Social Influence

Question 1

Obedience AO1
- define
- Milgrams Study

Answer 1

Definition - when a person responds to a direct order given by a perceived authority figure. The person receiving the order may respond in a way that they would not have done without the order .
Milgram:
Aim- to investigate whether an individual will obey orders from an authority figure even if it led to negative consequences
Sample- 40 American males ages 20-50
Method- lab experiment in Yale university
Procedure- a ppt was introduced to another ppt ( actually a confederate) and drew lots ( rigged) so that the ppt was allocated the role of teacher and the confederate allocated role of learner.
The teacher’s role was to deliver electric shocks to the learner when they get an incorrect answer. The volts ranged from 15V - 450V .
The experimenter gave prompts when ppt refused to carry on:
“Please continue” or “this study requires that you continue”
Found- 100% went to 300V, 12.5% stopped at 300V and 65% went to 450V

Question 2

AO1
Situational Variables Affecting Obedience

Answer 2

1. Proximity
   1- ppt (teacher) and confederate (learned) put in same room. Obedience decreased to 40%. This is because the ppt could see the negative effects of their actions.
   2- the ppt had to place the confederates hand on the shock plate. Obedience dropped to 30%.
   3- the experimenter left the room and gave orders over the phone. Obedience dropped to 20.5%. The closer the AF, the more obedient.
2. Location
   - Milgram changed location of study from Yale university to a seedy office in a run down area. Obedience dropped to 48%. This is due to less perceived legitimate authority
3. Uniform
   - experiment left the room to take a call, an ordinary person wearing everyday clothes took over and gave orders. Obedience dropped to 20%.
   - uniform acts as a visual cue for obedience and there was less perceived legitimate authority.

Question 3

A03
RTS situational variables affecting Obedience by Bickman

Answer 3

P- RTS mp+bp was conducted by Bickman in New York.
E- he gave 3 confederates different uniforms to wear which included a milkman, security guard and businessman. The confederates had to give orders to pedestrians passing by to pick up litter off the street.
E- he found that ppts were twice as likely to obey the security guard than the businessman.
L- therefore, supporting the power of uniform as ppts were more likely to obey and it also demonstrates how uniform affects obedience in a real life situation.

Question 4

AO3 - situational variables affecting obedience
☹️- Gender Bias

Answer 4

P- Milgrams research into mp+bp can be criticised for gender bias
E- this is because he only used males in his sample
E- therefore, it is difficult to generalise the findings to females, regardless of situational variables affecting obedience, as they may be more likely to obey due to their stereotypical role of being more submissive than males. For example, Sheridan and King found that when ordered to electric shock puppies, females obeyed 100% of the time whereas males only obeyed 54% of the time.
L- therefore, this weakens the external validity of Milgrams research into mp+bp as obedience as variables may affect obedience in some people more than others

Question 5

AO3 - situational variables affecting obedience
🙁 - alternative explanation

Answer 5

P- An alternative explanation to obedience is the dispositional explanation.
E- this suggests that obedience is due to internal factors such as our personality rather than external factors such as uniform and location.
E- for example, the authoritarian personal suggests obedience is caused by strict parenting during childhood
L- therefore this weakens Milgrams research into mp+bp because it is not the sole explanation.

Question 6

AO1
Explanations of obedience

Answer 6

1. Legitimacy of authority
   - obedient individuals accept the power and status of an authority figure eg, police, teachers and parents and see them as being in charge. The authority they have is legitimate as it is agreed by society. We accept their credentials and believe they know what they’re doing. It is ingrained in us from an early age to obey the orders even if they seem unjust or unethical. Factors affecting LOA are uniform and location, eg when Milgram changed his study to a seedy office rather than Yale obedience dropped to 48% as there was less perceived legitimate authority.
2. Agentic state
   This is when a person moves from a state of being responsible for their own actions to a state of not being responsible for their own actions as they belive they are acting on behalf of an authority figure. This is known as the agentic shift. This is when someone is perceived as an authority figure (higher position in social hierarchy). When a person is in the agentic state they no longer feel any guilt or responsibility for their actions as they believe they are carrying out the wishes of a more knowledgeable authority figure. When in agentic state the person is also more likely to obey.

Question 7

AO3 - explanations of obedience
😁 Hofling

Answer 7

P- RTS mp+bp was conducted by Hofling.
E- He conducted a study in which an unknown doctor gave orders over the phone to nurses on a ward to give a dangerous dose of medication to their patients.
E- He found that 21 out of the 22 nurses agreed to give the dangerous dose.
L- Therefore, this supports LOA as mp+bp because the doctor had more credentials and authority so the nurses obeyed the orders, moreover, this also supports AS because the nurses may have no longer felt responsible for their actions as they believe they were acting on behalf of the doctor (authority figure).

