Social Influence Lessons 09 - 12 (resistance and minority influence) Flashcards
Resistance to Social Influence
Stats for Milgram and Asch
Situational Explanation
35% of people refused to obey in Milgram’s (1963) study
25% of people did not conform in Asch’s (1951) study
Social Support Theory
Social support argues that when one person refuses to conform/obey, it becomes far more likely that other people will also resist social influence
People are more likely to not conform if they have an ALLY (someone who resists Social Influence), because the ally breaks the unanimity of the group - groups are more influential when unanimous. The presence of the ally gives an individual an independent assessment of reality and makes them feel more confident in their decision
People are more likely to defy an authority figure if they see a DISOBEDIENT ROLE MODEL refusing to obey, because this challenges the figure’s legitimate authority.
Evaluation of Social Support Theory
+ Milgram (1974) shock experiment. 65% of participants shocked Mr Wallace to 450 volts, however, when there was a disobedient role model, it fell to 10%
+ Asch (1951) line experiment. In 33% of trials, the participants conformed and gave the wrong answer. When there was an ally, it dropped to 5%.
- In both original versions of the studies, some participants were able to resist social influence even though they had no social support. This means that social support is not a complete explanation of resistance to social influence, so other factors must also play a part (e.g. personality traits)
What is a locus of control?
Dispositional Explanation
Rotter (1966) said that personality determines whether someone obeys or resists Social Influence
A locus of control refers to the extent to which a person believes they have control over their own behaviour (measured from internal to external)
Internal locus of control
People believe that whatever happens is the result of their own behaviour and actions. They can alter what happens to them.
If they do badly in a test, they see it as a result of inadequate revision.
They would agree with “Misfortune is usually brought about by people’s own actions”
External locus of control
People believe that whatever happens is out of their control and is determined by chance or other people. They have no ability to alter it.
If they do badly on a test, they blame it on bad luck or inadequate teachers.
They would agree with “Things that make us unhappy are largely due to bad luck”
People with a high internal locus of control are less likely to conform/obey because they …
- Are more likely to be leaders than followers
- Are less concerned with social approval
- Are more self-confident
- Believe that they control their own circumstances
Evaluation of locus of control
+ Oliner and Oliner (1988) interviewed 406 German people who helped Jewish people hide from the Nazis in the 1930s and 1940s. These people had an internal locus of control - they could disobey the Nazis
+ Milgram (1974) - shock experiment. 35% disobeyed and they were far more likely to have an internal locus of control than those who obeyed
- Williams and Warchal (1981) found that conformers were less assertive than non-conformers, however there was not a significant difference in their locus of control. Assertiveness is more important than locus of control when determining whether a person will refuse to conform/obey
What is Minority Influence and Conversion?
When a small group can change the way the majority behaves and thinks
Moscovici (1985) considered minority influence to lead to conversion (when individuals change their private believes and views because of minority influence)
Minority groups are most likely to be convincing when they are …
- COMMITTED: Shown when members of the minority demonstrate their dedication, perhaps by making sacrifices or taking risks (shows that the minority is not acting out of self-interest)
- CONSISTENT: Occurs when a minority repeatedly gives the same message over time - makes the majority reassess and consider the issue carefully
- FLEXIBLE: When the minority is non-dogmatic and is willing to listen to other viewpoints. The majority then listen to the minority POV and take their argument more seriously
Snowball effect
The minority viewpoint spreads and more people consider the issue and are converted . Eventually, it reaches a tipping point, where the minority becomes the majority
Social crypto-amnesia
Minority influence is a slow process and may even be unconscious.
When the individual is not unaware of where the new idea originated from.
Evaluation of Minority Influence
(+) Moscovici (1969) told 172 female participants that they were taking part in a colour perception task. Put into groups of 6 (4 were naive participants, 2 were confederates). Shown 36 slides of varying shades of blue. In the CONSISTENT condition, the confederates said green for all trials. In the INCONSISTENT contrition, they said green for 24 and blue for 12. In the consistent condition, participants were swayed by the minority 8.2% of the time. In the inconsistent, they were swayed 1.25% of the time. Conclusion: consistent minority is more effective than an inconsistent minority
(-) GENDER BIASED - only used women (beta bias). Unable to GENERALISE - research suggests that women are more likely to conform than men.
(-) CULTURALLY BIASED - all American - unable to GENERALISE
(-) Lacks ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY - experiment conduced in lab setting - participants are strangers who will probably never meet again
(-) ETHICS - DECEIVING PARTICIPANTS, lack of INFORMED CONSENT. However, deception was necessary to achieve VALID results (no DEMAND CHARACTERISTICS)
What is Social Change?
Refers to the change that occurs in a society and not at an individual level (e.g. equal rights for homosexual couples, increased recycling rates, smoking bans, female suffrage).
Occurs when the minority view challenges the majority view and is eventually accepted by the majority.
Why do people conform to the minority viewpoint?
Once the majority accepts the minority viewpoint, people conform due to normative social influence (compliance) and/or informational social influence (internalisation).
Governments/lawmakers bring about social change through OBEDIENCE (e.g. changing laws = changing social norms = more accepting of the viewpoint)
Dictators bring about social change through OBEDIENCE (leads to groups of people changing their behaviour because of the fear of punishment/consequences of not obeying)
