Paper 1 - Social Influence Flashcards

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

What is informational social influence?

A

Where a person conforms to gain knowledge, or because they believe that someone else is ‘right’. This may lead to internalisation

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

What are the 3 types of conformity?

A

Internalisation, Identification, Compliance

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

What is Internalisation?

A

A person genuinely accepts the groups norms which results in a public and private change of behaviour and it becomes permanent. The change persists even in the absence of other group members

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

What is Identification?

A

Conform to a group because there is something about it that we value and want to be part of it. Don’t necessarily agree with everything the majority believes

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

What is Compliance?

A

Simply going along with others in public but privately not changing your views. As soon as group pressure stops, the behaviour/ opinion stops

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

What is normative social influence?

A

Where a person agrees with the opinion of the group majority because they want to be accepted, gain social approval or be liked. May lead to compliance.

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

What findings did LUCAS ET AL find that supports ISI?

A

Asked students to gibe answers to mathematical problems that were easy or more difficult. There was greater conformity to incorrect answers when they were difficult. Study shows that people conform in situations were they don’t know the answer. We look to other people and assume they know better than us and must be right.

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

Outline Asch’s procedure…

A

Showed ppts two large white cards at a time. The lines were different lengths. Ppts were asked which of the three lines matched the standard. Each naive ppt was tested in a group of between 6-8 confederates. the first few times the confederates gave the right answers but then they made errors(same wrong answer).

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

Outline the findings of Asch’s procedure…

A

The naive participant gave a wrong answer 36.8% of the time. 25% did not conform on any trials, so 75% did.

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

What are Asch’s 3 variations?

A

1) Group size
2) Unanimity
3) Task difficulty

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

Asch’s variations - group size

A

With 3 confederates, conformity to wrong answer rose to 31.8%. after that it made little difference. This suggests that a small majority is not sufficient for and influence to be exerted.

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

Asch’s variations - unanimity

A

Whether the presence of another non-conforming person would affect the naive ppt. He introduced a confederate who disagreed with others. this meant that conformity was reduced by a quarter. the presence of a dissenter enabled the naive ppt to behave more independently. suggests that the influence of the majority depends on some extent on the group being unanimous.

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

Asch’s variations - task difficulty

A

he made the lines similar in length and conformity increased. this suggests that ISI plays a greater role when the tasks become harder. this is because the situation is more ambiguous so more likely to look for other people for guidance

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

Evaluation of Asch - A child of its time

A

PERRIN & SPENCER - repeated Asch’s study with engineering students. in a total of 396 trials only one student conformed. could be that engineering students felt more confident about measuring lines but it could be that the 1950’s were an especially conformist time in America so it made sense to conform to social norms.
This is a limitation as it means that the Asch effect is not consistent across situations and so is not generalisable to all human behaviour.

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

Evaluation of Asch - limited application of findings

A

only men were tested my Asch. other research may suggest that women may be more conformist maybe because they are more concerned with social relationships. the men were also from USA(individualist culture). similar conformity studies conducted in collectivist cultures(China) have found that conformity rates are higher. asch didn’t take gender and cultural differences into account.

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

Stanford Prison Experiment(SPE) conformity to social roles - procedure…

A

Zimabardo set up a mock prison in the basement of Stanford University. they advertised for volunteers who were deemed emotionally stable and were randomly assigned role of guard of prisoners and the prisoners were arrested outside their homes to heighten the realism of the study. the prisoners routines were heavily regulated and they were assigned numbers not names. the guards had their own uniform and weapons and mirror shades. they were told they had complete power over the prisoners.

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

SPE - findings…

A

the guards took up their role with enthusiasm and they took their role so seriously that it had to be stopped after 6 days instead of the 14. after 2 days the prisoners rebelled and retaliated. the guards would punish even the smallest misdemeanour. the prisoners became depressed and anxious and many were released early because they showed signs of psychological disturbance. the guards identified more and more with their role and it became more brutal and aggressive.

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

Evaluation of SPE - control

A

STRENGTH - zimbardo had control over the variables like the selection of participants. this would help to rule out individual personality differences. this increases the internal validity

19
Q

Evaluation of SPE - Lack of realism

A

BANUAZIZI & MOHAVEDI - argued the ppts were merely acting rather than genuinely conforming. their performances were based on stereotypes and one guard said he based his role off a character from Cool Hand Luke this would also explain why prisoners rioted because they thought they normally did.

20
Q

Milgrams obedience study - procedure

A

recruited 40 male ppts and were between 20-50 and were offered money to take part. a confederate always ended up as the ‘learner’ while the true ppt was the ‘teacher’. there was also an ‘experimenter’ that was dressed in a lab coat that told the ppt they could leave at any time. the teacher had to give the learner an electric shock everytime they made a mistake. the shocks were not real. the shocks had 30 levels, ranging from 15 to 450 volts. when the teacher got to 300 volts the learner pounded on the wall and gave no answer to the next question. if the teacher felt unsure to continue the teacher gave 4 prods - ‘please continue’ ‘the experiment requires that you continue’ ‘it is absolutely essential that you continue’ ‘you have no other choice you must go on’

21
Q

Milgrams study - findings

A

no ppts stopped below 300v. 12.5% stopped at 300. 65% continued to highest level(450). qualitative data was collected and many ppts showed signs of extreme tension, sweat, tremble and some had seizures.
all ppts were debriefed and assured their behaviour was normal. they did a follow up questionnaire and 84% said they were glad to have participated.

