Social Influence AO3 Flashcards
AO3
1
Q
Conformity AO3
(IN FAVOR)
A
- Research support for NSI
E- Asch study variation where naive participant writes down answer- conformity lowered by 12.5%
E- Shows answering privately means less pressure so less likely to conform - Research support for ISI
E- Todd Lucas et al found participants conformed more when the maths equation was harder
E- Shows participants were in an ambiguous situation with less clear answers so didnt want to be wrong and relied upon the given information
2
Q
Conformity AO3
(AGAINST)
A
- Counterpoint
E- Asch found that conformity reduced when there was another dissenting participant
E- Reduces the power of NSI ( provides social support ) and ISI ( an alternative source of information )
4.Individual Differences in NSI
P- NSI does not predict conformity in every case
E- McGhee & Teevan found that if students were nafiliators were less likely to conform
E- Some are greatly concerned with being liked e.g. nafiliators, so NSI underlines more for some than others
3
Q
Asch Variables
(AGAINST)
A
- May be ‘child of the times’ e.g. lacking temporal validity
E- Study was done during an era of anti-communism where people were scared to be different
E- Lacks temporal validity because it was done in an era of high conformity - Lack of Real World Applications
E- Was an artificial task which does not reflect every day conformity
E- Limited in application because we cannot apply to drinking with friends/ smoking - Ethical Issues
E- Broke guidelines such as deception and protection from harm
E- Experiment required deception or participants may have reacted differently and Asch debriefed them afterwards - Only applicable to certain groups
E- The study was only made up of 50 male students
E- Cannot apply to female groups and lacks population validity so needs further research - Culturally Limited
E-Can only apply to individualist cultures and not collectivist ones
E- ICs more concerned with themselves compared to CCs
4
Q
Zimbardo Experiment
(FOR)
A
- Control over Variables
E- Roles were randomly assigned to prisoner or guard for participants
E- Behavior must be due to the role itself as researchers ruled out individual personality differences - Lacking Realism COUNTERPOINT
E- Prisoners behaved and acted as if the prison was real e.g. 80% of conversations were about the prison
E- Increases internal validity of experiment
5
Q
Zimbardo Experiment
(AGAINST)
A
- Lacks Realism
E- It was not an actual prison but instead a basement of a university
E- The way they acted was stereotypical and and tells us little about conformity - Exaggerates the Power of Roles
E- 1/3 of guards behaved brutally and the other 2/3 did not
E- Zimbardo overstated his viewed and minimized dispositional factors (personality)
6
Q
Milgrams Research
(AGAINST)
A
- Limitations
E- The study was done using only 40 white, middle class, men
E- The findings that we obey to authority may not apply to other groups e.g. females - Fake?
E- Lots of other researchers thought it was fake and the participants had guessed it was fake half way through
E- BUT Milgram interviewed them after and asked if they thought it was fake and participants said no ( displayed anxious and stressed behavior ) - Reflecting Real Life
E- The study had people giving electric shocks to a learner
E- Not ecological valid because it is not a task we complete in everyday life meaning it can’t be applied to real life obedience situations - Excuses Behaviour
E- Milgram showed that anyone had the possibility to obey
E- A lot of nazis used this as an excuse in court that they were just doing as they were told, which was unfair to victims ( Soldiers are now subject to psychological training to prevent this )
7
Q
Obedience
(FOR)
A
- Real World Application
E- Nazi soldiers claimed they were just ‘following orders’
E- Passed the responsibility of actions onto the authority figure because scared of the consequences (Agentic State)
+
E- Soldiers recognised position in the heirachy and believed superiors had a right to order this (Legitimate Authority) - Evidence in Hofflings study
E- Nurses asked to do something on behalf of a DOCTOR
E- Nurses pass on responsibility for actions onto the authority figure (AS)
+
E- Nurses realise where they are in heirachy and that a doctor has the right to order this (LA)
8
Q
Obedience
(AGAINST)
A
- Cannot explain all Obedience
E- There are alternative explanations such as dispositional e.g. personality - Limited Explanation
E- Not everyone obeyed (35%) in Milgrams original study
E- There must be other factors that influence obedience
9
Q
Dispositional Explanations
(FOR)
A
- Research Evidence
E- Milgram and Elms interviewed 20 who obeyed and 20 who didn’t in the originals study and got them to complete the F-Scale
E- 20 obedient participants scored higher than those who didn’t obey
10
Q
Dispositional Explanations
(AGAINST)
A
- Counterpoint
E- The 20 who scored higher on the F-scale had characteristics that didn’t fit the Authoritarian Personality
E- Found they didn’t have hostile childhoods, or severe punishments and didn’t glorify their parents - Obedience for the Rest of Society
E- Pre war Germany had millions of individuals displaying obedient, racist and anti- semetic behavior
E- They all cannot be Authoritarian Personality - Political Bias
E- F-scale is a questionnaire that people have to fill in themselves
E- Meaning people can lie and not fill it in properly meaning an AP personality may not be measured properly
11
Q
Social Support
(FOR)
A
- Supporting Evidence (Asch)
E- Asch ‘unanimous’ variation where he introduced a confederate who dissented which resulted in 5% conformity - Supporting Evidence (Milgram)
E- Milgrams variation where he had 2 teachers who previously refused to obey leading to obedience being reduced to 10% (One of the lowest variations) - Real World Reseach Support
E- Buddy/ Mentor programme of pregnant teens resisting the urge to smoke
E- Has benefits for social support and those that has buddies were less likely to smoke
12
Q
Social Support
(AGAINST)
A
- Alternative Explanation
E- Milgrams variation of 2 refusing teachers
E- Personality of having an Internal Locus of Control makes people more likely to resist obeying
L- Locus or Control may be a better explanation as takes into account differences
13
Q
Locus of Control
(FOR)
A
- Supporting Evidence
E- Holland (1967) repeat Milgrams experiments but measured whether people were internal or external and resulted in 37% of internals didnt fully obey compared to 23% of externals
E- Internals showed greater resistance to authority and this evidence increases validity - Oliner and Oliner (1998) interviewed Jewish survivors and compared to those who rescued them and those who didn’t
E- 406 rescuers were more likely to have a high internal LOC in comparison to those who obeyed
14
Q
Locus of Control
(AGAINST)
A
- Alternative Explanations
E- Might be able to explain resistance to social influence better e.g. social support - Applications
E- LOC only comes into control in new situations
E- In familiar situations previous experiences prove more important and LOC is only helpful in explaining a small number of situations
15
Q
Minority Influence
(FOR)
A
- Research Support for Deeper Processing
E- Martin et al (2003) presented a message to two groups and measured how much they agreed (Group 1 was told it was from a minority and Group 2 was told it was from a majority) then it was re-measured how much people agreed
E- Participants in group 1 were less likely to change their view suggesting we process minorities views more deeply, making them last longer
