Social influence Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Definition of conformity

A

yielding to group pressure

Or

A change in behaviours or opinions due to real or imaginary pressure from a person or group of people

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Explain compliance.

A

Agreeing with the group publicly BUT disagreeing privately to gain approval or avoid disapproval

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Explain internalisation.

A

Internalisation is when you publicly agree and privately agree with the group.
Permanent change in opinion or behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Explain identification.

A

Identification is when you make the group beliefs your own BUT only due to a desire to be accepted

A person internalises the view on a SHORT TERM basis because it is likely to them being accepted by the group.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Explain normative conformity.

A

Normative conformity is when you conform because of the desire to be liked.
Want to avoid going against the majority so you conform to fit in

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Explain informational conformity.

A

We conform due to the desire to be right.
We copy others when we are unsure out of fear of being wrong.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Evaluate one strength of informational social influence as an explanation for conformity.

A

Strength: supported by research conducted by Lucas et al (2006) who found that there was greater conformity to incorrect answers when they were difficult rather than when they were easy, especially for students with poor maths skills. In conclusion, this study indicates that people conform to AMBIGUOUS SITUATIONS where they are unsure of the answer.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Strengths of normative social influence as an explanation for conformity.

A

1: supported by research from Linkenbach and Perkins that indicates that when adolescents were told the majority of their peers didnt smoke, they themselves were less likely to take up smoking. This indicates people conform to norms of the group in order to fit in and be liked.

2: Research from Schulz found that hotel guests reduced towel usage by 25% when they were told that the majority of the guests reuse their towels.

Therefore theory is credible because it has studies backing it up.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Evaluate one weakness of informational social influence as an explanation for conformity.

A

Weakness: The supporting research (Lucas et al 2006) can be criticised for age bias as it was only conducted on students. Perhaps adults may conform more or less therefore we can’t generalise findings to the wider population.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What was the sample of Asch’s study?

A

123 American male participants - undergraduates.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What are 5 methodological issues of Asch’s study? (Give a reason why for each one)

A

gender bias - only conducted on males
culture bias - only American participants were involved
Sample size
Age bias - all participants were undergraduates
lab experiment - IV was directly manipulated

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What were the 3 variables in Asch’s study?

A

Group size
Unanimity
Task difficulty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is the ethical issue with Asch’s study? (Give a reason)

A

Deception - participants thought they were taking part in a vision test not a conformity experiment. Due to this, participants may feel embarrassed or uncomfortable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What percent of participants in Asch’s experiment conformed at least once, every time and never?

A

75% - at least once
36.8% - every time
25% - never

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Explain why Asch’s line study can be classed as gender bias.

A

One limitation of Asch’s study is that it cant be generalised to the wider population because all the participants were males.
In this way the study cant be applied to the whole population because it doesn’t reflect the conformity rates of women.
An example of this is Eagly and Carli who found that women are more compliant than men and therefore differ in conformity styles. Therefore, Asch’s study is guilty of gender bias and findings can only be accepted with caution.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Give another weakness of Asch’s study. (mundane realism)

A

Asch’s study lacks mundane realism.
This is because judging the length of a line is not a realistic everyday task that people would complete. This means that participants may not have card about conforming in this experiment due to the task being insignificant.
Therefore we cant generalise Asch’s findings to real world situations involving conformity.
However, Kundu and Cummins found that participants still conformed to the majority in tasks relating to moral dilemmas such as attitudes towards infidelity suggesting that perhaps we can generalise Asch’s study to the wider population after all.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Background of Stanford experiment

A

-Funded by US Navy
-Wanted to see why prison guards were so aggressive and if we would conform to a given position

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

IV and DV of the Stanford prison experiment

A

IV: Whether the participants were a prison guard or a prisoner
DV: Resulting behaviours of the prisoners and guards

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Sample of the Stanford prison experiment.

A
  • 24 most mentally stable middle class American men
  • 3 dropped out so it was technically 21
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Uniforms for prisoners and uniform for guard in the Stanford prison experiment

A

Guards- khaki uniform, a baton and had sunglasses
Prisoners - one big dress, no underwear, ankle chains and a cap

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Aim of the Stanford Prison experiment

A

-To see how readily people would conform to the roles of the guard and prisoner.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Findings of the Stanford prison experiment

A

-Guards were sadistic and brutal - made prisoners clean toilets with bare hands and hit them with batons

-prisoners ‘told tales’ on eachother in order to act up to the prison guards to be on their good side

23
Q

What was the aim of Milgram’s study?

A

To see weather ‘Germans are different’ based on WW2 atrocities. Wanted to see if other people would obey too.

24
Q

Sample of Milgram’s study and how they were selected

A

40 male volunteers who were selected because they responded to a newspaper advert.

25
Q

What were the jobs of the Experimenter, teacher and student in Milgram’s study?

