Social Influence

Question 1

What is internalisation

Answer 1

When someone genuinely accepts groups norms it results in a change of opinion and behaviour both public and private. Permanent and persistent in absence of group

Question 2

What is identification

Answer 2

When we identify with group we value want to be a part of it. Publicly change opinions and behaviour, think you agree at the time, even if we don’t privately agree once leave group

Question 3

What is compliance

Answer 3

Going along with the group in public not changing private opinion it’s a superficial change and behaviour stops as soon as group pressure ceases

Question 4

What is ISI

Answer 4

Informational social influence is a cognitive process and is the desire to be correct and assuming the majority has more or better information than you. Most likely in ambiguous situations

Question 5

What is NSI

Answer 5

About the desire to behave like others, look at typical behaviour for social group (norms). Emotional rather than cognitive process. People prefer social approval rather than rejection. Most likely in unfamiliar situations with people you know or will get to know

Question 6

Evaluations of explanations for conformity

Answer 6

ISI has research support - Lucas et al asked students to give hard and easy answers to maths questions. More conformity for hard answers.

ISI has individual differences- people who are confident and or knowledgable less influenced by the view of majority. Asch found students less conformist than others

Two process explanation oversimplified- ISI and NSI are viewed as two separate things when they could be at work at same time or other factors

NSI has research support - Asch variation asked participants to write down answer and conformity fell meaning they were self conscious before about not being the norm

NSI individual differences- some people have greater need for social relationships (nAffiliators) this isn’t taken into account in the explanation

Question 7

What was the procedure for Aschs original study

Answer 7

Recruited 123 American male students each tested individually with group of 6-8 confederates. On each trial identified the length of a standard line. Each participant completed 18 trials. First few trials confederates gave correct answers, on 12 critical trials they gave the wrong answer

Question 8

Finding and conclusion from Asch study

Answer 8

Participant gave wrong answer 36.8% of time - shows high level of conformity called the Asch effect. Considerable individual differences- 25% never conformed, 75% conformed at least once. Most said they conformed to avoid rejection (NSI) but continued to trust own opinion (compliance)

Question 9

What were the variables affecting conformity tested in aschs study

Answer 9

Group size - number of confederates
Unanimity- having another dissenting person who isn’t conforming provide social support
Task difficulty- made the task more difficult by making the stimulus and comparison lines all more similar so more ambiguous

Question 10

What were the findings from the variables affecting conformity changes

Answer 10

Group size- 2 confederates conformity was 13.6% with 3 31.8% adding more made little difference

Unanimity- presence of dissenting confederate whether they were right or wrong reduced conformity, gave social support and confidence to give their own answer

Task difficulty - conformity increased with task difficulty, ISI plays a greater role now as it is more ambiguous

Question 11

Evaluation of Asch study

Answer 11

Temporal validity is questionable- 1950 a conformist time in America so people less likely to conform in subsequent decades. Perrin and Spencer repeated it in 1980 with engineering students only one conforming response in 396 (could suit skill set)

Task artificial- knew they were in study, demand characteristics, no reason not to conform of no consequence, don’t generalise to important everyday things

Only apply to certain groups - men and USA is a individualist culture so less worried about group needs, conformity may be higher in a collectivist culture.

Ethical issues- naive participant deceived

Question 12

What study looks into conformity to social roles

Answer 12

Zimbardo Stanford prison experiment

Question 13

Procedure of zimbardo study

Answer 13

Mock prison in basement of Stanford uni to whether brutality of guards is a sadistic personality or the situation.
24 emotionally stable from psychological testing randomly assigned role of guard or prisoner. Prisoners routines heavily regulated, 16 rules enforced by 3 officers at a time. Prisoners names never used, guards had uniform wooden club handcuffs keys and mirror shades- deindividuation

Question 14

How did zimbardo increase realism for prisoners

Answer 14

Arrested in homes delivered to prison blindfolded strip searched deloused and issued uniform and number

Question 15

What were the behavioural findings of zimbardo study

Answer 15

In two days rebellion from prisoners ripped uniform swore. Guards harassed prisoners conducting frequent headcounts sometimes at night. Enforce rules and punish whenever they can.

