SOCIAL INFLUENCE

Question 1

define COMPLIANCE

it leads to…

Answer 1

simply ‘going along with others’ in public, but not privately changing personal opinions and behaviour.
It results only in a superficial change and a particular behaviour or opinion stops as soon as the group pressure stops.

Question 2

define IDENTIFICATION

conform because…

Answer 2

We conform to the behaviour of the group because we value it and want to be a part of it, leading to identification with the group where we may publicly change our opinions to be accepted by the group, even if we don’t privately agree with what the group stands for.

Question 3

define INTERNALISATION

result in…

Answer 3

Occurs when a person genuinely accepts the group norms.
This results in private and public change of opinion/behaviour.
This change is usually permanent because attitudes become part of the way a person thinks, so the change persists even in the absence of the group.

Question 4

Deutsch and Gerard developed a two-process theory of why people conform.
They are based on two human needs:

exlanations of conformity

Answer 4

the need to be liked (NSI) and
the need to be right (ISI).

Question 5

NORMATIVE SOCIAL INFLENCE NSI

why it happens, when, type of process, leads to…

Answer 5

Suggests we agree with the majority due to the need to be accepted, gain approval and to be liked.
People do not like to appear foolish and prefer to gain social approval rather than rejection, therefore they often follow social norms. So NSI is an emotional process, not cognitive.
NSI mostly occurs in situations with strangers where people may feel concerned about rejection, or with friends as we are most concerned about the opinions of people we know. It often leads to compliance.

Question 6

INFORMATIONAL SOCIAL INFLUENCE ISI

Answer 6

Suggests we agree with the majority as we believe they are correct or more knowledgeable than us.
It is more likely to happen in situations that are new to a person or where there is some ambiguity (not clear what’s right), so people assume the group is more likely to be right.
It is a cognitive process that leads to internalisation.

Question 7

AO3 - research support for NSI

research evidence supporting NSI as an explanation of conformity - Asch

Answer 7

When Asch interviewed his participants, some said they conformed because they felt self-conscious giving the correct answer as they were afraid of disapproval.
When participants wrote their answer down, conformity rate dropped to 12.5% - this is because giving answers privately meant there was no normative group pressure.
This shows that at least some conformity is due to a desire not to be rejected by the group for disagreeing with them.

Question 8

AO3 - research support for ISI

research evidence supporting ISI as an explanation of conformity - Lucas

Answer 8

Lucas et al. found that participants conformed more often to incorrect answers when they were given when the maths problems were more difficult. This is because when the problems were easy the participants knew their own minds, but when the problems became harder the situation became unclear. The participants did not want to be wrong, so they relied on the answers they were given.
This shows that ISI is a valid explanation of conformity because it showed that people conform in situations where they do not know the answer, exactly what ISI states.

Question 9

AO3 - limitation of NSI

individual differences - nAffiliators (McGhee)

Answer 9

NSI does not predict conformity in every case.
Some people are greatly concerned with being liked by others - they are called nAffiliators, meaning they have a strong need for affiliation (wanting to relate to people). McGhee found that students who were nAffiliators were more likely to conform.
This shows that NSI underlies conformity for some people more than it does for others. There are individual differences in conformity that cannot be fully explained by the two-process theory.

Question 10

AO3 - limitation of Deutsch & Gerard’s two process theory

theory is flawed - both processes work together

Answer 10

The idea of Deutsch and Gerard’s two-process theory is that NSI and ISI work separately. However, more often, both processes work together.
For example, in Asch’s study the possibility of rejection was a strong reason for conformity, demonstrating NSI, but it was also true that the unanimous group conveyed the impression that everyone ‘knew’ the answer, demonstrating ISI.
This means that the theory is flawed as conformity is likely to be a result of a combination of both ISI and NSI.

Question 11

THIS IS NOT IN THE SPEC, BUT IT IS USEFUL

ASCH’S BASELINE PROCEDURE

Answer 11

123 American men were tested, each in groups of 6-8, where all others were confederates.
Each saw 2 large cards, one with the standard line and one with 3 comparison lines, one always clearly the same length as the standard line.
The other two were clearly wrong.
On each trial the participant had to say out loud which comparison line was the same as the standard line.
The participant was always seated last or second to last in the group.
The confederated gave all the same incorrect answers in all trials.

The genuine participants did not know others were confederates.

Question 12

ASCH’S BASELINE FINDINGS

average % of conformity, % of participants thatnever conformed

Answer 12

On average the genuine participants agreed with the confederates’ incorrect answers 36.8% of the time.
25% of the participants never conformed, meaning 75% conformed at least once.

Question 13

ASCH’S VARIATIONS

1 . GROUP SIZE

how, findings, suggests that…

Answer 13

Asch varied the number of confederates from 1 to 15. He found a curvilinear relationship between group size and conformity. Conformity increased with group size, but only up to 7. With 3 confederates, conformity rose to 31.8%.
This suggests that most people are very sensitive to the view of others, because just 2 confederates were enough to significantly sway opinion.

Question 14

ASCH’S VARIATIONS

2 . UNANIMITY

how, findings, suggests that…

Answer 14

Asch introduced a confederate who disagreed with the other confederates and gave the correct answer in one variation, and the other wrong answer in another. The participant conformed less often in the presence of a dissenter. Conformity levels dropped to as low as 5%, as the presence of a dissenter allowed the participant to behave more independently. This was even true when the dissenter gave the other incorrect answer.
This suggests the influence of the majority depends on it being unanimous.

Question 15

ASCH’S VARIATIONS

3 . TASK DIFFICULTY

how, findings, suggests that…

Answer 15

Asch increased the difficulty by making the standard and comparison lines more like each other.
This meant it became harder for the participants to see the differences between the lines.
Asch found that conformity increased, due to the situation becoming more ambiguous.
People look to others for guidance and assume they are right and themselves are wrong (ISI).

