Social Flashcards
1
Q
what are the 2 theories of obedience?
A
- agency theory
- social impact theory
2
Q
explain agency theory
A
- a theory proposed by milgram
- suggests that people obey authority figures because they enter an ‘agentic state’ where they see themselves as acting on behalf of someone else
3
Q
what is meant by the autonomous state?
A
- individuals see themselves as responsible for their own actions
- make independent decisions
4
Q
what is meant by the agentic shift?
A
- moving from an autonomous state to the agentic state when faced with an authority figure
5
Q
what is moral strain?
A
- the psychological distress experienced when obeying orders that go against our personal beliefs or ethics
6
Q
what is dissent?
A
- disagreeing with orders given from an authority figure, but not necessarily disobeying
7
Q
what 2 things did milgram say must be in place to enter the agentic state?
A
- the person giving the orders must be perceived as legitimate
- the person being ordered must believe that the authority will accept responsibility for what happens
8
Q
what is destructive obedience?
A
- obeying orders which leads to the harming of other people
9
Q
what is diffusion of responsibility?
A
- the person no longer monitors their own behaviour
- frees the individual from the demands of their consciences
10
Q
what are the 2 defence mechanisms?
A
- denial
- avoidance
11
Q
why do we use defence mechanisms?
A
- they help us avoid the distress of having to perform acts that we would usually deem unacceptable
12
Q
how do we develop knowledge of hierarchy?
A
- we are socialised to recognise authority figures and what punishments will be received if we disobey
13
Q
what evidence is there in milgram’s study that ppts suffered from moral strain?
A
- sweating
- nervous laughter
- 3 had seizures
14
Q
+ evaluation : 2 examples of supporting evidence for agency theory
A
- MILGRAM: 100% ppts administered 300V shock and 65% went all the way to 450V
- BURGER: 70% of ppts administered 150V shock
15
Q
+ evaluation : example of applying agency theory to society
A
- explains why soldiers in WW2 followed orders without question
- they saw themselves as agents to hitler
16
Q
- evaluation : example of credibility of agency theory
A
- agency theory can’t explain individual differences in obedience
- neglects the 35% in milgrams experiment that didn’t go to 450V
17
Q
- evaluation : how good is the supporting research of agency theory?
A
- milgrams experiment lacks ecological validity
- it was a lab experiment which involved administering shocks
- task wasn’t reflective of a real life order that would be given
- results may not accurately display how we obey under authority
18
Q
explain social impact theory
A
- explains how the presence and influence of others impact upon our behaviour
19
Q
who are sources?
A
- the ones giving orders
- influencers
20
Q
who are targets?
A
- the ordered
- influenced
21
Q
identify and explain the 3 social forces
A
- strength: how important the influencers are to you in terms of status, age and authority
- number of sources: we are more likely to be influenced by numerous people who agree with something
- immediacy: proximity
22
Q
what is meant by multiplication of impact?
A
- as the force of the source increases, so does their social impact
23
Q
what is meant by division of impact?
A
- as the number of targets increases, the sources social impact decreases
24
Q
which of milgram’s studies was immediacy a strong social force?
A
- baseline
25
how can we use immediacy to explain the results of milgram's shock plate variation?
- they had to place the learners hand on the shock plate
- increased their responsibility
- lower obedience
26
which of milgrams studies was immediacy less influential?
- the telephone variation
27
+ evaluation : evidence that supports the 3 social forces
MILGRAM
1. rebellious stooges (number): only 15% went to 450V
2. telephonic orders (immediacy): only 21% went to 450V
3. ordinary man (strength): only 20% went to 450V
28
+ evidence : application of social impact theory to real life
- using a maths formula, we can predict and prevent atrocities from occurring in the future.
- explain events from WW2: nazis wore uniform which increased their strength and the immediacy of their actions instilled fear
29
- evaluation: example of credibility of social impact theory
- doesn't explain individual differences so is reductionist
- assumes social behaviour can be explained purely in terms of the interactions between individuals, and that human behaviour can be reduced down to 3 factors (strength, immediacy, number)
30
- evaluation: example of opposing evidence for SIT?
HOFLING ET AL
- 98% of nurses obeyed and administered the injection despite it being against hospital rules
- he gave the order on the phone
- supports strength, but opposes immediacy
31
AO1 of milgrams baseline
- 40m
- 20-50yrs
- new haven area of america
- took place at yale uni
- volunteer sample from advert in local paper
- paid $4.50
- 4 prods eg 'it is absolutely essential that you continue'
- 300-315V learner banged the wall then went silent
- 65% went to 450V
- nervous laughter, 3 had seizures, sweating, trembling
32
A03 of milgrams baseline
- G: ethnocentric, 40 men, all from new haven area
+ R: standardised, same 4 prods, same pre-recorded banging on the wall, believed they were actually administering shocks up 15V
- EV: artificial setting at Yale, lacks mundane realism, administering shocks in a memory test is unrealistic
- E: deception, ppts thought the study was on learning and punishment rather than obedience
33
AO1 of milgrams telephone variation
- 21% went to 450V
- experimenter gave initial instructions and then left
- several ppts administered lower shocks than were required
- 4 prompts were given (link to proximity)
34
AO1 of milgrams run down office block variation
- industrial city of bridgeport
- 3 room office in a rundown commercial building
- area was unfamiliar to all ppts
- 2 ppts refused to administer even a 15V shock
35
AO1 of milgrams ordinary man variation
- experimenter doesnt indicate which shock levels are to be administered
- experimenter receives phone call, is flustered and eager to have the experiment finished
- after he leaves, confederate suggests increasing the shock level each time learner makes a mistake
- 20% didnt continue to the end
36
what situational factors affect obedience?