Question 8

AO3 - explanations of obedience
☹️ Mandel

Answer 8

P- Research to contradict AS as an mp+bp comes from Mandel.
E- Mandel describes a scenario in which German Nazi soldiers were given orders to shoot civilians in a small town in Poland.
E- he found that the soldiers obeyed this order, however, beforehand they were given the option to choose a different duty.
L- therefore this contradict AS mp +bp because the soldiers chose to shoot the civilians so they cannot place the responsibility on the authority figure.

Question 9

AO3 explanation of obedience
😁 Milgram

Answer 9

P- RTS the AS mp+bp was conducted by Milgram
E- in Milgrams original study, a ppt asked the experimenter “who is responsible if the learner is harmed?”. The experimenter responded “I am” in which the ppt continued to deliver the electric shocks.
L- therefore this support the AS mp+bp because the ppt no longer felt responsible for their actions so they continued to obey the orders of the authority figure (experimenter).

Question 10

AO1 - Dispositional explanation of obedience

Answer 10

Adorno proposed the dispositional explanation of obedience. It is an internal explanation that focus’s on certain personality traits that are associated with higher levels of obedience.
The authoritarian personality is caused by strict parenting during childhood, eg, extreme punishments, impossibly high standards and expect extreme loyalty.
The authoritarian personality involves extreme respect for people of perceived authority. They are in submission to authority figures as they see them as superior. However, they show anger towards those of lower status and view them as inferior.
Adorno measured the authoritarian persons using the F-scale questionnaire on a sample of 2000 Americans. The higher the core the more levels of authoritarianism they have.

Question 11

AO3 - dispositional explanation of obedience
😁 Milgram and Elms

Answer 11

P- RTS mp +Bp was conducted by Milgram and Elms.
E- they interviewed Milgrams original ppts using the F-scale questionnaire to measure levels of authoritarianism.
E- they found that ppts who were obedient (65% that went to 450V) scored higher on the questionnaire showing higher levels of authoritarianism than those who were defiant (12.5% that stopped at 300V)
L- therefore, this supports mp+bp as it shows that the authoritarian personality is associated with obedience.

Question 12

AO3 - dispositional explanation of obedience
☹️ social desirability bias

Answer 12

P- a criticism of Adornos research into the authoritarian personality is that there is social desirability bias as ppts may have exaggerated their fascist views to present themselves in the best possible light.
E- When the F-scale questionnaire was completed (just after WW11) ppts may have wanted to maximise their fascist views to seem more obedient.
L- Therefore, Adorno may not have been measuring what he set out to measure, mp, and so weakening the internal validity of Adornos research into the authoritarian personality.

Question 13

AO3 - dispositional explanation of obedience
☹️ Alternative explanation

Answer 13

P- an alternative explanation of mp+bp is situational factors
E- this suggests that obedience is caused by external factors such as uniform and location rather than internal factors like the authoritarian perosnality where people have extreme respect for authority due to strict parenting during childhood
L- therefore, this limits the mp+bp as it is not the sole explanation.

Question 14

AO1 Social Support

Answer 14

When a person receives social support they are able to resist pressures to conform or obey. This is because the ally gives them confidence and support to resist the pressures to conform or obey and remain independent in their behaviour.
Resisting conformity- the person must identify with the ally and see them as a role model of independent behaviour. Furthermore, having support for their point of view will help the person no longer fear ridicule so they can avoid NSI.
Resist obedience- the ally acts as a model of dissent for the person to copy which frees them to resist obedience and act from their own conscience. Furthermore, in certain situations where there is a group of allies this leads to diffusion of responsibility which means the person will feel less responsible as there are more people acting the same way so consequence is shared.

Question 15

AO3 - social support as an explanation to resisting social influence
😁 Albrecht

Answer 15

P- RTS mp+bp was conducted by Albrecht.
E- he analysed an 8 week programme for pregnant adolescents to help them resist the pressures of smoking. One group was provided with social support of a slightly older “buddy”.
E- he found that the group with the buddy were more likely to resist the pressures of smoking than the group without the buddy.
L- therefore l, this supports Mp+bp because the buddy acted as an ally which gave ppts confidence to resist pressures of smoking which is what the explanation suggests.
However, there are other factors that affect the likelihood of resisting social influence through social support. For example, the credibility of the ally. If the ally is not credible the person is less likely to identify with the ally and resist social influence with them. Therefore, this suggests SS is a more complex explanation and so weakens the explanation.

Question 16

AO3 - Social support
😁 Milgram

Answer 16

P- RTS mp+bp was conducted by Milgram
E- in one variation of his study, the ppt was partnered with two confederates to play the role of teacher. Part way through the study the two confederates refused to continue and withdrew from the study
E - he found that obedience levels of those who went to 450V dropped from 65% to 10%
L- therefore this supports mp+bp because when the ppts were provided with social support they were more likely to resist obedience.

