Social Influence Flashcards

1
Q

Conformity

A

Yielding to group pressures

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Internalisation

A

Publicly changing behaviour to fit in with the group and agreeing with them privately too (internalise the behaviour).
Changed behaviour and views.
Deepest level of conformity.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Identification

A

Conforming to expectations of a social role.
Private views remain the same.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Compliance

A

Publicly changing behaviour to fit in with the group.
Private views disagree with the behaviour of the group.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Normative social influence

A

The person conforms because of a need to be accepted by the group.
Belonging to the group could be rewarding, or not belonging could lead to punishment.
While they publicly conform, they still privately disagree and keep their old attitudes.
Leads to compliance.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Informational social influence

A

This is based on our need to be right.
If we don’t know what to do, this means we look to what others are doing and conform to them because they might know instead.
You both publicly conform and privately agree - this is known as conversion.
Leads to internalisation.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Asch’s line study - Aim

A

To investigate the extent to which social pressure from a majority group could affect a person to conform.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Asch’s line study - Procedure

A

123 male undergraduate students, USA
The participants were given a false aim that they were taking part in a vision test.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Asch’s line study - Method (x4)

A

There was only one naïve participant in groups of 6-8 confederates.
The group were shown 2 cards, one with a standard line and another with 3 comparison lines.
Participants had to state which line was the matching one.
The naïve participant always answered second to last.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Asch’s line study - Findings (x4)

A

Conformity rate = 36.8%
25% did not conform at all (75% at least once)
In the control group 1% gave the wrong answer.
In post experiment interviews, participants said they knew the answer but did it to avoid social rejection.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Asch’s line study - Conclusion

A

People do conform (even in unambiguous tasks) in order to fit in and not be rejected by the group.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Changed variables in Asch’s line study (x3)

A

Group size
Unanimity
Task difficulty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Asch’s line study - Group size

A

With 3 confederates, conformity rose to 31.8% but after that there was little difference.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Asch’s line study - Unanimity

A

The presence of 1 dissenter reduced conformity to 5.5% compared to when there was a unanimity.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Asch’s line study - Task difficulty

A

When the task was made more difficult, conformity increased.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

The Stanford Prison Experiment - Aim

A

To investigate how readily people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner in a role-playing exercise that simulated prison life.
Dispositional factors vs situational factors.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

The Stanford Prison Experiment - Procedure (x5)

A

24 male US college students (paid $15 a day).
Randomly assigned to the role of prisoner or guard.
Both had to wear uniforms.
Guards worked 8 hour shifts.
No physical violence was permitted.

18
Q

The Stanford Prison Experiment - Findings (x4)

A

Within 2 days the prisoners rebelled - guards punished them and withdrew privileges.
The prisoners became subdued, depressed and anxious (one went on a hunger strike).
Zimbardo convinced prisoners to stay if they asked to leave.
The study ended after 6 days.

19
Q

The Stanford Prison Experiment - Conclusions (x3)

A

People will readily conform to the social roles they are expected to play (especially if the roles are strongly stereotyped).
The prison environment was an important factor in creating the guards’ brutal behaviour.
Deindividuation and learned helplessness.

20
Q

Deindividuation - The Stanford Prison Experiment

A

You become so immersed in the norms of the group that you lose your sense of identity and personal responsibility.
The guards may have been so sadistic because they did not feel what happened was down to them personally. This may also be because of the uniform (lost personal identity).

21
Q

Learned helplessness - The Stanford Prison Experiment

A

The prisoners learned that whatever they did had little effect on what happened to them.
In the mock prison the unpredictable decisions of the guards led the prisoners to give up responding.

22
Q

Milgram’s Obedience Experiment (1963) - Aim

A

Researching how far people would go in obeying an instruction if it involved harming another person.

23
Q

Milgram’s Obedience Experiment (1963) - Procedure (x5)

A

Lab experiment
40 males aged 20-50
The teacher is told to administer an electric shock every time the learner makes a mistake when recalling word pairs (increasing the shock each time).
The learner gave mainly wrong answers on purpose.
When the teacher refused to administer a shock, the experimenter gave a series of orders/prods to ensure they continued.

