Social Influence

Question 1

Define conformity

Answer 1

yielding to group pressure

Question 2

Give the three types of conformity and who proposed them

Answer 2

Kelman proposed
- internalisation
- identification
- compliance

Question 3

Define compliance

Answer 3

• a person may publicly agree with a group of people but privately disagree with the group’s viewpoint / behaviour to fit in or avoid disapproval.
• it is a temporary change in views.
• shallowest form of conformity
• LINK TO NSI

Question 4

describe identification

Answer 4

• when someone conforms to the demands of a social role in society, as membership of that group is desirable
• No change in internal beliefs.

Question 5

Describe internalisation

Answer 5

• Publicly changing behaviour to fit in with the group while also agreeing with them privately
• Deepest level of conformity where beliefs of group become part of individual’s own belief system.
• link to ISI

Question 6

Outline the AIM and Procedure of Asch’s Line Study (AO1)

Answer 6

Aim: investigate whether people would conform to majority who gave obviously wrong answers.
Procedure:
- 123 American male students told it was study of visual perception.
- 1 real participant placed in groups of 7-9 confederates.
- In 18 trials, had to say which of 3 comparison lines matched the stimulus line.
- In 12 critical trials, confederates told to give identical wrong answers whilst the real participant would go last / 2nd to last.
- 36 participants were placed in a control group + tested individually in 20 trials to test accuracy of individual judgement.

Question 7

Give the results for Asch line study and the reasons why people conformed.

Answer 7

• In critical trials: 32% conformity rate , 5% conformed to all 12 wrong answers
• 18 trials: 75% conformed at least once
• Control group : error rate of 0.04% showing accuracy of individual judgement
• Distortion of action ⇒ to avoid ridicule despite not conforming privately
• Distortion of judgement ⇒ doubts concerning accuracy of judgement so conform to majority
• Distortion of perception ⇒ believed perception might actually be wrong so conformed

Question 8

Evaluate Asch’s line study

6

Answer 8

EVALUATION:
- It was conducted in an artificial lab setting, which doesn’t reflect real-world social interactions. This limits the ability to generalize the findings on conformity to everyday situations.
- lacks population validity : gender bias + androcentric as only carried out on men. SO results cannot be applied to females.
- Ethical issues : deception as told the study was about perception of lines so could not give informed consent.
- Psychological harm as distress from disagreeing. However Asch did debrief at the end.
- Time consuming, 1 tested at a time.
- Asch’s method for studying conformity became paradigm, accepted way of conducting conformity research

• Most conformed publicly but not privately, so motivated by NSI TO GAIN ACCEPTANCE

Question 9

Give the aim and procedure and Jenness Bean Jar Experiment.

Answer 9

Aim: to see if individual’s judgement of no. of jellybeans in jar influenced by group discussions
Procedure: Private estimate of number of jelly beans, group discussion and estimate + second private estimate

Question 10

Give the findings and conclusion of Jenness’ Bean Jar Experiment (AO1)

Answer 10

Findings:
- Women conformed more
- Typicality of opinion increased ⇒ Second estimate converged with group estimate
Conclusion:
- Judgement of individual affected by majority opinion , especially in ambiguous situations

Question 11

Evaluate Jenness Jelly Beans

Answer 11

• Artificial task ⇒ Lacks mundane realism as not an everyday event to be asked the number of jellybeans in jar so doesn’t reflect behaviour in real-life situation.
• Deception ⇒ weren’t told aim of study but not severe so more ethically sound than other studies.
• May involve NSI + ISI ⇒ 2nd estimate moved to group estimate due to desire for acceptance + to be correct (ISI)

Question 12

Give the variables which affect conformity.

Answer 12

• Group Size
• Task Difficulty
• Unanimity
• Normative Social Influence
• Informational Social Influence

Question 13

How does grouP size affect conformity. link to Asch line study

Answer 13

• Group Size ⇒ more likely to conform when in a larger group.
• E.G. Asch manipulated the number of confederates in the study and found found conformity increases with each extra person (i.e. confederate) in group. BUT, DOES NOT INCREASE AFTER 4-5 PPL ⇒ this is considered optimal group size.

Question 14

How does Task Difficulty affect conformity. Link to Asch line study.

Answer 14

• as task difficulty increases, so does conformity as motivated by ISI to be correct
• E.G. Asch manipulated task difficulty by making comparison lines more similar in length so the right answer was less obvious - ⇒ CONFORMITY INCREASED to wrong answer as it was harder to judge the correct answer

Question 15

How does Unanimity affect conformity. Link to Aschs study

Answer 15

• when everyone is in agreement + gives the same answer - conformity increases
• when there is a dissenter or if group answer is not unanimous , conformity decreases
• Asch (1951) found that even the presence of just one confederate that goes against the majority choice can reduce conformity as much as 80%.
• ADD INDIVIDUAL VARIABLES E.G. MOOD, CULTURE, GENDER

Question 16

How does Normative Influence affect conformity.

