Social influence

Question 1

What are the 3 types of conformity?

Answer 1

Kellman (1958) suggested there are 3 ways in which people conform to the opinion of the majority:

1) Internalisation - (strongest of the 3)
2) Identification - (moderate type)
3) Compliance - (superficial)

Question 2

Explain internalisation

Answer 2

Internalisation occurs when a person genuinely accepts the group norms. This results in a private and public change in behaviour and opinion. The change persists even without the presence of other group members. E.g. being influenced by a new faith and still practicing the faith away from the group.

Question 3

Explain identification

Answer 3

Sometimes we conform to the opinions/behaviours of a group because there is something about the group we value. We identify with the group and so want to be a part of it. This may mean we publicly change our opinions/behaviours to achieve this goal, even if we don’t privately agree with everything the group stands for. This is a temporary change in outlook while they belong to the group.
E.g. You decide to become a vegetarian because your new flatmates are vegetarian. However, whenever you are not with them you decide to eat meat.

Question 4

Explain compliance

Answer 4

This type of conformity involves simply ‘going along with others’ in public, but privately not changing personal opinions and or behaviour. Compliance results in only a superficial change. It also means a particular behaviour or opinion stops as soon as group presence does.
E.g. You say you like the same music as your friends even though you don’t really like it or listen to it privately.

Question 5

What are the 2 explanations of conformity?

Answer 5

Deutsch and Gerard (1955) argued that there are 2 main reasons why people conform. These are:

1) Informational social influence (ISI)
2) Normative social influence (NSI)

Question 6

Explain ISI

Answer 6

It’s a cognitive process based on how we think. It is based on the idea that we conform in order to be right - our desire to be right. If the majority agree on an answer in class, you may think they are likely to be right and therefore copy their answer (conform). ISI leads to a permanent change in behaviour as an individual accepts the opinion and behaviour, internalisation.

Question 7

Explain NSI

Answer 7

NSI is concerned with emotion, humans have a desire to be accepted and a fear of rejection. Following social norms is a way of being accepted. NSI leads to a change in behaviour only whilst the group are present as there is a private internal disagreement, compliance. NSI also occurs in unambiguous situations such as Asch’s (1951) study.
E.g. at the end of a play the entire audience applauds, you do the same even though you disliked the play.

Question 8

Evaluate SUPPORTING EVIDENCE for the 2 explanations of conformity

Answer 8

A strength for the explanations of conformity in ambiguous situations is that they are reliable. Jenness (1932) found that in ambiguous situations individuals are affected by the desire to be right. Sheriff’s (1936) autokinetic study also found over numerous estimates of the movement of light the group converged. This increases the reliability for the explanation of ISI as in both studies the estimates converged to the group estimate.

Question 9

Evaluate CRITIQUE for the 2 explanations of conformity

Answer 9

A criticism is that the situations and tasks used in researching the explanations were artificial. In Jenness’ study participants were asked to estimate the number of jelly beans in a jar, this was an ambiguous task. In Asch’s study participants were asked to match the correct sized line of a choice of 3 to a stimulus line, this was an unambiguous task. Both tasks do not occur in everyday life, therefore they are difficult to generalise to everyday situations involving conformity.

Question 10

Evaluate APPLICATIONS for the 2 explanations of conformity

Answer 10

One strength of NSI is that it has real-life applications. Schultz et al (2008) found that we’re able to change the behaviour of hotel guests. This was done by using printed messages encouraging them to save energy by using fewer bath towels. This example reinforces the use of NSI in daily behavioural changes.

Question 11

Conformity research, ISI and Internalisation - Jellybean study
A01

Answer 11

Jenness (1932) conducted a study to investigate the influence of an ambiguous task on conformity levels.

Participants made individual, private estimates of the number of jellybeans in a jar, an ambiguous task. Participants then discussed their estimates in groups, discovering that individuals differed widely in their estimates. After discussion, group estimates were created. Participants then made a second individual, private estimate.

Jenness found that participant’s second private guess tended to converge with the group estimate. The average change of opinion was greater among females - they conformed more.

Jenness concluded that in ambiguous situations individuals are affected by the majority’s opinion, resulting in ISI.

Question 12

Evaluate GENERALISABILITY in Conformity research, ISI and Internalisation - Jellybean study
A03

Answer 12

One strength is the sample that was used. Jennes’ sample included both men and women. Therefore the findings can be generalised to both sexes. Early social influence research often used only male samples as it was assumed women behave similarly to men.