Question 16

How did guards behaviour effect prisoners

Answer 16

Both mentally and physically:
After rebellion stopped prisoners subdued anxious and depressed.
3 released early from signs of psychological disturbance.
One on huger strike, attempted to force feed put in the hole.
Stopped after 6 instead of 8 days

Question 17

What does the zimbardo study mean for conformity to social roles

Answer 17

The situation has a high power to influence people’s behaviour. Guards prisoners and researchers all conformed to their roles.
More guards identified with role the more brutal they were.

Question 18

Evaluation of zimbardo study

Answer 18

Control over variables- also random assignment of roles increases internal validity

Lack of realism- participants play acted what they thought was correct. One guard based character from cool hand luke. Riot because of preconceptions. However data showed 90% of convo was about prison life showed they were immersed thought it was real increasing internal validity

Understated dispositional influences- only a third behaved brutally others were fair. Conclusion that participants conform to social roles may be over exaggerated on power of situation. Differences show that could exercise right or wrong choices despite the pressure

Lacks supporting research but has contradicting research reicher and haslam guards failed to identify with role and prisoners worked togherer

Unethical- questionable right to withdraw as zimbardo was both lead researcher and super intendant. Bad protection of participant

Question 19

What’s an agentic state

Answer 19

Act on behalf of another Obedience to authority occurs because a person becomes their agent and they feel no personal responsibility for their actions

Question 20

What’s the opposite of agentic state

Answer 20

Autonomous state - autonomy means being independent and free. Person behaved according to their own principles and feels responsible for actions

Question 21

What is agentic shift

Answer 21

Shift from autonomy to being an agent. Milgram suggested it occurs when we perceive someone as an authority figure. Higher position in social hierarchy

Question 22

What is a binding factor

Answer 22

Aspects of a situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise the damage they’re causing - reduce moral strain.

Question 23

What are the two social-psychological factors explaining obedience

Answer 23

Agentic state and legitimacy of authority figure

Question 24

Explain legitimacy of authority figure

Answer 24

Societies are structured hierarchically, those above us have legitimate authority agreed by society. We accept their ability to exercise social power over others to keep things running smoothly. Bad leaders e.g Hitler show abuse of this

Question 25

Evaluation of agentic state

Answer 25

Has reasearch support- blass and schmidt asked students who was to blame in milgrams study they said the researcher.

Limited explanation- doesn’t explain all situations e.g German Reserve Police had a choice of whether to shoot innocents and chose to do it- not powerless to disobey

Question 26

Evaluation of legitimacy of authority figure

Answer 26

Accounts for cultural differences- authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate in some cultures. This reflects how in some cultures it differs how people view authority figures. Supportive findings from cross cultural research increase validity

Application for situations where high levels of obedience is required- apply theories to prisons and the army

Question 27

What’s the dispositional explanation for obedience and the characteristics

Answer 27

The authoritarian personality- exaggerated respect for authority and submissiveness to it. Express contempt to people of inferior social status
Conventional attitudes towards race and gender.

Question 28

What causes the authoritarian personality a psychodynamic explanation

Answer 28

Forms in childhood through harsh parenting, extremely strict discipline expectation of absolute loyalty, impossibly high standards and severe criticism. Conditional love

Question 29

What is scapegoating

Answer 29

The experiences of an authoritarian child create resentment and hostility but can’t express against parents due to fear of reprisals. Feeling are displaced onto those viewed as weaker. Explains hatred towards people seen as socially inferior

Question 30

What’s the study for the authoritarian personality and aim

Answer 30

Adorno et al - investigate unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups of more than 2000 middle class white Americans

Question 31

What is the Adorno procedure

Answer 31

Several scales developed including potential for fascism scale. E.g there is hardly anything lower than a person who doesn’t feel great love gratitude and respect for his parents.

