Social Influence Flashcards
Give Myer’s definition of conformity.
A change in behaviour or belief as a result of real or imagined group pressure.
Define social norms.
Rules of behaviour that are generally considered acceptable in a given situation.
Name Kelman’s three types of conformity.
Compliance, identification and internalization
Define Complaince
Publicly conforming to the behaviour or view of others in a group but privately maintaining one’s own views.
Define Identification.
Adopting the views or behaviours of others both publicly and privately because you value membership of that group.
Define Internalisation.
A conversion or true change of private views to match those of the group. These new views become part of your VALUE SYSTEM; they are not dependent on the presence of the group.
Explain Deutsch and Gerard’s dual process model (1955).
They outlined TWO types of social influence that lead people to conform: normative and informational social influence.
Define normative social influence.
Normative social influence is based on our desire to be liked. We conform for approval and acceptance.
Outline Latane’s 1981 social impact theory.
We respond most to normative social influence when the group is very important to us and we spend a lot of time with the group. The size of the group is not significant.
Define informational social influence.
Informational social influence is based on our desire to be right. This can be particularly strong when we move from one group to another and experience situational ambiguity - we look to others to see how we should behave and think.
As well as situational ambiguity, what other factors can lead to informational social influence?
The presence of experts and emergency situations.
Who challenged Deutsch and Gerard’s definitions of conformity and on what grounds?
Insko et al (1983) claimed that normative and informational explanation for conformity should not be seen as separate. They often work together.
Outline Sherif’s 1935 study into the emergence of group norms.
Placed participant in a totally dark room in which a STATIONARY point of light appears to move …autokinetic effect.
Asked participants to judge movement of light in number of trials.
When same participants worked in groups of three and had to announce estimation as aloud - their judgements converged.
When first judgements made in a group and then individually - participants continued to give group answer.
What did Asch’s 1951 study investigate?
Asch wanted to examine if participants would yield to majority social influence even if incorrect answers were obvious.
Outline Asch’s 1951 study.
7 male students looked at 2 cards. The test card showed one vertical line the other cards showed vertical lines of different lengths.
Participants had to call out in turn which of three lines were same length.
All participants but ONE were accomplices who gave unanimous incorrect answers.
What were Asch’s findings?
32% conformed to incorrect answers.
74% conformed at least once.
26% never conformed.
Post-experiment interviews revealed that while some said they did not want to be in a minority - others claimed to have seen the line identified as the correct one as the correct answer!
Outline any problems with Asch’s study.
All the participants were male college students - so a very limited sample so hard to generalise to wider population.
Took place in 1950s America and McCarthyism - ultra conservative time of political witch hunts for those who did not conform.
Where was Asch’s participant placed in the row?
He answered sixth out of seven.
In order to assess which features of a situation made it more likely that someone would conform - what variations to his study did Asch add?
- A non- unanimous majority. Levels dropped to only 5% conformity when this happened.
- the size of the majority. When the majority dropped to only 2 people, conformity dropped to 12%. Increasing size of majority beyond 3 did not increase conformity as participants could suspect collusion.
- Losing a partner - if the participant started with a ‘partner’ who gave the correct answers initially but then moved to give the majority answers - conformity levels were 28.5%.
- Gaining a partner - when a ‘partner’ was gained half way through - conformity fell to 8.7%.
- The nature of the task - when tasks were made more difficult, levels of conformity increased.
- Mode of response - if asked to call out answer, conformity levels dropped sharply.
Name and outline an extension to Asch’s research.
Crutchfield (1955) found that participants with high scores in intelligence and leadership ability were less likely to conform.
Furman and Duke (1988) looked at how confidence affected conformity. Students studying music or another subject asked to offer opinion on 2 versions of a musical excerpt. Asked for response in group of 3 confederates with unanimous preference. Music students NOT influenced but non-music students significantly affected.
Outline a study which suggests that Asch’s findings reflected historical cultural climate of America.
Perrin and Spencer (1980) replicated Asch using British students. Only ONE conforming response in 396 trials!
Outline Perrin and Spencer’s 1981 study. Why is it significant?
In 1981 Perrin and Spencer used youths on probation as participants and probation officers as confederates. Demonstrated levels of conformity similar to Asch.
Important because suggests that if perceived costs of not agreeing were high - more would conform.
Outline a study which considered possible cultural variations in Asch’s study.
Smith and Bond (1998) meta analysis of 31 studies conducted in different cultures using Asch’s procedures.
Those in COLLECTIVIST cultures demonstrated higher levels of conformity. In such cultures loyalty to the group and group decision- making are preferred to individual decisions.
What was Zimbardo’s aim in the Stanford PRison Experiment?
To investigate reported brutality among American prison guards and see if there was a dispositional or situational explanation.