Question 16

AO3 - strength of Asch’s variables

research support for task difficulty - Lucas

Answer 16

There is support from other studies for the effects of task difficulty.
Lucas et al. asked their participants to solve ‘easy’ and ‘hard’ maths problems. Participants were also given answers that were falsely claimed to be from three other students. The participants conformed more often and agreed with the wrong answers when the problems were harder.
This shows that Asch was correct in claiming that task difficulty is a factor that affects conformity.

Question 17

AO3 - limitation of Asch’s situational variables

The task and situation were artificial (Fiske)

Answer 17

Participants knew they were in a research study and may have simply gone along with what was expected (demand characteristics). The task of identifying lines was relatively trivial and therefore there was no real reason not to conform. Furthermore, according to Fiske, Asch’s groups did not really resemble the groups that we experience in everyday life.
This means the findings do not generalise to real world situations, especially those where consequences of conformity may be important.

Question 18

AO3 - limitation of Asch’s situational variables

limited application - all american males (gender & culture bias)

Answer 18

Asch’s participants were American men.
Other research suggests that women may be more conformist, possibly because they are more concerned about social relationships and being accepted. Furthermore, the US is an individualist culture where people are more concerned about themselves rather than their social group. Similar conformity studies conducted in collectivist studies like China have found conformity rates in collectivist cultures is higher.
This means that Asch’s findings tell us little about conformity in women and people from other cultures.

Question 19

ZIMBARDO wanted to know why prison guards behave brutally - was it because they have

dispositional vs situational explanation

Answer 19

sadistic personalities or was it their social role (as a prison guard) that created such behaviour.

Question 20

THE STANFORD PRISON EXPERIMENT (SPE) - PROCEDURE

Answer 20

Zimbardo et al set up a mock prison in the basement of the psychology department at Stanford University.
They selected 24 men (student volunteers) who tested as emotionally stable.
The students were randomly assigned to play the role of prison guard or prisoner and were encouraged to conform to social roles both through the uniforms they wore and also instructions about their behaviour.

Question 21

ZIMBARDO - PROCEDURE

how did uniforms affect conformity to social roles?

prisoner uniform, guard uniform, deindividuation

Answer 21

The prisoners were given a loose smock to wear and a cap to cover their hair, and they were identified by number (their names were never used). The guards had their own uniform reflecting the status of their role, with wooden club, handcuffs, and mirror shades.
These uniforms created a loss of personal identity (called de-individuation) and meant they would be more likely to conform to the perceived social role.

Question 22

ZIMBARDO - PROCEDURE

how were the participants encouraged to conform to their social roles?

instructons about behaviour

Answer 22

The prisoners were further encouraged to identify with their role by several procedures. For example, rather than leaving the study early. prisoners could ‘apply for parole’.
The guards were encouraged to play their role by being reminded that they had complete power over the prisoners.

Question 23

What were the findings of the SPE?

who identified with their role more closely?

Answer 23

The guards took up their roles with enthusiasm, treating the prisoners harshly. Within two days, the prisoners rebelled ripped their uniforms and shouted and swore at the guards, who retaliated with fire extinguishers.
The guards harassed the prisoners constantly, to remind them of the powerlessness of their role they conducted frequent headcounts, sometimes at night, when the prisoners would stand in line and call out their numbers.
The guards highlighted the differences in social roles by creating opportunities to enforce the rules and administer punishments.
After their rebellion was put down, the prisoners became subdued, depressed, and anxious.
One was released because he showed symptoms of psychological disturbance.
Two more were released on the fourth day.
One prisoner went on a hunger strike. The guards tried to force-feed him and then punished him by putting him in the hole, a tiny dark closet.
The guards identified more and more closely with their role their behaviour became increasingly brutal and aggressive, with some of them appearing to enjoy the power they had over the prisoners.

Question 24

Zimbardo ended the study after

Answer 24

6 days instead of the intended 14.

Question 25

What did Zimbardo conclude? | supports which explanation?

Answer 25

Social roles appear to have a strong influence on individuals' behaviour. The guards became brutal, and the prisoners became submissive. Such roles were very easily taken on by all participants. Supports the situational explanation -> social roles affect behaviour.

Question 26

AO3 - strength of Zimbardo's SPE | control over key variables

Answer 26

Zimbardo and his colleagues had control over key variables. The most obvious example of this was the selection of participants. Emotionally stable individuals were chosen and randomly assigned to the roles of prisoner or guard. This rules out individual differences as an explanation of the findings as if the guards and prisoners behaved differently and were in the roles were only by chance, then their behaviour must have been due to the role itself. This degree of control over variables increased the internal validity of the study, so we can be much more confident in drawing conclusions about the influence of roles on conformity.

Question 27

AO3 - limitaton of Zimbardo's SPE | lack of realism / play acting - Mohavedi (Cool Hand Luke)

Answer 27

One limitation of the SPE is that it did not have the realism of a true prison. Movahedi argued the participants were merely play-acting rather than genuinely conforming to a role. Participants' performances were based on their stereotypes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave. For example, one of the guards claimed he had based his role on a brutal character from the film Cool Hand Luke. This would also explain why the prisoners rioted - they thought that was what real prisoners did. This suggests that the findings of the SPE tell us little about conformity to social roles in actual prisons.

Question 28

AO3 - limitaton of Zimbardo's SPE | exaggeration - Fromm (undermines the effect of dispositional factors)

Answer 28

Fromm accused Zimbardo of exaggerating the power of the situation and minimising the role of personality factors. For example, only a minority of the guards (about a third) behaved in a brutal manner. Another third was keen on applying the rules fairly. The rest actively tried to help and support the prisoners, sympathising with them, offering them cigarettes and reinstating privileges. The differences in the guards' behaviour indicate that they were able to exercise their own belief of right or wrong, despite the social pressure of conforming to a role. This suggests that Zimbardo overstated his view that SPE participants were conforming to social roles and minimised the influence of dispositional influences.

