Social influence (topic 5)

Question 1

what is the defiinition of conformity?

Answer 1

following what the majority are doing, which often leads to fitting in to a group

Question 2

what is obedience?

Answer 2

following orders of an authority figure

Question 3

what is deindividuation?

Answer 3

Losing our personal self-awareness and identity when part of a group or crowd

Question 4

what is bystander effect/apathy?

Answer 4

failing to help another in need, when in the presence of a group

Question 5

what is bystander intervention?

Answer 5

when we help another person in need

Question 6

situational factors affecting conformity?

Answer 6

-Diffusion of responsibility:
The tendency to divide (diffuse) the personal responsibility to help, by the number of bystanders present. Bystanders are less likely to intervene in situations as the size of the group increases, as they feel less personal responsibility

-Noticing the event:
—In large crowds we tend to pay less attention to what is going on around us
—-We are less likely to notice an emergency in a group, compared to being alone
—-We may not notice an emergency if we are in a hurry and not paying attention
—-Latane and Darley (1969), smoke room

-Pluralistic ignorance:
The third process is pluralistic ignorance, which results from the tendency to rely on the reactions of others when defining an ambiguous situation. If we see a large number of people not helping, then we are unlikely to interpret the situation as an emergency and help. However, if many others help we are likely to help too

-Cost of helping:
—-The costs of helping include effort, time, loss of resources, risk of harm, and negative emotional response.
—-The rewards of helping include fame, gratitude from the victim and relatives, and self-satisfaction derived from the act of helping
—-Costs may be different for different people and may differ from one occasion to another

Question 7

personal factos affecting conformity

Answer 7

-Competence:
We are more likely to help in a situation if we feel we are competent enough to do so

-Mood
We are more likely to help if we are in a good mood. When we are in a bad mood, we are more likely to be focusing on our own problems and may not be paying attention to what is going on around us

-Similarity:
If the person in need is similar to ourselves we are more likely to intervene. If we identify with the person, we may think that something similar to happen to ourselves and be more likely to help

Question 8

piliavin et al (1969)

what were the aims?

Answer 8

-To investigate the effect that the victim would have on the speed and frequency in which someone would help in an emergency
—The race of the victim
—Type of victim

-Investigate the effect of role model behaviours in emergency situations

-The relationship between the size of the group and helping a victim

Question 9

piliavin et al

what was the procedure?

Answer 9

-Sample: Approximately 4450 men and women on the New York subway

-There were four groups of confederates, each group consisted of four students (two male and two female), who boarded the train. The two female recorded data and the two male confederates were the victim and model

-The ‘type’ of victim was either ill or appeared drunk. The ill victim carried a cane and the drunk victim carried a bottle of alcohol and smelt of alcohol

-The race of the victim was either black or white

-The victim was dressed identically in all conditions

-The victim collapsed and remained on the floor until help was received (either by a participant or the model)

-The time it took for the model to help also varied, they did not help; helped after 70 sec; helped after 150sec.

-The female observers recorded how many people were in the critical and adjacent area and their race, sex, frequency in which helps was provided and how long it took them (103 trials)

Question 10

piliavin et al

what were the findings?

Answer 10

Models were rarely needed; the public usually helped quickly on their own (81/103)

Ill victims are more likely to be helped (and quicker) than drunk ones (62/65 (95%) trials compared to 19/38 (50%))

Males are more likely to help than females (60% of travellers were male but 90% of first helpers were male)

Race has little effect on helping although a drunk victim is less likely to receive opposite -race help

The longer no help is offered, the less important modelling becomes and the more likely someone is to leave the area, and more so with drunk victims

Spontaneous comments were more common in the drunk condition

There was not a strong correlation between the number of bystanders and helping behaviour (help was offered more in groups of 7, compared to group of 3/4

Question 11

piliavin at al

what was concluded?

Answer 11

Helping occurred quickly, within 70 seconds, before model intervention.