- gradual commitment
- proximity
- buffers
- location
- uniform
- group pressure
37
what are the 2 theories on individual differences in personalities?
- authoritarian personality
- locus of control
38
what was adorno interested in?
- discovering a link between collective ideologies - such as those proposed by the nazis - and the personalities of individuals
39
what 3 research methods did adorno use?
1. case studies e.g. nazis
2. clinical interviews - revealed situational aspects of childhood
3. psychometric testing - F-scale
40
what characteristics would someone who scored highly on the F-scale hold?
- conventionalism
- hostility to outgroups
- intolerance of ambiguity
- submissive to authority figures
- belief ppl are divided into weak and strong
- authoritarian aggression
- obsession with ranks/status
41
+ evaluation: example of supporting research for the authoritarian personality
ELMS AND MILGRAM
- obedients reported being less close to their fathers during childhood than defiants did
- obedients had often been punished by severe beatings or deprivation
42
- evaluation: explain example of credibility of authoritarian personality
- theory holds a great deal of political bias
- items on adorno's F-scale were very tied up with the social and political situation of the 1940-50s
- F-scale only measures right wing authoritarianism, ignores the existence of left wing authoritarianism
- therefore doesnt account for disobedience across the whole political spectrum
43
+ evaluation: how good is the research for authoritarian personality?
- based on empirical research
- clinical interviews, F-scale
- put on a scale of A-S (antisemetism, ethnocentrism, political-economic conservatism, potentially fascist)
44
explain the characteristics of someone with internal locus of control
- believe what happens to them is the consequence of their own behaviours
- less likely to obey or conform
- can succeed in stressful situations
45
explain the characteristics of someone with external locus of control
- believe in fate and luck
- more likely to obey and conform
46
+ evaluation: example of supporting evidence for locus of control
MILGRAM
- ppt refused to go beyond 210V
- she was raised in nazi germany
- had first hand experience of the consequences of blindly obeying an authority figure
- in an interview, she revealed that witnessing the obedience of nazi soldiers had made her more autonomous
47
what are the 5 key factors that increase someones social power?
- legitimacy
- reward
- expertise
- coercivity
- referent
48
AO1 for personality as an explanation for obedience
- adorno devised the F-scale which was a questionnaire used to detect authoritarian personalities
- a harsh style of parenting leads to children developing personality traits (such as toughness and destructiveness) where individuals are submissive to authority but harsh to those seen as subordinate to themselves
49
AO3 for personality as an explanation for obedience
- MILGRAM + ELMS: 20 ppts who were obedient were found to have difficult relationships with their fathers, receiving more punishment. Supports the idea that a harsher upbringing makes people more authoritarian.
- F-scales are derived from self-report data which could be subject to social desirability bias and therefore decreases validity.
50
AO1 for individual differences in obedience
- individual differences are explanations of behaviour based on their unique makeup (eg gender, age).
- theodore adorno reserached the authoritarian personality that have strong obedience levels and encourage the same behaviour in others.
- most research finds that gender doesnt have a significant influence on obedience. milhgram found women and men to be almost equal in obedience levels.
51
AO3 for individual differences in obedience
- the idea of an authoritarian personality would explain why 35% of ppts in milgrams experiment didnt obey to 450V.
- however, authoritarian personality has been critised for being politically biased as there was blind obedience in stalins communist regime, not just fascist regimes like hitlers.
- individual differences could help teachers identify diobedient or overly-obedient students early on. the f-scale could be used to find out which children are authoritarian and are more likely to join gangs.
- situational factors play a big role in obedience- the agentic state explanation.
52
what is the social classic study?
- sherif et al
53
what was the aim of sherif?
- to find out what factors make 2 groups devlop hostile relationships and then see how this hostility can be reduced
54
explain the sample of sherif
- 22 ppts
- 11 yr old boys
- opportunity sampling
- rattlers and eagles
- protestant families
- middle class
- oklahoma
55
how were the boys in sherif matched?
- IQ
- sporting ability
56
what was the group formation phase of sherif?
- seperated into 2 groups
- seperated for 5-6 days
- bonding activities like camping
57
what was the friction phase of sherif?
- 2 groups in a competitive activity of baseball
58
what prejudice behaviours occured in sherifs study?
- raids
- fights
- swearing
- burning of the flags
59
what was sherifs superordinate goal?
- fixing the water supply
60
- evaluation: explain the generalisability of sherif
- androcentric
- ethnocentric
61
- evaluation: explain the reliability of sherif
- field experiment
- not standardised
- couldnt control how the boys interacted
62
+ evaluation: explain the validity of sherif
- high ecological validity
- real summer camp
- triangualtion of methods
- high in mundane realism as real tasks like tug of war
63
+ evaluation: explain the applications of sherif
- use superordinate goals to reduce prejudice
64
whats the social contemporary study?
- burger
65
what was the aim of burger?
- investigate obedience by partially replicating milgrams study to examine whether situational factors affect obedience
66
explain burgers sample
- 70 ppts, 29m, 41w
- volunteer sample through an advert
- screened eg on drug problems
67
what was the highest voltage used in burgers study?
- 150V
68
explain the results of burger
- 70% obeyed to 150V
69
+ evaluation: explain the generalisability of burger
- used males and females
- results on obedience applicable to both genders
70
+ evaluation: explain the reliability of burger
- all ppts given 15v sample shock
- up to 150v
71
- evaluation: explain the validity of burger
- artificial to shock a learner
72
- evaluation: explain the ethics of burger
- deception and informed consent
- told the wrong aim
73
+ evaluation: explain the ethics of burger
- protection from harm
- presence of a clinical psychologist
- prior screening
