Social influence

Question 1

3 types of conformity

Answer 1

Compliance

Identification

Internalisation

Question 2

Compliance

Answer 2

Agree with group externally but keep personal opinions, temporary change in behaviour

Question 3

Identification

Answer 3

Behaviour and private values change only when with the group, as membership is valued.

Question 4

Internalisation

Answer 4

Personal opinions genuinely change to match the group. This is a permanent change.

Question 5

Explanations of conformity

Answer 5

Informational social influence

Normative social influence.

Question 6

Informational social influence

Answer 6

If correct behaviour is uncertain, we look to the majority for guidance on how to behave because we want to be correct. Informational social influence results in internalisation.

Question 7

Normative social influence

Answer 7

When the individual wants to appear normal and be one of the majority, so they are approved and not rejected. Normative social influence leads to compliance.

Question 8

Evidence supporting normative social influence.

Answer 8

Asch 1951 when given an unambiguous line length test with confederates choosing the incorrect response, participants gave the incorrect response 32% of trials.

When interviewed, participants suggested they conformed to a void rejection from the group majority supporting normative social influence.

Question 9

Evidence supporting informational social influence

Answer 9

Jenness 1932 who asked participants first alone, then in groups, then make second guess alone the number of beans in a jar an ambiguous task.

Individuals second private guess moved closer to the group guess, supporting the informational social influence explanation for conformity.

Question 10

Evidence against informational and social influence explanations for conformity

Answer 10

There is some evidence some people are more able to resist social pressures to conform such as locus of control.

Question 11

Who did a study on the variables affecting conformity that you need to know?

Answer 11

Asch 1951

Question 12

What 3 variables did Asch use in his study to see the affect on conformity?

Answer 12

Group Size

Unanimity

Task difficulty

Question 13

Procedure Asch 1951 variables affecting conformity

Answer 13

Participants were deceived and asked to take part in a “visual perception task” and tested with 7-9 confederates.

1st card has a standard line, 2 card had three comparison lines, only one being the same length as the standard line.

Groups were then asked on 18 trials which comparison line was the same as the standard. On 12 ‘Critical’ trials confederates gave wrong answers.

Question 14

Results of all Asch conformity study.

Answer 14

Conformity was 32%,
0.04% in control group.

75% conformed at least once

5% all 12 times.

Question 15

Results of Asch conformity study when Group size was changed?

Answer 15

3% conformity with 1 confederate

13% with two confederates

33% with three confederates

Didn’t increase with more confederates

Question 16

Results of Asch conformity study when Unanimity was changed?

Answer 16

If one confederate gives the correct response disagreeing with the majority conformity drops to 5.5%, due to the role of social support.

Question 17

Results of Asch conformity study when Task difficulty was changed?

Answer 17

When the difference between the line lengths is small conformity increased in the study due to the role of informational social influence.

Question 18

Evidence against Asch variables affecting conformity study.

4 long points never going to remember on flashcard for whiteboard.

Answer 18

Task was insignificant and did not have any moral importance - therefore, there were few costs attached to conforming. It was not a type of task that we confront in everyday life, meaning that it has low ecological validity. This limits the extent we can generalise results to conformity in everyday life.

Asch sample were male American students as a result having a low population validity and ethnocentric bias we cannot tell whether women or other cultures would conform in a similar way.

Study raises ethical issues - participants were deceived and might have felt humiliated as there was no protections in place for participants of psychological harm.

Perrin and Spencer 80 claimed the study was a ‘child of its time’ - that the climate of 50’s America was particularly conformist and that social chance since the 50’s has meant that people are now far more non-conformist and independent. When they repeated Asch’s study in the UK in the 70’s using science and engineering student they found only 1 conformist response out of 396 trials.

Question 19

Who conducted a study on testing conformity to social roles?

Answer 19

Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment 71

Question 20

What was Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment 71 procedure?

