psychology - social influence p1 Flashcards
1
Q
social influence definition
A
following what others do to fit in
can be good or bad
2
Q
conformity definition
A
publicly going with influence of majority
follow standards, rules, law
3
Q
what are forms of conformity in order from least serious?
A
-conformity
-identification
-internalisation
4
Q
compliance definition
A
publicly going along with majority to gain approval from group
shallowest form
e.g. school rules
5
Q
identification definition
A
public and private agreement to gain acceptance from group
e.g. football cheering
6
Q
internalisation definition
A
complete acceptance through adoption of beliefs
deepest form
e.g. vegan
7
Q
what are the kinds of influence
A
-majority influence
-minority influence
-stooge and confederate
8
Q
majority influence definition
A
a person changes themselves to fit in with a larger group
9
Q
minority influence definition
A
individual influences a big group to change opinions on issues
10
Q
stooge / confederate definition
A
non-participant has to answer differently.
real participants think they are a real participant
11
Q
what are the two main reasons people conform
A
Normative social influence (NSI)
Informative social influence (ISI)
12
Q
Normative social influence
A
-to fit in
-they don’t privately agree
-for reward and to avoid punishment
13
Q
informative social influence
A
-look to others for help if uncertain if they’re right or wrong
-to avoid standing out and to act appropriately
14
Q
Normative social influence (NSI) experiment
A
Asch 1956
results : change their answer to not ‘look stupid’
15
Q
Informative social influence (ISI) experiments
A
Jennesse 1932 - change answer due to looking at others
Abrams et al 1990 - likely to conform with those who are similar
16
Q
what was the aim of Asch’s experiment
A
-study effects of group pressure
-highlight conformity in groups
17
Q
procedure of Asch’s experiment
A
Line judgement
-placed a real participant in a room full of fake participants who had already agreed their answers
18
Q
Findings of Asch’s experiment
A
-37% of participants conformed to ‘avoid standing out’ (NSI) or due to ‘doubting themselves’(ISI)
19
Q
conclusion of Asch’s experiment
A
- in group settings, MORE will conform
- 37% with a partner
- 5% without a partner
20
Q
strengths of Asch’s experiment
A
1) lab settings - controlled
2) good control of extraneous variables
3) reliability
21
Q
weakness of Asch’s experiment
A
1) biased sample - all male, all same age
2) lacks population validity - female or elderly
3) low ecological validity
22
Q
tyranny definition
A
anyone acting as a dictator
e.g. Hitler and Kim Jong-Un
23
Q
deindividuation definition
A
phenomenon where people engage in impulsive/violent acts - believe they can’t identified
24
Q
aim of Zimbardo 1973 experiment
A
Impact of situational factors and power dynamics on behaviour
How to conform to the roles of guards and prisoners
25
Procedure of Zimbardo's experiment
- 24 men randomly assigned to roles
- prisoners names weren't used, only numbers
- guards had uniforms - told they had power over prisoners
26
Findings of Zimbardo's experiment
- relationships become very negative
- guards become more aggressive
- prisoners became anxious and depressive
- terminated 6 days instead of 2 weeks due to psychological abuse
27
conclusion of Zimbardo experiment
- illusion of 'power' became too real
- everyone identified and conformed to rules
28
strengths of Zimbardo's experiment
- random allocations - prevent extraneous variables
- goes on to inform how prison systems creates aggression
29
weakness of Zimbardo's experiment
- unethical - physical and psychological abuse
- deception
- 1/3 guards conformed to roles
30
what are the strengths of the Reicher and Haslam experiment
- improve on past ethical issues
- psychological and physical help available throughout
31
what are the weaknesses of the Reicher and Haslam experiment
- demand characteristics - knew they were being recorded so might change their behaviour
- only included males - not representative of population
32
demand characteristics
participants know what the study wanted so might change their behaviour positively or negatively - inaccurate results.