A

Experimenter - told participants to keep going even though they wanted to stop
Teacher - Asked questions and gave shocks
Learner - Answered questions, if wrong then they get shocked

26
Q

What were the findings of Milgram’s study?

A

-All 40 participants went up to 300 volts
-65% administered max of 450 volts
-35% defied the strong pressure of the experimenter

27
Q

AO3
Outline one strength of Milgram’s study
(High external validity)

A

Supported by research from Hofling (1966).
Researchers found that 95% of nurses obeyed orders from a doctor over a phone to administer a lethal dose of a medication, knowing it was dangerous to the patient. This suggests that everyday individuals are still susceptible to obeying destructive authority figures.
This is what is consistent with Milgram’s findings. This strengthens our acceptance of Milgram’s findings as similar results have been extracted in other experiments e.g. Hofling et al.

28
Q

AO3
Outline one strength of Milgram’s study
(Real life applications)

A

One strength of Milgram’s research is that it highlighted how Hitler was able to achieve what he wanted through authority and obedience. illustrates how obedience results in social change. This suggests that Milgram’s findings are representative of real life obedience on a large scale. This strengthens our acceptance of Milgram’s findings.

29
Q

AO3
Outline one weakness of Milgram’s study
(Lack of internal validity)

A

One weakness of Milgram’s experiment is that it may have been more about trust than obedience because the study was carried out at Yale university. The participants may have thought that nothing would actually happen to the learner because they are in such a prestigious setting. Furthermore, when the study was replicated in a run down office block, obedience fell to 20%. This suggests the original study didnt investigate what it intended to.
Therefore, this weakens our acceptance of the studies findings as there is a lack of internal validity.

30
Q

Outline and explain the findings of Milgram’s investigation into the effect of location on obedience (4 marks)

A

When Milgram repeated his study in a run down office block, 48% of participants obeyed the experimenter.
When you take away the status and prestige of an environment like Yale then people will obey differently as they dont think it is as legitimate hence obedience levels fall

31
Q

What effect did ‘no uniform’ make on obedience levels in Milgram’s study?

A
  • Only 20% of participants administered max of 450 volts
  • When the experimenter has no lab coat it removes authority and legitimacy so more likely to disobey
32
Q

What effect did ‘location’ have on obedience levels in Milgram’s study?

A
  • Obedience fell to 48%
  • When you take away the status and prestige of the environment you are more likely to disobey
33
Q

What effect did ‘proximity’ have on obedience levels in Milgram’s study?

A
  • Obedience fell to 20%
    -When you see the consequences of your actions you are more likely to disobey
  • This example is when the experimenter left the room and gave orders over the phone
34
Q

Explain the agentic state

A

-The agentic state occurs when you are following orders from an authority figure so the consequences of your actions are not your responsibility because the responsibility has been deferred to the authority figure as they are giving you orders. However in the autonomous state you are in control of your actions.

35
Q

Explain what is meant by legitimacy of authority

A

Social hierarchy is accepted in societies
Most of us accept that authority figures have to be allowed to exercise social power as this allows society to function easily. One of the consequences of legitimacy of authority is that some people are granted the power to punish others

36
Q

What are situational variables of obedience

A

proximity
uniform
location

37
Q

Explain how social support makes resistance to obedience more likely

A

The presence of others who resist pressures to conform or obey can help others do the same

These people give others the confidence to go along with their own opinions as the ‘model’ has shown it is possible to go against authority is possible.

38
Q

Give 2 pieces of evidence for social support

A

ASCH-
-Conformity dropped to 5.5%
-Breaks unanimity of the majority
-Presence of an ally gives people confidence to go with their own opinion

MILGRAM -
-Obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when the genuine participant was joined by a disobedient confederate

39
Q

What are the 3 things a minority needs to be to influence the majority?

explain why each one is necessary

A

Consistency - The minority needs to be persistent with their argument. The majority cant understand why minority have a different view point. This creates conflict which turns into anxiety. To reduce anxiety the minority are examined and the majority try to comprehend the minority’s argument

Flexibility - The minority have no power so they have to make compromises and negotiate with the majority as they are powerless compared to majority.

Commitment - The minority need to go out of their way to influence the majority and show that they are dedicated and stand by their opinions. This can cause majority members to be persuaded by minority argument

40
Q

Why are internals more likely to resist social influence?

A

Have greater self confidence which in turn leads to them standing by their opinions more and not getting as easily swayed as they dont feel a need for social approval.
Internals are more likely to be leaders rather than followers.

41
Q

Give a strength of authoritarian personality.

