Social infleucne part 2

Question 1

Evaluation of Agentic state and Legitimacy of authority: The agentic state explanation and real life obedience

Answer 1

• Milgram claimed that people shift back and forth between the autonomous state and the agentic state
• this fails to explain the gradual and irreversible transition that Lifton 1986 found in his study of German doctors working in Aushwitz
• lifton found that doctors had changed from ordinary medical professionals who cared for there patients to carried out vile and lethal experiments on pateitns
• Staub suggests that rather than the agentic shift being responsible for the transition found in Holocaust perpetrators it is the experience of carrying out acts of evil over a long period of time that changes the way that they think

Question 2

Evaluation of Agentic state and Legitimacy of authority: the agentic state or just plain cruel

Answer 2

• one of the signs of cruelty is the fact that the participants used the situation to express their sadistic impulses
• proved by SPE, within a few days guards became cruel even though there were no authority figure telling them to do so

Question 3

Evaluation of Agentic state and Legitimacy of authority: the legitimate authority explanation and real life obedience

Answer 3

• can be used to justify harming others, if people authorise another person to make judgements for them about what is appropriate conduct they no longer feel that their own moral values are relevant to their conduct
• therefore as a consequence when directed by a legitimate authority they are willing to do so
• shown in military authority

Question 4

Evaluation of Agentic state and Legitimacy of authority: the agentic state as loss of personal control

Answer 4

• Fennis and Aarts - suggest that the process of agentic shift is not confined to obedience to authority but extends to other forms of social influence
• reason for the agentic shift is a reduction in an individuals experience of personal control therefore they show an increased acceptance of external sources of control to compensate for this therefore they have greater obedience to authority

Question 5

Evaluation of Agentic state and Legitimacy of authority: the obedience in the cockpit a test of legitimate authority

Answer 5

Tarnow - provided the support for the power of legitimate authority through a study of aviation accidents

• studied data from US national trnaportation sadtey board review of all serious aircraft accidents in the US between 1978 and 1990 where the flight recorder was available and where crew actions were a contributing factor
• the participant accepts the experimenters definition of the situation - there was excessive dependence on the captains authority and expertise the second officer claimed that although the captain was taking a risky approach he said nothing as he assumed the captain knew what he was doing
• found this in 19 of the 37 accidents

Question 6

What is the authoritarian personality

Answer 6

this is a distinct personality pattern characterised by strict adherence to conventional values and a belief in absolute obedience or submission to authority

Question 7

Describe the F scale

Answer 7

this is an explanation to why some individuals require very little pressure in order to obey
F scale used by Adorno et al to measure the difficult components that make up the authoritarian personality
- F scale contained statements such as obedience and respect are the most important virtues that children should learn
- individuals with these type of personality were rigid thinkers who obeyed authority
- Adorono et al found that people who scored high had strict upbringings, there parents used physical punishment therefore assume there social situation is the norm,
- they learn and imitate

Question 8

Describe Right wing authoritarian

Answer 8

• Robert Altemeyer refined the concept of the authoritarian personality by identifying the three of the original personality variable that he referred to as right wing authoritarianism
• Coventionalism - adherence to conventional norms and values
• authoritarian aggression - aggressive feelings toward people who violate these norms
• authoritarian submission - uncritical submission to legitimate authorities
• tested the relationship between RWA and obedience where they were asked to give each other increasing levels of shock when they made mistakes
• significant correlation between RWA and the shocks give themselves
• obedience was unquestionable

Question 9

Describe the procedure Elms and Milgrams study

Answer 9

• did a follow up study using participants who had previously taken part in one of Milgrams experiments two months before
• selected 20 obedient participants and 20 defiant participants
• each participant completed a MMPI scale and the F scale to measure there level of authoritarianism
• participants were also asked a series of open ended questions including questions about there relationship with their parents during childhood and their attitudes to the experimenter

Question 10

Describe the finds of Elms and Milgrams study

Answer 10

• Little difference between obedient and defiant participants on MMPI variables
• however higher levels of authroiariansim among participants classified as obedient compared with those who were defiant
• found other differences such as obedient were less close to there fathers during childhood and more likely to describe them in negative terms and found the experimenter more admirable and the learner less so

Question 11

Evaluation of The Authoritarian Personality: Research evidence for the authoritarianism/ obedience link

