Social Influence Flashcards
The three types of conformity
Compliance: publicly but not privately going along with majority influence to gain approval
Internalisation: true conformity, public and private acception through adoption of the majority group’s belief system
Identification: public and private acceptance in order to gain group acceptance, don’t always agree (usually to fulfil a social role)
Conformity
Yielding to group pressure
Explanations of conformity
ISI- agree with the opinion of the majority because you believe it is correct (cognitive)
NSI- agree with the opinion of the majority because you want to be accepted (emotional)
Asch’s Study (1951) findings
Influence due to the social situation a person is in, influenced by dispositions factors. Investigated situational factors through changing: group size, social support, task difficulty. With the introduction of a dissenter conformity drops. With increased difficulty conformity rises through ISI rather than NSI. It is artificial and it includes only men so it isn’t applicable to public. Easy replication and it tells us why they conform. 75% conformed at least once in the original and conformity was 37% of the time. With a dissenter with the right answer conformity dropped to 5.5% and a dissenter with a different wrong answer it dropped to 9%
Social roles
The parts people play as members of various social groups. These are accompanied by expectations we and others have of what is appropriate behaviour in each role.
Sherif (1935) Method
Used visual illusions called the auto kinetic effect where a stationary spot of light viewed in a dark room appears to move. Participants falsely told that the experimenter would move the light. They had to estimate how far it moved. Initially tested individually, then in threes, then individually again.
Sherif (1935) Findings
Initially individuals had highly different results but then results converged when in a group, final results were closer to the group than to the individual initially. Participants influenced by others for their estimates- ISI. It can be replicated, all variables constant. Ethical problem of deception
Asch (1951) Method
In groups of 8 participants judged line lengths by saying out loud which comparison line (1, 2, 3) matched the standard line. Each group contained only one real participant with the rest being confederates. Real participants always went last so they can test how they answer after hearing all the confederates answers whom they believe to also be participants. Each participant did 18 trials
Zimbardo (1973) Method
Male students were recruited to act as either guards or prisoners in a mock prison. They were ‘arrested’ as they went about their day and taken to ‘prison’. They were assigned random roles of guard or prisoner. Guards wore uniforms and mirrored sunglasses while prisoners, uniforms and numbers. Initially guards tried to assert their role but prisoners resisted by sticking together but then they became more passive and obedient while guards invented nastier punishments. The experiment was abandoned early because some prisoners became very distressed.
Zimbardo (1973) Findings
Guards and prisoners adopted their social roles quickly- social role can influence our behaviour. Seemingly well-balanced men became unpleasant and aggressive in the role of guard. Good control of variables. Artificial not generalised to real-life situations, bad ethics, observer bias- Zimbardo admitted he became too personally involved, conclusion doesn’t explain why only some conformed to their role
Situational and Dispositional behaviour
Dispositional- explanation of individual behaviour caused by internal characteristics that reside with the individual’s personality
Situational- explanations that focus on the influences that stem from the environment in which the individual is found
Authoritarian Personality
A collect of traits developed from strict/rigid parenting. A dispositional (personality) explanation of obedience. Suggests children being socialised to obey authority unquestioningly because they learn strict obedience from parents
Reicher and Haslam (2006)- BBC prison Method
Controlled observation in a mock prison, filmed for television. 15 male volunteers responding to an advert were participants, randomly assigned into two groups. 5 guards 10 prisoners. Had daily tests to measure depression, compliance, stress. Prisoners knew that at random one of them would become a guard after 3 days. An ethics committee could stop it whenever to protect participants. The guards failed to form a united group to identify with their role, didn’t always exercise their power as they felt uncomfortable with the inequality. The prisoners acted alone in first 3 days but became a strong group since no one else would become a guard. On day 6 prisoners rebelled and pptts decided to live in democracy
Reicher and Haslam (2006) -BBC prison Findings
Pptts didn’t fit into their expected social roles, suggesting these roles are flexible. The unequal system collapsed due to the unwillingness of the guards and the strength of the prisoner group. Contrasts Zimbardo’s experiment but these guards were not as empowered as Zimbardo’s who were actively encouraged to maintain order and this one was shown of tv so participants acted differently to avoid criticism. Good ethics due to the ethics committee and pptts weren’t deceived. Can’t be generalised to real life because it’s an artificial situation
Obedience
A type of social influence which causes a person to act in response to an order given by another person. The person who gives the order is usually a figure of authority, who has power to punish when obedient behaviour is not forth coming
Proximity in Milgram
In the original the teacher and student were in different rooms and there was 65% obedience. The variation is the teacher and student in the same room and obedience dropped to 40% of people who went to maximum voltage. Milgram then used touch proximity and made the teacher force the students hand on the electroshock plate when he refused to answer the question- obedience dropped to 30%. The experimenter then left the room and gave instructions through telephone- remote proximity- and obedience dropped to 20.5%