PSY1001 WEEK 6 Flashcards
define social influence
process whereby attitudes and behaviour are influenced by the real or implied presence of other people
define compliance
attempts to persuade an individual to accept a request to respond in a desired way
define obedience
performance of an action in direct response to an order from a figure in authority
give a reason why compliance can work
reciprocity - key notion in social exchange, if someone gives us something we feel a need to give in return. deeply ingrained, found in multiple cultures
state the 3 techniques for compliance
foot-in-door technique
door-in-face technique
low-balling
explain foot-in-door technique
smaller request that virtually everyone agrees to, followed by larger target request. we are already committed to course of action and we have a change in views of self (“I must be type of person who support good causes”)
what factors influence foot-in-door technique
individual differences, a desire to act consistently
same requester and same target requests
explain a common study in foot-in-door technique (Freedman & Fraser, 1966)
asked small request of households to display smaller poster “Keep California beautiful”, between-ppt design (some households didn’t receive poster)
then larger request of displaying a billboard, found small request increased compliance 55% vs 17%
explain the door-in-face technique (including reciprocal concessions and social responsibilities and guilt)
larger request first that most will reject then followed by smaller more reasonable one
reciprocal concessions follows the norm to reciprocate as we recognise requester has made concessions so feel pressure to reciprocate and compromise
social responsiblity and guilt - large request indicates need and we feel obliged to help, accepting smaller request alleviates the guilt from our initial decline
give a study for door-in-face technique (Cialdini et al, 1975)
large request of asking individuals to sign up to volunteer in youth offending centre often (betwee-ppt design)
smaller request was asked to chaperone group from centre to zoo one time
those receiving a large request first 3x more likely to comply
explain compliance low balling
relies on fact we do not like to change mind after committment to course of action
provide a study into low balling (Cialdini et al, 1978)
asked to ppt in a 7am study (half not told it is at 7am, only asked to ppt in)
when already said yes, committed to course of action and less likley to un-committ
low-balling = 53% followed through
control = 24% signed up
give a real life example for low balling
for flight prices we see initial low cost and sign up, even though this doesn’t include many aspects
give the key parts of Milgram electric shock study
increased shock up to 400v with 4 escalating prods from experimenter
found 65% gave full v, replicated in different countries and samples (Shanab & Yahya, 1977: Jordan)
what were some pre-study expectations in Milgram electric shock study
110ppts (including 39 psychiatrics) predict not many higher than 150v, only 4% up to 300v, 1-2% to full volt
how does agentic state explain Milgram electric shock study
instrument of another
increased psychological distance
little/no sense of personal responsibility
state a few ethical considerations of Milgram
harm, deception, insufficient debriefs
ppts not immediately told shock is fake
transformed view of human behaviour = people viewed Nazi as evil so they felt better about self, however study made news impacting view on humankind
replications are impossible for current day
give critical evaluation of Milgrams method
- experimenter improvised prompts, was more coercive (Perry, 2013)
- scepticism of cover story, 50% actually believe (Perry, 2013)
- engaged fellowship: went along as identified with the experimenter
- Milgram misrepresented debrief procedure (Nicholson, 2011)
outline Sherif 1936 Autokinetic movement experiment (conformity)
dot stays stationary however illusion makes it look like lights slightly move
1. ppts judge privately
2. ppts judges in group - confederate shouts out answer
3. found ppt with extreme scores change answer to align with other
outline Asch 1955 conformity experiment
sits in semi-circle with naive ppts last (every one else is confederate)
first 2 trials confederate answer correct
then false answer
25% ppt correct on all 12 trials
75% conformed to group on at least 1 trial, total error rate = 36.8%
name an adaptation from Asch with their result
increasing gropu size 7-15 and thought conforming to norm would increase. found error rate with no. confederates was=
2: 13.6%
7: 31.7%
9: 35%
15: 31%
what 3 factors does Turner say why people conform
- informational influence
- normative social influence: want of acceptance
- referent informational influence: derive identity from majority response (conforming to group schema)
give critical evaluations of Asch method
- demand characteristics- didn’t want to ruin result
- confusing situation: providing wrong answer to easy situation, may be wondering if something is off
- ppts reported they conformed as didn’t want to spoil research or seem foolish. believed a victim of optical illusions, showing blind conformity wasn’t present
what did Moscovici; Jetten & Hornsey critically evaluate from Asch (questions on aim)
Moscovici = does not show conformity but instead provides evidence of significant resistance level (every one time ppt conformed dissentedtwice, so more likely to resist majority than to conform)
Jetten & Hornsey = did the study display conformity or resistance? 25% resisted group norm pressure, 11% conformed in all trials
