Social Influence 4.1.1 Flashcards
What is conformity?
The process by which an individual attitudes, beliefs or behaviour are modified by the presence or action of others.
Who discovered the types of conformity?
Kelman in 1958
What is compliance conformity?
- Public
- requires a group presence
-temporary change - why? to gain others approval
An example of compliance conformity
Wearing jeans even though you wouldn’t usually simply because the rest of your social group does.
What is Identification conformity?
- Publicly but sometimes privately
- Will agree while with group but can change ( as want to fit in)
- permanent viewpoint when in the group but can change when alone
-why? due to a want to be liked
An example of Identification conformity?
Winston is visiting from the UK to the USA. H stands up at the national anthem as he doesn’t want to upset his hosts.
He values the national anthem and respects those who sing it.
What is internalisation conformity?
- views held publicly and privately
- Group presence is not required (opinions obtained)
- The person genuinely accepts and agrees with the majority and the norms
Example of internalisation conformity
Len is driving through a built up area and he slows down significantly because he believes it is wrong.
He believes it is wrong and accept it personally so no view change
Who researched the explanations for conformity?
Deutsch and Gerard
What is ISI (informational social influence) ?
The need to be right
taking the belief of the minority in order to get the right answer
What’s NSI (normative social influence) ?
The need to be liked
Agreeing with the majority in order to seek social approval
What was the aim for Asch’s study?
To investigate the effect of social influence on the rate of conformity
Outline the procedure for Asch’s study
18 trial lab study
A judgement task where the subjects had to say which of the comparison lines matched the standard line
Only 1 naive participant and 6-8 confederates.
What is a confederate
Someone who is aware of the works of the experiment/research
What was the group size variable?
With 3 confederates –> conformity = 31.8% to the wrong answer
Conclusion of the group size variable
A small majority is not not sufficient for influence to be exerted.3+ is not needed
Adding more than three confederates made litttle difference
What was the unanimity variable?
Asch controlled a confederate right next to the ppt to disagree with the other confederates (dissenter)
Conformity –> 5%
Conclusion of the unanimity variable
conformity rates to be higher the majority needs to be unanimous (fully in agreement)
presence on dissenter redyced conformity making the ppt act more independently
What was the task difficulty variable ?
Asch made the comparison lines closer the standard line
Conclusion of the task difficulty variable
ISI presents a larger role in more difficult tasks which increases conformity
What are the findings of Asch’s research
- Naive ppt gave incorrect answer 36%
- ## 25% did not conform 75% conform at least once
In the following interviews after they ppt said they confirmed due to NSI
Strengths of Asch’s research
- simple task –> no reason to conform
- Lucas et al task difficulty
- Rosander 2011 - online communities research
Task difficulty increased conformity - lab study control of extraneous variables
Limitations asch
- Artificial tasks – ppt knew they were in a study so may display demand characteristics - findings not generalisable to everyday situations
- Only men were treated by Asch / ppt from an individualist culture in USA limited population validity not generalizable as didn’t take gender or cross- culture into account.
- Sogon (1984) - found conformity within a group of strangers increased.
- Deception - Naïve ppt through the others were genuine / however the benefit was highlighting peoples susceptibility to the group
- Era was a time of conformity in America / less likely in subsequent decades Asch effect not consistent over time
When was zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment ?
1971
What role did Zimbardo play within the research?
he oversaw the behaviour as the role of super intendent and
Why did Zimbardo carry out his research?
To see if the high level of agression in US prisons was due to dispositional or situational factors
How long was the SPE but how long was it meant to last
Lasted 6 days but intended to last 14
–> was finished early due to a member showing sings of psychosis
SPE Zimbardo procedure
- 12 guards/12 prisoners ( random roles but asked for preference)
- Extensive testing for ‘mental stability’ before
-Realism → prisoners arrested from homes
Prisoners blindfolded/stripped/deloused (uniform+number)
Guards enforce the 16 rules
How did zimbardo accquire ppt?