Answer 20

Fake prison created in the basement of Stanford university, 21 male students rated as physically and mentally stable chosen from 75 volunteers who responded to newspaper adverts who were randomly selected into 10guards and 11 prisoners.

Prisoners given realistic arrest by local police, fingerprinted, stripped, deloused and given a prison uniform and number to dehumanise them. They had to follow strict rules during the day. Guards had complete control and given a uniform, clubs, handcuffs and sunglasses to avoid eye contact.

Question 21

What were the results of Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment?

Answer 21

Prisoners and guards confirmed to their social roles quickly, but after two days prisoners revolted against the poor treatment by the guards. In day six of the experiment was cancelled early due to fears for the prisoner’s mental health.

Extreme behaviour of previously stable students suggests prison environments have the situational power to change behaviour to conform to socially defined roles.

Question 22

What are the evaluative weaknesses of Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment?

Answer 22

Ecological validity, clearly the prison was not real and the participants were engaged role play rather than a real-life situation, knew they could leave the experiment when they wished, and were only confined for a short period of time. To what extent we can generalise findings to real institutions and real abuse of power by guards against prisoners is, therefore, debatable.

Ethically questionable psychological study. Although participants gave informed consent they were not told they would be arrested at home. They were not deceived and were given the right to withdraw, but they were subject to fairly severe physical and psychological harm, and it is argued that Zimbardo had a moral responsibility to stop the study as soon as the guards showed any signs of brutality.

Question 23

What are the evaluate strengths of Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment?

Answer 23

The social roles given to the guard and prisoner of powerful and powerless do seem associated in the real world with sadistic violence.

He counselled participants afterwards to cope with their experiences and that the study illustrated such an important aspect of human behaviour that the temporary suffering experienced by some participants was justified.

Behaviour of the guards in study has been witnessed countless times in total institutions e.g. Abu Graib prison in Iraq where a number of American soldiers were found to have sadistically abused Iraqi prisoners.

Question 24

What was Milgram’s obedience study? Procedure.

Answer 24

Milgram 1963 was a study to test obedience in response to the holocaust.

40 male 20-50 year old volunteers to a newspaper advert for a study on ‘memory’. Participants were given the role of teacher and introduced to confederates “professor” in a lab coat and “learner”.

Learner was strapped to a chair in another room and had electrodes attached. Participant told to deliver electric shocks, becoming intense ranging 15-450volts when “learner” answered incorrectly.

At 300volts the “learner” made noise and refused to go on, after 315volts the “learner” made no more noise, indicating unconsciousness or death. If the participant/teacher resisted the “professor” encouraged them to continue.

Question 25

What was the findings from Milgram’s obedience study?

Answer 25

Participants became distressed but continued to obey:
100% continuing to 300volts
12.5% stopped at 300volts
65% continued to the max 450volts

Question 26

What was the 3 variations Milgram did to his obedience study to see situational variables affecting obedience?

Answer 26

Proximity replication

Location replication

Uniform replication

Question 27

What was the proximity replication of Milgram’s obedience study?

Answer 27

Learner is in the same room.

Question 28

What were the results in the proximity replication of Milgram’s obedience study?

Answer 28

Obedience dropped to 40%

On holding hand on shock plate it fell further to 30%

Question 29

What was the Location replication of Milgram’s obedience study?

Answer 29

At office block in run down area.

Question 30

What was the results of the location replication of Milgram’s obedience study?

Answer 30

Obedience fell to 47.6% due to lack of legitimacy of authority

Question 31

What was the Uniform replication of Milgram’s obedience study?

Answer 31

Professor replaced with confederate in normal clothes.

Question 32

What was the results of the Uniform replication of Milgram’s obedience study?

Answer 32

Obedience dropped to 20% due to lack of legitimacy of authority.

Question 33

What evidence is there supporting Milgram’s obedience study research?

Answer 33

Hofling conducted a field experiment in a psychiatric hospital. Boxes of placebos labeled ‘Smg Astrofen, maximum dose 10mg daily’ were placed in the pharmacy.

