SOCIAL INFLUENCE Flashcards
What Is meant by social change
When whole societies rather than just individuals, adopt new attitudes, beliefs + way of doing things. Eg women rights
ASCH RESEARCH - ARTIFICIAL SITUATION + TASK
ppts knew this was a study so just played along with the trivial task (demand ch)
ASCH RESEARCH - LIMITED APPLICATION
research only conducted on American men
ASCH RESEARCH - RESEARCH SUPPORT
Lucas found more confromity when maths problems were harder
—- conformity more complex, confident ppts were less conforming (individual factors)
TYPES - RS FOR NSI
when no normative group pressure (wrote answers) conformity down to 12.5% (asch)
TYPES - RS FOR ISI
ppts relied on other people’s answers to hard maths problems (Lucas)
— cannot usually seperate isi + nsi, a dissener may reduce power of nsi or isi
TYPES - INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES in NSI
nAffiliators want to be liked more, so conform more (McGhee + Teevan)
ZIMBARDO’S - CONTROL
Random assignment of roles increased internal validity
ZIMBARDO’S - EXAGGERATES THE POWER OF ROLES
Only 1/3 of guards were brutal so conclusions exaggerrated (Fromm)
ZIMBARDO’S - LACK OF REALISM
ppts play-acted their roles according to the media derived stereotypes (Banuazizi)
—evidence that prisoners thought the prison was real to them eg 90% of conversations were abt prison (McDermott)
MILGRAM’S RESEARCH - RS
French TV documentary/game show found 80% gave max shock - similar beh to Milgrams ppts (Beauvois)
MILGRAM’S RESEARCH - LOW INTERNAL VALIDITY
ppts realised shocks were fake so ‘play acting’ (Holland) Supported by Perry tapes of ppts showed only 50% thought it was real
— ppts gave real shocks to puppy ( Sheridan + King)
MILGRAM’S RESEARCH - ETHICAL ISSUES
Deception meant ppts could not properly consent (Baumrind) May be balanced by benefits of the research
SITUATIONAL VARIABLES - RS
Bickman showed power of uniform in a field experiment
SITUATIONAL VARIABLES - CROSS-CULTURAL REPLICATIONS
Dutch ppts ordered to say stressful things to interviewee decreased proximity led to decreased obedience (Meesus)
— most studies in countries similar to the US so not generalisable (Smith)
SITUATIONAL VARIABLES - LOW INTERNAL VALIDITY
Some of Milgram’s procedures in the variations were specially contrived, so not genuine obedience (Holland)
AGENTIC STATE - RS
Milgram’s resistant ppts continued giving shocks when experimenter took responsibility
AGENTIC STATE - A LIMITED EXPLAINATION
cannot explain why Rank + Jacobson’s nurses and some of Milgram’s ppts disobeyed
LEGITIMACY OF AUTHORITY - EXPLAINS CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
Milgram style rs - In Austrailia 16% obeyed (Kilham & Mann) but 85% Germany (Mantell), related to structure of society eg authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate due to individuals. reflects how different societies are structured
LEGITIMACY OF AUTHORITY - CANNOT EXPLAIN ALL (DIS)OBEDIENCE
Rank & Jacobson’s nurses in hierarchal structure but did not obey legitimate authority ppts in milgrams study disobeyed suggests individual differences
AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY - RS
Obedient ppts had high F - scale scores (Elms & Milgram) Adorno findings = obedient ppl show similar characteristics to those with AP
— Obedient ppts unlike authoritains in many ways, complex
AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY - LIMITED EXPLAINATION
Can’t explain obedience across a whole culture (social identity theory is better)
AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY - POLITICAL BIAS
Authoritarianism equated with right-wing ideology, ignores left-wing authoritarianism (Jahoda)
f - scale only measures extreme forms of right wing ideology = emphasis importance of complete obedience in political authority
SOCIAL SUPPORT - RW RS
Having a buddy helps resist peer pressure to smoke (Albrecht)
SOCIAL SUPPORT - RS FOR DISSENTING PEERS
Asch found that the genuine ppt conformed less often in the presence of a dissenter. Dissenter freed the ppt to act more independenty
LOCUS OF CONTROL - RS
Internals less likely to fully obey in Milgram type procedure (Holland)
LOCUS OF CONROL - CONTRADICTORY RS
People are now more independant but also more external (Twenge)
MINORITY INFLUENCE - RS FOR CONSISTENCY
Wood et al meta - analysis (100) found minorities seen as consistent most influencial
MINORITY INFLUENCE - RS FOR DEEPER PROCESSING
Pps exposed to minority view resisted confliciting view (Martin)
— real world majorities have more power/status than minorities, missing from research
MINORITY INFLUENCE - ARTIFICIAL TASKS
Tasks often trivial so tell us little about real world influences (eg. asch line study) lack external validity
MINORITY INFLUENCE - POWER OF MINORITY INFL
More ppl agree with minority in private
SI + SOCIAL CHANGE - RS FOR NORMATIVE INFLUENCES
NSI valid explanation of social change eg. reducing energy consumption (Nolan)
— normative influence does not always produce change (Foxcroft) alcholol use found only reduction in quantity not frequency
SI + SOCIAL CHANGE - MINORITY INFLU EXPLAINS CHANGE
Minorities stimulate divergent thinking - broad, creative, more options (Nemeth)
SI + SOCIAL CHANGE - ROLE OF DEEPER PROCESSING - LIMITATION
It is majority views that are processed more deeply than minority influence (Mackie) bc we like to believe that maj shares our view so question if they don’t