A

Supported by research from elms and Milgram who found that participants who went up to 450 volts had a negative relationship with their fathers. This is consistent with what authoritarian personality states. Therefore theory has more validity as it has supporting research

42
Q

AO3
Outline one weakness of authoritarian personality (Questionnaire)

A

One weakness of authoritarian personality is that research was gathered from a questionnaire
-This is a problem because participants might lie due to social desirability. E.g. if ppts guess the aim and and not admitted to being authoritarian as it may make them look bad
-This suggests the questionnaire lacked internal validity meaning it wasn’t a true measure of authoritarian traits
Thus weakning our acceptance of AP as it used invalid methods of gathering data

43
Q

Give one weakness of authoritarian personality
(involvement of situational factors)

A

-There is still evidence to suggest that situational factors are more important
-E.g. in Milgram’s study was carried out in a run down office block, conformity fell from 65% to 48%
-This suggests that obedience is affected by situational factors as well as dispositional factors
-Therefore the theory lacks validity as research suggests a more holistic view should be taken when trying to explain obdience

44
Q

Explain the 5 stages required for social change

A

-Draw attention to the issue which opposes majority opposition

-Role of conflict - means we examine the minority position deeply

-Consistency - When minorities express their arguments consistently, they are more likely to be taken seriously

-Argumentation principle - If there is a risk involved then the view is more likely to be taken seriously

-The snowball effect - A process that starts from an initial state of small significance builds upon itself, becoming large. (old minority is new majority and old majority is now new minority)

45
Q

One weakness of authoritarian personality

A

One weakness of AP is that it cant be applied to real life scenarios. For example, it is very unlikely that everyone in Nazi Germany had an authoritarian personality but rather they displaced their fears about the future onto an ‘inferior’ group of people. Therefore, the theory lacks validity as it has a limited explanation for some examples of obedience.

46
Q

AO3
Strength of locus of control
(Oliner and Oliner)

A

There is research evidence supporting the link between locus of control and social responsibility. For example, Oliner and Oliner (1988) interviewed two groups of non Jewish people who had lived through the holocaust. They also interviewed 406 people who protected and rescued Jews from Nazis and 126 people who did not. The rescuers were found to have an internal locus of control and also scored higher on measures of social responsibility. However, this also draws doubt over the direct link between locus of control and resistance to obedience - perhaps measures of social responsibility are more important/influential?

47
Q

AO3
Strength of locus of control
(Supporting research from Milgram)

A

This idea is also supported by a variation of Milgram’s study, where there were two other participants (who were actually confederates) and disobeyed the experimenter. The presence of the other person caused the level of obedience to reduce to 10%. This shows that the social support provided from the other participants gave them the confidence to reject the position of authority.

48
Q

What did Moscovici find?

A

Despite giving answers that were clearly wrong, minorities could still influence the judgement of a majority. But minorities had more effect if they were consistent than if they were inconsistent.

49
Q

Moscovici’s aim

A

To investigate whether a minority could influence a majority in tasks where there was a clear answer

50
Q

Sample + Procedure + Results of Moscovici

A

-192 females. Split into groups of 6.
-2 confederates who are the majority giving an incorrect answer and 4 real participants who are the majority.
-Shown 36 different shades of blue slides. The 2 confederates said the slides are green when they are clearly blue.
-Found that when the confederates were consistent ppts agreed with them 8.2% of the time, compared to when they were inconsistent ppts agreed 1.25% of the time
-32% agreed at least once

51
Q

(AO3)
Outline one weakness of Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment + Counterbalance
(Unethical)

A

One criticism of Phillip Zimbardo’s research was that it was considered unethical

For example, prisoners could have been subjected to psychological harm as they were stripped of their clothes, put in solitary confinement and chilled with cold CO2 gas. Moreover, ppts didn’t know what they were consenting to. They weren’t told they would go through and experience traumatic things

This suggests ppts couldn’t give informed consent. This weaken our acceptance of Zimbardo’s research

However, Zimbardo pointed out that he had selected psychologically healthy people and he didn’t know that the study would turn violent. Furthermore, he stopped the experiment before it could have gotten any worse

52
Q

(AO3)
Outline one weakness of Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment + Counterbalance
(Generalisability)

A

One criticism of Zimbardo’s research is that it has a lack of generalisability

For example, Zimbardo only recruited white middle class men as the sample. Perhaps this is only how white middle class men behave.

This means we cannot apply his findings to other groups of people in other cultures. E.g. Zimbardo’s findings tell us nothing about the conformity of 10 year old Asian girls.

Therefore this weakens our acceptance of the findings because we cannot apply them to other cultures/groups of people. Findings lack population validity.

However, Zimbardo’s findings could be used to explain examples of brutality in the world, suggesting his results are generalisable after all.

53
Q

(AO3)
Outline one weakness of Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment + Counterbalance
(Ecological validity)

A

One weakness of Zimbardo’s research into conformity of social roles is that it has been criticised for lacking ecological validity.

Perhaps the ppts didn’t believe the study was real so they didn’t act in a genuine way. This means we cannot apply these findings to the real world.

This weakens our acceptance of the finding as they cant be used for justification of real life conformity.

However, the participants did show strong emotional reaction to what was going on and 90% of conversations which took place were about life in prison