social influence

Question 1

conformity

Answer 1

a change in our opinions or behaviour to fit in with social norms or as the result of perceived group pressure

Question 2

dispositional factors

Answer 2

internal personal characteristics which may affect how a person will behave

Question 3

informational social influence

Answer 3

changing behaviour or opinions because we think other people have superior knowledge to us

Question 4

normative social influence

Answer 4

changing behaviour or opinions because we want to fit in and be accepted by others

Question 5

social influence

Answer 5

the effect other people have on our opinions and behaviour

Question 6

social factors affecting conformity

Answer 6

group size, task difficulty, anonymity

Question 7

dispositional factors affecting conformity

Answer 7

personality, expertise

Question 8

asch’s study aim

Answer 8

to investigate if people would conform to the opinions of others to give an answer they knew to be wrong

Question 9

asch’s study design

Answer 9

a laboratory experiment in which there was control of possible extraneous variables and all procedures were standardised to ensure the study could be replicated easily. Participants were male American college students

Question 10

asch’s study method

Answer 10

groups of 7 to 9 people were shown sets of 4 lines: a standard line and 3 other comparison lines. They were asked to state out loud which comparison line was the same length as the standard line. The correct answer was always clear.

there was only one real participant in each group. He was told the aim of the study was to investigate visual judgement. Unknown to him, the other members of the group were confederates working for the experimenter who had been instructed to give the same incorrect response for 12 out of the 18 sets of lines. Each real participant was always one of the last to answer so heard the majority of responses before he gave his own judgement. This was to put him under pressure to conform to the incorrect majority.

Asch recorded whether participants gave the correct answer or conformed by giving the same incorrect judgement as the group.

Question 11

asch’s study results

Answer 11

participants conformed to give the incorrect answer of the group 36.8 per cent of the time. 76 per cent of participants conformed to the incorrect majority at least once. 24 per cent of the participants resisted the pressure to conform and gave the correct judgement in every trial.

Question 12

conclusion of asch’s study

Answer 12

the results showed that people conform to fit in with a group, even when they know they are giving an incorrect judgement.

Question 13

pros of asch’s study

Answer 13

+ Shows the role of social influence: when participants were tested alone, error in responses was 1%. When in a group, it rose to 36.8%. Since it manipulated the IV (alone or in a group) it was possible to show the effect of group pressure on behaviour

+ laboratory setting where high levels of control over extraneous variables

+ Modifications showed factors influencing conformity: eg: group size, giving your responses anonymously

+ laboratory setting, standardized procedures, replicable, so we can see if the results are the same , so they can be considered reliable

Question 14

cons of asch’s study

Answer 14

• lacks ecological validity, we don’t know if these results would apply in a real life setting
• Task lacks personal significance, as the task was oversimplified and the decision had no real significance for the person. If there were real consequences, maybe the conformity levels were different​
• culturally biased: represents the characteristics of US culture during the 50s. We might have got different results today.

Question 15

obedience

Answer 15

following the orders of an authority figure

Question 16

agency

Answer 16

the responsibility we feel for our own actions

Question 17

agency theory

Answer 17

the idea that a person will obey an authority figure when they believe this authority figure will take responsibility for whatever the person does

Question 18

milgram’s agency theory

Answer 18

We have learned from childhood to enter an agentic state and follow orders from authority figures​.

Obedience is the result of SOCIAL factors, such as authority, proximity, culture

Question 19

evaluating milgram’s theory

Answer 19

+ there is evidence supporting the theory, both from his own laboratory experiment, as well as from real life examples in history

• the theory explains obedience by focusing only on social factors. It ignores dispositional factors (personality)​
• according to Adorno, personality with authoritarian characteristics, is more important in explaining obedience

Question 20

authority

Answer 20

when a person is perceived to have the right to give orders

Question 21

culture

Answer 21

a group of people who share similar customs, beliefs, and behaviour

Question 22

proximity

Answer 22

how near or close something is to us

Question 23

social factors affecting obedience

Answer 23

authority, culture, proximity

Question 24

dispositional factors affecting obedience

Answer 24

self-esteem, confidence, intelligence, personality

Question 25

adorno’s theory of the authoritarian personality

Answer 25

He supports that obedience is the result of a specific type of personality: the authoritarian personality​ due to childhood experiences

Question 26

evaluation of adorno’s theory

Answer 26

+ there is evidence showing that people who score high on the F scale (authoritarian personalities), are also very obedient

• people with low education have been found to be very obedient. This is a criticism to the theory, because the theory says that obedience is only based on personality​
• does not take into consideration how other dispositional factors such as intelligence and self esteem could affect obedience​
• does not take into consideration social factors, such as authority, proximity, culture​
• he has found a correlation between authoritarian personality and obedience. BUT, this does not mean that personality is the cause of obedience, since this is a correlational finding. There might be social factors that affect obedience​
  ​

Question 27

prosocial behaviour

Answer 27

actions that benefit other people or society

Question 28

bystander apathy

Answer 28

doing nothing when someone is in need of help

Question 29

bystander behaviour

Answer 29

the way that someone responds when they witness someone else in need of help

Question 30

bystander intervention

Answer 30

when a person who witnesses a person in need offers help

Question 31

social factors affecting bystander behaviour

Answer 31

the presence of others e.g diffusion of responsibility, the cost of helping

Question 32

dispositional factors affecting bystander behaviour

Answer 32

similarity to the victim, expertise

Question 33

piliavin’s subway study aim

Answer 33

to investigate whether the appearance of a victim would influence helping behaviour

Question 34

piliavin’s subway study design

Answer 34

field experiment, little control of extraneous variables, participants were male and female passengers travelling in the subway in New York

Question 35

piliavin’s subway study method

Answer 35

An actor pretended to collapse in the train carriage with his appearance altered.​

In 38 of the trials his appearance was altered to be that of someone who was drunk; he smelt of alcohol and had a bottle of alcohol wrapped in a paper bag.​

In 65 trials he appeared sober and carried a walking stick.​

Researchers recorded how often and how quickly the “victim” was helped.​

​

Question 36

piliavin’s subway study results

Answer 36

When the actor was carrying a walking stick, he was helped within 70 seconds 95% of the time.​

When he appeared drunk, he received help within 70 seconds 50% of the time.

Question 37

piliavin’s subway study conclusion

Answer 37

A person’s appearance will affect whether or not they receive help and how quickly this help is given.

Question 38

piliavin’s subway study evaluation

Answer 38

• Overlooked cultural factors​ (individualistic in america)
• Individual differences in helping​ (e.g people’s moral values)
• Differences between rural/urban environments (people friendlier in rural)

+ High ecological validity​

+ Natural behaviour of participants​

+ Important point shown: why some victims are not helped due to perceived cost of helping (examples?)​

Question 39

collective behavior

Answer 39

the way in which people act when they are part of a group

Question 40

antisocial behavior

Answer 40

when people do not act in socially acceptable ways or consider the rights of others

Question 41

social factors affecting collective behavior

Answer 41

social loafing, deindividuation, culture

Question 42

social loafing

Answer 42

putting less effort into doing something when you are with others doing the same thing

Question 43

deindividuation

Answer 43

the state of losing our sense of individuality and becoming less aware of our own responsibility for our actions

Question 44

dispositional factors affecting collective behavior

Answer 44

personality (internal vs external locus of control), morality