Module 1 - Social Influence Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

What is compliance?

A

A superficial and temporary form of conformity where we publicly agree but privately disagree. Only lasts as long as the group is watching us.

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

What is identification?

A

A moderate type of conformity where we act in the same way as the group because we value it and want to be a part of it. We don’t necessarily agree with everything it stands for.

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

What are 2 differences between internalisation and compliance?

A

Public acceptance and private rejection.

Public and private acceptance.

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

Explain what is meant by normative and informational social influence.

A

Both explanations for conformity.
NSI - Conforming in order to be liked / to fit in → usually leads to compliance.
ISI - conforming in order to be right - conformity occurs when situation is novel; the correct course of action is unclear; an expert is present → most likely to lead to internalisation.

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

Lucas et al. (2006) used mathematical problems to provide research support for informational social influence. Describe their study and their findings. How does this support ISI?

A

Participants had to give answers to easy and difficult maths questions.
Increased conformity for the difficult questions → especially for people who rated their ability as poor.
Shows that people conform when they do not know the answer. We look to others and assume they are right → predicted by ISI.

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

Research often assumes that either NSI or ISI is responsible for conforming behaviour. However, it has been claimed that both could play a role. Explain this.

A

Assumption is that behaviour is due to either NSI or ISI - however could be both.
In Asch’s research conformity dropped when another dissenter was introduced → reduction in NSI (social support) or in ISI (more information).
The respective roles of NSi and ISI are difficult to disentangle, which casts doubt on whether NSI and ISI are in fact individual processes.

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

What support for NSI was provided by Asch’s study (1951)?

A

Participants went along with a wrong answer because other people did.
When asked they said they feared disapproval by the others.
Supports: participants conformed in order to be accepted and gain social approval.

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

What has research shown about the role of individual differences in conformity?

A

Some people feel the need to be liked more than other → going to be more affected by NSI.
nAffillators have a greater need for affiliation - relationships with others.
McGhee & Teevan (1967) nAffiliators conform more.
Conformity does not apply universally.

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

In relation to Asch’s research, explain what is meant by the terms unanimity and task difficulty.

A

Unanimity: The extent to which all members of a group agree.
Asch: The majority was unanimous when all confederates chose the same comparison line → produced the greatest levels of conformity.
Task difficulty: Asch’s study becomes more difficult when it becomes harder to work out the correct answer.
Asch: Conformity increases with task difficulty, as participants assume the majority is right.

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

Describe Asch’s study of conformity. Include details of what he did and what he found in your answer.

A

Showed participant 2 white cards - one had three lines of different length and one had a standard line.
Participants had to match the two lines of the same length.
Each participant was tested with a group of confederates, who after the first few trials started given wrong answer. All confederates gave the same wrong answer.
Overall, the participants gave the wrong answer 36.8% of the time. Every participant conformed at least once, meaning that 75% conformed once.
When asked why they conformed, they said “to avoid rejection”. → NSI

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

“Asch’s study is a child of it’s time” - Explain what is meant by this.

A
When Perrin and Spencer repeated Asch’s study in 1980, only one student conformed out of 396. 
The 1950s (the time when Asch’s study was conducted) was a particularly conformist time in America - it made sense to conform to established norms. 
This means that people may have conformed because it was the norm to do so → We now live in a less conformist age, meaning the results would be different i.e. the study is a child of it’s time.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Asch’s study has been criticised for being an artificial task and situation. What does this mean and why is this a limitation?

A

Participants knew they were in a study and may have just gone along with the situation → Demand characteristics.
The task was fairly trivial - not conforming would have had no negative impact - and not resembling any everyday task.
Limitation because the tasks cannot be generalised to everyday situations.

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

Explain the ethical issues with Asch’s research. Do you believe the benefits of the study outweighed the cost? Explain your answer.

A

Deception - they thought the other people were part of the study.
Benefits outweigh the costs - gives us information about conformity in society and shows us the destructive possibilities of conformity and how these can be combated.
The ethical issues were fairly unproblematic (mild embarrassment) and was dealt with by a debrief form.

