Social influence (Easy)

Question 1

What does conformity mean?

Answer 1

A change in behaviour or belief as a result of real or imagined group pressure

Question 2

What are the explanations of conformity?

Answer 2

NSI, ISI

Question 3

What are the types of conformity?

Answer 3

Compliance, identification, internalisation

Question 4

Who suggested the types of conformity?

Answer 4

Kelman (1958)

Question 5

Define Compliance:

Answer 5

Agree in public
Disagree privately
Does not change the beliefs privately
Temporary

Question 6

Define identification

Answer 6

Conform to group
Something about the group we value
Publicly change opinion
Even if we don’t agree

Question 7

Define Internalisation:

Answer 7

Agrees publicly
Agrees privately
Longer lasting effect

Question 8

Who proposed the explanations for conformity?

Answer 8

Deutsch and Gerard (1955)

Question 9

What did Deutsch and Gerard (1955) propose?

Answer 9

Two-process theory
Two central human needs
Normative social influence
Informational social influence

Question 10

Define NSI

Answer 10

Individual wish to be liked by majority
Go along with majority, concerned about rejection
Following the crowd to fit in with the norm
Emotional rather than cognitive process
Temporary change, usually with strangers
Stressful situation, need for social support

Question 11

Define ISI

Answer 11

who has better info? you vs rest of group
Follow majority to be right
cognitive process
Permanent change
Happens in situations that are new.
Crisis situations, decision to be made quickly.
Assume group=right

Question 12

Give me research support for NSI, +ve AO3

Answer 12

Asch (1956) study supports NSI: ppts conformed to majority’s incorrect answers to avoid disapproval.

Post-experimental interviews reveal conformity driven by desire to fit in.

Removing public pressure reduces conformity: Asch demonstrated a drop to 12.5% when participants wrote down answers instead of saying them aloud.

Question 13

Give me research support for ISI, -ve AO3

Answer 13

Jenness (1932) supports ISI
Ppts made independent judgments about jelly beans in a jar.
After group discussion, they made another individual estimate.
Second estimates moved closer to the group estimate.
Females typically conformed more.
Shows ISI in unfamiliar, ambiguous situations, as participants believe they gain knowledge from the group and are more likely to be correct.

However,

Lacks ecological validity.
Estimating the number of beans in a jar is a mundane task
X social consequences.
? about whether similar levels of ISI would be displayed in tasks with more significant social consequences.
For example, hearing evidence in a court case from an ‘expert’ barrister.
Further research examining ISI in real-world settings is needed to generalise these results beyond the laboratory.

Question 14

What study will you use when talking about conformity to social roles?

Answer 14

Zimbardo’s research, Stanford prison study

Question 15

Define social roles

Answer 15

The part people plays as members of a social group
Behaviour change to fit the expectations to fit role

Question 16

Give me the aims of Zimbardo’s study

Answer 16

How the taking on social roles would lead to conformity to roles
test the disposition hypothesis

Question 17

Method of the Stanford prison study

Answer 17

Basement of Stanford University
Participants randomly allocated to ‘prisoner’ or ‘guard’
Guards told not to use physical punishment

Question 18

What were the sample for the Stanford Prison experiment:

Answer 18

21 male student volunteers
middle class
white
passed psychological testing
‘Prisoners’ collected from home and were fingerprinted, blindfolded, searched and given a uniform (role of identification)

Question 19

What was the purpose of the uniforms?

Answer 19

De-individuation, loss of identity. More likely to conform to perceived social roles.

Question 20

Results of the Stanford prison study

Answer 20

Guards humiliated and punished prisoners
Prisoners began to show signs of mental and emotional distress
Riots on the second day
Prisoners later on became passive and helpless
Guards became aggressive in authoritarian way
5 Prisoners had been released earlier
The experiment was stopped 6 days instead of the planned 14 days

Question 21

Conclusion of Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment:

Answer 21

Rejects the dispositional hypothesis
Readily conformed to social roles they were expected to play
Social roles shaped their attitudes and behaviour

Question 22

Give a limitation for Zimbardo’s prison study, other research contradicting findings -ve AO3

Answer 22

Reicher and Haslam’s 2006 replication of the Stanford Prison Experiment refutes Zimbardo’s findings

Ppts X conform to roles automatically.

Guards didn’t assert authority
prisoners resisted collectively
Power dynamics shifted + prison system collapsed.
This challenges Zimbardo’s notion of automatic social role conformity.

Question 23

Give me another limitation of Zimbardo’s prison study, to do with individual differences -ve AO3

Answer 23

Individual differences (personality) influence conformity to social roles.
In Zimbardo’s experiment, guard behaviour varied widely:
from extreme sadism in 1/3 -> few guards who provided support, sympathy, cigarettes, and reinstated privileges for prisoners.

Indicates that situational factors X sole cause of conformity.
Dispositional factors like personality also contribute.

Implies that Zimbardo’s conclusion may have been overstated.

