Section 1 : Social Influence - Conformity To Social Roles Flashcards

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

What are social roles

A

Behaviours that society expect from you.

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

What is an example of social roles

A

Mother has to fulfil her role as mother by loving and caring for her child

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

Who set up a study for conformity to social roles

A

Zimbardo (1973)

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

What did Zimbardo set up

A

A mock prison - to see if people would conform to the assigned roles as prisoner or guard

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

Who were selected for this study

A

Male students

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

How were students who were selected for this study assigned roles

A

They were randomly assigned a role of prisoner or guard

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

What was being observed during this study

A

The behaviour of the prisoners and guards

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

What was the method used for this study

A

-Prisoners were arrested
-They were taken to prison given uniform and numbers
-Guards also wore uniforms and mirrored sunglasses

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

What was the result of this study

A

-Guards tried to assert authority over prisoners
-Prisoners stuck together and then became more passive and obedient, while guards invented nastier punishments
-Experiment was abandoned early because some prisoners were very distressed

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

What can we conclude about Zimbardo’s Prison Study

A

-Guards and Prisoners quickly adopted their roles.
-Zimbardo claims that our social role can influence our behaviour - seemingly well balanced men became unpleasant and aggressive in the role of the guards

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

Was this a controlled observation

A

Yes, meaning there was good control of variables.

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

Why can’t the study be generalised

A

Because it was an artificial environment meaning it cannot be generalised to real life situations

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

Were there ethical problems with Zimbardo 1973

A

Yes, prisoners found the experience very distressing

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

Was there observer bias

A

Yes. Zimbardo ran the prison himself and later admitted that he became too personally involved in the situation. The conclusion Zimbardo reached doesn’t expIain why some of the participants acted according to their roles

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

Has anyone replicated Zimbardo’s prison study

A

No. This is down to design problems

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

Have their been similar studies to Zimbardo’s Prison Study

A

Yes: Reicher and Haslam

17
Q

What was Reicher and Haslam (2006) - The BBC Prison Study

A

-A controlled observation, in a mock prison which was filmed for tv.
-15 All male participants (5 guards and 10 participants)
-Daily tests for depression, compliance with rules and stress
-Prisoners knew one prisoner chosen at random would become a guard after 3 days
-Ethics committee had power to stop experiment at any time to protect participants

18
Q

What were the results of Reicher and Haslam (2006)

A

-Guards failed to form a united group and identify with their role
-In the first 3 days, prisoners acted in a way that would get them promoted to a guard
-After one got promoted, they became stronger as no chance of promotion
-Unequal system between guard and system collapsed as unwillingness of the guards and strength of prisoner group.
-Day 6 prisoners rebelled and participants decided to live in democracy - this also collapsed
-Study was abandoned early on the advice of the ethics committee as participants showed signs of distress

19
Q

What is the conclusion of Reicher and Haslam

A

The participants didn’t fit into their expected social roles, suggesting that roles are flexible

20
Q

What were the evaluations of Reicher and Haslam (2006)

A

-Contrast in attitudes between prisoners (strong) and guards (weak)
-Criticised for being made for TV - argued that elements of the study were staged and participants played up for the cameras
-Results cannot be generalised - it was artificial situation
-Ethically study was good. Participants weren’t deceived so they were able to give informed consent
-Participants were protected and study abandoned after distressed appeared.