Social Influence: L5-8

Question 1

Social roles

Answer 1

the ‘parts’ people play as members of various social groups. Such as parent, student etc. These are accompanied by expectations we and others have of what is appropriate behaviour in each role

Question 2

Who led the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE)

Answer 2

Zimbardo et al (1974)

Question 3

Aims of the SPE

Answer 3

To see whether people will conform to new social roles.

Question 4

How many people were involved in the SPE

Answer 4

24 male college students - 2 reserves, 1 drop out leaving 10 prisoners and 11 guards

Question 5

How were the SPE candidates chosen

Answer 5

Volunteer sampling

Volunteers were given diagnostic interviews and personality tests to eliminate candidates with psychological problems, medical disabilities, or a history of crime or drug abuse.

Question 6

How was the SPE made ‘realistic’

Answer 6

• Prisoners were arrested at their own homes, without warning, and taken to the local police station. They were fingerprinted, photographed and ‘booked.’
• Zimbardo had had the basement set out as a prison, with barred doors and windows, bare walls and small cells.

Question 7

How did deindividuation occur during the SPE (Prisoners)

Answer 7

When the prisoners arrived at the prison they were stripped naked, deloused, had all their personal possessions removed and locked away, and were given prison clothes and bedding.

• They were issued a uniform, and referred to by their number only. The use of ID numbers was a way to make prisoners feel anonymous.

Question 8

How did deindividuation occur during the SPE (Guards)

Answer 8

• All guards were dressed in identical uniforms of khaki, and they carried a whistle around their neck and a billy club borrowed from the police.
• Guards also wore special sunglasses, to make eye contact with prisoners impossible.

Question 9

What roles did Zimbardo have during the SPE

Answer 9

Zimbardo observed the behaviour of the prisoners and guards (as a researcher), and also acted as a prison warden or superintendent.

Question 10

Results of the SPE

Answer 10

Both the prisoners and guards quickly identified with their social roles. Within days the prisoners rebelled, but this was quickly crushed by the guards, who then grew increasingly abusive towards the prisoners.

Question 11

How did the SPE end

Answer 11

• Although the experiment was set to run for two weeks, it was terminated on day 6, when fellow postgraduate student Christina Maslach convinced Zimbardo that conditions in his experiment were inhumane.

Question 12

Findings of the SPE

Answer 12

Within a very short time both guards and prisoners were settling into their new roles. Within hours of beginning the experiment some guards began to harass prisoners. The prisoners initially tried to rebel, however quickly became submissive after failing

Question 13

Conclusion of the SPE

Answer 13

Zimbardo concluded that people quickly conform to social roles, even when the role goes against their moral principles.

Furthermore, he concluded that situational factors were largely responsible for the behaviour found, as none of the participants had ever demonstrated these behaviours previously.

Question 14

Strengths of the SPE: Good level of control over variables

Answer 14

• When selecting participants, Zimbardo and his team chose the most emotionally stable, each participant was randomly assigned to either prisoner or guard meaning that there was no experimenter bias.
• It also meant that if the guards and prisoners behaved very differently but were in those roles through chance, then their behaviour had to be due to the pressures of the situation rather than their own individual personalities.
• As this study did have high control over lots of variables it increases the internal validity of the study

Question 15

The SPE and its relevance to Abu Ghraib

Answer 15

• Zimbardo argues that the same conformity to social role effect that was evident in the SPE was also present in Abu Ghraib.
• Zimbardo believed that the guards who abused the prisoners were actually victims of the situational factors at that time.

Question 16

Weaknesses of the SPE: Lack of research support

Answer 16

Reicher and Haslam (2006) in the BBC Prison Study - their findings were very different to those of Zimbardo and his colleagues. It was the prisoners who eventually took control of the mock prison and subjected the guards to a campaign of harassment and disobedience.

They argued that the guards had failed to develop a shared identity as a cohesive group, but the prisoners did. They actively identified themselves as members of a social group that refused to accept the limits of their assigned role as prisoners.

Question 17

Weaknesses of the SPE: Ethical issues

Answer 17

• A major ethical issue was Zimbardo’s dual roles. When, a student who wanted to leave the study spoke to Zimbardo in his role as a superintendent. The whole conversation was conducted as if the student was a prisoner in a prison, asking to be ‘released’. Zimbardo responded to him as a superintendent rather than as a researcher with responsibility towards his participants.

Question 18

What is obedience?

