Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

Social > Lecture 9 - Conformity and Obedience > Flashcards

Lecture 9 - Conformity and Obedience Flashcards

1
Q

Define conformity

A

Changing ones behaviour or beliefs in response to explicit or implicit pressure from others

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

Define compliance

A

Changing behaviour following explicit request of another

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

Define obedience

A

Submitting to demands someone who is higher in the social hierarchy than oneself

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

When does compliance persist

A

Public agreement and outward change in behaviour

Persists only under surveillance

Power as basis of compliance

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

Define conversion

A

Private agreement
Acceptance and internalisation

True internal change persists in absence of surveillance

Not based on power but subjective validity of social norms

Confidence and certainty norms are correct and appropriate

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

What is Informational and Normative Social Influence a part of

A

Conformity

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

Define Informational Social Influence

A

Adoption objective external sources information and conversion

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

What can’t Informational social influence explain

A

Not explain internal conflict, or cold rational judgement

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

Define Normative Social Influence

A

Confirming to the expectation of others

Behavioural compliance in group contexts

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

What are the classic studies on conformity

A

Sherif: moving light

Asch: line comparison

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

Outline Sherif 1935 Auto-kinetic Experiment method

A

Perceptual bias - dark room stationary point light looks like it’s moving
Estimate how much moving
Initially alone then in groups

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

Outline Sherif 1935 Auto-kinetic Experiment results

A

Alone = huge variability
Converge into groups start conforming to group norm
Look to others for info = Informational Social Influence

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

What type of social influence does Sherif’s 1935 autokinetic study show

A

Informational Social Influence

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

Criticism of Sherif 1935 autokinetic experiment

A

Task ambiguous

Hard

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

Outline Asch 1952 line study aim

A

Group influence on unambiguous judgements

Pull internal and external conflict

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

Outline Asch 1952 line study method

A

Standard line and 3 comparison lines
Group 4 confederates and 1 true ppt last
Initially confederates right answer
Trial 3 introduced incorrect answers

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

Outline Asch 1952 line study results

A

Average conformity 33%

5% conformed all trials

50% conformed least once

25% remained independent

Compared 0.7% errors in control

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

Outline Asch 1956 line study self reported reasons for conformity

A

Independents were certain what they saw

Most compelling intolerableness appearing different from group - normative Social Influence

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

What social influence is Asch 1952 line study demonstrating

A

Normative Social Influence

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

Outline Aschs study critical review by Hodges and Geyer 2006

A

Show people don’t simply just conform
Ppts privately answer line task on piece paper
Conformity dropped 12.5%
Confirming Normative Social Influence

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

Results of Aschs study critical review Hodge and Geyer 2006 results can be interpreted as:

A

Low levels public conformity
Almost no private persuade

Group pressure - enough for public show consensus but not internally persuaded

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

Outline conformity and uncertainty perceived pressure by Deutsch and Gerard 1955 method

A

Conformity eradicated in Asch when task not under surveillance

3 confederates 1 ppt
Face to face condition - call out answers front each other
Face to face - told to be accurate as possible
Private booth - anonymous

Low uncertainty - stimulus present
High uncertainty - stimulus absent

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

Outline conformity and uncertainty perceived pressure by Deutsch and Gerard 1955 result

A

Decreasing pressure and uncertainty reduced conformity
Still 23% conformed private and anonymous condition with stimulus present = low uncertainty

Groups persuasive
Change public behaviour not necessarily internal

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

Outline the Referent Informational Influence by Turner 1991

A

Social identity shapes individual behaviour be consistent salient group
Low ambiguity with no social sanctions people comply group responses

More identify group more influenced

Influenced public responses also private responses shaped group membership

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

Outline Bond and Smith 1996 meta analysis of 133 Asch style experiments

A

Focus visual judgements rather option

Measure compliance rather internalisation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

When do Bond and Smith 1996 argue conformity increases

A

Level ambiguity
Size groups (more people more info draw from)
Female
Majority not out group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Outline conformity rates in collectivist countries

A

Higher
Promote social harmony and cohesiveness
NSI - regard for others
ISI - learn from others

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

What is the trend of conformity over time

A

Declined over time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Outline the relationship between group unanimity and conformity

A

Greater conformity when group unanimous
Consistent in decision
All takes 1 deviant confederate break sense conformity
Not matter whether this is the right answer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Outline the relationship between anonymity and conformity

A

Conformity decreases when decisions can be made anonymously

Deutsch and Gerard: not eradicate conformity entirely

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Outline the relationship between expertise and status with conformity

A

High status or expert have more social influence

Experts exerts more ISI

High status exerts more NSI

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

What are the 3 explanations for behaviour of conformity

A

Conform less when understand reasons others behaviours
- person says can’t see very well when proving answer for Asch

Obvious explanation for why we may have deviant opinion

Know acting out bias or self interest

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Outline Cialdini and Goldstein 2004 reviewer research 3 factors influencing compliance