Question 29

describe Milgram's baseline procedure

Answer 29

40 American men volunteered to take part in a study, supposedly on memory. They were paid $4.50 upon arrival. When each volunteer arrived at Milgram's lab he was introduced to another participant (a confederate of Milgram's). They drew lots to see who would be the 'Teacher' (T) and who would be the Learner' (L). The draw was fixed so that the participant was always the Teacher. An 'Experimenter' (E) was also involved (also a confederate, dressed in a grey lab coat).

Question 30

Milgram's study aimed | describe layout (shocks, what mr Wallace did after 300 volts)

Answer 30

The study aimed to assess obedience in a situation where an authority figure (Experimenter) ordered the participant (Teacher) to give an increasingly strong shock to a Learner located in a different room when he made errors. (in 15-volt steps up to 450 volts). The shocks were fake, but the Teacher did not know this. · The switches were labelled from slight, intense and to danger - severe shock. · When the teachers got to 300V, the learner pounded on the wall and gave no response to the next question. · At 315V, he pounded on the wall one last time and gave no response until the end

Question 31

# MILGRAM - BASELINE PROCEDURE The 4 standard prods the experimenter used to order the teacher to continue were:

Answer 31

1. Please continue, 2. The experiment requires that you continue, 3. It is absolutely essential that you continue, 4. You have no other choice, you must go on.

Question 31

MILGRAM - baseline findings | how many went up to 300?, psychological effects, % up to the full 450?

Answer 31

Every participant delivered all the shocks up to 300 volts. · 12.5% (five participants) stopped at 300 volts (labelled intesne shock). · Milgram also collected qualitative data including observations such as: the participants showed signs of extreme tension; many of them were seen to 'sweat, tremble, stutter, bite their lips, groan and dig their fingernails into their hands'; three even had full blown seizures. 65& continued to the highest level of 450 volts, they were fully obedient.

Question 31

MILGRAM - conclusion

Answer 31

German people are not different. The American participants in his study were willing to obey orders even when they might harm another person.

Question 32

AO3 - strength of MILGRAM'S BASELINE STUDY | replication - jeu de la mort

Answer 32

One strength is that Milgram's findings were replicated in a French documentary that was made about reality TV. This documentary focused on a game show made especially for the programme. The participants in the 'game' believed there were contestants in a pilot episode for a new show called Le Jeu de la Mort (The Game of Death). They were paid to give (fake) electric shocks (ordered by the presenter) to other participants (who were actually actors) in front of a studio audience. 80% of the participants delivered the maximum shock of 460 volts to an apparently unconscious man. Their behaviour was almost identical to that of Milgram's participants - nervous laughter, nail-biting and other signs of anxiety. This supports Milgram's original findings about obedience to authority and demonstrates that the findings were not just due to special circumstances.

Question 32

AO3 - limitaton of MILGRAM'S BASELINE STUDY | low internal validty - orne & holland, perry (tapes)

Answer 32

One limitation is that Milgram's procedure may not have been testing what he intended to test. Milgram reported that 75% of his participants said they believed the shocks were genuine. However, Orne and Holland argued that participants behaved as they did because they didn't really believe in the set up, so they were 'play-acting'. Perry's research confirms this. She listened to tapes of Milgram's participants and reported that only about half of them believed the shocks were real. Two-thirds of these participants were disobedient. This suggests that participants may have been responding to demand characteristics, trying to fulfil the aims of the study.

Question 33

AO3 - strength of MILGRAM'S BASELINE STUDY | COUNTERPOINT - research support (Sheridan & King, puppies)

Answer 33

There is evidence confirming Milgram's findings are valid. Sheridan and King conducted a study using a procedure like Milgram's. Participants (all students) gave real shocks to a puppy in response to orders from an experimenter. Despite the real distress of the animal, 54% of the men and 100% of the women gave what they thought was a fatal shock. This suggests that the effects in Milgram's study were genuine because people behaved obediently even when the shocks were real.

Question 34

AO3 - limitaton of MILGRAM'S BASELINE STUDY | alternative explanations - social identity theory (Haslam, prods)

Answer 34

Another limitation is that Milgram's conclusions about blind obedience may not be justified. Haslam et al. showed that Milgram's participants obeyed when the Experimenter delivered the first three verbal prods. However, every participant who was given the fourth prod ('You have no other choice, you must go on) without exception disobeyed. According to social identity theory (SIT), participants in Milgram's study only obeyed when they identified with the scientific aims of the research ('The experiment requires that you continue). When they were ordered to blindly obey an authority figure, they refused. This shows that SIT may provide a more valid interpretation of Milgram's findings, especially as Milgram himself suggested that identifying with the science' is a reason for obedience.

Question 35

# SITUATIONAL VARIATIONS AFFECTING OBEDIENCE - MILGRAM 1 .1. TOUCH PROXIMITY VARIATION the Teacher had to force the Learner's hand onto an electroshock plate if he refused to place it there himself after giving a wrong answer. Obedience dropped further to

Answer 35

30%.

Question 35

# SITUATIONAL VARIATIONS AFFECTING OBEDIENCE - MILGRAM 1 . PROXIMITY In Milgram's baseline study, the Teacher could hear the Learner but not see him. In the proximity variation, Teacher and Learner were in the same room. The obedience rate dropped from the original 65% to

Answer 35

40%

Question 36

# SITUATIONAL VARIATIONS AFFECTING OBEDIENCE - MILGRAM 1 . 2 REMOTE INSTRUCTION VARIATION the Experimenter left the room and gave instructions to the Teacher by telephone. Obedience reduced to

Answer 36

20.5% | The participants also frequently pretended to give shocks.

