Social Influence - Resistance To SI Flashcards
Define social psychology
Social Psychology looks at the relationships between people and how people
affect each other’s behaviour (social influence).
What is a situational explanation?
Milgram (1974) argued that people can obey horrific orders not because of their own personalities, but because of the situation they are in
What is resistance to social influence?
Give 2 examples
- When the pressure to conform and/or obey can exert powerful influence over peoples behaviour
- some people resist the pressure to conform, and they disobey orders (displaying nonconformity/disobedience)
One example, would be in Milgram (1963), 35% of people disobeyed
Another example would be in Asch (1963) where 25% of participants did not confirm on a single trial
Define and explain the situational explanation of resistance to social influence
Social support theory argues that when one person refuses to conform/obey, it makes it more likely that other people can resist social influence and refused to conform/obey
- People are more likely to not conform if they have an ally who resist social influence and refused to confirm this is because the unanimity of the group is broken. Unanimity makes groups more influential
- The presence of an ally gives an independent assessment of reality, so that people think their thinking is more or equally legitimate
- If they see a disobedient role model refusing to obey, this also increases likeliness to disobey authority figures, because by refusing the instruction of an authority figure the disobedient role model challenges the legitimate authority
Evaluate the situational explanation of resistance to social influence
- Strength: Milgram (1974), participants delivered electric shocks to Confederate, Mr Wallace when he was incorrect. The shocks we’re not real, but participants believe they were.. 65% of participants went to 450 V. When disobedient role model (Confederate) was present and refused to shock. Mr Wallace, only 10% of participants delivered up to 450 V.
- strengths: Asch (1951) asked participants to compare three test lines to a standard line, and the participants were in a group with confederate to purposely gave the wrong answer. 33% of Potter spell answers conformed to the group and we are wrong, even though genuine mistakes had 1% chance of happening.. conformity dropped to 5% when one confederate acted as an ally and gave the correct answer
- weakness: in both of these original versions of the studies, outlined above, some participants were able to resist social influence, and refused to confirm/obey, even though they had no social support, meaning that social support is not a complete explanation of resistance to social influence and other factors also play a part in allowing people to refuse to confirm
Explain the dispositional explanation of resistance to social influence
Locus of control:
- Rotter (1966), personality determines conformity/resistance to social influence
- locus of control refers to how much they believe they have control over their own behaviour and is measured on a dimension from internal to external
- People with an internal locus of control believe that what occurs in their life is the result of their own behaviour and therefore they can alter what happens to them. For example, if they do bad on a test, it is the result of their own revision
- People with an external locus of control believe strongly that what happens in their lives is outside of their own control. They think what occurs in their lives is determined by chance or other people and they have no ability to alter this. If they do bad on a test, they will blame it on bad luck or inadequate teachers
- People with a high internal locus of control are less likely to confirm because they: are more likely to be leaders rather than followers – are less concerned with social approval – are more self-confident – believe that they control their own circumstances
Evaluate the dispositional explanation of resistance of social influence
- strength: Oliner and Oliner (1988) interviewed 406 German people who sheltered Jews from Nazis during 1930–1940, and the German people had an internal locus of control, which allowed them to disobey the Nazis
- Strength: Milgram (1974) asked participants to deliver electric shocks to a confederate called Mr Wallace when he got a question wrong, the shocks were not real, but the participants believed they were. 65% obeyed and shocked Mr Wallace up till 450V. Milgram (1974), gave the participants a questionnaire to measure locus of control, and found that the 35% who disobeyed more likely to have internal locus of control.
- Weakness: Williams,and Warchal (1981) found that conformers were less assertive, than non-conformers but the two groups did not score differently on a test to determine the locus of control, suggesting that assertiveness is more important than locus of control in determining whether or not a person will refuse to conform/obey
What is minority influence?
What does it lead to?
When a small and persuasive group/individual can change the way the majority behaves and thinks. Moscovici (1985) said minority influence leads to conversion which is when individuals change their private beliefs and views because of minority influence.
Describe the process of minority influence
Initially there is a small effect, but this spreads as more people consider the issue being raised and are converted to the minority view point. This is known as the snowball effect where eventually it reaches a tipping point, and the minority becomes the majority. minority influence is a slow process and can be unconscious. Sometimes the individual is not aware of where the new idea originated from, and this is called social crypto-amnesia.
When are minority groups most likely to be convincing?
- committed: commitment is shown when members of the minority demonstrate their dedication to the belief by making sacrifices (augmentation principal) by taking risks/being inconvenienced which shows that they are not acting out of self-interest
- Consistent: this is when the minority repeatedly gives the same message over time, and this makes the majority reassess their belief and consider the issue
- Flexibility: a.k.a. being non-dogmatic is when a minority shows when they are willing to listen to other viewpoints, the majority will then listen to the minority and take the argument more seriously 
Evaluate minority influence
- strength: Moscovici (1969),172 female participants told they were taking part in colour perception task. Naïve participants placed in groups of 6 and shown 36 slides, of varying shades of blue. 2/6 participants = confederates. Participants stated aloud the colour of each slide. In consistent condition the confederates said slide was green in all 36 trials. In the inconsistent condition the confederates said that 24 slides were green and 12 were blue. In the consistent condition participants were swayed by the minority 8.2% of the time. In the inconsistent condition the participants only went along with the minority 1.25% of the time. This shows that a consistent minority is more effective than an inconsistent minority.
- weakness: samples of studies into minority influence are gender biased E.g. Moscovici (1969) (only women) hence we can’t conclude about male participants response to minority influence. Research suggesting that women more likely conform than men. More research needed on male participants
- weakness: The samples are culturally biased (only Americans). So findings cannot be generalised to other populations. Participants from other cultures might not respond to minority influence the same.
- weakness: most studies into minority influence are based in laboratory setting experiments therefore poor ecological validity as participants usually are students and strangers to each other
- weakness: studies for minority influence have deceived participants E.g. Moscovici (1969) told they were taking a colour perception test. Also means no informed consent. Although deception is unethical required to produce valid results by avoiding demand characteristics.
Define social change
Social change refers to the change that occurs in a society and not at an individual level E.g. equal, rights for homosexual couples, smoking bans. Social change occurs when the minority view challenges the majority view and is eventually accepted by the majority
Describe the change in effect of minority influence to majority influence
Once the majority has accepted the minority viewpoint people may conform to this viewpoint due to normative social influence (compliance) and/or informational social influence (internalisation).
How do governments bring about social change?
Dictatorships?
Governments/lawmakers can bring about social change through power and through the process of obedience. For example, changing the law to allow gay marriage could mean that people may be more accepting of homosexual rights because changes in the law make a behaviour a social norm which others then adopt.
Dictators can also bring about social change through obedience. This leads to groups of people changing their behaviour because of the fear of punishment/consequences of not obeying
