Social Influence Flashcards
What is social psychology
- social psychology looks at the relationship between people and how people affect each other’s behaviour
- social influence
What is conformity
- form of social influence
- person changes behaviour/attitudes/beliefs to be in line with the majority
- occurs from pressure of majority
- pressure can be real/imagined
What are the types of conformity (3)
- compliance
- internalisation
- identification
What is compliance
- individuals adjust their behaviour/attitudes/beliefs that are shown in public to be in line with majority
- no change to private behaviour/attitudes/beliefs
- only lasts when group is present
- superficial and temporary
What is internalisation
- individuals adjust behaviour/beliefs in public and private
- in line with majority
- individual examines own behaviour on what others are saying and decides that majority is correct
- deeper than compliance and more permanent
What is identification
- individual accepts social influence to be associated with a role model or group
- adopting role model/group’s behaviour to feel connected to them
Who developed a theory to explain why people conform
- Deutsch and Gerrard (1955)
What are the reasons to why people conform (2)
- normative social influence
- informational social influence
What is normative social influence (NSI)
- people have a need for social approval and acceptance
- people avoid behaviour which leads to rejection
- leads to copying others to fit in
- therefore associated with compliance
What is informational social influence (ISI)
- people have need to be right and have an accurate perception of reality
- may make objective tests against reality but if not possible they rely on opinions of others
- likely if situation is ambiguous or if others are experts
- leads to internalisation
What are positive evaluation points for normative and informational social influence (3)
- Asch (1951)
- Jenness (1932)
- Sherif (1935)
How is Asch (1951) a positive evaluation point for normative and informational social influence
- asked participants to say which three test lines was same as standard line
- participants were in groups with confederates who gave wrong answers
- 33% of trials led to conformity giving wrong answer
- conformed due to normative social influence
- after study claimed they knew answer but did not want to be ridiculed
How is Jenness (1932) a positive evaluation point for normative and informational social influence
- asked participants to estimate number of beans in a jar
- participants made individual estimate first then another as group
- found when in a group, estimates would be close, even though initially reported different numbers individually
- informational social influence as participants uncertain about number so genuinely influenced by group
How is Sherif (1935) a positive evaluation point for normative and informational social influence
- autokinetic effect
- small spot of light in dark room appears to move but does not
- participants estimated how far light moved (20cm to 80cm)
- participants then put into manipulated groups (2 similar, 1 not) and found group came to common estimate
- informational social influence, ambiguous task
What are negative evaluation points for normative and informational social influence (2)
- McLeod (2007)
- dispositional factors
How is McLeod (2007) a negative evaluation point for normative and informational social influence
- third explanation for conformity, ingratiational conformity
- similar to normative social influence, but group influence does not affect conformity
- instead motivated by need to impress or gain favour instead of fear of rejection
How are dispositional factors a negative evaluation point for normative and informational social influence
- impact whether person conforms
- people with internal locus of control less likely to conform than external locus of control
- NIS and ISI cannot explain this
- person’s locus of control refers to extent which they believe they have control over their own behaviour
What was Asch’s (1951) study
- tested different variables which affected social influence
- three lines study
How did Asch (1951) carry out his study
- naive participant in group with confederates
- group asked to look at standard line and decide individually which of the three test lines was same length as standard
- gave responses one at a time
- answer was obvious (1% chance of genuine mistake)
- confederates purposely gave wrong answer on 12 of 18 trials
- naive participant was last so heard all responses before they gave their own
What were the findings of Asch’s (1951) study
- 1% chance to make a genuine mistake
- 33% of responses incorrect
- 75% of participants conformed at least once
- 5% conformed on all trials
- 25% did not conform at all
- when participants interviewed, they knew answer but said wrong answer to avoid disapproval (NSI)
How did Asch (1956) use group sizes to test social influence
- same study as his 1951 three lines test but varied sizes of groups
What were the findings when Asch (1956) altered group sizes
- 3% conformity rate with one confederate
- 13% conformity rate with two confederates
- 32% conformity rate with three confederates
- little change after three confederates
How did Asch (1956) use task difficulty to test social influence
- adjusted task difficulty so test lines were more similar in length
What were the findings when Asch (1956) altered the task difficulty
- conformity increased, due to ISI having an impact
- when uncertain, people look to others for confirmation
- the higher the difficulty, the higher the ISI and conformity
How did Asch (1956) use unanimity to test social influence
- when group had been unanimous (all confederates agreed), conformity increased
- when one confederate gave different answer to other, group was no longer unanimous and conformity dropped
What were the findings when Asch (1956) altered the unanimity
- when confederate gave the right answer, conformity dropped to 5% from 33%
- when confederate gave a different wrong answer (still going against the group), conformity dropped to 9%
What were the evaluation points for Asch’s (1951 and 1956) studies (5)
- temporal validity
- ecological validity
- sample representation
- volunteer sample
- ethical issues
How is temporal validity an evaluation point for Asch’s (1951 and 1956) studies
- negative, does not have temporal validity
- study was 80 years ago, people may have been more conformist
- post war attitudes showing people should work together rather than dissent which may have affected results
How is ecological validity an evaluation point for Asch’s (1951 and 1956) studies
- negative, lacks ecological validity and mundane realism
- task is artificial and unlikely to occur in real life
- conformity takes place in a social context, with people we know and not strangers
How is sample representation an evaluation points for Asch’s (1951 and 1956) studies
- negative
- gender bias as only contains males
