Social Influence Flashcards
What is conformity?
A change in a persons behaviour or opinions as a result of a real or imagined pressure from a person/group
What is compliance
Going along with others views in public, but in private they arent changed
Superficial change
Temporary
Only when group pressure is present
E.g. Eating with chopsticks at a Chinese even though its tedious, too scared to ask for a fork
What is identification
Conforming to the views of a group because there is something desirable about them
Temporary change
Public change but not private
Only in group pressure
E.g. Buying something because your friend has it and you want them to like you still
What is internalisation
Views change in private and public
More permanent
Opinions internally changed
E.g. Liking a certain band because everyone else does but you realise they are good
Normative social influence
To gain approval or avoid disapproval
Leads to compliance
Informational social influence
Uncertain of what to do in a situation
Look to others for advice
Leads to internalisation
Asch - study of conformity
APFC
A- see if people conform to a group when the answer is clearly wrong
P - thought it was a vision test
One participant, seven confederates
Shown a line, had to say which it was most alike, a/b/c
F - conformed to incorrect answers 32% of the time
75% on at least one critical trial
25% never conformed
Less than 1% incorrect in control group
C - people will conform to the majority, even if the majority is incorrect
Variables affecting conformity - group size
No need for the group to be larger than 3 for conformity to take place
Variables affecting conformity - unanimity
The extent to which all members of the group agree
Majority was unanimous therefore the participants selected the same line
Variables affecting conformity - task difficulty
Harder tasks mean people are most likely to assume that the majority are right
Evaluation of Asch study of conformity
+ conducted in a lab, variables controlled
+ good sample size of 123 participants
- biased sample, all male americans, cant be generalised
- lacks ecological validity, no application to real life as its not meaningful
- participants were deceived, ethical issue
- ‘child of its time’ results may be different if it was done today
Zimbardo - study of conformity to social roles
APFC
A - see if brutality in prisons was to do with personality or identification to the social roles
P - newspaper ad, people applied, paid, two weeks, 24 ‘normal average’ males selected
Randomly assigned roles, prisoner or guard
Mock prison
Prisoners were unexpectedly arrested at their homes
Referred to by number, 3 meals a day, 2 hours reading and 2 visits per week ‘rights’
F - took to their roles ‘too well’
Guards made prisoners do dehumanising tasks, they volunteered to do extra hours without pay
5 prisoners sent home early
Experiment was cut short, only lasted 6 days
C - due to normative social influence and identification
Conditions of the prison are to blame
Evaluation of zimbardo’s prison study
+ lab environment, controlled
+ findings can be applied to real life situations
- biased sample, all white american males
- ethical issues, psychological harm
Milgram - study of obedience
APFC
A - why did germans follow Hitlers orders? Are they more obedient?
