SOCIAL INFLUENCE: Evaluation Flashcards
TYPES OF CONFORMITY
1) Can’t know where compliance/internalisation takes place
Individual may change their view in private because of new or forgotten information
Shows difficulty in determining compliance or internalisation
TYPES OF CONFORMITY
2) Research has supported role in normative beliefs in shaping behaviours
‘Most people don’t smoke’, less took up smoking
supports idea people change behaviour to fit in, power of NSI
TYPES OF CONFORMITY
3) Studies show how others beliefs can shape your own
Expose negative info about African Americans, more negative attitudes reported
Shows the importance of ISI in shaping behaviour
TYPES OF CONFORMITY
4) Individual may not see the behaviour of others affecting their own
Behaviour of neighbours had the biggest effect on individuals change in behaviour surrounding energy conservation
TYPES OF CONFORMITY
5) Not always a clear criteria for validation for the informational explanation of conformity
Can’t decide if Bristol is the most fun city becuase that can’t be made using an objective criteria
Majorities should exert a greater influence on social rather than physical issues
ASCH
1) Findings were a ‘child of their time’
McCarthyism
If study repeated now, the results would be very different
ASCH
Research lacked ecological validity and mundane realism
results less applicable to real life
people questioned the validity
ASCH
Study was ethically questionable
involved deceiving participants
justified as lack of informed consent needed and proper debrief was followed
ASCH
2) Bond suggests conformity studies have a limited range of majority sizes
no groups were bigger than 9
means we know little about the effect of bigger majority groups
ASCH
3) In the study only 1/3 of trials where majority gave wrong answer produced conforming response
means 2/3 stuck to their original judgement
not an overly conformist representation of humans
SPE
3) Study was unethical even though it followed guidelines
admits it should have been stopped much earlier
SPE
5) People quickly descend into tyrannical behaviour
because they unthinkingly conform to roles
BBC study says the conformed to their own norms and values
SPE
4) Explains events in Abu Ghraib
suggested guards acted this way due to situational factors
led to tyrannical behaviour in both cases
SPE
1) BBC study challenged idea that guards behaviour was due to role of SPE
argued that the guards behaviour varied
therefore they chose their behaviour and actions
SPE
2) Behaviour due to demand characteristics
students guessed the aim of the study correctly
behaviour not due to situational factors
MILGRAM
1) Participants distrusted experimenters
most didn’t believe the shocks were real
shows study lacks internal validity
MILGRAM
2) Questioned if the same thing would happen today
found no relationship between year and obedience levels when looking at correlational analysis
study would still hold the same amount of validity today
MILGRAM
3) Mandel aruged conclusions aren’t based on reality
police ordered to kill village of Jews and nearly all agreed to
therefore using obedience as an explanation for real life events masks the real reasons for behaviour
MILGRAM
4) Participants knew they were a part of a study as they were in a university
increases the obedience as it’s a prestigious place, but might not in a different location
need to be careful generalising results
MILGRAM
5) Authoritative figure in uniform may increase validity
in one study children chose a civillian wearing a police uniform as the most suitable to make an arrest
suggests children base authority on uniform and appearence
AGENTIC STATE/LEGITIMACY OF AUTHORITY
1) The shift doesn’t explain behaviour of German doctors in Auschwitz
doctors stopped caring and carried out lethal experiments on patients
concluded carrying out many evil acts changes behaviour
AGENTIC STATE/LEGITIMACY OF AUTHORITY
2) Other ways too explain the results other than the agentic shift
anxiety in participants can explain cruelty in SPE
suggests obedience explained by agentic shift or obedient behaviour
AGENTIC STATE/LEGITIMACY OF AUTHORITY
3) Legitimate authority used to justify inflicting pain on others
more willing to take part in immoral actions
therefore more obedient to legitimate authority
AGENTIC STATE/LEGITIMACY OF AUTHORITY
4) Agentic shift is more likely if individual has less personal control
leads to increase in obedience to legitimate authority, bystander apathy and increased compliance
process of agentic shift could extend to other forms of social influence
AGENTIC STATE/LEGITIMACY OF AUTHORITY
5) Tarnow supported power of legitimate authority
they found crews actions were contributing factors to airplane crashed
in Milgram’s study they relied on the experimenter
AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
1) Participants doubted if shocks were real
2 psychologyis repeated the study but told them shocks were’t real, all participants acted as though they were
