Social Influence Flashcards
What did Milgram design a baseline procedure for
To assess obedience levels, the procedure was adapted in later variations and baseline findings used to make comparisons. He wanted to know why Nazis killed so many innocent people and if they were different from others
What was Milgrams baseline procedure
40 American men volunteered to take part at Yale uni supposedly on memory. When each volunteer arrived at lab they were introduced to another participant (confederate) and they drew to see who would be teacher and who would be learner (draw fixed so participant always teacher). There was also a experimenter (confederate) dressed in grey. Teacher couldn’t see learner but could hear him and teacher gave learner shock form 15V-450v every time he made a mistake it increased. Shocks were fake but labelled to suggest they were very dangerous
What would the learner say as shocks got higher and what would experimenter do if participant thought about stopping in Milgram baseline procedure
When teacher got to 300v (intense shock label) learner pounded on wall and gave no response, after 315v it was silence for rest of the procedure. If the teacher thought of stopping experimenter would say one of 4 prods
What were the 4 prods from experimenter in milgrams baseline procedure
1-please continue 2-experiment requires you to continue 3-it’s absolutely essential you continue 4-you have no choice, you must go on
What were milgrams baseline findings
Every participant delivered shock up to 300v, 12.5% stopped at 300v and 65% continued to highest shock level- were fully obedient
What qualitative data did milgram collect in his baseline findings s
Observations like participants showed extreme tension, many seen sweating, trembling, stuttering and biting their lips, groaning and digging fingernails into their hands and 3 even had seizures
What did Milgram do before his baseline study and what did this show
He asked 14 psychology students to predict participants behaviour and they estimated no more than 3% would be fully obedient (450v). Shows findings unexpected as students underestimated how obedient people are
What did Milgram do after his baseline study
All participants were debriefed and assured their behaviour was normal, they were all sent a follow up questionnaire and 84% said they were half they had participated
What conclusions did Milgram makes after his baseline procedure
Milgram concluded German people aren’t different, the American participants in his study were willing to obey orders even when they may harm another person, he suspected there were certain factors in situations that encourage obedience, so decided to conduct further studies to investigate these
What did Milgram do after conducting his baseline procedure
He carried out a large number of variations in order to consider situational variables that may lead to more or less obedience
What was the first variation Milgram did of his baseline
Proximity
How did Milgram investigate proximity as a situational variable for obedience
Teacher could hear but no see the learner in baseline but in proximity variation teacher and learner were in same room
What were Milgram findings in proximity variation
Obedience rate dropped from 65% to 40%
What was milgrams touch proximity variation
Teacher had to force learners hand into electroshock plate when he refused to answer a question
What was milgrams touch proximity findings
Obedience dropped from 65% to 30%
What was Milgrams remote instruction variation (proximity)
Experimenter left room and gave teacher instructions by telephone
What were remote instruction variation findings
Obedience reduced to 20.5% and participants frequently pretended to give shock
What were milgrams explanations for his 3 proximity variation studies
Decreased proximity allows people to psychologically distance themselves from consequences of their actions. Eg. When teacher and learner physically separated the teacher was less aware of harm they were causing to another person so more obedient (in baseline procedure)
What was the second variation Milgram looked at
Location
How did Milgram look at location as a situational variable in obedience and what were the findings
Milgram conducted variation in run down office block rather than prestigious Yale university and in this Locarno obedience fell to 47.5%
What was milgrams explanations for the effect of location on obedience
University environment gave Milgrams study legitimacy and authority, participants were more obedient in this location as they perceived that experimenter shared this legitimacy and that obedience was expected. However, obedience still quite high in office block as participants perceived scientific nature of procedure
What was the 3rd variation Milgram looked at
Uniform
How did Milgram look at uniform as a situational variable in obedience
In baseline experimenter wore lab coat as symbol of authority, in one variation experimenter called away due to a phone call at start of procedure and role of experimenter taken over by a member of public (confederate) in everyday clothes rather than lab coat
What were milgrams uniform variation findings
Obedience rate dropped to 20%, lowest of all his variations
What was milgrams explanation for uniform effecting obedience
Uniform encourages obedience as they are widely recognised symbols of authority. We accept someone in a uniform is entitled to expect obedience as their authority is legitimate and someone without a uniform has less right to expect our obedience