P - experiment investigating ‘learning’
40 males between 30 and 50
Range of jobs
Introduced to participant who was a confederate, drew straws to determine role, confederate always learner
Word pairs to remember and recall from a list of 4
Administer electric shock, increases each time, 15v-450v
Wrong answer on purpose, standard instructions and told to continue giving the shocks
F - 65% went all the way to 450v, 100% went to 300v
C - likely to follow orders of an authority figure, even to the extent of killing someone
Evaluation of Milgrims study of obedience
\+ controlled lab environment \+ actor faked screaming to make it more realistic \+ standardised procedure (reliable) \+ can be replicated \+ has been replicated in other cultures
- participants were deceived
- low ecological validity
- not protected from harm (guilt/shame)
- biased sample (all men)
- lack of internal validity, people worked out that it was fake
Variables affecting obedience - proximity
Rate dropped when the experimenter left the room
Also dropped when the person receiving the shocks was in the same room as they could see the pain they were in
Variables affecting obedience - location
Obedience rates lowered when it was in a less prestigious environment e.g. Run down office block
Variables affecting obedience - uniform
Obedience rate dropped when the experimenter was wearing normal, everyday clothes or was a member of the public
What is the agentic state
Individuals believe they’re acting on behalf of someone else
No sense of responsibility for their actions
Social hierarchy to the authority figure
What is the autonomous state
State of independence
Free will to make their own decisions and choose how to behave
Take full responsibility
What are blinding factors
Aspects of the situation that allow us to block out the moral strain that we should feel
What is the legitimacy of authority
Social hierarchy, people at the top have authority and power
Their authority is legitimate and is to keep society in order
Learn to accept these figures from a young age
Power to punish us
What is an authoritarian personality
High level of obedience is a psychological disorder
California F scale (fascist)
People with a high score
- very obedient to authority
- submissive to authority figures
- conventional attitudes about race/sex/gender
Forms in childhood due to strict parenting/discipline
Elms & Milgrim - authoritarian personality study
APFC
A - to see if participants high in authoritarianism are more likely to obey an authority figure
P - 20 obedient, 20 defiant completed the F and MMPI scale
Asked questions about the relationship with parents during childhood
Attitude towards the experimenter and learner (from milgram’s origional experiment)
F - higher levels of authoritarianism in participants that were classified as obedient
C - obedient group usually have more authoritarian traits
Evaluation of milgram & elms authoritarian personality study
+ link between a high score on F scale and obedience
- f scale is politically based and measures an extreme form of right-wing ideolgy
- only shows a correlation, doesnt show that the personality will cause people to be obedient
What is locus of control
How responsible you feel over your own destiny
Evaluation of locus of control
+ holland, 37% of internal didnt continue to give the highest shock level
- v little influence over our behaviour in familiar situations
- people have became more resistant to obedience, but also more external
Internal locus of control
Life is within your own control
Determined by hard work/decisions
Confident
Motivated
Success-orientated
Every situation is unique
Accepts responsibility and makes own decisions
External locus of control
Life is outside of your control
Determined by fate and external factors
Let things happen to them
Passive/accepting
Successes happen due to luck
Follow the crowd
Wont stand up for what they believe in
What is social support
People acting as models to show that resistance to social influence is possible
Other people who dont conform
Asch - effect of social support
Added more non-conformists to the group who gave the right answer
Participant felt more comfortable giving the right answer too
Milgram - effect of social support
Participant paired with an actor that refused to give the shocks
Had support from someone else
What is minority influence
One person or a small group influences the behaviour of others
Minority influencing the majority
More likely to lead to internalisation
Minority influence - consistency
Majority will assume the minority is wrong
Minority must be consistent with their views for the majority to reassess their views
Minority influence - commitment
Suggests certainty and confidence Easier to persuade the majority Will be taken more seriously Prove that they are right Take part in risky activities to demonstrate their dedication
Minority influence - flexibility
Compromise and negotiate
More effective than being stubborn
Evaluation of Minority influence
+ consistency is key
+ moscovici’s research supports the theory
- research is limited
- research has ethical issues as participants were lied to
6 Conditions for social change to occur
1 - draw attention to the issue
Expose views of minority
Causes conflict to be reduced
2 - consistency
Will be taken more seriously if the views are repeated
3 - deeper processing
Reassess the situation and think about it more due to the conflict it caused
4 - augmentation principle
People that take risks will be more likely to be taken seriously
5 - snowball effect
More and more people join the movement
Wider audience
6 - social crypto-amnesia
People remember that the change occurred bur forget how/why
Evaluation of social change
+ Nolan et al, conformity can lead to social change through normative social influence
- relies on studies by asch, milgram, moscovici, which can be criticised
Moscovici - minority influence
APFC
A - to see if minority influence leads to internalisation
P - 4 participants, 2 confederates
Shown blue slides and asked to judge the colour of them
Consistent - always called the slides green
Inconsistent - called green 2/3 times
Control - always called blue (only participants)
F - consistent influenced majority to say green on over 8%
32% said green on at least 1 trial
