Social influence L8-13

Question 1

The agentic state (idea)

Answer 1

Milgram proposed obedience to destructive authority occurs bc person does not take responsibility but acts for someone else as an agent.

Question 2

Agentic state strengths

Answer 2

• makes sense in explaining why we obey authority, Blass and Schmitt showed milgrams study to students and asked who was responsible for harming learner, they blamed experimenter
  Said scientist was at top of hierarchy, participants were merely agents

Question 3

Agentic state weaknessess

Answer 3

Doesn’t explain why pps disobeyed in milgram, one nurse in hofling, 16/18 in rank and Jacobson despite doctor being higher in hierarchy Doesn’t explain
Research evidence refutes idea that Nazi behaviour is explained by Agentic state, mandel explained an incident where Germans shot the polish without direct orders and the option to do something else

Question 4

Social support

Answer 4

One reason people can resist the pressure to conform or obey is if they have an ally.
Builds confidence and allows individuals to remain independent. No more fear of ridicule, avoid NSI. May be short term (Asch). With support for pov, may be less likely to obey.

Question 5

Resistance to social influence stats

Answer 5

Asch 1951 - 24% didn’t conform at any point.
Milgram - 35% didn’t obey authority
Hofling - One nurse disobeyed
Zimbardo - Two thirds resisted pressure to behave sadistically

Question 6

Social support Conformity

Answer 6

Pressure to conform decreases if others don’t conform
Asch - conformity dropped to 9% with incorrect, 5.5% with correct dissenter
Allen and Levine 1971 found decrease with 1 dissenter in Asch type study despite them saying vision problems+thick glasses

Question 7

Social support obedience

Answer 7

Pressure to obey can be reduced if another is seen to disobey. Milgram variation - obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when particp was joined by disobedient confederate. Person may not follow disobedient person’s behaviour but has will to decide based on own conscience.

Question 8

Gamson’s study

Answer 8

Volunteers asked to discuss firing of petrol station manager. HR Company saying offensive lifestyle, manger saying speaking out. MHRC trying to make participants defend their side, asking if footage can be shown in court.
Pps developed strong group identity, decided demands were unreasonable. In 25/33 groups, majority rebelled showing social support and power.

Question 9

Strengths of social support

Answer 9

Research support - Asch and Milgram, show power of social support in resisting social influence
Gamson’s study has high ecological validity. Can be applied irl.

Question 10

Weaknesses of social support

Answer 10

Strong for explaining group size under 10. Real world, groups are massive e.g 100, one dissenter won’t influence majority. Restricted to small group, more research needed .

Question 11

Locus of Control

Answer 11

Julian Rotter 1966
Refers to persons perception of degree of control they have over their behaviour.
External LOC - future and actions result mostly from outside factors, e.g. luck or fate.
Internal LOC- Stronger sense of control over their lives than external loc. More active seekers of info, rely less on opinions of others, more likely to resist pressure from others. (and so social influence).

Question 12

effects of LOC

Answer 12

Internal LOC more likely to resist conformity or to obey, Taking responsibility for actions and experiences means more likely to base decisions on their own beliefs.
Tend to be more self confident, achievement orientated, intelligent and less need of social approval.

Question 13

Strength LOC

Answer 13

Supporting evidence. Oliner and Oliner interviewed two groups of non-jewish ppl who lived through holocaust and nazi Germany. Compared those who protected/rescued jews and those who didn’t. Group that did, had internal LOC, so likely to act.
Holland repeated Milgram and measured LOC. 37% of internals didn’t continue, 23% of eternals. Research support.

Question 14

Weakness LOC

Answer 14

Conflicting research evidence. American obedience studies over 40 years show more resistance to obedience but more external LOC.

Question 15

Authoritarian personality

Answer 15

Dispositional explanation for obedience. Adorno 1950. Dispositional explanations of behaviour claim individual’s personality determines behaviour not situational influences. Adorno argued authoritarian personalities are more likely to obey authority.

Question 16

Traits of authoritarian personality

Answer 16

Servile towards people of perceived higher status
Hostile towards people of lower status
Preoccupied with power
Inflexible in beliefs and values
Conformity and conventional (e.g. rule following)
Likely to categorise people as ‘us’ or ‘them’
Dogmatic (intolerant of ambiguity)

Question 17

Why do they have authoritarian personalities? F scale?

