Social influence :) Flashcards
2 (+) of Social change
(+) R.S. Asch - consistency - unanimity. Added a dissenter
(+) R.S Milgram - Disobedient Role models (internalization)- social change does occur
3(-) of social change
(-) Indiv. Differences - Some people more resistant
(-) Cultural Differences- Collectivist eastern society. may happen quicker than individualist western. fails to acknowlege
(-) Social change can happen quickly - e.g: COVID wearing masks
2 (+) of explanations for conformity
(+) R.s for NSI = Asch interviewed p.ps after study asking why they conformed. Some did as they felt self conscious and afraid of disproval
(+)R.S informational S.I =Todd and Lucas found p.ps conformed more often to harder math problems
2 (-) of explanations for conformity
(-)not always easy to distinguish between Normative and Informative S.I e.g: Asch introduced variables that can reduce the power of NSI and ISI. Social support
(-) Individual differences = nAffiliators greatly concerned with being liked by others. McGhee and Teevan (1967) found these were more likely to conform
1 (+) of Asch study
(+) Reliable E.g: standardised procedures = vaariations
4 (-) of Asch study
(-) Artificial environment= p.p in heightened situation so demonstrate demand characteristics
(-)Ethical issues - could not be given informed consent
(-)Culture bias - based on western culture
(-) Biased sample - sample of all men
Stanford prison experiment All a03
(+) control over key variables= emotional stability test
(-) lack of realism- Banuazizi and Mohavedi argued p.p were play acting rather than conforming to a role. performances based on stereotypes
(+) Counterargue lack of realism = 90% of prisoners conversations were about prison life
(-)Exagerates the power of roles = only 1/3 of guards behaved in a brutal way, iothers showd compassion
(-) R.Refuting = Reicher and Haslam did a partial replication of SPE. broadcasted on TV. In this case, the prisoners took control of prison and were brutal towards guards.
Milgram all A03
(+) R.S = Bickman, people twice as likely to obey security guard compared to confed dressed in suit and tie
(+) Cross cultural replications. Findings replicated in other cultures= Miranda et al studied Spanish participants. found 90% obedience rate in Spanish students
(-) Cross cultural replication is limited - Smith + Bond identified just 2 variations that took place in non western countries. Can’t apply findings everywhere
(-) demand characteristics = p.p may have figured shocks aren’t real. in recordings can be heard saying they doubt the shocks are real
(-) Bias sample - all men
or
(-) Ethics - Baumrind was critical of how Milgram deceived his participants. reduce usefulness?
Agentic shift 2 (+)
(+) R.s Bickman
(+) R.s Blass and Schmidt - showed a film of milgrams study to students, asking who was responsible. majority said experimenter
Agentic shift 3(-)
(-) Quality of R.s Bickman new york sample
(-) Indiv. differences = some obey, some don’t
(-) Alt. expl = Legitimacy of authority / authoritarian personality
Legitimacy of Authority 2 (+)
(+)R.s Bickman, people obeyed to highest authority
-(+)P.A schools/prisons hierarchy
Legitimacy of Authority 3 (-)
(-) Quality of R.s Bickman new york sample
(-) can’t explain indiv. differences some people accept authority, some don’t
(-) Alt. expl. Dispositional expl = Authoritarian personality
Social support 3 (+)
(+) R.S - Milgram - Variation, disobedient confedf. Obedience dropped from 65% to 10%.
(+)R.S - Asch (non conforming confed) - Conformity
(+)R.S - Allen + Levine (1971) Conformity decreased when there was a dissenter in Asch type study. Even when the dissenter stated couldn’t see the lined properly. Don’t conform because free from pressure of group
Social support 2 (-)
(-) Bias sample all male in asch and milgram study
(-) Alt. expl = Dispositional, Locus of control
Locus of control 2 (+)
(+) R.s, Holland. Milgram. measured locus of control of milgram p.p. 37% of internals did not continue to highest shock. 23% of externals didn’t.
(+)R.S= Oliner and Oliner interviewed two non Jewish groups of people who lived through Nazi Germany. compared 406 people who rescued Jews, 126 who hadn’t. Found group that rescued Jews had scores demonstrating an internal locus of control.
