Social influence Flashcards
What is social influence?
- Attitudes/behaviours influenced by real/implied presence of others
- Change of attitudes/beliefs/opinions/values and behaviour
What are 7 key functions of social norms?
- reduce uncertainty about how to behave
- coordinate individual behaviour
- help with distribution of outcomes
- potentially dynamic
- evaluative - violating norms leads to negative responses
- descriptive and injunctive
- communicated implicitly, explicitly and through inference
What did Sherif (1936) study relating to socially facilitated influence?
Autokinetic effect:
- optical illusion
- pitch black room -> point of light 5m away
- light point appears to move
- 1/2 took part individually then came together in groups, other half took part as groups then individually and asked to give an oral estimate of how much they thought the light had moved
- The subjects conformed to group norms, often without even realizing it. Group norms were established by finding an intermediate position, with the extreme positions moving toward the middle.
What are 3 types of social influence?
- compliance
- conformity
- obedience
What is compliance?
- public change in behaviour
- no private change in attitudes
- research has focussed on factors affecting compliance
What is the foot-in-the-door compliance technique?
Small request -> big request
What did Freedman and Fraser (1966) research relating to foot-in-the-door?
- Can our researchers come to your home to do a 2 hour survey of household product use? - just over 20% compliance
- When same question asked after ppts had agreed to take part in a short telephone survey, just over 50% complied
Why does foot-in-the-door work as a compliance technique?
We infer what we are from what we do: if we are helpful on first occasion, we must be a helpful person, and so we should be helpful on second occasion
What is the door-in-the-face compliance technique?
Big request first -> unlikely to be successful
Followed with more reasonable request -> greater likelihood of compliance than if 2nd request was presented in isolation
What did Cialdini et al. (1975) study in relation to the door-in-the-face compliance technique?
‘will you volunteer at a young offenders’ institute for 2hrs p/w for the next 2yrs?’ -> minimal compliance
‘will you take these young offenders to the zoo?’
- after 1st request, 50% compliance
- without 1st request, 17% compliance
2nd request perceived as a concession on the part of the requester
What is conformity?
- influence in groups
- more indirect form of influence
- behaviour guided by group norms
- affects attitudes as well as behaviour
- informational vs normative influence
What is normative influence? (conformity)
Desire to be liked
What is informational influence? (conformity)
Desire to be right - in Sherif’s autokinesis study, people might assume that other group members have a more accurate judgement than they do
What problem did Asch (1952) address with Sherif’s (1936) study?
No clear right answer
- people might conform to group norms in ambiguous situations but what about when there is an obvious and objective criteria on which to base one’s judgement?
Solution: Line-length judgement experiment
What was Asch’s 1952 line experiment?
Which of the lines is the same length as the target line?
- ppts in group of 7-9 (rest were confederates who had been instructed to give wrong answer)
- 50% of ppts conformed to majority and gave wrong answer in at least 1 trial
- without group (control) less than 1% gave wrong answer.
Reasons for conformity:
- confusion
- group pressure
- fear of disapproval
- feelings of anxiety/loneliness
- group may have been right
- didn’t want to stand out
Most common response over all trials was resistance
Who studied minority influence?
Moscovici (1976)
What is minority influence?
Minorities require consistency to overcome majority rejection
- when minorities are persistent, they can succeed at influencing majority
What did Moscovici et al. (1969) study in relation to minority influence?
6 ppts presented with a series of slides unambiguously blue and differed only in light intensity - had to say colour of slide
- in one condition, 2 confederates answered green on every trial
- incorrect guesses rose from 0.25% to 8.42%
What is conversion theory (Moscovici, 1980)?
Group discussion -> minority influence -> validation -> conversion (indirect, delayed, durable)
Group discussion -> majority influence -> comparison -> compliance (direct, immediate, temporary)
How does Nemeth (1974) show that consistency and confidence aid minority influence?
Personal injury claim given to 5 subjects (1 confederate)
Before discussion - compensation of $12000 to $20000 deemed fair
Discussion - 40 mins to discuss the case
Conditions:
- chosen
- chosen head
- chosen side
- assigned
During discussion - confederate consistently presents 6 arguments for compensation of only $3000
Findings: only when confederate chose the head seat were they influential
What is one influential obedience study?
Milgram’s shock experiment
What did Gibson (2013) suggest could be used to shed light on what actually went on in Milgram’s experiments?
Rhetorical and discursive psychology
What did Hollander (2015) do relating to Milgram’s experiment?
Fine-grained conversation analysis of how ppts resisted experimenter
What did Gibson’s rhetorical analysis of transcripts from the Milgram studies show?
- Obedience not always enforced by an authority figure.