33
Ethics in Reicher and Haslam experiment
- submitted for scrutiny by BPS
- participants were screened to ensure they were physically and emotionally healthy
- gave INFORMED consent
- checked weekly by clinical psychologist
- paramedic on set
- 5 person ethics comitee could terminate test at any point
34
Procedures for participants in Reicher and Haslam experiment
- recruited by advert in national press
- fully assessed over a weekend
- 332 applicants reduced to 27 mean
- 15 chosen to represent diversity
- 5 guards and 10 prisoners
35
what is quantitative data?
numerical data that can be statistically analysed
e.g. experiments, observations, correlations
36
what was the quantitative data in Reicher and Haslam?
- video and audio recording of behaviour
- daily psychometric scales
- cortisol level (saliva) as stress indicator
37
what is obedience as a social influence
type of social influence which causes someone to act in a response to an order from someone else. The person who gives the order normally has power or authority
38
Milgram quote
'could it be Eichmann and others in the Holocaust were just following orders?'
39
Aim of Milgram experiment
- find out how far people would go to follow orders
40
Procedure of Milgram experiment
- experimenter and learners were stooges. Teacher reads sentences and questions.
- If 'learner' gets it wrong, they get shocked going from 15 to 450 V, increasing by 15 V each time
41
Findings in Milgram experiment
65% were willing to deliver fatal shock.
All teachers showed discomfort, some more that others ( groaning, dig nails into skin)
42
Milgram experiment details of participants
- recruited by newspaper advert
- volunteers were paid (4.50) no matter what happened
- experiment - white lab coat (authority)
- teacher - naïve participant
- learner - stooge - strapped into chair
experimenter had scripts
43
Results of Milgrams experiment
- 100% went to 300 volts
- 12.5% stopped when they got to 300 volts
- 65% went to the max of 450 volts
- psychiatrists thought only 1-3% would go all the way
- he used agentic state to explain his results
44
what factors did Milgram believe affect the level of obedience
- related to external circumstances not personality
- proximity
- location
- uniform
44
Experimenters quotes in Milgram experiment
- 'although shocks may be painful, but they aren't dangerous'
- 'please continue'
- 'the experiment requires you continue'
- 'it's absolutely essential that you continue'
- 'you have no other choice; you must go on'
45
Situational factors in Milgram experiment
-Milgram's 'baseline study' established a method he could repeat or vary
-situational factors might explain behaviour better than personality
46
What happened to results when Milgram changed the location of the experiment
the obedience dropped for 65% doing fatal shock to 45%
47
What happened to results when Milgram changed the proximity of the experiment
- in different rooms = 65%
- same room = 40%
- touch proximity = 30%
- instruction over phone = 20.5%
48
Milgram evaluation AO3 weakness
- lacks external validity - antrocentism = bias in research where is only or mainly men
49
Milgram evaluation AO3 strengths
Sheridan and King 1972 found 52% males and 100% females gave 450V shock to puppy
But Burger 2009 found no difference in male or female
49
Milgram issues
-lack of external validity in relation to other cultures
-is it relevant to modern society?
-internal validity
50
Milgram lack of external validity in relation to other cultures
-Meeus and Raajimakers 1986-90% Spanish obeyed
-Kilham and Mann 1974-28% Australian obeyed
- Mantell 1971 - 80% Germans obeyed
-Milgram is NOT generalised to other cultures
50
is milgrams study relevant to modern society?
- Burger 2009, found no difference in results when he replicated it 50 years later
51
does milgrams study have internal validity
- Orne and Holland 1968 thought participants knew the shocks weren't real
- Post experiment interviews show how 75% thought they were real
- Perry 2012 found only 50% thought the shocks were real
52
strengths from ethical evaluation of Milgrams study
- 2% said they regretted involvement - no signs of long term damage after 1 year
- milgram was surprised by the obedience rate(65%) - 40 psychiatrist thought it would be 1-3%
- he debriefed them after - said they had to think shocks were real otherwise the results would be off
- 35% refused to go on
- Milgram had his membership to American Psychological Association suspended
53
What is Derren Browns experiment
modern day Milgram OBEDIENCE
54
results of derren brown experiment
- 50% gave the lethal 450V shock
- blind obedience - 'I was only following orders'
55
Autonomous state
people direct their own actions , and they take responsibility for actions
- less likely to do bad things
56
what did Lifton 1986 study
- studied german doctors working in auschwitz
- they change from normal doctors to people who could do vile things to prisoners
57
What to compare hofling to?