Question 36

# SITUATIONAL VARIATIONS AFFECTING OBEDIENCE - MILGRAM 2 . LOCATION Milgram conducted a variation in a run-down office block rather than in the prestigious Yale University setting of the baseline study. In this location, obedience fell to

Answer 36

47.5%.

Question 37

# SITUATIONAL VARIATIONS AFFECTING OBEDIENCE - MILGRAM PROXIMITY EXPLANAION Decreased proximity allows people to

Answer 37

psychologically distance themselves from the consequences of their actions - when the Teacher and Learner were physically separated (as in the baseline study), the Teacher was less aware of the harm they were causing to another person, so they were more obedient.

Question 38

# SITUATIONAL VARIATIONS AFFECTING OBEDIENCE - MILGRAM LOCATION EXPLANATION | obedience was still high because

Answer 38

The prestigious university environment gave Milgram's study legitimacy and authority. Participants were more obedient in this location because they perceived that the Experimenter shared this legitimacy, and that obedience was expected. However, obedience was still quite high in the office block because the participants perceived the 'scientific' nature of the procedure.

Question 39

# SITUATIONAL VARIATIONS AFFECTING OBEDIENCE - MILGRAM 3 . UNIFORM In the baseline study, the Experimenter wore a grey lab coat as a symbol of his authority (a kind of uniform). In one variation, the Experimenter was called away because of an inconvenient telephone call at the start of the procedure. The role of the Experimenter was taken over by an 'ordinary member of the public'. The obedience rate dropped to

Answer 39

20%, the lowest of these variations.

Question 40

# SITUATIONAL VARIATIONS AFFECTING OBEDIENCE - MILGRAM UNIFORM EXPLANATION

Answer 40

Uniforms 'encourage obedience because they are widely recognised symbols of authority. We accept that someone in a uniform is entitled to expect obedience because their authority is legitimate (i.e. it is granted by society) Someone without a uniform has less right to expect our obedience.

Question 41

AO3 - strength of MILGRAM'S SITUATIONAL VARIATIONS | research support for uniform - Bickman

Answer 41

One strength is that other studies have demonstrated the influence of situational variables on obedience. In a field experiment in New York City, Bickman had three confederates dress in different outfits - jacket and tie, a milkman's outfit, and a security guard's uniform. The confederates individually stood in the street and asked passers-by to perform tasks such as picking up litter or handing over a coin for the parking meter. People were twice as likely to obey the assistant dressed as a security guard than the one dressed in jacket and tie. This supports the view that a situational variable, such as a uniform, does have a powerful effect on obedience.

Question 42

AO3 - strength of MILGRAM'S SITUATIONAL VARIATIONS | Cross-cultural replications supporting proximity - Meeus

Answer 42

Another strength of Milgram's research is that his findings have been replicated in other cultures. For instance, Meeus used a more realistic procedure than Milgram's to study obedience in Dutch participants. The participants were ordered to say stressful things in an interview to someone (a confederate) desperate for a job. 90% of the participants obeyed. The researchers also replicated Milgram's findings concerning proximity. When the person giving the orders was not present, obedience decreased dramatically. This suggests that Milgram's findings about proximity affecting obedience are not just limited to Americans or men but are valid across cultures and apply to women too.

Question 43

AO3 - limitaton of MILGRAM'S SITUATIONAL VARIATIONS | low internal validity for member of public - Orne & Holland (+ Milgram)

Answer 43

One limitation is that participants may have been aware the procedure was faked. Orne and Holland made this criticism of Milgram's baseline study. They point out that it is even more likely in his variations because of the extra manipulation of variables. A good example is the variation where the Experimenter is replaced by a 'member of the public. Even Milgram recognised that this situation was so contrived that some participants may well have worked out the truth. Therefore, in all of Milgram's studies it is unclear whether the findings are genuinely due to the operation of obedience or because the participants saw through the deception and just 'play-acted' (i.e. responded to demand characteristics).

Question 44

# SITUATIONAL EXPLANATIONS (1) the Agentic State Milgram's initial interest in obedience was sparked by the trial of Adolf Eichmann in 1961 for war crimes - Eichmann had been in charge of the Nazi death camps and his defence was that he was only obeying orders. | This led Milgram to propose that

Answer 44

obedience to destructive authority occurs because a person does not take responsibility. Instead, they believe they are acting for someone else - that they are an 'agent. An 'agent' is someone who acts for or in place of another.

Question 45

# SITUATIONAL EXPLANATIONS (1) An agent is not an unfeeling puppet - they experience | but they feel poweless to

Answer 45

high anxiety (moral strain) when they realise that what they are doing is wrong | but feel powerless to disobey.

Question 46

# SITUATIONAL EXPLANATIONS (1) The opposite of being in an agentic state is being in an autonomous state. A person in an autonomous state is free to | Autonomy means to be independent or free

Answer 46

behave according to their own principles and feels a sense of responsibility for their own actions.

Question 47

# SITUATIONAL EXPLANATIONS (1) The shift from autonomy to agency is called the agentic shift. Milgram suggested that this occurs when

Answer 47

a person perceives someone else as an authority figure. The authority figure has greater power because they have a higher position in a social hierarchy. In most social groups, when one person is in charge others defer to the legitimate authority of this person and shift from autonomy to agency.

Question 48

# SITUATIONAL EXPLANATIONS (1) Milgram observed that many of his participants said they wanted to stop but seemed powerless to do so. This is due to binding factors, which are

Answer 48

aspects of the situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effect of their behaviour and thus reduce the 'moral strain' they are feeling. Milgram proposed a number of strategies that the individual uses, such as shifting the responsibility to the victim or denying the damage they were doing to the victims.