Answer 18

Obedience is a form of social influence in which an individual follows a direct order. The person issuing the order is usually a figure of authority, who has the power to punish when obedient behaviour is not forthcoming.

Eg during the Nazi regime

Question 19

Aim of Milgram experiment

Answer 19

To investigate the level of obedience participants would show when an authority figure tells them to administer electric shocks to another human being.

Question 20

Procedure of Milgrams obedience experiment (Participant selection)

Answer 20

• Milgram selected participants by advertising for male participants to take part in a study of learning at Yale University. This is known as a volunteer sampling method. There were 40 male participants in all that took part in his original study.
• The procedure was that the participant was paired with another person and they drew lots to find out who would be the ‘learner’ and who would be the ‘teacher’. The draw was fixed so that the participant was always the teacher, and the learner was one of Milgram’s confederates

Question 21

What year was Milgrams obedience experiment

Answer 21

1963

Question 22

Procedure of Milgrams experiment

Answer 22

The Learner was known as Mr Wallace. The learner (Mr Wallace) was taken into a room and had electrodes attached to his arms – the teacher (the real pp) saw this happening.

• Mr Wallace was asked if he had any medical conditions and he replied, ‘that apart from a minor heart condition’ he was fine!. Next, the teacher and researcher went into a room next door that contained an electric shock generator and a row of switches marked from 15 volts (Slight Shock) to 375 volts (Danger: Severe Shock) to 450 volts (XXX).

Question 23

Milgrams four prods

Answer 23

Prod 1: ‘Please continue’ or ‘Please go on’;
Prod 2: ‘The experiment requires that you continue’;
Prod 3: ‘It is absolutely essential that you continue’;
Prod 4: ‘You have no other choice, you must go on’.

The prods were always made in sequence. Only if Prod 1 was unsuccessful could Prod 2 be used, etc. If the participant continued to disobey after Prod 4, the experiment was terminated. The experimenter’s tone of voice was always firm, but not impolite.

Question 24

Milgrams predictions before the study

Answer 24

Milgram had predicted before the study that 2% of people would shock to the highest level, but most people would quit very early on.

• In fact, prior to the study Milgram asked 14 psychology students to predict the participants’ behaviour. The students estimated that no more than 3% would continue to 450 volts.

Question 25

Milgrams studies result

Answer 25

All participants shocked up to 300 volts and 65% of participants shocked all the way up to 450 volts.

Question 26

What happened to participants during Milgrams study

Answer 26

Many participants showed signs of nervousness and tension. Participants sweated, trembled, stuttered, bit their lips, groaned, dug fingernails into their flesh, and these were typical not exceptional responses. Quite a common sign of tension was nervous laughing fits (14 out of 40 participants), which seemed entirely out of place, even bizarre.

• Full-blown uncontrollable seizures were observed for three participants. On one occasion, a participant had such a violently convulsive seizure that the experiment had to be halted

Question 27

Conclusion of Milgrams experiment

Answer 27

normal ordinary people will obey authority even if their actions may be detrimental. Thus the hypothesis that the ‘Germans are different’ was not supported.

Question 28

Strengths of Milgrams experiment: Good external validity

Answer 28

It still shows the relationship between the authority figure (in this case the experimenter) and the participant. Milgram argued that the lab environment accurately reflected real life authority.

Question 29

Strengths of Milgrams experiment: Hofling et al (1966)

Answer 30

22 nurses working a various American hospitals received telephone calls from a confederate “Dr Smith”, instructing them to give Mr Jones (Dr Smith’s patient) 20mg of a made up drug called Astrofen.

The box containing the drug stated that the max dose was 10mg. So if the nurse obeyed she would be exceeding the maximum daily dose.
In reply to questionnaires, most nurses said they would not obey. In reality, 21/22 nurses that received a call complied and 11 later said that they had not noticed the dosage discrepancy.

Question 31

Weaknesses of Hofling et al

Answer 31

Rank and Jacobson (1977) queried the facts that the nurses had no knowledge of the drug involved and that they had no opportunity to seek advice from anyone of equal or higher status.

They replicated Hofling’s experiment but the instruction was to administer Valium at 3 times the recommended level, the telephoned instruction came from a real, known doctor on the hospital staff and the nurses were able to consult with other nurses before proceeding. Under these conditions, only 2 out of 18 nurses prepared the medication as requested.