Question 13

Evaluate RELIABILITY in Conformity research, ISI and Internalisation - Jellybean study
A03

Answer 13

One strength of Jeness’ research is that the results are reliable. In Sheriff’s study participants stared at a stationary light that appeared to move, even though it was stationary (autokinetc effect). Participants made an individual estimate of how far the light had moved. Participants were then grouped into 3, 2 with similar estimates and 1 very different and told to share their estimates. Sheriff found that over numerous estimates of the movement of light, the group converged. The results showed that the ‘deviant’ in the group conformed to the majority view. This results were similar over a small number of trials at the autokinetic task.

Question 14

Evaluate APPLICATIONS in Conformity research, ISI and Internalisation - Jellybean study
A03

Answer 14

One strength of Jenness’ research is that it is evident in real-life behaviour. For example, people make voting choices based on friends/family opinions, accepting their opinion is correct. In school it is common for a class to conform to the majority group’s opinion as the students have a desire to be right, informational social influence. These examples support Jenness’ conclusions that conformity is due to informational social influence.

Question 15

NSI and compliance - Asch’s research

A01

Answer 15

Asch (1951) conducted an experiment to investigate the extent to which social pressure from a majority group could affect a person to conform in an unambiguous task.

In this study, a group of 7 participants were tasked with identifying from a choice of 3 comparison lines (A,B or C) which one matched the stimulus line. There was an obvious answer (unambiguous). 6 of the paricipants were confederates, ‘in on it’ and the other a genuine (naïve) participant. Participants gave their answers out loud, one at a time, with the naïve participant answering either last or second to last. Beforehand, the confederates agreed upon their responses that they would give on each round. There were 18 trials in total and the confederates gave wrong answers to 12 of them. Asch measured how many times the naïve participant conformed to the group opinion.

Asch found that on average, a naïve participant gave a wrong answer 36.8% of the time. Overall, 75% conformed on at least one of the rounds. When participants were interviewed afterwards most said they conformed to avoid rejection (normative social influence).

Asch concluded that in unambiguous situations participants complied, temporarily changed their public behaviour but not their beliefs, with the majority opinion, resulting in normative social influence (fear of rejection).

Question 16

Evaluate GENERALISABILITY NSI and compliance - Asch’s research
A03

Answer 16

One limitation of Asch’s study is that it was only conducted in America. America is an individualist culture, where people are more concerned about themselves rather than their social group. Similar conformity studies in collectivist cultures have found conformity rates are sometimes higher than Asch found as they were more concerned with their social group. Asch’s findings may only apply to individualist cultures as he did not take cultural differences into account.

Question 17

Evaluate RELIABILITY NSI and compliance - Asch’s research

A03

Answer 17

One limitation of Asch’s research is that the results are unreliable. Perrin and Spencer (1980) repeated Asch’s original study with engineering students in the UK. They found that only 1 student conformed out of a total of 396 trials. This is a limitation as Asch’s conclusions are not consistent across situations and across time.

Question 18

Evaluate APPLICABILITY NSI and compliance - Asch’s research

A03

Answer 18

One strength of Asch’s research is that it is evident in real-life behaviour. For example, an individual may feel like they have to smoke if they are a part of a social group consisting of majority smokers as not to be rejected. Fashion styles may also be influenced by what is seen as socially accepted and will not result in rejection. These examples support Asch’s conclusions that conformity is due to NSI.

Question 19

Describe Asch’s (1955) variation research into conformity AO1

Answer 19

Asch (1955) was further interested in the conditions that might lead to an increase or decrease in conformity. He investigated this by carrying out some variations of his original procedure (1951).

The first condition Asch tested was group size. He wanted to see how determining the size of the majority affected the rate of conformity. Asch used the same original procedure but varied the group sizes, this ranged from 1 confederate to 15 confederates in each trial. Asch found that 1 confederate had no real effect on conformity, with 3 confederates, conformity to the wrong answer rose to 32% but the addition of further confederates made little difference. Asch concluded that in unambiguous situations conformity increased with group size to a point due to NSI. Therefore, adding any more confederates made little difference.