A confederate doctor telephoned the nurse on duty saying he needed the nurse to give 20mg of Astrofen to a patient as he was in a hurry, and that he’d sign the drug authorisation document later.

To obey the doctor’s orders the nurse would be breaking 3 procedural rules (i) the dose was above the daily limit, (ii) drugs should only be given after written authorisation from a doctor, (iii) the nurse must be sure the doctor is genuine.

Despite these important rules 21 out of 22 nurses immediately obeyed. Thus, this more ecological valid study supports Milgram’s original findings.

Question 34

What ethical criticisms are there of Milgram’s obedience study?

Answer 34

Milgram gained consent from participants but not informed consent, they knew they were in a psychological study but did not know what the true nature of the study was. It is likely they would not have given consent had they known the true aim.

Participants were pressured to continue in the study even though they asked to withdraw. Nearly all participants expressed anxiety and a desire to not shock the “learner”. Although he told them they could at any point they wanted, once the study was in progress if they expressed a desire to stop he responded with statement such as ‘it is absolutely essential that you continue’.

Participants were exposed to high levels of psychological stress. It could be argued that the study caused long-lasting damage to self-esteem.

Question 35

What were methodological criticisms of Milgram’s study?

Answer 35

Lacked ecological validity, findings could not be generalised beyond the laboratory setting. The obedience task that Milgram’s participants performed was artificial and had no social ‘context’, they didn’t fear punishment if they disobeyed as soldiers would for example.

Participants may have shown demand characteristics, they didn’t believe the shocks were real and play-acted along. Although post-experimental interviews seem to indicate that participants did take the study seriously, a research assistant of Milgram’s claimed that quite a number of participants believed the shocks to be fake, and it was these participants who gave the highest intensity shocks.

Question 36

What are dispositions (dispositional explanation for obedience that’s why)

Answer 36

Personality types.

Question 37

What is the dispositional explanation for obedience?

Answer 37

Adorn argued that certain dispositions (authoritarian personality) were prone to high levels of obedience as a result of negative early childhood experiences.

Question 38

What are the characteristics of the ‘authoritarian personality’ that is prone to higher levels of obedience according to Adorno?

Answer 38

High levels of obedience and respect for authority.

Support for corporal (bodily) and capital punishment (death penalty).

Racial /out-group prejudice.

Question 39

Adorno’s study on dispositional explanation for obedience’?

Answer 39

Adorno interviewed over 2000 US students about their political beliefs and early childhood experiences and used projective tests to assess whether they were racially prejudice.

Question 40

Findings Adorno dispositional explanations for obedience?

Answer 40

Adorno found that strict parents who used harsh physical punishment tended to produce children with high levels of obedience and respect for authority. Adorno drew on Frued’s view that a harsh upbringing lead to feelings of hostility and ager to parents which is ten displaced onto weaker, minority groups.

Question 41

From Adorno’s research what did he produce?

Answer 41

F-Scale

Question 42

What is the F-Scale?

Answer 42

Facist-Scale, people who scored highly on the F-scale showed high respect for people with higher social status.

Had fixed stereotypes for other groups and identified with “strong people and disliked “weak” people. They were inflexible with strong, clear ideas of right and wrong.

Question 43

Step-by-step guide for dispositional explanation for obedience?

Answer 43

Adorno study-2000 US students

Developed F-scale and other questionnaires and scales which measured ethnocentrism and anti-Semitism.

From this he claimed that certain dispositions explained why people conformed these were all put under the title ‘Authoritarian personality’.

Question 44

Research against dispositional explanation for obedience.

Answer 44

Questionnaires used to measure personality type can be criticised in that participants may answer socially sensitive questions with socially appropriate answers. Respondents may feel guilty or that they might be natively judged for expressing negative views about for example, homosexuals. This would lead to questionnaires used in the explanation for obedience such as F-Scale lacking validity.