Question 49

# SITUATIONAL EXPLANATIONS (1) AO3 - strength of AGENTIC STATE | research support - Milgram (questions from participants)

Answer 49

One strength is that Milgram's own studies support the role of the agentic state in obedience. Most of Milgram's participants resisted giving the shocks at some point, and often asked the Experimenter questions about the procedure. One of these was 'Who is responsible the Learner is harmed?' When the Experimenter replied 'I'm responsible, the participants often went through the procedure quickly with no further objections. This shows that once participants perceived they were no longer responsible for their own behaviour, they acted more easily as the Experimenter's agent, as Milgram suggested.

Question 50

# SITUATIONAL EXPLANATIONS (1) AO3 - limitaton of AGENTIC STATE | limited explanation - (Jacobson, nurses)

Answer 50

One limitation is that the agentic shift doesn't explain many research findings about obedience. For example, it does not explain the findings of Jacobson's study. They found that 16 out of 18 hospital nurses disobeyed orders from a doctor to administer an excessive drug dose to a patient. The doctor was an obvious authority figure. But almost all the nurses remained autonomous, as did many of Milgram's participants. This suggests that, at best, the agentic shift can only account for some situations of obedience.

Question 51

# SITUATIONAL EXPLANATIONS (2) LEGITIMACY OF AUTHORITY Most societies are structured in a hierarchical way. This means that people in certain positions hold authority over the rest of us. e.g. parents, teachers, police officers, nightclub bouncers all have authority over us at times. The authority they wield is legitimate in the sense that it is agreed by society most of us accept that authority figures have to be allowed to exercise social power over others because this allows society to function smoothly. One of the consequences of this legitimacy of authority is that

Answer 51

some people are granted the power to punish others: we agree that the police and courts have the power to punish wrongdoers. So, we are willing to give up some of our independence and to hand control of our behaviour over to people we trust to exercise their authority appropriately.

Question 52

# SITUATIONAL EXPLANATIONS (2) We learn acceptance of legitimate authority from childhood, from

Answer 52

parents initially and then teachers and adults generally.

Question 53

# SITUATIONAL EXPLANATIONS (2) DESTRUCTIVE AUTHORITY Problems arise when legitimate authority becomes destructive. History has too often shown that charismatic and powerful leaders (such as Hitler, Stalin) can use their legitimate powers for destructive purposes, ordering people to behave in ways that are cruel and dangerous. Destructive authority was obvious in Milgram's study, when

Answer 53

the Experimenter used prods to order participants to behave in ways that went against their consciences.

Question 54

# SITUATIONAL EXPLANATIONS (2) AO3 - strength of LEGITEMACY OF AUTHORITY | can explain cultural differences - Mann (australian) , Mantell (german)

Answer 54

One strength of the legitimacy explanation is that it is a useful account of cultural differences in obedience. Many studies show that countries differ in the degree to which people are obedient to authority. For example, Mann found that only 16% of Australian women went all the way up to 450 volts in a Milgram-style study. However, Mantell found a very different figure for German participants - 85%. This shows that, in some cultures, authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate and entitled to demand obedience from individuals. This reflects the ways that different societies are structured and how children are raised to perceive authority figures.

Question 55

# DISPOSITIONAL EXPLANATION THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY Adorno wanted to understand the anti-Semitism of the Holocaust. They believed that a high level of obedience was basically a psychological disorder. They believed that the causes of such a disorder lie in

Answer 55

the personality of the individual rather than in the situation it is a dispositional explanation.

Question 55

# SITUATIONAL EXPLANATIONS (2) AO3 - limitaton of LEGITEMACY OF AUTHORITY | cannot explain all disobedience - Jacobson (nurses), Milgram

Answer 55

One limitation is that legitimacy cannot explain instances of disobedience in a hierarchy where the legitimacy of authority is clear and accepted. This includes the nurses in Jacobson's study that disobeyed the doctor's orders to administer a fatal dose to a patient. Most of them were disobedient despite working in a rigidly hierarchical authority structure. Also, a significant minority of Milgram's participants disobeyed despite recognising the Experimenter's scientific authority. This suggests that some people may just be more or less obedient than others. It is possible that innate tendencies to obey/ disobey have a greater influence on behaviour than legitimacy of authority figures.

Question 56

# DISPOSITIONAL EXPLANATION Adorno et al. argued that people with an Authoritarian Personality (AP) show an extreme

Answer 56

respect for (and submissiveness to) authority.

Question 57

# DISPOSITIONAL EXPLANATION Such people view society as 'weaker than it once was', so believe we need strong and powerful leaders to enforce traditional values such as love of country and family. Both of these characteristics make people with an Authoritarian Personality more likely to

Answer 57

obey orders from a source of authority.

Question 58

# DISPOSITIONAL EXPLANATION People with Authoritarian Personalities also show contempt for

Answer 58

those of inferior social status.

Question 59

# DISPOSITIONAL EXPLANATION Everything is either right or wrong and they are very uncomfortable with uncertainty. Therefore, people who are 'other' (e.g. belong to a different ethnic group) are responsible for the ills of society - these people are a convenient target for authoritarians who are

Answer 59

likely to obey orders from authority figures even when such orders are destructive.

Question 60

# DISPOSITIONAL EXPLANATION ORIGINS OF THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY Adorno et al. believed the Authoritarian Personality type forms in childhood, mostly as a result of harsh parenting. This parenting style typically features

Answer 60

extremely strict discipline, an expectation of absolute loyalty, impossibly high standards and severe criticism of perceived failings: parents give conditional love - that is, their love and affection for their child depends entirely on how he or she behaves (I will love you if...).

Question 61

# DISPOSITIONAL EXPLANATION Adorno et al. argued that these childhood experiences create resentment and hostility in a child, but the child cannot express these feelings directly against their parents because they fear punishment. Their fears are displaced onto ...

