Social Influence - Paper 1 Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

What does social psychology examine human behaviour in terms of?

A

Relationships with other people, how we interact

How culture and society affects our behaviour

Conformity, why people conform, variations in conformity

Obedience, why people obey authority, variations

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

What do social psychologists believe in?

A

The effects of interaction between individuals

The effects of being in groups within society

The power of the social situation

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

What do social psychologists believe in?

A

The effects of interaction between individuals

The effects of being in groups within society

The power of the social situation

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

What is conformity?

A

When a person changes their attitude or behaviour due to ‘real’ or ‘imagined’ group pressure.

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

According to Kelman (1958) what are the 3 levels of psychology?

A

Compliance

Identification

Internalisation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is compliance?

A

The lowest level of conformity. Here a person changes their public behaviour (the way they act) but not their private beliefs. This is usually a short term change.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is identification?

A

The middle level of conformity. Here a person changes their public behaviour (the way they act) but not their private beliefs. This is usually a short term change.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is internalisation?

A

The deepest level of conformity. Here a person changes both their public behaviour and their private beliefs. Usually a long term change.

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

What was Asch’s aim? (1951)

A

To see if participants conform to a majority influence in an unambiguous situation.

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

What was Asch’s procedure? (1951)

A

• Asch’s used 50 male college students in his first study.
• In the experiment room, seven male student participants looked at two cards: the test card showed one vertical line while the other card showed three vertical lines of different length.
• The participants called out in turn which of the three lines was the same length as the test line.
• All the participants were confederates except the one who sat second from last who was a real participant.
• Accomplices gave unanimous wrong answers on 12 of the 18 trials.
• These 12 trials were called the critical trials.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What were Asch’s results? (1951)

A

• Participants conformed to the unanimous incorrect answer 32% of critical trials.
• 74% conformed at least once
• 26% never confirmed

In post experiment interviews, some participants stated they actually believed the confederates were correct whereas others stated they changed their answer because they could not hear being in the minority and risk being ridiculed or excluded by the group.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What were Asch’s conclusions? (1951)

A

Even when the situation is unambiguous, people still conform to strong group pressure. Also, there appear to be different reasons for conforming - they wanted to fit in and be correct.

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

What was a strength of Asch’s research?

A

The results of this experiment have been replicated numerous times therefore this would increase the validity and reliability of the findings.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What were the limitations of Asch’s research?

A

• All participants were male college which is a limited sample, questioning generalisability.
• McCarthyism is practice of making accusations of subversion or treason without proper regard for evidence. It also means practise of making unfair allegations or using unfair investigative techniques, especially in order to restrict dissent or political criticism.” This happened in the 1950s in America around the time of the Asch experiment. In social psychology, McCarthyism means that people will not speak out against a group because they are scared people will make accusations about them. Therefore, they will be more likely to conform or obey. This may influence the results of studies at the time of McCarthyism as the conformity of obedience rates may be higher than what they should be.
• The task was extremely artificial (mundane realism) therefore we would question how participants may perform in a more lifeline and realistic task.
• As the task was artificial, participants may have guessed the true aims of the experiment (demand characteristics). Results of poor experimental method.
• There are ethical issues with Asch’s expedient as participants were deceived believing their visual perception was being tested. May have caused psychological harm.

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

What is normative social influence?

A

When someone conforms because they want to be liked and accepted by the group.

They may publicly change their behaviour but privately disagree.

This type of social influence leads to compliance.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What is informational social influence?

A

When someone conforms because they do not know what to do, but they want to be correct. They follow the majority because they assume that the majority know what the right thing to do is.

This type of social influence tends to lead to internalisation and is most likely to happen when there is a crisis, the situation is ambiguous or where others are believed to be experts.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What are strengths of explanations of conformity?

A

• The idea of normative social influence is supported through Asch’s experiment as he found through follow-up interviews that participants conformed to avoid the discomfort of disagreeing.
• The idea of informational social influence is supported through Asch’s experiment as he found through follow up interviews that participants confirmed because they genuinely believed the confederates were correct.

