social influence Flashcards

Question

legitimacy of authority/agentic state eval - legitimacy of authority explains behaviour in cultural contexts

Answer 1

Legitimacy of authority explains behaviour in cultural contexts: Kilham and Mann found varying obedience rates across different cultures, reflecting differences in the perceived legitimacy of authority Eg: 16% of Australian women obeyed all the way in a Milgram-style study, compared to 85% of German participants this suggests that the legitimacy explanation offers valuable insights into how societal structures and cultural upbringing impact obedience behaviours this could be linked to australias work structure where there is less of a hierchal structureauthority is on the same level as workers - ppts less likely to obey the authority in australia compared to germany Collectivist cultures are more likely to obey authority than individualist due to ingrained beliefs of respect But individualists have lower obedience to authority due to the priority of personal rights and freedoms BUT certain ppts disobeyed still so this limitation outlines the complexity of obedience behaviours, suggesting that individual differences may play a significant role alongside perceived legitimacy of authority

Answer 2

Situational explanations changed proximity, location and uniform proximity - when teacher and learner were in same room, obedience decreased from 65% to 40% + teacher forcing learners hand onto electrocution plate, obedience decreased to 30% + if teacher left the room and delivered instructions by telephone, obedience fell to 20.5% with some even pretending to give shocks decreased proximity allows ppts to psychologically distance self from consequences of actions (eg: teacher learner in separate rooms) location - changed from prestigious yale to run down office - obedience decreased to 47.5% yale meant ppts felt the researchers were in positions of legitimate authority and obeyed uniform - experimenter called away and plain clothed experimenter came in obedience fell to 20% the symbol of authority (uniform was removed) plain clothed = same level of hierachy as ppt

Answer 3

Research support: bickman et als field experiment in NYC - 3 confederates dressed as guard, civilian, and milkman asked ppts individually to pick up trash and public were 2x more likely to obey guard over milkman/civilian therefore uniform has a powerful effect on obedience due to legitimacy of authority guards have authority through their uniform and are higher up in social hierarchy milkman and civilian are same level or even lower than ppts so they didnt obey BUT this ignores dispositional factors like personality influencing ppts behaviour (may not just be uniform affecting obedience eg: those with internal locus of control are likely to resist obeying others)

Answer 4

Offensive conclusions: mandel argues milgrams results created an alibi to excuse ppts from bad behaviour eg: holocaust survivors may take offence to these findings as it suggests the nazis were simply obeying orders and therefore hold no accountability for the murder of many implies everyone in that position of situational pressure would do the same which many jews in particular may take offence to milgram's findings trivialised genocides and entirely disregards the dispositional explanation that ppts personality influences obedience

Answer 5

Cross cultural replication: Replication of milgrams study in a Dutch context, observed high obedience rates (90%) when participants were ordered to say stressful things to a confederate In addition, when the person giving the order was not present, obedience decreased significantly, replicating the effects of proximity this indicates the universality of obedience tendencies across cultures, extending the generalizability of Milgram's conclusions on obedience BUT Smith and Bond (1998) identified few replications outside culturally similar contexts to the US, such as India and Jordan. Most cross-cultural replications have involved countries that are similar to the US, in terms of their notions regarding the role of authority e.g. Spain, Australia, Scotland uncertain whether Milgram's findings can be universally applied across cultures, prompting caution in generalising his results

Answer 6

Low internal validity: orne and holland criticised milgrams study suggesting ppts showed demand characteristics and knew the true aims of the study many of the situational variables, particularly the switching of uniform from lab coat to plain clothes were deemed very artificial many ppts may have worked out that this wasn't a test on memory ( even milgram agrees) difficult to distinguish whether obedience was due to obedience or ppts were play acting based off of demand characteristics raises concerns about the authenticity of Milgram's results, highlighting the need for further investigation into the potential influence of demand characteristics in obedience studies

Answer 7

Dispositional explanation - authoritarian personality Adorno believed high obedience was due to a psychological disorder termed Authoritarian Personality extreme respect for authority and a belief in societal decline which needs strong leaders AP individuals adhere to rigid, black-and-white thinking, fostering prejudice and scapegoating arises from harsh upbringing in childhood and conditional love (only love you if you do x) resentment cant be shown to parents as they fear them so are displaced to those below them in hierarchy who are deemed weaker (link to psychodynamic approach) Adorno: studied more than 2000 white middle class americans and their unconcious attitudes to other ethnic groups measured through F scale high f scale score = authoritarian personality (concious of status) had distinct prejudices in their minds + stereotypes

