Social influence Flashcards
Social influence
How individuals effect others and how others are effected
Conformity
-also known as majority influence
-conformity is yielding to group
pressure
-our behaviours and beliefs are influenced by larger groups of people
3 types of conformity
-compliance
- identification
-internalisation
COMPLIANCE
- a person goes along with others peoples attitudes and beliefs but does not believe them to correct
-comply publicly but there private opinion does not change
-they go along with beliefs to keep peace and gain approval
-temporary when in the presence of the group
-
IDENTIFICATION
-individuals adjust their behaviour and opinions of the group as membership of the group is desirable
-both private and public - but often temporary
INTERNALISATION
- The individual accepts the group view and believes the view to be correct
-conforming to other peoples views both publicly and privately in the genuine view they are correct
- permanent
What are the two reasons people conform
-Informational social influence
-normative social influence
Informational Social influence
- humans have a need for certainty (need to be right)
-When uncertain they look for others
-happens in unfamiliar and ambiguous situations
Normative social influence
- humans have a need to be liked / be in certain social groups
-agreeing with the majority group view because we want to be liked ,accepted and gain social approval
-occurs when you fear rejection from the group/strangers
What was the original theory of conformity ?
psychologists said people conform because of either NSI OR ISI not both
Research support for ISI
Lucas et al
what did Lucas et al find - does this support or oppose ISI
Lucas et al asked students to give answers to mathematical problems that were easy or more difficult .
There was greater conformity to incorrect answers when they were difficult rather than when they were the easier ones . This was most true for students who rated there mathematic al ability as poor .
This study shows people conform in situations where they feel like they don’t know the answer
which is exactly the outcome predicted by the ISI explanation . We look to other people and assume they know better than us and must be right .
What is a nAffilator ? How does it link to NSI?
nAffiliator is the character description for people who are more concerned about being liked and therefore more effected by NSI than those who care less about being liked . These people have a greater need for affiliation - a need for being in a relationship with others.
For example McGee and Teevan (1967)found that students high in need of affiliation were more likely to conform . This shows the desire to be liked underlies conformity for some people more than others .
Therefore there are individual differences in the way people respond . Not everyone effected by NSI equally
Research support for NSI
Asch’s study
Research support - Ash study
-One strength of NSI is that evidence supports it as an explanation of conformity
-For example when Asch interviewed participants some said they conformed because they felt self-conscious giving the correct answer and they were afraid of disapproval
when participants wrote their answers down conformity fell to 12.5%
-This is because giving answers privately meant there was no normative group pressure
-This shows that at least some conformity is due to a desire to no be rejected by the group for disagreeing with them
Asch baseline procedure
Asch devised a procedure to assess to what extent people will conform to the opinion of others , even in a situation where the answer is certain
Asch’s sample consisted of 50 male students from Swarthmore College in America, who believed they were taking part in a vision test.
Asch used a line judgement task, where he placed areal participant in a room with seven confederates (actors), who had agreed their answers in advance.
The real participant wasdeceivedand was led to believe that the other seven people were also real participants. The real participant always sat second to last.
In turn, each person had to say out loud which line (A, B or C) was most like the target line in length.
Asch Baseline findings
-On average the genuine participants agreed with confederates incorrect answers 36.8% of the time (i.e they conformed about 1/3 of the time )
-There were individual differences - 25% of the participants neve gave the wrong answer - (i.e never conformed)
Variables investigated by Asch
-group size
-unanimity
-task difficulty
What was Asch investigating with these variables
Ach extended his baseline study to investigate variables that might lead to an increase or decrease in conformity
group size
what did Asch want to test
Asch wanted to know whether the size of the group would be more important than the agreement of the group
How did Ach test group size
-varied the number of confederates from 1-15
-Asch found a curvilinear relationship between group size and conformity rate
-conformity increased with group size -but only up to a certain point
-with three confederates - conformity to the wrong answer rose to 31.8%
-the presence of more confederates made little difference - the conformity rate soon levelled off
This suggests most people are very sensitve towards the views of others bevuase just one or two confederates was enough to wsay opinons
unanimity
What did Asch want to test
Asch wondered if the presence of a non-conforming person would effect the naïve persons conformity
How did Asch test unanimity and what were the conclusions ?
