paper one - social influence Flashcards
define conformity
matching your attitude , belief or behaviour to fit in with the group
what did Jeness do in (1932)
-asked participants to guess how many beans were in a jar
- could discuss estimates in group and give a final estimate
FINDINGS: final estimates tended to converge to a group norm
define compliance
conforming to gain approval/avoid disapproval. motivated by the desire to ‘fit in’. doesn’t result in private change or attitude, only changed views and behaviour expressed in public
define Internalisation
when an individual conforms because they accept the group views, individual has engaged in a validation process of their own beliefs , may become convinced they are wrong and group is correct , leads to acceptance of groups point of view privately and publicly
define Identification
conforming to what is expected of you based upon social roles, involves conforming to gain approval and is motivated by desire to ‘fit in’ with the group
define normative social influence
conforming so people in the group will like you. Motivated by the need to fit in with the group
define informational social influence
conforming because you believe the group to be correct. motivated by the desire to be correct
what are the issues with distinguishing between compliance and internalisation
- they aren’t really two separate things
- more of a continuum
- start at compliance and self doubt begins leading to internalisation
explain the research supporting informative social influence
Wittenbrink and Henley (1996)
-if P’s were given fake newspaper with negative opinions about African Americans shown to be majority view
- accepted this view later
Fein et al
- ‘political expert’ is shown to p’s (political neutral) reacting to political debate (clear favourite) influence p’s choice
explain the research supporting normative social influence
Halekala nature park
- issue with people taking rocks
- put a sign saying “most people who visit choose not to take rocks”
- this was more effective than threat of fines
Yale + havard
- used stop smoking SNI signs over 30% reduction over 3 months of exposure
explain the proof that normative influence may not be detected
Nolan et al (2008)
- people believed neighbours had least impact on energy consumption
- however it was the strongest
- suggests we don’t detect normative influence impact
how is informational influence moderated by the type of task
if we can tell what is correct through non social means then informational conformity has less impact
- if we can find out if statement is true less likely to conform
eg. bristol is biggest city , can google so less likely to conform
bristol is the best city , we can’t find out
- more likely to conform when it comes to issues of social rather than physical reality
what is the agentic state
- feeling like an agent carrying orders
- don’t take blame/ responsibility
high obedience rates
what is the autonomous state
- taking blame and responsibility
- feeling personal responsibility
why do we adopt an agentic state
- to maintain a positive self image
- guilt free and not affect self image
what are the binding factors in an agentic state
social etiquette
- awkward and rude to stop
give an another example of agentic state apart from milgram
Hoffling et al (1996)
- nurses ask by doctors to administer 2xs the dosage to a patient , 21 out of 22 did
apart from agentic state name another reason for higher obedience rates
legitimacy of authority
- we need to perceive authority as being legitimate before we shit into an agentic state
- requires an institution structure (eg. lab in Yale for milgrim)
How does agentic state not apply to real life always (eg.)
Milgram believes we shift rapidly back and forth between the autonomous and agentic state
- doesn’t explain gradual and irreversible transition found by Lifton (1986) with German doctors in Aushwitz changed from medical professionals to criminals
- cultural differences in tendency to shift, some cultures are more likely to accept authority (individualistic and collectivist)
explain and describe limitations to agentic state theorty
1) milgrim believed we shift back and forth from agentic state to autonomous but doesn’t explain irreversible changes found by Lifton
- german doctors in Auschwitz changed from medical professionals to committing crimes against humanity
2) in Milgrims experiment some people disobeyed
- doesnt apply to everyone must be alternate explanations
- p’s shown video clips and all said obedience was down to legitimacy of authority
explain strengths to agentic state theory
1) Fennis and Aarts suggested agentic shift is not confined to obedience to authority, may extend to other forms of social influence eg. bystander effect ( tendency to remain passive in the presence of unresponsive others when faced with emergency)
2) Tarnow provided support for legitimacy of authority throughout a study of aviation accidents
- excessive dependance on the captain’s authority
explain another reason other than AS and LA to why people obeyed in milgrim’s study
Authoritarian Personality
- a distinctive personality pattern characterised by strict adherence to conventional values and a belief in absolute obedience or submission to authority
how do we measure authoritarian personality
the F scale
- used to measure different personality components making up an authoritarian personality
- agree or disagree to statements
people who score high:
- raised by parents who had an authoritarian parenting style inc violence
- gained through learning and inimidation
how did Altemeyer change the authoritarian personality concept
by identifying a cluster of 3 personality variables that he referred to as right wing authoritarianism
- conventionalism, adhere to conventional norms and values
- authoritarian aggression, aggressive feelings to who breaks the rules
- authoritarian submission, submit to authority figures
explain altemeyers experiment highlighting the correlation between RWA and obeying authority
He conducted a Milgrim variation experiment
- give themselves a shock when get question wrong
- people with RWA personalities gave themselves the most shocks
explain Elms and Milgrims F scale experiment
did p’s obey because of situational factors or was obedience dispositional?
- gathered 40 ps who had taken part in Milgrim’s original study, 20 obeyed and 20 disobeyed
- each completed F scale and also asked questions about their relationships with parents and attitudes towards experimenter ( authority figure )
- found higher levels of authority in those who were classed as obedient
- found obedient p’s were less close to their dad and were likely to describe them as negative
- also find experimenter more admirable
describe and explain limitations to the F scale and authoritarian personality
1) education role
- less educated = high F , maybe simply lack of education
2) limited explanation
- in nazi Germany millions showed obedience , can not say all had AP, social identity (identify with nazi state)
3) ‘F scale is comedy of methodological errors’ greenstein
- every question worded in the same direction
- if you tick same line of boxes down side of page get high AP , acquiescence bias (people who agree with everything) invalid results
describe and explain strengths to F scale and authoritarian personality
1) argument of demand characteristics
- some argued demand characteristics came into play with Milgrim’s experiment bc they knew shocks were fake
- however Dambrun et al replication where p’s knew shocks were fake still found high correlation to obedience and F scale score
2) left wing less obedient?