Answer 8

Supporting evidence: milgram and elms - interviewed 20 original ppts from milgram's study who showed 100% obedience and they completed the F scale had a significantly higher F scale score - showing authoritarian personality compared to 20 disobedient ppts suggests that authoritarian traits may contribute to obedience behaviours, supporting the Authoritarian Personality theory BUT obedient participants displayed characteristics inconsistent with the typical Authoritarian Personality many of them didn't have strict upbringing or show hostility to parents suggests the link between obedience and authoritarian personality is complex and cant be simplified to a score on F scale This complexity suggests that authoritarianism alone may not be a reliable predictor of obedience challenges the simplistic association between obedience and authoritarianism proposed by the Authoritarian Personality theory

Answer 9

Methodological issues: greenstein found the words were all worded in the same direction suggests F scale only measures ability to agree rather than showing their actual views + social desirability bias may have meant many people who held prejudicial views to those beneath them did not voice their opinions and instead scored lower on F scale therefore conclusions drawn from this may be inaccurate as results aren't true + reliant on truthfulness of ppt to tell researcher about upbringing and may have not felt comfortable talking about any resentment

Answer 10

Stigamatises and labels individuals: Over simplification of a persons character based on high F scale score Reduces complex individuals to mere labels Overlooks multitude of factors contributing to behaviour Reinforces harmful stereotypes and societal divisions Suggests individuals are predisposed to blind obedience and prejudice

Answer 11

fails to explain obedient behaviour in entire populations cant explain how many people in pre war germany obeyed authority and showed anti-semitic views they must have all had individual and distinct personalities and its unlikely they were all showing authoritarian personality BUT could be that german population identified with nazis so used social identity theory where our views are strongly influenced by those in our groups

Answer 12

Reductionist: Simplifies complex human behaviour by attributing obedience to personality Neglects situational influences such as cultural/environmental factors Question whether authoritarian personality is a comprehensive explanation of obedience in all contexts Eg: many ppts in milgram's study showed high obedience but has low F scale scores so obedience was affected by situational factors

Answer 13

Resistance to social influence resisting conformity - social support enables naiive participant to follow their own views dissenting of one person gives rise to others dissenting too so majority no longer unanimous resisting obedience - presence of a disobeying confederate in milgrams study meant obedience dropped from 65% to 10% confederates disobedience gave rise to others disobeying as well rotters locus of control: internal locus of control = more likely to disobey, things that happen to them are due to their own doings leader like + confident to voice their own views external Locus of control = obey, believe in fate affecting their lives, no control over what happens Suggests leaders are less reliant on social approval

Answer 14

Real world research for social support: albrecht analyses a 8 week course to help pregnant adolescents resist peer pressure to smoke those who had social support of a buddy were less likely to smoke at the end of the course than a control group without a buddy social support can help young people resist social influence research by Asch demonstrated that participants were less likely to conform to incorrect group answers when they had an ally who provided the correct response + allen and levine found that in an asch like experiment if someone with seemingly good eyesight dissented, 64% of participants refused to conform to wrong answer vs 3% resisting when there was no social support research evidence supporting the role of dissenting peers in resisting obedience: observed higher levels of resistance when participants were in groups, with 88% rebelling against orders to aid in a smear campaign for an oil company highlights the power of peer support in challenging authority and encouraging disobedience suggests that dissenting peers can undermine the legitimacy of authority, leading to increased resistance to obedience

Answer 15

Research support for LOC: holland conducted milgrams study again but measured ppts LOC found those with high internal locus of control did not continue to highest voltage (37%) vs only 23% of externals not continuing confidence of internals meant they voiced their opinion more easily and resisted authority findings increase validity of theory that LOC affects obedience this supports the validity of LOC as an explanation for disobedience behaviours, emphasising the role of personal beliefs in resisting authority

Answer 16

Contradicting research: twenge et al analysed 40 years worth of american LOC studies and found over the years participants obeyed less but also became more external goes against theories as you'd expect a greater % of people to have become internal LOC therefore LOC not a valid explanation for resisting obedience links to rotter pointing out that LOC isn't entirely affecting our obedience and other factors affect too challenges the validity of LOC as a comprehensive explanation for resistance to social influence BUT based on individualist cultures o

Answer 17

Minority influence - minority of people persuade others to adopt their beliefs until it becomes the majority affects people's views through internalisation - change in private and public minority influence needs to show: consistency - eg diachronic consistency saying same thing for a long period of time or synchronic consistency - consistently voicing the same views commitment - extreme activities draw attention eg suffragettes jumping in front of a horse = augmentation principle - others consider the view due to extreme commitment shown flexibility - nemeth says commitment gets boring over time by always repeating instead you should adapt your views to accept reasonable counter arguments etc overtime, people are attracted to the cause and show internalisation eventually minority becomes the majority more people converting = faster rate of conversion = snowball effect Moscovici's 'blue slide, green slide' study: Participants viewed blue slides and had to determine their colour. Two confederates consistently labelled them green, leading true participants to agree on 8.42% of trials. When the minority was inconsistent, agreement dropped to 1.25%.

