Social Influence Flashcards
Conformity
A change in a person’s behaviour or opinions as a result of real of imagined pressure from a person or group.
Internalisation
A deep type of conformity where we take on the majority view because we accept it as correct. It leads to a permanent change in behaviour even when the group is absent.
Identification
A moderate type of conformity where we act in the same way with the group because we value it and want to be a part of it. Doesn’t mean we privately agree.
Compliance
A temporary and fake type of conformity. We outwardly go along with the majority view, but privately disagree. It only lasts when we’re with the group.
Informational social influence (ISI)
An explanation of conformity that says we agree with the opinion of the majority because we believe it’s correct, so we want to be correct too. This may lead to internalisation.
Normative social influence (NSI)
An explantion of conformity that says that we agree with the majority because we want to be accepted, gain social approval. This may lead to compliance.
Evaluation of conformity-types and explanations
Research for ISI- Lucas et al- asked students to give answers to a maths problems that were both easy/difficult. There was greater conformity for difficult questions.
Individual differences for NSI- some people are less concerned about being right. (McGee and Teevan- nAffiliators).
Conformity- Asch’s research (procedures)
Showed 2 cards, one with a line on and 3 different lines to compare the right one to. In groups of 6-8 confederates.
Asch’s findings
The participant gave the wrong answer 36.8% of the time. 25% didn’t conform at all. So after the study the 75% said they conformed to avoid rejection. NSI
Asch’s variations
Group size- 3 confederates was the maximum needed to reach the highest levels of conformity- any more made little difference.
Unanimity- if someone agreed with the participant, it reduced the conformity by a quarter from when everyone disagreed.
Task difficulty- when the lines were harder to tell, conformity increased. ISI plays a greater role when the task is harder.
Asch’s research- evaluation
Perrin and Spencer- 396 trials and only 1 student conformed. Asch’s was in 1950 america where it was a conformist time, society has changed a lot since then. Show’s it’s not consistent. Lacks temporal validity.
Artificial situation/task- may have shown demand characteristics, not generalisable or validity.
Zimbardo’s stanford prison experiment- procedure
Mock prison in the basement, volunteer sample, the participants were randomly assigned roles of guards/prisoners. To heighten the realism the prisoners were arrested at home, deloused, stripped and given a number. The prisoner’s names were never used. And guards had handcuffs, sunglasses and keys, they could say if a prisoner could go to the toilet or not.
Zimbardo’s stanford prison experiment- findings
The study ended after 6 days instead of 14 as the guards took up their roles and their behaviour became a threat to the prisoner’s psychological and physical health. They harassed the prisoners constantly. One went on hunger strike so they punished him by putting him in a tiny dark closet. Overall, they all conformed to their roles.
Zimbardo’s prison study evaluation
Highly controlled, meaning increased internal validity. (eg. selection of participants). Also the prisoners thought it was real rather than acting, also meaning increased internal validity.
Ethical issues- zimbardo took part and watched, one wanted to leave but he didn’t let him as he cared more about his study rather than his responsibilities towards his participants.
Obedience- Milgram’s research procedure
40 male participants through newspaper articles, they were offered $4.50 to take part. There was a rigged draw for their role so the participant always ended up with the teacher role. If the learner (confederate) made a mistake on the learning task the participant would have to shock them from 15 volts up to 450 volts (labelled danger- severe shock). If the participant was unsure about carrying on they were given 4 prods.
Milgram’s 4 prods
- Please continue or please go on
- The experiment requires that you continue
- It is absolutely essential that you continue
- You have no other choice, you must go on.
Milgram’s findings
No participant’s stopped below 300 volts, 5 stopped at 300v, 65% carried on to do the full 450v. Most participants showed distress such as bitting their lips, sweating. They were all debriefed, 84% said they were glad that they took part.
Milgram’s evaluation
Good external validity, reflects obedience to authoritative figures in real life. Hofling et al- 21 out of 22 nurses did unjustified demand’s for doctors. Can be generalised.
Low internal validity- may have behaved in that way because they didn’t believe in the set up, guessing that they weren’t real electric shocks.
Obedience- situational variables (Milgram)
Proximity, Location, Uniform.
Proximity
The physical closeness or distance of an authority figure. (eg. participant and victim in his study) fell 25% when in the same room and fell 35% when in touch proximity. (from original 65%)
Location
The place where an order is issued. When in a run down building obedience dropped 17.5% from 65% in a lab.
Uniform
When the experimenter gave orders by phone, the obedience dropped by 44.5% and when the experimenter was played by a member of public, it dropped 45% from 65% in original study.
Evaluation- Milgram situational variables
Research support- Bickman had 3 confederates dress up as a milkman, security guard and jacket and tie. They asked passers by to pick up litter. They listened to the security guard the most.
Lack of internal validity- participants knew it was faked, realised this from extra manipulation (member of public).
Obedience- social/psychological factors- agentic state
Agentic state- a mental state where we feel no personal responsibility for our behaviour because we believe ourselves to be acting for an authority figure.
Autonomous state
Opposite of agentic state, they are free to behave however they want, so feels a sense of responsibility for their own actions.
Agentic shift
Shift from autonomy to agency due to authoritative figures.
Binding factors
Staying in the agentic state.
Legitimacy of authority
An explanation for obedience, we are more likely to obey people who we perceive as more authoritative.
Destructive authority
Hitler used their powers for destructive purposes- cruel and stupid. Such as Milgram’s study.
Obedience- dispositional explanations (Adorno et al- authoritarian personality)
Created a Fascism scale to measure authoritarian (high level of obedience is a psychological disorder, authoritarian is one.)
Adorno et al- findings (authoritarian)
People who scored high on the F scale identified as strong and they disregarded the weak (think they were better).
Origin of the authoritative personality
As a result of harsh parenting, strict discipline, impossibly high standards, conditional love and severe criticisms of failings.
Resistance to social influence- social support
The presence of people who resist pressures to conform or obey can help others do the same. These people act as role models to show others that resistance to social influence is possible.
Asch’s- another person not conforming
Milgram- dropped to 10% when the participant was joined by a disobedient confederate.
Minority influence
A form of social influence in which a minority of people persuade others to adopt their beliefs, attitudes or behaviour. Leads to internalisation or conversion, in which private attitudes are changed as well as public behaviours.
Minority influence- consistency
Most effective if the minority keeps the same beliefs, this draws attention to the minority view.
Minority influence- commitment
More powerful if the minority demonstrates dedication to their position.
Minority influence- flexibility
More effective if the minority show flexibility by accepting the possibility of compromise.
Minority influence- the snowball effect
When the minority becomes the majority.
Social influence
The process by which individuals and groups change each other’s attitudes and behaviours. Includes conformity, obedience and minority influence.
Social change
This occurs when whole societies, rather than just individuals adopt new attitudes, beliefs and ways of doing things. Examples would be accepting gay rights and environmental issues.
