S.influence Flashcards
who proposed the 3 types of conformity
Kehlman ‘58
research support for normative influence
Linkenbach and Perkins’03
-peers exposed to message that majority don’t smoke..less likely to
Research support for informational
Wittenbrink and Henley’96
- african Americans
Weakness for Normative…
Nolan et al ‘ 08
-energy conservation study
key study of conformity
Asch ‘56
- 123 US male undergraduates
- all but 1 confederates
- seated around table, asked which of the 3 lines matched the standard line
- took turns..real participant answered second to last
- 12/18 critical trials told to give wrong answer
- 33% said same answer as confederates
- 1/4 never conformed
strengths for Asch’s study
- conducted experiments..high control variable..able to manipulate variables..contributed to our understanding of conformity
- practical applications- problems such as jury/decision making process.. first vote is 95% of outcome..conformity is bad for group decisions
ethical issues for Asch’s study
told it was a talk of visual perception..decieved thus not full consent ..lacks validity so could not give full consent
- of Asch.. Smith et al ‘06
culture affects conformity average conformity rate: Individual culture- 25% Collectivist- 37% perhaps higher..viewed more favourably in binding communities together
Asch- group size stats
1 or 2 confederates - little
3- 30%
3+ -did not increase
unanimity- support of a confederate
33%-> 5.5%
key study to conformity for social roles
Zimbardo ‘73 SPE
procedure for Zimbardo’s SPE
- mock prison
- wanted to see if brutality of guards was bc of personality or conformity to social role
- 24 most stable volunteers
- randomly allocated guard or prisoner
- inc realism- prisoners were arrested at home, de-individualised, referred to as numbers
- officers given uniform, mirrored glasses(hide emotions)
findings for Zimbardo’s study
- guards became abusive..woke them up middle of night to clean toilets with hands
- symptoms after 2 days..rebelled
- 5 had to be released
- terminated after 6 days
+Where was the same social effect as SPE seen at?
Abu Ghraib ‘ 04.. US soldiers tortured Iraqi prisoners..misused the power that was associated with the assigned role
+ ethical issues of SPE
- met guidelines of the Stanford uni ethics committee
- ppl debriefed for several years..found no lasting effects
-ethical issues of SPE
Z was too involved in the study..psychological harm..emotionally distressed
-____ claims conformity to role is not automatic
Haslam and Reicher ‘12
- found guards did small favours for prisoners
- didn’t harass
- chose to behave rather than conform
- SPE - contradicting research by ________
Haslam and Reicher ‘06
- BBC
- prisoners worked together collectively and challenged authority
- guards failed their role
- power shifted
- in SPE, guards didn’t conform to their roles..more like a shared social identity
situational variables affecting obedience
proximity
location
uniform
proximity -obedience..
1) obedience rate if teacher and learner were in the same room?
2) obedience rate if experimenter gave orders over the phone?
1) 40%
2) 21%
The obedience rate if Milgram’s experiment was in an office(no connection to Yale)
48%
Key study for obedience
Milgram ‘63
how many participated in Milgram’s study
40 participants
what were the (false) aims told to the participants of Milgram’s study
how punishment affects learning