Social Influence

Question 1

conformity

Answer 1

yielding to group pressure

Question 2

outline Asch’s study of conformity (9s)

Answer 2

A: to investigate group pressure in an unambiguous situation
M: -participants (123 male students) thought they were taking part in a study of visual perception
-participants were shown a standard line and three comparison lines, they were told to pick which line was the same as the standard line
-each participant was tested with a group of 6/8 confederates and the true participant was always sat at the end so they could hear everyone else’s answers first
-the first 12 trials the participants said the correct answer to gain trust
-the last 6 trials the confederates all gave the identical wrong answer
-Asch counted how many times the participant agreed with this wrong answer
R: when wrong answers were given:
-32% conformed overall
-5% always conformed
-75% conformed at least once
-25% never conformed
C:-majority of people are influenced by group pressure
- though many can resist

Question 3

what is a weakness of Asch’s study of conformity (9s)

*child of the times

Answer 3

P- results may only be relevant to 1950s America
E- 1950s America was a particularly conformist as politicians ensured that people followed the rules so people were afraid to behave differently
L- his research isn’t consistent over time and may only be apparent in certain conditions

Question 4

what is a weakness of Asch’s study of conformity (9s)

*artificial task

Answer 4

P- task and situation was artificial
E- judging the length of a line with strangers isn’t an everyday task
L- results may not reflect everyday situations (especially when the consequences of conformity are more important)

Question 5

what is a weakness of Asch’s study of conformity (9s)

*collectivist

Answer 5

P- Asch’s research is more reflective of conformity in individualist cultures (UK and America)
E- research has found that conformity studies done in collectivist countries (China) produce higher conformity rates as they’re more oriented to group needs
L- suggests that Asch’s findings are probably less reflective of conformity in collectivist cultures

Question 6

social factor

Answer 6

explanation in terms of the social world around you

Question 7

what are the social factors affecting conformity

Answer 7

• anonymity
• task difficulty
• group size

Question 8

how does anonymity affect conformity

social factor

Answer 8

• reduces our concern (less pressure) about people disagreeing with our views
• lowers conformity as we aren’t worried about what others will think of us

Question 9

evaluate how anonymity affects conformity

social factor

Answer 9

P- weakness; involved strangers
E- research has shown that when participants are friends/when with a group of friends conformity increases
L- anonymity may sometimes increase rather than reduce conformity

Question 10

how does task difficulty affect conformity

social factor

Answer 10

-as the difficulty of the task increases the answer becomes less certain so people will feel less confident about their own answer and look to others for the right answer

Question 11

evaluate how task difficulty affects conformity

social factor

Answer 11

P- weakness; may not be for everyone
E- people with greater expertise may be less affected by task difficulty
L- info can’t be generalised

Question 12

how does group size affect conformity

social factor

Answer 12

• more people in a group=greater pressure to conform
• two confederates: 13.6% conformity
• three confederates: 31.8% conformity
• more than three made little difference

Question 13

evaluate how group size affects conformity

social factor

Answer 13

P- weakness; depends on task
E- when there’s no obvious answer (eg.musical preference) people don’t conform until the group size gets to 8/10 people
L- group size is sometimes important

Question 14

dispositional factor

Answer 14

explanation in terms of the individual’s personal characteristics

Question 15

what are the dispositional factors that affect conformity

Answer 15

• personality

- expertise

Question 16

how does personality affect conformity

dispositional factor

Answer 16

Locus of control: 
-personality dimension (on continuum)
-extent to which people believe they're in control in their lives 
Internal Locus:
-in control of what happens to them 
-personal responsibility
-more likely to resist social influence
External Locus:
-feel they can't control situations
-don't feel in control of their actions (fate, luck)
-likely to conform/obey

Question 17

evaluate how personality affects conformity

dispositional factor

Answer 17

P- weakness; can’t explain why we conform differently in familiar situations
E- research has found that in unfamiliar situations people rely on their LOC to find out how to behave but in familiar situations we look to how we have behaved in the past
L- suggests that control is less important in familiar situations

Question 18

how does expertise affect conformity

dispositional factor

Answer 18

• increases your confidence in your opinions
• more knowledgeable=conform less
• research found that math experts were less likely to conform to other’s answers on math problems
• older people consider themselves more knowledgeable=less likely to conform