Answer 16

• Normative Influence: motivational force to be liked + accepted by majority
• so agree with majority opinion to fit in

Question 17

How does Informational Social influence affect conformity

Answer 17

• Informational Influence ⇒ motivational force to be correct so look to others for guidance in order to be correct
• Leads to internalisation.
• OCCURS IN UNFAMILIAR SITUATIONS

Question 18

Define conformity to social roles

Answer 18

• Pressure to conform to the expectations of a social role.
• Social roles ⇒ part people play as members of a social group (e.g. student, teacher, policeman etc).
• often called identification.

Question 19

Describe the aim and procedure for the Zimbardo - Stanford Prison Experiment (AO1)

Answer 19

Aim: to investigate how readily people would conform to the social roles
Procedure:
- Converted basement of Stanford University psychology building into a mock prison.
- 21 American male students were chosen in response ad for study of prison life, planned to run for 2 weeks.
- Randomly assigned to play 10 guards + 11 prisoners in a simulated prison environment.
- Prisoners arrested by real local police, fingerprinted, stripped, deloused + further dehumanised with nylon stock capping + were referred by number only.
- Guards wore khaki uniform, issued handcuffs + wore dark glasses, to prevent eye contact. No physical violence was permitted.
- Zimbardo OBSERVED the behaviour of the prisoners + guards (as a researcher), + also acted as prison warden.

Question 20

Describe the findings and conclusions for the Zimbardo - Stanford Prison Experiment (AO1)

Answer 20

→ Quickly settled into social roles with guards becoming more sadistic + taunting + gave meaningless tasks to do & prisoners becoming submissive + unquestioning of guard’s behaviour
→ 4 released as showed fits of rage + crying
→Stopped after 6 days as increasingly harmful nature of guards + extent of harm realised
→ Prisoners adopted prisoner-like behaviour

Question 21

Evaluate the Zimbardo - Stanford Prison Experiment (AO1)

6

Answer 21

• Harmful treatment of participant led to formal recognition of ethical guidelines as studies must now gain ethical approval before they are conducted.
• Internal validity ⇒ SELECTION of participants – random allocation of participants
• Unethical ⇒ lack of fully informed consent by participants as Zimbardo himself did not know what would happen in the experiment (it was unpredictable). Also, the prisoners did not consent to being ‘arrested’ at home.
• Lack population validity ⇒ US male students so findings cannot be applied to female prisons / those from other countries. E.G. America is an individualist culture (were people are generally less conforming) and the results maybe different in collectivist cultures (such as Asian countries).
• may have changed behaviour due to demand characteristics to please experimenter.
• Lack ecological validity⇒ environment ( IV) was manipultated and not indidcatitve of a real life setting.

Question 22

define obedience

Answer 22

• type of social influence,
• where one complies with demands of authority figure

Question 23

Give the aim and procedure for Milgram’s Shock study.

Answer 23

Aim: to see whether people would obey a legitimate authority figure when given instructions to harm another human being.
Procedure:
- 40 American males aged 20-50 responded to ad for study of memory and learning at Yale uni.
- Met by confederate experimenter in lab coat & confederate participant, Mr Wallace.
- Experimenter told real + participant, they would be randomly assigned role of teacher / learner (real always teacher + Mr Wallace always confederate (learner).
- Teacher + learner were put into separate rooms.
- Teacher had to give ½ word pair & Wallace would give other half in predetermined recorded response. If answered incorrectly, they were asked by experimenter to administer electric shocks (which were actually harmless), which went in 15 volt increments, up to max of 450 V.
- If hesitant, experimenter (Mr Williams) gave a series of prompts : please continue, the experiment requires you to continue, It is absolutely essential that you continue, you have no other choice but to continue.

Question 24

Give the results and conclusion of Milgram’s shock study

Answer 24

Results:
-all participants went to 300 volts + 26 went all the way to 450 volts.
- Many showed signs of distress: twitching + sweating. But many fully concentrated on the task at hand.
- Milgram carried out 18 variations of his study where he altered the situation (IV) to see how this affected obedience ( DV)
Conclusion:
- People tend to exhibit high levels of obedience towards authority figures.
- ,which can be seen as normal behavior in a hierarchically organized society.
- This occurs even if it goes against their personal moral code and causes them distress.

