social influence Flashcards
Define social influence
Being influenced by other people to change your behaviour/views (conformity)
Obedience - following rules set by people
Minority influence - a minority influences the behaviour of a majority
What are the types of conformity proposed by Kelman?
Internalisation, compliance, and identification
Explain internalisation
The individual accepts the pov of the group publicly and privately
Believe the groups views are correct and will continue to believe them even in absence of other group members
Explain compliance
Going along with others to gain approval or avoid disapproval, to fit in with the group
Do not privately agree but will publicly express behaviours that agree with the group
Explain identification
Involves compliance and internalisation
Only internalising the groups views as they want to be apart of the group
What are the 2 explanations of conformity?
informational and normative social influence
Explain informational social influence
Occurs when we take info from others as evidence about reality.
If we are uncertain about what behaviour or beliefs are right or wrong we look to others for guidance.
Likely to occur in new or ambiguous situations
Likely to be an example of internalisation - change both their public and private attitudes.
Evaluate informational social influence as an explanation for conformity
Wittenbrink showed that other people’s beliefs have an important influence on social stereotypes. When participants were exposed to negative information about African Americans and led to believe this was the view of the majority, they too reported negative beliefs about a black individual.
Individual differences can affect how people conform, e.f. in Asch’s study students were found to be the least conformist compared to other types of participants.
Explain normative social influence
This is about norms for a social group. We don’t like to appear foolish and we want social approval and don’t want rejection and so our behaviour is regulated by norms.
An emotional process rather than cognitive.
Likely to occur around strangers but also friends as we want their approval
Evaluate normative social influence as an explanation of conformity
Schultz found hotel guests exposed to the normative message that 75% of guests reused their towels each day, rather than requiring fresh, reduced their own towel use by 25% - showing we shape our behaviour to fit in with the group and gain social approval
In asch’s study many participants went along with what was clearly the wrong answer just because other people did. They said they felt self-conscious about giving the correct answer as they were afraid of disapproval. When he repeated the study and got participants to write down their answer conformity rates fell - supports normative social influence
Describe Ash’s procedure and what he found
123 male undergrads tested
Asked to sit around a table and look at 3 lines of different lengths
Had to compare these 3 lines to a standard line, saying which they believed to be the same length
The real participant was always the second to last to answer
The confederates were told in 12 of 18 critical trials to give the same wrong answer
Wanted to see if the real participant would stick to what they believed to be right or go along with the majority
Findings:
On the 12 critical trials the average conformity rate was 33%. Participants agreed with the confederates giving the wrong answer on average on 1/3 of the trials
Found 75% of participants conformed at least once
Interviewed participants after who had conformed and found the majority had done so through compliance. They privately continued to believe their own answer but publicly changed their behaviour to avoid social disapproval
What are the 3 variables affecting conformity according to Asch?
Group size- found when the experiment had 3 confederates conformity rates rose to 31.8%, but fewer confederates didn’t affect conformity nor did more than 3
Unanimity of the majority - originally confederates unanimously gave the same wrong answer. When this changed and some gave the correct answer, conformity dropped from 33% to 5.5%. Suggests unanimity was key in conformity
Task difficulty - in one variation the task was made more difficult by reducing the length of the lines to make the answer less obvious. This led to conformity increasing - shows informational social influence. People less confident in their abilities were also more likely to conform (individual differences)
Evaluate Asch’s research
Designed and conducted in 1950s in America - during the McCarthyism period (a time where people were more likely to conform) so conformity may be different in todays society. Perrin and Spencer repeated the study in UK in 1980’s with science students and found conformity did not occur. Suggests research may be outdated
Cultural differences - Smith et al (2006) found average rate of conformity in individualistic cultures was 25% compared to 37% in collectivist cultures. Suggests conformity is favoured in collectivist cultures as it binds the cultures together
Demand characteristics - participants knew they were in a research study and so may have gone along with the demands of the group. The task was trivial and so more likely to be conformed to compared to real life situations. Therefore the task by Asch cannot be generalised to measure conformity in everyday situations
Explain Zimbardo’s procedure
Experiment took place at Stanford University in California where a mock prison was created.
Male student volunteers were psychologically and physically screamed and the most stable 24 were randomly assigned to play the role as a prison guard or a prisoner
Prisoners were unexpectedly arrested and when they entered they were blindfolded and given a prison uniform and referred to by ID numbers.