Question 19

evaluate how expertise affects conformity

dispositional factor

Answer 19

P- weakness; focusing on only one factor to explain conformity is too simplistic
E- in some situations people may still conform in order to be liked
L- shows that all factors work in different ways to affect conformity levels

Question 20

obedience

Answer 20

response to a direct order from an authority figure

Question 21

outline Milgram’s study of obedience

Answer 21

A: to investigate whether in certain circumstances a normal person would give somebody a potentially lethal electric shock if told to do so by an authority figure
M: -40 paid male volunteers (thought it was for a study on memory)
-a confederate was the “learner” while the participant always ended up being the “teacher”
-an “experimenter” (other confederate) directed the study
-experimented instructed the teacher to give the (fake) electric shock (15 increasing to 450 volts) to the learner every time he answered incorrectly on a memory task
-learner began to pound on wall and stop giving responses at 300 volts
-teacher was asked to continue when asked for guidance
R: -no participant stopped below 300 volts
-65% shocked to 450 volts
-caused participants extreme tension
C: ordinary people are likely to follow orders given by an authority figure even to the extent of killing someone

Question 22

what is a weakness of Milgram’s study of obedience

*lacked realism

Answer 22

P- participants may have not believed that the shocks were real
E- participants often raised their suspicions and may have felt it was unlikely such lethal shocks were being delivered (knew shocks were fake) and went along to not spoil it
L- lacks realism

Question 23

what is a weakness of Milgram’s study of obedience

*lab

Answer 23

P- was done in lab conditions
E- may not represent how we obey in everyday life
L- lacks ecological validity

Question 24

what is a weakness of Milgram’s study of obedience

*ethical issues

Answer 24

P- participants experienced considerable stress
E- caused psychological damage to participants (3 seizures were reported) as they thought they were causing paint to the learner
L- brings psychology into disrepute

Question 25

social factor of obedience: outline Milgram's agency theory (9t) Agency Agentic State Autonomous State Agentic Shift Culture Proximity

Answer 25

Agency: act as an agent (for someone else) because they assume that the person giving orders is taking responsibility Agentic State: act on behalf of someone else and would follow their orders blindly (person feels no responsibility for their actions Autonomous State (free): where they behave according to their own principles and feel responsible for their own actions Agentic Shift: moving from making own free choices to following orders (occurs when someone is in authority) Culture (social hierarchy) -some people have more authority than others because of their position in the social hierarchy -depends on society and socialisation Proximity: -proximity increases the "moral strain" that a person feels which leads to an increased sense of personal responsibility -Milgram: less obedient if the learner was in the same room as them

Question 26

what is a strength of the social factor of obedience: Milgram's agency theory (9t) *research support

Answer 26

P- research support E- Blass and Shmitt showed students a film of Milgram's study, they blamed the experimenter rather than the participants L- students recognised legitimate authority as a cause of obedience

Question 27

what is a weakness of the social factor of obedience: Milgram's agency theory (9t) *doesn't explain all findings

Answer 27

P- doesn't explain why there isn't 100% obedience E- 35% of participants didn't obey fully L- social factors can't fully explain obedience

Question 28

what is a weakness of the social factor of obedience: Milgram's agency theory (9t) *obedience alibi

Answer 28

P- it "excuses" people who blindly follow destructive orders E- offensive to the holocaust survivors as it suggests that the Nazis just obeyed orders and ignores roles that racism and prejudice played L- dangerous, as it allows people to think they aren't always personally responsible

Question 29

dispositional factor of obedience: Adorno's theory of the authoritarian personality (9t) The Authoritarian Personality Cognitive style Originates from childhood Scapegoating

Answer 29

The Authoritarian Personality: -exaggerated respect for authority -more likely to obey orders -very aware of their own and other's social status -look down on people of inferior social status -very respectful to people of higher status Cognitive Style: -"black and white" -belief in rigid stereotypes Originates in Childhood: -develops when a child experiences strict parenting/discipline -child only receives love when they behave correctly -the child internalises these values and expects all people to behave the same -child also feels hostility towards parents but can't express these feelings directly as they fear reprisals Scapegoating: -hostility felt towards parents for being critical is put onto people who are socially inferior

