social influence Flashcards
social influence=
the process by which attitudes, perceptions & behaviours can be affected by the real or implied presences of others (can be+ or -)
Mechanisms that can give situations their power (3)
- social norms
- conformity
- compliance
social norms= (1) + (3)
“rules” or standards that are understood by a group that guide behaviour & expectations
>emerge naturally our of interactions with others
>may or may not be stated
>social consequences when broken
conformity=
changing one’s behaviour to match other varieties
types of conformity (2)
> internalisation= deep & private, change in personal views that influences behaviour
> compliance= superficial & public, change in behaviour only, not views
Majority influence- internalisation: Sherif (1935): method (6)
makes use of autokinetic effect (optical illusion)
- put participants in pitch black room, except for 1 pin light which was STATIONARY
- asks participants how much light moved back and forth
- some asked alone, THEN in group
- some asked in group, then alone
- tested effect of socail influence by testing similarities/differences of alone> group vs group>alone
Majority influence- internalisation: Sherif (1935): results>
- convergence when moving from alone>group
- maintenance of beliefs when alone
-thus majority influence= internalisation
Majority influence- compliance: Asch (1952): method (4)
- unambigious task “vision test”
- 1 participant, 7 confederates
- asked which does line on L match in length
- 18 trials, 12 “critical trials” where confederates gave same wrong answer
Majority influence- compliance: Asch (1952)> results>
- 36% of critical trials showed conformity
- individual variation: 75% conformed at least once; 25% never; 5% on every trial
- control group: less than 1% errors
-asked participants why> answered felt uncomfortable & out off fear of being “odd”
Majority influence- compliance: Asch»Variation on Asch (1956) Group size>
- 1 confederate= 3%
- 2 confederate= 13%
- 3 confederate= 32%
-ceiling effect= no significant increase in conformity beyond 3
Majority influence- compliance: Asch»Variation on Asch > ambiguity
- increased difficulty increased conformity
Majority influence- compliance: Asch»Variation on Asch (1953)> individual factors (3)
- low self-esteem, low IQ & high need for social approval increases conformity (crutchfield, 1955)
Majority influence- compliance: Asch»Variation on Asch> cultural factors>
- collectivist cultures have higher rates of conformity (smith & bond, 1998)
Majority influence- compliance: Asch»Variation on Asch> influence of one
- presence of one ally (a confederate who diverged from group) reduced conformity from 32%> 5% (asch, 1956)
- even if appear incompetent (Allen & levine, 1968)
results of informational influence vs normative influence on judgements>
informational influence> produces private acceptance
normative influence> produces public compliance
informational influence=
belief everyone else knows what is going on, more so than us
>we change our judgements because we trust others more than ourselves & want to appear correct
normative influence=
we express judgements in line with the group in order to maintain others’ positive evaluations (performative)
minority influence> moscovici (1976,1980, 1985) method
- 36 slide were different shades of blue
- 4 participants & 2 confederates
- consistent: said green to all
- inconsistent: said “green” to 24 & “blue” to 12
results: found consistency is key
>found when minority consistent in “green”, responses of “green” from participants increase (1.25%>8%)
types of consistency in studies>
- diachronic= consistency over time
- synchronic= consistency between members
why does consistency work?> (3)
- disrupts the norm & creates uncertainty
- makes majority re-think their position
- confidence & dedication makes others think you know what you are saying
Obedience: Milgram (1960s): method (5)
- confederate asked qns, each time ans wrong participant has to give electric shock
- participant given taster shock at start
- incremental increase from 15V> 450V
- after each shock, participant hears confederate moaning, shouting etc then silence at 315V (pre-recorded)
- if participant hesitates, experimenter says specific order of phrases telling them to continue (increasing in seriousness ‘requires’ > essential)
- study stops if hesitate a 5th time
Obedience: Milgram (1960s): predictions vs results
- predictions: psychiatrist= 1.25% would reach end; <4% reach 300V
- people on street: all said would refuse
- results:
>62.5% reached highest level
>average maximum shock= 368 V
>demonstrates HIGH obedience to authority
Obedience: Milgram (1960s): variations: effect of proximity>
- if confederate in room= less likely
- if experimenter (authority) in room= more likely
Obedience: Milgram (1960s): method: variation: if another participant (confederate)
- diffusion of responsibility> confederate to give shock
- social support= willing to quit when other confederates quit