22
Q

Evaluation of Milgram - low internal validity

A

ORNE & HOLLAND - argued ppts behaved the way they did because they knew the electric shocks weren’t real , so Milgram was not testing what he intended to test - so the study lacked internal validity.

23
Q

Evaluation of Milgram - ethical issues

A

BAUMRIND - was critical of Milgram as he deceived his participants as they thought the shocks were real. there was a deception of a betrayal of trust and it could damage the reputation of psychologists and their research.

24
Q

situational variables

A

1) proximity
2) location
3) uniform

25
Q

proximity results

A

-in the original study, the teacher and learner were in adjoining rooms. in the proximity variation, they were in the same room
- proximity dropped from 65% to 40%
obediency decreased when teacher and learner could hear each other

26
Q

location results

A
  • milgram changed the location from Yale university to a run down building
  • obedience fell from 65% to 47.5%
27
Q

uniform results

A
  • in original study the experimenter wore a grey lab coat
  • milgram did a follow up study where they had to leave because of a phone call so the experimenter was taken over by an ordinary member of the public(dressed in normal clothes)
  • obedience rate dropped the LOWEST from 65% to 20%
28
Q

EVALUATION OF MILGRAMS VARIATIONS

A

SUPPORT - BICKMAN ET AL
NYC - had 3 confederates dressed in different outfits
- jacket &tie
- milkman
- security guard
asked them to perform tasks such as litter
*people were 2x as likely to obey the security guard than the one dressed in the jacket and tie
supports milgram as uniform conveys authority

29
Q

EVALUATION OF MILGRAMS VARIATIONS

A

LIMITATION - ORNE & HOLLAND

  • some ppts realised that the study was fake, because of the extra manipulation (e.g. when they swapped the experimenter for a member of the public)
  • unclear whether the results are genuine or because the ppts saw through the deception
  • lacks internal validity
30
Q

what is the agentic state?

A

a mental state where we feel no personal responsibility for our behaviour because we believe our selves to be acting for an authority figure. ( as their agent)
- this frees us from the demands of our consciences and allows us to obey even a destructive authority figure

31
Q

what is the autonomous state?

A

opposite of agentic

free to behave according to their own principles and therefore feels a sense of responsibility for their own actions.

32
Q

what is the agentic shift?

A

the shift from autonomy to agency

  • milligram suggested that this occurs when we perceive someone else as a figure of authority.
  • this person has greater power because of their position in the social hierarchy.
33
Q

binding factors

A

milgram wondered why an individual remains in the agentic state
binding factors - aspect of the situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effect of their behaviour - which then reduces the moral strain they are feeling

34
Q

legitimacy of authority

A

people in certain positions hold authority over the rest of us (parents, teachers)
and it is legitimate (agreed by society)
most accept that authority figures are allowed to have social power of us for society to run smoothly
CONSEQUENCE
some people are granted power to punish others
we learn acceptance from childhood and parents

35
Q

destructive authority

A

powerful leaders such as Hitler and Stalin can use their legitimate powers for destructive reasons such as ordering people to behave in certain ways
shown in Milgrams study - when experimenter used prods to order ppts to behave in ways that wentarainst their consciences

36
Q

EVALUATION FOR AGENTIC STATE

A

BLASS & SCHMITT - showed a film of milgrams study to students and asked them to identify who they felt was responsible for the harm to the learner(experimenter or teacher)

  • the students blamed the experimenter rather than the the ppt
  • they also indicated that responsibility was due to legitimate authority.
  • they recognised legitimate authority as a cause of obedience - SUPPORT*
37
Q

EVLAUATION FOR AGENTIC SHIFT

A

A LIMITED EXPLANANTION
it doesn’t explain many of the research findings
- doesnt explain why many to the ppts did not obey
* suggests that the agentic shift can only account for some situations of obedience

38
Q

EVALUATION OF LEGITIMACY OF AUTHORITY

A

CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
STRENGTH - useful account of cultural differences in obedience.
many studies show that countries differ in the degree in which people are obedient
e.g. KILHAM& MANN - replicated milligrams study in Australia and found that only 16% of ppts went to the highest voltage(65% in original)
MANTELL- Germany - 85%
*shows that in some cultures authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate.
such supportive findings from cross cultural research increase the validity of the explanation

39
Q

ADORNO - Authoritarian personality

A

a type of personality that Adorno argued was especially susceptible to obeying people in authority. such individuals are also thought to be submissive to those of higher status and dismissive or this who are inferior

40
Q

what was Adornos procedure

A
  • 2000 middle class white americans and their unconscious attitudes towards racial groups
  • developed scales to measure this (f-scale)
41
Q

what were Adornos findings

A
  • those who scored high on the f-scale identified with strong people and were generally contemptuous of the weak
  • they were very conscious of thrown thoughts and others status showing excessive respect to those higher
  • he also found that they have a cognitive style
    there was no fuzziness between categories of people and there were fixed and distinctive stereotypes about other groups
  • there was a strong positive correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice
42
Q

authoritarian characteristics

A

adorno concluded that people with an authoritarian personality have a tendency to be especially obedient to authority

43
Q

EVALUATION OF AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY

A

RESEARCH SUPPORT
milligram conducted interviews with a small sample of fully obedient ppts who scored highly on the f scale.
- however this is just a correlation so it makes it impossible to draw conclusions that the authoritarian personality causes.
- there may be a 3rd factor that is involved

44
Q

resistance to social influence

A

the ability of people to withstand the social pressure to conform to the majority or obey the authority
this ability to withstand social pressure is influenced by both situational and dispositional influences