Social Influence Flashcards
Conformity
A change in a person’s behaviour or opinions as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or group
Internalisation : types of conformity
A deep type of conformity where we take on the majority view because we accept it as correct. It leads to a far-reaching and permanent change in behaviour, even when the group is absent
Identification: types of conformity
A moderate type of conformity where we act in the same way with the group because we value it and want to be part of it. But we don’t necessarily agree with everything the majority believes
Compliance: types of conformity
A superficial and temporary type of conformity where we outwardly go along with the majority view, but privately disagree with it. The change is our behaviour only lasts as long as the group is monitoring us.
Informational social influence (ISI): explanations for conformity
An explanation of conformity that says we agree with the opinion of the majority because we believe it is correct. We accept it because we want to be correct. This may lead to internalisation
Normative social influence (NSI): explanations for conformity
An explanation of conformity that says we agree with the opinion because we want to be accepted, gain social approval and be liked. This may lead to compliance.
Evaluation for conformity, ISI:Lucas et al (2006)
He asked students to give answers to mathematical problems that were easy or more difficult. There was a greater conformity to incorrect answers when questions were difficult. (ISI)
- people conform in situations where they feel they don’t know the answer
ISI AND NSI work together:Deutsch and Gerard 1955
Developed a 2 process theory, arguing that there are 2 main reasons people conform (ISI and NSI)
Unanimity: variables affecting conformity
A variable that affects conformity
The extent to which all members of a group agree. When all confederates selected the same comparison line. This produced the greater degree of conformity
Asch found that if one of the confederates dissented and gave the correct, then conformity levels dropped from 32% to 5%
Task difficulty: variables affecting conformity
A variable that affects conformity
When it becomes harder to work out the correct answer. Conformity increases because naive participants assume that the majority is more likely to be right.
When Asch made the line judgement task more difficult, conformity levels increased
Evaluation for asch’s study; Perrin and spencer 1980
They repeated Asch’s study with engineering students in the uk
Social roles
The parts people play as members of various social groups. These are accompanied by expectations we and other of have of what is appropriate behaviour for each role
Evaluation for zimbardo; Banuazizi and mohavedi 1975
They argued that participants in zimbardos study were merely play-acting rather than genuinely conforming to a role
Obedience
A form of social influence in which an individual follows a direct order. The person issuing the order is usually a figure of authority, who has power to punish when obedient behaviour is not forthcoming
Milgram 1963-obedience study
Sought an answer to the question of why the German population had followed the orders of hitler and slaughtered over q0 million Jews, gypsies and members of other social groups in the Holocaust during the Second World War
Evaluation of milgrims study;Orne and Holland 1968
They argued that participants in milgrams study behaved the way they did because they didn’t really believe in the set up
Evaluation for milgrim’s study; Gina Perry 2013
She listened to tapes of milgrams participants and found that many of them expressed their doubts about the shocks
Zimbardo 2007-conformity to social roles study
Suggested how obedience can be used to create social change through the process of gradual commitment. Once a small instruction is obeyed, it becomes more difficult to resist bigger ones.
Aim- to investigate if behaviour in prisons is due to the roles people play
Procedure- Stanford university basement set up as a prison, roles were randomly assigned. All regular occurrences for prisoners e.g arrested at homes, uniforms for guards and inmates
Findings - prisoners rebellious at first, guards acted brutally, study had to be stopped after 6 days instead of the 2 weeks being completed. One prisoner went on a hunger strike, many had to leave because guards became a threat.
Conclusion- behaviour can be explained by conformity to social rules, showing the power of the situation in shaping people’s behaviour.
Evaluation- prisoners and guards were randomly assigned roles meaning zimbardo had more control over internal validity
However, one guard said he acted like a character from a film- not conformity
Ethical issues, psychological + physical harm
The snowball effect and cryptomnesia
The fifth and sixth stages of social ch age. People have a memory that change has occurred but they don’t remember how it happened
The augmentation principle
The fourth stage of social change. The idea that we should assign greater weight to a particular cause of behaviour if there are other causes present that normally would produce the opposite outcome
Deeper processing
The third stage of social change
Drawing attention and consistency
The first and second stages of social change
Social change
This occurs when whole societies, rather than just individuals adopt new attitudes, beliefs and ways of doing things
Social influence
The process by which individuals and groups ch age each other’s attitudes and behaviours. This includes conformity, obedience and minority influence
Snowball effect
The more people who change their views to match the minority, the quicker the rate of conversion
Diachronic consistency
The minority have been saying the same thing for a long time
Synchronic consistency
The minority are all saying the same thing
Flexibility
Relentless consistency could be counter-productive if it is seen by the majority as unbending and unreasonable. Therefore minority influence is more effective if the minority show flexibility by accepting the possibility of compromise
Commitment
Minority influence is more powerful if the minority demonstrate dedication to their position. This is effective because it shows the minority is not acting out of self interest
Consistency
Minority influence is most effective if the minority keeps the same beliefs, both over time and between all the individuals that form the minority. It’s effective because it draws attention to the minority view
Minority influence
A form of social influence in which a minority of people persuade others to adopt their beliefs, attitudes or behaviours. Leads to internalisation or conversion in which private attitudes are changed as well as public behaviours
External locus of control
The belief that it is mainly a matter of luck or other forces d Thais responsible for what happens to you
Internal locus of control
The belief that you are mostly responsible for what happens to you
Locus of control
Refers to the sense we each have about what directs events in our life
Resistance to social influence
Refers to the ability of people to withstand the social pressure to conform to the majority or to obey authority. This ability to withstand social pressure is influenced by both situational and disposition as factors
Social support
The presence of people who resist social pressures to conform or obey can help others do the same. These people act as models to show others resistance to social influence is possible
McGhee and Teevan 1967
They found that students high in need of affiliation were more likely to conform
- the desire to be liked underlies conformity
Individual differences in ISI
- ISI does not affect everyone’s behaviour in the same way
For example, Asch 1955 found that students were less conformist 28% than other participants 37%.