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

Explain why Asch’s findings have limited application in the real world.

A

Only men were tested by Asch - research suggests that women may be more conformist because they are more concerned with social relationships.
The men were all from the USA - an individualist culture. In individualist cultures, people are largely concerned with themselves.
In conformity studies conducted in collectivist cultures (people are more concerned with social groups), conformity rates were higher → such cultures are more concerned with group needs.
Conformity rates could in fact be much higher than Asch suggested.
His results may only apply to western men, as he did not take gender and cultural differences into account.

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

Explain what is meant by a social role. Use examples in your answer.

A

The parts people play as members of different social groups e.g. teachers, teenagers, students, etc.
This is accompanied by the expectations people have have of how individuals in these roles should be behave.

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

Outline the procedure, findings and conclusions of the Stanford Prison Experiment.

A

Mock prison created + PPTs randomly assigned to guards or prisoners. PPTs arrested from home + blindfolded strip searched etc.
Roles clearly divided - prisoners had 16 rules to follow, which were enforced by guards, who were all dressed in uniform with tinted glasses. Guards had total control.
Guards took to their roles quickly - constantly harassing and abusing prisoners (fire extinguishers, head counts, isolation, reminders of who is in charge).
Prisoners rebelled against the guards - rebellion was put down and prisoners became subdued and depressed.
Experiment had to be ended after 6 days instead of the intended 14.

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

One strength of the Stanford Prison Experiment is the level of control. Outline what is meant by this and why this is a strength.

A

The most obvious example of this is the PPT selection - psychologically tested and randomly assigned.
This meant that individual differences could be minimised and the behaviour displayed would be down to the role and not down to personality.
Increases the internal validity as is means it is easier to draw conclusions about the cause of the behaviour.

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

Critics have argued that Zimbardo exaggerated the role of the situation - explain this point.

A

The role of the situation could have been exaggerated and the role of personality could have been minimised.
Not all guards behaved the same - some were brutal, some were fair and some were kind.
Social roles may not have caused the behaviour, as guards still seem to know the difference between right and wrong. → Dispositional factors are important.

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

Why has it been argued that the Stanford Prison Experiment lacked realism?

A

Banuazizi & Mohavedi.
The performances of PPTs during the study was based on stereotypes of how people are supposed to behave. E.g. one guard based his character on ‘Cool Hand Luke’. This means that the results may not have been down to social roles.
However Zimbardo claimed quantitative data gathered during the study indicated that prisoners thought the prison was real - just run by psychologists.
It seems on balance the situation was real to the participants which contradicts claims by Banuazizi and Mohavedi.

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

Outline ethical issues with Zimbardo’s research.

A

Ethical issues arose due to Zimbardo being part of the study - when ppts asked to leave the participant he was responding as a prison warden would and not like a researcher.
Protection from harm was the biggest issue - although prisoners were eventually allowed to leave, it was much later than it should have been.
Zimbardo should have remained detached.

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

Outline the study done by Haslam and Reicher and explain why this challenges Zimbardo’s conclusions about conformity to social roles.

A

Replicated the SPE - but in Britain.
Findings were different - prisoners formed a collective identity and took over the prison → Attributed to social identity theory → The guards did not manage to do this.
In the SPE, Zimbardo argued that the people conformed to their roles quickly and easily and the behaviour of the PPT stemmed from these roles.
However we can see from the BBC prison study that social roles are not taken on easily or naturally → which was also seen in the SPE where some of the guards were actually helping the prisoners.

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

Outline Milgram’s research into obedience.

A

Procedure: ‘Teacher’ gave fake electric shocks to ‘learner’ during a ‘learning task’, ordered to do so by an experimenter. At 315v learner pounded on the wall for the last time. Prods, e.g. ‘You have no other choice, you must go on’.
Findings: No participants stopped before 300v and 65% went all the way to the top of the shock scale, 450v. Many showed signs of stress, most objected but continued anyway. Prior survey said 3% would obey.

