Social Influence

Question 1

What is obedience?

Answer 1

To follow an order given by a person with recognised authority

Question 2

Milgram’s aim

Answer 2

to see if a volunteer would obey to giving electric shocks to someone they thought was another participant

Question 3

Milgram’s procedure

Answer 3

40 male volunteers were selected from a range of backgrounds, they thought the study was about memory and learning.
Ppts were deceived as they thought roles were random, but all of them were teachers.
The ‘learner’ was strapped to an electric chair, the Ppts was sampled shocked with 45V.
Ppt asked questions, if ‘learner’ got it wrong they would be shocked, the voltage increased each time.
The ‘learner’ was behind a cloth so ppt couldn’t see them but could hear them.

Question 4

Milgram’s 4 prods

Answer 4

1. Please continue
2. The experiment requires you to continue
3. It’s absolutely essential that you continue
4. You have no other choice, you must go on

Question 5

Milgram’s results

Answer 5

65% went to 450v - the maximum shock

Question 6

Milgram’s conclusion

Answer 6

People will obey in certain situations even if they don’t necessarily want to.

Question 7

Milgram’s variations

Answer 7

1. Experiment took place in a run down office building (dropped to 48%)
2. The teacher and leaner were in the same room (dropped to 40%)
3. The teacher had to force the learners hand down on the shock plate (dropped to 30%)
4. Experimentor gave instructions to the teacher over the phone (dropped to 20%)
5. Participants worked in groups to shock the learner, two rebelled (dropped to 10%)
6. Someone else administrated the shock (increased to 92.5%)
7. Teacher couldn’t see or hear the learner (increased to 100%)

Question 8

Milgram’s strengths

Answer 8

High scientific validity - lab experiment so variables were controlled, ppts believed roles were random so demand characteristics were reduced

Question 9

Milgram’s supporting research

Answer 9

Bickman: Milkman, man and security guard asking passers by to pick up litter - people were twice as likely to do it for the security guard (legitimate authority)
Hofling: Unkown doctor phoned 22 nurses to administer an overdose drug not on ward list - 95% obey without question
Beavous et al: (French TV game show) mocked up Milgram’s experiment - 80% went to 450v

Question 10

Milgram’s ethical issues

Answer 10

Ppts were deceived - can have serious psychological harm

Question 11

Milgram’s limitations

Research support

Answer 11

Charles Holland: argued the ppts knew it was fake so it lacked scientific validity
Sheridan and King: Ppts gave electric shocks to puppies - 54% males obeyed & 100% females - Milgrams is gender biased and can’t be applied through whole population
Killman and Manh: Milgram’s experiment in Australia - 15% obedience - all of MIlgram’s repeated were in western cultures (cultural bias)

Question 12

Agentic state

Answer 12

Shifting responsibility onto the person who gave the orders

Question 13

Legitimate authority

Answer 13

For us to obey someone they must have some sort of social power

Question 14

Authoritarian personality

Answer 14

Strict parents who attach conditions to love and an emotionally absent father = child grows up very insecure and needing to belong
As an adult they don’t like anyone different from them, they believe in following higher authority and more likely to follow facist leaders - obey without question

Question 15

Adorno et al

Answer 15

F-Scale questionnaire to show authoritarian personality

Question 16

Research support for Adorno et al

Answer 16

Milgram and Elms: 20 obedient and 20 disobedient ppts who took part in Milgrams experiment completed F-Scale questionnaire - obedient ppt scored higher on F-Scale and didn’t have a close relationship with father.
Strength: controlled variables
Strength: provided quantitive and qualitative data (high scientific validity)
Limitation: correlation

Question 17

Criticism of Adorno et al

Answer 17

Political bias - doesn’t account for extreme left wing views
Lacks temporal validity - questions unique to 1950s so no longer relevant
Response bias - ppts answered according to what they thought was socially desirable
Middentrope Meleon: argued those less educated were more obedient (education isn’t authoritarian personality)

Question 18

Social support

Answer 18

Conformity decreased when individuals rebelled - people more likely to disobey if others do it first

Question 19

Locus of control - Rotter

Answer 19

Measured on a scale
High internal locus of control: believe things are your own choice and responsibility
High external locus of control: believe things are due to luck or fate

Question 20

Research support for Locus of control

Answer 20

Oliner and Oliner: compared 406 people who protected jews and 126 who didn’t - rescuers had high internal locus of control

Question 21

Minority influence

Answer 21

Individual or small group’s attitude/behaviour influence a larger group

Question 22

Consistency - Moscovici

Answer 22

Lab experiment - 172 female ppts, groups of 6 (2 confederates and 4 naive)
36 blue slides
condition 1: consistent - confederates said all slides were green - 8.2& agreed
condition 2: inconsistent - confederates said 24 were green and 12 were blue - 1.25% agreed
Strength: controlled variables - high internal validity
Limitation: Gender bias - all ppts were female

Question 23

Flexibility - Nemeth

Answer 23

4 ppts (1 confederate) decided compensation rates for ski lift accident victims
Condition 1 : inflexible - confederate argued for low compensation rate and wouldn’t budge
Condition 2: flexible - confederate argued for low compensation rate then goes slightly higher
Strength: high internal validity (lab experiment)
Strength: high external validity
Limitation: small sample size - doesn’t reflect minority

Question 24

Moscovici’s conversion theory

Answer 24

Minority can cause social change if they show : consistency/sacrifice/group membership
Consistency: Moscovici blue slide experiment
Sacrifice: Rosa parks being arrested, Suffragettes fought for women’s rights
Group membership: Group of heterosexual men spoken to by a minority about gay rights - more likely to listen to heterosexual minority rather than homosexual minority as they can relate.

Question 25

Other factors that influence minority

Answer 25

Deeper processing
Snowball effect - initially change is small but increases as more people join
Augmentation principle - if minority are physically harmed for belief then people feel sympathy so they support then
Drawing attention
Social cryptominesia - people forget that change has happened

Question 26

Limitation for minority influence

Answer 26

Bashir: research on peoples views on environmentalists - some people viewed them as ‘treehuggers’ - negative viewpoint so people didn’t want to be associated with them they were wiling to help the environment.

Question 27

Strength for minority influence

Answer 27

Nolan: 2 residential areas in SanDiego
Notes on doors - 1= save energy 2= I save energy
In second group energy usage dropped as they felt they were apart as a community