The second condition Asch tested was unanimity. He was interested in whether a non-conformist would affect the naïve participant’s conformity rate. Asch introduced a truthful confederate, and a dissenting confederate; who did not go along with the majority view but still gave an incorrect answer. The presence of a dissenting confederate reduced conformity, whether the dissenter was giving the right or wrong answer. Conformity fell from 32% to 5.5%. Asch concluded that the dissenter provides social support, reducing the power of NSI, unanimity decreases conformity due to the desire to be accepted.

The third condition Asch tested was task difficulty. He wanted to investigate the effect of making the line task more ambiguous on the rate of conformity. The comparison lines were made more similar in length, therefore it was harder to judge the correct answer. Asch found the rate of conformity increased when the task became more ambiguous. Asch concluded that conformity increased due to ISI, the naïve participants look to the confederates for guidance as they were unsure of the correct answer.

Question 20

Evaluation GENERALISABILITY Variables affecting conformity, Asch’s variations (1955)
AO1

Answer 20

One limitation of Asch’s study is that it was only conducted in America. America is an individualist culture, where people are more concerned about themselves rather than their social group. Similar conformity studies in collectivist cultures have found conformity rates are sometimes higher than Asch found as they were more concerned with their social group. Asch’s findings may only apply to individualist cultures as he did not take cultural differences into account.

Question 21

Evaluation ETHICAL ISSUES Variables affecting conformity, Asch’s variations (1955)
AO1

Answer 21

This study can be considered unethical as participants were deceived of the aim, therefore could not give fully informed consent. Participants were told they were taking part in a study on perception, not conformity. However, it can be argued that the participants had to be naïve in order to validate the test of conformity. If told the true aim, demand characteristics would have been a confounding variable. Asch partially addressed these ethical issues as he made his participants aware of the deception and true aims within the debrief.

Question 22

Evaluation APPLICATIONS Variables affecting conformity, Asch’s variations (1955)
AO1

Answer 22

One strength of Asch’s research is that it is evident in real life behaviour. For example, people are less likely to conform to substance abuse if just one friend drinks in the social group. Whereas, if three friends are drinking, the likelihood of conforming to drinking increases. This example reinforces Asch’s conclusion that the optimal group size of three increases conformity.

Question 23

Conformity to social roles - Zimbardo (1971)

A01

Answer 23

Zimbardo’s (1971) prison study was conducted to investigate the influence of social roles in conformity.

A mock prison was set up in the basement of Stanford University. 24 males were randomly assigned the role of guard or the role of prisoner, they were recruited through a newspaper advert which asked for volunteers in a study investigating prison life. To heighten realism, the prisoners were arrested from their homes by their local police and given a uniform and an ID number. The guards were instructed to maintain control over the prisoners but were not given advice on how. Over the course of the experiment, the guards took up their roles with enthusiasm/brutality and the prisoners became more passive. The study was stopped after 6 days instead of the indented 14 days due to the threat of prisoners’ physiological and physical health by the over-enthusiastic guards. The simulation revealed the power of the situation on influences people’s behaviour. Guards, prisoners and the researcher (Zimbardo acted as prison guard) all conformed to their roles within the prison, illustrating identification.

Question 24

Evaluation GENERALISABILITY Conformity to social roles - Zimbardo (1971)
A03

Answer 24

One limitation of Zimbardo’s study is that it was only conducted in America. America is an individualist culture where independence is valued. Research by Smith (2006) has shown that conformity is much higher in collectivist cultures where interdependence is valued, as it is viewed more favourably. Therefore it is difficult to generalise conclusions about conformity to their roles within the prison (social roles) from Zimbardo’s study to other cultures.

Question 25

Evaluation APPLICATIONS Conformity to social roles - Zimbardo (1971)
A03

Answer 25

One strength of Zimbardo’s research is that it is evident in real life behaviour. In Abu Grahib the soldiers conformed to the social role of the guard within the prison. The identification to this role led the prisoners to be beaten, forced to strip and masturbate and form naked piles. This reinforces Zimbardo’s conclusions about the power of the situation to influence people’s behaviour.

Question 26

Evaluation ETHICAL ISSUES Conformity to social roles - Zimbardo (1971)
A03

Answer 26

This study can be considered unethical as participants were subject to physical and psychological harm. For example, the guards would punish the prisoners by putting them into tiny, dark closets, making them clean toilets with their bare hands and make them pick nettles off blankets. Zimbardo stopped the study after 6 days and not the intended 14 due to harm but it is argued he should’ve done so earlier. These ethical issues are a limitation as the participants suffered long term psychological harm despite debrief many years later.