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

Evaluate Milgram’s research in terms of validity.

A

Low Validity - Orne & Holland. Participants could guess the study. Demand characteristics.
High External validity - Hofling et al. Nurses administering drugs after being told by doctors. Milgram’s findings apply to other situations.

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

What is the social identity theory and why does it suggest that people obey?

A

All about group identification. In Milgram’s study the teachers identified with the science and so obeyed the researcher. Obedience dropped because ppts started to identify with the victim.

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

Why is the social identity theory a limitation to Milgram’s conclusions about obedience?

A

Milgram claimed ppts obeyed because of the presence of the authority figure. SIT suggests obedience occurred due to identification with the researcher or victim.

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

Outline the ethical issues with Milgram’s instructions. What knock-on effects could these have had for participants?

A

Deception: Didn’t know that teacher / learner was rigged; didn’t know the shocks were fake.
It prevents participants from giving their fully informed consent to take part. If participants are deceived about the procedure they can still consent to take part, but that consent is worthless because participants do not know what it is they are consenting to. It may even mean that participants are leaving themselves vulnerable to psychological harm, because they do not know what the procedure involves and what their role in it is.

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

Briefly outline what is meant by situational variables.

A

Factors that affect someone’s level of obedience. Factors are all due to external circumstances.

28
Q

Outline the 3 situational variables Milgram tested and the effect it had on obedience.

A

Baseline obedience at 65%.
Proximity - the closeness of a participant to the experimenter affected obedience. When the experimenter was in a different room obedience fell to 40%.
Location - where the experiment is held. When in a run down office building obedience fell to 47.5%.
Uniform - what the experimenter was wearing. When the experimenter was wearing civilian clothing conformity fell to 20%.
Uniform caused the largest drop in the level of conformity or any other concluding sentence.

29
Q

Outline one strength of Milgram’s variations.

A

Research support. Experiments conducted in other areas saw similar results proving that situational variables apply universally.
Example: outside of a laboratory experiment a confederate wearing civilian clothing told strangers there was a fire and he needed help. The participants were more likely to conform when the investigator was wearing a police or other authoritative uniform than when wearing civilian clothing.
Shows that these variables apply outside a lab setting.

30
Q

Outline one limitation of Milgram’s variations.

A

Lack of internal validity. Participants may have worked out that it was ‘staged’ and acted how they thought the investigator wanted them to act. Demand characteristics. Would mean that the results were not showing authentic behaviour, but behaviour that was put on.

31
Q

Briefly explain what happened when Milgram’s variations were applied across different cultures.

A

Similar results were found in different cultures. It was found that Spanish students had obedience 90% (similar to Milgram’s results). This suggests Milgram’s findings aren’t limited to the male American students and range across different cultures.
Smith and Bond said that these variations were only applied across western developed societies so it cannot be said these results apply universally, they just aren’t limited to the USA.

32
Q

Why is a high level of control a strength of Milgram’s variations?

A

He focused on one variation at a time. He isolated each variable in order to study that explicitly. Therefore he got true results for each variation so there was a high level of control. Made the study reliable and replicable.

33
Q

Milgram’s finding support the influence of situational explanations of behaviour. This has, however, been criticised by Mandel, who claims that this simply offers an excuse for evil deeds. Taking the Holocaust into account, why could this been seen as offensive? Why do individual differences need to be considered?

A

It could be argued that Nazi soldiers can’t be held responsible for their actions in the Holocaust because they were just following orders.
The situational variables they were exposed to:
Proximity - orders given face to face.
Uniforms - the soldiers uniform.
Location - Battle fields/War camps.
Suggests the soldiers are also victims.
Individual differences would have an affect on behaviour - this explanations suggests that all people would act in the same way, if they were in the same situation.

34
Q

Outline the agentic state as an explanation for obedience. Refer to autonomous state and binding factors in your answer.