- Milgrams
- field experiments vs lab experiments
58
Aim of Hoflings experiment
- more realistic study involving nursers who didnt know they were involved the experiment
- test extent the nursers would go to obey a doctor's orders
59
what 3 rules did the nurses break
- not allowed to accept instructions over the phone
- the dose was over the maximum limit stated on the box
-medicine itself as unauthorised
60
Results of Holfing
- 21 out of 22 (95%) of the nurses obeyed.
- 11 admitted to knowing what the dosage was but doing it anyway
- 31/33 said they wouldn't obey
61
conclusion of Hofling
- showed how people are very unlikely to question commands given by authority
- social pressure of imbalance of power
62
strengths of Hofling
- high ecological validity - real life environment
- replicability - the 'doctor' had a script that was said to all nurses
- control group - allow comparisons to be made between experimental and control condition
63
weakness of Holfing
- attrition - control group had 33 but only 22 in the experiment (high dropout rate)
- ethical issues - broke ethical guideline of deception as the doctor was real - Code of Conduct - stress
- lack reliability - Rank and Jacobson tried to replicate with a well known drug but didnt get a similar results (nursers knew the results of overdosing)
64
what to compare Burger to`
- Milgram Variation 5 (learner was complaining of heart condition
65
aim of Burger 2009
- find out if the same results as Milgram could re-occur when the study is replicated with modern participants
- see if personality traits influence obedience
66
procedure of Burger 2009
- experimenter is white male in his 30s, the learner in his 50s
- the script is the exact same as Milgrams but the participants was given 15V shock instead of 45V
- the experiment was stopped when participants went to deliver 165V
67
sample in Burger 2009
- 70 participants in a volunteer sample given $50 before the study started
- did questionnaires to choose the participants
68
results of Burger 2009
- 70% were prepared to go past 150V
- those who stopped at 150V or sooner had significantly higher locus of control
69
conclusion of Burger 2009
- milgrams results are still the same 50 years later
70
Burger 2009 empathy
- Burger found empathy had no difference even thoguh Milgram said it did
71
what is destructive authority
when people with legitimate authority abuse their power and treat others harshly
72
what is agentic shift
when someone goes into the agentic state after someone with authority gives an order
73
Situational factors influencing obedience
- explanations that focus on the influences that stem from the environment in which that person is found
74
Dispositional factors influencing obedience
- suggests individuals behaviour caused by internal characteristics within their personality
75
Authoritarian personality origins
- first proposed by Fromm 1941
- used to explain those with right-wing, conservative views.
- he identified dispositional characteristics of absolute obedience
76
Adorno et Al procedure
- investigate the causes of obedient personality in a study of more than 2,000 middle-class, white Americans and their unconscious attitudes to other races
- developed F-scale questionnaire to measure relationship between personality and prejudiced beliefs
77
Fascist
someone who believes in totalitarian state rule by supreme leader who controls people and treats people harshly
78
Adorno et al findings
- those who scored highly, identified with 'strong' people and looked down on 'weak' people
- very conscious of peoples actions
- high scores had cognitive style
79
Authoritarian characteristics
- obedient to authority
- submissive to authoirty
- inflexible with thier outlook
- believe society needs strong leaders to enforce traditional values
80
what did Elms and Milgram do
a fellow up study with those who were in Milgrams original study
81
what did Elms and Milgram find for the F-Scale
those who gave the 450V shock scored higher on tests of authoritarianism and lower on social responsibility.
