Social Influence.

Question 1

Agentic State.

Answer 1

An explanation of obedience, in which individuals carry out orders as an ‘agent’ for a figure of authority. The don’t take responsibility for their actions.

Question 2

Compliance.

Answer 2

A change in an individual’s behaviour to comply with that of a group which only exists in the presence of that group. Internal beliefs remain unchanged.

Question 3

Internalisation.

Answer 3

A complete change in an individual’s behaviour and internal beliefs to conform with a group. These changes exist outside the presence of the group.

Question 4

Identification.

Answer 4

A change in an individual’s behaviour and internal beliefs but only in the presence of the group.

Question 5

Informational social influence.

Answer 5

When an individual conforms as they believe that someone holds more knowledge than they do so is more likely to be right.

Question 6

Normative social influence.

Answer 6

When an individual conforms due to the belief that they will be ostracised or perceived negatively if they do not.

Question 7

Legitimacy of authority.

Answer 7

An explanation of obedience in when an individual obeys someone in a perceived higher position of authority or the social hierarchy.

Question 8

Locus of control.

Answer 8

An explanation of either resistance or conformity to social influence. The idea of an individual to explain events in their life, either by attributing them to an external or internal locus of control.

Question 9

Conformity.

Answer 9

Obeying the standard of normality.

Question 10

Independence.

Answer 10

doing your own thing/ your own will.

Question 11

Disobedience.

Answer 11

Not obeying instructions.

Question 12

What year was Asch’s study?

Answer 12

1951

Question 13

What type of experiment was Asch’s study?

Answer 13

Laboratory experiment with group design.

Question 14

Asch’s method:

Answer 14

In groups of 8, p/pants had to verbally answer but 7 of the p/pants were confederates. The real p/pant would answer last or second last to see if they conform to the previous incorrect answers. On 12 trials (critical trials) the confederates all gave the same wrong answer. There was a control group where the answers were given in isolation.

Question 15

Asch’s results:

Answer 15

In control trials, p/pants gave the wrong answer 0.7% of the time. In the trials p/pants conformed 37% of the time, 25% never conformed and 75% conformed at least once.

Question 16

Strengths of Asch’s study.

Answer 16

High internal validity.
Lab experiment.
Supports normative social influence.

Question 17

Weaknesses of Asch’s study.

Answer 17

Lacks ecological validity.
Lacks population validity due to sampling issues.
Ethical issues- deception.
Lacked validity- 1951.

Question 18

Factors effecting conformity:

Answer 18

Group size: 2 confederates- 14%, 3 confederates 32%.
Unanimity: One confederate agrees with the p/pant that the conformity fell to 5.5%.
Task difficulty: When Asch increased task difficulty conformity increased.

Question 19

Situational explanation.

Answer 19

The situation people are in that causes people to act as they did- depending on who they are around.

Question 20

Deutsh and Gerard 1955.

Answer 20

2 main ways to influence people.
Informational social influence.
Normative influence.

Question 21

Name and year of Zimbardo’s study.

Answer 21

1973- Standford prison study.

Question 22

What type of study was Zimbardo’s?

Answer 22

Controlled observation.

Question 23

Zimbardo’s method.

Answer 23

American students were randomly assigned roles or either prisoner or guard. They were taken and placed into a ‘prison’ that was in the Stanford psychology ward. They were given uniforms and only referred to as their designated numbers. Guards were given props, no one was allowed to leave. Guards worked in 8-hour shifts, while the others were on call. No physical violence was permitted, they were being observed.

Question 24

Zimbardo’s results.

Answer 24

Both the guards and prisoners fell into their roles almost immediately. Guards began to harass and torment the prisoners- they later enjoyed doing so. Prisoners would talk about prison life (forgetting the outside world) and snitch on each other to the guards. They believed it was real and therefore did not play up to demand characteristics.

Question 25

Strengths of Zimbardo’s study.

Answer 25

Real-life applications.
Fully debriefed.

Question 26

Weaknesses of Zimbardo’s study.

Answer 26

Lacks ecological validity- suffered demand characteristics.
Lacks population validity- American male students.
Ethical issues- consent due to deception. Psychological harm- not protected from stress, anxiety, emotional distress and embarassment.

Question 27

Social-Psychological factors meaning.

Answer 27

Factors from the environment that affect the way we act.

Question 28

Autonomous state.

Answer 28

When you act independently with your own free-will and take on the responsibility for your own actions.

Question 29

When was Milgram’s study?

Answer 29

1974

Question 30

Milgram’s method:

Answer 30

‘Learner’, ‘Teacher’ and ‘Experimenter’.
P/pants were assessed on how many electric shocks they were willing to give to the ‘learner’, ranging from 300-450V where 330V was marked as ‘lethal’. The experimenter’s role was to give a series of orders/prods when
The participant refused to administer a shock, which increased in
terms of demandingness for every time the participant refused to
administer a shock.

Question 31

Milgram’s results.

Answer 31

All mp/pants went up to 300V, and 65% went to 450V. Only 12.5% of p/pants stopped at 300V so most people were willing to give the lethal shock.

Question 32

Strengths of Milgram’s study.

Answer 32

Debriefing.
Real-life applications- nazis.
High internal validity
Highly replicable.
External validity has been established by supporting studies.

Question 33

Weaknesses of Milgram’s study.

Answer 33

Ethical issues- informed consent
Socially sensitive topic- killing can be excused.
Lack of internal validity- trust rather than obedience.
Lack of ecological validity- not real-life situation.

Question 34

Binding factors- conformity.

Answer 34

Sequential nature of the action- the idea that disobedience causes them to admit that everything they had done to that point was wrong.
Situational obligation- they have made a commitment and so they feel they must see it through to the end.
Anxiety- the idea that when you think about disobedience, you start to feel anxious, naturally, you get shy from that feeling.

Question 35

Variations in Milgram’s study.

Answer 35

Proximity
Touch proximity- The teacher made the learner touch the electroshock plate.
Remote instruction- experimenter gave instructions via telephone.
Location- run-down building rather than the university- obedience fell to 47.5%.
Uniform- originally had the experimenter wearing lab clothes but in one variation the experimenter left and was replaced by a guy wearing ‘ordinary clothes’- obedience fell to 20% (the lowest).

Question 36

What was Mandel’s 1998 study?

Answer 36

Actions of the reserve police battalion, Jozefow, Poland.

Question 36

Mandel 1998.

Answer 36

Proximity to victim- even when close to the people they had to kill they still carried out the execution.
Proximity to the authority figure- the senior officers gave the orders and then went to a dinner party, but the police officers still followed the orders.
Presence of Allies- some declined to do it and the rest knew this yet carried on.
Increasing teacher discretion- as they were not being supervised they had the chance to let some people escape but did not.

Question 37

Adorno et al.

Answer 37

Found that one particular characteristic that people
may have an authoritarian personality.

Question 38

Milgram’s varients: base-line study.

Answer 38

65%

Question 39

Milgram’s varients: proximity.

Answer 39

40%

Question 40

Milgram’s varients: touch proximity.

Answer 40

30%

Question 41

Milgram’s varients: location.

Answer 41

47.5%

Question 42

Milgram’s varients: remote instruction.

Answer 42

20.5%

Question 43

Milgram’s varients: uniform.

Answer 43

20%

Question 44

What did Mandel come up with?

Answer 44

Authoritarian personality.

Question 45

What did Mandel use to criticise Milgram?

Answer 45

Polish reserve police battalion 101.