Answer 11

• several studies have reported that more authoritarian participants are more obedient
  for example, milgram and Emlms
• milgram study - tend to suffer from a good deal of suspicion to whether or not that the shocks were real
• Damburn and Vantine overcame this problem by using an immersive virtual environment where the actor was filmed and recorded receiving the shocks then shown to the participants but they were told the victims reactions were not real but they still responded as if they were real, there were clear differences between participants RWA scores and the max voltage administered

Question 12

Evaluation of The Authoritarian Personality: The social context is more important

Answer 12

• Milgram accepted that there might be a dispositional basis to obedience and disobedience he did not believe the evidence for this was strong
• showed that variations in the social context of the study were the cause of the participants level of obedience

Question 13

Evaluation of The Authoritarian Personality Differences between authoritarian and obedient participants

Answer 13

Elms and Milgram research also presented important differences in the characteristics of the Authoritarian personality and the characterstics of obedient participants
- Elms and Milgram asked participants about their upbringing many of the full obedient participants were reported having a very good relationship with their parents rather than growing up with a strict parenthood like authoritarian

Question 14

Evaluation of The Authoritarian Personality: Education may determine authoritarianism and obedience

Answer 14

• Research has found that those that are less educated are more authoritarian than those who are well educated
• found that those with lower levels of education are more likely to be obedient
• suggests that instead of authoritarian causing obedience it might be lack of education which can be responsible for both

Question 15

Evaluation of The Authoritarian Personality: the left wing views are associated with lower levels of obedience

Answer 15

Altemeyers reformulation of the authoritarian personality in terms of right wing authoritarianism this suggest that people who define themselves as on the right of the political spectrum are more likely to obey authority

• Begue et al carried out a replication of Milgrams study as a games show where they had to deliver electric shocks to other participants
• interviews using world value survey questionnaire revealed that the more left the participants the lower intensity of shocks that they agreed to give the other participants

Question 16

Resistance to social influence:

what is social support and resisting conformity

Answer 16

• Asch found that the presence of social support enables an individual to resist conformity pressure from the majority
• introduction of an ally caused conformity levels to fall
• breaks the unanimity of the majority
• provides the individual with an independent view of reality making them more confident in there ability

Question 17

Resistance to social influence:

social support and resisting obedience

Answer 17

• disobedience can change the perception than it is difficult to take a stand against authority as the obedient behaviours of others make a harmful action appear acceptable
• if an individual has an ally to join them they are more likely to disobey than if they did not have an ally
• disobedient peers therefore act as role models
• individuals are able to use the defiance of peers as an opportunity to extricate themselves from causing harm to a victim
• milgram - one of variables was to shock the learner after seeing two others refuse to shock the learner, the participant refused to shock the learner and only 10% continued to the maximum 450v shock level

Question 18

Resistance to social influence:

what is locus of control

Answer 18

this is when people differ in there beliefs about whether the outcomes of their actions are dependent on what they do or events outside there personal control

Question 19

Resistance to social influence:

the nature of locus of control

Answer 19

• a strong internal locus of control is associated with the belief that we can control events in our lives, believe what happens to them is a consequence of their own ability and effort therefore they are more likely to have independence in thought and behaviour
• people with high external locus of control tend to believe what happens to them is to do with external factors they believe that things just happen to them and approach events with a more passive and fatalistic attitude than internals

Question 20

Resistance to social influence:

internality and resistance to social influence

Answer 20

1. high internals are active seeks of useful information so are less likely to rely on opininons of others which make them less vulnerable to social influence
2. high internals - more achievement orientated and consequently more likely to become leaders
3. high internals are better able to resist coercion from others, for example in a prisoner of war camp situation internals were able to resist attempts of an interrogater - Hutchins and Estey

Question 21

Evaluation of resistance to social influence: social support the importance of response order

Answer 21

• Allen and Levine studied whether the response position of the person providing social support made any difference to a participant resisting the majority
• in one condition a confederate answered first giving the right answer while other confederates all gave the same wrong answer
• in the second condition the confederate answered fourth
• the real participant always answered last
• support was more effective in position 1 than in position 4
• a right first answer confirms the participants own judgement this means that the initial commitment to the correct response that is initial

Question 22

Evaluation of resistance to social influence: support may not have to be valid to be effective

Answer 22

• Allen and Levine looked at whether social support was not particularly valid would not be effective in helping particpants resist conformity
• in one condition the confederate wore glasses with thick lenses therefore providing invalid social support
• in the second the supporter had normal vision
• both reduce conformity but the valid social supporter had much more impact