A
  1. Accuracy
    Interesting and responding correctly to situational demands - norms
  2. Affiliation
    Act seek others approval motivation be liked respected
  3. Positive self-concept
    Want be consistent prior attitudes, beliefs behaviours
34
Q

How does the minority influence the Majority according to Moscovici

A

Assumption conflict within groups and social influence affects how respond

Conformity - majority to minority
Normalisation - mutual compromise leading convergence

Innovation - minority creates and accentuates conflict persuade majority adopt viewpoint

35
Q

Outline Moscovici 1976 genetic model of social influence

A 
Create social change 
Minorities actively create draw attention and accentuate group conflict 
Resolve conflict quickly 
Can’t resolve look at reasons why 
Cognitive dissonance
36
Q

When according to Moscovici 1976 genetic model of social influence is it not easy to dismiss the minority

A

Minority’s message is consistent across time and context

Demonstrate investment in cause - sacrifice

Acts out of principle - not self interest

37
Q

Outline Moscovici Lage and Naffrechoux 1969 study on minority influence

A

Required ppts distinguish slide green or blue vary in intensity

4 real ppts and 2 confederates
Told confront confederates and ask people why believe what believe
Then group decide what colour slide is

Experimental group - sometimes confederates consistent others inconsistent

38
Q

Outline Moscovici Lage and Naffrechoux 1969 study on minority influence results

A

Conformed minority 8% consistent

Much larger than inconsistent group

39
Q

Outline the Moscovici 1980 conversion theory

A

Cognitive foundation underpin earlier theory

Majority influence enacted through public compliance - reasons both normative and informational dependence

Minority influence enacted through indirect often private change due resolution cognitive dissonance (processes ISI)
Slowly individual level then snowball effect

40
Q

What is the conversion effect identified by Moscovici 1980 Conversion Theory

A

Sudden dramatic change attitude of majority due to minority influence

41
Q

Outline the critical review of the minority bs majority

A

Ethics - can it be any persuade message?
Controversial and counter attitudinal positions
Way manipulated

Does it override ppts own knowledge and experience

Attitudes and judgements may be influenced

Distinction between signal conformity and action conformity

42
Q

Outline Milgrams 1963 study on obedience

A

Ways authority influence subordinates
Learner confederate “randomly assigned”
Electric shocks to confederate in mock learning task

43
Q

What occurred at each of the voltages in Milgrams study

A

45V - sample ppts

75V - ugh

150V - get me out of here, hearts bothering me

180V - can’t stand pain

220V - let me out

270V - agonised

300V - refuse answer and agonised screams

345V - silence

44
Q

What happened when ppts hesitated in Milgrams study

A

Experimenter told them to go on

45
Q

What was the initial prediction for Milgrams study

A

Less than 1% go all the way to the end

46
Q

What were the results of Milgrams study

A

80% went past 150V

62% to 450V 2/3

47
Q

What was the critical voltage point in Milgrams study

A

150V

Heart hurting - heart condition

48
Q

Outline findings from replications of Milgrams study in Spain and Holland

A

90% compliance

49
Q

Outline findings from replications of Milgrams study in Italy Germany Austria

A

80%

50
Q

Outline findings from replications of Milgrams study in Australia

A

Men = 40%

Women = 16%

51
Q

What is the explanation for lower obedience levels in Milgrams study in Australia

A

Believe script not as convincing as Milgrams

52
Q

Outline effect of ppts having free choice in Milgrams study and difference between obedience vs aggression

A

Ppts chose own shock level - get rid authority figure

If aggression based - gravitate max 450V

Only 3 ppts went beyond 135V
1 went to 450V

Credibility obedience not aggression

53
Q

What factors influences obedience according to Milgram

A

Closeness - immediacy of authority

Legitimacy authority

Proximity shock equipment - one more credible ?

54
Q

Outline immediacy as an influencing factor of obedience Milgram

A

How close person is to learner

Unseen and unheard - 100% compliance

Pounding on wall - Heart condition 62.5%

Visible during experiment - 40%

Holding hand to electrode - 30%

55
Q

Outline legitimacy of authority as an influencing factor of obedience Milgram

A

Type authority
Yale University and lab coated experimenter

Reduced experiment in industrial setting

56
Q

Why is commitment to an action difficult to overturn in obedience Milgram

A

Disobey means reject competence authority
Obedience - willing ppt legitimate experiment

Subsequent disobedience challenges definition if stop have consider what done so far questionable and less worthy
Effort justification. Already committed

Continue obey - follow legitimate commands avoid painful realisation previous actions misguided

57
Q

Outline obedience and agentic state

A

Internal change shift autonomy to agentic state

No longer view acting out of own purposes
Rather agent executing others orders

Directions higher order not assessed against internal moral standards

No longer responsible own actions - instrument carrying out others wishes

Acting within hierarchical structure

Evolutionary benefits: coordinate accomplishments, threat defence, conflict reduction

58
Q

Outline critical review of Milgrams study Blass 1999: levels conformity symptoms time and culture

A

Over time conformity decreasing

Increased awareness Milgram: people less susceptible

Levels obedience varies massively 28-91% - other factors?