volunteers from adverts 21 male
Zimbardo SPE findings
Settled into social roles quickly
Prisoners rebelled against the harsh treatment (starvation strikes)
Guards retaliate with fire extinguishers
Prisoners (submissive) Guards (aggressive)
Prisoners were taunted and given menial tasks
conclusion of SPE ZImbardo
Before were not showing signs of sadistic behaviour so the conformity,as indicated, is due to the environment
- revealed the power of the situation
Strengths of SPE Zimbardo
- Researches had control over variables ppt randomally recruited and assigned roles control increases internal validity
- Although 90% of prisoners conversations were about prison life - increases internal validity
- Recruited ppt through flyers
Limitations of SPE Zimbardo
- Reicher and Haslam (lacks research support) replicated the SPE and found guards failed to developed shared social identity as a group / prisoners took over contradicts SPE
- Individual differences only 1/3 of guards behaved brutally conclusions of conformed to social roles may be over exaggerated therefore highlights individuals could understand right rom wrong despite the situational / environmental pressures
- Paid $15 –> demand characteristics as wanted to earn money
- Ethical issues
Protection from harm / right to withdrawal difficult - Lack of realism –> ppt play acting for the stereotypes / one ppt based behaviour from a film
- Psychological harm had to stop after 6 days due to a ppt showing signs of psychosis
Conformity to roles is not automatic-Zimbardo believed that the guards sadistic behaviour was a direct consequence of them embracing their role however only about a 1/3 of the guards behaved in a brutal manner Haslam and Reicher(2012) argue that this shows that the guards chose how to behave rather than blindly conforming to their social role
Why did Milgram want to conduct the study?
Wanted to know why many germans followed Nazi orders and killed millions of jews with the only excuse od ‘I was following orders’
How did Milgram recruit participants?
40 male ppt through flyers and newspaper ads
What was the aim of the study and where was it held?
To see how far people would go obeying an instruction if it involved harming someone else
Yale university
Procedure of Milgram
Roles of Teacher ( naive ppt) and Learner (confederates)
The learners were expected to match word pairs and if answered incorrectly the teacher would have to shock them
However the confederates were instructed to give incorrect answers
Shocks were not real except for the initial demonstration to teacher to create a sense if realism
The learner would scream and shout → even though not being shocked
40 male ppt → recruited through flyers aged 20-50
Paid $4.50 to take part
How many volts did the shock increase by each incorrect answer and what was the max voltage?
Increased by 15 volts each incorrect
450 volts max (capable of death)
What was the aim given to the participants ?
to study how punishment affects learning (deception)
Findings of Milgram
- no one stopped before 300v
- 65% went to 450 volts
- qualitative data collected ( visible /verbal signs of distress)
- situation factors influenced behaviour
- legitimate figure increased obedience
What are the three Milgram situational factors?
proximity/uniform/location
Proximity Milgram
- when teacher and learner in same room obedience fell by 40%
- touch proximity = 30% obedience
- when experimenter absent = 21% obedience
Location Milgram
- yale uni more people felt confidence in the iterate –> 65% obedience
- when moved to run down offices in conneticut 48%
Uniform Milgram
- A member of the public replaced the experimenter
- obedience dropped to 20%
Uniforms give more power/authority
Strengths of MILGRAM
- External validity lab – based relationship between experiment and ppt reflect real life authoritative relationships / Hofling et al found nurses more likely to give unjust order by doctors on a hospital ward results can be generalized
- Replications - France 80% gave 450 volt to an ‘unconscious’ man. supports milgram conclusions and shows replicability
Lab study -> controlled
Obtained written consent
Qualitative data
Right to withdrawal though discouraged by experimenter
Replicated research in france where 80% ppt delivered to 460 volts
Limitations of MILGRAM
- Orne and Holland PPT guessed the electric shocks were fake lacks internal validity /member of public variation ppt more likely to work out the aim
- Deception ppt believed the teacher and learner roles were assigned randomally / forced to believe that the shocks are real less likely to do future research
- Identified experimenter as a scientific authority figure → so continued to → validity in question
- Deception in the aim they were told impossible for them to give informed consent
- No protection from harm as ppt visibly distressed
- The obedience alibi – Reserve police protested against carrying out mass killing of jews
- Obedience alibi Mandel argue situational factors act as an excuse for evil behaviour -
What did ORNE and HOLLAND state about MILGRAM?
stated that ppt may distrust experiments due to previous studies → display demand characteristics / lack of internal validity