A

Milgram found that people involved in atrocities do not take the blame for them.
Feel like the are acting for some else - agent for someone else’s will.
Opposite to agentic state is autonomous state → free to behaviour according to their own principles.
Agentic shift occurs when some perceives someone else as a figure of authority because of their position in the social hierarchy.
Binding factors explain why people remain in an agentic state despite wanting to leave.
These are aspects of the situation that allow people to ignore the damaging effects of their actions e.g. shifting blame to the victim.

35
Q

Outline the legitimacy of authority as an explanation for obedience. Refer to destructive obedience in your answer.

A

Most societies are structured in a hierarchical way - people in certain positions hold authority over us. The authority is legitimate - accepted by society and allows society to function smoothly. This legitimacy of authority means that some people are granted to permission to punish other - which is accepted by most and learnt from a young age. Problems arise when the legitimate authority becomes destructive - as has been seen through history on numerous occasions. Destructive authority was clearly seen in Milgram’s study when experimenters used prods to make ppts behave in ways that went against their conscience.

36
Q

Outline some research support for the agentic state.

A

Blass & Schmidt (2001) showed a clip of Milgram’s study to ppts. Ppts stated that the harm done to the learner was the experimenter’s fault and the responsibility was due to the legitimacy of authority - the experimenter is at the top of the hierarchy and also an expert. Legitimacy of authority is given as a reason for obedience, supporting this explanation.

37
Q

Explain why the agentic state offers only a limited view on obedience.

A

Does not explain some research findings showing that people did not obey. Humans are all involved in social hierarchies and so all should obey.
The agentic shift also does not explain findings from Hofling’s study, where nurses did not show any levels of anxiety (unlike in Milgram’s study) despite being aware of their role of the destruction.
This suggests the agentic state can only explain some cases of obedience but not all of them.

38
Q

Explain how the behaviour of the soldiers from battalion 101 challenges the idea of the agentic state.

A

Mandel (1998) described one incident in the Second World War where a battalion of soldiers obeyed orders to shoot civilians in a small village in Poland, despite not having been given the order to do so directly (They were given a choice to opt out and be assigned different duties).
The soldiers murdered with having been ordered to do so. There was no agentic shift, as they did not see themselves as acting on behalf of a higher authority
They were acting of their own accord, out of hatred and prejudice. This is a different explanation, compared to the single minded explanation given by Milgram in which obedience is due to the agentic shift.

39
Q

Outline how cross cultural research has supported the idea of the legitimacy of authority.

A

The explanation gives a useful account of cultural differences in obedience.
Kilham & Mann found in Australia only 16% went to 450v, whereas in Germany Mantell found an 86% obedience. This shows how in some cultures authority is more likely to seen as legitimate and accepted. This reflects the different ways in which societies are structured and how children are raised to accept authority - supportive cross cultural findings increase ecological validity of the explanation.

40
Q

Briefly introduce the basic idea behind dispositional factors of obedience.

A

High levels of obedience is a psychological disorder, caused by an individual’s personality.

41
Q

Outline the key study into dispositional factors.

A

Adorno et al. (1950) - causes of the obedient personality. 2000 middle class white Americans -studied unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups. Used the F-Scale to measure the authoritarian personality. High scorers on the F-scale identified with strong people and were contemptuous of the weak, conscious of their own status, showing excessive respect to those of a higher status. Very black and white with high levels of prejudice and stereotypes beliefs.

42
Q

Outline 2 conclusions of Adorno’s study.

A

People with an authoritarian personality have/are: Very obedience to authority; have an extreme respect for authority and are submissive to it; are contemptuous of people with an “inferior” social status; have very conventional views; are inflexible; believe we need to be strong and powerful.

43
Q

What was suggested by Adorno about the origin of the authoritarian personality.

A

Harsh parenting - strict discipline, high standards, loyalty, criticisms, conditional love.
Creates resentment and hostility which cannot be expressed and so is displaced.

44
Q

Outline the research support for the authoritarian personality provided by Elms (1966).