Question 32

Weaknesses of Milgrams experiment: Low internal validity

Answer 32

Orne and Holland (1968) argued that the participants behaved the way they did because they didn’t really believe in the set-up and guessed that they were not really giving electric shocks to the ‘learner’ meaning that the study is not measuring what it intends to measure thus lacking internal validity.

• In fact, Perry’s (2013) research confirms this. As she listened to tapes of Milgram’s participants and many of them expressed doubts on whether the shocks were real or not.

Question 33

Weaknesses of Milgrams experiment: Ethical issues

Answer 33

• Baumrind (1964) was extremely critical of the ways Milgram deceived his participants. For example, Milgram made his participants believe that the roles of teacher and learner were purely randomly allocated when in reality the participant was always the teacher.
• Also, the fact that Milgram made his participants believe that the shocks were real. Baumrind believed that deception was seen as a betrayal of trust that could damage the reputation of psychologists and their research.

Question 34

Situational variables: Proximity

Answer 34

The term proximity refers to how physically close the teacher and learner are and the teacher and experimenter are.

In Milgram’s original study, the teacher and learner were in an adjoining room, so the teacher could hear the learner but not see him. In the proximity variation, they were in the same room.

In this condition, the obedience rate dropped from 65% to 40%.

In another variation, the teacher had to force the learner’s hand onto an ‘electroshock plate’ when he refused to answer a question. In this touch proximity condition, the obedience rate dropped further to 30%.

In a third proximity variation, the experimenter left the room and gave instructions to the teacher by telephone. In this remote instruction condition time proximity was reduced. The outcome was a further reduction in obedience to 20.5%

Question 35

Situational variables: Location

Answer 35

In another variation, Milgram changed the location of the obedience study. He conducted a variation in a run-down building rather than the prestigious university setting where it was originally conducted (Yale University).

Obedience levels fell to 47.5%. This is still quite a high level of obedience but is less than the original 65% in the baseline study.

Question 36

Situational variables: Uniform

Answer 36

In the original baseline study – the experimenter wore a grey lab coat as a symbol of his authority, Milgram carried out a variation in which the experimenter was called away because of a phone call right at the start of the procedure.

The role of the experimenter was then taken over by an ‘ordinary member of the public’ ( a confederate) in everyday clothes rather than a lab coat. The obedience level dropped to 20%, the lowest of the variations.

Question 37

Strength of Milgrams variations: Bickman (1974)

Answer 37

Three male researchers gave orders to 153 randomly selected pedestrians in New York. The researchers were dressed in one of three ways: in a suit (jacket and tie), a milkman’s uniform, or a guard’s uniform.

Bickman (1974) found that participants were most likely to obey the researcher dressed as a guard (80%) than the milk man or civilian (40%). This study supports Milgram’s conclusion that a uniform conveys the authority of its wearer and is a situational factor that is likely to produce obedience.

Question 38

Strength of Milgrams variations: Control

Answer 38

A strength of Milgram’s variations especially for proximity and location were highly controlled as he only altered that one variable but kept the rest of the variables constant to see what effect this would have on obedience. In fact he replicate his variations on 1000 participants in total – this suggests that Milgram’s research is not only valid (measuring the IV) but also replicable (it can be repeated) meaning that stronger conclusions can be drawn about situation variables and obedience.

Question 39

Strength of Milgrams variations: Miranda et al (1981)

Answer 39

Miranda et al (1981) found high obedience rates in Spanish students (90%). This suggests that Milgram’s conclusions about obedience are not limited to American males but apply to females and other cultures too (Milgram did repeat his study on American females and found the same level of obedience as his males participants)

Question 40

Weaknesses of Milgrams variations: Smith and Bond (1998)

Answer 40

Smith and Bond (1998) did point out that Milgram’s study was replicated in developed societies which are similar to the US such as Spain and Australia meaning that we may not be able to apply these findings across all countries since developing countries will have different norms and values to developed countries. This then means that Milgrams findings about proximity and location may not be applied across the world.

Question 41

Weaknesses of Milgrams variations: Orne and Holland

Answer 41

The participants had worked out that the whole procedure was a ‘set-up’ and thus fake and the participants may have realised this through the four prompts used. In fact, in the variations of Milgram’s research when the experimenter is replaced by ‘a member of the public’ obedience rates went down to 20% - even Milgram recognised the situation as so contrived that some of the participants may have worked out the truth (hence why 35% did not shock to the full 450 volts).