- Obedience not always enforced through explicit orders - many implicit demands of system as a whole that should be considered.
- Many instances of resistance and defiance by ppts that have gone unnoticed.
What did Milgram maintain about obedience?
Obedience was not related to authority personality or style, but rather the authority was seen as legitimate in the institutional setting.
This indicates that the environment plays a crucial role in how authority is perceived.
What factor may have contributed to the participants’ obedience in Milgram’s study?
The perceived expertise of the experimenter, who had conducted many trials.
This suggests that participants might have trusted the experimenter’s knowledge and instructions.
True or False: Milgram’s findings were solely based on the personality of the authority figure.
False
Milgram emphasized the legitimacy of authority in institutional contexts rather than personality traits.
Fill in the blank: The experimenter’s perceived _______ may have influenced participants’ obedience.
[expertise]
This expertise refers to the experimenter’s experience and knowledge in conducting trials.
What is a concept that parallels Milgram’s findings related to obedience?
Convergence towards norm behavior as seen in Asch’s and Sherif’s work.
This concept suggests that individuals may conform to group norms, influencing their behavior in the presence of authority.
What voltage switch did participants start with in Milgram’s study?
15v
What effect did the lowest voltage switch have on the learner in Milgram’s study?
No effect
The initial action of starting with a low voltage switch in Milgram’s study is reminiscent of which psychological technique?
Foot-in-the-door technique
What did participants in Milgram’s study experience relating to information?
Participants found themselves in a difficult position- They searched for information on how to act but had only the experimenter, who appeared calm.
What was a significant change in the variation of Milgram’s study in 1974?
Milgram used two experimenters, where one expressed concern about the study - led to disappearance of obedience
True or False: In Milgram’s original study, participants had multiple sources of information to guide their actions.
False
Participants had only the experimenter, which created a challenging situation.
Fill in the blank: In Milgram’s study, when one experimenter expressed concern, _______ disappeared.
obedience
What responsibility did the experimenter assume in Milgram’s study?
The experimenter assumed responsibility for the actions of the participants
This indicates that participants felt less accountable for their actions.
In a version of Milgram’s study where participants watched a confederate administer shocks, how many refused to take part?
Only 3 out of 40 refused to take part
This suggests a level of obedience even when not directly administering shocks.
What was the key feature of Burger’s (2009) modelled refusal condition?
A confederate starts reading word pairs and administering ‘shocks’
This setup aimed to test obedience in a more modern context.
At what voltage did the confederate refuse to continue in Burger’s study?
At 75 volts
This point marked a significant moment in the experiment, illustrating the confederate’s limits.
What did the confederate say when they refused to continue in Burger’s study?
‘I don’t think I can do this’
This statement reflects the confederate’s discomfort with the task.
In Burger’s study, what role was the participant asked to take over?
The participant was asked to take over the experiment
This shift in roles tested the participant’s willingness to continue the experiment.
How did a screening process make Burger’s (2009) experiment more ethical than Milgram’s?
Scales and specific questions concerning past mental illness/trauma followed by interview with clinical psych
How did Burger (2009) ensure the right to withdraw better than Milgram?
ppts informed 3x that they could withdraw at any point and maintain $50 payment
In what way were shocks less intense in Burger’s (2009) study compared to Milgram’s?
Sample shock only 15v rather than 45v
Study ended at 150v
How was Burger’s (2009) debrief better than Milgram’s?
Ppts informed immediately following the study that the learner was not being shocked
What was Burger’s (2009) key methodological innovation that built on Milgram’s study?
In Milgram’s condition 5 (new baseline condition), 79% of ppts who continued past 150v (learner’s 1st demand to be released) continued to the end
- Burger therefore suggested that by stopping at 150v, we can get a decent idea of how likely peopl are to go on
What were Burger’s (2009) main conclusions?
- no evidence for increase or decline in obedience
- no evidence of gender differences
- disobedient model didn’t make it easier to disobey
What are some issues with Burger’s (2009) replication of Milgram?
- Excluding certain people (those who have heard of Milgram’s experiments and screening out over 50% for ethical reasons) may make research unrepresentative of all populations - were these possible more/less likely to disobey?
- Burger’s modelled refusal condition not comparable with Milgram’s group condition
What is the game of death?
TV host as modern-day authority figure
81% obedience in conditions based on Milgram’s voice-feedback condition
BUT learner doesn’t demand to be released until 380v
How did Slater et al. (2006) study virtual reality and obedience?
Questionnaires and physiological measures (heart rate; skin conductance) used to measure participant responses to being in the situation
These measures suggested that participants responded as if it was real
17/23 participants administered all the shocks
In a 2nd condition where interaction with the learner was text-only, all participants (n = 11) went all the way.
- ppts knew it was not real