What is a strength of milgrams variation studies
Strength is other studies show situational variables effect obedience. Field experiment in New York by Bickman had 3 confederates dressed in different outfits-jacket and tie, milkman and security guard. Confederates individually stood in street and asked passers by to perform tasks like picking up litter. People twice as likely to obey assistant dressed as security guard than one dressed in jacket and tie. Supports view that situational variable like uniform has powerful effect on obedience
What is a further strength of Milgrams situational variable studies
Strength is his findings been replicated in other cultures. Meeus used more realistic procedure than Milgram to study obedience in Dutch people. Participants ordered to say stressful things in an interview to someone (confederate) who’s desperate for a job. 90% obeyed and Meeus also replicated milgrams proximity findings-when person giving orders wasn’t present obedience fell rapidly. Suggest milgrams findings of obedience aren’t limited to just Americans or males but valid for all
What is a counterpoint to milgrams situational variables having cross culture support
Replications of milgrams study aren’t very cross culture. Smith and Bond identified just 2 replications between 1968-85 in non western cultures. Other countries involved aren’t that culturally different form USA. Eg. They have similar notions about role of authority. So, may not be appropriate to conclude Milgrams findings apply to people in all or most cultures
What is a limitation of Milgrams situational variable studies
Limitation is participants may be aware procedure was fake. Orne and Holland mad criticism of Milgrams baseline study and they said it’s even more likely in variation study as there is more manipulation of variables. Good example is variation where experimenter replaced by member of public, even Milgram recognised this situation was so contrived even participants may have worked out truth. So in all of Milgram studies it’s unclear if findings genuinely due to operations of obedience or as participants swe through deception and played along w demand characteristics
Where did milgrams initial interest in obedience spark from
Trail of Eichmann in 1961 for war crimes, he was in charge of Nazi death camps and his defence was he was only obeying orders
What did trail of Eichmann lead Milgram to propose
Obedience to destructive authority occurs as person doesn’t take responsibility for their actions instead they believe they are acting for someone else as their ‘agent’
What is an ‘agent’ in terms of Milgram and obedience
Someone who acts for or in place of another person, an agent isn’t an unfeeling puppet as they experience anxiety when they realise what there doing is wrong but feel powerless to disobey
What do agentic state
A mental state where we feel no responsibility for our behaviours as we believe we are acting for an authority figure as their agent
What is the opposite of agentic state
Autonomous state
What is autonomous state
A person in this state is free to behave according to their own principles and feels a sense of responsibility for their own actions
What is the shift from autonomy to agency called
Agentic shift
When did Milgram suggest agentic shift occurs
When a person perceives someone else as an authority figure
What classes as an authority figure
Someone with greater power as they have higher position in a social hierarchy. In most socia groups when one person is in charge others defer to legitimate authority of this person and shift from autonomy to agency
What did Milgram wonder after many of his participants said they wanted to stop but felt powerless doing so
He wondered why they remained in agentic state
What did Milgram say was the reason his participants remained in agentic state
Binding factors- aspects of the situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise damaging effect of their behaviour and thus reduce the moral strain they are feeling
What binding factors did Milgram observe in his participants
Participants used many strategies to blame shift like blaming the victim “he was stupid to volunteer” to deny the damage they were causing the victim
How are most societies structured
In a hierarchical way
What does it mean that most societies structured in hierarchal way
People in certain positions hold responsibility over the rest of us
What are examples of authority figures
Parents, teachers, police officers
What makes an authority legitimate
It is agreed by society, most of us accept that authority figures have to be allowed to exercise their social power over others to keep society functioning smoothly
What is a consequence of legitimacy of authority
Some people granted power to punish others
What does it mean that we agree police officers and courts have the power to punish wrongdoers
We are willing to give up some of our independence and hand control of our behaviour over to people we trust to exercise their authority appropriately
When do we learn acceptance of legitimate authority
From childhood, from parents initially then teachers and adults in general
When do problems arise to do with authority
When legitimate authority becomes destructive
What events in history show destructive authority and how
Charismatic and powerful leaders like Hilter and Starlin used their legitimate power for destructive purposes like ordering people to behave in ways that are cruel and dangerous.
