Social Influence

Question 1

what is conformity?

Answer 1

a change in a persons behaviour or opinions as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or group of people

Question 2

what is compliance?

Answer 2

when a person just goes along with what others are doing
behaviour is to fit in with a group and be accepted by them
publicly not privately

Question 3

what is identification?

Answer 3

when sometimes a person will conform to behaviours of a group because there’s something you value about the group
privately you may also hold these beliefs (generally only temporary)

Question 4

what is internalisation?

Answer 4

when a person genuinely believes and accepts a group norm-the change is permanent
behaviour and beliefs become apart of the way they think
publicly and privately

Question 5

aim, procedure, findings and conclusions of Asch’s study

Answer 5

aim-to assess how much people will conform to the opinion of others even in a situation where the answer is certain
procedure-showed participants two large white cards at the same time, one with a standard line and the other with comparison lines (1/3 lines were the same length as the standard and the others=SUBSTANTIALLY different). participant then asked which line matched the standard. each naive participant tested within a group of 6-8 confederates, in first few trials confederates gave right answers but then made errors
findings-naive participant gave wrong answer 36.8% of the time, 25% didn’t conform at all. in post-study interview participants mostly said they conformed to avoid rejection (NSI)
conclusions-most conformed to avoid rejection and ASCH EFFECT-the extent to which participants conform even when the situation is unambiguous

Question 6

what are Asch’s variations?

Answer 6

group size-number of people within a social group

unanimity-the degree to which group members are in agreement with each other

task difficulty-how obvious the correct answer is

Question 7

manipulation of GROUP SIZE and results

Answer 7

added more confederates to the group

made little difference, smaller group-conformity rose by 31.8%

Question 8

manipulation of UNANIMITY and results

Answer 8

introduced a confederate who disagreed with the others

conformity reduced by 1/4 from the level it was at when majority was unanimous
= ppts behaved more independently

Question 9

manipulation of TASK DIFFICULTY and results

Answer 9

made the stimulus line and the comparison lines more similar in length

conformity increased in more ambiguous situation
-more likely to look for guidance and assume others are right and you’re wrong

Question 10

what are the explanations of conformity?

Answer 10

normative social influence (NSI)

informational social influence (ISI)

Question 11

what is NSI?

Answer 11

• the need to be liked and fit in (emotional process)
• occurs in stressful situations (looking fo social support) and in situations with strangers when concerned about rejection (or when seeking social approval)
• links to compliance

Question 12

what is ISI?

Answer 12

• the need to be right (cognitive process)
• occurs in new situations/situations where there’s ambiguity, when someone else in the group is an expert
• links to internalisation

Question 13

aim, procedure, findings and conclusions of Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment

Answer 13

aim-to see if participants would conform to the social roles with the experiment
procedure-advertised for 24 male volunteers to take part. they were in a mock prison setting in Stanford Uni basement. guards were given uniform and handcuffs etc. prisoners stripped of identity (given number, had to wear a dress with no underpants underneath). weren’t allowed to cause physical harm
findings-guards were brutal and quite aggressive (rose voices and swore). prisoners got more submissive, guards got more brutal and demanded greater obedience. as at first, prisoners laughed and couldn’t take the guards seriously-quickly changed. after 6 days (due to withdrawal and extreme mental distress) the experiment ended (supposed to be 14 days)
conclusions-Zimbardo concluded that people quickly conform to social roles, even when the role goes against their moral principles. situational factors were largely responsible for behaviour found (this behaviour wasn’t demonstrated previously)

Question 14

what is social influence?

Answer 14

the process by which individuals and groups change each others attitudes and behaviours

Question 15

what is obedience?

Answer 15

when an individual follows a direct order from a person who is usually a figure of authority, who has the power to punish when obedient behaviour does not occur

Question 16

what is destructive obedience?

Answer 16

when an individual obeys an order to do something immoral, which causes the individual carrying out the order distress and regret

Question 17

aim, procedure, findings and conclusions of Milgram’s experiment

Answer 17

aim-to understand if Germans were different and more obedient to figures of authority than people in other countries
procedure-recruited 40 male participants (aged 20-50 ) for a study about ‘memory’. told they could leave at any time. experimenter wired in lab coat was an actor and the ppt was the teacher. learner strapped in a chair in another room wired with ‘electrodes’. teacher was required to give the learner an increasingly severe electric ‘shock’ each time learner made a mistake on learning task. experimenter gave prods to teacher despite ‘screams’ from learners
findings-no ppts stopped below 300V. 12.5% stopped at 300V. 65% continued to highest level (450V). ppts showed signs of extreme tension (sweating stress etc) and 3 had ‘uncontrollable seizures’
conclusions-under the right circumstances, ordinary people would obey to injust orders. Germans weren’t different because the same would happened (under those circumstances) in another country

Question 18

define ‘situational variables’

Answer 18

features of an environment that impact the degree to which individuals obey

Question 19

what are the 3 situational variables (define them)?

