Social influence and social change

Question 1

Lessons from minority influence research

Answer 1

1) Drawing attention through social proof – the civil rights marches of the 1950’s drew attention to this racial issue, providing social proof of the problem.

2) Consistency – civil rights activists took part in marches over several years, always presenting the same non-aggressive messages.

3) Deeper processing of the issue – the activism meant people began to think deeply about the unjustness.

4) The augmentation principle – the personal risk indicated a strong belief and reinforces their message.

5) The snowball effect – Activists (such as Martin Luther King) gradually got the attention of the US government. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act prohibited discrimination, marking a change from a minority to a majority support for civil rights.

Question 2

Lessons from conformity research

Answer 2

Asch’s research highlighted the importance of a dissenter in breaking the power of majority. Such dissent has the power to lead to social change.

Environmental health campaigns appeal to normative social influence by providing information about what other people are doing. Social change is encouraged by drawing attention to what the majority are actually doing.

Question 3

Lessons from obedience research

Answer 3

Milgram’s research demonstrates the importance of disobedient role models.

Zimbardo suggested how obedience can be used to create social change through gradual commitment. Once a small instruction is obeyed, it becomes more difficult to resist a bigger one.

Question 4

Evaluation of social influence and social change (brief)

Answer 4

strength - psychologists can explain it, Nemeth
strength - support for NSI, Nolan et al
weakness - deeper processing might not play role, Mackie

Question 5

strengths of social influence and social change

Answer 5

Psychologists can explain how minority influence brings about social change. Nemeth claims social change is due to the type of thinking minorities inspire. When people consider minority arguments, they engage in divergent thinking. Nemeth argues such thinking leads to better decisions and more creative solutions to social issues. Therefore, this shows why dissenting minorities are valuable as they stimulate new ideas and open minds in a way majorities cannot.

there is research support for normative influences. Nolan et al aimed to see if they could change energy use habits. They hung messages on front doors every week for a month. The key message was that most residents were trying to reduce energy usage. As a control, some messages told residents to save energy but made no reference to other people’s behaviour. There was a significant decrease in energy usage in the first group compared to the second. Therefore, this shows that conformity can lead to social change through the operation of normative social influence, this is seen to be a valid explanation.

Question 6

weakness of social influence and social change

Answer 6

deeper processing may not play a role in how minorities bring about social change. People are supposedly converted because they think more deeply about the minorities views. Mackie disagrees and presents evidence that it is majority influence that may create deeper processing if you don’t share their views. When we find out a majority believes something different, we are forced to think hard about their arguments and reasoning. Therefore, this means that a central element of minority influence has been challenged, casting doubt on its validity as an explanation of social change.