A

Elms and Milgram conducted interviews with people who scored highly of the F-Scale, believing there may be a link to obedience.
However links are only correlational and give us no real link of causality.
There could be a third factor involved, e.g. lower levels of education (Hyman & Sheatsley (1954).

45
Q

Outline some of the methodological problems with research conducted into dispositional explanations.

A

Greenstein (1969) criticises the F-Scale for its methodological errors. E.g. all of the questions are worded in the same direction. This means you can get a high score just by giving the same answer repeatedly. The F-Scale therefore suffers from an acquiescence bias and interviewer bias because the interviewers knew the test scores and hypothesis. The Authoritarian personality has no basis in fact if the methodology used to asses it is flawed.

46
Q

Explain why the authoritarian personality has been considered a limited explanation.

A

Will find it hard to explain obedience in the majority of a country’s population. Pre-war Germany - lots of racist, hostile and anti-semitic behaviour - seems unlikely they all had an authoritarian personality. Limitation because it is clear a much more realistic alternative is possible - Social Identity Theory. The population identified with the anti-semitic state and thus behaved accordingly.

47
Q

Why has it been argued that explanations using the authoritarian personality are politically biased?

A

The F-Scale measures tendencies towards an extreme right wing ideology.
Left wing ideologies actually have a lot in common with right wing ideologies e.g. the emphasis on complete obedience to a legitimate authority figure.
It is not a comprehensive dispositional explanation that can be applied across the entire political spectrum.

48
Q

Name 2 causes for resistance to social influence.

A

Social Support & Locus of Control.

49
Q

Outline the role of social support in conformity and obedience.

A

Plays a large role in both.
Asch - conformity dropped to 25% when a dissenter was introduced.
Milgram - dropped to 10% when a dissenter was introduced.

50
Q

Outline what is meant by the locus of control and how it relates to resisting social influence.

A

Is a scale that measures what people believe to control behaviour. Internal and External.
Internals - they are in control of their behaviour and therefore responsible for it.
Externals - behaviour is controlled by forces beyond our control (e.g. luck) and are not responsible.
Internals are more likely to resist. This is because they see themselves as responsible for their actions.

51
Q

Outline supporting evidence for the role of social support for both conformity and obedience.

A

Obedience: Evidence for the role of dissenters in resisting obedience (Gamson et al. 1982). PPTs were in groups - found higher levels of resistance than Milgram - 88% rebelled. Shows there is a link between peer support and resistance.
Conformity: Allen and Levine. Conformity decreased when a dissenter was present in an Asch-type study. Even when the dissenter wore thick glasses and claimed to have bad vision. Shows that it is not the presence of another answer that causes resistance, but the dissenter allows us to be free of pressure.

52
Q

Outline the support for the LoC provided by Holland (1967).

A

Repeated Milgram’s study - measured if PPTs were internal or externals. 37% of internals did not continue to 450v & 23% of externals did not. Shows that internals are more likely to resist - increases the validity/credibility of the theory.

53
Q

Rotter (1982) pointed out the role of the LoC may have been slightly exaggerated. Outline his claims and why they present a problem.

A

Suggested the LoC only comes into play in novel situations. In familiar situations past experiences may be more important. This means that people who have conformed or obey in specific situations are likely to do so again. It suggests that locus of control can explain only a limited range of situations - maybe not as important as first thought.

54
Q

What is minority influence and who was one of the first people to research it?

A

A form of social influence in which a minority persuade others to adopt their beliefs, attitudes or behaviours. Leads to internalisation or conversion. Moscovici.

55
Q

Outline the 4 main processes in minority influence.

A

Consistency - increases interest others; synchronic consistency & diachronic consistency → makes people start to rethink their own views.
Commitment - engagement in extreme activities, which are sometimes risky; Majority group members then pay even more attention → augmentation principle.
Flexibility - Nemeth (1986). Consistency can be interpreted negatively as it can be misinterpreted as being rigid and dogmatic; Members of the minority need to ready to adapt their point of view and accept reasonable and valid counter-arguments → Balance between consistency and flexibility.
The process of change - Over time, increasing numbers switch from the majority position; they have become converted; the more it happens, the faster the conversion → snowball effect.