Adorno’s theory cannot account for the kind of mass and sudden racism witnessed in events such as Nazi Germany, other wise all Germans would had to have had similar punishment-based childhoods, all at the same time.

Question 45

Research supporting dispositional explanation for obedience.

Answer 45

Milgram believed that social factors such as proximity, location and social support were the most important factors influencing whether someone would obey but he also stated that personality type may have been a deciding factor in influencing why some of his participants obeyed whereas others refused to obey.

After Milgram’s study on variables affecting obedience he carried out interviews with his participants after they had completed the experiment and found that those participants who shocked the learner to 450V were much more likely to score highly on measures of authoritarianism and lower on measures of social responsibility than those who refused to obey the experimenter.

This supports Adorno’s dispositional explanation for obedience and indicates that social factors can combine with dispositional factors in influencing overall levels of obedience.

Question 46

What are the two explanations of resistance to social influence?

Answer 46

Social Support

Locus of Control

Question 47

What is social support as an explanation of resistance to social influence?

Answer 47

Seeing others resist social influence reduces pressure to obey or conform, increasing the individual’s confidence. Either providing a disobedient role model or creating a small alternate group to belong to.

It breaks the unanimity go the groups and challenges the legitimate authority of the authority figure.

Question 48

What is Independent behaviour?

Answer 48

Any individual or group who resists pressures to conform or obey. For example, early feminists held non-conformist views and were disobedient.

Question 49

What is Locus of control?

Answer 49

This concept refers to how much control a person thinks they have over their own behaviour and events in their life.

Question 50

What is a High internal locus of control?

Answer 50

The individual believes they have a great deal of control over events in their lives so that what happens to them is primarily caused by their own personal decisions, abilities and efforts.

Question 51

If you have a high external locus of control how is there going to effect social influence?

Answer 51

A high external locus of control means that an individual is more likely to take personal responsibility for their own lives and be less likely to conform and obey.

Question 52

What is high external locus of control?

Answer 52

The individual believes that what happens to them is largely out of their control, and caused by fate, luck, or other external circumstances.

Question 53

If you have a high external locus of control how is there going to affect social influence?

Answer 53

Less likely to take personal responsibility for their own lives and be more likely to conform and obey.

Question 54

What evidence is there supporting locus of control as a resistance to social influence?

Answer 54

Holland 1967 did a replication of Milgram, participants assessed for locus of control. 37% of those with an internal LOC refused to continue to the highest shock level, compared to 23% of those with an external LOC.

Anderson 78 found that amongst a group of college students those who passed a high internal locus of control were more likely to emerge as leaders in their groups. It can be assumed that such people lead rather than conform to the ideas of others.

Atgis (‘98) found that high external locus of control and conformity were correlated (+0.37) suggesting that there are higher rates of conformity in ‘externals’ rather than ‘internals’.

Question 55

What evidence is there supporting social support as a resistance to social influence?

Answer 55

Asch’s study, conformity rates dropped to 36.8% to 5.5% when there was another independent participant present. The other participant does not have to agree with this person in order for them to remain independent - Asch observed that then this ally gave a different, but incorrect, response to the majority, conformity still decreased to 9%

Milgram’s study when 2 other confederates were present how refused to continue with shocks, participants’ obedience dropped to 10%. Thus, others who are disobedient may act as role models on whom we base our own behaviour and provide a sense of social support, strength and group opposition to the authority figure.

Question 56

What is minority influence?

Answer 56

A change in beliefs or behaviours by a larger group to fit in with a minority or individual’s views and behaviours.

Question 57

What is an example minority influence?

Answer 57

Emmeline Pankhurst and the suffragettes (a minority) challenging mainstream (the majority) sexist views in the uK and eventually won the right for women to vote. Thus minority can lead to social change.

Question 58

What is the snowball process of minority influence?