Question 27

Describe Milgram’s research into obedience

A01

Answer 27

Milgram (1963) conducted an experiment to investigate how far people would go in obeying an instruction if it involved harming another person.

Milgram recruited 40 male participants, between the ages 20-50, they were obtained through a newspaper advertisement. Participants did a rigged draw for their role, the true participant was always the teacher, the confederate was always the learner. The teacher was required to give the learner an electric shock each time the confederate each time the learner made a mistake, the shocks were not real. The voltage increased in 15 volt increments to 450 volts. If the teacher felt unsure about continuing the experimenter (another confederate) used a series of prods, e.g. ‘the experiment requires you to continue’.

Milgram found that out of the 40 participants 62% of them (25) administered the full 450 volts. 100% of participants administered at least 300 volts.

Milgram concluded that people were more likely to obey orders to hurt another person if the situational factors were correct.

Question 28

Evaluate Milgram’s research into obedience
GENERALISABILITY
A03

Answer 28

One limitation of Milgram’s study is that it was only conducted in America. However, cross cultural replications have demonstrated similar levels of obedience to Milgram. Meeus and Raajmakers (1986) found 22/24 participants were fully obedient (92%). However, Holland and America are both individualist cultures, obedience may be higher in collectivist cultures making Milgram’s conclusions difficult to generalise.

Question 29

Evaluate Milgram’s research into obedience
APPLICATIONS
A03

Answer 29

One strength of Milgram’s research is that it is evident in real life behaviour. In the My Lai Massacre American soldiers were ordered on a search and destroy mission in South Vietnam and told to ‘destroy the village and all its inhabitants’ massacring 347 unarmed civilians. Only one soldier faced charges and was found guilty, Lt. William Calley, his defence was that he was ordered by Captain Ernest Medina to kill everyone in the village of My Lai. This reinforces Milgram’s conclusions about the power of the situation on obedience.

Question 30

Evaluate Milgram’s research into obedience
ETHICAL ISSUES
A03

Answer 30

This study can be considered unethical as participants were subject to psychological harm. For example, many participants were seen to sweat, tremble, dig their fingernails into their hands, 3 even had seizures. This was partially overcome in the debrief as participants met the learner, so could see no harm had actually come to him. Furthermore, there was a 1 year follow up check for negative effects, 84% of participants during this follow up said they were glad they took part.

Question 31

Describe 2 or more situational variables that have been shown by Milgram to affect obedience
AO1

Answer 31

Milgram carried out a number of variations of his original study in order to consider the situational variables that might create a greater or lesser rate obedience.

One situational variable Milgram changed was the proximity of the victim. In Milgram’s original study, the teacher and learner were in adjoining rooms, so the teacher could hear the learner but not see them. In the variation, they were in the same room. In this condition, the obedience rate dropped from 60% to 40%.

Another situational variable Milgram changed was the proximity of the authority figure. In the original study, the experimenter was in the same room as the teacher. In the variation, the experimenter left the room and gave instructions to the teacher through a telephone. In this remote instruction condition time proximity was reduced. Milgram found that obedience further reduced to 20.5%.

Another situational variable Milgram changed was the location. Milgram changed the location of the study from a prestigious university (Yale) to a run-down building. In this situation the experimenter had less authority. As a result obedience fell to 47.5%.

Question 32

Evaluate 2 or more situational variables that have been shown by Milgram to affect obedience
GENERALISABILITY
AO3

Answer 32

A limitation of Milgram’s variations is that it is only conducted in America, an individualist culture. Individualist cultures may have reacted differently to the proximity of the learner than a collectivist culture. For example, proximity may be different in China due to different interpretations of personal space. Therefore it is difficult to support the conclusions of Milgram to people across cultures.

Question 33

Evaluate 2 or more situational variables that have been shown by Milgram to affect obedience
APPLICATIONS
AO3

Answer 33

A strength of Milgram’s variations is that it has real-life applications. School pupils are more likely to pick up litter if asked by a teacher in school than in town. Children are more likely to obey parents instructions to do chores if asked face to face than over the phone. These real=life applications provide support for the conclusions made based on the location and proximity to the authority figure variation.