Question 32

Adorno findings and conclusion

Answer 32

Authoritarians who scored High on the f scale identified with strong people and were contemptuous to the weak. Conscious of their status showing excessive respect to those above them. Had a cognitive style no fuzziness between categories and had stereotypes of others.

Question 33

Evaluation of authoritarian personality and f scale research

Answer 33

Support for link between A.P and obedience- elmms and milgram interviewed high obedience found they scored high on f scale ( correlation not causation)

Explanation is limited- millions of Nazi Germans displayed obedience and anti Semitic behaviour unlikely they all had authoritarian personality

F scale methodology open to huge biases. Items worded in a direction that encourages agreement. Researcher also knew who had the personality before the f scale test

Question 34

What are the explanations for resistance to social influence (both obedience and conformity)

Answer 34

Social support and locus of control

Question 35

Explain social support

Answer 35

Pressure to conform reduced with another dissenter. Someone else not following majority frees others to follow own conscience. If non conforming peer stops being different the person tends to as well. Obedience reduced by another dissenting partner.

Question 36

What’s an internal locus of control

Answer 36

Believe things that happen to them are largely controlled by themselves. Base ideas on their own beliefs, more self confident, achievement oriented, higher intelligence and less need for social approval.
More likely to resist social influence

Question 37

What’s an external locus of control

Answer 37

Things happen outside of their control. Linked to depression

Question 38

Evaluation for resistance to social influence

Answer 38

Research evidence supports role of dissenting peer- even if dissenter had thick glasses and said had bad eyesight it encouraged independence in Asch study proves its the social support not ISI that has allowed them to be free of group pressure.

Research evidence support link between locus of control and resistance to obedience- holland repeated milgram and found internals obeyed less

Not all research supports link between LOC and resistance to obedience- twenge et al analysed American loc- people have become more independent but also more external, if resistance was linked to loc would expect people to become more internal

Question 39

How does minority influence change people’s opinions

Answer 39

Changing the behaviour/opinions of the majority. Their influence leads to internalisation through the three processes of consistency commitment and flexibility

Question 40

Explain consistency

Answer 40

Minority's views gain more  interest. Make others rethink their views 
Synchronic consistency (people in the minority are all saying the same thing)
Diachronic consistency ( saying the same thing for a long time)

Question 41

Explain commitment

Answer 41

Gain attention through extreme activities. Must create some risk to minority to demonstrate commitment to the cause. Augmentation principle- make people realise how much minority believe in their view so makes them think about their own views

Question 42

Explain flexibility

Answer 42

Should balance consistency with flexibility so don’t appear rigid which is off putting to the majority. Minority should adapt point of view and accept reasonable counter arguments

Question 43

What’s the snowball effect

Answer 43

Over time more people get converted and switch from minority to majority. The more this happens the faster the rate of conversion. Minority becomes majority and social change has occurred

Question 44

What’s the research for minority influence

Answer 44

Moscovici et al
Group of six people viewed a set of 36 blue green slides varying in intensity and stated whether they were green or blue. Three conditions confederated consistently said slides were green. Inconsistent about colour. No confederates

Question 45

What’s the findings from moscovici study

Answer 45

Consistent minority meant participants copied and got it wrong on 8.42% of trials, 32% gave same answer on at least one trial.

Inconsistney minority meant 1.25% agreement
No confederates people got it wrong 0.25% of time

Question 46

Evaluation of minority influence

Answer 46

Moscovici study proves importance of consistency

Minority influence research often involves artificial tasks - the minority changing opinions in moscovici study has no real consequence unlike jury decision making etc. Findings lack external validity as don’t tell us how it works in real life. Means applications are limited

Research supports internalisation as a process when becoming minority. Moscovici variation where they wrote down their answers showed more agreement meaning they were persuaded privately as well.

Question 47

What example from history shows minority influence on social change and the process

Answer 47

Draw attention- civil rights marches highlighted reality of black separation

Consistency - lots of marches with same message

Deeper processing- lead people to think about the unjustness

Augmentation principle - willing to suffer for cause shows commitment and gives more power. Freedom riders risked their lives

Snowball effect - minority influence spreads and more and more people join until it becomes majority and NSI and ISI takes over

Social cryptomnesia - change occurs but people have no memory of it happening g

Question 48

What is social change

Answer 48

Social change refers to any significant alteration over time in behavior patterns and cultural values and norms.

