Social Influence Flashcards

Question

Milgram's study lacked internal validity. How is this a weakness?

Answer 1

* Orne and Holland argued that participants guessed electric shocks were fake * This was supported by Perry's discovery that only half of the participants believed the shocks were real * Suggests participants may have been responding to demand characteristics

Answer 2

* Sheridan and King's participants gave real shocks to a puppy * 54% of males and 100% females delivered what they thought was a fatal shock * Suggests the obedience in Milgram's study might be genuine

Answer 3

* Haslam found every participants given the first 3 prods obeyed the Experimenter, but those given the 4th prod disobeyed * According to SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY, the first 3 prods required identification with the science of the research, but the 4th prod required blind obedience to the Experimenter * This suggests that the findings are best explained in terms of identification with the science and not as blind obedience to authority

Answer 4

* Participants were DECEIVED - thoughts shocks were real, Milgram dealt with this by debriefing the participants. However, some weren't debriefed until up to 12 months after the study ended * Baumrind felt this deception could have serious consequences for participants and researchers (IMPOSSIBLE FOR INFORMED CONSENT TO BE GIVEN) * Therefore, research can damage reputations of psychologists and their research in the eyes of the public

Answer 5

* Teacher and learner in same room - obedience = 65% * Touch proximity (teacher forced learner's hand on shock plate) - obedience = 30% * Remote instruction (Experimenter gave instructions via phone) - obedience = 20.5% (participants also often pretended to give shocks)

Answer 6

Decreased proximity allows people to mentally distance themselves from the consequences of their actions, e.g. when teacher and learner were separated, teacher was less aware of harm being done, so was obedient

Answer 7

Study conducted at run-down building, rather than Yale (where baseline study was conducted) - obedience = 47.5%

Answer 8

Obedience higher at Yale because setting was legitimate, prestigious and had authority, so obedience was expected

Answer 9

* In baseline study, Experimenter wore grey lab coat * In uniform variation, Experimenter called away by a phone call at the beginning of the study and was replaced by a "member of the public" (confed in everyday clothes) - obedience = 20%

Answer 10

Uniform = symbol of authority. Someone without uniform has less right to expect obedience

Answer 11

* Bickman's confeds dressed in different outfits (suit, milkman and security guard) and asked regular people to pick up litter in NYC * People twice as likely to obey the security guard than the suit confed * This suggests that situational variables have an effect on obedience

Answer 12

* Meeus and Raaijmakers worked with Dutch participants who were ordered to say stressful comments to interviewees * 90% obedience but obedience fell when proximity decreased (person giving orders not present) * Suggests Milgram's findings are not limited to American males, but are valid across cultures

Answer 13

* Smith and Bond noted most replications took place in Western countries that are culturally similar to the USA * Therefore, we cannot conclude that Milgram's findings about proximity, location and uniform apply to people in most cultures

Answer 14

* Orne and Holland suggested the variations were even more likely to trigger suspicion because of the extra EXPERIMENTAL MANIPULATION * In the uniform variation, even Milgram recognised this was so unrealistic that some participants may have worked it out * Therefore, it's unclear whether the results are due to obedience or because the participants saw the deception and were influenced by demand characteristics

Answer 15

* Milgram's conclusions suggest situational factors determine obedience * Mandel argues that this offers an alibi for GENOCIDE. Situational explanations hugely oversimplify the causes of the Holocaust and are offensive to survivors * This permits others (e.g. Adolf Eichmann) to excuse destructive behaviour in terms of ***_"I was just following orders"_***

Answer 16

* AGENTIC STATE - person acts on behalf of an authority figure as an agent. Agent feels no responsibility for their actions * AUTONOMOUS STATE - person acts on their own principles and feels responsible for their actions * AGENTIC SHIFT - shift from autonomy to agent. According to Milgram, this occurs when we perceive someone else as an authority figure because of their position in the social hierarchy * BINDING FACTORS - aspects of a situation that allow a person to ignore the damaging effects of their behaviour and reduce the “***_moral strain_***” they feel, e.g. shifting responsibility to the victims or denying damage being done to the victims