Answer 18

Support for consistency: moscovici - 6 females had to determine if 36 slides were blue or green 2/6 people were confederates saying it was green and ppts conformed to say green 8.4% of the time minority influence became the majority if the same people continued to say green again and again BUT 8.4% is still low and many people did not change their views suggesting commitment for a long period of time was required or greater number of people supporting the cause number of people agreeing with green increased when writing down answers as there was less of a reason to fear disapproval from the group therefore minority influence was proved Meta analysis of 100 similar studies found that a consistent minority opinion had a greater influence on changing views of the majority compared to an inconsistent one But too large of a group meant minority felt like a majority and influence decreased

Answer 19

A change in the majority's position involves deeper processing of the minority's ideas: Martin compared participants who listened to agreement from a minority group versus a majority group before being exposed to a conflicting view ppts were less willing to change their opinions after exposure to a minority group compared to a majority group, indicating deeper processing of minority messages highlights the importance of understanding the cognitive processes involved in minority influence and its implications for attitude change However, real-world social influence situations involve more complexity This discrepancy limits the applicability of research findings to real-world scenarios this suggests that while controlled experiments offer insights into minority influence dynamics, they may not fully capture the complexities of real-life minority influence situations

Answer 20

support for flexibility: nemeth - 3 ppts and 1 confederate had to decide on compensation given to a ski lift accident when confederate was consistently not increasing the compensation - there was no effect on compensation given BUT when he was flexible, and agreed to a slightly higher compensation, the majority was influenced to lower their demands suggests flexibility is more important than commitment

Answer 21

Low internal validity (moscovici) only asked women - unsure whether gender influences how susceptible we are to minority influence could have been groups of just men and groups of a mix of genders which were compared artificial situation - doesnt represent the struggles of campaigners etc in real life ppts may have said green but didnt internalise the view + may have responded to demand characteristics lowering internal validity

Answer 22

Social change 6 steps to social change: Drawing attention, Consistency, Deeper processing (people who accepted majority view begin to question situation),The augmentation principle (extreme actions to demonstrate committment), The snowball effect, Social cryptomnesia (people know the change has occured but dont remember how) social change - linked to NSI (eg: bin it - others do) or aschs confederate dissenter -> led to others dissenting milgrams confederate not obeying -> ppt also not obeying Eg: african american civil rights movement -> social cryptomnesia and change in legislation

Answer 23

Research support: nolan hung messages on the doors of californian homes about their neighbours trying to reduce their energy usage + a few controls where they were just asked to lower their usage without mentioning others significant drop in energy usage after finding out the majority of their neighbours do so too therefore majority influence can cause social change suggests that normative social influence can be a valid mechanism for fostering behavioural change on a societal level but you could argue that use of NSI isnt a long term change and neighbours may have soon stopped reducing their energy usage psychologists can explain how minority influence brings about social change Nemeth argues that minorities inspire a different type of thinking that eventually leads to social change This ‘divergent thinking’ is much broader and leads to better decisions and creative solutions to social issues this highlights the value of dissenting minorities in stimulating new ideas and fostering open-mindedness to drive social change and progress

Answer 24

deeper processing may not play a role in how minorities bring about social change: Mackie presents evidence suggesting that majority influence, rather than minority influence, may trigger deeper processing when individuals encounter conflicting views This is because individuals like to think that other people also share their views and think similarly and would be forced to think hard if this was not the case this raises doubts about the validity of the notion that deeper processing is a central mechanism of minority influence

Answer 25

Barriers to social change: bashir et al - found many people did not want to be more sustainable as they didnt want to be associated with the minority of environmentalists stereotypical views of the minority may mean people dont want to join them link to just stop oil augmentation principle was shown people glued themselves to the road which at first showed commitment but later, people found them to be a nuisance and not many people were influenced by their commitment Social change initiatives may lead to societal pushback as a result