Question 34

Evaluate 2 or more situational variables that have been shown by Milgram to affect obedience
ETHICAL ISSUES
AO3

Answer 34

Milgram’s findings from his variations provide a situational explanation of obedience. Mandel (1988) argues the findings offer an excuse or ‘alibi’ for evil behaviour. Mandel believes it is offensive to suggest that Nazis during the Holocaust were simply obeying orders and were victims themselves of situational factors beyond their control. Milgram’s finding raise ethical concerns as it suggests we willingly obey ‘evil’ commands.

Question 35

Outline situational explanations of obedience

Answer 35

There are several situational explanations of obedience.

One situational explanation of obedience is the agentic state. Obedience to a destructive authority occurs because a person does not take responsibility for their actions. Instead the believe they’re an ‘agent’ for someone else.
This is seen in Milgram’s study as the participants felt powerless to disobey the experimenter, as the experimenter was seen as the authoritative figure they were acting on behalf of.

Another situational explanation of obedience is the autonomous state. A person in this state is independent/free to behave according to their own principles and therefore feels a sense of responsibility for their own actions.
This is shown in proximity to the victim and authority figure variations in Milgram’s study. They gave the participant the ability to feel a sense of responsibility for their actions, reducing the level of obedience.

Another situational explanation of obedience is legitimate authority. For example, teachers, police officers and parents all have perceived authority over us. Allowing these examples to have social power over us helps society to function smoothly. A consequence of legitimate authority is that some people are granted the power to punish others. We willingly give up some independence as we trust these authorities to exercise their power appropriately. Problems arise when legitimate authority becomes destructive.
This was demonstrated in Milgram’s study, where the experimenter used prods to order participants to behave in ways that went against their conscience.

Question 36

Evaluate situational explanations of obedience
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
A03

Answer 36

There is evidence to support social factors as an explanation of obedience. Blass and Schmitt (2001) showed a film of Milgram’s study to students and asked them to identify who they felt was responsible for the harm to the learner. They put the responsibility onto the experimenter rather than the participant. The participants therefore recognised legitimate authority as the cause of obedience.

Question 37

Evaluate situational explanations of obedience
OPPOSING EVIDENCE
A03

Answer 37

The behaviour of the Nazis cannot be explained in terms of authority and agentic shift. Mandel (1998) describes how the German Battalion 101 obeyed orders to shoot civilians in a small town in Poland. However, they had the choice to be assigned to other duties of they preferred. As the men of Battalion 101 were not ordered to murder civilians directly their behaviour challenges the agentic state explanation.

Question 38

Evaluate situational explanations of obedience
APPLICATIONS
A03

Answer 38

A strength of this explanation is that it can help to explain real-life war crimes such as the My Lai Massacre using obedience. American soldiers committed horrific acts against civilians in Vietnam. The one soldier prosecuted stated he was only following orders supporting the legitimate authority explanation, as he was obeying orders from the commander in charge. This case also explains the agentic state explanation as the soldier did not take responsibility.

Question 39

Discuss the authoritarian personality as an explanation of obedience
A01

Answer 39

Adorno concluded from his 1950s research using th F-Scale (potential for Facism scale) that people with an authoritarian personality type have a tendency to be especially obedient to authority.

One characteristic of the authoritarian personality type is respect. They have an extreme respect for authority and submissiveness to it. This results from harsh parenting in childhood, this is likely to feature extremely strict discipline and expectation of absolute loyalty.

Another characteristic of the authoritarian personality type is contempt. They also have contempt for people they perceive as having inferior social status, and have highly conventional attitudes to sex, race and gender. One likely cause of this resentment and hostility is harsh parenting, the child cannot express these feelings directly against their parents because of a well-founded fear of reprisals. So these fears are displaced onto others who have been perceived weaker, a process known as scapegoating.

Another characteristic of the authoritarian personality type is comfort. People with an authoritarian personality are inflexible in their outlook - for them there is no ‘grey areas’. Everything is either right or wrong and they are very uncomfortable with uncertainty. This characteristic may arise because of parenting, characterised by conditional love - a parents’ love and affection for their child depends entirely on how they behave.

Question 40

Discuss the authoritarian personality as an explanation of obedience
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
A03

Answer 40

There is evidence to support dispositional actors as an explanation of obedience. Milgram and \elms (1966) carried up a following study, they selected 20 obedient participants and administered the F-scale (potential for Factors scale). They found obedient participants reported being less close to their father during childhood and were more likely to describe them in more negative terms; they also saw the authorisation figure in Milgram’s study as more admirable and the learner less so. This suggests that the obedient group has a higher trait of authoritarianism.