Answer 17

* SOCIAL HIERARCHY - people in certain positions hold authority over others, e.g. teachers, police, parents due to their position on the social hierarchy * LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY - most of us accept that authority figures should exercise power over others to allow society to function properly * CONTROL - authority figures have the power to punish others. We give up some independence to people we trust to exercise authority properly. We learn to accept authority during childhood through parents and teachers * DESTRUCTIVE AUTHORITY - history has shown that leaders, e.g. Hitler and Pol Pot use legitimate authority destructively, ordering people to behave in cruel ways

Answer 18

* Most of Milgram's participants asked the Experimenter who was responsible if the learner is harmed * When the Experimenter said he was responsible, the participants went through the procedure with no objections * This shows participants acted more easily as an agent when they believed they were not responsible for their actions

Answer 19

* Rank and Jacobson found 21 / 22 nurses disobeyed a doctor's orders to give an excessive dose of Valium * Doctor = authority figure but nurses remained autonomous, just like some of Milgram's participants * This suggests agentic shift can only explain obedience in some situations

Answer 20

* 16% Australian showed 16% in their study, whereas Mantell found 85% of German participants obeyed in their study * This suggests authority more likely seen as legitimate in some cultures, reflecting upbringing

Answer 21

* 21 / 22 of Rank and Jacobson's nurses were disobedient, as were some of Milgram's participants, even though authority figures were legitimate in both studies * Suggests innate tendencies towards (dis)obedience may be more important than legitimacy of authority

Answer 22

* My Lai Massacre soldiers obeyed their commanding officer, because he had more power to punish than a doctor * Therefore, there is some evidence in real-world situations that respect for legitimate authority can lead to destructive obedience

Answer 23

* People have extreme respect for authority and submissiveness to it * Contempt for “inferiors” * Originates in childhood - harsh parenting, extremely strict discipline, impossibly high standards, etc. * Feelings of hostility and resentment towards parents from childhood displaced to others who are weaker

Answer 24

* 2000 middle class, white Americans * F-scale used (items included “obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues for children to learn”) * Those who scored high on the F-scale identified with the strong and had contempt for the weak * They were conscious of their own and others' status, showing excessive respect to those of higher status * Authoritarian people had a cognitive style, where there was no “fuzziness” between categories of people, with fixed and distinctive prejudices about other groups

Answer 25

* Elms and Milgram interviewed 20 fully obedient participants from Milgram's original obedience studies * They scored significantly higher on the F-scale than a comparison group of 20 disobedient participants * This suggests obedient people may share many characteristics of people with an authoritarian personality

Answer 26

* Subscales of the F-scale showed obedient participants had characteristics that were unusual for authoritarians, e.g. did not experience high levels of punishment in childhood * This suggests a complex link and means authoritarianism is not a useful predictor of obedience

Answer 27

* Millions of people in Germany displayed anti-Semitic behaviour, but can't have all had an authoritarian personality * More likely explanation is most Germans identified with the Nazi state * Therefore, social learning theory may be a better explanation

Answer 28

* Christie and Jahoda suggest the F-scale aims to measure tendency towards extreme right-wing ideology * But right-wing and left-wing authoritarianism (e.g. Chinese Maoism) both insist on complete obedience to political authority * Therefore, Adorno's theory is not a comprehensive dispositional explanation, as it doesn't explain obedience to left-wing authoritarianism, i.e. it's politically biased

Answer 29

* F-scale has been used in many studies that have led to an explanation of obedience based on the authoritarian personality * HOWEVER, according to Greenstein, the F-scale is flawed, e.g. people who tend to agree with the statements (response bias) are scored as authoritarian * Therefore, explanations of obedience based on research with the F-scale may not be valid

Answer 30

* Pressure to conform is reduced if a DISSENTER is present * Asch's research showed dissenter doesn't have to give right answer * Someone else not following majority frees others to follow their own conscience - dissenter acts as a “model” * Dissenter shows the majority is no longer UNANIMOUS * Pressure to obey is reduced if another person disobeys * Milgram's research showed obedience rates dropped from 65% to 10% in the TWO PEERS REBEL variation * Participants may not follow the disobedient peer but disobedience allows participants to act on their own principles * A disobedient model challenges the legitimacy of the authority figure