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

What is a limitation of explanations for conformity?

A

• Sometimes both ISI and NSI work together as part of a dual process as people conform to be right because they want to be liked
• There way be alternative reasons why people are more likely to conform than others which may impact likelihood of social influence. This may come down to individual differences such as the person’s education, gender etc.
• Much of the research to support these ideas is conducted in artificial settings with artificial tasks therefore we can question validity in application to the real world as the research lacks validity in the real world.
• Individual differences may play a role in social influence as some people are less impacted by normative social influence due to their nature of non-conformity. These are known as non-affiliates (nAffiliators) who do not conform in situation of wanting to be liked.
• Other explanations such as social identity theory may have a stronger argument in particular circumstances as sometimes people change their behaviour because they identify themselves as part of the group and therefore perform group behaviours.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What is meant by deindividuation?

A

The process that occurs when one loses one’s sense of individual identity so that social, moral and societal constraints on behaviour are loosened.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What is a situational factor?

A

Any variable for the environment that may trigger or cause a change in behaviour.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What was Zimbardo’s aim? (1973)

A

To investigate how readily people would conform to new roles assigned to them.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What was Zimbardo’s procedure? (1973)

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What were Zimbardo’s results? (1973)

A

• The guards harassed the prisoners and conformed to their perceived roles with such zeal that the study had to be discontinued after 6 days.
• The prisoners rebelled against the guards after 2 days, however the guards quelled the rebellion using fire extinguishers.
• Some of the prisoners became depressed and anxious causing mental breakdowns: 1 prisoner on the first day and 2 more on the fourth day.
• One prisoner went on hunger strike and the guards attempted to force-feed him however, when he refused, they placed him in a dark closet similar to solitary confinement known as ‘the hole’.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What were Zimbardo’s conclusions?

A

The situational factors of the prison environment played a crucial role in creating the guard’s brutal behaviour as none of them had shown these tendencies before the experiment. People will readily conform to social roles they are expected to play, especially if they are heavily stereotyped.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What are strengths of Zimbardo’s research?

A

There is clear application to Nazi Germany in concentration camps as Nazi soldiers conformed to their roles.

Additionally, there is also application to Abu Ghraib as Zimbardo claims the atrocities carried out there are a result of situational factors that caused the abuse of power in their role.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

What are limitations of Zimbardo’s research?

A

Ethical issues as there was a lack of informed consent since participants were unaware they would be arrested at home. They were also deceived and not protected from harm as many became anxious and depressed with some experiencing mental breakdowns.

Zimbardo played a dual role (researcher and prison warden) and therefore his behaviour may have affected the way the experiment went (investigator effects) as there was conflict between being a researcher and protecting participants and the prison warden whose role was to reinforce guards

Demand characteristics as people could have guessed the aims and acted out their role more and it may not have been explicitly down to the social role.

Lack of ecological validity as the use of a mock prison means they may not have behaved naturally as if they were real prison guards in a real prison.

Issue with population validity as only males were used, we cannot be sure that women would act the same way

Research focuses on situation factors however ignores dispositional factors in affecting conformity as some people’s personalities and characteristics make them more likely to conform to social roles rather than situational factors.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

What are the 3 variables affecting conformity?

A

Size of the group

Unanimity

Difficulty of the task

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Describe how the size of the group affects conformity

A

Using same experimental method, Asch completed a number of variations where the size of the group playing an influence changed in size.
2 people=13%
3 or 4 people =33%
4 or 5 people=32%
When we report this, we say that group size affects conformity rates as the group gets larger, the conformity rates increase until we reach 5 people in the group. At this point, conformity rates plateu at 32%.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Describe how unanimity affects conformity

A

If someone else in the group agrees with you or disagrees with the group, you are less likely to conform. This was also tested in Asch’s line experiment with a variation on unanimity.

Asch found that conformity reduced to 5.5% when one of the confederates gave a different answer to the rest of the group that was correct.

