social influence

Question 1

define conformity

Answer 1

a form of social influence that results from exposure to the majority position and leads to compliance with that position.

the tendency for people to adopt the behaviour, attitudes and values of other members of a reference group.

Question 2

what are the three types of conformity?

define them.

Answer 2

compliance:
going along with others to gain their approval/avoid their disapproval- accepting their views publicly but not privately

internalisation:
going along with others because you have accepted their view both publicly and privately

identification:
going along with others because you have accepted their view only because there is something bout them that you value and wants to be a part of.

Question 3

Deutsch and Gerard (1955) developed a two process theory which was based on two central human needs.

What were these?

Answer 3

Informational Social Influence (ISI)
desire to be right
cognitive
believe others to be the expert
internalisation
new situations

Normative Social Influence (NSI)
desire to be liked
emotional
occurs when we want approval/fear rejection
compliance/identification

Question 4

describe research support for ISI?

Lucaset al (2006) (maths problems)

Answer 4

Lucas et al (2006) asked students to give answers to mathematical problems.

greater conformity in answers where the questions were more difficult

shows people conform in situations where they feel they don’t know the answer

Question 5

explain how NSI does not affect everyone’s behaviour in the same way

Answer 5

people who are less concerned with being liked are less likely to be affected by NSI

Mcghee and Teevan found that those in high need of affliliation are more likely to conform- nAffiliators

this shows desire to be liked underlies conformity for some people more than others

Question 6

Describe Asch’s experiment (1956)

Answer 6

aim: to investigate how a lone participant reacts in the majority of confederates who conform

participants were asked to match length of lines, the answer was obvious

123 males

36.8% conformed to give the wrong answer

Question 7

describe variations of Asch’s study and the impact on conformity levels.

Answer 7

when the difficulty of the task increased, so did conformity levels as there was a less obvious answer so naturally, people look for guidance from others (ISI)

conformity increased with size of majority up to a certain point, after that there was little difference
conformity decreased as group size decreased

when unanimity of confederates decreased, so did conformity (to less than 1/4 or 9%)

Question 8

evaluate Asch’s research into conformity
-culture
-men
-time period

Answer 8

-findings unique to culture (done in America)
Smith and Bond analysed conformity in various countries 1952-1994, found collectivist cultures showed higher levels of conformity as it may be seen as positive in some cultures

-participants were all men
Eagly and Carli (1981) carried out meta-analysis of 145 studies and found women were more compliant than men- explained by differences in sex roles

-study was done in 50s, Americans scared to be different
perrin and Spencer (1980) repeated experiment and found only one student conformed in 396 trials

Question 9

explain how critics may argue that the ‘two-process theory’ is incorrect

Answer 9

the theory suggests that behaviour is EITHER influenced by NSI or ISI

Asch’s study demonstrates that often both processes are involved

Asch’s study:
conformity reduces when there was a dissenter
ISI reduced as there was an alternative source of info
NSI reduced as dissenter provides social support

two processes work together (as opposed to independently) in conforming behaviour

Question 10

Zimbardo’s Study

when was the study?
what was the aim of the study?
who were the participants?
how were the participants assigned?
how were the participants encouraged to conform to their roles?
what were the findings?

Answer 10

The study was in 1973.
The aim of the study was to investigate whether prison guards behaved brutally due to sadistic personality or their social role (as a guard.)
The participants were 21 ‘emotionally stable’ males
The participants were randomly assigned a role of either guard or prisoner.
guards: wooden baton, uniform, mirror shades
prisoners: identified with number, wear lose smock

guards took up role with enthusiasm, prisoners became depressed
had to end after 6 days (supposed to be 14)
proved social roles had influence on behaviour

Question 11

In Zimbardo’s experiment (1973), what was the affect of the guards wearing a uniform?

Answer 11

created a loss of personal identity, known as de-individuation

Question 12

Evaluate Zimbardo’s study (1973)

Answer 12

+ control variables
all participants were deemed to be ‘emotionally stable’ therefor this removed the possibility of individual personality traits having an affect
increasing internal validity

-overexaggerated conformity
only 1/3 of the guards actually behaved brutally (1/3 tried to be fair and other 1/3 tried to help)
in findings, suggested everyone conformed, but minimised other factors such as personality

-lacked realism
was not a proper prison
Banuazizi and Movahedi (1975) argued the participants were merely play acting
tells us little about conformity to social roles in real life

Question 13

define obedience

Answer 13

obedience is a form of social influence in which an individual follows a direct order

Question 14

Milgram’s baseline study of obedience

when
who
place
what was the aim?

Answer 14

1963
40 males age 20-50
Yale University
aim: to see how far ordinary people would go in obeying an instruction even if it involved harming another person

Question 15

What did Milgram tell the participants the aim of the study was?

