Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology > Social Influence L1 - 5 (Conformity) > Flashcards

Social Influence L1 - 5 (Conformity) Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
AP® Psychology flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards Psychology 101 flashcards
1
Q

Conformity:

A

Change in a person’s behaviour/opinion as a result of real/imagined pressure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

3 types of conformity and a summary of each:

A
  • Compliance –> temporary conformity to line up w/ majority publicly but not privately
  • Internalisation –> permanent conformity privately + publicly
  • Identification –> moderate public not private conformity due to admiration and similarities between the people
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Who developed a 2 process theory for explanations for conformity and what is it?

A

Gerard and Deutsch.
Normative Social Influence (NSI) and Informational Social Influence (ISI)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is NSI, what does it lead to and in what situations is it likely to occur?

A
  • The need to be liked and fit in w/ norms
  • Leads to compliance, as it ensures acceptance
  • Likely to occur w/strangers + stressful situations.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is ISI, what does it lead to and in what situations is it likely to occur?

A
  • Need to be right, especially when you are unsure about what is correct/incorrect
  • Likely to lead to internalisation
  • Likely to occur when the situation is ambiguous/complex/a crisis/one where you are inexperienced in comparison
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

List the strengths of the explanations of conformity

A
  • Research support available for ISI and NSI
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

List the weaknesses of explanations for conformity:

A
  • Individual differences in NSI and ISI
  • ISI and NSI may work together in explaining conformity
  • Supporting studies lack ecological validity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What research support is available for ISI?

A

Lucas et al (2006) found that conformity occurred more to incorrect answers when mathematical problems were more difficult or ambiguous due to the need to be right

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What research support is available for NSI?

A

Asch (1951) found that many participants went along with a blatantly incorrect answer (line matching test) due to a fear of rejection due to the need to fit in

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Explain individual differences in NSI:

A
  • McGhee and Teevan (1967) found that nAffiliators are more likely to conform as they have a greater need for affiliation, suggesting a lack of population validity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Explain individual differences in ISI:

A
  • Asch (1955) found students were not as conformist (28%) compared to other types of participants (37%)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Give one example of when ISI and NSI may have been working together to explain conformity

A

Asch’s experiments found that conformity reduced when there was one dissenting participant. The dissenting participant may reduce ISI, as an alternative source of info is provided, or NSI, as social support is now provided

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Explain a lack of ecological validity in lab studies:

A
  • Demand characteristics can cause participants to guess cues and provide a set of inaccurate data
  • Cannot be sure if this behaviour mirrors that in the real world
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Which key study explains ISI?

A

Jenness in 1932

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Explain Jenness’ study (1932) and state the results

A
  • Glass bottle w/ 811 white beans as an ambiguous situation
  • Sample of 26 students
  • Firstly they estimated individually
  • Then they were divided into 3s and provided a grp estimate after discussion
    Results:
  • Nearly all participants changed their original answer
  • Range dropped from 1875 to 474 (decrease of 75%)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Explain the Asch Effect (1951) and state the results:

A
  • Which line A, B or C matched the standard line? w/ obvious answers
  • 123 male US undergraduates
  • 18 trials of one naive participant + 8 confederates –> 12 were critical
  • Real participant was at end/ last to end in each trial
  • 20 trials of 36 real participants as control groups w/ error rate of 0.04%
    Results:
  • 25% never conformed
  • About 75% conformed at least once
  • Around 35% conformed in critical trials
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What are critical trials?

A

Trials where the confederates give the same answer each time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What are the three variables affecting conformity investigated by Asch?

A
  • Group size
  • Unanimity of the majority
  • Task difficulty
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Explain group size variable:

A
  • Very little conformity w/ 1 or 2 confederates
  • Conformity increased to 30% w/ 3 or more confederates
  • Conformity is unaffected beyond this size
20
Q

Provide one criticism of group size variable:

A

Campbell and Fairey (1989) said group size will have an effect depending on type of judgement being made and motivation of individual

21
Q

Explain unanimity of the majority variable:

A
  • If 1 confederate gave correct answer, conformity dropped from 33% to 5.5%
  • If 1 confederate gave incorrect answer that was the same as the majority conformity dropped to 9%
22
Q

Explain the task difficulty variable:

A
  • Levels of conformity increased when Asch made differences between line lengths smaller (more difficult)
  • Lucas et al’s experiment (2006) showed that participants w/ high self-efficacy conformed less than those with lower levels
23
Q

What is self-efficacy?