Asch also found that conformity reduced to 9% when a confederate went against the majority but gave the other incorrect answer.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Describe how the difficulty of the task affects conformity

A

If the task is easy, we are less likely to look to others for guidance. If you are more confident, you are less likely to conform.

If the task is more difficult, we are more likely to conform. This is shown is Asch’s line experiment where Asch made the lines similar in length so the answer was less obvious. due to this being more difficult, conformity rates rose.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

What are strengths of the variables affecting conformity?

A

These concepts are all supported by research conducted by Asch in variations of the line experiment.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

What are the limitations of variables affecting conformity?

A

Research may have been affected by McCarthyism as people were scared to speak out against majority.

There are no studies on a majority size of a greater scale (larger than 15) which would mean we would question group behaviours in everyday situations.

We can’t be sure if the participants normally conform or rebel and therefore it’s hard to establish cause and effect

May have been demand characteristics if participants weren’t convincing enough and participants may have guessed aims and changed their natural behaviour.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

What was Milgram’s (1963) aim?

A

To find out whether people obey an unjust order from a person of authority to inflict pain on another person.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

What was Milgram’s (1963) procedure?

A

-40 male volunteers aged between 20 and 50
-conducted at Yale University
-participants were deceived and told it was a memory experiment, when it was an experiment to test obedience
-fixed draw, confederate always learner, participant always teacher
-learner had to memorise word pairs which he would be tested on
-teacher had to administer a shock every time learner was wrong
-shock generator had 30 levers
-participants watched confederate be strapped into a chair next door where electrodes were attached to his arm
-confederate informed experimenter he had a heart condition and the experimenter reassured him that this would not cause any serious harm
-teacher was given a 45v shock before experiment so they were aware of what they would be administering
- Milgram used standardised procedure as learner’s response was a tape recording so all participants reactions would be a result of the same stimuli
- confederate answered correctly and then began to make mistakes
- shocks went from 15v to 450v
- teacher encouraged shocks by giving verbal prods e.g ‘You have no other choice but to continue’
- participant continued until teacher refused to continue or until 450v were reached and given 4 times
- participant was debriefed and taken to meet learner to show they weren’t harmed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

What were Milgram’s (1963) results?

A

100% went to 300v
65% went to 450v
Most participants found the experience stressful and wanted to stop, showing signs of anxiety. However whilst they dissented verbally, they continued with administering shocks

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

What was Milgram’s (1963) conclusion?

A

Under certain circumstances, most people will obey orders that go against conscience. When people occupy a subordinate position in a dominance hierarchy, they become liable to lose feelings of empathy, compassion and morality, and are inclined towards blond obedience.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

What are strengths of Milgram’s experiment?

A

Controlled and standardised experiment, can establish cause and effect from obedience with conformity

Debriefed participants and made sure they weren’t harmed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

What are limitations of Milgram’s experiment?

A

Lacks mundane realism as it isn’t natural everyday task, not entirely representative

Lacks ecological validity, prestigious Yale University and may have obeyed more

Lacks population validity, male volunteers 20-50

Demand characteristics, may have guessed aim

Lack of informed consent, told it was a memory experiment. Deception may have caused harm

Participants were prodded to continue, violating their right to withdraw

May have caused psychological harm due to nature of experiment as they may have felt like they actually killed someone, harm may have not been detected in debrief

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

What are the two explanations of obedience?

A

Legitimate authority

Agentic state

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

What is meant by legitimate authority?

A

Refers to natural hierarchal leverage a person has over others. e.g. teacher has legitimate authority over a student. In these cases people are more likely to obey. This person has particular leverage to reprimand the individual.
It requires a situation or institution to occur.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

What is meant by ‘agentic state’?

A

a.k.a agentic shift . Milgram says there are tow states; autonomous and agentic.

People see themselves as behaving voluntary and aware of the consequences (autonomous)

However when they see themselves as being an agent of someone (agentic state) they lose responsibility and perform any required tasks

42
Q

What are strengths of the explanations of obedience?

A

Support by Milgram can be seen as explanations from his study. Legitimate authority of experimenter over teacher

A strength of this explanation is that it can be linked to a historical event.

As can be seen, the officers in Nazi Germany stated that they committed mass genocide as they were ‘just following orders’. This demonstrates legitimate authority as it shows that the officers completed the orders due to the hierarchal stance of their superiors. This would therefore increase the validity of the explanation of legitimate authority as a reason for obedience.

43
Q

What are weaknesses of the explanations of obedience?

A

Difficult to differentiate between legitimate authority and agentic state as they often occur together in similar scenarios. There may be an alternative explanation that covers both reasons

Agentic state and obedience are cyclical. The explanations states that you obey because of agentic state and you are in agentic state because you are obedient. Therefore, we cannot know what causes obedience in the first place

Agentic state doesn’t explain why people do not obey and is therefore only applicable in certain situations

These explanations can sometimes be impacted by situational or dispositional factors . Causes of obedience should be considered holistically rather than on a reductionist scale.

44
Q

What is a situational factor?

A

A factor part of the environment that may influence the results of the experiment.

45
Q

Describe the situational factor of proximity in Milgram’s experiment

A

Defines how close the participant was to the confederate

In the same room at 1.5 feet away, obedience
rates were 40%
When teacher had to physically put learner’s hand on shock plate, obedience rates were 30%

Can also define how close participant was to the experimenter, when given instructions via telephone obedience rates were 21%

46
Q

Describe the situational factor of location in Milgram’s experiment

A

When the setting changed (ecological validity) to a run down office block, obedience rates dropped to 48%, less prestigious than Yale

47
Q

Describe the situational factor of uniform in Milgram’s experiment

A

In Milgram’s experiment, experimenter was wearing lab coat.

Milgram tried same experiment but the role of he experimenter was taken over by an ‘ordinary member of the public’ who was also a confederate in everyday clothes.

Obedience dropped to 20%

48
Q

Describe Bushman (1988)’s study into situational factors and obedience (APRC)

A

Female researcher ‘told’ people on the street to give money to a male researcher for an expired parking meter. Obedience changed depending on her uniform:
Police-style uniform = 72%
Business executive = 48%
Beggar = 52%

When interviewed afterwards, participants claimed that they obeyed the police uniform more because it had ‘authority’

48
Q

Who researched situational factors of obedience?

A

Bushman (1988)

49
Q

What are the strengths of situational factors?

A

Support from Bushman to show roles of uniform

Milgram’s experiment variations show roles of situational factors when compared to the original experiment

50
Q

What are the weaknesses of situational factors?

A

Other factors may have played a role, such as gender or culture of participants of the experimenter on obedience levels

There are several evaluations of Milgram, including ethical and methodological issues

Some would question temporal validity, same results may not be obtained as culture has shifted since 1960/70 to 2010

Mandel (1988) states it doesn’t really represent Nazi Germany as the killing of the Jews was undertaken in close proximity of the victims without protest from the guards

50
Q

What are dispositional factors?

A

Dispositional factors are the individual or personal characteristics of a person that may affect how they behave or conform.

They reject situational factors and say the most important factor is someone’s personality in predicting how obedient they are

51
Q

What is the F-Scale?

A

It was created by Adorno et al (1950)

It was created to measure how authoritarian you are; the higher on the scale, the more authoritarian you were and therefore more obedient

52
Q

What is the authoritarian personality?

A

A collection of traits/dispositions developed from strict/rigid parenting.

53
Q

What are the 6 traits of an authoritarian personality?

A

Rigid thinker - unable to consider alternatives to current thoughts

Conformist - copy others behaviour

Conventional - adhere to what is normally done

Dogmatic - state principals as undeniably true

Obedient towards people of perceived higher status

Harsh towards people perceived as having lower status

54
Q

Who researched into the dispositional factors of obedience?

A

Elms and Milgram (1966)

55
Q

What was Elms and Milgram’s (1966) aim?

A

To investigate dispositional factors of obedience

56
Q

What was Elms and Milgram (1966)’s procedure?

A

20 obedient and 20 defiant participants were taken from Milgram’s experiment and they completed:
The MMPI (personality test)
The F-Scale test
Answered a series of open and closed questions about their: relationship to their parents, views of the experimenter, views of the learner during the study

57
Q

What were Elms and Milgram (1966)’s results?

A

MMPI = no difference between participants
F-Scale = obedient participants had higher scores
Relationship to parents = obedient were more distant with fathers
Views to experimenter = obedient participants thought they were admirable
View of learner = obedient thought little of learner

58
Q

What was Elms and Milgram (1966)’s conclusion?

A

Authoritarian personality is a strong predictor for identifying obedience

59
Q

What are strengths of dispositional factors being an explanation for obedience?

A

There is research to support from Elms and Milgram (1966) showing that there is a relationship between authoritarianism and obedience

60
Q

What are limitations of dispositional factors as an explanation for obedience?

A

Situational factors may have played a greater role

Difficulty of cause and effect authoritarian personality as the research is correlational meaning we cannot be certain it is the direct cause of obedience

This explanation cannot explain obedience in entire societies as we cannot all be the same

The F-Scale is unreliable as it is self-report meaning responses may not be a true likeness of the individual

Education may be the determining factor for obedience due to it being engrained over time through growing up

This idea shows political bias against right wing views and therefore may not be entirely applicable to all countries as a result of their political stance / viewpoint

61
Q

What is meant by resistance to social influence?

A

Factors that make people resist obedience and conformity

These can all be seen in all experiments so far as Asch and Milgram show that people did not conform or obey just as much as they show people do.

However, there are a few recognised factors

62
Q

What is the first explanation of resistance to social influence?

A

Social support

63
Q

Describe how a dissenting peer can encourage resistance to conformity

A

Pressure to conform is reduced if other people are not conforming

Asch’s research showed that the dissenter doesn’t have to give the ‘right’ answer

Simply someone else not following the majority frees others to follow their own conscience

The dissenter acts as a ‘model’

The dissenter shows the majority is no longer unanimous

64
Q

Describe how one other dissenting partner can encourage resistance to obedience.

A

Pressure to obey can be reduced if another person is seen to disobey

Milgram’s research - obedient behaviour greatly decreased in the disobedient peer condition (from 65% to 10%)

The participant may not follow the disobedient peer but the dissenter’s disobedience frees the participant to act from their own conscience

A disobedient model challenges the legitimacy of the authority figure

65
Q

What is the 2nd explanation for resistance to social influence?

A

Locus of control (LOC)

66
Q

Who described internal versus external LOC?

A

Rotter (1966)

67
Q

What do internals believe?

A

Things that happen to them are largely controlled by themselves (e.g doing well or badly on an exam depends on how hard you work)

68
Q

What do externals believe?

A

Things happen outside their control.

If they fail an exam they say it was because they had a bad teacher or had bad luck because the questions were hard

69
Q

How is there a continuum? (LOC)

A

LOC is not just being internal or external

There is a scale from one to the other and people differ in their position on it

High internals at one end and high externals at the other, low internals and low externals lie in-between

70
Q

Explain how people with an internal LOC show greater resistance to social influence

A

People with internal LOC are more likely to resist pressures to conform or obey

1) If someone takes personal responsibility for their actions (good or bad) they are more likely to base their decisions on their own beliefs

2) People with high internal LOC are more confident, more achievement-orientated and have higher intelligence - traits that lead to greater resistance (also the traits of leaders, who have less need for social approval)

71
Q

Who researched into LOC as an explanation for resistance to social influence?