Answer 31

* Rotter described INTERNAL vs EXTERNAL LOC * Internals believe they control what happens to them (exam performance depends on amount of revision they did) * Externals believe things happen out of their control (exam performance depends on question difficulty) * LOC is not just external and internal, there is a CONTINUUM * Internals are more likely to resist pressures to conform or obey * High internals are more confident, more achievement oriented and have higher intelligence (trait of leaders who have less need for social approval)

Answer 32

* In Albrecht's study, social support was given to pregnant adolescents to resist pressure to smoke by an older “buddy” * Those adolescents were less likely to smoke at the end of the programme than a control group who did not have a buddy * This suggests social support can help young people resist social influence in real-world situations

Answer 33

* Gamson et al. asked groups to give evidence for an oil company to use in a smear campaign * 29 / 33 groups rebelled against orders, much higher than in Milgram's studies * Shows how supporters can undermine legitimacy of authority and reduce obedience

Answer 34

* Only 3% of Allen and Levine's participants resisted conformity when there was no supporter, but 64% resisted when a dissenter refused to conform * HOWEVER, 36% resisted when the dissenter clearly had poor eyesight and could not be relied on to judge the lines * This suggests the explanation is valid because we would expect less resistance when participants believed social support was not helpful

Answer 35

* Holland repeated Milgram's study and measured whether participants were internals or externals * 37% of internals did NOT continue to highest shock level (showed greater resistance, only 23% of externals did not continue) * Therefore, resistance is partly related to LOC, increasing the validity of this explanation of disobedience

Answer 36

* Twenge analysed data from American LOC studies over 40 years (1960-2002), showing that people have become more independent but also more EXTERNAL * This is interesting because if resistance was linked to INTERNAL LOC, we would expect people to have become more internal * Therefore, LOC may not be a valid explanation for resistance to social influence

Answer 37

* A lot of studies (e.g. Holland) show that having an internal LOC is linked with being able to resist social influence * HOWEVER, Rotter pointed out the LOC only significantly influences behaviour in NEW SITUATIONS. In familiar situations, our previous responses are always more important * Therefore, the validity of the LOC explanation is limited because it can predict resistance in some situations but not in others

Answer 38

* Minority influence refers to how one person or small group influences the beliefs and behaviour of other people * This leads to INTERNALISATION - both public and private beliefs are changed

Answer 39

* Consistency makes others rethink their own views, since minority keeps saying the same thing * SYNCHRONIC CONSISTENCY - minority all saying the same thing * DIACHRONIC CONSISTENCY - they've been saying the same thing for a long time

Answer 40

* Activities must create some risk to the minority to demonstrate commitment to the cause * AUGMENTATION PRINCIPLE - majority pay even more attention to minority (if people see extreme activities and recognise the risk, it makes them think more about minority's commitment, so more likely to change their views)

Answer 41

* Minority should balance consistency and flexibility so they don't appear DOGMATIC * Nemeth argues bein consistent and repeating arguments can be off-putting to majority, so minority should adapt their point of view and accept reasonable counter-arguments

Answer 42

* Over time, people become “converted” - there is a switch from minority to majority * The more this happens, the faster the rate of conversion, so gradually minority view becomes majority view and social change has occurred

Answer 43

* Moscovici found a consistent minority opinion had a greater effect on other people than an inconsistent opinion * Wood conducted a meta-analysis of 100 similar studies and found that minorities seen as being consistent were most influential * This suggests that consistency is a major factor in minority influence

Answer 44

* Martin gave participants a message supporting a particular viewpoint, and measured attitudes * Then they heard an endorsement of the view from either a minority or majority * Finally they heard a conflicting view, attitudes measured again * Participants were less willing to change their opinions to the conflicting view if they had originally listened to a minority group than a majority group * This suggests the minority message had been more deeply processed and had been more deeply processed and had an enduring effect

Answer 45

* In research studies, majority and minority groups are distinguished in terms of numbers * But there is more to majorities and minorities than just numbers (e.g. power or commitment) * This means research studies are limited in what they tell us about real-world minority influence

