Social Influence Flashcards
explanations for conformity
deutsch and gerard
normative social influence (nsi) - to be liked by majority group so we go along with them even though we may not agree with them. following the crowd in order to fit in.
(compliance and identification)
Informational social influence (isi) - look to majority group for info as we are unsure about the way to behave and want to do right thing. We genuinely believe majority is right and we look to them for right answer. (internalisation)
compliance
superficial & temporary. publicly go along with group to fit in but in private our opinions are unchanged
identification
we take on majority view of group we admire or identify with publicly and privately. this is temporary and not maintained once leaving the group
internalisation
take on majority view publicly and privately. permanent change in behaviour
ao3 explanations of conformity
:) research support. schultz et al - 75% of hotel guests reused towel when exposed to messages that suggested others did too. normative social influence
:) lucas et al - students gave answers to math problems which were easy or difficult. higher conformity to incorrect answers when questions were difficult compared to easier ones.
:( individual differences in nsi - mcghee and teevan ‘nAffiliators’- cared about being liked, what others thought of them and had to be in relationships. they were more likely to conform
:( difficulties in distinguishing between compliance & internalisation - compliance individuals may have agreed in the first place but then changed their mind as they received or forgot info. internalisation people may have originally complied but received info to make them accept the position as their own
agentic state ao1
- proposed by milgram to explain why people go against their conscience and do as they’re told even if it causes distress
- autonomous state - act according to own conscious and feel responsible for our own actions
- agentic state - no longer independent and act according to instructions from someone else. No longer feel responsible.
- shift from autonomous to agentic is agentic shift
- Moral strain - feeling discomfort when in agentic state and go against morality
Binding factors - keep you in agentic state
agentic state + legitimacy of authority ao3
:) tarnow -Plane crashes. found 19/30 pilot did something risky other crew members did not question him as he was authority figure
:( excuse to be cruel. Not agentic state but dispositional factors, nobody told ppt in milgram’s exp to act cruel but they did. he was accepted as legitimate authority and was in a respected institution supported by zimbardo study. nobody told them to act violent they just did
:(obedience alibi.they blame their behaviour on them being told to do this, and you cant hold them accountable.
:) real world application - my lai massacre. 504 american soldiers raped and killed unarmed vietnamese civilians. they did this because they were given orders and therefore didnt feel responsible.
legitimacy of authority ao1
-presence of legitimate authority causes individual to shift into agentic state.
-legitimate authority ‘someone who is seen to be a position of control due to their hierarchy within a specific social situation.
- seen as legitimate if:
society agrees on their social status
represent respected institution
wear recognised uniform
- when they use their status for evil they become destructive authorities eg hitler
asch research into conformity ao1
aim - to investigate if people conform even when they know others are wrong
method - lab exp, male american uni students
procedure - groups of 7-9 shown 4 lines and got told its a visual judgement task. had to compare standard line to others and say which its most similar to. 1 real ppt, rest confederates. ppt said answer last. 12/18 times confederates said wrong answer.
results - ppt conformed and gave wrong answer 33%
75% ppt conformed at least once
conc - may conform to fit in even when they know theyre wrong
asch research into conformity ao3
:( lack of external validity, lab exp, fake environment, doesnt mirror real life setting. line task doesnt mirror everyday task therefore lack of mundane realism. cannot be generalised to real world.
:( low temporal validity & gender bias. 123 male ppt only, they did the exp at a time when conformity in america was high bc people afraid to stand out. when it was recreated in 1980s there was a lower rate of conformity.
:( group size may effect conformity rates. bond argues more than 9 confederates would mean more conformity. we havent investigated the effect of larger majorities on conformity
:( cultural differences. smith et al found that individualistic cultures conformity was 25% whereas collectivist cultures was higher at 37%. average conformity rate across cultures was 31.2%. conformity may be higher than asch concluded. his research may only apply to americans and cant be generalised to other cultures.
minority influence ao1
- when minority people persuade others to adopt their beliefs
- stems from isi
- leads to internalisation
How does it lead to change? - they have to be consistent in their view, overtime people will accept their view
- have to show commitment so people take them seriously
augmentation principle - people engage in extreme activities to draw attention and show commitment - flexibility, they have to negotiate their view, this makes them more influential.
minority influence research moscovici et al.
- 6 ppt, (2 confederates and 4 ppt)
- shown 36 slides of various intensity of blue
- ppt asked to state if it was blue or green
results:
consistent - confederates called slide green, conformity was 8% in trials
inconsistent - confederates called 2/3rd of slides green, 1.25% conformed at least once
control - no confederates, no naive ppt - 0.25% answered incorrectly
ao3 minority influence
:) research support from moscovici.
:) support of the concept of flexibility. nemeth - mock jury, put forth alternative pov and didnt change his view, had less effect. another ind who compromised had more effect.
:( fails to mirror real life, people often search for more information and then consider more options. lacks mundane realism. lab environments also make distinction between majority and minority groups.