Answer 58

Minorities changing majority opinions start as a slow process. However as more of the majority conversation to the new view the process speeds up in a process called the snowball effect. And the minority view improves its acceptability.

Question 59

What 3 behaviours must a minority do to cause minority influence to occur?

Answer 59

Consistency

Commitment

Flexibility

Question 60

What is consistency in minority influence?

Answer 60

The minority needs to demonstrate it is confidence in its view, if they repeat the same message over time the argument seems more powerful.

Question 61

What evidence is there supporting consistency in helping minorities to have any real effect?

Answer 61

Moscovici ‘69 conducted a study where 4 genuine participants (the majority) were put into a group with 2 confederates (the minority). The group were shown a series of 36 slides of different shades of blue and asked to state the colour of each slide.

In condition 1, the 2 confederates consistently responded that the slides were green rather than blue.

In condition 2, the confederates responded that the slides were green 24 out of 36 times (inconsistent).

The number of genuine participants who agreed with the minority was 8% in condition 1 and 1.25% in condition 2.

This suggests that a consistent minority can change a majority’s viewpoint even when asked to agree to an obviously wrong answer.

Such consistency can be seen in successful social change movements such as the suffragettes who consistently fought for equal voting rights for women.

Question 62

Why must a minority group be flexible?

Answer 62

Mugny suggested that flexibility in minorities argument is essential as the minority is relatively powerless compared to the majority and need, therefore, to negotiate their position rather than try to enforce it

A minority who appears too rigid and inflexible in their beliefs can cause majorities to reject there message. However, if a minority are too flexible they may be viewed as inconsistent and this, again, may cause the majority to ignore the minority’s message.

Question 63

What evidence is there suggesting flexibility is important for the success of minority influence?

Answer 63

Nemeth 87 provides evidence for the importance of this. In a simulated jury situation, participants were asked to discuss how much compensation should be paid to someone injured in a ski-life accident. A confederate who put forward an alternative point of view and inflexibility stuck to his view caused no influence on the majority group, but a confederate who comprised and showed some flexibility did. This was most effective if flexible compromise was shown later in negotiations rather than earlier.

Question 64

Why must a minority influence show commitment to persuade others?

Answer 64

Majorities are much more likely to be persuaded by minorities if the minority view is seen to arise from commitment to a higher moral principal: e.g. equal rights and fairness.

Question 65

What evidence shows commitment being important to minority influence success?

Answer 65

The suffragettes who persistently showed commitment and made sacrifices in order to persuade others. They were persistently arrested, imprisoned, went on hunger strikes acting from moral principles rather than self-interest and as a result achieved overtime earned the vote for women.

Question 66

What is social change?

Answer 66

Social change is the change that happens in a society and not at an individual level. Minorities can change the positions of members of the majority via consistency, flexibility and commitment.

Question 67

What is an example of minority influence/belief causing majority belief?

Answer 67

Homosexuality in the UK.

Question 68

What is the 5 stage process that minority influence can cause social change?

Answer 68

Drawing attention to an issue.

Cognitive conflict

Consistency

The augmentation principle

The snowball effect.

Question 69

What is the augmentation principle?

Answer 69

If a minority appears to suffer for their views they are seen as more committed and taken more seriously by the majority.

Question 70

Why do minorities need to be similar to majorities in terms of social class, age, ethnicity and gender to cause social change?

Answer 70

Research also suggested that minorities need to be similar to majorities in terms of social class, age, ethnicity and gender if they are to be successful.

An example of some of the earliest protects by gay men and women involved silent placard carrying whilst wearing smart clothes. This helped overcome stigmatisation of homosexuals as ‘abnormal’, ‘different’ etc.

Question 71

Can single individuals bring social change? And if so who has?

Answer 71

Single individuals can bring about considerable social change e.g Martin Luther King. It is difficult to assess to what extent the individual personality characteristics of minority leaders are responsible for creating social change.

Often leaders simply highlight and act as a focal point for wider social and political events.