Social Influence: Conformity To Social Roles Flashcards
What are social roles?
Social roles are ‘parts’ people play as members of various social groups, they’re accompanies by expectations of what’s appropriate for them to act like. Social roles with strong expectations can cause conformity because our perception of how we should act in a certain role may change our behaviour. Conformity to social roles involves identification.
What is de-individuation
Social roles with strong expectations often are those with specific identities such as those required to wear uniform. In these cases de-individuation may also play a role which is a state where individuals have lower self-awareness and a weaker sense of personal responsibility for their actions.
The aims of Zimbardo’s study (1972) is…
To investigate the extent to which people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner in a role playing simulation of prison life.
The method of Zimbardo’s study (1973) is…
Zimbardo set up mock prison in basement of Stanford University. Observational study. Male student volunteers psychologically and physically screened and the 21 most stable were randomly assigned prisoner or guard. Prisoners and guards were encouraged to conform to social roles through uniforms and instructions about their behaviours. Zimbardo also took on the role of superintendent.
The uniforms in Zimbardo’s study (1973) …
Prisoners - loose smock to wear and a cap to cover their hair, they were identified by a number and their names were never used.
Guards - uniform to reflect status of their role, wooden club, handcuffs, mirror shades.
The uniforms created loss of personal identity (de-individuation) meaning they were more likely to conform to social roles.
The instructions about behaviour in Zimbardo’s study (1973)…
Prisoners encouraged to identify with their role by several procedures e.g. rather than leave the study early prisoners could ‘apply for parole’. Guards were reminded that they had complete power over the prisoners which encouraged them to conform to their social role.
The results of Zimbardo’s study (1973)…
First few days guards increasingly abusive - harrassed prisoners constantly e.g. conducted frequent headcount’s where prisoners would stand in line and call out their number. Guards created opportunities to enforce rules and administer punishments. Prisoners became subdued, depressed and anxious, one went on hunger strike and was punished by being put in a tiny dark closet. Participants would forget it was only a study and some of the guards appeared to enjoy the power they had over prisoners. Zimbardo ended the study after 6 days instead of the intended 14.
The conclusions of Zimbardo’s study (1973)…
Social roles appear to have a strong influence on people’s behaviour, Guards became brutal and Prisoners became submissive. Roles were very easily taken on by all participants.
Zimbardo Evaluation: High control
High control over key variables such as selection of participants. Emotionally-stable individuals were chosen and randomly assigned prisoner or guard. Strength because we can be confident that the findings aren’t being affected by confounding variables and are caused by the roles which increased internal validity.
Zimbardo Evaluation: Low population validity
Participants were all American male students so it isn’t representative of all people. Limitation because results are difficult to generalise to other people and may not explain the extent to which other types of people conform to social roles.
Zimbardo Evaluation: Ethical issues
Protection of participants - Zimbardo’s participants (prisoners) experienced a significant amount of psychological harm and some experienced physical harm
Informed Consent - prisoners weren’t made fully aware of all aspects of the study e.g. they weren’t told they were going to be arrested outside their house. Limitation because it goes against the current BPS ethical guidelines for conducting psychological research.
Zimbardo Evaluation: Low ecological validity
Some aspects of Zimbardo’s simulated prison don’t reflect real prison life e.g. the maximum anticipated sentence being 2 weeks, threats of violence, participants could ask to leave the study. Limitation of Zimbardo’s study because it may be difficult to generalise the findings to real life.