Answer 19

proximity-the physical closeness or distance of an authority figure to the person they’re giving an order to/physical closeness of person carrying out an order to their victim

location-the place where an order is issued

uniform-the clothes an authority figure wears that symbolise their position of authority

Question 20

in milgram’s study how did proximity affect the experiment?

Answer 20

in the original study 65% of participants obeyed when they were in adjoining rooms however obedience dropped to 40% when (teacher and learner) were in the same room. when teacher forced ppts hand onto the shock plate (in one variation) obedience rate was 30%. the closer the teacher is to their actions the less likely they are to obey.

Question 21

in milgram’s study how did location affect the experiment?

Answer 21

the original study (Yale uni)’s location was changed to a run down office block where obedience fell to 47.5%. in a more prestigious/formal location ppts are more likely to obey

Question 22

in milgram’s study how did uniform affect the experiment?

Answer 22

in the original study the experimenter wore a grey lab coat. the role of the experimenter was took over by an ordinary member of the public in ordinary clothes, where obedience dropped to 20%. wearing uniform increases the rate of obedience

Question 23

what are the social-psychological factors of obedience?

Answer 23

agent shift/state

legitimacy of authority

Question 24

what is the legitimacy of authority?

Answer 24

an explanation for obedience which suggests that people are more likely to obey people who they percieve to have authority over them. this authority is justified by the individuals position go power within a social hierarchy

Question 25

evaluation of the legitimacy of authority-‘there is supporting evidence for the legitimacy of authority’ (strength)

Answer 25

There is supporting evidence for the legitimacy of authority explanation.
In Milgram’s original research, which took place at Yale University, the percentage of participants administering the full 450 volts was high (62.5%). However, when the experiment took place in a rundown building in Bridgeport, Connecticut, obedience levels dropped significantly (48%).
This change in location reduced the legitimacy of the authority, as participants were less likely to trust the experiment. This change in location reduced the legitimacy of the authority, as participants were less likely to trust the experiment.
This meant that the participants were far less likely to obey, providing support for this explanation of obedience

Question 26

evaluation of the legitimacy of authority-‘Tarnow provided support for the power of the legitimacy of authority through a study of aviation accidents’ (strength)

Answer 26

Tarnow provided support for the power of legitimate authority through a study of aviation accidents.
He studied data from all serious aircraft accidents in the US between 1978 and 1990 where there was a flight voice recorder and where flight crew actions were a contributing factor in the crash. Tarnow found that there was excessive dependence on the captain’s authority and expertise. One officer claimed that, although he noticed the captain taking a particularly risky approach, he said nothing as he assumed ‘the captain must know what he is doing’.
This shows the power that a legitimate authority can have over individuals in the real world.
This therefore provides support for the legitimacy of authority as an explanation of obedience.

Question 27

evaluation of the legitimacy of authority-‘can help explain cultural differences in obedience eg countries differ to which people are traditionally obedient to’ (strength)

Answer 27

The legitimacy of authority explanation can help to explain cultural differences in obedience.
Many studies show that countries differ in the degree to which people are traditionally obedient to authority. For example, Kilham and Mann (1974) replicated Milgram’s procedure in Australia and found that only 16% of their participants went all the way to the top of the shock hierarchy. Whereas, Mantell found a very different figure for German participants, 85%. 2. The legitimacy of authority explanation can help to explain cultural differences in obedience.
This shows that in some cultures, authority figures are more likely to be accepted as legitimate and therefore entitled to demand obedience from other individuals.
This reflects the way that different societies are structured and how children are raised to perceive authority figures, increasing the validity of the explanation.

Question 28

what is the agentic shift?

Answer 28

a mental state where an individual feels no personal responsibility over their behaviour as they believe themselves to be acting for an authority figure (as an agent)
in the agentic state an individual gives up their free will by handing over responsibility to the authority figure=frees them up from the demands of the conscience and allows them to obey the authority figure

Question 29

evaluation of the agentic shift-‘the agentic shift doesn’t explain many of the research findings’ (limitation)

Answer 29

The agentic shift does not explain many of the research findings. It does not explain why some of the participants in Milgram’s experiment did not obey. The agentic state explanation suggests that as humans involved in social hierarchies the participants should have all obeyed the orders and hand over responsibility to the experimenter, but this was only the case for 65% of participants. This suggests that, at best, the agentic shift only accounts for some situations of obedience.

Question 30

evaluation of the agentic shift-‘the agentic state explanation suggests that behaviour is not controlled by individuals’ (limitations)

Answer 30

The agentic state explanation suggests that behaviour is not controlled by individuals. It suggests that free will can be given up. This is deterministic as it means that behaviour is controlled by something else i.e. the power an authority figure holds. This does not fit with the judiciary system which suggests that we have control over our actions and should be held responsible for the consequences of them.