Question 30

what is a weakness of the dispositional factor of obedience: Adorno's theory of the authoritarian personality (9t) *lack of support

Answer 30

P- lack of support due to the flawed questionnaire E- the F scale used has a response bias L- challenges validity as it's based on poor evidence

Question 31

what is a weakness of the dispositional factor of obedience: Adorno's theory of the authoritarian personality (9t) *results are correlational

Answer 31

P- data is correlational E- can't claim that authoritarian personality causes greater obedience as it may also be caused by a lower level of education L-suggests that other factors may explain apparent link between obedience and the authoritarian personality

Question 32

what is a weakness of the dispositional factor of obedience: Adorno's theory of the authoritarian personality (9t) *social and dispositional

Answer 32

P- its both social and dispositional E- Germans were obedient but didn't all have the same upbringing (otherwise we'd expect all Germans to be authoritarian) L- shows that a dispositional factor alone can't explain high levels of obedience

Question 33

prosocial behaviour

Answer 33

behaviour that is beneficial to other people and may not necessarily benefit the helper

Question 34

outline Piliavin's subway study (9s)

Answer 34

A: to investigate if characteristics of a victim affect help given in an emergency M: -103 trials -4 researchers -"victim" (male student) staged a collapse on the subway and remained on the floor until help was coming -38 trials: victim smelled of alcohol and carried a bottle of alcohol wrapped in a brown bag (drunk condition) -65 trials: victim appeared sober and carried a black cane (disabled condition) -victim dressed and behaved the same in both conditions R: -disabled condition: helped at some point on 95% of the trials and 87% of the of the victims were helped in the first 70 seconds after they collapsed -drunk condition: helped at some point on 50% of the trials and 17% of the of the victims were helped in the first 70 seconds after they collapsed C: -characteristics of victim affects help given -number of onlookers doesn't affect help in natural setting

Question 35

what is a strength of Piliavin's subway study (9s) | *high realism

Answer 35

P- high realism E- participants weren't aware that their behaviour was being studied so they responded how they would normally (natural) L- results have high validity

Question 36

what is a weakness of Piliavin's subway study (9s) | *urban sample

Answer 36

P- people studied were likely to be mainly people who lived in the city E- they might have been accustomed to seeing beggars and may have become more used to ignoring someone in need L- observed behaviour may not be typical of all people (info can't be generalised)

Question 37

what is a strength of Piliavin's subway study (9s) | *qualitative data

Answer 37

P- qualitative data was recorded E- observers noted remarks from passengers which gives a deeper insight into why people didn't help L- has the value of both qualitative and quantitative data

Question 38

what are the social factors affecting prosocial behaviour

Answer 38

- presence of others | - cost of helping

Question 39

how does presence of others affect prosocial behaviour | social factor

Answer 39

- the more people present=less likely someone will help - Darley and Latane found that 85% of people reported a seizure when they believed they were alone but only 31% when they believed they were in a group of 4

Question 40

evaluate how presence of others affects prosocial behaviour | social factor

Answer 40

P- weakness; other research has found that helping rates aren't always lower when others are present (depends on the situation) E- everyday story, Westley Autry jumped onto train tracks to save a young man having an epileptic fit who fell on the tracks L- when immediate action is required and the emergency is very serious the presence of others doesn't always have a negative effect

Question 41

how does cost of helping affect prosocial behaviour | social factor

Answer 41

- cost of helping: possible danger to yourself, effort, time taken and possible embarrassment - cost of not helping: feeling guilty, blame of others and leaving someone in need of help - cognitive conflict between these 2 costs and possible rewards (feeling good, praise and social recognition)

Question 42

evaluate how cost of helping affects prosocial behaviour | social factor

Answer 42

P- costs of helping isn't the only factor E- if someone doesn't judge/interpret a situation to be an emergency where someone needs help they won't help. research by Shotland and Straw found that 19% of people intervened when a married couple were arguing whereas 85% intervened when the attacker appeared to be a stranger L- shows that cost of helping alone can't explain why someone will or will not help