Answer 15

to see the affect of punishment on learning

Question 16

What was the task the participants were given in Milgram’s study?

Answer 16

assigned roles of ‘teacher’ and ‘learner’

learner had task of memorising pairs of words- would indicate answer on light system

Question 17

summarise the findings of the Milgram’s baseline study

Answer 17

100% went up to 300V
65% went up to ends of shock 450V

Question 18

explain the situational variables in Milgram’s study affecting obedience

Answer 18

location: environment gave study legitimacy and authority

proximity: decreased proximity allows people to psychologically distance themselves from the consequences of their actions

uniforms: encourage authority because we assure the authority is legitimate and the person is entitled to this authority.

Question 19

name the percentage of fully obedient participants in these variations:

baseline
changes location to rundown office
teacher & learner same room
teacher forces learner’s hand onto plate
experimenter gives orders by phone
experimenter played by ‘member of public’

Answer 19

baseline study- 65%
change of location- 47.5%
teacher and learner same room- 40%
teacher forces learner’s hand onto plate- 30%
experimenter gave orders on phone- 20.5%
experimenter played by ‘member of public’ - 20%
disobedient model- 10%

Question 20

evaluate milgram’s study of situational variables

Answer 20

+research support
Bickman had three confederates in different uniforms, who asked passers by to pick up litter.
twice as likely to obey security guard than person in jacket.
supports view that situational variables such as uniform can affect obedience

-low internal validity
Orne and Holland- participants didn’t believe they were harming learner (especially when member of public added)
participants may have been responding to demand characteristics

-low population validity
only used males in situational variables
Kilham and Mann (1974) - Australian students, 40% males did max shock compared to 16% females max shock.
raises questions about the generalisability

Question 21

situational explanation:

agentic state and shift

Answer 21

mental state when you feel no personal responsibility for your behaviour as you’re acting as an agent for an authority

autonomous state is when you take responsibility for your own actions

an agentic shift is when you shift from an autonomous state to an agentic state

binding factors are factors which allow a person to ignore/minimise the damaging affect of their behaviour

Question 22

situational explanation:

legitimacy of authority

Answer 22

perceived right of an authority figure to have power/control over people

hierarchy of authority is learnt from adults/parents

Question 23

evaluate agentic state
+research support (Milgram)
-not all cases, Rank and Jacobson

Answer 23

+research support
most of Milgram’s participants resisted giving the shock at some point , only carried on when researcher said they were responsible

-doesn’t explain all situations of obedience
Rank and Jacobson’s study (1977) - 16/18 hospital nurses disobeyed doctor’s orders when told to administer excessive drug overdose

Question 24

evaluate legitimacy of authority

Answer 24

+useful account of cultural differences
Mann (1974) - Australian, 16%, 450v
Mantell (1971)- German , 85% , 450V
in some cultures, authority is more legitimate

• can not explain all disobedience
  Rank and Jacobson’s study - some people may be more likely to disobey/obey (innate tendencies have greater effect than legitimacy of authority figure)

Question 25

dispositional explanation:

authoritarian personality (AP)

• How did Adomo argue people with an AP responded to authority?
  -How do people with an AP view society?

Answer 25

Adomo argued that people with an AP showed extreme respect and submissiveness to authority and see society as weaker than it once was , therefore requires strong leaders

Question 26

How did Adomo argue an AP is developed?

Answer 26

Adomo argued an AP id developed in childhood through a strict parenting style with harsh punishment, demanding respect for authority.

Conditional love (love you if…) means person can not express themselves (due to dear of punishment) and therefore displaces this fear onto the ‘weaker’ in society

Question 27

What did Adomo et al’s research consist of?

What were the findings?

Answer 27

Adomo interviewed over 2000 whit middle class Americans about their unconscious attitudes to those of a different race.

Measured on F-scale (potential fascism) which was 1-6.
used F scale statements such as ‘the most important virtues a child learns is obedience and respect’

found that people who measured higher on F scale (AP) :
identified with strong people
were contemptuous of the weak
conscious of status
fixed stereotypes
strong positive correlation between authoritarian personality and prejudice

Question 28

evaluate authoritarian personality
(dispositional explanation)

Answer 28

+research evidence
Milgram and Elms
conducted small scale study on 20 participants who had been fully obedient in Milgram’s study
found they had higher F-scale score than those who had been disobedient
shows link between obedience and AP, as suggested by Adorno

-limited explanation
doesn’t explain all cases of obedience
e.g pre-war Germany, many people antisemitic and can’t all have had AP
likely there are other explanations such as social identity theory

-flawed methology
Greenstein- F scale had acquiescence bias as all questions were worded in the same way
people may just agree- not truthful - inaccurate results

Question 29

explain what is meant by social identity theory

Answer 29

people obey authority figures in order to fit in with social norms

Question 30

locus of control is used for an explanation of independent behaviour.

what are the two types of LOC? explain them.