- does not represent female behaviour
- culture bias as only white Americans that do not reflect behaviour of all cultures
- positive
- however, study has been repeated with different samples and cultures
- still proven to be reliable
How is the use of a volunteer sample an evaluation point for Asch’s (1951 and 1956) studies
- negative
- used volunteer sample who may not represent behaviour of wider population
- lacks population validity and cannot be generalised
How are ethical issues evaluation points for Asch’s (1951 and 1956) studies
- negative
- deception
- lack of informed consent
- psychological harm
- necessary to deceive participants to prevent demand characteristics
What are social roles
- behaviours expected of an individual who has a certain social position or status
- people conform to social roles assigned to them
What did Zimbardo (1973) investigate
- whether conformity to social roles altered a person’s behaviour or not
How did Zimbardo (1973) carry out his study
- stimulated prison in basement of Stanford University psychology department created
- 24 emotionally available and psychologically stable young men recruited and randomly assigned role of prisoner or guard
- prisoners arrested at home, taken to local police to be booked, photographed, and fingerprinted
- blindfolded and driven down to simulated prison, stripped naked, deloused, given ID numbers
- guards had control over prisoners who were confined to cells
- guards told to maintain order (barring physical violence)
- guards worked in threes for 8 hour shifts
- prisoners were 3 to a cell
What were the findings of Zimbardo’s (1973) study
- on second day, prisoners tried rebelling by ripping off prison numbers and barricading themselves in cells
- guards sprayed them with CO2, stripped them naked, took beds and forced ringleaders into solitary confinement
- guards become increasingly cruel and aggressive
- prisoners became passive and depressed
- guards became so aggressive that study had to be ended after only 6 days (planned for 2 weeks) due to psychological health concerns
What were the evaluation points for Zimbardo’s (1973) study (5)
- ethical issues
- role of Zimbardo
- sample representation
- demand characteristics
- individual differences
How are ethical issues evaluation points for Zimbardo’s (1973) study
- prisoners subjected to psychological harm
- five prionsers released early due to extreme reaction
- however Zimbardo did not expect guards to behave in such a way so harm could not have been anticipated
- negative
How is the role of Zimbardo an evaluation point for Zimbardo’s (1973) study
- took on the role of prison warden
- became too involved in experiment and lost objectivity
- had to be told by a colleague to end experiment due to concerns over distress of prisoners
- validity of findings can be questioned
- negative
How is sample representation an evaluation point for Zimbardo’s (1973) study
- culture bias, all participants white bar one
- gender bias, all participants male
- age bias, all participants young
- status bias, all participants middle class
- negative, unrepresentative
How are demand characteristics an evaluation point for Zimbardo’s (1973) study
- guards may have behaved the way they did due to demand characteristics
- some participants reported afterwards they thought the experimenters wanted them to be aggressive
- validity can be questioned
- negative
How are individual differences an evaluation point for Zimbardo’s (1973) study
- some guards did not conform to role given whereas some were abusive
- suggests individual differences are important in determining extent of conforming to social roles
- shows there must be other dispositional factors contributing to conformity => LoC?
- negative
What is obedience
- behaving as instructed to by an authority figure
- authority figures have status/power over others
How did Milgram (1963) get participants for his study
- placed advert in newspaper asking for males to take part in study on effect of punishment on learning
- 40 participants invited to psychology department of Yale University and met by experimenter (confederate)
- introduced to Mr Wallace (confederate), old man with weak heart
How did Milgram (1963) assign roles for his study and what did each role do
- participant and Mr Wallace asked to pick paper from hat to determine role
- both pieces of paper had teacher written to ensure naive participant was teacher and Mr Wallace was learner
- teacher had to punish learner if they made a mistake on a memory test through an electric shock
- electric shock increased in voltage each time mistake was made
How was the learner set up in Milgram’s (1963) study
- learner taken to room and hooked to electric shock machine
- teacher saw this then taken to adjoining room with electric shock controls and experimenter
- electric shock machine were fake but convincing
- teacher pressed switches on machine to administer shocks
How was the electric shock machine set up in Milgram’s (1963) study
- each switch labelled with voltage rating
- switches started at 15 volts and rose in increments of 15 to 450 volts
- each group of four switches was labelled with text (slight shock, moderate shock, danger: severe shock)
What was happening during Milgram’s (1963) study
- as shocks became more severe, Mr Wallace demanded to be released from experiment
- Mr Wallace was screaming, kicking the wall, complaining about his weak heart and refusing to answer questions
- finally Mr Wallace went silent
Why did the participants not stop shocking Mr Wallace
- experimenter ensured teacher continued with experiment
- when teacher showed reluctance, experimenter prompted them to continue using one of four statements
- please continue
- the experiment requires that you continue
- it is absolutely essential that you continue
- you have no choice, you must continue
What were the findings of Milgram’s (1963) study
- 100% of participants gave shocks up to 300 volts (when Mr Wallace banged on wall and stopped answering)
- 65% of participants gave shocks until 450 volts
- participants felt high levels of stress and showed symptoms including sweating, trembling, and anxious and hysterical laughter
- most were obedient and willing to inflict lethal shocks to a man with a weak heart
What were the evaluation points for Milgram’s (1963) study (5)
- deception
- psychological harm
- right to withdraw
- sample representation
- cost-benefit analysis
How is deception an evaluation point for Milgram’s (1963) study
- negative
- participants deceived about true nature of experiment
- means no informed consent to take part
- necessary to prevent demand characteristics to prevent a decrease in validity of findings
How is psychological harm an evaluation point for Milgram’s (1963) study
- negative
- participants became extremely distressed
- some thought they had killed Mr Wallace
- Milgram did not expect his participants to obey so this psychological harm could not have been anticipated