Question 17

AO1 locus of control as an explanation of resisting social influence

Answer 17

Locus of control is a personality trait that refers to a persons perception of personal control over their behaviour.

Internal LOC- person believes they are in control of what is happening to them through personal decisions and effort. They trust their own judgement more than others. More likely to remain independent in their behaviour and therefore more likely to resist social influence.

External LOC- do not control what happens to them instead it’s down to luck or fate. They trust the judgement of authority figures more than their own. Less likely to be independent in their behaviour and therefore less likely to resist social influence.

Question 18

AO1 minority influence

Answer 18

Minority influence is when the majority group changes their beliefs and behaviours due to the minority influencing their decisions. The minority must show commitment, consistency and flexibility.

1. Consistency - the minority must repeat the same belief to the majority both over time (diachronic consistency) and between all members of the minority (synchronic consistency).
2. Commitment- minority must show dedication and make personal sacrifices eg, giving up their time. They may engage in extremist activities which present risk which will draw the majorities attention and make them reconsider the minorities idea (augmentation principle)
3. Flexibility- the minority must not be too rigid or dogmatic. They must accept reasonable counter arguments and make compromises.

Question 19

AO3 RTS minority influence
😁😁 Moscovici

Answer 19

P- research to support the importance of consistency in minority influence was conducted by Moscovici. He put 2 confederates (minority) in a room with 6 ppts (majority) and were asked to name the colour of a slide. In condition one the minority inconsistently called blue slides “green” which found to have little effect on the majority as they changed their answer 1% of the time, however, in the second condition the minority consistently called all the blue slides “green”, this had a greater impact on majority as they changed their answer 8% of the time. Therefore, supporting the importance of consistency in influencing the majority.

Question 20

AO3 minority influence
☹️☹️☹️ Moscovici lacks mundane realism

Answer 20

P- Research to support consistency in minority influence, conducted by Moscovici, can be criticised for lacking mundane realism
E- this is because the task of naming the colour of a slide is very artificial
R- therefore, it is difficult to generalise the findings, that consistency is important when influencing a majority group, to real life examples of minority influence, eg when a jury is deciding on a verdict the minority may be less influencial as the outcome can be life threatening. Therefore, research to support consistency in minority influence lacks external validity.

Question 21

AO3 RTS minority influence flexibility
😁😁 Nemeth and Brilmayer

Answer 21

P- RTS flexibility in minority influence was conducted by Nemeth and Brilmayer who created a mock jury situation to come up with a verdict for the amount of compensation a person gets for a ski lift accident. They found that when the jury gave an opinion and refused to change their answer, this had no effect on the majority. However, when the minority gave their opinion and compromised with the majority’s ideas this had a greater effect on the majority. Therefore, supporting the idea that flexibility is important process in minority influence as when the minority accepted reasonable counter arguments this influenced the minority.

Question 22

AO1 - Social change

Answer 22

Social change is a change in societies laws, attitudes and behaviours. A real life example of social change is the Suffragette movement who influenced the majority to chnage laws to give women the right to vote.

When the minority have an idea they must show commitment by making personal sacrifices and showing dedication. They must be consistent by repeating the same belief to the majority both over time and between all members of minority. They must also be flexible by not being too rigid or dogmatic and accepting reasonable counter arguments.
When the minority have presented all three behaviours they can influence the majority to change their beliefs and behaviours both public and privately (internalisation).
Once a few members of the majority move towards the minority, this influences even more of the majority group to move over to the minority and this starts to gather momentum until the minority idea becomes the majority idea (snowball effect)
When the majority remember the minorities idea but not that it came from the minority, the two become separated (social crypto amnesia)
Social change has occurred in which there is a change in societies laws, behaviours and attitudes

Question 23

AO3 Social chnage
😁😁😁😁😁 suffragettes

Answer 23

There is real life evidence to support the minority influence in social influence processes in social change coming from the Suffragettes. They showed commitment by going on a hunger strike. They remained consistent by repeating the same belief that women should have the right to vote between all members of minority. They were flexible by accepting the voting age for women to be 30 when men’s was 21. The majority internalised the minorities idea and this led to social change where there was a change in societies laws to allow women’s rights to vote. Therefore, this supports the role of minority influence in the process of social change.

Question 24

AO3 social change
☹️☹️ deviant

Answer 24

Real life evidence to support role of minority influence in social change can be criticised as the minority may have been seen as deviant. This means the majority may not have wanted to change their behaviours to be in line with the minority as they don’t want to be seen as deviant themselves. This may be why the suffragettes took so long to influence the majority as they may have been viewed as deviant.