Answer 61

others who they perceive to be weaker, in a process known as scapegoating. This explains the hatred towards people considered to be socially inferior or who belong to other social groups, a central feature of obedience to a higher authority. This is a psychodynamic explanation.

Question 62

# DISPOSITIONAL EXPLANATION ADORNO ET AL.'S RESEARCH PROCEDURE Adorno et al. studied more than 2000 middle-class, white Americans and their unconscious attitudes towards other ethnic groups. | Describe the F scale (exmple of item on it)

Answer 62

The researchers developed several measurement scales, including the potential-for-fascism scale (F-scale). This scale is still used to measure Authoritarian Personality. Two examples of items from the F-scale are: 'Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues for children to learn', and 'There is hardly anything lower than a person who does not feel great love, gratitude, and respect for his parents'.

Question 63

# DISPOSITIONAL EXPLANATION ADORNO's research FINDINGS

Answer 63

People with authoritarian leanings (those who scored high on the F-scale and other measures) identified with 'strong people' and were generally contemptuous of the 'weak'. They were very conscious of status and showed extreme respect, deference, and servility to those of higher status - these traits are the basis of obedience. Adorno et al. also found that authoritarian people had a certain cognitive style in which there was no 'fuzziness' between categories of people - they had fixed and distinctive stereotypes about other groups. | strong positive correlation between authoritarianism & prejudice.

Question 64

# DISPOSITIONAL EXPLANATION AO3 - strength of THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY | research support - Milgram & Elms (interviews)

Answer 64

One strength is evidence from Milgram supporting the Authoritarian Personality. Elms and Milgram interviewed a small sample of people who had participated in the original obedience studies and been fully obedient. They all completed the F-scale (and other measures) as part of the interview. These 20 obedient participants scored significantly higher on the overall F-scale than a comparison group of 20 disobedient participants. The two groups were clearly quite different in terms of authoritarianism. This finding supports Adorno et al.'s view that obedient people may well show similar characteristics to people who have an Authoritarian Personality.

Question 65

# DISPOSITIONAL EXPLANATION AO3 - limitaton of THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY | limited explanations (Nazi germany) - SIT better explanation

Answer 65

One limitation is that authoritarianism cannot explain obedient behaviour in the majority of a country's population. For example, in pre- war Germany, millions of individuals displayed obedient and anti-Semitic behaviour. This was despite the fact that they must have differed in their personalities in all sorts of ways. It seems extremely unlikely that they could all possess an Authoritarian Personality. An alternative view is that the majority of the German people identified with the anti-Semitic Nazi state, and scapegoated the 'outgroup' of Jews, a social identity theory approach. Therefore, Adorno's theory is limited because an alternative explanation is much more realistic.

Question 66

AO3 - limitaton of THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY | F scale politically biased - Jahoda & Christie

Answer 66

Another limitation is that the F-scale only measures the tendency towards an extreme form of right-wing ideology. Christie and Jahoda argued that the F-scale is a politically biased interpretation of Authoritarian Personality. They point out the reality of left-wing authoritarianism in the shape of Russian Bolshevism or Chinese Maoism. In fact, extreme right-wing and left-wing ideologies have a lot in common. For example, they both emphasise the importance of complete obedience to politcal authority. This means Adorno's theory is not a comprehensice dispositional explanation that accounts for obedience to authority across the whole political spectrum.

Question 67

# RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL INFLUENCE (1) SOCIAL SUPPORT IN RESISTING CONFORMITY The pressure to conform can be resisted if there are other people present who are not conforming. The fact that someone else is not following the majority is SOCIAL SUPPORT - it enables | dissent gives rise to

Answer 67

the naive participant to be free to follow their own conscience. The confederate acts as a 'model' of independent behaviour. Their dissent gives rise to more dissent because it shows that the majority is no longer unanimous.

Question 68

# RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL INFLUENCE (1) SOCIAL SUPPORT IN RESISTING OBEDIENCE The pressure to obey can be resisted if there is another person who is seen to disobey. In one of Milgram's variations, the rate of obedience dropped from 65%

Answer 68

to 10% when the genuine participant was joined by a disobedient confederate. The participant may not follow the disobedient person's behaviour, but the point is the other person's disobedience acts as a 'model' of dissent for the participant to copy and this frees him to act from his own conscience. The disobedient model challenges the legitimacy of the authority figure, making it easier for others to disobey.

Question 69

# RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL INFLUENCE (1) AO3 - strength of SOCIAL SUPPORT | research support - Albrecth (pregnant teens resist smoking)

Answer 69

One strength is research evidence for the positive effects of social support. For example, Albrecht et al. evaluated Teen Fresh Start USA, an eight-week programme to help pregnant adolescents aged 14-19 resist peer pressure to smoke. Social support was provided by a slightly older mentor or 'buddy'. At the end of the programme adolescents who had a 'buddy' were significantly less likely to smoke than a control group of participants who did not have a 'buddy'. This shows that social support can help young people resist social influence as part of an intervention in the real world.

Question 70

# RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL INFLUENCE (1) AO3 - strength of SOCIAL SUPPORT | research support - Allen and Levine (asch replication - dissenter)

Answer 70

Another strength is research evidence to support the role of dissenting peers in resisting conformity. Allen and Levine found that conformity decreased when there was one dissenter in an Asch-type study. This also occurred when dissenter wore thick glasses and said had difficulty reading, suggesting he was in no position to judge line length. This means that another person not conforming removes the pressure of you not conforming, in line with the social support theory. Therefore, it has high external validity.

Question 71

# RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL INFLUENCE (2) LOCUS OF CONTROL Rotter proposed locus of control (LOC) as a concept concerned with internal control versus external control. | difference between internal and external LOC

Answer 71

· Some people have an internal LOC - they believe that the things that happen to them are largely controlled by themselves. · Some people have an external LOC - they tend to believe the things that happen are outside their control.

