Social influence Flashcards
what was the conformity rate in Asch’s baseline study
36.8%
what were the individual differences in Asch’s baseline study
- 25% never conformed
- 75% conformed at least once
findings in group size variation of Asch’s study
- curvilinear relationship between groups size and level of conformity
- two confederates - conformity = 13.6%
- three confederates - conformity = 31.8%
- above three - conformity levelled off
findings in unanimity variation of Asch’s study
- in the presence of a dissenter, conformity reduced on average to less than a quarter of the level it was when the majority was unanimous
findings in Task difficulty variation of Asch’s study
conformity increased
Asch evaluation
situation and tasks were artificial:
- P’s knew they were in research study - task was trivial (demand characteristics)
- Fiske (2014) - groups were not like real-life groups - lacks ecological validity
Findings have little application:
- only American men tested
- Neto (1995) - women might be more conformist
- Bond and Smith (1996) - collectivist cultures have higher conformity rates
- lacks population validity
evidence to support Asch’s findings:
- Lucas et al (2006) - p’s had to solve ‘easy’ and ‘hard’ maths problems
- given 3 wrong answers
- P’s conformed more for the ‘hard’ questions
- supports task difficulty variation
Zimbardo experiment findings
- social roles are power influences on behaviour - most conformed strongly to their roles
- Guards became brutal, prisoners became submissive
- other volunteers also easily conformed e.g. Chaplain
Zimbardo experiment evaluation
control over key variables:
- all emotionally stable
- randomly allocated to their roles
- internal validity
lacked mundane realism:
- Movahedi (1975) - participants were play-acting
- one guard based their role on a character from the film Cool Hand Luke
Zimbardo exaggerated the power of roles:
- only a third behaved brutally, another applied the rules fairly and the rest supported the prisoners - giving cigarettes and reinstating privileges
Milgram baseline findings
- 12.5% stopped at 300V
- 65% continued to 450V
- Qualitative data - P’s showed signs of extreme tension - three had ‘full-blown uncontrollable seizures’
Milgram baseline evaluation
replications have supported his findings:
- French game show - contestants order to give shocks when ordered by presenter to other P’s
- 80% gave the maximum volts of 460V
Study lacked internal validity :
- Orne and Holland (1968) - P’s guessed the shocks were fake
- Perry (2013) - discovered only half believed the shocks were real
- demand characteristics
Counter:
- Sheridan and King (1972) - P’s gave real shocks to a puppy
- 54% of males and 100% of Females went up to fatal shock
findings were not due to blind obedience:
- Haslam et al. (2014) - those given the first three prods obeyed the experimenter and those that disobeyed were given the 4th prod
- SIT suggests first three required identification with scientific aims and the fourth required blind obedience
- shows findings best explained in terms of identification with scientific aims
What is internalisation?
- A deep type of conformity where we take on the majority view because we accept it as correct
- far reaching and permanent change in behaviour
What is identification?
- A moderate type of conformity where we act in the same way as the group because we value it and want to be part of it
- don’t agree with everything from the majority
What is compliance?
A superficial and temporary type of conformity where we outwardly go along with the majority view but privately disagree with it
Types of conformity evaluation
- research support for NSI (Asch - writing down answers)
- research support for ISI (Lucas et al)
- individual differences in NSI - nAffiliators
Milgram proximity variation
- teacher and learner in same room - 40%
- touch proximity - 30%
- remote instruction 20.5%
Milgram location variation
Run down office block - 47.5%
Milgram uniform variation
Conformity lowest when confederate in own clothes - 20%
Milgram variation evaluation
- research support from Bickman
- cross cultural replications
- low internal validity
What are binding factors?
Aspects of the situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effects of their behaviour and thus reduce the ‘moral strain’ they are feeling
Agentic state evaluation
- research support - Milgram - when the experimenter took responsibility the p’s went through the procedure quickly with no further objections
- limited explanation - agentic shift doesn’t explain nurse study
Legitimacy of authority evaluation
- Explains cultural differences
- cannot explain all (dis)obedience
Authoritarian personality evaluation
Research support - elms and Milgram
Limited explanation - a social identity theory may be more realistic
Political bias - F - scale only measures the tendency towards an extreme form of right-wing ideology
What is social support?
- The presence of people who resist pressures to conform or obey can help others to do the same
- these people act as models to show others that resistance to social influence is possible
Social support evaluation
- real-world research support
- research support for dissenting peers
what is locus of control?
- internals believe that things that happen to them are largely controlled by themselves
- externals believe things happen outside of their control
LOC evaluation
- (str) evidence to support the role of LOC in resisting obedience
- (lim) not all research supports the role of LOC in resistance
minority influence evaluation
- research supporting consistency (Moscovici)
- minority influence research often involves artificial tasks
social change evaluation
- support for NSI in social change (hanging messages in front of doors) C: doesn’t always produce social change
- minority influence explains social change
- (lim) deeper processing may apply to majority influence
