social influence lessons 1-7

Question 1

compliance

Answer 1

when people change behaviour to be in line with majority but their private views do not change

Question 2

internalisation

Answer 2

change beliefs to be in line with majority and the persons views change privately and publicly

Question 3

identification

Answer 3

people changing their views to be part of a group we feel similar with and people that we admire. agree publicly and disagree privately

Question 4

conformity

Answer 4

change in views or behaviour from real or imagined pressure from a group or people

Question 5

two process theory

Answer 5

made by deutsch and gerard and it is used to identify reasons for conformity

Question 6

informational social influence

Answer 6

the need to be right. when unsure, people will look to the majority to see if they have the correct answer.

Question 7

normative social influence

Answer 7

the need to be liked. people act in a certain way to be accepted and not to be ridiculed (concerned about rejection) NSI is likely to lead to compliance

Question 8

ISI strengths

Answer 8

Lucas et al found that when maths problems are harder people look to agree with others who they think are smarter or better than maths.

Question 9

ISI weakness

Answer 9

Asch found that ISI doesn’t affect everyone the same. students were not as conformist as other like office workers

Question 10

NSI strengths

Answer 10

Asch found that people went along with a clearly wrong answer because others did. they did it because they feared rejection.

Question 11

NSI weaknesses

Answer 11

people who are concerned about being liked. nAffilliators have a greater need for affiliation so are more likely to conform.

Question 12

NSI AND ISI WEAKNESS

Answer 12

studies to support them were carried out in lab conditions and thus lack ecological validity. this may not affect the same in the real world

Question 13

what did jenness do

Answer 13

jenness used a glass bottle filled with 811 white beans. 26 students were asked to estimate how many beans were in the jar. they were then split into groups and asked to come up with a number after discussing. results showed after discussing people had a lot more similar answers

Question 14

what is Asch’s study procedure.

Answer 14

123 male US students were put in a group with up to 8 confederates and were asked to state which line matched the length of the target line. the pps were sat last or second to last. 18 trials in total, 12 being critical

Question 15

Asch experiment results

Answer 15

in the critical trials about 33% conformed. over 12 critical trials 75% of pps conformed at least once. in the control group less that 1% conformed. asch interviewed pps after and most said they knew the answer but went along to fit in which shows NSI

Question 16

variables affecting asch results

Answer 16

group size : very little conformity w 1 or 2 confederates. when majority w 3 confederates con rates rose to 30%. after it didn’t raise much
unanimity of majority: if one confederate gave a correct answer con rates dropped to 5%. if one gave a differing wrong answer it dropped to 9%
task difficulty: when lines were made closer to the answer con rates increased due to hesitation.

Question 17

evaluation of asch’s study (AO3)

Answer 17

lacks temporal validity as perrin and spencer repeated study in 1980 and only one student conformed in 396 trials but they did it on engineering students.
lacks ecological validity as this would not occur in every day life and pps may have guessed study which they then may show demand characteristics.
lacks population validity as female behaviour was not taken into account and only us pps so lacks individualist culture.
deception as he made pps think confederates were fellow pps and the confusion related can lead to psychological harm.

Question 18

stanford prison experiment procedure

Answer 18

comprised of 24 MALE college students of the most psychologically secure and were paid £15 an hour
pps were randomly assigned to the role prisoner or guard. two reserves one dropped out so 10 prisoners and 11 guards. prisoners unknowingly blindfolded and taken from their homes, stripped, deluded, given prison clothes, bedding and an id number. nylon cap and no underwear and chained leg. guards dressed in khaki, carried a whistle, club and wore special sunglasses. instructed to do whatever to keep order but no violence.

Question 19

SPE RESULTS

Answer 19

both prisoners and guards identified w social roles. prisoners rebelled and guards were abusive towards them and dehumanised them like cleaning toilets w bare hands. 5 prisoners left after a few days because of extrem reaction like seizures, crying etc. terminated on day 6 as it was deemed inhumane.

Question 20

SPE EVALUATION

Answer 20

no experimenter bias and zimbardo had control over variables like selecting most stable pps and randomly assigned roles. so it was due to the pressures of situation rather than pps characteristics.
increases internal validity so we can make better conclusion. abu ghraib.
lack of research support as bbc prison study had different results where prisoners took over
zimbardo’s dual role so he was worrying more abt running the prison rather than as a researcher w responsibility. lack of informed consent when arresting them and the psychological harm that could have been induced. although he did debrief them and sent questionnaire

Question 21

MILGRAM PROCEDURE

Answer 21

to investigate level of obedience w authority figure.
40 male pps paid £4 an hour at yale uni. pps was always teacher and confederate was learner. they saw electrodes attached to learner. from 15v to 250v. at 180 the learner shouted, at 300 he begged to stop, at 315 he was silent. pps were given prods when hesitant.

Question 22

MILGRAM RESULTS

Answer 22

all pps shocked to 300v. 65% of pps shocked to 450v. 14 disobeyed and 26 obeyed. common signs of tension and nervousness and nervous laughing fits. one pps had a violent seizure. all were debriefed and were sent a questionnaire which 85 said they were glad to pps. disproved that the germans were different

Question 23

MILGRAM EVALUATION

Answer 23

good external validity bc it shows relationship between authority figure and the pps. milgram argued lab authority reflected real life authority. holding et al w the doctor smith telling to give more dose supports this. 21 out of 22 complied w doctor smith.
low internal validity as were they being obedient or did they know and then showed demand characteristics. they doubted whether the set up was real. milgram deceived participants and the roles weren’t random. however questionnaires and debriefing happened.

Question 24

MILGRAM VARIABLES

Answer 24

proximity: how close the learner and teacher is and experimenter and teacher. when learner and teacher were in same room the obedience rates dropped from 65% to 40%. in touch proximity when teacher forced the learner the obedience rate dropped to 30%. when experimenter asked on the phone obedience rates dropped to 20.5%.
location: when he changed to a run down building rather than yale uni obedience rates fell to 47.5%
uniform: when the experimenter wore ordinary clothes rather than the grey lab coat then obedience levels dropped to 20%

Question 25

MILGRAM VARIABLE EVALUATION

Answer 25

research support from bickman who found when dressed as a guard 80% obeyed rather than as a milkman 40%. cross culture replications as miranda did the same in spain as milgram and found similar results. milgram did it on females too.may not apply to developing countries. milgram only varied one variable at a time to keep the others controlled.

lack of internal validity as participants may have seen through the deception and seen it’s fake so they just show demand characteristics.
obedience alibi which is if these situational variables are just an excuse for evil and bad behaviour so did the nazis only do it due to situational factors?