Answer 46

* Moscovici's task was identifying the colour of a slide, far removed from how minorities try to change majority opinion in the real world * In jury decision-making, outcomes are vastly more important, and sometimes a matter of life and death * Findings of studies lack external validity and are limited in what they tell us about how minority influence works in real world situations

Answer 47

* Agreement with the minority was only 8% in Moscovici's study - minority influence must be quite rare so not a useful concept * HOWEVER, more participants agreed with the minority when writing their answers privately. So those who do publicly change their views must be the “***tip of the iceberg***” and hold their new views strongly (internalisation) * Therefore, minority influence is valid - it is an unusual form of social influence but can change people's views powerfully and permanently (***conversion***)

Answer 48

* ***_DRAWING ATTENTION_*** - segregation in 1950s America (schools, restaurants, etc. in the southern states were exclusive to white people). CIVIL RIGHTS MARCHES drew attention to the situation by providing social proof of the problem * ***_CONSISTENCY_*** - people took part in the marches on a large scale. Even though it was a minority of the American population, they displayed consistency of message and intent * ***_DEEPER PROCESSING_*** - this activism meant that many people who had accepted the status quo began thinking deeply about the unjustness of it * ***_AUGMENTATION_*** - FREEDOM RIDERS were mixed racial groups who got on buses in the South to challenge separate seating for black people. Many were beaten and the personal risk strengthened their message * ***_SNOWBALL EFFECT_*** - civil rights activists, e.g. Martin Luther King gradually got the attention of the US government. The Civil Rights Act 1964 was passed. Change happens bit by bit just as a rolling snowball grows as it gathers more snow * ***_SOCIAL CRYPTOMNESIA_*** - social change came about but some people have no memory (cryptomnesia) of the events leading to that change

Answer 49

* ***_DISSENTERS MAKE SOCIAL CHANGE MORE LIKELY_*** - Asch's research : variation where one confed ALWAYS gave correct answers. This broke the power of the majority, encouraging others to dissent. This demonstrates potential for social change * ***_NORMATIVE SOCIAL INFLUENCE_*** - environmental and health campaigns exploit conformity by appealing to NSI. They provide information about what other people are doing, e.g. reducing litter by printing normative messages on bins ("bin it - others do")

Answer 50

* ***_DISOBEDIENT MODELS MAKE CHANGE MORE LIKELY_*** - Milgram's research : disobedient models in the TWO PEERS REBEL variation. The rate of obedience in naïve participants plummeted (65% → 10%) * ***_GRADUAL COMMITMENT LEADS TO “DRIFT”_*** - Zimbardo found that once a small instruction is obeyed, it becomes more difficult to resist a bigger one. People “drift” into a new kind of behaviour

Answer 51

* Nolan hung messages on the front doors of houses. The key message was most residents are trying to reduce energy usage * Significant decreases in energy use compared to a control group who saw messages to save energy with no reference to other people's behaviour * Shows conformity can lead to social change through NSI

Answer 52

* Exposing people to social norms doesn't always change behaviour * Foxcroft reviewed 70 studies of programmes using social norms to reduce alcohol intake * There was only a small effect on drinking quantity and no effect on drinking frequency * This suggests that NSI doesn't always produce long-term social change

Answer 53

* Nemeth says minority arguments cause people to engage in divergent thinking (broad, active information search, more options) * This thinking leads to better decisions and creative solutions to social problems * Suggests that minorities are valuable because they stimulate new ideas and open people's minds

Answer 54

* Mackie disagrees with the view that minority influence caused individuals in the majority to think deeply about an issue * Majority influence creates deeper processing because we believe others think as we do. When a majority thinks differently, this creates pressure to think about their views * Therefore, a central element of minority influence has been challenged, casting our doubt on its validity as an explanation for social change

Answer 55

* The steps involved in the process of social change provide practical advice for minorities wanting to influence a majority (e.g. be consistent) * Even so, majorities still often resist change because they find the minority unappealing (environmental activists = “tree-huggers”). But according to Bashir, even this can be counteracted * This suggests that minority influence research does provide applications that eventually influence majorities to change