A

Holland (1967)

Avtgis (1998)

Milgram (1974)

72
Q

Describe Holland’s research

A

Repeated Milgram’s experiment and measured whether participants were internals or externals

He found that 37% participants didn’t continue to the highest shock level

23% of externals did not continue to the highest shock level

73
Q

Describe Avtgis’ research

A

Completed a meta-analysis considering LOC and conformity.

It was found that those with a higher external LOC were more easily persuaded and conformed more than those who did not have a high external LOC

74
Q

Describe Milgram’s research (LOC)

A

He noted the background characteristics of participants who took part in the experiment

He recorded the age, martial status, occupation, military experience, educational history and religion

He found that less educated individuals were less likely to resist pressures to obey.

Also, Roman Catholic participants were more likely to obey the experimenter

75
Q

What are the strengths of resistance to social influence?

A

Research to support from Holland (1967) that shows people are more likely to obey is they have an external locus of control in comparison to those with an internal.

Avtgis (1998) also supports the idea as shown through a meta-analysis that externals conform more due to them being easily persuaded.

Milgram (1974) also supports the model as Roman Catholics are described as having an external locus of control therefore and they were more obedient participants thus supporting the idea of locus of control.

The Rosenstrausse Protest shows disobedient models as people were willing to join in with others in
disobedience despite the potential costs of performing the action.

Asch (1951) shows that people do not conform at all 26% of the time showing more resistance to social influence.

Milgram (1973) shows that people resist obedience 35% of the time as not all the participants went to 450 volts.

76
Q

What are the limitations of resistance to social influence?

A

Other factors may play a greater role in determining behaviour as they have a greater impact on obedience and conformity rates in research such as situational and dispositional factors.

It is difficult to measure whether someone is internal or external in reference to locus of control due to the nature of the test being self-report.

Therefore, we cannot be entirely sure that it has an impact on behaviour.
Locus of control explanations are mainly based on correlational studies therefore it is difficult to establish the cause and effect relationship between the behaviour and personality trait.

77
Q

What is meant by minority influence?

A

Minority influence is different to the work of Asch as this studies the impact of a small group of people on others behaviour (minority social influence) rather than a large group of people and their impact on others behaviour (majority social influence)
The process works by people converting from a majority to a minority through a staged process until it becomes the majority.

78
Q

What are the 3 factors of the minority that will influence how effective it is?

A

Consistency

Commitment

Flexibility

79
Q

Describe the factor of consistency

A

When a minority forms, people assume they are wrong. However, if they remain consistent, people will reassess the situation and consider the issue carefully. This can be achieved by repeating the same message.

Consistency contributes to social change when a minority repeatedly gives the same message.

This makes a majority reassess their belief and consider the issue more carefully (and so may adopt the minority point of view)

80
Q

Describe the factor of commitment

A

This is when a minority sticks to its cause and is uncompromising in its approach. It suggests: certainty, confidence and courage. Due to this, this may encourage people to join from the majority as they are risking more being in the minority.

This can be done by explaining how people are taking their time on things.

Commitment contributes to social change when a minority show they are willing to give up something for their belief the majority take their argument more seriously (and so may adopt it as their own).

81
Q

Describe the factor of flexbility

A

In order to gain power, minorities need to negotiate their position with the majority. They must avoid being dogmatic in their approach however, it cannot be too flexible and switch its views as it would be viewed as inconsistent. This can be done by listening to others to form conclusions.

Flexibility/being non-dogmatic contributes to social change when a minority show they are willing to listen to other viewpoints the majority listen to their point of view/take their argument more seriously (and so may adopt it as their own).

82
Q

Who researched into the influence of minorities?

A

Moscovici et al (1969)

83
Q

What was Moscovici et al (1969)’s aim?

A

To see whether a consistent minority of participants could influence a majority to give an incorrect answer in a colour perception task.

84
Q

What was Moscovici et al (1969)’s procedure?

A

172 female participants were tested to ensure they had good eyesight.

Four participants at a time were placed in a room with two confederates and asked to state the colour of the slides they were presented with.

The confederates answered first followed by the four naïve participants. All of the slides were blue but of differing brightness totalling 36.