- he introduced a confederate who disagreed with the other confederates
-In one variation of the study this person this person gave the correct answer and in another variation he gave a different wrong one
-The genuine participant conformed less often in the presence of a dissenter
-The rate decreased to less than a quarter of the level it was when the majority was unanimous
-the presence of a dissenter appeared to free the naiive participant to behave more independently
-This suggests that the influence of majority depends to a large extent on being unanimous
-and non-conformity is more likely when cracks are perceived in the majorities unanimous view
task difficulty
What did Asch want to test
Asch wanted to know whether making the task harder would effect the degree of conformity
How did Asch test Task difficulty and what were the conclusions
-He increased the difficulty of the line judging task by making the stimulus line and comparison lines more similar to each other in length
-This meant it became harder for genuine participants to see differences between lines
-Asch found that conformity increased
-It may be that the situation is more ambiguous when the task becomes harder - it is unclear to participants what the right answer is
- In these circumstances it is natural to look toother people for guidance and to assume they are right and you are wrong
Limitation - ethical issues
-Deception - participants are being lied to by confederates and by researchers
-lack of informed consent - they didn’t know the real aims
-protection from harm - participants may leave feeling embarrassed /upset
Limitation - ecological validity
-highly controlled lab study - not a real life lab situation i.e they wouldn’t normally be in this room with strangers comparing lines or anything like that in real life
-the use of strangers as confederates could be an unrepresentative way of studying conformity because we are most likely to be in a group of people similar to us such as friends and family and not strangers . So this could effect conformity differently
Limitation - not reprasentive of different cultures
A limitation of Asch’s research is that it may not be representative of different cultures . The study was conducted in the US which is an individualistic culture , meaning there is more pressure to think independently and less pressure to get along with the group . These findings therefore do not represent what conformity may be like in collectivist cultures (like China) whose more importance is based on being part of a group . Research has suggested that conformity rates are higher in these collectivist cultures . Therefore Asch’s study lacks cultural validity and the findings cannot be applied to everyone globally , limiting the value of research.2
What three variables did Asch not consider
-mood
-gender
-culture
Mood
- Human conform more when in
a good mood - When happy more amendable to agreeing with others . We also conform more when moving from a fearful to relaxed mood
-Tong et al 2008 - participants conform to wrong answers on math questions given by confederates when in a positive rather than neutral mood
Culture
-individualistic (western e.g UK and US)
-places value on personal success/happiness
Collectivist (Eastern e.g China )
-places value on the groups happiness /
Difference between collectivist and individualistic cultures
-Perrin and Spencer (1980)-conformity level of 0.25% in Yorkshire science students suggesting low conformity in Britain . However scientists should be independent thinkers
-Smith and Bond (1993) - average conformity rate in collective cultures of 25-58% . In individualistic cultures only 14-29%
Gender
-women conform more readily
-socialised into more submissive roles
-Eagly Et Al (1981)- females focus on the quality of relationship - more normative social influence
-possibly evolutionary - women more nurturing
-Jenness (1932) -women conformed more than men
-population validity
What is a social role
The parts people play as members of social groups and the expectations that come with this .
E.G a parent is expected to be caring nurturing and look after their children . A student is expected to be obedient and respect authority
Abu Ghraib
-military prison in Iraq
-torture in 2003 and 2004 by US soldiers
-prisoners were tortured ,physically and sexually abused , humiliated , some were murdered
-Zimbardo noticed similarities between the behaviour of guards at Abu ghraib and the guards in the Stanford prison experiment
Zimbardo Prison Experiment - AIMS
His aim was to examine whether people would conform to the social roles of a prison guard or prisoner, when placed in a mock prison environment.
Furthermore, he also wanted to examine whether the behaviour displayed in prisons was due to internal dispositional factors, the people themselves, or external situational factors, the environment and conditions of the prison.
Prison guards - was it because of their sadistic personalities or was it their social role
The Stanford Prison Experiment - Procedure
-Zimbardo et al set up a mock prison in the basement of the psychology department in Sandford university
-they selected 21 male student volunteers who tested as ‘emotionally stable ‘
-Students were randomly assigned to play the role of prison guard or prisoner
-prisoners and guards were encouraged to conform to social roles both through uniforms they wore and instructions about behaviour
How did Zimbardo make the experiment as realistic as possible
- the ‘prisoners’ were arrested by real local police and fingerprinted, stripped and given a numbered smocked to wear, with chains placed around their ankles.
The guards were given uniforms, dark reflective sunglasses, handcuffs and a truncheon.
The guards were instructed to run the prison without using physical violence. The experiment was set to run for two weeks.
How did the uniforms mean they were more likely to conform to the perceived social role
The uniforms created a loss of personal identity (de-individualisation )
Zimbardo - Findings
Zimbardo found that both the prisoners and guards quickly identified with their social roles.