Question 43

what are the dispositional factors affecting prosocial behaviour

Answer 43

- similarity to the victim | - expertise

Question 44

how does similarity to the victim affect prosocial behaviour | dispositional factor

Answer 44

- if you identify with the victim you are more likely to help - research by Levine et al. found that people were more likely to help a victim if they believed them to support the same football team

Question 45

evaluate how similarity to the victim affects prosocial behaviour (dispositional factor)

Answer 45

P-weakness; similarity alone can't explain why bystanders help in emergency situations E- in many bystander studies there was no similarity but the victim still received help, similarity may increase the likelihood of help but if the situation is too ambiguous or if there are high costs help isn't guaranteed L- factors other than similarity affect bystander behaviour

Question 46

how does expertise affect prosocial behaviour | dispositional factor

Answer 46

- people with specialist skills are more likely to help in emergency situations - Cramer et al. found that when a workman fell off a ladder registered nurses (high expertise) were more like to help than non medical students (low expertise)

Question 47

evaluate how expertise affects prosocial behaviour | dispositional factor

Answer 47

P- expertise may not always matter E- red cross trained people were no more likely to give help than untrained people when faced with someone bleeding a lot (both intervened) L-decision to help was unaffected by expertise but it definitely affects the quality of help given

Question 48

crowd

Answer 48

large but temporary gathering of people with a common focus

Question 49

antisocial behaviour

Answer 49

behaviour that is harmful to others | -behaving aggressively and doing things that may distress others

Question 50

link between anonymity and antisocial behaviour

Answer 50

- Le bon predicted that anonymity would lead to antisocial behaviour in a harmful way - normally behaviour is ruled by social norms (behaving correctly) - when we can't be identified (anonymity) we lose our normal restraints and normal sense of responsibility for our actions as punishment is harder to issue - we cease to behave rationally and instead act impulsively

Question 51

collective behaviour

Answer 51

behaviour that emerges when a group of people join together - the group may behave in a way that's different from the way the individuals might have behaved on their own - the group creates their own identity

Question 52

deindividuation

Answer 52

-psychological state in which an individual loses their personal identity and takes on the group identity of the people around them

Question 53

outline Zimbardo's study of deindividuation

Answer 53

A: to study the effects of loss of individual identity (in an adaptation of Milgram's obedience study) M: -groups of 4 female participants were required to deliver fake electric shocks to another student to "aid learning" -individuated group: wore normal clothes, given name tags, introduced to each other and could see each other -deindividuated group: wore large coat and hood that concealed identity and weren't referred to by name R: deindividuated group was more likely to shock the person and held the shock button twice as long C: -supports the view that anonymity and deindividuation increases the likelihood that people will act antisocially -being anonymous increases aggression

Question 54

what is a weakness of Zimbardo's study of deindividuation | *not always antisocial

Answer 54

P- deindividuation doesn't always result in antisocial behaviour E- in a similar study deindividuated participants wearing nurse gowns (prosocial group norms) gave fewer shocks and at lower levels (less antisocial behaviour) than a deindividuated group wearing KKK type gowns (antisocial group norms) L- shows that deindividuation doesn't automatically lead to antisocial behaviour

Question 55

what is a strength of Zimbardo's study of deindividuation | *real world application

Answer 55

P- can be used to help manage crowds E- making people feel more self aware and less deindividuated by using video cameras so people can see themselves (crowd control) L- understanding deindividuation can reduce antisocial behaviour in situations using crowds so it has real life application

Question 56

what is a weakness of Zimbardo's study of deindividuation | *crowding

Answer 56

P- antisocial behaviour may be due to crowding rather than collective behaviour E- research has shown that being in crowded situations can make people feel stressed and behave antisocially (creates aggression) L- suggests that crowd behaviour can be explained in terms of overcrowding as well as deindividuation

Question 57

outline the case study on crowd and collective behaviour | --->(riot in St Paul's Bristol 1980, Reicher)

Answer 57

A: to investigate crowd behaviour to see if it was ruly or unruly M: -analysed reports of the riot from the police, newspapers, Tv and radio stations -interviewed 20 people after the riot -6 people were interviewed in depth R: -riot was triggered by police raiding cafe which the community felt was unjust, crowd of 300 to 3000 gathered and attacked which then intensified and spread -crowd threw bricks and burnt police cars but calmed down when police left C: shows damage was rule driven and targeted at police (reflecting the social attitude of that area)

Question 58

what is a strength of the case study on crowd and collective behaviour *supported by research

Answer 58

P- other research has come to similar conclusions about crowd behaviour E- shows that crowd behaviour isn't without direction analysis: football hooligans' violence doesn't escalate beyond a certain point L-supports the view that crowd behaviour isn't unruly but is governed by the social norms of the group and is rule driven

Question 59

what is a weakness of the case study on crowd and collective behaviour *issues with methodology

Answer 59

P- data was subjective E- study is based on eye witness testimony so the data may be biased L- data may lack validity

Question 60

what is a strength of the case study on crowd and collective behaviour *real world application

Answer 60

P- provides ideas about how to police such riots E- Reicher's study suggests that increasing police presence doesn't always lead to a decrease in violence so it may be better to let local communities "police" themselves L- research has real value and can have positive real life application

Question 61

what are the social factors affecting crowd and collective behaviour

Answer 61

- deindividuation - social loafing - culture

Question 62

how does deindividuation affect crowd and collective behaviour (social factor)

Answer 62

group norms determine crowd behaviour -may result in freeing the individual of personal norms and them becoming less aware of their responsibility for their actions

Question 63

evaluate how deindividuation affects crowd and collective behaviour (social factor)

Answer 63

P-weakness; antisocial behaviour may be due to crowding rather than collective behaviour E- being tightly packed together is unpleasant (Freedman: creates aggression) L- may explain antisocial behaviour

Question 64

how does social loafing affect crowd and collective behaviour (social factor)

Answer 64

when working in a group, people put in less effort as you can't identify individual effort -Latane et al. found that when participants were asked to scream as loudly as they could, when they were in a larger group they individually made less noise than when they were on their own

Question 65

evaluate how social loafing affects crowd and collective behaviour (social factor)

Answer 65

P- weakness; negative effects of group work don't apply to all kinds of tasks E- creative tasks (brainstorming) benefit from a group of people working together L- shows that in some tasks the output from a group is often greater than the sum of individuals in the group

Question 66

how does culture affect crowd and collective behaviour | social factor

Answer 66

individualists (US): focused on individual result collectivists (Chinese): decisions are made with reference to the needs of the group, social loafing is likely to be lower -Earley found that Chinese people put in the same amount of effort in a group task where individual effort can't be identified as the group task where individual effort could be identified whereas the Americans put in less effort on the group task where individual effort couldn't be identified

Question 67

evaluate how culture affects crowd and collective behaviour | social factor

Answer 67

P- weakness; overgeneralised E- people vary considerably within a country as there is more than one culture and religion so people will hold different values L- too simplistic to talk about national cultures and make predictions about behaviour

Question 68

what are the dispositional factors affecting crowd and collective behaviour

Answer 68

- personality | - morality

Question 69

how does personality affect crowd and collective behaviour | dispositional factor

Answer 69

internal locus of control enables individuals to be less influenced by crowd behaviour as they're more likely to follow their personal norms than the social norms created by others around

Question 70

evaluate how personality affects crowd and collective behaviour (dispositional factor)

Answer 70

P- weakness; not all research has shown that personality matters E- participants were tested to see if they would report researchers for conducting an unethical study (whistleblowing) participants who were willing to speak had similar scores on a personality test to those who didn't speak out L- may not be a useful explanation for crowd and collective behaviour

Question 71

how does morality affect crowd and collective behaviour | dispositional factor

Answer 71

- "morals" are our ideas of right and wrong - people with a strong sense of right and wrong helps resist pressure from group norms - in Milgram's study a professor of religion was able to resist the pressure of "what everyone else was doing" due to his strong sense of moral responsibility

Question 72

evaluate how morality affects crowd and collective behaviour (dispositional factor)

Answer 72

P- strength; supported by historical evidence of individuals who stood up to crowd behaviour E- in Nazi Germany, Sophia Scholl was found guilty of circulating anti Nazi literature, she resisted to group pressure and stood up for what she believed in L- shows that some people are willing to sacrifice their life for a principle and good of others