Question 41

Discuss the authoritarian personality as an explanation of obedience
CRITIQUE
A03

Answer 41

A limitation of the authorisation personality is that it is based on a lawed methodology. For example, the scale has been heavily criticised as everyone of its items in warded in the same direction. Participants may just tick one box for every question, acquiescence bias. This means it is possible to get a high score by ticking the same line of boxes down the page. People who agree with the issues on the F-scale are not necessarily authoritarian but simply agree to everything, this acquiescence bias reduces this internal validity of Adam’s conclusions.

Question 42

Discuss the authoritarian personality as an explanation of obedience
OPPOSING EVIDENCE
A03

Answer 42

There is opposing research to the dispositional explanation of obedience, it may be that education determines authoritarianism and obedience. Research has found that participants with lower levels of education were more obedient than those with higher levels of education. This suggests that instead of the authorisation personality causing obedience, a lack of education could be responsible for both. However, in Milgram and Elm’s study when education was statistically controlled obedient subjects were still more authoritarian on the F-scale.

Question 43

Describe 2 explanations of resistance to social influence

A01

Answer 43

The ability to resist social pressure is influenced by both situational and dispositional factors. The two explanations for resistance are: social support and locus of control.

Social support is a situational factor that reduces the pressure to conform. In Asch’s research into unanimity the presence of a dissenting confederate led to a 25% decrease in conformity. This may be because the presence of a non-conforming individual may reduce the power of NSI due to social support or reduce the power of ISI as they provide different information.

Pressure to obey can be reduced if there is another person seen to disobey. In Milgram’s social support variation, the rate of obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when a disobedient confederate was added. The disobedient confederate acts as a model to allow the participant to act from their own conscience.

Rotter (1966) proposed the concept of locus of control (LOC). The LOC is how much individual control we think we have over our vies and what happens to us. The concept is concerned with internal and an external LOC. Internals believe that they are mostly responsible for what happens to them. Externals believe that things happen because of thing outside of their control. People differ in the way they explain their successes and failures but this not simply a matter of being internal or external- there is a continuum.

People with an internal LOC of control are more likely to be able resist pressure to conform or obey. People with a high internal LOC are more self-confident, more achievement-orientated, have higher intelligence and less need for social approval. These personality traits lead to greater resistance to social influence.

Question 44

Evaluate 2 explanations of resistance to social influence
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
A03

Answer 44

Research evidence supports the link between the LOC and resistance to obedience. Holland (1967) repeated Milgram’s original study and measured whether participants were internals or externals. He found that 37% of internals did not continue to the highest shop level (showed some resistance). Whereas only 23% of externals did not continue. In other words, internals showed greater resistance to authority. Research supposed this nature increase the validity of the LOC explanation and our confidence that it can explain resistance.

Question 45

Evaluate 2 explanations of resistance to social influence
CRITIQUE
A03

Answer 45

The role of the LOC in resisting social influence may have been somewhat exaggerated. Rotter et a (1982) found that LOC is only important in new situations - it has little influence in familiar situations where previous experiences are always more important. This suggests people who have conformed or obeyed in specific situations in the past are likely to do so again, even if they have a high internal LOC. This is a limitation as it suggests LOC is not an important factor in resistance as Rotter suggested and is only helpful in explaining a small range of new situations.

Question 46

Evaluate 2 explanations of resistance to social influence
OPPOSING EVIDENCE
A03

Answer 46

Not all research supports the link between LOC and resistance. Twenge et al (2004) analysed data from American obedience studies over a 40 year period (from 1960 to 2002). The data showed that, over this time span, people have become more resistant to obedience but more external. If resistance was linked to an internal LOC, we would expect people to have become more internal. This challenges the link between LOC and increasing resistant behaviour.

Question 47

Describe research into minority influence

AO1

Answer 47

A minority of people can persuade others to adopt their beliefs, attitudes or behaviours. This often leads to internalisation-permanent change in attitude and behaviour. There are three behavioural styles which increase the effectiveness of minority influence.

Firstly, consistency which increases over time and within one minority group’s views increase the amount of interest from other people making the majority rethink their own view. Secondly, commitment which is when minorities can engage in quite extreme activities to attention to their cause. These can be risky but demonstrate commitment to their cause increasing interest from the majority. Thirdly, flexibility which when being extremely consistent can be seen as rigid and off-putting to the majority so the minority need to adopt their point of view and adopt reasonable and valid counter-arguments.