Question 31

evaluation of the agentic shift-‘Blass and Schmitt showed a film of Milgram’s study to students and asked them to identify who they felt was responsible for the harm to the learner’ (strength)

Answer 31

Blass and Schmitt showed a film of Milgram’s study to students and asked them to identify who they felt was responsible for the harm to the learner. The students blamed the ‘experimenter’ rather than the participant. If the students felt that the responsibility was on the experimenter as the authority figure, it is easy to see how the teacher would have given up their responsibility and entered the agentic state, thus leading them to continue to give the electric shocks. This suggests that the agentic state is a valid explanation of obedience.

Question 32

adorno et al investigating the causes of obedient personality in a study of more than 2000 middle class white Americans and their unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups- procedure and findings

Answer 32

procedure-Adorno et al (1950) investigated the causes of obedient personality in a study of more than 2000 middle class white Americans and their unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups. This was done primarily using the F-scale. The ‘F’ stands for fascist which is a dictator with complete power that people follow.

findings-people who scored high on the F-scale identified with ‘strong’ people and were generally disrespectful and had a hatred for the ‘weak’. they were very conscious of their own and others’ status and showed excessive respect, submission and were slave like to those of higher status. authoritarian people had no ‘fuzziness’ between categories of people. they had distinctive stereotypes and saw things as very black and white with no grey areas.

Question 33

characteristics of the authoritarian personality

Answer 33

· Tendency to be especially obedient to authority
· Extreme respect for authority and a submissiveness to it
· Hatred for people they perceive as having inferior social status
· Traditional attitudes to sex, race and gender
· View society as going downhill and therefore think we need strong and powerful leaders to enforce traditional values
· Their outlook is inflexible – black or white – and they are very uncomfortable with uncertainty

Question 34

origins of the authoritarian personality

Answer 34

Harsh parenting was thought to result in this personality. Parenting features included:
· Extremely strict discipline
· Expectation of complete loyalty
· Impossibly high standards
· Severe criticism of perceived failures
· Conditional love

=create resentment and hostility in the child. fears and anger are displaced onto people who are weaker. this explains a central trait of obedience to higher authority and a hatred of people who are socially inferior or belong to different social groups.

Question 35

limitation of the authoritarian personality-the link between authoritarian personalities and harsh parenting is only correlational

Answer 35

the link between authoritarian personalities and harsh parenting is only correlational
there is no way to establish cause and effect as experiments in this area cannot be carried out due to ethical reasons.
therefore, we do not know the true reason for an authoritarian personality.
this limits the validity of the explanation.

Question 36

limitation of the authoritarian personality-milgram and elm’s research is only correlational

Answer 36

milgram and elm’s research is only correlational
it is impossible to draw the conclusion that authoritarian personality causes obedience on the basis of this result. It may be that a third factor is involved
Hyman and Sheatsley thought that both obedience and authoritarian personality were associated with lower levels of education and therefore not directly linked with each other
this limits the authoritarian personality explanation of obedience.

Question 37

strength of the authoritarian personality-milgram and elm’s conducted interviews with some of the individual involved in milligram’s original study

Answer 37

milgram and elm’s conducted interviews with some of the individual involved in milligram’s original study
those participants who were highly obedient, were significantly more authoritarian on the F-scale than disobedient participants
this suggests that there is a link between authoritarian personality and obedience.

Question 38

what is social support?

Answer 38

having an ally (someone supporting their point of view) to build confidence and allow individuals to remain independent

Question 39

define ‘resistance to social support’

Answer 39

the ability of people to withstand the social pressure to conform to the majority or to obey to authority

influences by-situational factors(social support) and dispositional factors(locus of control)

Question 40

what does social support allow individuals to do?

Answer 40

act according to their own conscience-this means that they’re resisting social influence (they’re withstanding the social pressure to conform to the majority or to obey the authority

Question 41

supporting evidence of social support from aschs study

Answer 41

Asch found that social support does not have to be valid to be effective
even if another dissenter gives a wrong answer it allows the participant to dissent too
although the rate of conformity was lowest (5.5%) when the dissenter gave the correct answer, there was only 9% conformity when the dissenter gave another incorrect answer
this shows how powerful social support can be in helping people resist social influence

Question 42

supporting evidence of social support-research support for the role of dissenting peers in resisting obedience

Answer 42

there is research support for the role of dissenting peers in resisting obedience
gamson et al. (1982) asked participants to produce evidence that would be used to help an oil company run a smear campaign (a plan to discredit a public figure by making false accusations)
they found higher levels of resistance in their study than Milgram; 29 out of 33 groups of participants (88%) rebelled
this was probably because the participants in Gamson’s study were in groups, showing that peer support is linked to greater resistance.