24
Q

Milgram’s Obedience Experiment (1963) - Findings (x2)

A

2/3 of participants (i.e teachers) continued to the highest level of 450 volts.
All the participants continued to 300 volts.

25
Q

Milgram’s Obedience Experiment (1963) - Conclusion (x3)

A

Ordinary people are likely to follow orders given by an authority figure, even to the extent of killing an innocent human being.
Obedience to authority is ingrained in us all from the way we are brought up.
People tend to obey orders from people if they recognise their authority as morally right and/or legally based. This response to authority is learned in a variety of situations (e.g in the family, school and workplace).

26
Q

Milgram’s Obedience Experiment (1963) - Altered variables (x5)

A

Agentic state (someone else administered the shock)
Location and legitimate authority
Proximity to the learner
Proximity to the authority figure
Uniform and legitimate authority

27
Q

Autonomous state

A

We behave voluntarily and are aware of what will happen as a result of our actions - we feel responsible for our actions.

28
Q

Agentic state

A

When we act as an agent (representative) of someone in authority. We find it easy to deny personal responsibility for our actions - it’s just doing our job or just following orders.

29
Q

The agentic shift

A

When we move from an autonomous state to an agentic state. There is normally a moral strain.

30
Q

Binding factors

A

The reason people stay in their agentic state. These are aspects of the situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effect of their behaviour and reduce the moral strain they are feeling.

31
Q

Legitimate authority

A

Milgram suggested that we are more likely to obey a person who has a higher position or status in a social hierarchy. People tend to obey others if they recognise their authority as morally right and / or legally based (i.e legitimate).

32
Q

Destructive authority

A

Charismatic and powerful leaders can use their legitimate powers for destructive purposes.

33
Q

Authoritarian personality (x3)

A
  • People with the authoritarian personality defer to authority.
  • They are more likely to obey an authority figure.
  • They believe that people below them in the hierarchy should defer to them.
34
Q

Internal locus of control

A

You have personal control over your own behaviour.

35
Q

External locus of control

A

You believe that what happens to you is the result of luck or fate, or is determined by people in authority.

36
Q

Social change processes

A
  1. Attention seeking
  2. Consistency
  3. Augmentation principle
  4. Deeper processing of the message
  5. Snowball effect
  6. Social cryptoamnesia
37
Q

Minority influence (3 features)

A
  • Consistent
  • Commitment
  • Flexibility
38
Q

Conversion theory - Moscovici (x5)

A
  • Different viewpoint = conflict
  • We don’t like conflict
  • We take steps to reduce it
  • We examine arguments of minority closely and think more deeply about content
  • More likely to be swayed on a private level and internalise
39
Q

Conversion theory - Mackie (x3)

A
  • We like to think others share our thoughts (false assumption)
  • Result = when a majority disagrees with us we spend longer examining their arguments and weighing up the evidence
  • When faced with a minority that disagrees we’re generally not that bothered (we are still in the majority)
40
Q

Social identity theory

A

You are more likely to be influenced by people who you think are like you.

41
Q

Tajfel social identity

A

Personal identity (definition of self) —>
Social identity (via) —>
Social categorisation (facilitates) —>
Distinct social groups —>
- In-group (‘we’) —> satisfied social identity
- Out-group (‘they’) —> dissatisfied social identity

42
Q

Moscovici (1969) - Minority influence study (x7)

A
  • To see if a consistent minority could influence a majority to give an incorrect answer, in a colour perception task.
  • Groups of 6 shown 36 slides, which were all varying shades of blue.
  • Consistent condition = the 2 confederates said that all 36 slides were green.
  • Inconsistent condition = the 2 confederates said that 24 of the slides were green and 12 were blue.
  • Consistent condition: real ppts agreed on 8.2% of the trials.
  • Inconsistent condition: real ppts agreed on 1.25% of the trials.
  • If a minority is consistent in their view then they are also showing commitment to their cause.