Social Influence Flashcards
Outline the process of Social Change through Minority Influence
Drawing attention - Draw attention to the issue using social proof
Cognitive Conflict - The majority begin to think more deeply about the issue
Consistency - Must be consistent
Augmentation principle - Minority appears to be willing to suffer for their beliefs
Snowball Effect - Support grown exponentially
Research support for Minority Influence
Blue slides study
Moscovici et al (1969)
- Groups of 6 (4 real, 2 confederates) were shown 36 slides with various shades of blue
- They had to decide if it was blue or green
Results
Percentage of wrong responses from participants:
Consistent minority: Confederates said
green on every trial - 8.42%
Inconsistent minority: Confederates said green in 2/3 of the trials - 1.25%
Control - 0.25%
Name the elements of the behavioural style for Minority Influence
Commitment
Consistency
Flexibility
Research support for the Authoritarian Personality
Shock Study
Elms and Milgram (1966)
- Made the participants from the study take the F scale questionnaire
- Correlation between high score and obedience
Outline research support for the Authoritarian Personality
Original study
Adorno et al (1950)
- 2000 middle class Americans given the ‘F scale’ questionnaire
- F for Facist
- Questions include “Rules are there for people to follow, not change”
Results
- The higher the score the more authoritarian and right-wing they are
Counter
- Right-wing bias
- Questionnaire wasn’t counterbalanced
Define the Authoritarian Personality
- A dispositional explanation for obedience
- Highly obedient towards people of perceived higher status
- Hostile towards people of pecieved lower status
- Rigid and harsh parenting
- Black and white thinking
- Conformist, conventional and dogmatic
Variables Affecting Obedience
Variations of Milgram’s study
- Original - 65%
- Proximity, teacher and learner in the same room - 40%
- Location, Run down office - 48%
- Uniform, experimenter wears plain clothes - 20%
Outline research on Obedience
Electric Shock Study
Milgram (1963)
- 40 participants
- Start 15V, End 450V, going up in 15V increments
- If the participant wanted to stop, the experimenter would try to convince them to stay
Results
- 65% went to 450V
- 100% went to at least 300V
- Only 5 participants stopped at 300V
Counter
- Perry (2012) interviewed the participants and found that many of them doubted the experiments was real
- Lacks ecological validity
Conformity to Social Roles
Prison Study
Zimbardo (Haney) et al (1973)
- 24 students, 12 guards 12 prisoners
- Prisoners were fake arrested, given numbers and stripped down
- Guards were given uniforms, clubs, whistles and mirrored sunglasses
Results
- Guards became severely abusive
- Originally rebellious prisoners began to conform even when they didn’t know they were being watched
- Experiment was stopped after only 6 day (supposed to be 2 weeks)
Counter
- Some argue it was unethical even though it followed the guidelines
- Possible demand characteristics
- Possible investigator effects because Zimbardo was the Prison Superintendent
- Some guards were kind, behaviour varied
Outline research support for Informational Social Influence
Maths Study
Lucas et al (2006)
- Similar to Asch (1956) but with maths questions
- The influence of task difficulty depended of the self-efficacy of the participant
- Participants with high self-efficacy conformed less even when the task was more difficult
Variables in Conformity
Variations of Asch’s original study
Group Size
-Increase in conformity rate but effect is limited
- A minimum of three confederates are needed
Unanimity of the Majority
- When one confederate gives the correct answer, conformity rates goes from 33% to 5.5%
- Increases participants confidence
Task Difficulty
- Increase in conformity rate
- Informational SI
Outline research support for Normative SI
Line Study
Asch (1956)
- 123 male undergraduates
- Between 6-8 confederates in each group
- 12/18 were critical trials
Results
- Mean conformity rate was 37%
- 75% confirmed at least once
- 5% confirmed in all 12 critical trials
Counter
- Low ecological validity
- Lacks population validity
- Cultural differences between collectivist and individualist countries
Name the explanations for conformity
Normative social influence
Informational social influence
Define Identification
- Short term while in presence of the group
- Change of views publicly
- Possible change of views privately but only as long as you are a member of the group
Define Internalisation
- Long term
- Change of views publicly
- Change of views privately because of the belief they are correct