Where was destructive authority seen in milgrams experiments
When experimenter used prods to order participants to behave in ways against their conscience
What is a strength of agentic state
Strength is Milgrams own studies support role of agentic state in obedience. Most of milgrams participants resisted giving shock at some point and often asked questions about procedure to experimenter. ‘Who’s responsible is learner harmed’ and experimenter would say ‘I am’ and participants continued with no further objections. Shows that once participants perceived they were no longer responsible for their behaviour they acted more easily as experimenters agent
What is a limitation of agentic state
Limitation is agentic shift doesn’t explain many research findings of obedience. Eg. Doesn’t explain finding by Rank and Jacobson, they found 16 out of 18 hospital nurses disobeyed orders from doctor to administer excessive drug does to patient even though doctor was obviously authority figure. But almost all nurses remained in autonomous state, as did many of Milgram participants. Suggest that at best agentic shift can only account for some situations of obedience
What is a strength of legitimacy of authority
Strength is useful account of cultural differences in obedience. Many studies show countries differ in degree to which they obey authority. Kilham and Mann found only 16% of female Australian participants went to 450v in Milgram style study but Mantell found 85% of Germans were fully obedient. This shows in some cultures authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate and entitled to demand obedience form individuals, this reflects ways different societies are structured and how children raised to perceive authority figures
What is a limitation of legitimacy of authority
Limitation is it can’t explain disobedience in hierarchy where legitimacy of authority is clear and accepted. Eg. Nurses in Rank and Jacobsons study were mostly disobedient despite working in rigid hierarchical authority structure. Also, a significant minority of Milgram participants disobeyed despite experimenters scientific authority. Suggests some people may just be more or less obedient than others. It is possible that innate tendencies to obey or disobey have greater influence on behaviour than legitimacy of authority figure
What type of explanation is agentic state and legitimacy of authority for obedience
Situational explanation
What type of explanation is authoritarian personality for obedience
Dispositional explanation
Like Milgram what did Adorno et al want to understand
Wanted to understand the anti-semitism of Holocaust
Did Adorno and Milgram draw similar conclusions and what were Adorno conclusions
They were very different, they believed high level of obedience was a psychological disorder and the cause of it lay in the personality of the individual rather than situation (dispositional explanation)
What did Adorno et al argue people with authoritarian personality first and second show and what does this mean in terms of obedience
An extreme respect for authority and second, they view society as weaker than once was, so they believe we need strong powerful leaders to enforce traditional values like love country and family-both of these characteristics make people w AP more likely to obey orders from authority
What do those with Authoritarian personality show contempt for and what are other characteristics of someone with AP
Those of inferior social status, this is fuelled by their inflexible outlook on the world- no grey areas, everything is wrong or right and they’re uncomfortable with uncertainty, so people who are from different ethnicities are responsible for ills of society
How are ‘others’(ethnic minority) a convenient target for authoritarians
They are a convenient target for authoritarians who are likely to obey orders forms authority figures even when such orders are destructive like in Nazi Germany
Where did Adorn et al believe authoritarian personality stems from and how
From childhood as result of harsh parenting, this parenting style features extreme discipline, expectation of absolute loyalty, impossibly high standards and severe criticism of perceived failings. Also, if parents give conditional love.
What did Adorno et al argue that harsh parenting causes in a child
Harsh childhood experiences create resentment and hostility in a child but child can’t express feeling towards their parents as they fear punishment so their fear is displaced onto others weaker than them, process known as scapegoating
How does harsh parenting explain authoritarian personality
Explains hatred to people considered to be socially inferior or who belong to other social groups which is a central feature of obedience to higher authority- known as psychodynamic explanation
What did Adorno et al base their theory off
Research data
What was Adorno et al procedure
Adorno et al studied over 2000 white middle class Americans and their unconscious attitudes to racial groups. Researchers developed several measurement scales like F-scale. This scale still used to measure AP. 2 examples items of f-scale are ‘obedience and respect for authority are most important virtues for child to learn’ ’nothing lower than child who doesn’t respect their parents’.