- Begue et al replication found evidence for lower obedience in left wing vs right
name the 2 reasons why people resist social influence
social support and locus of control
explain social support in reference to resisting social influence
assistance from others
eg. Asch introduce an ally where they also gave a correct answer
- lowered conformity to rest of the group, make us feel like we can go against majority
eg. milgrim variable where P was in a team with 2 other confederates who both refused to continue at some point
- defiance lowered obedience only 10% went to 450 volts , confidence to disobey
what is locus of control
refers to a persons perception of personal control over their own behaviour
- you can have a high internal locus of control or high external locus of control
what is a high internal locus of control
type of individual who believes what happens to them is largely a consequence of their own ability and effort
- rely less on opinion of others and take more responsibility of their own actions - better resist SI
what is a high external locus of control
type of individual who believe what happens to them is more based on external factors eg. luck
- less personal responsibility and more likely to ACCEPT social influence
explain the importance of response order in reference to social support
Asch variation by Allen and Levine
confederate answered first correct answer = significantly more important than correct answer being said 4th
- correct answer being said 1st confirms p’s own judgement, produces initial commitment to correct response
explain the importance of the validity of the support within social support
Asch variation by Allen and Levine
confederate wore glasses with obviously thick lenses and gave correct answers ( support may not be valid within this case as confed has clear vision impairment)
- still reduced conformity (valid support more effective)
-strength as highlights social support as being important to resisting social influence , however, must consider the extent of the validity for optimum results
explain strengths and weaknesses to locus of control within resisting social influence
Spector:
measured LOC and predisposition to normative and informative conformity in 157 undergrads
- sig correlation between LOC and normative conformity ( high external more likely to conform)
- however no correlation with informational conformity
strength : highlights LOC is significant within conformity and resisting social influence (prove it)
weakness : we can only comment on normative conformity not conformity as a whole
explain the issues around LOC not being static
research suggests a historical trend in LOC. Meta analysis by twenge et al found young Americans to have an increasingly high external LOC. Weakness as showing factors are effecting LOC and may not be able to be. used to explain social influence.
name and explain an example of social support in the real world
1943 German women protested in Berlin where nazis were holding 2,000 jewish men.
- nazis threatened to open fire but women refused to back down , normally people were afraid to disobey but as a group they knew they were among friends and risked it together
name and explain research support for resisting social influence and LOC
meta -analysis study of the relationship between LOC and different forms of social influence. P’s who scored higher on external LOC tend to be more easily persuaded and more easily influenced
what 3 things do a minority need to be to influence the majority view
1) consistent
- when first introduced to a minority we may believe they are wrong. However, if their message is consistently repeated we are forced to re-asses and consider their view
2) committed
- suggests certainty, courage and confidence - makes it harder to dismiss the minority
3) flexible
- minorities must negotiate with the majority rather than forcing their view
- if refuse to compromise are seen as narrow minded and difficult but if too flexible they are seen as inconsistent
what is the augmentation principle within minority influence
suffering to have views heard
explain research evidence for flexibility being an important factor in minority influence
study in the role of flexibility in a stimulated Jury situation
- p’s must decide how much compensation to give a ski lift accident
- when confed gave different view but refused to change position had no effect
- if confed was flexible did exert influence
explain the benefits of minority influence
- minorities liberate people to say what they believe and stimulate creative thought
- study showed various work groups had improved decision quality when exposed to minority view highlighting they can encourage positive change
do we process the minority’s message more?
study shows minority views aren’t necessarily processed more… but rather an alternate view from the majority creates greater message processing
- if the majority express a different belief to us, we must process it more to understand why so many think differently to us
explain minority perceived negatively issue
often afraid of becoming a minority because of the negative associations
eg. narrow minded
majority views persist
explain the tipping point for commitment and the snowball effect
study highlighted ‘tipping point’ where number of people holding a minority position is sufficient to change majority opinion
- used computer models to stimulate the situation
- 10% committed opinion holders to tip majority to accept minority (snow ball effect)
name the five stages required to moscovici’s conversion process to take place
1) draw attention to an issue
2) creates a cognitive conflict in the minds of the majority
3) minority must ensure consistent but also committed and flexible such that the cognitive conflict continues
4) minorities must adhere the augmentation principle
5) eventually lead to the snow ball effect (rapid change in opinion until the norm)
possible sixth ; social crypto-amnesia - people not recalling having a different view in the first place
explain the link between SNI and majority influence
if we think something is the norm we tend to alter our behaviour to fit in with this norm
eg. advertising to reduce anti social behaviour is often lead by the idea of a majority view for example ‘most people dont smoke’
explain the issue with minority influence being slow
is very slow
- natural instinct is to conform to a majority rather than a minority
explain the issue with minorities being viewed as deviant
will limit the affect of a minority as the majority do not want to be viewed as deviant also
explain how SNIs have limitations
don’t always work eg. plenty of alcohol SNIs which have shown null effect
explain the boomerang effect with SNIs
supposed to make our behavior more desirable however, due to high spread nature it can spur p’s who already possess desirable nature into now having the undesirable nature
how do you overcome deviant minority problem
if minority present themself having some of the same view (flexible) less likely to be seen as deviant , overcoming problem.