Question 42

Weaknesses of Milgrams variations: David Mandel (1998)

Answer 42

David Mandel (1998) argues that using these situational variables almost makes them an excuse or ‘alibi’ for evil or bad behaviour. In his opinion, he sees these variables as a feeble excuse to the survivors of the holocaust

i.e. saying that the reasons why the Nazi’s committed this atrocity was due to situational factors beyond their control! How would we react to that if we were a survivor of the holocaust?

Question 43

autonomic state

Answer 43

When acting as independent individuals, people are aware of the consequences of their actions and make decisions knowing they will be held account for the consequences.

Question 44

agentic shift

Answer 44

The change from an autonomous (independent) state to the agentic state is known as the agentic shift.

Milgram (1974) suggested that this occurs when a person perceives someone else as a figure of authority. This other person has greater power because of their position in a social hierarchy

Question 45

Agentic state

Answer 45

When in an agentic state (state in which a person carries out orders with little personal responsibility) an individual sees themselves as under the authority of another, not responsible for the actions they take. In this state they will often carry out an order without question.

Question 46

Binding factors

Answer 46

These bindings factors include aspects of the situation that allow the person to ignore the damaging effects of their behaviour and thus reduce the ‘moral strain’ they are feeling and shifting the responsibility to the victim (e.g. why did he agree to take part and he was foolish to volunteer). This helps the person feel calm and in control because they feel that what they are doing is not their fault and that they are merely agents following orders – the fault lies in the victim and authority figure

Question 47

Strengths of Agentic state explanation

Answer 47

Blass and Schmitt (2001) showed a film of Milgram’s study to some students and asked them who was responsible for harming the learner Mr Wallace. The students blamed the experimenter rather than the participant. The students also indicated that the fact that the experimenter was a scientist – at the top of the hierarchy thus had authority – the participants were merely agents and following orders from the scientist.

Question 48

Weaknesses of the agentic state theory: Research

Answer 48

However, this theory does not explain many other research findings such as why some of the pps did not obey the authority figure in Milgrams study. It also does not explain why one of nurses in Holfling’s study did not give the drug prescribed by the doctor who is higher up in the hierarchy than a nurse whereby a nurse is merely the agent! In fact, it does not explain the findings of Rank and Jacobson’s study where only 2/18 nurses were willing to give the drug prescribed by the doctor. Clearly the agentic state theory is not explaining why people who are ‘agents’ still do not obey.

Question 49

Weaknesses of the agentic state theory: Nazis

Answer 49

A limitation of the ‘agentic state’ explanation is that research evidence has refuted the idea that the behaviour of the Nazi’s can be explained in terms of the agentic state. For example, Mandel (1998) explained one incident involving German Reserve Police Battalion 101 where men obeyed orders to shoot civilians in Poland. Infact, these men were not given any direct orders to do so and were told that they could do other duties if they preferred. The Police still preferred to carry out the shootings – this example shows that the agentic state theory does not explain obedience since the police were not acting as agents as they did not have to shoot – however they still chose to shoot

Question 50

Legitimate Authority

Answer 50

Most societies are structured in a hierarchical way. This means that people in certain positions hold authority over the rest of us such as parents, teachers, police. Also, from early childhood, we are socialised to obey certain legitimate authority figures. This refers to the amount of social power held by the person who gives the instruction. We are taught that we should obey such people with legitimate authority because we trust them, or because we fear punishment.

Question 51

Strengths of legitimate authority: My Lai

Answer 51

Kelman and Hamilton (1989) argue that the My Lai massacre can be understood in terms of the power of the hierarchy of the US Army. The My Lai massacre took place in 1968 during the Vietnam War. 504 civilians were killed, women were gang-raped. The soldiers blew up buildings, burnt the village and killed all the animals. Only one soldier was found guilty and faced charges – his defence that he was only doing his duty to follow orders

Question 52

Strengths of legitimate authority: Culture

Answer 52

Another strength of this explanation is that it explains cultural differences in obedience – for example, Kilham and Mann (1974) replicated Milgram’s study in Australia and found 16% went to the full voltage. However, Mantell (1971) who replicated Milgrams’s study in Germany found an 85% obedience rate. Both these studies show the cultural differences in perceived legitimacy of authority and how different cultures have different upbringings thus strengthening the legitimacy of authority explanation.

Question 53

Weaknesses of legitimate authority: Harold Shipman

Answer 53

In real life there have been examples of legitimate authority figures who have abused their power. Harold Shipman, as a doctor, was a well known example; because he was a trusted, justified authority figure he was able to kill over 200 patients without suspicion.