Question 72

# RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL INFLUENCE (2) THE LOC CONTINUUM People are not just either internal or external. LOC is a scale, and individuals vary in their position on it.

Answer 72

So, high internal LOC is at one end of the continuum and high external at the other. Low internal and low external lie in- between.

Question 73

# RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL INFLUENCE (2) RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL INFLUENCE People with a high internal LOC are more able to

Answer 73

resist pressures to conform or obey. If a person takes personal responsibility for their actions and experiences, they tend to base their decisions on their own beliefs rather than depending on the opinions of others.

Question 74

# RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL INFLUENCE (2) Another explanation is that people with a high internal LOC tend to be more self-confident, more achievement-oriented and have higher intelligence. These traits lead to greater

Answer 74

resistance to social influence. These are also characteristics of leaders, who have much less need for social approval than followers.

Question 75

# RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL INFLUENCE (2) AO3 - limitation of LOCUS OF CONTROL | contradictory research - Twenge (data over 40 year period)

Answer 75

One limitation is evidence that challenges the link between LOC and resistance. For example, Twenge et al. analysed data from American locus of control studies conducted over a 40-year period. The data showed that, over this time span, people became more resistant to obedience but also more external. This is a surprising outcome. If resistance is linked to an internal locus of control, we would expect people to have become more internal. This suggests that locus of control is not a valid explanation of how people resist social influence.

Question 75

# RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL INFLUENCE (2) AO3 - strength of LOCUS OF CONTROL | research support - Holland (repeated Milgram's study % measured LOC)

Answer 75

One strength is research evidence to support the link between LOC and resistance to obedience. Holland repeated Milgram's baseline study and measured whether participants were internals or externals. He found that 37% of internals did not continue to the highest shock level (they showed some resistance), whereas only 23% of externals did not continue. In other words, internals showed greater resistance to authority in a Milgram-type situation. This shows that resistance is at least partly related to LOC, which increases the validity of LOC as an explanation of disobedience.

Question 76

Minority influence is most likely to lead to

Answer 76

internalisation - both public behaviour and private beliefs are changed by the process.

Question 77

MINORITY INFLUENCE refers to | how is it differentfrom conformity

Answer 77

situations where one person or a small group of people (a minority) influences the beliefs and behaviour of other people. This is distinct from conformity where the majority is doing the influencing. In both cases the people being influenced may be just one person, or a small group or a large group of people.

Question 78

how did MOSCOVICI demonstrate the effect of minority influence? | procedure

Answer 78

where a group of 6 people was asked to view a set of 36 blue-coloured slides that varied in shades and asked to state whether it was blue or green. In each group there were 2 confederates who consistently said the slides were green.

Question 79

MOSCOVICI findings | both consistent and inconsistend minority conditions

Answer 79

The true participants agreed with the minority and gave a wrong answer 8.42% of the time. A second group of participants were exposed to an inconsistent minority said green 24 times and blue 12 times. In this case, the conformity to the minority fell to 1.25%.

Question 80

# FACTORS AFFECTING MINORITY INFLUENCE 2 . COMMITMENT The minority must demonstrate commitment to their cause or views. Sometimes minorities engage in quite extreme activities to draw attention to their views. It is important that these extreme activities present some risk to the minority because | augmentation principle

Answer 80

this shows greater commitment. Majority group members then pay even more attention. This is called the augmentation principle.

Question 81

# FACTORS AFFECTING MINORITY INFLUENCE 1 . CONSISTENCY The minority must be consistent in their views. Over time, this consistency increases the amount of interest from other people. Consistency can take the form of | DIACHRONIC and SYNCHRONIC consistency

Answer 81

agreement between people in the minority group (synchronic consistency - they're all saying the same thing), and/or consistency over time (diachronic consistency - they've been saying the same thing for some time now). A consistent minority makes other people start to rethink their own views.

Question 82

# FACTORS AFFECTING MINORITY INFLUENCE 3 . FLEXIBILITY Nemeth argued that consistency is not the only important factor in minority influence because it can be off-putting. Someone who is extremely consistent, who simply repeats the same old arguments and behaviours again and again may be seen as rigid, unbending, and dogmatic. This approach on its own is unlikely to gain many converts to the minority position. | Instead, members of the minority need to be

Answer 82

prepared to adapt their point of view and accept reasonable and valid counterarguments. The key is to strike a balance between consistency and flexibility.

Question 83

EXPLAINING THE PROCESS OF CHANGE All of the three factors make people think about the minority's view or cause. Hearing something you already agree with doesn't usually make you stop and think. But if you hear something new, then you might think more deeply about it, especially if the source of this other view is consistent, committed, and flexible. It is this deeper processing which is important in the process of conversion to a different, minority viewpoint. Over time, increasing numbers of people

Answer 83

switch from the majority position to the minority position. They have become 'converted'. The more this happens, the faster the rate of conversion. This is called the snowball effect. Gradually the minority view has become the majority view and change has occurred.

Question 84

AO3 - strength of MINORITY INFLUENCE | research support for consistency - Wood meta analysis

Answer 84

One strength is research evidence demonstrating the importance of consistency. Moscovici et al.'s blue/green slide study showed that a consistent minority opinion had a greater effect on changing the views of other people than an inconsistent opinion. Wood et al. carried out a meta-analysis of almost 100 similar studies and found that minorities who were seen as being consistent were most influential. This suggests that presenting a consistent view is a minimum requirement for a minority trying to influence a majority.

Question 85

AO3 - strength of MINORITY INFLUENCE | research support for the role of deeper processing - Martin (agreements)

Answer 85

Another strength is evidence showing that a change in the majority's position does involve deeper processing of the minority's ideas. Martin et al. presented a message supporting a particular viewpoint and measured participants agreement. One group of participants then heard a minority group agree with the initial view while another group heard a majority group agree with it. Participants were then exposed to a conflicting view and attitudes were measured again. People were less willing to change their opinions if they had listened to a minority group than if they had listened to a majority group. This suggests that the minority message had been more deeply processed and had a more enduring effect, supporting the central argument about how minority influence works.