Question 23

Evaluation of resistance to social influence: locus of control is related to normative but not informational influence

Answer 23

• spector measured locus of control and predisposition to normative and informational influence in 157 undergrads
• found correlation between locus of control and predisposition to normative social influence
• found no relationship for predisposition to informational social influence therefore not a factor in this kind of conformity

Question 24

Evaluation of resistance to social influence: locus of control people are more external than they used to be

Answer 24

• meta analysis study by Twenge et al found that young Americans increasingly believed that there fate was determined more by luck and powerful others rather than their own actions.
• studies used for this analysis researchers found that locus of control scores are more external in student and child samples between 1960 and 2002

Question 25

Evaluation of resistance to social influence: social support in the real world - the Rosenstrasse protest

Answer 25

• 1943
• women protested in Berlin for the Gestapo to release 2,000 Jewish men who were married to non Jewish men
• stood in the street while the Gestapo threatened to open fire if they did not disperse
• Jews were set free
• example of Milgrams research
  disobedient peers made others more confident

Question 26

Minority influence: what is minority influence

Answer 26

this is a form of social influence where members of the majority group change their behaviours or beliefs as a result of their exposure to a persuasive minority

Question 27

Minority influence: consistency

Answer 27

• when people are exposed to minority influence they assume that the minority is in error
• minority adopt a consistent view and the majority begin to look at why the minority takes that position
• Wood et al carried out a meta analysis study of 97 studies of minority influence and found that minorities who were perceived as being consistent were influential

Question 28

Minority influence: Commitment

Answer 28

• commitment is important in the influence process as it suggests certainty confidence and courage in the face of the majority
• joining the majority has a greater cost for the individual than staying with the majority
• the commitment shown by minority members is typically greater this persuades majority members to take them seriously

Question 29

Minority influence: Flexibility

Answer 29

Mugny - suggests that flexibility is more effective at changing majority opinion

• minorities are typically powerless so they must negotiate their position with the majority rather than trying to enforce it
• majority that is too flexible is seen as weak
• netiher is effective but some degree of flexibility is better than none

Question 30

Minority influence: Procedure Moscovici et al

Answer 30

• each group is compromised four native participants and a minority of two confederates
• shown a series of blue slide that only varied in intensity and were asked to judge the colour of each slide
• in the consistent condition two confederates repeatedly called the blue slides green
• in the inconsistent condition they called the blue slides green on 2/3 of the time
• in a control condition with no confederates they were called blue throughout

Question 31

Minority influence: Findings Moscovici et al

Answer 31

• the consistent minority - influenced the naïve participants to say green on over 8% of the trials
• inconsistent minority exerted very little influence and did not differ from the control condition
• after the main study participants were asked to sort 16 coloured discs into either blue to green
• three of these discs were blue and three were green
  the remaining ten discs could be considered either blue or green
• had to decide a threshold point where everything would be blue and everything would be green
• those in the consistent and inconsistent set thresholds at different points
• consistent condition judged them more green than those in inconsistent condition
• greater with those who hadn’t gone along with the minority showing that the initial influence was more at a private than public level

Question 32

evaluation of minority influence: Research support for flexibility

Answer 32

• Nemeth and Brilmayer studied the role of flexibility in a stimulated jury situation where group members discussed the amount of compensation to be paid to someone involved in a ski lift accident
• confederate put forward an alternative point of view and refused to change his position this had no affect on other group members
• when the confederate compromised and showed a degree of shift towards the majority they did exert an influence on the rest of the group
• only evident in those who shifted late in negotiations and not early

Question 33

evaluation of minority influence: The real value of minority influence

Answer 33

• Nemeth argues that dissent in the form of minority opinion opens the mind
• as exposure to the minority it causes people to search for information, consider more options and make better decisions
• dissenters allow people to say wha thtey believe and stimulate diverget

Question 34

evaluation of minority influence: do we really process the minority’s message more

Answer 34

• Mackie argues that the views of the minority do not necessarily lead to greater processing
• it is the majority which lead to greater message processing, if the majority expresses a different one from the one we hold we must consider it carefully to understand why this is the case

Question 35

evaluation of minority influence: a tipping point for commitment

Answer 35

• xie et al discovered a tipping point where the number of people holding a minority position is sufficient to change majority opinion, they developed computer models of social networks with individuals free to chat with each other
• each individual held a traditional view but where open to other views
• added some committed individuals representing an alternative point of view
• if opinion was different the listener considered it and moved on to talk to another
• if opinion was the same it reinforced the belief
• if the individual also held the new belief the listener adopted it
• after a while opinion shifted and the number of holders necessary to tip the majority into accepting the minority position was just 10%

