P1 - Social psychology Flashcards
how many types of conformity did Kelkman argue there were?
compliance = Adjusting behaviour in order to be accepted and avoid disapproval
For example, you might say you support a team in a group of people and in private have little interest in this team.
Saying to a group of friends that you like something when really you have little interest.
Internalization = Occurs when individuals genuinely adjust their behavior and opinions to those of a group. This involved individuals being exposed to belief systems of others and having to decide what they truly believe in.
Being influenced by a group to support a team and genuinely having an interest in private, without the influence of the group. Aman said to his new Buddhist friends that he liked the Buddhist faith and when he went home he began to practise it and genuinely believed in it.
Identification = When individuals change their behaviour and opinions to those of a group, because membership within that group is desirable. This is private and public acceptance, for example a army soldier may adapt to new behaviours in civilian life.
You might have learned new beliefs and behaviours whilst in a busy office job but upon retiring new beliefs and behaviours might follow.
study into conformity
Jenness conducted one of the earliest experiments examining conformity.
Method & Procedure
Researchers created an ambiguous problem that involved a glass bottle filled with 811 white beans. 101 participants (psychology students), individually estimated how many beans the glass bottle contained. Participants were then divided into groups of three and asked to provide a group estimate through discussion. Following the discussion, the participants were provided with another opportunity individually estimate the number of beans, to see if they changed their original answer.
Jenness found that nearly all participants changed their original answer, when they were provided with another opportunity to estimate the number of beans in the glass bottle.
women conformed more than men
These results demonstrate the power of conformity in an ambiguous situation and are likely to be the result of informational social influence
describe and explain Asch study
Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgment.
Aim: Solomon Asch conducted an experiment to investigate the extent to which social pressure from a majority group could affect a person to conform.
Procedure: Asch used a lab experiment to study conformity. Using the line judgement task (see above), Asch put a naive participant in a room with seven confederates. The confederates had agreed in advance what their responses would be when presented with the line task. The real participant did not know this and was led to believe that the other seven participants were also real participants like themselves. Each person in the room had to state aloud which comparison line (A, B or C) was most like the target line. The answer was always obvious. The real participant sat at the end of the row and gave his or her answer last. In some trials, the seven confederates gave the wrong answer. There were 18 trials in total and the confederates gave the wrong answer on 12 trails. Asch was interested to see if the real participant would conform to the majority view.
What would the results tell us if the participants gave an incorrect answer?
They had conformed by compliance as they want to fit in even though the correct answer is obvious. Instead of getting the answer correct they want to fit in with the rest of the group and not seem abnormal. The effects of group pressure causes this conformation.
This shows that the importance of being liked is greater than being right
Results: Asch measured the number of times each participant conformed to the majority view. On average, about one third (32%) of the participants in each trial went along and conformed to the clearly incorrect majority. Three quarters of the participants (75%) conformed on at least one trial.
Conclusion: Why did the participants conform so readily? When they were interviewed after the experiment, most of them said that they did not really believe their conforming answers, but had gone along with the group for fear of being ridiculed or thought “peculiar”. A few of them said that they really did believe the group’s answers were correct.
evaluation of Asch’s line study
Reduced population validity within study.
All of the members are male within Asch’s study minimized conformity rates compared to Jennes’ study which also used females who conformed more Beta Bias which does not give us an accurate representation of conformity between gender
Temporal validity of Asch’s study
Asch’s study took place In 1951 and Jennes’ took place in 1932
Conformity Results may be very different today due to the study being such a long time ago and social expectations have changed.
Asch’s results maybe more valid compared to that of Jennes’ today due to the era in which it took place
study uses deception to manipulate results
Asch told the participants they were participating in an eye test, not conformity test
list the variables affecting conformity
Size of majority
Research indicates that conformity rates increase as the size of majority increases, but there is a peak where increase of size of majority does not affect conformity.
This is likely due to the participants becoming aware that there is something unusual about the conformity of others. Increasing the group to two or three persons increased conformity substantially. Increases beyond three people (e.g., four, five, six, etc.) did not further-increase conformity.
Presence of supporter
There is likely reduced conformity when there is a presence of a supporter due to two potential reasons;
- The supporter could provide useful information to each participant.
- The supporter might also reduce the participants’ need for social approval
Task difficulty
Asch identified task difficulty as a variable that affects conformity. He discovered that when he made the line judgement task more difficult, conformity levels increased, as the participant was more likely to believe that the actors were right.
describe the two explanations for conformity in terms of what it is, why it occurs, which type of conformity it may lead to, transient or permanent? and research related to it
Normative Social Influence is where a person conforms in order to be accepted and belong to a group. They do this because it is socially rewarding and/or to avoid social rejection (e.g. ridicule for not ‘fitting in’).
Why does it occur?
To avoid being ridiculed and be liked by the group. It is also to fit in as there is a fear of being different.
Which type of conformity might it lead to? identification Transient / permanent? Transient
Research related to NSI:
Asch’s line study
Participants clearly new that the answer was wrong, however 75% conformed at least once.
There must have been another reason why people conformed.
Many people said they conformed because they didn’t want to stand out.
Informational Social Influence is where a person conforms to gain knowledge, or because they believe that someone else is ‘right’.
Why does it occur?
In order to gain knowledge and be correct. Also to fit in and not be different by being incorrect.