they displayed high RWA and supported link between authoritarianism and obedience
AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
2) Agreed that there are dispositional reasons for obedience
Variations the main cuase of difference in levels and specific social situations cause participants to obey or resist
therefore explanations of obedience based on authoritarianism lack flexibility to account for variation
AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
3) Elms and Milgram showed difference in characteristics of obedience and authoritarian personality
obedient participants reported a good relationship with parents
unlikely all obedient participants grew up in a harsh family environment
AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
4)Less-educated people are more likely to have authoritarian personality
Milgram found similar results in his study
therefore lack of education responsible and any causal relationship between authoritarianism and obedience likely to be an illusion
AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
5) Those on the right of the political spectrum are more likely to obey authority
On a mock gameshow, participants on left of spectrum gave lower intensity shocks
suggests situational context doesn’t exclude individual differences as influencing obedience
SOCIAL SUPPORT
1) Studied the effectiveness of response from social support
more effective when real participant answered last
suggests when an answer agrees with theirs it reinforces judgement
SOCIAL SUPPORT
2) Helps resist conformity if social support are friends
drink less if one friend in a group also doesn’t drink
shows that social support from friends decreases conformity
SOCIAL SUPPORT
3) Rosentrasse protest illustrates Milgram’s study
the women were threatened with open fire, but Jews were eventually set free
backs Milgram’s theory that disobedient peers give courage to resist orders
LOCUS OF CONTROL
1) Spector measured control and predisposition to ISI/NSI in students
found a correlation between locus of control and predisposition to NIS, not ISI
concluded that external individuals conform more to NSI situations
LOCUS OF CONTROL
2) Trend between locus of control and external young people
more young Americans believed their fate was due to luck and powerful people
suggested it was due to alienateion experienced by young people
LOCUS OF CONTROL
3)A meta-analysis study looked at relationship between locus of control and social influence
showed a positive correlation
suggests external individuals are more easily persuaded and more conforming
MINORITY INFLUENCE
1) Nemeth and Brilayer supported this using a fake jury system
no effect if jury presented with alternate POV, big effect if confederate compromised
suggests flexibility sometimes good for changing majorities opinion
MINORITY INFLUENCE
2) Dissent in form of minority opinion opens the mind
encourages person to search for more information and therefore they will make better decisions
supported by other psychologists who saw improved decision quality
MINORITY INFLUENCE
3) Majority create greater message processing
if majority have different views we are forced to consider why
but we often don’t waste time on the minority
MINORITY INFLUENCE
4) ‘Tipping point’ where minority hold majority opinion
on chat rooms if the listener heard a new opinion they considered it then moved on, if new opinion the same as last they adopted it and shifted
10% holding minority opinion needed to tip
MINORITY INFLUENCE
5) It’s difficult to convince people of the value of dissent
they quickly accepts it but then become irritated by the
persistent views
therefore if minority view persists then innovative thinking associated with minority influence is lost
SOCIAL INFLUENCE PROCESSES IN SOCIAL CHANGE
1) Takes a long time to bring about social change
more likely to conform to majority as its easier
therefore minority are more latent than direct
SOCIAL INFLUENCE PROCESSES IN SOCIAL CHANGE
2) It’s hard to influence majority without being seen as ‘deviant’
majority tend to focus on source of message
added challenge for the minority
SOCIAL INFLUENCE PROCESSES IN SOCIAL CHANGE
3) Limitations to social norms intervention
social norms didn’t reduce alcohol intake during one study
not all social norms interventions produce socal change
SOCIAL INFLUENCE PROCESSES IN SOCIAL CHANGE
4) Social norms interventions can also help people with desirable behaviours
normative messages can increase aspects of behaviour, this is known as boomerang effect
e.g. found that it decreased some electricity used and increased it in some cases
SOCIAL INFLUENCE PROCESSES IN SOCIAL CHANGE
5) Minorities need to avoid being seen as ‘deviant’
early communists avoided this by making it clear they were part of the majority
this created the impression that they had potential to overthrow majority and create social change