Question 24

Give me a strength of Zimbardo’s study +ve AO3

Answer 24

Control over key variables
Selection of ppts- those emotionally stable
One way ruled out individual personality diff
Guards and prisoners behaving differently, in roles by chance, B must have been due to role itself.
↑ internal V. Confident with drawing conclusions.

Question 25

What is obedience?

Answer 25

Type of social influence, following instructions, commands, or rules given by an authority figure

Question 26

What is the aim of Milgram’s research?

Answer 26

investigate effects of obedience on authority even if there was potential consequences

Question 27

AO1 for Milgram’s study

Answer 27

Milgram’s study at Yale University investigated whether ordinary people would obey orders and give electric shocks to person.
Ppts acting as ‘teachers,’ were instructed to increase shock levels for each mistake made by a ‘learner.

Despite protests, the experiment continued until participants refused or reached 450 volts.

Results showed that all participants reached 300 volts, with 65% administering the full 450 volts. Qualitative observations noted signs of distress like sweating and trembling.

Question 28

In what sub topic do you discuss Milgram’s study?

Answer 28

Obedience

Question 29

Conclusions of Milgram’s study

Answer 29

Germans not ‘different’ American ppts willing to obey, even though they cause harm.
Certain factors= encouraged obedience, conducted further studies 2 investigate

Question 30

Limitation of Milgram’s study, lacks internal validity AO3

Answer 30

Orne and Holland (1968): Participants believed electric shocks were fake, ? the validity of Milgram’s obedience test.

Sheridan and King (1972): Participants administered what they thought was a fatal shock to a puppy, with 54% of males and 100% of females doing so. Supports, effects in Milgram’s study = genuine, people behaved obediently even when shocks=real

Milgram’s study: Despite doubts about shock authenticity, 70% of participants displayed obedience.

Question 31

Milgram’s study, methodological criticism -ve AO3

Answer 31

Milgram’s study lacks population validity due to its biased sample of 40 male American volunteers from an individualistic society.

Generalisation to other populations, especially collectivist cultures or females, is limited.

Exclusion of female participants demonstrates a beta bias, overlooking potential gender differences in obedience to authority.

The study’s androcentric approach further hampers its generalisability to females

Question 32

Strength of Milgram’s research, findings replicated AO3 +ve

Answer 32

Beauvois (2012)

French documentary: Contestants paid to administer fake electric shocks

Participants instructed by presenter to deliver shocks to other participants

80% administered maximum 450 volts, like Milgram’s study

B= signs of anxiety, supporting Milgram’s conclusions

Demonstrates obedience to authority beyond Milgram’s original study

Question 33

What sub topic do variables investigated by Asch fall into?

Answer 33

Conformity, first topic.

Question 34

Asch’s question

Answer 34

To what extent will people conform to the opinion of others?

Question 35

Procedure of Aschs study

Answer 35

Solomon Asch’s lab experiment on conformity used a line judgment task.

A naïve participant was placed with seven confederates who had pre-arranged their responses.

Ppt believed the confederates were genuine.

Each person had to state which line matched the target line, with the real participant giving their answer last.

In some trials, the confederates purposely gave wrong answers.

12/18 trials confederates gave X answer

Question 36

What is the results of Asch’s study?

Answer 36

Asch measured conformity rates, with around one-third (32%) conforming to the incorrect majority per trial on average.

75% of participants conformed on at least one trial.

Question 37

What are the variations of Asch’s original procedure?

Answer 37

Group size
The unanimity of the majority
Difficult of the task

Question 38

Explain the Asch’s variation of original procedure

GROUP SIZE

Answer 38

confederates ranged from 1 to 15.
Little conformity was observed when the majority consisted of 1/2 confederates.
3= increased by about 30%.
↑ size beyond this point X ↑ conformity.
size of the majority is important up to a certain extent.

Question 39

Explain the Asch’s variation of the original procedure

UNANIMITY OF THE MAJORITY

Answer 39

The presence of dissenting confederates reduced conformity

whether the dissent was giving right or wrong answer

The average figure is 25% wrong answers

Having a dissenter enabled a naïve participant to behave more independently

Question 40

Explain the Asch’s variation of the original procedure

DIFFICULTY OF TASK

Answer 40

Asch made the line-judging task harder by making the stimulus line and comparison lines more similar in length

Conformity increased when the task was more difficult

Informational social influence plays a greater role when the task becomes harder

The situation is more ambiguous so we are more likely to look to others for guidance and assume they are right

Question 41

limitation of Asch’s study

Situation and task was artificial
-ve, AO3

Answer 41

Ppts knew they were in a study. Respond to demand characteristics
The line task = trivial
No reason to conform.
Naïve ppt were in a group X like the groups found in everyday life.
Findings X generalise to everyday situations

Question 42

+ve Research support for Asch’s study

Answer 42

Todd Lucas
ppts asked to solve easy +hard maths Q’s
ppts given answers from 3 other students (not real)
Conformed when harder
Asch correct in task difficulty.

However,

Lucas found conformity= more complex than Asch suggested.
Ppts ↑ confidence in maths conformed less.
Individual level factor affects conformity. Asch X research this.