Which type of conformity might it lead to? idealisation Transient / permanent? Permanent
Research related to ISI:
Jenness
sherif
explain zimbardo’s research
Aims
Zimbardo was interesting in examining whether people would obey social roles of a prison guard or prisoner when placed in a real prison environment. Furthermore, he also wanted to examine whether the behavior displayed in prisons was due to internal dispositional factors, the people themselves, or external situational factors, the environment and conditions of the prison.
Method
Zimbardo’s sample consisted of 21 female university students who volunteered in response to a newspaper advert. The participants were selected from 75 volunteers on the basis of their physical and mental stability and were each paid $15 a day to take part. Each participant was strategically assigned to one of two social roles, prisoner or guard.
Zimbardo wanted to make the experience as realistic as possible, turning the basement of Yale University into a mock prison. Furthermore, the ‘prisoners’ were arrested by real local police and fingerprinted, stripped and given a numbered smock to wear, with chains placed around their ankles. The guards were given uniforms, dark reflective sunglasses, handcuffs and a gun. The guards were instructed to run the prison without using physical violence. The experiment was set to run for two weeks.
Results
Zimbardo found that both the prisoners and guards quickly identified with their social roles. Within days the prisoners rebelled, but this was quickly crushed by the guards, who then grew increasingly kind towards the prisoners. The guards dehumanized the prisoners, waking them during the night and forcing them to clean toilets with their bare hands; the prisoners became increasingly confrontational, identifying further with their subordinate role.
Five of the prisoners were released from the experiment early because of their adverse reactions to the physical and mental torment, for example, crying and extreme anxiety. Although the experiment was set to run for two weeks, it was terminated after just four days, when fellow postgraduate student Christina Maslach convinced Zimbardo that conditions in his experiment were acceptable.
evaluation of Zimbardo study
ecological validity - Most prisoners officers would have had training before
In 2018 prisoners would have a greater sense of their right and would be more likely to rebel and most likely be less keen to co-operate
internal validity - Zimbardo’s collaborator supposedly persuaded some of the guards to take on a more touch stereotypical role of a guard. He created a sense of ‘us’ and ‘them’ while speaking to individual guards.
In the recorded version, Jaffe told the guards to be more involved and touch in prison. This completely goes against the aims of Zimbardo.
replicability - It was a famous study and many people know how it plays out, so people will change their behaviour.
ETHICS
Deception & consent - Although the participants signed a consent form, they only volunteered to take part in prison life and did not volunteer to the nature of the abuse that the prisoners received.
The participants have not consented to the role in which they were going to take, as they did not know which way round the study would be.
Psychological Harm - Participants were embarrassed and humiliated excessively, for example when the prisoners had to re-enact Frankenstein’s wedding.
The breach of ethical guidelines was also seen through prisoner 819, been humiliated by having his name chanted by the other prisoners.
right to withdraw - The prisoners were also not allowed to get up and leave as this is not an accurate representation of a prison. This is known as the right to withdraw.
zimbardos defense of the ethics
Debrief
Extensive group and individual debriefing sessions were held and all participants returned post-experimental questionnaires several weeks, then several months later, then at yearly intervals
Cost vs Benefit
Zimbardo also strongly argues that the benefits gained about our understanding of human behaviour and how we can improve society should out balance the distress caused by the study
explain how deindividuation can explain zimbardo’s results
The prisoners and prison guards lost their own individuality and instead took up the role of their part in the study. This meant they would act in ways that they would not have as an individual and instead acted in the way that they saw was expected of their role. Once they put the uniform on they no-longer felt responsible for their actions. Both the guards and prisoners were given uniforms and were deindividualized.
What are the limitations of the deindividuation explanation of Zimbardo’s results
Individuation is not a good predictor of how people will change their behaviour and knowing the position of the role is the better predictor
study to evaluate zimbardo
Reicher and Haslam replicated Zimbardo’s research by randomly assigning 15 men to the role of prisoner or guard. In this replication, the guards did not identify with their status and refused to impose their authority; the prisoners identified as a group to challenge the guard’s authority, which resulted in a shift of power and a collapse of the prison system.
Zimbardo’s finding are unreliable
Hawthorn effect = where your behaviour changes due to the thought that you are being watched
Explain how the social identify theory has been used to explain BBC’s findings.
The SI theory suggests that when placed within a group, that identity becomes a part of you and when a member of this group, your actions will differ to that of if you were not influenced by the group. This can be used to explain the BBC’s findings as the prisoners began to dominate the guards as a group and adopted a hostile output towards the guards as they were ‘prisoners’ they felt a group identity. This then led to the guards feeling intimidated due to their position feeling threatened as a guard.
define obedience
Obedience occurs when you take an action which occurs directly in response to a direct order from an individual in direct authority
Describe Milgram’s research into obedience
Aims
Investigate the level of obedience when the participants were told by an authority figure to administer shocks to another person
Study the Germans’ obedient disposition
Method
Conducted at Yale university in a lab environment
IV=prods produced by machine
DP=degree of obedience
Method was a controlled observation
Quantitve data=how many volts were given
Qualitative=participants emotional responses
Results
After the largest shock had been administered, the participant was asked to continue at this level until the experimenter eventually stopped the proceedings; at this point many of the obedient participants had sighs of relief or shook their heads in regret. Most of the participants showed signs of stress and tension
conclusions
Milgram believes it is the situation people are put in rather than their own dispositions when being obedient.