A

How confident/competent the person feels about the task

24
Q

List weaknesses of Asch’s studies:

A
  • Lacks temporal validity
  • Lacks ecological validity
  • Lacks population validity
  • Ethical issues
25
Q

Explain the lack of temporal validity in Asch’s study:

A
  • Perrin and Spencer (1980) repeated the study on engineering students to find that only 1 student in 396 trials conformed
  • 1950s was a conformist decade in US and society has changed greatly since then
26
Q

Explain the lack of ecological validity in Asch’s study:

A
  • Demand characteristics may have been shown as it is not a common task to be doing
  • Fiske (2014) argued that grps did not resemble that of everyday life
27
Q

Explain the lack of population validity in Asch’s study:

A
  • All participants were male and students
  • Neto (1995) showed that women may be more conformist since they are more concerned about social relationships
  • Bond and Smith (1996) said that the men from the study were from an individualistic culture (US) so the results may be different in collectivist cultures, where they would be more oriented to the group (China)
28
Q

Explain the issue of ethical issues in Asch’s study:

A
  • Deception was used through confederates, causing psychological harm due to confusion and stress
  • It can be questioned whether Asch gave his participants fully informed consent
29
Q

What are social roles?

A

Parts that people play as members of various social groups

30
Q

What was the name of the experiment that explored conformity to social roles, when was it conducted and by who?

A

Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) conducted by Zimbardo (1973)

31
Q

What was the aim of the experiment?

A

To find out whether conformity was due to the dispositional hypothesis (sadist personalities of guards) or situational hypothesis (conforming to social roles)

32
Q

What results would support which hypothesis?

A

Non-aggressive behaviour would support dispositional hypothesis
Behaving the same way as others would support situational hypothesis

33
Q

State the procedure of the experiment

A

1) Zimbardo converted Stanford uni psych basement into mock prison
2) Advertised for volunteers and more than 70 applied
3) 24 male college students (paid $15 a day) were chosen after diagnostic and personality tests were conducted to eliminate those w/ medical issues, history of crime, psychological disorders
4) Randomly assigned roles - 11 guards, 10 prisoners
5) Guards were in 3s and changed shift every 8 hours. Told to do whatever was necessary to maintain law and order w/out physical violence
6) The prison had barred doors, bare walls and small cells. There was also a solitary confinement cell where misbehaved prisoners went
7) Upon entrance, they were stripped naked, deloused, possessions removed and were issued uniform and an ID number

34
Q

What did the guards wear?

A
  • Whistle
  • Billy cap
  • Special sunglasses to avoid eye contact w/prisoners
  • Khaki uniform
35
Q

What did the prisoners wear?

A
  • Tight nylon cap
  • Smock w/ ID number
  • Chain around ankle
36
Q

What were the results of the experiment?

A
  • Both prisoners + guards quickly identified w/ roles eg. told tales on others to guards to receive a good name and took roles very seriously
  • Prisoners were dehumanised eg. forced to clean toilets w/ bare hands, woken up in middle of night to do menial tasks
  • 5 prisoners had to be released from experiment early eg. one after 36 hrs due to uncontrollable bursts of crying + screaming
37
Q

How long was the experiment expected to run and how long did it actually last?

A

2 weeks but it actually lasted 6 days when fellow psychologist, Christian Maslah, strongly objected after seeing the abuse

38
Q

What was the conclusion made from the experiment?

A

Zimbardo concluded that it was the situational factors that was largely responsible for the behaviour found

39
Q

Give strengths of SPE

A
  • Increased internal validity due to good control over variables
  • Application to Abu Ghraib
40
Q

How did Zimbardo have a good level of control over variables?

A
  • Most emotionally stable men chosen when selecting participants
  • No experimenter bias as roles were randomly assigned
41
Q

How was SPE relevant to Abu Ghraib?

A
  • Military prison in Baghdad notorious for torture and abuse of Iraqi prisoners by US soldiers
  • Zimbardo believed that the guards were victims of situational factors such as boredom and lack of training
42
Q

Give weaknesses of SPE

A
  • Lack of research support
  • Ethical issues
43
Q

Why was there a lack of research support for SPE?

A
  • Reicher and Hallam (2006) partly replicated study, known as BBC Prison Study
  • Findings were very different as prisoners took control of the mock prison and harassed the guards which is explained by SIT (Social Identity Theory) Tajfel 1981
  • This was because the prisoners developed a shared identity that the guards could not
44
Q

What ethical issues were there with SPE?

A
  • Zimbardo’s dual roles in study meant he neglected his moral responsibility as a psychologist eg. when one of the participants asked to be released (right to withdraw) he responded as a prison warden and said he would be able to do so if he snitched on the other prisoners
  • Passive deception was used as the prisoners did not know they would be arrested in their own homes
45
Q

How does Zimbardo counteract the ethics questioned in SPE?

A
  • Extensive grp + individual debriefing sessions
  • Questionnaires returned at several weeks, months and yearly intervals
  • He argues that the benefits gained about our understanding of human behaviour should outweigh the distress caused by the study

Psychology (26 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions