Social Influence

Question 1

Define conformity

Answer 1

When someone’s behaviour or thinking changes due to real or imagined group pressure

Question 2

Describe Asch’s Study of Conformity

Answer 2

Aim - To investigate how people respond to group pressure

Method - 123 American male students used. They were sat individually in a room with 6-8 confederates. Shown 2 cards, ‘standard’ line and three ‘comparison’ lines. Asked which line matched the standard line, confederates answered incorrectly.

Results - Participants gave the wrong answer 36.8% of the time. 75% conformed at least once.

Conclusion - People are influenced by group pressure, even when they know the answer is wrong. It is possible to resist conformity.

Question 3

Define conformity

Answer 3

When someone’s behaviour or thinking changed due to real or imagined pressure

Question 4

Describe Asch’s study of conformity

Answer 4

Aim - To see how people responded to group pressure

Method - 123 American students. Each in a room, 6-8 confederates. Two cards, standard line and three comparison lines. Asked which matched the standard, confederates lied.

Results - 36.8% of the time the wrong answer was given, 75% conformed once+

Conclusion - People influenced by group pressure, possible to resist conformity

Question 5

Evaluate Asch’s study of conformity

Answer 5

Participants all male. Androcentric. Unrepresentative, ungeneralisable.

Use of confederates. Participants may have guessed, shown demand characteristics. Reduces internal validity.

Question 6

Describe and evaluate Asch’s study of conformity

Answer 6

Aim - To see how people responded to group pressure

Method - 123 American students. Each in a room, 6-8 confederates. Two cards, standard line and three comparison lines. Asked which matched the standard, confederates lied.

Results - 36.8% of the time the wrong answer was given, 75% conformed once+

Conclusion - People influenced by group
pressure, possible to resist conformity

Participants all male. Androcentric. Unrepresentative, ungeneralisable.

Use of confederates. Participants may have guessed, shown demand characteristics. Reduces internal validity.

Question 7

What are social factors?

Answer 7

due to environment

Question 8

What are the social factors of conformity?

Answer 8

TAG

Task difficulty- less obvious, less confident, more conformity
Anonymity- Decreases conformity, no embarrassment
Group size - More people, more pressure, more conformity

Question 9

What is a dispositional factor?

Answer 9

Due to yourself

Question 10

What the the dispositional factors of conformity?

Answer 10

EP

Expertise - More confident if we know what we’re doing.
Personality - Locus of control (Internal/External)

Question 11

Describe and evaluate Milgram’s study of obedience

Answer 11

Aim - To see whether a normal person would administer a lethal electric shock if told to.

Method - 40 male volunteers told they were taking part in a memory study. The participant was asked to give the learner an electric shock every time they got an answer wrong, slowly increasing the voltage from 15v to 450v.

Results - 100% went to 300v, 65% went to 450v, 3 had stress-induced seizures.

Conclusion - People will listen to an authority figure as they believe they aren’t responsible. People obeyed due to location, pressure, and newness of situation.

Some may have seen through the study, shown demand characteristics, decreases internal validity.

Male only, androcentric, unrepresentative, not generalisable

Question 12

Define obedience

Answer 12

Following orders from an authority figure

Question 13

Describe Milgram’s agency theory

Answer 13

We obey as we act as an agent for an authority figure.
Autonomous state - People behave based on their principles as we feel responsible for our actions.
Agentic state - People act on the behalf of an authority figure, don’t feel responsible for actions.
Agentic shift - The movement from an autonomous state to an agentic state due to the presence of an authority figure.
Proximity - In Milgram’s experiment, participants closer to the learner were 20% less obedient due to ‘moral strain’, but more obedient nearer to the authority figure.

Question 14

Evaluate Milgram’s agency theory

Answer 14

Supporting evidence - Milgram’s study of obedience. Meaning that the theory is sound.

Hofling found nurses would administer double the maximum dose of a drug due to doctor’s orders over the phone.

Question 15

Describe and evaluate Milgram’s angency theory

Answer 15

We obey as we act as an agent for an authority figure.
Autonomous state - People behave based on their principles as we feel responsible for our actions.
Agentic state - People act on the behalf of an authority figure, don’t feel responsible for actions.
Agentic shift - The movement from an autonomous state to an agentic state due to the presence of an authority figure.
Proximity - In Milgram’s experiment, participants closer to the learner were 20% less obedient due to ‘moral strain’, but more obedient nearer to the authority figure.

Supporting evidence - Milgram’s study of obedience. Meaning that the theory is sound.

Hofling found nurses would administer double the maximum dose of a drug due to doctor’s orders over the phone.

Question 16

Describe Adorno’s theory of authoritarian personality.

Answer 16

Authoritarian personality - A person who is easily influenced by authority figures, follows superiors, and is hostile towards inferiors. May have experienced harsh parenting as a child.

Authoritarian thinking is black and white and subscribes to rigid stereotypes.

In childhood, faces harsh parenting and high standards as parents offer conditional love. Child will internalise parent’s values and will expect everyone to subscribe to them. Develops hostility towards parents.