Guards were given a uniform, whistles, reflective sunglasses (to prevent eye contact). The study was planned to last 2 weeks
Explain Zimbardo’s findings
Guards became tyrannical towards prisoners, they woke them in the middle of the night and forced them to complete degrading activities
Within 2 days prisoners rebelled against the harsh treatment. They ripped their uniformed and swore and shouted at the guards
Participants appeared to forget they were acting
Prisoners became extremely passive and 5 had to be released early due to their extreme reactions. One prisoner went on a hunger strike
After 6 days the study was terminated due to the neglect
Demonstrated that both guards and prisoners both conformed to their social roles
Evaluate Zimbardo’s study
Demand characteristics - participants may have guessed what the experimenters expected of them and so their behaviour may have been influencing, suggesting they may have been influenced by powerful demand characteristics instead of actually conforming
Application to real life - similar results can be seen in Abu Ghraib, a military prison in Iraq that became known for its torture and abuse of Iraqi prisoners by US soldiers. Zimbardo stated that guards who committed the abuse were victims of situational factors that made the abuse more likely e.g. lack of training, boredom, no accountability to a higher authority.
Lack of research support - Reicher and Haslam conducted a partial replication on the study, the BBC prison study. The findings were different from Zimbardo’s study. The prisons eventually took control of the prison due to the guards not being able to work as a group efficiently.This criticises Zimbardo’s study as the findings were not replicated
Describe Milgram’s procedure
40 participants took part over a series of conditions where situational variables occurred to see their effect on obedience. They were told the experiment was about how punishment affects learning
2 confederates used -an experimenter and a man who was introduced as another volunteer participant. The real participant was always the teacher and the confederate was the learner. The learner was sitting in another room to the teacher but could be heard
Teacher asked to test learner on their ability to remember word pairs
Each incorrect answer the teacher had to administer electric shocks (which were fake but the participant thought they were real) starting at 15 volts increased every time up to 450 volts (enough to kill if shock was real)
Learner mainly gave wrong answers deliberately and would pretend to be in pain
If the teacher asked to stop giving the shocks the experimenter would convince them to continue
Explain Milgram’s findings
26/40 (65%) of participants continued to administer shocks up to 450 volts.
All went to 300 volts, with only 5 stopping at this point (12%)
Demonstrated that the majority obeyed when being told what to do by an authoritative figure (the experimenter)
What are the situational variables affecting obedience according to Milgram’s
Proximity - in the proximity study the teacher and learner were seated in the same room and obedience fell to 40%. This shows proximity is a crucial factor
Location - participants said Yale University gave the study prestige and they had confidence in the experimenter due to the location. They claimed they could not have obeyed to the same degree if the location was different. When the study was moved to a run-down office in Connecticut obedience rates dropped slightly but not significantly
The power of uniform - in the original study Milgram wore a lab coat as a symbol of authority. In a variation Milgram was replaced with ‘an ordinary member of the public’ secretly who was a confederate who wore everyday clothes and not a lab coat. Obedience rates dropped to 20%
Evaluate Milgram’s study
Ethical issues- Milgram deceived his participants as he did not tell them the true purpose of the study. Consequently the participants did not make an informed decision to take part in the study. Participants may have not been fully aware of their right to withdraw due to the experimenters commands to continue with the procedure.
Internal validity- criticised for a lack of realism. The learner cried out in pain and yet the experimenter remained calm. Some argue this led to the participants assuming that the learner was not suffering any real harm.
Individual differences - Milgram, had a group where participants were female. The rate of obedience was the same as males although females reported more tension when they administered the maximum shock levels. This challenged the common assumption that women are more susceptible to social influence than men
Explain what is meant by the agentic state as an explanation for obedience
-The agentic state is a process where you shift responsibility for your own actions onto someone else
-Move from being an autonomous person to acting as an agent for someone else, an authority figure
-The person can shift between autonomous and agentic
Evaluate the agentic state
My Lai village - Vietnam War (1960’s). Platoon commander ordered his men to murder over 500 unarmed Vietnamese villagers. At his trial he denied murder claiming to have carried out orders of his superior officers.- showing he was in the agentic state
In Auschwitz doctors went from caring to performing potentially lethal experiments on helpless prisoners - this is a criticism of the agentic state as it shows that it is gradual and irreversible
Explain what is meant by the legitimacy of authority
a legitimate authority figure is someone who is perceived to be in a position of social control within a situation.
a person will obey this figure as they perceive them to be of a higher social class than them
Evaluate the legitimacy of authority
Explanation helps to explain cultural differences in obedience in relation to how we socialise children to perceive authority figures. Kilham and Mann replicated Milgram’s study in Australia and found that only 16% of pps went to 450 volts. However Mantell found in Germany 85% obeyed. Consequently this increases the validity of the explanation for obedience