What was Adorno et al research findings
People with authoritarian leanings (high f score)!identified w strong people and contemptuous of weak. They were very conscious of their status and others and showed extreme respect to higher status- basic traits of obedience. Adorno et al also found authoritarians had certain cognitive style (black and white thinking)-no fuzziness. Had fixed stereotypes of other groups
What did Adorno et al find a strong correlation between
Strong positive correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice
What is a strength of Adornos theory of authoritarian personality
Strength is research from Milgram supporting AP. Milgram and Elms interviewed small sample of people who took part in original study and were fully obedient, they all completed f-scale as part of interview. These 20 obedient participants scored significantly higher overall on f-scale than comparison of 20 disobedient participants. 2 groups clearly quite different in terms of authoritarianism. This finding supports Adorno et al view that obedient people may well show similar characteristics to people w AP
What is a counterpoint to authoritarian personality have research support
When researchers analysed individual sub scales of f-scale they found obedient participants had a number of characteristics unusual of someone with AP. Eg. Unlike authoritarians milgrams obedient participants didn’t glorify their fathers, did not experience punishment in their childhood and weren’t hostile to their mothers. Means that link between obedience and authoritarianism is complex, obedient participants were unlike authoritarians so may be unlikely that it’s a useful predictor of obedience
What is a limitation of authoritarian personality by Adorno et al
Limitation is authoritarianism can’t explain obedient behaviour for a whole population. Eg. Pre war Germany millions of individuals displayed obedient, racist, anti-Semitic behaviour despite the fact they must have differed in personality. Seemed very unlikely they all had AP. An alternate view was majority of Germany identified with anti-Semitic Nazi state and scapegoated Jews-social identify theory approach. So Adornos theory is limited as alternative explanation is more realistic
What is a further limitation of authoritarian personality by Adorno et al
Limitation is f-scale only measures tendacy to extreme right wing ideology. Christie and Jahoda argue f-scale is politically biased interpretation of AP. They said left wing authoritarianism like Russia or China both emphasis complete obedience to political authority. This means Adornos theory isn’t a comprehensive dispositional explanation that accounts for obedience to authority across whole political spectrum
What does f-scale stand for
Fascism scale, measure right wing ideology
How can the pressure to conform be resisted
If there are other people who aren’t conforming
Which study shows a dissenter helps resist conformity
Asch study
How does a dissenting person help someone else resist conformity
Someone else not following majority provides social support, it enables naive participant to be free to follow their own conscience. The confederate acts as a model of independent behaviour and their dissent gives rise to more dissent as it shows majority is no longer unanimous
How can pressure to resist obedience come about
If there is another person who is seen to disobey
What study shows how a disobeying person can help others to disobey
In one of milgrams variations obedience fell from 65% to 10% when genuine participants joined by disobeying confederate.
In Milgram variation how did disobeying confederate help naive participant to disobey
Participant may not follow disobeying persons behaviour but point is others persons disobedience acts as a model of dissent for the participant to copy and this frees him to act from his own conscience. Disobedient model challenges legitimacy of authority figure making it easier for others to disobey
What did Rotter proposed
Locus of control as a concept concerned with internal control versus external control
What do people with internal LOC believe
They believe that the things that happen to them are largely controlled by themselves
What is an example to someone with internal LOC
If you do well in exam it’s as you worked hard and if you did bad it’s as you didn’t work hard
What do you believe if you are external LOC
believe things that happen into them are outside their control
What is an example of someone who is external LOC
If they did well in exam it was as they had a good textbook or if they did bad blame it on having a bad textbook
Are people just internal or just external LOC
No, LOC is a scale and individuals vary in their position on it, so high internal LOC is one end of continuum and high external LOC at other end. Low internal or external LOC lie in the middle
What is one explanation to what people with high internal LOC can do and why
Able to resist pressure to conform or obey, if a person takes personal responsibility for their actions and experiences they tend to base decisions on their own beliefs not others
What is another explanation to what people with high internal LOC can do and why
People with high internal LOC are more self-confident, more achievement orientated and have higher intelligence, these traits lead to greater resistance to social influence and are also characteristics of leaders who have much less need for social approval than followers
What is a strength of social support
Strength is research evidence for positive effects of social support. Eg. Albrecht et al evaluated Teen Fresh Start USA, an 8 week programme to help pregnant teens resist peer pressure to smoke. Social support was provided by slightly older mentor/buddy. At the end of programme teens with buddy were significantly less likely to smoke than control group of participants with no buddy. Shows social support can help young people resist social influence as part of an intervention in real world
What is another strength of social support
Strength is research evidence to support role of dissenting peers in resisting obedience. Gamson et al participants told to produce evidence that would be used to help an oil company run smear campaign. Researchers found higher levels of resistance in their study than Milgram did in his, probably as participants were in group so could discuss what they were told to do. 29 out of 33 rebelled against their order. Shows peer support can lead to disobedience by undermining legitimacy of authority figure
What is a strength of locus of control