Individual differences in NSI
-some research shoes that NSI does not affect everyone’s behaviour in the same way. For example people who are less concerned with being liked are less affect by NSI than those who care more about being liked. These are called nAffiliators. McGhee and Teevan 1967 found that students high in need of affiliation were more likely to conform
Asch’s research- 1951- variables affecting conformity
Aim- to see if people will conform to the majority, even if the answer is obvious
Procedure- 123 American males, only 1 true participent, chose a line A, B,C
Findings- 36.8% were conforming, 75% conformed at least once
Conclusion- people will conform to a majority, even if majority is wrong. Afterwards, many stated they conformed to fit in
Evaluation- the task was insignificant and not a reflection of real life conformity
- as there was no real consequences of disagreeing, so can’t be applied to real life
- only American men were tested (lacks population validity)
- results may be specific to 1950s era
Group size: variables affecting conformity
A variable that influences conformity
Asch found that if he increased the size of the majority, conformity levels increased. With 2 confederates conformity occurred on 12.8% of trials, rising to 32% for trials with 3 confederates
Agentic state: explanations for obedience
Explanations for obedience:
The individual perceives themselves as an agent of the authority figure and is willing to carry out their commands, even if it goes against their own moral code
Legitimacy of authority: explanations for obedience
Explanations for obedience:
The perceived right of an authority figure to have power and control over others
Evaluation of milligrams study: Sheridan and king 1972
SUGGESTED that participants would’ve acted the same way with real shocks-when instructed to give real shocks to puppies, participants obeyed, 100 % of women and 54% of men
Evaluation of Milgrams study; Hofling et al 1966
Studied nurses on a hospital ward. Nurses were told over phone to give an overdose to patients, 21/22 obeyed, supporting Milgrams findings that people are obedience, strengthens the external validity
Evaluation of Milgrim’s study; le jeu de la mort
It is a replication of milgrims study. 80% delivered 450v and behaviour was almost identical to milgrims participants, demonstrating that his findings were not just a one off
Evaluation for zimbardo’s study; reicher and Haslam 2011
They replicated his study for tV, their findings were inconsistent with zimbardos study, prisoners were disobedient and guards lacked authority
Situational variables for obedience; proximity
The physical closeness or distance of an authority figure to the person
Situational variables for obedience; location
The place where the order is issued
Situational variables for obedience; uniform
People in positions of authority have an outfit symbolic to their authority
When there was a change of location to an abandoned office what did the levels of obedience from to?
Form 65% to 45%
Milgrim; When the teacher and the learner was in the same room what did obedience levels drop to?
65% to 40%
Milgrim; when the teacher forced the learner’s hand onto a plate what did obedience levels drop to?
65% to 30%
Milgrim; when the experimenter gave orders by phone what did obedience levels drop to?
65% to 25%
Milgrim; when the experimenter was played by a member of the public what did obedience levels drop to?
65% to 20%
What did Milgrim control in his study?
He systematically altered one variable at a time (i.e. proximity) to see the effect on obedience. This was kept the same in other replications
Name a person who criticises milgrims study
David Mandel- says it is offensive to suggest that nazis were simply obeying orders. Milgrims study is an excuse for evil behaviours.
Mandel 1998
Carried out a content analysis of secondary data. He analysed the diaries and reports of a polish raised police force who were responsible for cleaning out Jewish ghettos, taking Jewish people into the woods and executing them
State the 3 ways Mandel’s research countered milgrim’s
Proximity to victim- even when close to the people they had to kill, they stilled carried out the executions
Proximity to authority figure- the senior officers gave orders and then went away, officers stilled carried out their orders
Presence of allies- there were some who declined doing it and the rest knew this yet carried on
Increasing teacher discretion- as they were not being supervised they had the chance to let some people escape, but they didn’t
Why was mandel’s research more valid than milgrim’s
His were on real life events
Autonomous state
When you act independently on your own, with your own free will and take on the responsibility of your own actions
Agentic state
When you carry out what someone else instructs you to do so you take no blame for your actions.
Milgrim’s binding factors (3)
Sequential nature of the action; the idea that disobedience causes them to admit that everything they had done was wrong
Situational obligeance; they had made the commitment and so feel the need to see it through to the end
Anxiety; the idea when you think about disobedience, you start to feel anxious, naturally, you shy from that feeling
Sequential nature of the action
The idea that disobedience causes them to admit that everything they had done was wrong
Situational obligeance
That had made the commitment and now feel the need to see it through to the end
Authoritarian personality
When you believe you should obey or completely submit to authority figures