Question 36

evaluation of minority influence: minority influence in name only

Answer 36

• Nemeth claims that it is still difficult to convince people of the value of dissent
• people accept the principle only on the surface
• however they become irritated by a dissenting view that persists and they fear lack of harmony
• therefore we try to belittle the dissenting view or contain it
• people are encouraged to fit in and made to fear repercussions including being marginalised for having a deviant point of view therefore the majority persists and the opportunities from innovating thinking are lost

Question 37

social influence process in social change: how does social change occur through minority influence

Answer 37

• drawing attention to an issue
• cognitive conflict
• consistency of position
• the augmention principle
• the snowball effect

Question 38

social influence process in social change:

describe drawing attention to an issue

Answer 38

• minorities bring about social change by drawing the majorities attention to an issue
• if their views are different to those held by the majority this creates a conflict that the are motivated to reduce

Question 39

social influence process in social change:

cognitive conflict

Answer 39

• minority creates a conflict between what majority group members believe and the position advocated by the minority
• doest result in a move all the time but makes the majority think deeper about the issues

Question 40

social influence process in social change: consistency of position

Answer 40

• more influential when they are consistent

- bring about social change when they express there arguments consistently over time

Question 41

social influence process in social change: the augmentation principle

Answer 41

• if a minority is willing to suffer for their views they are seen as more committed and are taken more seriously
• suffragettes were willing to risk death and imprisonment therefore became more powerful

Question 42

social influence process in social change: the snowball effect

Answer 42

• minority influence initially has a relatively small effect but this spreads more widely as more people consider the issues being more promoted until it reaches a tipping point which results in social change and acceptance by the majority

Question 43

social influence process in social change: Social change through majority influence - conformity

Answer 43

• this is when behaviour is based upon what other people than on their real beliefs as this means that they will do the norm
• the gap between the perceived and actual norm is reffered to as misperception

Question 44

social influence process in social change:

Social norms interventions

Answer 44

• social norms interventions start by identifying a widespread misperception relating to a specified risky behaviour within a target population
• for example, young adults drinking alcohol
• perception correlation can be used in media campaigns promotional material and though other routes, they communicate to the target population the actual norm concerning the particular behaviour

Question 45

social influence process in social change:

Most of us don’t drink and drive

Answer 45

• Montana USA campaign aimed at 21-34 year olds
• age group had been over-represented in alcohol related crashes but only 20.4% had drunk and driven in the previous month whereas 92% believed that the majority of the peers had done so
• ran an advert and found that those drinking and driving was reduced by 13.7% compared to countries that did not run the campaign

Question 46

Evaluation of Social influence processes in social change: Social change through minority may be very gradual

Answer 46

history challenges the view that minorities such as suffragettes can bring about social change quickly
- because there is a strong tendency for humans to maintain the social quo rather than engage in social change

Question 47

Evaluation of Social influence processes in social change: Being perceived as deviant limits the influence of minorities

Answer 47

• the potential for minorities to influence social change is often limited because they are seen as deviant in the eyes of the majority
• majority avoids aligning themselves because they do not want to be seen as deviant

Question 48

Evaluation of Social influence processes in social change: limitations of the social norms approach

Answer 48

• while social norms interventions have shown positive results in a number of different settings e.g. reducing drink driving they also have there limitations
• particular problem is that not all social norms have led to social change
• ## Dejong et al - tested the effectiveness of social norms marketing campaigns o reduce alcohol usage among students across 14 different college sites

Question 49

Evaluation of Social influence processes in social change: social norms and the boomerang effect

Answer 49

Shultz et al - suggest that an unwelcome problem with social orms interventiosn

• typically aimed at individuals whose behaviour is less desirable than the norm
• widespread nature fo the approach means that those whose behaviour is more desirable than the nrom will also receive the message
• found that a campaign was effective in getting heavy energy users to use less electricity but it also caused those who used less than the norm to increase their usage

Question 50

Evaluation of Social influence processes in social change: Overcoming the deviant minority problem: the communist manifesto

Answer 50

• minorities have the particular problem of avoiding being portrayed as deviants in order to persuade the majority
• communism shows how effective it is - Marx and Engels showed that they had no interests in separating from the majority, and they emphasised the fact that they were part of the proletariat and the stuggle was with the owners of the means of production