Social Influence Flashcards
Summarise the three types of conformity.
Internalisation - when a person genuinely accepts the group norms. Private and public change of opinion. Persists even in absence of others.
Identification - conforming to opinions because you value the group. Publicly change opinion but may not privately.
Compliance - going along with others in public. Not changing opinion in private. Stops as soon as group pressure stops.
Summarise informational social influence.
Concerned with who has better info. Typically if you don’t know what is right or if the other person is an ‘expert’.
Summarise normative social influence.
Concerned with norms. Prefer social approval over rejection so go with the ideas of others.
Evaluate research support for ISI.
Lucas et al. Math questions. Greater conformity to incorrect answers when it was difficult vs easy. Shows people conform when they don’t know themselves.
Evaluate individual differences for NSI.
NSI does not affect everyone in same way. Difference if you care about being liked or not. (naffiliators).
Evaluate ISI and NSI working together.
Both processes are involved. E.g. social support reduces power of NSI. Difficult to tell which influence is working.
Summarise Asch’s research.
Line experiment. 4 lines. Asked to identify which line matched the first. One genuine and 6 other confederates (genuine was not aware). In 12/18 trials confederates all gave wrong answer.
Naive participant gave wrong answer 37% of time. 75% people conformed at least once.
Summarise the three Asch research variations.
- Group Size - Smaller group = less conformity.
- Unanimity - Tested to see if other non-conforming person would affect conformity. Reduced conformity to 25%. Allowed them to behave more independent.
- Task difficulty - Made it more difficult. Conformity increased.
Evaluate outdated study Asch.
Repeated in 1980 in the UK with engineering students. Only one student conformed. 1950’s were conformist times in America, but conformism is less today. His research is not consistent across time.
Evaluate artificial situation Asch.
They knew they were in a study so went along with demands. No reason not to conform. Findings do not generalise.
Evaluate limited application Asch.
Only men were tested. Men were from the US where there is individualist culture where people care less about social groups. Repeated in china where conformity rates were higher. Ethnocentric.
Summarise Zimbardo’s stanford prison experiment.
Mock prison at Uni. Students were tested and assigned randomly to roles of guard and prisoner. Prisoners were arrested in home and taken to prison. Prisoners had to follow 16 rules and had no names, only numbers.
Study was stopped after 6 days instead of 14. Officers behaviour became a threat. Prisoners rebelled and were set against each other to fight. Guards constantly reminded prisoners they were in control. After, the prisoners became depressed and anxious.
Everyone conformed to social roles within the prison.
Evaluate control of Zimbardo’s research.
Zimbardo had control over variables. Selection of participants. All were deemed emotionally stable. Increases internal validity so more confidence in drawing conclusions.
Evaluate lack of realism of Zimbardo’s research.
Participants were just play-acting rather than conforming. E.g. acting like a prisoner in a film.
Zimbardo argued that 90% of conversations were about prison life. High internal validity.
Evaluate role of dispositional influences of Zimbardo’s research.
Fromm accused Zimbardo of exaggerating power of situation to influence behaviour. Only minority of guards acted brutally. 1/3 wanted fair rules. Others helped prisoners.
Suggests Zimbardo’s conclusion is over exaggerated and not all of them conformed to social roles.
Summarise Milgram’s obedience study.
Teacher. Student (confederate). Experimenter. Teacher had to shock the student more every time they made a mistake. Shocks were not real. After 300v the student banged on wall and didn’t reply. Continued shocking after asking experimenter.
No participants stopped below 300 volts. 13% stopped at 300. 65% continued to highest level. Participants showed severe anxiety.
Evaluate low internal validity of Milgram’s study
Participants did not believe in the set up. They knew the shocks weren’t real. The study lacked internal validity and infact many did doubt it was real. Puppy study proved this wrong. Suggests the effects were genuine as they behaved the same with real shocks.
Evaluate good external validity of Milgram’s study
Conducted in a lab. Lab environment reflected wider authority relationships. Study of nurses who obeyed doctors supports this. Can be generalised to other situations.
Evaluate supporting replication of Milgram’s study.
The Game of Death TV show. Paid to give shocks to actor in front of audience. 80% of participants gave the maximum shock. Proves the original study was not a one off.
Summarise 3 variations of Milgram’s study.
- Proximity - Teacher and learner in same room. Obedience dropped from 65 to 40%.
Teacher forced hand onto electroshock plate. Obedience dropped to 30%.
Experimenter left room. Obedience dropped to 20%.
- Location - Changed location of study to run down building. Obedience fell to 47.5% as less authority.
- Uniform - Experimenter was played by normal person . Obedience dropped to 20%.
Evaluate research support of situational variables.
Three confederates dressed as businessman, milkman outfit and security guard. Asked to pick up litter.
2x more likely to obey security guard than businessman.
Supports uniform conveying authority.