Question 86

AO3 - limitation of MINORITY INFLUENCE | artificial tasks

Answer 86

One limitation of minority influence research is that the tasks involved are often just as artificial as Asch's line judgement task. This includes Moscovici et al.'s task of identifying the colour of a slide. Research is therefore far removed from how minorities attempt to change the behaviour of majorities in real life. In cases such as jury decision-making and political campaigning, the outcomes are vastly more important, sometimes even literally a matter of life or death. This means findings of minority influence studies are lacking in external validity and are limited in what they can tell us about how minority influence works in real-world social situations.

Question 87

what are the 6 steps of the creation of social change?

Answer 87

1. Drawing attention through social proof 2. Consistency 3. Deeper processing of the issue - 4. The augmentation principle 5. The snowball effect 6. Social cryptomnesia

Question 88

# USING THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT TO EXPLAIN SOCIAL CHANGE 1 . Drawing attention through social proof -

Answer 88

In the 1950s, black and white segregation applied to all parts of America. There were black neighbourhoods and, in the southern states of America, places such as certain schools and restaurants were exclusive to whites. The civil rights marches of this period drew attention to this situation, providing social proof of the problem.

Question 89

# USING THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT TO EXPLAIN SOCIAL CHANGE 2 . Consistency -

Answer 89

Civil rights activists represented a minority of the American population, but their position remained consistent. Millions of people took part in many marches over several years, always presenting the same non-aggressive messages.

Question 90

# USING THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT TO EXPLAIN SOCIAL CHANGE 3 . Deeper processing of the issue -

Answer 90

The activism meant that many people who had simply accepted the status quo began to think deeply about the unjustness of it.

Question 91

# USING THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT TO EXPLAIN SOCIAL CHANGE 4 . The augmentation principle -

Answer 91

Individuals risked their lives numerous times. For example, the freedom riders were mixed ethnic groups who boarded buses in the south, challenging racial segregation of transport. Many freedom riders were beaten. This personal risk indicates a strong belief and reinforces (or augments) their message.

Question 92

# USING THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT TO EXPLAIN SOCIAL CHANGE 5 . The snowball effect -

Answer 92

Activists (e.g. Martin Luther King) gradually got the attention of the US government. More and more people backed the minority position. In 1964 the US Civil Rights Act prohibited discrimination, marking a change from minority to majority support for civil rights.

Question 93

# USING THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT TO EXPLAIN SOCIAL CHANGE 6 . Social cryptomnesia (people have a memory that change has occurred but don't remember how it happened) -

Answer 93

Social change clearly did come about so the south is quite a different place now. But some people have no memory (crypto amnesia) of the events that led to that change.

Question 94

# SOCIAL CHANGE - LESSONS FROM CONFORMITY RESEARCH Asch highlighted the importance of dissent in one of his variations in which one confederate gave correct answers throughout the procedure. This broke the power of the majority, encouraging others to do likewise. Such dissent has the potential to ultimately lead to social change. A different approach is one used by environmental and health campaigns

Answer 94

which exploit conformity processes by appealing to normative social influence. They do this by providing information about what other people are doing. Examples include reducing litter by printing normative messages on litter bins (Bin it - others do) and preventing young people from taking up smoking (telling them that most other young people do not smoke). In other words, social change is encouraged by drawing attention to what the majority are actually doing.

Question 95

# SOCIAL CHANGE - LESSONS FROM OBEDIENCE RESEARCH Stanley Milgram's research clearly demonstrates the importance of disobedient role models. In the variation where a confederate Teacher refuses to give shocks to the Learner, the rate of obedience in the genuine participants plummeted. Zimbardo suggested

Answer 95

how obedience can be used to create social change through the process of gradual commitment. Once a small instruction is obeyed, it becomes much more difficult to resist a bigger one. People essentially 'drift' into a new kind of behaviour.

Question 96

AO3 - strength of SOCIAL CHANGE | research support - Nolan (energy-use habits)

Answer 96

One strength is that research has shown that social influence processes based on psychological research do work. Nolan et al. aimed to see if they could change people's energy-use habits. The researchers hung messages on the front doors of houses in San Diego, California every week for one month. The key message was that most residents were trying to reduce their energy usage. As a control, some residents had a different message that just asked them to save energy but made no reference to other people's behaviour. There were significant decreases in energy usage in the first group compared to the second. This shows that conformity (majority influence) can lead to social change through the operation of normative social influence. Therefore, it is a valid explanation.

Question 97

AO3 - strength of SOCIAL CHANGE | minority influence explains social change - Nemeth

Answer 97

Another strength is that psychologists can explain how minority influence brings about social change. Nemeth claims social change is due to the type of thinking that minorities inspire. When people consider minority arguments, they engage in divergent thinking. This type of thinking is broad rather than narrow, in which the thinker actively searches for information and weighs up more options. Nemeth argues this leads to better decisions and more creative solutions to social issues. This shows why dissenting minorities are valuable - they stimulate new ideas and open minds in a way that majorities cannot.

Question 98

AO3 - limitation of SOCIAL CHANGE | role of deeper processing - Mackie (majority creates it not minority)

Answer 98

One limitation is that deeper processing may not play role in how minorities bring about social change. Some people are supposedly converted because they think more deeply about the minority's views. Mackie disagrees and presents evidence that it is majority influence that may create deeper processing if you do not share their views. This is because we like to believe that other people share our views and think in the same ways as us. When we find that a majority believes something different, then we are forced to think long and hard about their arguments and reasoning. This means that a central element of minority influence has been challenged, casting doubt on its validity as an explanation of social change.