Social Influence Flashcards
What are the 3 types of conformity, and can you explain them?
1) Internalisation = genuinely accepting groups norms publicly and privately.
2) Identification = publicly changing opinions though we may not agree with all views in private.
3) Compliance = “going along with others” in public. A superficial/ temporary agreements that ceases without group pressure.
What are the two explanations for conformity?
1) Informational Social Influence (ISI)
- A desire to be right and is a cognitive process.
- Occurs in ambiguous or new situations.
- Leads to internalisation.
2) Normative Social Influence (NSI)
- A desire to behave like others and not look foolish.
- Emotional as we seek for social approval.
- Occurs in familiar and familiar situations.
Give one strength and one weakness of ISI
Research support:
- Lucas et al. (2006) - studied students on maths problems, the harder they got, the more conformity there was.
Individual differences:
- Lucas et al. study also showed participants with high maths ability conformed less.
- Perrin + Spencer (1980) found engineering students conformed much less 1/396.
Give one strength and one weakness of NSI
Research support:
- Asch found some would give a wrong answer because they were afraid of disapproval.
- Conformity fell to 12.5% when they wrote it down as giving private answers has no normative pressure affecting.
Individual differences:
- People who care more about being liked are called nAffiliators.
- McGhee + Teevan (1967) - found nAffiliators were more likely to conform.
Explain Asch’s (1951) procedure and what is what about.
- Variables affecting conformity.
- 123 American male students.
- Each ‘tested’ with 6-8 confederates.
- Identified length of a standard line.
- Confederates gave wrong answers together.
What were Asch’s (1951) findings?
- Naive participants gave wrong answers 36.8% of the time.
- 25% never gave a wrong answer.
- 75% conformed at least once.
- Most said they conformed to avoid rejection (NSI).
What were the 3 variables affecting conformity?
- Group size
- Unanimity
- Task difficulty.
How did Asch change the variables affecting conformity?
1) Group size varied between 1-15 confederates.
2) Confederate introduced who was always dissenting but did not always give the correct answer.
3) Changing task difficulty; line lengths similar.
Give the findings of Asch’s (1955) study?
1) Group size - conformity peaked at 3 confederates, 32%.
2) Unanimity - dissenting confederate reduced conformity as the naïve participant could behave independently.
3)Task difficulty - conformity increased increased when the task was more difficult.
Critically evaluate Asch’s conformity research
1) ‘Child of the times’
- Perrin + Spencer found just 1/396 conformers in UK engineering students
- 1950s a more conformist time.
2) Situations and tasks were artificial:
- May have responded to demand characteristics.
- Trivial tasks and the group was not like a “real-life group”
- Findings may not generalise to everyday life?
3) Findings only apply to certain groups:
- Only men tested by Asch.
- Neto - women might be more conformist as they care more about social relationships.
- America and individualistic culture, higher in collectivist?
- Research cannot be applied to all without culture and beta bias.
Describe Zimbardo’s SPE procedure?
- Mock prison set up in Stanford Uni.
- 24 emotionally stable students were randomly assigned roles.
- Prisoners arrested in their homes and given numbers (de-individualisation).
- Guards were told they had complete power over prisoners.
- Both groups encouraged to conform through use of uniform.
What were the findings and conclusions of Zimbardo’s study?
Findings:
- Guards identified with role and became increasingly aggressive.
- Prisoners rebelled but became subdued and passive after harsh retaliation from guards.
- Ended early, 6 days not the intended 14.
- Three prisoners released early (psych distress) and one placed in the hole.
Conclusions:
- Shows the power of social roles, guards brutal, prisoners submissive.
- Other volunteers easily conformed, prison chaplain.
Give a strength of the SPE
Some control over variables:
- chose emotionally stable to play roles, randomly assigned which meant that the results were down to situational pressures.
Give four weaknesses of the SPE
1) SPE lacks realism:
Banuazizi and Mohavedi
- Participants were play-acting with behaviour reflecting stereotypes.
- One guard based his behaviour off the film Cool Hand Luke.
=> Counterpoint:
McDermott
- 90% of conversations were about prison life.
- Prisoner 416 believed it was a real prison run by psychologists.
2) Zimbardo exaggerated the power of roles:
Fromm
- Only 1/3 guards behaved brutally.
- Minimised dispositional factors.
3) Generalisability:
- Impossible without gender (Beta) and cultural bias.
4) Ethical implications were not considered at all.
What was the procedure for Milgram (1963) study?
- 40 American men volunteered for “memory tests”.
- Participant = teacher, Confederate = learner and experimenter.
- Given an electric shock every time a wrong answer was given.
- Shocks went from 15V to 450V.
- Different prods were given by the experimenter.
What were the findings of Milgram’s (1963) study?
- No one stopped below 300V
- 12.5% stopped at 300V
- 65% went to 450V
- Participants showed signs of great tension (qualitative).
- Psychology students predicted no more than 3% would go to 450V.
- Participants debriefed to assure them that their behaviour was normal and 84% glad to have taken part.
What were the conclusions of the Milgram’s study?
We obey legitimate authority blindly.
Give two positive evaluations of Milgram’s study.
1) Replications
- French TV game.
- Contestants paid to give electric shocks (fake) to other participants (actors).
- 80% gave maximum shock to (acting) unconscious man.
2) Replications
Sheridan and King
- Participants gave real shocks to a puppy.
- 54% males and 100% females delivered what they thought was a fatal shock.
Give two negative evaluations of Milgram’s study.
1) Lacked internal validity:
Orne and Holland
- Participants guessed shocks were fake.
- Perry’s discovery that only half the participants believed the shocks to be real.
- Demand characteristics.
2) Findings are not due to blind obedience:
Haslam et al.
- Participants all obeyed the first three prods but not the fourth.
- First three required identification with the science of the research but the fourth required blind obedience.