Moscavicci (1967) conducted an expeiment to investigate the effects of a consistent minority on the majority. He took groups of 6 female participants and presented them with blue slides differing in intensity and asked what colour they were. 2 participants were confederates and answered in one of two ways. Firstly, they always said the slide was green. Secondly, they said the slides are green on 2/3 of trials. Moscavicci found that the consistent minority group influenced the participants to say ‘green’ on 1.25% of the slides. Moscavicci concluded that consistency is vital for minority influence to occur. If the minority consistently give the same answer they are more likely to sway a majority.

Question 48

Evaluate research into minority influence
APPLICATIONS
AO3

Answer 48

A strength of minority social influence is that it has real life applications. For example, the suffragettes were consistent with their campaigns that began in 1866 and scaled down in 1914 as world war one broke out. During the campaigns they were committed to risky protests such as hunger strikes. The suffragettes were flexible in their attitudes as they took on mal jobs during the war. This example is a strength as it illustrates consistency, commitment and flexibility playing a role in minority social influences as eventually the suffragettes won their cause.

Question 49

Evaluate research into minority influence
VALIDITY
AO3

Answer 49

A limitation of minority social influences research is that it lacks ecological validity. Identifying the colour of a slide is an artificial judgement task, which is far removed from low minorities attempt to change the behaviour of minorities in real life. In cases such as jury service, the outcomes are vastly more important even literally as a matter of life or death. This means that the findings of minority influence are limited in how they can be applied to every day minority influences.

Question 50

Evaluate research into minority influence
ETHICAL ISSUES
AO3

Answer 50

A limitation of minority social influence research is that it has ethical issues. For example, in Moscavicci’s study participants were deceived of the real aim of the study and therefore could not give consent. However, it can be argued that the participants had to be naïve to validate the test of minority social influence. Half were told the true aim demand characteristics would have been a confounding variable. Moscavicci has partially addressed these ethical issues as he made his participants aware of the deception and the aims within the debrief.

Question 51

Describe the role of social influence processes in social change
AO1

Answer 51

Social change can be caused by majority social influence. Social changes in majority social influence can be caused by drawing attention to the majority’s behaviour. Environmental and health campaigns exploit conformity by appealing to NSI. They provide information about what others are doing. For example, by reducing litter by printing normative messages on bins (‘Bin it-others do’).

Social change is also caused by minority social influence. Firstly, this is done by drawing attention through social proof. For example, when the suffragettes committed to risky protests such as hunger strikes to draw attention to their campaign for the women’s right to vote. Secondly, consistency in attitude. For example, the suffragettes maintained the consistency of their message and intent on their campaign and continuously demonstrated this through marches. Thirdly, commitment. Some minorities engage in quite extreme activities and be seen as self- sacrificing to be seen as committed. For example, the suffragettes risked imprisonment and death from hunger strikes. Lastly, as the minority message spreads it reaches a tipping point where it leads to a whole-scale social change. For example, the suffragette movement led to all adult citizens having the right to vote, finally accepted by the majority in the UK (snowball effect).

Question 52

Describe the role of social influence processes in social change
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
A03

Answer 52

There is research to support the fact that conformity can lead to social change through the separation of NSI. Schultz (2009) found they were able to change the behaviour of hotel guests by using printed messages encouraging them to save energy. The messages that suggested other guests were using fewer bath towels were the most successful. This is a strength as it highlights how conformity due to NSI has led to the change in guest’s behaviour.

Question 53

Describe the role of social influence processes in social change
CRITIQUE
A03

Answer 53

One limitation of social norms interventions is that their widespread nature means that those whose behaviour that is more desirable that the norms will also receive tis message. Therefore, people already behaving constructively may begin to behave more destructively. Schultz et al (2007) found a campaign that was effective in getting heavy energy users to use less electricity, but it also caused those who used less that the norm to increase their usage. This affects social norm intervention can cause a ‘boomerang effect’, increasing undesirable behaviour in people previously behaving desirably.

Question 54

Describe the role of social influence processes in social change
CRITIQUE
A03

Answer 54

Social change through minority influence may be very gradual. History challenges the claim that minority influences, such as the suffragettes, brings about a social change quickly. People have a strong tendency to conform to the majority position, groups are more likely to maintain the status quo rather than engage in social change. The influence of a majority therefore creates the potential for change rather than actual social change.