People with authoritarian personality displace their anger onto inferiors and minorities

Question 17

Define authoritarian personality.

Answer 17

A person who is easily influenced by authority figures, follows superiors, is hostile to inferiors. May have experienced harsh parenting as a child.

Question 18

Evaluate Adorno’s theory of Authoritarian personality

Answer 18

Other researches suggest authoritarian personality stems from poor education. Decreases validity as parts of the theory may be incorrect or missing.

Adorno made a questionnaire to see if someone had an authoritarian personality called the F scale. People who obeyed in Milgram’s study of obedience were more likely to score highly on the F-scale.

Question 19

Describe and evaluate Adorno’s theory of authoritarian personality

Answer 19

Authoritarian personality - A person who is easily influenced by authority figures, follows superiors, and is hostile towards inferiors. May have experienced harsh parenting as a child.

Authoritarian thinking is black and white and subscribes to rigid stereotypes.

In childhood, faces harsh parenting and high standards as parents offer conditional love. Child will internalise parent’s values and will expect everyone to subscribe to them. Develops hostility towards parents.

People with authoritarian personality displace their anger onto inferiors and minorities

Other researches suggest authoritarian personality stems from poor education. Decreases validity as parts of the theory may be incorrect or missing.

Adorno made a questionnaire to see if someone had an authoritarian personality called the F scale. People who obeyed in Milgram’s study of obedience were more likely to score highly on the F-scale.

Question 20

Describe Pilivin’s study on prosocial behaviour

Answer 20

Aim - To see if the appearance of a victim impacts whether or not they receive help.

Method - The victim (Confederate) fell over on a NYC subway. Participants = people on the subway, observed to see whether or not they’d help.

Results - Disabled victim helped 95% of time and helped quicker, drunk victim helped 50% of time.

Conclusion - Appearance of a victim affects whether not not they are helped.

Question 21

What is bystander behaviour?

Answer 21

The idea that the presence of others reduces the likelihood that help is offered in an emergency

Question 22

What is prosocial behaviour?

Answer 22

Actions that benefit others people, helping society.

Question 23

Evaluate Piliavin’s study of prosocial behaviour

Answer 23

Natural setting, behaviour close to real-life, no demand characteristics.

Participants unaware of observation, no consent, BPS ethical guidelines.

Question 24

Describe and evaluates Piliavin’s study of prosocial behaviour.

Answer 24

Aim - To see if the appearance of a victim impacts whether or not they receive help.

Method - The victim (Confederate) fell over on a NYC subway. Participants = people on the subway, observed to see whether or not they’d help.

Results - Disabled victim helped 95% of time and helped quicker, drunk victim helped 50% of time.

Conclusion - Appearance of a victim affects whether not not they are helped.

Natural setting, behaviour close to real-life, no demand characteristics.

Participants unaware of observation, no consent, BPS ethical guidelines.

Question 25

What are the social factors for prosocial behaviour?

Answer 25

CO

Presence of Others (More people, less prosocial behaviour, believes someone else will help. But Pilivin’s research says there is very little change.)

Cost of helping (E.g. danger, effort, time, guilt, rewards. But ignores other factors, e.g. emergency)

Question 26

What are the dispositional factors for prosocial behaviour?

Answer 26

ES

Expertise (Someone with special knowledge will be more likely to help in an emergency situation as they feel more confident. But, people still offer help without expertise.

Similarity to victim (More likely to help someone with similar characteristics to us. Supporting research. Man United fans more likely to help someone in a Man United t-shirt than a Liverpool one.

Question 27

Describe and evaluate Zimbardo’s study of crowd behaviour

Answer 27

Aim - To see whether deindividuation impacts whether someone hurts someone.

Method - Replica of Milgram’s study of obedience. All participants female. Two groups:
1. Own clothes with a name tag.
2. Large coats, hood obscuring face, never referenced by name.

Results - Participants in group 2 more likely to give the learner an electric shock due to felling less responsible for their actions.

Conclusion - Anonymity and deindividuation increases likelihood that people will act antisocially.

Weakness - Only female participants, gynocentric, unrepresentative, not generalisable

Weakness - Use of confederates, could realise fake, demand characteristics, lower internal validity.

Question 28

Define deindividuation

Answer 28

A psychological state where one loses sense of their sense of identity and responsibility, generally in a group setting.

Question 29

Define crowd behaviour

Answer 29

When people in a group act differently to how they would as an individual, often in an antisocial way, due to taking on the identity of the group.

Question 30

What are the social factors affecting crowd behaviour

Answer 30

SCamp

Social loafing - Behave differently in a group when doing a task, put in less effort (Unless a creative task).

Culture - Collectivist cultures less likely to change than individualist cultures as they are used to it. (But we cannot generalise to an entire culture).

Question 31

What are the dispositional factors affecting crowd behaviour?

Answer 31

scaMP

Morals - Stronger morals less likely to change behaviour (Someone stopped at 150v in Milgram’s due to morals)

Personality - Internal locus of control less likely to change behaviour (But cannot tell someone’s LOC for certain).