Strength is research evidence supporting link of LOC and obedience. Holland repeated Milgrams baseline study and measured if participants were internals or externals, he found 37% of internals didn’t continue to highest shock level but only 23% of externals didn’t continue. So internals showed greater resistance to authority in Milgram type situation. Shows resistance is at least partially related to LOC which increases validity of LOC as explanation for obedience
What is a limitation of LOC
Limitation is evidence that challenges link between LOC and resistance. Eg. Twenge et al analysed data from American LOC studies over 40year period, data showed over this time span people became more resistant to obedience but also more external which is a surprising outcome. If resistance is linked to internal LOC we would expect people to become more internal. Suggests that locus of control is not a valid explanation of how people resist social influence
What is minority influence
Refers to situations where one person or a small group of people influence beliefs and behaviours of others. It is different from conformity where majority influence minority
What type of conformity does minority influence lead to
Internalisation- both public and private views are changed by process
Who studies minority influence using what
Moscovici studied minority influence in blue and green slide study
What are the 3 ways minority influences use to persuade majority
Consistency, commitment, flexibility
What is consistency in minority influence
Minority must be consistent in their views, over time, consistency increases amount of interest from others. A consistent minority makes other people start to rethink their own views
What are the 2 types of consistency and minority can use
Synchronic consistency- they all say the same thing, diachronic consistency- they’ve been saying same thing for a long time now
What is commitment in minority influence
Minority must demonstrate commitment to their cause or views, sometimes minorities engage in extreme activities to draw attention to their views, if these activities pose risk to the minority it shows greater commitment and majority group members pay more attention
What is commitment by performing an extreme activity called in minority influence
Augmentation principle
What is flexibility in minority influence
Nemeth argued consistency isn’t only important factor in minority influence as it can be off putting, someone who is extremely consistent and repeats same old arguments and behaviours may be seen as rigid and this approach on its own is unlikely to gain many converts to minority influence. So, minority members must adapt their point of view and accept reasonable and valid counter arguments
What two things must there be a balance between for minority influence to work
Consistency and flexibility
What does consistency, commitment and flexibility do which helps bring change
They make people think deeply about minorities cause, if you hear something you already agree with you don’t think about it but if you hear something new you may think more deeply about it esp if source is committed, consistent and flexible.
What is important in converting minority to majority
Deeper processing of minority viewpoint, as it means over time increasing numbers switch from majority to minority
What is the snowball effect in minority influence
More people who convert the faster the conversion and gradually minority view has become majority view and change has occurred
What was Moscovici et al blue green slide procedure and findings for first variation
Demonstrated minority influence in study where 6 people asked to identify if 36 different slides were green or blue (they varied in intensity but were all blue). In each group there were 2 confederates who consistently said slides were green and true participants gave same wrong answer 8.42% of the time (agreed with confederates)
What was Moscovici et al blue green slide procedure and findings for second variation
Second group of participants were exposed to inconsistent minority, confederates said green 24times and blue 12 times, in this case agreement with answer green fell to 1.25%
What was Moscovici et al blue green slide procedure and findings for third control group
There were no confederates and all participants had to do was identify colour of slides and they only got it wrong 0.25% of the time
What is a strength of minority influence
Strength is research evidence showing importance of consistency. Moscovici et al blue green slides study shows a consistent minority has great effect on changing views than inconsistent opinion. Wood et al carried out meta analysis of 100 similar studies and found minorities who were consistent were most influential. Suggests presenting a consistent view is minimum requirement for a minority trying to influence a majority
What is another strength of minority influence
Strength is evidence showing change in majorities position does involve deeper processing of minority ideas. Martin et al presented message supporting particular viewpoint and measured participants agreement, one group of participants then heard minority agree with initial view while another group heard majority agree. Participants then opposed to conflicting views and attitudes remeasured. People less willing to change if they heard minority group than majority group. Suggests minority message more deeply processed and more enduring effect, supports central argument of how minority influence works.
What is a counterpoint to research support of deeper processing in minority influence
Research study’s like Martin et al make clear distinctions between majority and minority. Doing this in a controlled way is a strength of minority influence research. But real world social influence situations are more complicated as majority usually has more power and status than minorities and minority often face hostile opposition. So Martin et al findings are very limited in what they can tell us about minority influence in real world situations
What is a limitation of minority influence
Limitation is tasks involved are often too artificial and trivial. Including Moscovici et al task of identifying colours on a slide. Research is therefore far removed from how minorities attempt to change behaviour of majorities in real life. In cases like jury decision making and political campaigning the outcomes vastly impact our lives so are more important. Means findings of minority influence studies lack external validity and limited about what they can tell about of how minority influence works in real world situations