Question 43

what is locus of control?

Answer 43

the degree of control an individual feels they have over their own life and is measured on a continuum from internal to external

• internals believe things that happen to them are largely controlled by themselves eg, doing well in an exam was because they worked hard
• externals believe things happen outside their control eg, if they did well in an exam it might be because the textbook was good

Question 44

are internals or externals more likely to resist social influence?

Answer 44

INTERNALS because they take personal responsibility for their actions and base their decisions on their own beliefs

-they’re more self-confident, more achievement
orientated, have higher intelligence and have less need for social approval which leads to greater resistance

Question 45

the limited role of LoC-evaluation (double)

Answer 45

the role of LoC in resisting social influence may be exaggerated
Rotter (1982) found that LoC is only important when people are in a novel (new) situation
this is a limitation because it means that LoC is only helpful in explaining a narrow range of new situations
this means that even if people have an internal LoC but have conformed or obeyed in a specific situation in the past, they are likely to do so again

Question 46

contradictory research for LoC-evaluation (combo)

Answer 46

there is contradictory evidence for the role of LoC and resistance to social influence
Twenge et al. (2004) analysed data from American locus of control studies over 40 years (1960-2002). They knew that the American public had become more independent over this time. But people have become more external in their LoC
although this challenges the link between internal LoC and increasing resistance behaviour, it is possible that other factors could have influenced the results
it is possible that the change is because society is so unstable that many things are out of people’s personal control and therefore they are more external in their LoC

Question 47

research support for LoC-evaluation (ham)

Answer 47

there is evidence to support the link between LoC and resisting obedience
Holland repeated Milgram’s baseline study and measured whether people were internal or external. He found 37% of internals did not go to 450v whereas only 23% of externals did not
this shows that external individuals are less likely to resist social influence and that internal individuals are more likely to resit social influence

Question 48

what is minority influence?

Answer 48

situations where one person or a small group influence the beliefs, attitudes and behaviours of others.
likely to lead to internalisation

Question 49

minority influence study-aim, procedure, findings, conclusions

Answer 49

moscovia studied princess of minority influence in his ‘blue slide, green slide’ study.
procedure-6ppl we’re asked to view a set of 36 differing coloured slides and state whether they were blue or green, in each group there were two confederates who consistently said the slides were green on 2/3 of trials
findings-a second group was exposed to an inconsistent minority and agreement fell to 1.25%. for a 3rd control group there were no confederates-ppts just had to identify the colour of each slide and they got this wrong on 0.25% of trials
=study drew attention to processes of minority influence

Question 50

consistency in MI

Answer 50

consistency in minority’s views increases amount of interest from others-eg consistency might be an agreement between two people (synchronic consistency) or over time (diachronic consistency)=keep same beliefs over time=draws attention to belief

Question 51

commitment in MI

Answer 51

eh minorities might engage in extreme activities to draw attention to their views-risk demonstrates commitment. MI is more powerful if personal sacrifice is made

Question 52

flexibility in MI

Answer 52

members of the minority need to be prepared to adapt their POV and accept reasonable and valid counter arguments-MI is more effective is minority show flexibility by accepting possibility of compromise

Question 53

snowball effect in MI

Answer 53

as more ppl switch from the majority position to the minority position, they’ve become ‘converted’ over time. the more this happens=faster the rate of conversion (change has occurred)

Question 54

what is social change?

Answer 54

process by which society changes its beliefs, attitudes and behaviours to create new social norms-happens at gradual pace
minority influence=driving force behind change
majority influence=maintains change

Question 55

stages of social change for minorities

Answer 55

1) draw attention to issue by getting majority to focus on issue
2) minority=influential bcos express consistency of their position over time
3) causes deeper processing of issue-majority question beliefs
4) leads to augmentation principle-majority pay even more attention bcos minority is willing to suffer for views, seen as committed so taken more seriously
5) leads to snowball effect-minority initially had small impact but spreads more widely
6) comes a point of critical mass-minority view becomes that of majority leading to social cryptomnesia (ppl have a memory social change has occurred but don’t remember how it happened)

Question 56

conformity creating social change

Answer 56

eg NSI-providing info on what other ppl are doing to get them change their behaviour
dissent-by breaking power of majority, dissenters encourage others to dissent

Question 57

obedience creating social change

Answer 57

process of gradual commitment-once small instruction is obeyed it becomes more difficult to resist a bigger one eg people drift into a new kind of behaviour
obedience-Milgrams research shows disobedient role models mean real ppts also disobeyed (imagine on societal level)

Question 58

conformity maintaining social change

Answer 58

ppl may conform to new norms via compliance

want to be able to fit in with ppl around them-NSI

Question 59

obedience maintaining social change

Answer 59

new social norm may have laws and rules put in place to ensure ppl obey new attitudes and behaviours