Question 25

Evaluate Milgram’s Shock Study. Give positives

Answer 25

• Insight into Historical Events: The study provides an understanding of why people under the Nazi regime were willing to follow orders to harm others.
• Standardized Procedure: lab experiment, improving the reliability of the study and helping to establish a causal relationship.
• Internal Validity: Participants believed the situation to be real, leading to strong reactions.
• Post-Experiment Feedback: Milgram interviewed participants afterward to assess the impact of the deception. 83.7% said they were glad to have participated, and only 1.3% wished they had not.
• Stress Reduction Post-Debriefing: Once debriefed and assured the confederate was unharmed, participants’ stress levels decreased. Milgram’s follow-up interviews a year later showed that most participants were happy to have taken part.

Question 26

Evaluate Milgram’s Shock Study. Give negatives.

/6

Answer 26

• Ecological Validity: The study was conducted in a lab under artificial conditions, making it difficult to generalize the findings to real-life settings where people do not usually receive orders to harm others.
• Historical Validity: The study was done in the 1960s, a time when American culture was more authoritarian and obedient, which may not reflect current obedience levels.
• Cultural Bias: The study only included American participants, so the results cannot be generalized to other cultures.
• Androcentric: The study only included male participants, making it difficult to generalize the findings to females, who may be more obedient due to societal gender roles promoting submissiveness.
• Ethical Issues: The study involved deception about its aim and the use of confederates, which meant they did not give fully informed consent.
• Psychological Harm: Participants experienced distress such as trembling, sweating, stuttering, nervous laughter, biting lips, and digging fingernails into their palms. Three participants had uncontrollable seizures, and many pleaded to stop the experiment.

Question 27

Describe the aim and procedure of Burger’s experiment

Answer 27

AIM- to develop variation of milgram’s procedures allowing comparison with the original investigation while protecting the well-being of participants
Procedure-
Changes made:
-No one with knowledge of Milgram’s study used and max shock was 150V
-2 step screening process for participants used to exclude any who might react negatively or with history of mental problems/stress-related.
-participants told 3 times they have right to withdraw throughout anytime.
-experimenter clinical psychologist who could stop procedure at any sign of excessive stress
-70 male AND females used of all age groups

Question 28

Give the findings and conclusion of Burger’s study

Answer 28

Findings
-obedience rate 70%
-no difference between males and females

Conclusion
-possible to replicate milgram study without harm
-obedience rates did not change drastically
-between 50 years- participants may know of his study?? - could lead to demand characteristics

Question 29

Evaluate Burger’s study

Answer 29

• lacks ecological validity as everyone knew no one was being killed unlike nazis and nazis did not have right to withdraw
• females and male sample were used so no gender bias
• still a western bias

Question 30

Give the two explanations for obedience.

Answer 30

• legitimacy of authority
• agentic state

Question 31

Define legitimacy of authority

Answer 31

• an explanation for obedience which suggests we are more likely to obey people who we perceive to have authority over us
• due to the position of power that they hold within the social hierarchy

Question 32

Define Agency theory

Answer 32

• people will obey an authority as they believe that the authority will take responsibility for the consequences of their actions,
• relieving themselves of moral strain

Question 33

Give the three situational factors which affect obedience.

Answer 33

• uniform
• proximity of an authority figure
• status of location

Question 34

How does uniform affect obedience. Link to Milgram’s Shock Study.

Answer 34

• A person is more likely to obey someone wearing a uniform as it gives them a higher
  status and a greater sense of legitimacy.
• the confederate who acted as the experimenter (called Mr. Williams) wore a laboratory coat to signify some element of scientific expertise or intelligence; this allowed for him to be perceived as an individual of higher rank or status.
• In the uniform variation, the experimenter was called away for a supposed phone call and was replaced by a confederate dressed in ‘ normal, everyday clothes’. Obedience dropped to 20%, suggesting uniform has a great effect on obedience.

Question 35

How does status of location affect obedience? Link to Milgram’s study.

Answer 35

• A person is more likely to obey someone in a location linked to higher status and
  legitimacy.
• Milgram’s experiment was conducted at Yale, - one of the most prestigious and well-respected universities in the world. Its distinguished reputation and high status gave the study greater credibility and respect in the eyes of the participants, so they were more likely to obey.
• when Milgram’s study was conducted in ‘ run down’ offices , obedience had dropped with only 48% of participants shocking to the maximum 450 volts (65% in the original study).
• This is because contrary to the institutionalised setting of Yale University, the run-down offices were not indicative of prestige and wealth and so were deemed as less important to the participants.