Answer 17

Extremely harsh discipline from parents in upbringing. Feelings of hostility directed towards weaker others who can’t fight back. Can’t take out anger with parents (fear), act submissive. Extend submissive behaviour to all authority.
Questionnaire to measure fascism scale. Relationship between authoritarian personality and high scores on F scale.

Question 18

Strengths of authoritarian personality

Answer 18

Elms and Milgram follow up study. 20 obedient participants (up to 450 volts) 20 disobedient.
MMPI Scale to measure personality traits. Little difference in MMPI Scale, but higher levels of authoritarian traits in obedient participants. More likely less close with father, and negative descriptions of them. More likely to perceive experimenter (authority figure) as admirable.

Miller test where participants shock themselves. F scale high scores more likely to obey.

Question 19

Weaknesses of authoritarian personality

Answer 19

Limited explanation- does not explain why majority population in country like Germany are obedient but not all can have authoritarian personality.
Methodological problems - Each question on F scale is worded similarly, easy to get high score, all questions are closed, Adornos interviewer bias

Question 20

Minority influence - consistency

Answer 20

Minority influence will be persuasive if minority is consistent with its opinion/behaviour, show confidence in belief and appears unbiased. Consistent approach leads to others reassessing and considering issue more carefully, must be a reason why minority takes the position and is confident to maintain. (Nemeth 2010)

Question 21

Moscovici (1969)
To see if a consistent minority could influence majority to give an incorrect answer in colour perception task.

Answer 21

Sample of 172 female pps who were told they’re taking part in colour perception task.
Groups of 6 and shown 36 slides, varying shades of blue. Had to state colour out loud. 2/6 pps were confederates and in one condition (consistent) said all 36 were green. Second condition (inconsistent) said 24 were green and 12 were blue.

In consistent, real participants agreed on 8.2% of the trials.
In inconsistent, agreed on 1.25%.

Question 22

Minority influence - commitment

Answer 22

Important in influence process because suggests certainty, confidence and courage in face of hostile majority. Joining minority inevitably has greater cost than staying with majority, therefore commitment shown is typically greater. Greater commitment might persuade majority group members to take them seriously or convert to minority position. Augmentation principle explains how minorities can change majority because risky but committed makes majority pay more interest.

Question 23

Xie at Al 2011

Answer 23

Discovered a ‘tipping point’ where number of people holding a minority position is sufficient to change majority opinion. Xie found you need about 10% of the minority population to influence the majority,

Question 24

Legitimate authority

Answer 24

Most societies have hierarchies. People in certain positions hold authorities over rest of us. From early childhood, socialised to obey certain legitimate authority figures. This refers to amount of social power held by the person giving instruction. Taught to obey such people because we trust them or fear punishment.
One consequence of legitimate authority is people are granted power to punish others.
Uniforms are often symbol of authority (Bickman’s study). Location and proximity can add.
Problem is when it becomes destructive. Hitler for destruction (holocaust). Destructive authority in milgram when experimenter used profs on pps to administer lethal shocks to innocent learner.

Question 25

Strengths of legitimate authority

Answer 25

Need them in well functioning, ordered society thus strength is that it explains functioning of civilised nation. Help prevent crime. Can help explain real life war crimes. My Lai massacre happened due to orders from seniors in US Army.
Explains cultural differences. Kilham and Mann in Australia did Milgram’s study, found 16% went to full voltage. Mantell in Germany found 85% obedience rate. Both show cultural differences in perceived legitimacy of authority and how different cultures have different upbringings thus strengthening explanation.

Question 26

Weaknesses of legitimate authority

Answer 26

Not all should be obeyed. Sometimes we will obey because of status even if we disagree with order. Milgram showed people will obey even if it leads harm to another. Harold shipman was able to kill 200+ without suspicion. Suggests balance must’ve struck between teaching children to obey authority but also encouraging questioning sometimes in case orders are destructive.

Question 27

Minority influence - flexibility

Answer 27

Mugny (1982) suggests flexibility is more effective at changing majority opinion than rigidity of arguments. Minorities- generally powerless comparatively, must negotiate not enforce their position over majority. Minority that is too flexible or too rigid risks being seen as weak/inconsistent or dogmatic. Nemeth argues balance between consistency and flexibility is important.

Question 28

Nemeth (1986) Research support for flexibility

Answer 28

She believes consistency was not most important factor as often misinterpreted as negative trait.