Obedience because Experiment is in authority (in charge)or an authority (expert)
Different interpretations

59
Q

Outline Russell and Gregory 2011 review Milgram

A

Development strain resolving mechanisms

Features designed in experiment reduce strain/tension max levels obedience

Ppts rationale inflicting pain transformers evil action (shock) into something good (advanced learning)

60
Q

What does Haslam and Reicher 2011 Social Identity account find problematic Milgram

A

Focus behaviour rather processes govern obedience problematic
Contextual variations affective levels obedience

Agentic state - no evidence

61
Q

What does Haslam and Reicher 2011 Social Identity account paradigm address

A

Ppts being torn between competing demands

Not in passive state

62
Q

Define the Haslam and Reicher 2011 Social Identity account on obedience

A

Obedience predicted upon perceptions shared identity with experimenter

Salient: e.g. both engaged in science
Physically: same room

Instructions adhered consistent identity group norm

Requests and scientific rationale prompts basis shared social identity

Command/order less adhered to lack shared social identity

Requests framed as orders people not obey

63
Q

Outline Meta Milgram 2014 by Haslam Loughnan and Perry

A

Re analysed Milgrams data 21 conditions

Coded for presence or absence key factors led continue 450V

64
Q

What significant factors did Meta Milgram 2014 by Haslam Loughnan and Perry influenced likelihood continuing 450V

A

Teacher - Group pressure disobey

Teacher -> Learner - proximity, indirectness, intimacy

Experimenter - illegitimacy, non directiveness, inconsistency

Experimenter -> Teacher - distance

65
Q

What conclusions did Meta Milgram 2014 by Haslam Loughnan and Perry influenced likelihood continuing 450V

A

Obedience rates across 21 conditions 43.6%

Greater proximity more intimate conformity lower

Indirectness higher conformity

66
Q

Burgers 2009 replication of Milgram sample selection

A

70 ppts
20-81 years
Screening process

67
Q

Outline Burgers 2009 replication Milgrams Experiment screening process

A

People taken 2+ psychology courses excluded
People history mental health excluded
Pass - in person interview clinical psychologist

68
Q

What method did Burger 2009 replication of Milgram use

A

Terminated 150V - partial replication
150V critical point

Random assignment to base condition or modelled refusal condition

69
Q

Why is 150V the critical point

A

Learner says get me out, heart condition, look experimenter for guidance
79% Milgrams ppts delivered 150V continued to the end

70
Q

Define the Base Condition of Burgers 2009 replication of Milgram

A

Resembles Milgrams experiment 5

Confederate learner and reveals heart condition

Script same Milgram - after 150V learner yells get me out of here

71
Q

Define the Modelled Refusal Condition of Burgers 2009 replication of Milgram

A

2 confederate - 1 learner role and 1 first teacher role

Ppt assigned 2nd teacher role
Experimenter instructs first teacher go first
90V first teacher refuses continue and leaves

Ppt take over

72
Q

Results of Burgers 2009 replication of Milgram

A

70% base went continue past 150V
63.3% modelled refusal condition
Not dissimilar Milgrams 82.5%

73
Q

Results regards to gender of Burgers 2009 replication of Milgram

A

No significant differences men and women

  1. 7% men
  2. 7% women in base condition
74
Q

Results regarding personality in Burgers 2009 replication of Milgram

A

Mixed and inconsistent results personality

No difference empathetic concern between stoppers and continuers either condition

Base condition - stoppers higher desire control

Not replicated modelled refusal condition

75
Q

Outline Dolinski et al 2017 replication of Milgram initial reasoning

A

First replication Central Europe - Poland

Post WW2 historical conditions - strict obedience authority, mandatory

76
Q

Outline Dolinski et al 2017 replication of Milgram method

A 
Used Burgers 2009 replication 
80 ppts 1/2 men 
18-69yrs 
Same pre screening 
Without modelled refusal condition
77
Q

Outline Dolinski et al 2017 replication of Milgram results

A

Obedience 90% willing go past 150V

No significant effect gender of learner

78
Q

Outline Dolinski et al 2017 replication of Milgram trend

A

3x more likely refuse if female learner - not significant

79
Q

Outline Dolinski et al 2017 replication of Milgram limitations

A

Partial replication

What extent you asking same question?
Conceptually altered what think study and conclusions we can draw?

80
Q

Conclusions of conformity and obedience

A

Presence others lead behavioural compliance - desire avoid disapproval NSI or belief others know how to act ISI

Minority groups - social change - deep seated attitude change - consistent, invested

Right circumstance potential obey commands blindly even at great cost
Does not seem diminished over time

Social (10 decks)

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