Social Influence Flashcards
Findings of Asch’s study?
Naive participants confirmed on 37% trials
25% never conformed
What were the variations of Asch’s study?
Conformity increased up to group size of four
Dissenter reduced conformity
Conformity increased when task was harder
What are some evaluations of Asch’s study
A child of its time- Perrin and spencer found less conformity in 80’s than 50’s
Artificial situation - demand characteristics meant participants played along with trivial task
Limited application- Only conducted on American men
Ethical issues
What were the procedures of Zimbardos research?
Mock prison with students randomly assigned guards or prisoners
Findings of Zimbardos research
Guards became increasingly brutal
Prisoners increasingly withdrawn and depressed
Conclusions of Zimbardos research
Participants conformed to their roles as guards or prisoners
Evaluations of Zimbardos research
Random assignment to roles increased internal validity
Lack of realism- participants play acting their roles according to media derived stereotypes
Dispositional influences- 1/3 of guards brutal so conclusions exaggerated
Ethical issues
Procedure of milgrams research?
Participants gave fake electric shocks to a ‘learner’ in obedience to instructions from the ‘experimenter’
Findings of milgrams research
Low internal validity- participants realised shocks fake
Replication with real shocks got similar results
Good external validity- findings generalise to other situations (hospital wards)
Game of death found 80% fave maximum shock, similar behaviour to milgrams participants
Ethical issues
Could be social identity theory?
What is internalisation
Private and public acceptance of group norms
What is identification
Change behaviour to be part of a group we identify with
What is compliance
Go along with the group publicly but no private change
What is informational social influence
Conforms to be right
Assumes others know better then us
What is normative social influence
Conforms to be liked or accepted by group
Evaluation of ISI
Research support- more conformity to incorrect maths answers when they were difficult as predicted by ISI
Evaluation of NSI
Individual differences in NSI
Naffiliators want to be liked more
Evaluation of both NSI and ISI
Isi and nsi work together
Dissenter may reduce power of ISI And NSI
Three situational variables of obedience
Proximity
Location
Uniform
Explain how proximity affected Milgram’s research
Obedience decreased to 40% when teacher could hear learner
To 30% in touch proximity conditions
Explain how location affected Milgrams research
Obedience decreased to 47’5% when study moved to run down office block
Explain how uniform affected Milgrams research
Obedience decreased to 20% when ‘member of public’ was the experimenter
Evaluation of situational variables
Bickman showed power of uniform in field experiment
Lack of internal validity- some of Milgrams procedures contrived so not genuine obedience (Orne and Holland)
Cross cultural replications- support milgram
Almost all studies in similar cultures to USA so not generalisable
‘The obedience alibi’
What are the three social psychological factors affecting obedience
Agentic state
Autonomous state
Binding factors
Explain Agentic state
Acting as agent of another
Explain autonomous state
Free to act according to conscience
Switching between the two - Agentic shift
Explain binding factors
Allow individual to ignore he damaging effects of their obedient behaviour
Evaluation to support Agentic state
Blass and Schmitt found that people do blame the legitimate authority for the participants behaviour
A limited explanation of Agentic state ?
Cannot explain why some of Milgrams participants disobeyed or the lack of moral strain in Hofling et al’s nurses
What is legitimacy of authority
Created by hierarchical nature of society
What is destructive authority
Problems arise e.g Hitler
Evaluation of legitimacy of authority
Cultural differences- explains obedience in different cultures because reflects different social hierarchies
‘Obedience alibi’ revisited
Real life crimes of obedience
Procedure of Adorno’s authoritarian personality
Adorno et al used F-scale to study unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups
Finding of authoritarian personality
People with authoritarian personalities identify with the ‘strong’ and have fixed cognitive style
What are authoritarian characteristics
Extreme respect for authority and obedience to it
Origin of authoritarian personality?
Harsh parenting creates hostility that cannot be expressed against parents so is displaced
Evaluations of authoritarian personality
Some of Milgrams participants had authoritarian personalities (Elms)
Limited - can’t explain increased in obedience across a whole culture
Better explanation is social identity theory
Political bias- equates authoritarian personality with right wing ideology
Ignores extreme left wing authoritarianism
Methodological problems
Correlation not causation
What is the locus of control
LOC is sense of what directs events in our lives (Rotter)
Explain the continuum
High internal at one end and high external at the other
Use LOC to explain resistance to social influence
People with high internal LOC are more able to resist pressures to conform or obey
Evaluate the locus of control
Internals less likely to fully obey in Milgram type procedure (Holland)
Contradictory research
People have become more external and more disobedient recently (Twenge et al)
Hard for LOC to explain
Limited role of locus of control
Explain conformity in social support
Reduced by presence of dissenters from the group
Explain obedience in social support
Decreases in presence of disobedient peer who acts as a model to follow
Evaluation of social support
Conformity decreased when one person dissents even if they are not credible (Allen and Levine)
Obedience drops when disobedient role models are present ( Gamson et al)
What four factors are needed for minority influence
Consistency
Commitment
Flexibility
The process of change
Explain consistency in minority influence
If minority is consistent this attracts attention of the majority over time
Explain commitment in minority influence
Augmentation principle- personal sacrifices show commitment and attract attention
Explain flexibility in minority influence
Minority more convincing if they accept some counter arguments
Explain process of change in minority influence
Above factors make majority think more deeply about issue
Snowball effect - minority view gathers momentum until it becomes majority influence
Evaluation of minority influence
Research support for consistency- moscovici’s blue green slides and Wood et al’s meta analysis
Research support for depth of thought- minority views have longer effect because they are deeply processed (Martin et al)
Artificial tasks- tasks often trivial so tell us little about real life influence
Supports internalisation
Limited real word applications
What is the special role of minority influence in social change
Minority influence is powerful force for innovation and social change
Civil rights movement in USA
Lessons from conformity research leading to social change?
NSI can lead to social change by drawing attention to what majority is doing
Lessons from obedience leading to social change?
Disobedient role models
Gradual commitment is how obedience leads to change
Evaluation of social change
NSI valid explanation of social change e.g reducing energy consumption (Nolan et al)
Only indirectly effective- effects of minority influence are limited because they are indirect and appear later (Nemeth)
Role of deeper processing- majority views that are processed more deeply than majority views, challenging central feature of minority influence
Barriers to social change
Methodological issues
What was the procedures of Asch’s study?
Confederates deliberately gave wrong answers to see if participants would conform
