Social Influence (Paper 1) Flashcards
Friday 16th May - 9:15 → 11:15
Definition of conformity
when an individual changes their thoughts or behaviour so that they are the same as the majority of others in a group
Definition of obedience
when we are ordered to do something by someone with authority over us and we do as we’re told
Definition of minority influence
when an individual or small group changes the attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours of a large group
Definition of compliance
When a person publicly changes their behaviour to agree with others but privately continues to believe their own views
Definition of identification
Individual adopts the behaviour and attitudes of a group that they want to be associated with. This is shown for as long as the individual values membership of that group
Definition of internalisation
An individual changing and adopting a new set of beliefs or behaviours that become part of their own personal values. Not dependant on being part of the group.
Informational social influence explanation
Individuals conform because we want to be right and don’t want to seem foolish by getting something wrong.
Normative social influence explanation
Individuals conform because they want to be liked and accepted by a group
2x strengths/ 2x weaknesses of conformity
S+ Students had to answer easy and difficult maths questions and were shown incorrect responses. Greater conformity to difficult questions
S+ Adolescents given the message that most adolescents did not smoke, were less likely to start to smoke
C- Individual differences in conformity behaviour exist. Science and engineering students were less likely to agree with others who gave the wrong answer to lengths of lines
C- Inkso: informational social influence and normative social influence were not exclusive but operate together to produce conforming behaviours.
Change in public behaviour?
Compliance (NSI) - Yes
Identification (NSI) - Yes
Internalisation (ISI) - Yes
Change in private beliefs?
Compliance (NSI) - No
Identification (NSI) - Yes (only in presence of group)
Internalisation (ISI) - Yes
Is the change short or long term?
Compliance (NSI) - Short term
Identification (NSI) - Short term (while group membership is valued)
Internalisation (ISI) -Long term
Procedures of Asch’s study
- 123 male American students
- Each naïve participant tested individually with a group of between 6 and 8 confederates
- They had to call out loud which line out of 3 was the same length as a target line
- The confederates all began by giving the correct answers and so did the naïve participant
- Confederates then began to give incorrect answers on 12 out of the 18 trials
- Findings of Asch’s study
- Conformity rate was 32%
- 74% of participants conformed with wrong answers at least once
- 26% conformed on all trials
What conclusions did Asch draw
people feel a strong pressure to be the same as others and will conform even when they know what they’re saying or doing is incorrect.
What are the 3 variables that affect conformity
Group size
Unanimity
Task difficulty
How did group size affect results
- 2 confederates led to naïve ppts conforming on 13% of critical trials
- 3 confederates → 32%
- Conclusion: a group of 3 people is sufficient to exert conformity pressures and a large group is not necessary
How did unanimity affect results
- One confederate gave the correct answer and conformity rates fell to 5%
- Confederate gave an answer that was incorrect but different to other confederates → 9%
- Conclusion: where a group is not unanimous conformity pressures are reduced and individuals are more able to act independently
How did task difficulty affect results
-Conformity increased when it was harder to tell which line was correct
- Conclusion: if situation is ambiguous or a task is difficult, then people begin to look to others for a correct answer ↓
individual differences in how people respond as self efficacy also has an affect on conformity
1x strength/ 3x weaknesses of Asch’s research
+ Lab experiment allows high control over extraneous variables and data is reliable
- arrangements were artificial and unnatural in relation to situations in which we usually experience pressure to conform
- Culturally biased as it only used Americans who have individualistic culture. Africa, south America, Asia are more collectivist where group membership is valued more highly so conformity is higher
- Unethical as ppts were deceived as to the true nature of the study, could’ve experiences stress and embarrassment.
What is meant by social role
The different positions people occupy as members of society which all carry certain expectations of appropriate behaviour and attitudes.
Procedures of Zimbardo’s study
- Mock prison made in basement of Stanford university
- Advert asked for students to volunteer
- Assessments selected most stable ppts
- Randomly allocated to guard or prisoner
- Prisoners arrested in their homes (blindfolded, strip searched) and referred to only by a number
- Guards were told they had absolute power over prisoners (uniform, handcuffs, and dark glasses)
Results of Zimbardo’s study
- GUARDS → became controlling and abusive towards prisoners
→ forced them to carry out degrading and humiliating tasks
→ Responded to rebellion with increasingly severe behaviour - PRISONERS → Rebelled, tore their uniforms, shouted and swore at the guards
→ Later became subdued, depressed and anxious, 5 were released early due to extreme responses
Terminated after 6 days
Conclusions of Zimbardo’s research
People readily conform to the social roles they occupy. Behaviour is strongly influenced by social situations and people who behave badly are not necessarily bad people.
+/ - Zimbardo’s research
+ Research was well controlled so we can be confident that people readily conform to social roles
+ Prison environment was genuine so the experience felt real
- Participants could’ve been showing demand characteristics
- Overexaggerates the power of social roles as behaviour of prison guards varied widely
Procedures of Milgram’s research
- Newspaper advert for volunteers to take part in a study of memory
- 40 men volunteered
- Participants drew rigged lots with a confederate
- Participant was always the teacher
- Confederate had to remember a list of word pairs
- Participant had to give increasingly powerful electric shocks each time a mistake was made
Findings of Milgram’s research
- 65% gave shocks up to 450v
- 100% gave shocks to at least 300v
- 84% were ‘glad to have taken part in the study)
Conclusions of Milgram
People find it very difficult to refuse to obey someone whose authority they respect as legitimate
3x situational variables affecting obedience
- Proximity
- Location
- Uniform
Milgram’s findings on proximity
- 40% gave maximum voltage when ppt and victim were in the same room
- 30% gave maximum voltage when ppt had to force the hand onto the shock plate
- 20.5% gave maximum voltage when authority figure was on the phone
Milgram’s findings on location
- 47.5% gave maximum voltage in a less impressive location
Procedure of Bickman on uniform
- Members of public had to pick up a bag, give money to someone for parking, and stand in a zone which said ‘no standing’
Bickman’s findings on uniform
- Guard was obeyed on 76% of occasions
- Milkman obeyed on 47%
- Ordinary man obeyed on 30%
2+/2- Milgram’s research
+ Sheridan’s study 77% of ppts gave fatal electric shocks to a puppy
+ 21/22 nurses followed the orders of a bogus doctor
- Ppts didn’t believe the electric shocks were real
- Obedient behaviour would not be replicated in any situations outside a laboratory
+ of legitimacy of authority
+ supported by milgram’s study
+ Flight voice recorder evidence showed excessive obedience to the captain’s authority
Definition of autonomous state
when we make decisions for ourselves and act upon our own morals and values
Definition of agentic shift
when we become like an agent or instrument of the authority figure
+/- agentic state
+ ppts in Milgram’s study place responsibility on researcher for their actions
- German doctors at Auschwitz gradually and irreversibly changed into criminals
Procedures of Adorno’s research
- 2000 middle class, white Americans completed several personality tests
- F scale assessed the tendency towards fascism
- Measures whether someone has an authoritarian personality
Findings of Adorno’s study
People who scored high on F scale:
- Identified closely with ‘strong people’
- were very conscious of status
- Showed extreme respect of those with higher status
- Cognitive style was very rigid and lacked flexibility
- positive correlation between authoritarian and prejudice
Conclusions of Adorno’s study