Question 49

What are the lessons from conformity research in relation to social change

Answer 49

One person can break the power of the majority encouraging others to dissent- this demonstrates potential for social change

Social change can also be encouraged by (NSI) drawing people’s attention to what others do, they want to fit it with the majority and therefore change behaviour e.g recycling

Question 50

Lessons from obedience research in relation to social change

Answer 50

Disobedient models make change more likely. E.g in milgrams the confederate saying no in the pairs variation made obedience plummet

Gradual commitment leads to drift- once someone has obeyed to a small instruction can lead to drift and obey larger things

Question 51

Evaluation of social change and minority influence

Answer 51

Minority influence is only indirectly effective in creating social change, is also delayed so effects not seen for a long time.

Identification is an important factor overlooked in minority influence- people don’t want to have the negative label that comes with some minority’s e.g hippies so minority groups need to be desirable to be a part of

Cognitive side- Doubt and less validity on moscovici theory that minority makes us think more, if more people think differently to us then that is likely to be dwelled upon in deeper detail. However this only works if don’t agree with majority

Question 52

Other evaluations for social change

Answer 52

Research supports NSI as useful to social change - Nolan et al notes on doors saying everyone was trying to reduce energy usage daw a much larger decrease than the control group that just said try to reduce energy usage

Explanations of social change rely on studies from moscovici asch and milgram all have artificial tasks meaning they may have low ecological validity

Question 53

Who was used in milgrams study

Answer 53

40 male participants found through newspaper advert 20-50 years old from unskilled to professional. $4.50 for coming

Question 54

What was the procedure for milgrams study

Answer 54

Participant drew lots for the role but the other participant mr Wallace was a confederate and was always the learner. Told they could leave whenever. Learner in another room strapped to chair each time got word pair wrong teacher had to give an electric shock of increasing intensity up to 450 which is deadly. Labelled from 15 at slight shock to danger severe shock. At 300 learner banged wall gave no response then At 350 banged then nothing after that

Question 55

What were the prods the scientist gave the learner

Answer 55

Please go on
The experiment requires you continue
It’s essential you continue
You have no other choice but to proceed

Question 56

What were the milgram findings

Answer 56

No stop below 300
12.5% stopped at 300
65% continued to 450
Participants showed extreme tension sweating trembling and three had seizures. Estimated before that no more than 3% would go to 450 so unexpected.

Question 57

Evaluation of milgram study

Answer 57

Lacked internal validity as some participants guessed the shocks weren’t real. However 70% of participants thought they were real

Good external validity- lab based relationship reflected wider real life authority relationships e.g nurse and doctor so results can be generalised

Replications have supported the research e.g French documentary 80% gave the max voltage of 450

Ethical issues - deceived participants, lied about the reason for study, thought shocks were real and thought it was random allocation.

Question 58

What are the variations of milgrams study

Answer 58

Proximity- teacher and learner in same room 65% to 40%. Teacher force learner hand onto plate dropped to 30%. Remote instructions from a telephone not in room down to 20.5%

Location - from Yale to run down building fell to 47.5% had less authority in this setting

Uniform- scientist called away so someone in ordinary clothes gave instructions. Fell to 20%. Suggests uniform strong visual authority symbol and cue to behave in obedient manner

Question 59

Evaluation for situational variables of obedience

Answer 59

Research support for situational variables- bickman looked at affect of authority on obedience with a confederate dressed in shirt and jacket or security guard more likely to give coin to security guard than the normal person - supports uniform conclusion

May lack internal validity- variation where experimenter replaces by public member it’s so contrived people likely to have worked it out

Replicated in other cultures- Miranda et al repeated in Spain found 90% obedience so not limited to American males. However are western societies so premature to apply to everyone

Control of variables- systematically changed the variables so know the change in obedience has a cause and effect relationship with the thong that was changed