Question 36

Describe how proximity of an authority figure affects obedience. Link to Milgram’s Shock Study

Answer 36

• A person is more likely to obey when they are less able to see the negative consequences
  of their actions and are in closer proximity to the authority figure.
• In Milgram’s original study, the experimenter was in the same room as the participants. This illustrated that when close to an authoritative figure, an individual is more likely to obey as they feel more pressure or an inability to disobey to the figure.
• In Milgram’s variation study, the experimenter instructed and prompted the participants by telephone; obedience levels as a result fell to 22.5%.

Question 37

Define a dispositional explanation. Give one for obedience.

Answer 37

Dispositional explanation = internal explanation i.e personality factors/individual reasons why someone obeys.
- authoritarian personality

Question 38

Describe the characteristics of the authoritarian personality and who proposed it

Answer 38

• submissive to superiors
• dismissive of inferiors
• highly prejudiced
• Adorno et al

Question 39

Explain how an authoritarian personality develops.

Answer 39

• An authoritarian personality develops from having a harsh parenting style in childhood.
• This harsh parenting style consists of strict discipline, criticism of failings and impossibly high standards.
• As the child cannot express
  their feelings to their parents so they displace these to others they deem weaker and scapegoat
  .

Question 40

How is the authoritarian personality measured?

Answer 40

The F scale
- Fascist Scale

Question 41

Give the limitations of the F-scale

Answer 41

• susceptible to acquiescence bias, which describes the phenomenon of respondents always responding in the same way using the scales provided, regardless of the content shown.
• lacks ecological validity because it cannot explain many real-life examples of mass obedience . i.e. the Nazis
• has political bias as it measures the likeness between an individual to Fascism , but left-wing authoritarianism is also present and is ignored by the theory

Question 42

Give 2 Explanations of resistance to social influence

Answer 42

1. Locus Of control
2. Social Support

Question 43

define locus of control (LOC) by Rotter (1966)

Answer 43

• extent to which individual feels in control of events in their lives/behaviour.

Question 44

Contrast an external and internal LoC

Answer 44

internal:
- more control
- behaviour is caused by their own personal decisions and effort
external:
- behaviour is caused by luck or fate

Question 45

How does locus of control impact resistance to social influence? link to research.

external vs internal

Answer 45

• Atgis (1998) conducted a meta-analysis of studies considering locus of control and likeliness to conform. It was found that those who scored highest on the external locus of control were more easily persuaded and more likely to conform.
• Rotter proposes that people with internal locus of control are better at
  resisting social pressure to conform or obey, perhaps because they feel responsible for their actions.

Question 46

How does social support impact resistance to social influence? Link to Research.

research : Asch + Milgram

Answer 46

• SS is the perception of assistance + solidarity available from others
• In 1 of Asch’s variation, the presence of a dissident led to a decrease in the conformity levels in true participants – as the presence of a dissident gave the true participant social support + made them feel more confident in their own decision + in rejecting the majority position.
• a variation of Milgram’s study, where there were confederates alongside the participant and disobeyed the experimenter, he
  presence of the other person caused the level of obedience to reduce to 10%. This shows
  that the social support provided, gave them the confidence to reject the position of authority.

Question 47

Define minority influence

Answer 47

• type of social influence that motivates individuals to reject established majority group norms

Question 48

Outline the process of minority influence.

Answer 48

• New info provided = re-examine their beliefs
• some majority converted and pace of conversion increases
• minority becomes majority due tot he snowball effect establishing status quo, where minority viewpoint becomes mainstream
• majority will begin to conform by compliance
• Social crypto amnesia occurs

Question 49

How is commitment and consistency shown in minority influence

Answer 49

1. Commitment = sacrificing something ; may lead to sympathy and illustrate dedication to the cause.
2. Consistency = unchanging belief/view seen as more persuasive + confident + unbiased

Question 50

How does consistency impact minority influence.

Answer 50

• members of the majority will, take notice, and assess their views (i.e. the minority focuses attention on itself).
• A consistent minority disrupts established norms and creates uncertainty, doubt and conflict.
• This can lead to the majority taking the minority view seriously.

Question 51

Give research which illustrates the significance which consistency has on minority influence.

Answer 51

• Moscovici conducted an experiment in which female participants were shown 36 blue slides of different intensity and asked to report the colors. There were two confederates (the minority) and four participants (the majority).
• In the first part of the experiment the two confederates answered green for each of the 36 slides. They were totally consistent in their responses.
• In the second part of the experiment they answered green 24 times and blue 12 times. In this case they were inconsistent in their answers.
• When consistent about 8% of participants said the slides were green. When inconsistent about 1% of participants said the slides were green.
• When the majority is confronted with someone with self-confidence and dedication to take a popular stand and refuses to back own, they may assume that he or she has a point.

Question 52

Define social change

Answer 52

• when a whole society adopts a new belief or behavior which then becomes widely accepted as the ‘norm’.