There were two conditions:
Consistent - the two confederates called the slides green on all trials.

Inconsistent - the two confederates called the slides green 24 times and blue 12 times.

85
Q

What were Moscovici et al (1969)’s results?

A

32% reported the slide as green once
Participants conformed

8.4% of the time in the consistent condition

Participants conformed 1.3% of the time in the inconsistent condition.

86
Q

What was Moscovici et al (1969)’s conclusion?

A

When a minority behave consistently, the care more influential compared to when they are inconsistent. They must maintain a consistent viewpoint and agreement amongst the members of the minority.

This research therefore supports the idea of consistency as it shows a higher percentage of conformity rates in the consistent condition compared to the inconsistent condition.

87
Q

What are the strengths of minority influence?

A

This can be applied to many different scenarios in the world including: The Civil Rights Movement, The Suffragettes etc.

There is research to support form
Moscovici (1969)

88
Q

What are the limitations of minority influence?

A

We can criticise the research in this field as it is a test of majority influence. The first two confederates influence the third to give an answer which is majority influence and this continues with a domino effect to the rest of the participants.

Additionally, we can question the research for its validity in reference to ecological validity, mundane realism, population validity and demand characteristic.

Research using confederates is unethical as it deceives participants which may later cause them psychological harm.

The size of the minority has to be taken into consideration as this may have an impact on conformity rates if the minority is a large minority compared to a small one.

89
Q

What is meant by social change?

A

Social change refers to the ways in which a society (rather than an individual) develops over time to replace beliefs, attitudes and behaviour with new norms and expectations.

90
Q

How does social change occur?

A

Social change occurs as a result of minority influence but also as a result of obedience and conformity which both can explain large scale social change.

91
Q

What are the 6 steps of social change?

A
  1. Create attention
  2. Cognitive conflict
  3. Consistency
  4. The Augmentation principle
  5. The Snowball effect
  6. Social cryptomnesia
92
Q

Describe the step of “creating attention”

A

The view of opposition to the current ideology needs to be expressed otherwise the majority will not recognise it. The majority will seek to reduce this opposition and therefore, the minority group needs to create attention.

93
Q

Describe the step of “cognitive conflict”

A

The minority shows the conflict between majority and minority creating social competition. They show the have a different stance to the majority making others think about the differences.

94
Q

Describe the step of “consistency”

A

This is the most important factor to making a group successful and influential. This will mean that they are taken more seriously as this is over a period of time.

95
Q

Describe the step of “the augmentation principle”

A

When there are risks involved, the minorities views are taken more seriously. These risks are difficult circumstances where there may be repercussions for speaking out e.g. imprisonment or abuse. The minority are willing to make sacrifices for their cause thus augmenting their point.

96
Q

Describe the step of “the snowball effect”

A

This is how social change happens. As one person defects from the majority to the join the minority, others will follow. This means that the minority group gather momentum and thus, more people join the minority. As more move across, it decreases the pressure for others to conform to the majority (the role of allies).

97
Q

Describe the step of “social cryptomnesia”

A

People remember that change has occurred however, they have no memory as to why or how it happened.

98
Q

What are the strengths of social change?

A

Creating attention is shown through the Rosenstrausse protest as they created attention for their cause against Nazi Germany.

Consistency is supported by Moscovici who shows a consistent minority is more influential than an inconsistent minority (8.4 > 1.3).

The augmentation principle is supported by Kruglanski (2003) who states that terrorism is one of the greatest cases showing how social change is intended through minority influence as a minority is willing to go to extreme lengths for their beliefs.

Research to support the snowball effect comes from Asch’s breaking unanimity study as it shows that it people go against the majority; other people are more likely to go against the majority.

99
Q

What are the limitations of social change?

A

The boomerang effect may cause some people to change to the minority but in fact, those who stay with the majority become more driven to go against the minority group.

We have to question at what point does the minority become a majority and the influence change? Once they become the majority has social change occurred or is there more to the process?