Answer 30

internal locus control :
-believe what happens to them is largely down to their own behaviour
-they can control their life and succeed in difficult situations , because they are in control

external locus of control:
-what happens to them is largely controlled by external factors
-believe things are largely uncontrollable and that luck/fate are important factors

Question 31

How does LOC explain independent behaviour?

Answer 31

those with a high internal LOC are more likely to be independent
-less likely to be influenced by other’s opinions
-feel own lives aren’t influenced by others
-feel they’re in control of life
-less likely to obey and conform

those with a high external LOC are less likely to be independent
-rely on info and instructions from others
-feel they do not control their own lives
-more likely to conform and obey

Question 32

evaluate LOC

Answer 32

+Holland (1967) repeated Milgram’s baseline study and measured LOC
internal- 37% did not continue
external-23% did not continue
those who had external LOC were more likely to continue

-evidence that challenges link between LOC and resistance
Twenge et al (2004)
data showed people have become more resistant to obedience but also more external
this suggests LOC is not a valid explanation of how people resist social influence

Question 33

social support used as an explanation for disobedience

Answer 33

In Asch’s study, with confederate giving right answer, conformity dropped from 36.8% to 9%

In Milgram’s study, dissenting confederate, conformity dropped from 65% to 10%

in both contexts, person not conforming acts as a ‘model’ so the participant is freed to follow their own conscience

Question 34

evaluate social support used as an explanation for disobedience

Answer 34

+research evidence
Albrecht (2006) - Teen Fresh Start USA
programme designed to help pregnant young adults stop smoking
those who had ‘buddy’- significantly less likely to smoke

+ research support for dissenting peers
Gamson (1982) - participants told to produce evidence that would help oil company run smear campaign
88% rebelled against orders
higher levels of resistance than Milgram’s study
peer support can lead to disobedience by undermining legitimacy of authority figure

Question 35

explain what minority influence is

Answer 35

minority influence refers to situations when one person/a small group influences the behaviours or beliefs of others- this is most likely to lead to internalisation

Question 36

name the three things needed for minority influence to work

Answer 36

consistency
synchronic synchrony (all saying same thing)
diachronic synchrony (saying same thing for a while)

commitment
engaging in extreme activity can lead to augmentation principle (they must really believe what they’re saying)

flexibility
Nemeth (1986)- consistency can be off putting, must be willing to adapt view point in order to gain converts

Question 37

explain the process of change with minority influence

Answer 37

by hearing something which has been outlined by the minority, a person can think more deeply about it- this is known as deeper processing

the snowball effect then takes place as the minority view has gradually become the majority view

Question 38

evaluate minority influence

Answer 38

+ research support for consistency
coloured slides study- Moscovici (1969)
when consistent , 8% went to minority
not consistent , 1.25% went to minority

-limited real world applications
real life situations are much more complicated, there is more than a difference of numbers between minority and majority , often majorities have more power

-artificial tasks
Moscovici’s task lacked realism in terms of task and setting
in real life, outcomes of minority trying to influence majority are a matter of life or death
research studies lacking validity - limited explanation for minority influence in real life

Question 39

social influence & social change

lessons from minority influence
lessons from conformity
lessons from obedience

Answer 39

MINORITY INFLUENCE
draw attention
consistency
deeper processing
augmentation principle
snowball effect
social cryptonesia

CONFORMITY
Asch’ research
dissent has potential to lead to social change
power of NSI

OBEDIENCE
Milgram’s research
dissent has potential to lead to social change, confederate teacher refuses to give shocks, obedience plummets to 10%
Zimbardo- gradual commitment , once a small commitment is obeyed, becomes more difficult to resist a bigger one
people ‘drift’ into a different behaviour

Question 40

evaluate research into social change

Answer 40

+Nolan et al (2008)
wanted to see how minority influence could lead to social change of energy using habits
group 1- neighbours put signs up saying they were reducing energy
group 2- signs saying you should reduce energy
findings: group 1 , reduced energy
shows conformity (majority influence) can lead to social change through the operation of NSI

+Nemeth (2009)
social change is due to the type of thinking minorities inspire - broad rather than narrow
when people consider minority arguments, they engage in divergent thinking- leads to better solutions
dissenting minorities are valuable as they stimulate new ideas in ways majorities do not

-Mackie (1987)
suggests it is majority influence which brings about deeper processing
we like to believe people share our view
we like to know the reasoning on majority, so deeper thinking
as a result, central element of minority influence is challenged