Social Influence Flashcards
Conformity
A change in beliefs, attitudes or behaviours due to exposure to a dominant/larger group (majority influence)
Normative social influence
You conform because you want to be liked and fit in (emotional process)
Informational social influence
You conform because you want to be right so you look to others for guidance.
Compliance
A result of normative social influence. Going along with things you don’t necessarily agree with. You change your public beliefs but not your private beliefs.
Internalisation
A result of informational social influence. You change your public and private beliefs. You really believe in what you are doing.
Identification
When you want to be part of a group so you accept their attitudes and values and believe in them when you are with the group.
Jenness (1932) Beans in a jar
- Jenness was the first psychologist to study conformity
- Participants were asked to individually estimate how many beans the bottle contained
- Jenness the put the group in a room with the bottle and asked them to provide a group estimate
- Participants were then asked to estimate the number on their own again
- Jenness then interviewed the participants individually again and asked if they would like to stay with their estimate or the group’s estimate
- Almost all changed their answer to be closer to the group estimate
Sherif (1935) Autokinetic Effect Experiment
- Used the autokinetic effect - where a small spot of light (projected onto a screen) in a dark room will appear to move even though it is still
- When participants were individually tested their estimates on how far the light moved varied considerably (20cm-80cm)
- Participants were tested in groups of three with 2 people whose individual estimates were very similar and 1 person whose estimate was very different
- Sherif found that the group converged to a common estimate
- The person whose estimate of movement was different conformed
Asch (1951)
- 50 male students from Swarthmore College in America who believed they were taking part in a vision test
- Line judgement task
- Real participants placed in a room with 7 confederates who had agreed their answers in advance
- The real participant was always 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 (the correct answer was always obvious)
- Each participant completed 18 trials and the confederates gave the same incorrect answer on 12 trials (critical trials)
- The real participants conformed on 32% of the critical trial, 74% conformed on at least one critical trial and 26% never conformed
- Most participants said they knew their answers were incorrect but conformed to fit in or avoid being ridiculed
Unanimity (Asch)
- Asch added another real participant or a confederate who had been instructed to give the right answer to the group
- Conformity levels dropped form 33% to 5.5%
- This suggests that the wrong answer needs to be unanimous in order for conformity to take place
Group size (Asch)
- Asch increased the group size (number of confederates)
- When there were 3 confederates conformity increased to 30% but further increases of the majority did not substantially increase levels of conformity
- This suggests that the size of the majority is important but only to a point
Task difficulty (Asch)
- Asch made the differences between the line lengths much smaller so the task was more difficult and the correct answer was less obvious
- This increased the level of conformity
- This suggests that perhaps there was an increase in informational social influence due to the person looking for guidance
Strength of Asch’s experiment
It is a lab study so there was high control of variables and therefore easily replicable.
Weaknesses of Asch’s experiment
- No longer applicable - 1950s USA was more conformist compared to today’s society, people more likely to conform
- Low ecological validity - Unrealistic setting means people may have acted differently in real life and risk of demand characteristics
- Gender biased - Women could be more concerned about social relationships and therefore more likely to conform but Asch only used men in his study
- Lacks cultural validity - USA is an individualist culture where people are more concerned about themselves than social groups, but collectivist cultures like China and Japan are the opposite, so are more likely to conform.
Social roles
The sets of behaviours and expectations that come with holding positions in society (teenager, mother, priest)
Zimbardo et al (1973)
Stanford prison experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment (Method)
- Male students recruited to act as either guards or prisoners in a mock prison (they were psychologically assessed before and deemed “normal”)
- Randomly given the roles of prisoner or guard and their behaviour was observed.
- The prisoners were “arrested” as they went about their day taken to “prison” and given uniforms and numbers
- The guards also wore uniforms and mirrored sunglasses
The Stanford Prison Experiment (Results)
- The guards tried to assert their authority and the prisoners resisted by sticking together
- The prisoners then became more passive and obedient while the guards invented nastier punishments
- The experiment was abandoned early (after 5 days instead of 2 weeks) because some prisoners became very distressed
The Stanford Prison Experiment (Conclusion)
- Guards and prisoners adopted their social roles quickly
- Zimbardo claims this shows that our social role can influence our behaviour as seemingly well-balanced men became unpleasant and aggressive in the role of the guard
A strength of the Stanford Prison Experiment
It was a controlled observation so there were good control variables
Weaknesses of the Stanford Prison Experiment
- As it was an artificial experiment, the results can’t really be generalised to real life
- There were poor ethics as some participants found the experience very distressing
- There is a problem with observer bias as Zimbardo ran the prison himself and admitted that he became too personally involved
- The conclusion Zimbardo reached doesn’t explain why only some participants acted according to their assigned roles (not all guards acted with brutality)
Orlando (1973) mock psychiatric ward
- Set up a mock psychiatric ward in a hospital for 3 days
- 29 staff members of the hospital volunteered to be patients
- Another 22 staff members were involved but they were asked to carry out their normal daily roles
- It only took a little while for the patients to start behaving like real patients of the hospital (many showed signs of depression and withdrawal with 6 trying to escape from the ward)
- The mock patients reported that they felt frustrated, anxious and despairing. Some said that they felt they lost their identity
- A real world study that can be linked to real life patients
Reicher and Haslam (Study for the BBC)
- Very similar to the Stanford Prison Experiment but had very different findings
- Guards did not identify with their social role whereas the prisoners increasingly identified with theirs
- Guards were overcome by the prisoners who worked collectively to challenge their authority and establish a egalitarian set of rules
The key difference between Zimbardo’s study and Reicher and Haslam’s study
The participants of Reicher and Haslam’s British study knew they would be seen by millions of viewers on TV. Even as they got used to the cameras the guards still didn’t become aggressive. Perhaps people are more aware of the dangers of conforming to stereotyped views nowadays.