/daughter
What are social roles important for?
Individuals learn how to behave by looking at the social roles other people play in social situations and then conforming to them.
These learned social roles become like internal mental scripts (schema), allowing individuals to behave appropriately in different settings.
What does conformity to social roles involve?
Conformity to social roles involves identification (stronger than compliance), involving both public and private acceptance of the behaviour and attitudes exhibited.
But, conformity to social roles isn’t as strong as internalisation, as individuals adopt different social roles for different situations.
What does Zimbardo’s (1973) Prison Simulation Study illustrates?
Zimbardo’s (1973) Prison Simulation Study illustrates the role of social roles in conformity.
Two different explanations for this behaviour were explored in Zimbardo’s study?
The Dispositional Hypothesis: Proposed that the violence and degradation of prisons was due to the ‘nature’ of the people found within the prison system i.e. that both guards and prisoners had sadistic and aggressive characteristics.
The Situational Hypothesis: Saw violence and degradation as a product of the prison environment.
Two aims of Zimbardo’s study?
To investigate the extent to which people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner in a role-playing simulation of prison life.
To test the dispositional (i.e. prison violence due to sadistic personalities of guards) vs. situational (prison violence as due to the brutal conditions of the prison environment) hypotheses.
Zimbardo’s procedure (participants) :
75 male university students responded to a newspaper advertisement asking for volunteers for a study of prison life paying $15 a day.
21 students rated as the most physically and mentally stable, mature and free from anti-social and criminal tendencies were used.
Individuals were randomly chosen to play the role of guard or prisoner (10 guards; 11 prisoners).
Zimbardo played the role of prison superintendent.
Zimbardo’s procedure:
The basement of the Psychology department at Stanford University was converted into a mock prison.
Dehumanisation = degrading people by removing their individual identity.
Participants were dehumanised in the following ways:
Prisoners were arrested by (real) local police and then fingerprinted, stripped and deloused.
Prisoners wore numbered smocks, nylon stocking caps and a chain around one ankle.
Guards wore khaki uniforms, reflective sunglasses and were issued with handcuff, keys and a truncheon.
The study was planned to run for 2 weeks.
To make the simulation as similar to a prison as possible, prisoners were placed 3 to a cell. A regular routine of shifts, meal times etc. was established, as well as visiting times, a parole and disciplinary board, and a prison chaplain.
Zimbardos findings:
Guards and prisoners settled quickly into their social roles.
Guards became increasingly sadistic and abusive
The prisoners became submissive and unquestioning of the guards’ behaviour,
Deindividuation was observed -
the prisoners referred to each other and themselves by their prison numbers instead of their names.
Findings 2, 3, 4 of Zimbardos study.
After 36 hours, one prisoner was released because of fits of crying and rage.
3 more prisoners developed similar symptoms and were released on successive days.
A fifth prisoner developed a severe rash when his parole was denied.
The study was stopped after 6 days when Zimbardo realised the extent of the harm that was occurring and the increasingly aggressive nature of the guards’ behaviour.
In later interviews, both guards and prisoners said they were surprised at the uncharacteristic behaviours they had shown
conclusions of Zimbardo:
Zimbardo felt that the situational hypothesis provided a better explanation than the dispositional hypothesis as none of the ppts had ever shown such character traits or behaviour before the study.
Therefore, it was the environment of the mock prison and the social roles that the ppts had to play that led to their uncharacteristic behaviour.
This research suggests that individuals conform readily to the social roles demanded of a situation, even when such roles override an individual’s moral beliefs about their personal behaviour.
It was suggested that the participants had gained knowledge about these social roles from media sources (e.g. prison films), and learned models of social power (parent-child; teacher-student).
Zimbardo evaluation: P: Zimbardo played a ‘dual-role’ (prison superintendent and principal investigator), which led to a conflict of roles and a major ethical issue.
E:…Arguably, he lost sight of the psychological and physical harm being caused to participants and neglected his responsibilities as principal investigator to protect the volunteers from harm. It was Zimbardo’s leadership role and the guard orientation which laid the ground work for abuse.
C: Therefore, Zimbardo’s own behaviour affected the way in which events unfolded and the validity of the findings could be questioned.
Zimbardo - evaluation:
P: Serious ethical issues were raised (a criticism of the procedure)….
E: Psychological harm: Some prisoners displayed uncontrolled fits of screaming, crying and rage, with one prisoner developing a severe rash as the guards became increasingly aggressive. In some cases this harm may have been long-term.
Lack of fully informed consent: The level of degradation to be experienced over the course of the experiment was not outlined in sufficient detail to participants. Also, the prisoners did not consent to being ‘arrested’ at home.
Right to withdraw: Although participants were initially informed of their right to withdraw their participation in the study, it was subsequently revoked.
C: The harmful treatment of participants led to the formal recognition of ethical guidelines by the American Psychological Association.