56
Q

Outline some research for the role of consistency.

A

Moscovici et al (1969) - blue and green slides. Consistent minority opinion had a greater effect on other people than an inconsistent opinion. Wood et al. (1994) - consistent minorities were most influential.

57
Q

Discuss research by Martin et al. (2003) and how it supports theory of minority influence.

A

Martin et al. (2003) gave participants a message supporting a particular viewpoint and measured their support. PPTs then heard either a minority or a majority group agree with the view and they also heard a conflicting view. People were less willing to change their opinion if they had heard support from the minority group → Minority view had been more deeply processed.

58
Q

Outline why it has been argued that research into minority influence is lacking in external validity.

A

Artificial tasks are used. Research is therefore far removed from how minorities attempt to change the behaviour of majorities in real life → in real life, outcomes can be vastly more important. So they lacks external validity and are limited in what they can tell us about minority influence in real life.

59
Q

Discuss the limited real-world applications of research into minority influence.

A

Research studies often make a clear distinction between majority and minority → However majority and minority is about more than just numbers.
Majorities have more power and status and minorities are very committed and are often tight knit.
Studies often don’t reflect these differences.
Tasks are often trivial and so it is difficult to see why anyone would be motivated to choose one opinion over another → studies do not capture the commitment of minorities or the social support they provide each other.

60
Q

What are the steps in how minority influence creates social change?

A
Drawing Attention.
Consistency.
Deeper Processing.
The augmentation principle.
Snowball effect.
Social Cryptmnesia.
61
Q

What lessons regarding social change can be learnt from research into conformity and obedience?

A

Conformity: The importance of a dissenter within a majority (Asch’s study conformity dropped). Highlighting what other people are doing and using NSI to sway people’s opinions.
Obedience: The importance of a dissenter within a majority (Milgram’s study obedience dropped). Zimbardo showed how obedience can be used to bring about social change through gradual commitment.

62
Q

Outline research support for normative influences in social change.

A

Nolan et al. Messages on doors saying that people were trying to cut their energy consumption down - control had a similar message but with no reference to others. Energy consumption dropped in first group → highlighting NSI.

63
Q

The validity of Moscovici’s theory has been cast into doubt regarding the role of deeper processing. Explain this point, referring to research where possible.

A

Moscovici suggested that minority influence causes individuals to think deeply, which is a different cognitive process from majority influence.
Mackie (1987) disagrees, arguing that majority influence creates deeper processing if you do not share their views.
We believe that others think in the same ways as us; when we find that a majority believes differently, we are forced to think hard about their arguments.
So a central element of minority influence is challenged and may be incorrect, casting doubt on the validity of Moscovici’s theory.

64
Q

What did Bashir et al. (2013) find when investigating why people often resist social change?

A

Bashir et al. suggest that people are less likely to behave in environmentally friendly ways because they want to avoid the label of being environmentalists.
Participants rated environmental activists negatively (“tree huggers”).
Minorities wanting social change should avoid behaving in ways that reinforce stereotypes; off-putting to the majority.
This suggests that being able to identify with a minority group is just as important as agreeing with their views in terms of changing behaviour.

65
Q

Explain why research into social change suffers from methodological issues. Do you think these issues undermine the link between social influence and social change?

A

Explanations of social change rely on studies by Moscovici, Asch and Milgram.
These can be evaluated in terms of their methodology, mainly over the artificial nature of the tasks and whether the group dynamics reflect real life.
These criticisms apply to the evaluation of explanations for the link between social influence processes and social change.
This does not mean that the link between social influence and social change is non-existent.
There are many studies using very different methods that support such a link. It is not so much individual studies that are important but the overall body of evidence that needs to be considered.
Practical steps based on research studies have proven effective in bringing about change, suggesting the link with social influence is at least partly valid.