However some who were more obedient had good relationships with parents
82
what did Altemeyer find for the F-Scale
authoritarianism personality gave themselves higher scores
83
what did Zilmer et al find for the F-Scale
16 Nazis scored highly on 3/9 on the f-scale
Suggests there might be other factors influencing obedience
84
what does locus of control refer to
someone's perception of personal control over their own behaviour
85
what is internal locus of control
believes their life is determined by their own efforts
'I made that happen'
86
what is external locus of control
believes their life id determined by fate, luck, and external factors
'wrong place wrong time'
87
how does internal locus of control effect social influence
- they seem out information which will help them
- less likely to rely on others
- resist pressure from others
88
how does external locus of control affect social influence
- more likely to be influenced
- don't believe they exercise personal control over their lives
- not very self assured
89
who evaluated locus of control?
- Spector 1983
- Shute 1975
- Avtgis 1998
- Holland 1967
- Blass 1991
- Jones and Kavanagh 1996
90
what did Spector do
gave Rotters questionnaire to 157 uni students
91
what did Spector find
- students with external LOC conformed more in NSI
- people with less need to socially fit in are more able to resist social influence
92
what did shute do
exposed undergraduates to students with conservative or liberal attitudes to drug taking
93
what did shute do
exposed undergraduates to students with conservative or liberal attitudes to drug taking
94
what did shute find
- students with internal LOC confronted less to pro drug attitude
- people with high internal LOC have increased resistance to social influence
95
what did Avtgis do
meta-analysis of LOC and conformity
96
what did Avtgis find
- individuals with internal LOC were less easily persuaded, less likely to conform
97
what did Holland find
no relationship between LOC and obedience
98
what did Blass do
analysed data from Holland's experiment
99
what did Blass find
- those with internal LOC were more able to resist obedience
100
what did Jones and Kavanagh find
those with external LOC were more likely to obey unethical authority
101
what is minority influence
- form of social influence
- achieved through process of conversion
- most likely to lead to internalisation
102
important factors in minority influence
commitment
consistency
flexibility
103
consistency in minority influence
- over time, consistency in minoritys views increased the interest from others
- it makes others rethink their views
104
commitment in minority influence
- important that their activities have some risk for the minority as it demonstrates their commitment
- Augmentation Principle - increase the amount of interest
105
flexibility in minority influence
- as minorities are usually powerless, they must negotiate thier positions at time and compromise
- Nemeth - if they are too rigid, they wont succeed. if they are too flexible, they are inconsistent
106
process of change in minority influence
- all 3 factors make people think about the topic
- over time, people become 'converted' to minority view.
- the more this happens, the faster the rate of conversion (snowball effect)
107
moscovici minority influence study 1969
- referred to the process of changing the majority view by the minoirity as conversion
- 192 women
- judge colour of 36 slides
- 2 confederates - 8.4% said they were green. 34% they were green at least once
- control group - no confederates - 0.25% said they were green
- lab experiment
108
aim of moscovici minority influence study
to investigate the effects of consistent minority on the majority
109
results of moscovici minority influence study
- in condition one, a consistent minority (two confederates) had 8.42% of true ppt copying their answer
- but for the inconsistent minority, had only 1.25% saying green
- 32% said it was green at least once
110
conclusion of moscovici minority influence study
- minorities can influence a majority, but not always, and only if they behave in certain ways (i.e. consistent, flexible, commitment)
111
what is social change
alteration of behaviour patterns and attitudes within a cultural group
112
social change
- involves the way society changes big shifts in beliefs and attitudes
- happening constantly at a gradual pace, with minority being the main influence
- minority slowly converting majority to have new social norms
- e.g. African American Rights, Suffragettes
113
aim of martin, hewstone, martin social change study
see if majority or minority influence are more resistant
114
what did martin, hewstone and martin find in their social change study
- minority influence creates systematic processing and are more resistant to counter-persuasion
- supports idea that minority influence cn lead to social change
- minority influence is a source of innovation and change
115
weakness of moscovici's study for minority influence
- lacks mundane realism
- no real life relevance as it was a lab experiment
- therefore, low ecological validity
116
what is agentic state
when someone acts as an agent for someone who is an authority figure, often passing the blame for their actions onto others
120