Within days the prisoners rebelled, but this was quickly crushed by the guards, who then grew increasingly abusive towards the prisoners.
The guards dehumanised he prisoners, waking them during the night and forcing them to clean toilets with their bare hands; the prisoners became increasingly submissive, identifying further with their subordinate role.
Five of the prisoners were released from the experiment early, because of their adverse reactions to the physical and mental torment, for example, crying and extreme anxiety.
Although the experiment was set to run for two weeks, it was terminated after just six days, when fellow postgraduate student Christina Maslach convinced Zimbardo that conditions in his experiment were inhumane.
Zimbardo - Conclusions related to social roles
Zimbardo concluded that people quickly conform to social roles, even when the role goes against their moral principles.
Furthermore, he concluded that situational factors were largely responsible for the behaviour found, as none of the participants had ever demonstrated these behaviours previously.
Zimbardo STRENGTH
CONTROL
Zimbardo had high control over key variables, such as the selection of participants.
-emotionally stable individuals were selected to take part in the experiment and they were randomly assigned to either a prisoner or guard
- This random allocation controlled participant variables
- The control of individual characteristics increases the internal validity of the study because the personalities aren’t effecting the results
Zimbardo LIMITATION
LACK Of REALISM
A limitation of the experiment is that it lacks realism and authentic behaviour
For example, Banuazizi and Movahedi (1975) have argued that many of the participants in the Stanford Prison Experiment were play-acting rather than actually conforming to a role. They were performing based on stereotypes of what guards and prisoners should be, for example one of the guards claimed he based his character from a film and one of the prisoners said he saw the experiment as an ‘’improv’ exercise.
- It doesn’t consider demand characteristics as it ignores the fact the participants are changing their behaviours to fit their role
- This effects the results as you can’t tell if the behaviour is genuine or not
Zimbardo -LIMITATION
EXAGGERATES THE POWER OF ROLES
-Zimbardo exaggerated the power of social roles to influence behaviour
-for example only 1/3 of guards actually behaved in a brutal manner
-another third tried to apply the rules fairly
-The rest actively tried to help and support the prisoners
-This means most guards were able to resist situational pressures to conform to a brutal role
-This means that Zimbardo overstated his view that participants were conforming to social roles and minimised the influence of dispositional factors like personality.
What is obedience ?
Obedience is a type of social influence which causes a person to act in response to an order given by another person.
The person who gives you the order usually has power or authority
Milgram’s Research - AIM
to discover why such high proportion of German people supported Hitlers regime and why many of the Nazi party committed atrocities in the name of ‘following orders’
Milgrams Research - PROCEUDRE
-40 American men volunteered to take part in a study at Yale university on supposedly memory .
-When each participant arrived at Milgram’s lab he was introduced to another participant (who was actually a confederate of Milgram’s). They drew lots to see who would be the teacher and who would be the learner .
-The draw was fixed so the participant was always the teacher . An experimenter was also involved (he was also a confederate dressed in a grey lab coat .
The baseline procedure was arranged so The teacher could not see the learner but could hear him .
The teacher had to give the learner an electric shock every time the learner made a mistake on a memory task.
The shocks increased with each mistake in 15 volt steps up to 450 volts .
A sound track was played to make the participant think the confederate was in distress IN FACT SHOCKS WERE FAKE BUT LABELLED TO SUGGGEST THEY WERE INCREASINGLY DANGEROUS .
Milgram’s Research -BASELINE FINDINGS
-Every participant delivered all the shocks up to 300 volts
-12.5%(5 participants ) stopped at 300 volts (intense shock )
-65% continued to the highest level of 450 volts (they were fully obedient)
-Milgram also collected qualitive data including observations such as the participants showed signs of extreme tension ; many of them were seen to sweat , tremble , stutter , bite their lips , groan and dig their fingernails into their hands
-Three even had ‘full blown uncontrollable’ seizures .
Milgram’s Research -Conclusions
Milgram conducted that German people are not different .
The American people in this study are willing to obey orders even when they might harm another person .
He suspected there were certain factors in the situation that encouraged obedience , so decided to conduct further studies to investigate these
Milgrams original research -STRENGTH
RESEARCH SUPPORT
Milgrams original research - LIMITATON
LOW INTERNAL VALIDITY
Milgrams original research - LIMITATION
ETHICAL ISSUES
Why did Milgram do variations of his study
To discover if features of the situation would make obedience more or less likely
-So he investigated situational variables