Helping is more likely with ill compared to drunk victims

Men are more likely to help compared to females

In the drunk condition, helping is more likely with same race

The longer an emergency continues: the less important the role of a model and the more likely people are to leave the area

Question 12

piliavin et al

what were the strengths of the study??

Answer 12

• field experiment + covert observations- natural behaviour
• ## ecological validity (the extent to which the findings still explain the behaviour in different sitiations)

Question 13

piliavin et al

what were the weaknesses

Question 14

what is conformity?

Answer 14

following the behaviour and beliefs of others. This could be to fit in with the group or because we don’t know how to behave in an unusual situation or in order to fit in. The change is in response to real (physical presence of others) or imagined (presence of social norms / expectation) group pressure

Question 15

what is majority influence

Answer 15

when the behaviour of a large number of people affects the behaviour of a smaller group of people. It often leads to conformity

Question 16

what is minority influence

Answer 16

a form of social influence that is attributed to exposure to a consistent minority position in a group

Question 17

types of conformity?

Answer 17

—compliance:
going along witht he majority even though we dont privately agree

—identification:
temporarily adopting the behaviours of the role model or group

—internalisation:
going along witht he majority because we dont know how to behave in a situation- we adopt the beleifs of the group

Question 18

why do people conform?

Answer 18

—Normative social influence:
Conforming to be accepted and to feeling belonged to a group. Because it is socially rewarding or to avoid social rejection

—Informational social influence
Conforming to gain knowledge, when not knowing what to do. Semi-permanent change in adopting new beliefs because the majority are right or experts

Question 19

asch (1951)

Answer 19

Sample all male
Artificial task
32% of the participants conformed and gave the incorrect answer
75% of the participants conformed at least once
25% never conformed

Question 20

Sherif (1953)

Answer 20

—Aim:
Investigated whether people conform when faced with an unclear situation

—Procedure:
Used the auto kinetic effect
Participants were asked how far the light moved (individually and groups of three)
The groups were manipulated (two people with similar answers and one with a very different answer, i.e.: 30cm, 28cm and 70cm)

—Results:
The group converged to a common estimate, the different participant conformed to the view of the other two in the group

—Conclusion:
When in an unclear situation a person will look to others for guidance

Question 21

persinality factors affecting conformity

Answer 21

Locus of controlrelates to our interpretation of how much control we have in our lives

—Those with aninternal locus of controlfeel they are responsible for the events that happen to them. So, less likely to be influenced by those around them

—Those with anexternal locus of controlsee the things that happen to them throughout their lives as caused by other people or events. Therefore, are more likely to be influenced by others

Question 22

haney et al

what were the aims?

Answer 22

—To investigate the prisoner-guard conflict in a mock prison when ‘normal-average’ people were assigned the role of ‘guards’ or ‘prisoners’

—Specifically, they were looking at changes in emotions, mood, interactions, coping skills and attitudes towards oneself and others

Question 23

haney et al

what was the procedure

Answer 23

—75 people responded to an ad on the newsapape r (volunteer sampling)
—22 ppt took part in the study (2 were kept at standby)
—they were paid $15 per day
—randomly assigned roles of ‘prisoners’ and ‘guards’ by flipping a coin
—ppt were aware of constant surveillance
—‘prisoners’ lost civil rights such as freedom.
—guards would be able ot leave after their shifts
— guards didnt recieve any trainiing on how they should treat prisoners (physical punishment was not permitted)
—prisoners were stripped sprayed with delouse and asked to wait naked alone
—The prisoners and guards could engage in any form of interaction, no direction was given about how they should or should not interact with each other
—Self-evaluations using questionnaires and tests were completed by prisoners and guards over the duration of the study in order to assess the individual’s moods and personality
—The experiment was terminated on day six. This was eight days earlier than scheduled

Question 24

haney et al

what were the findings

Answer 24

—Group interactions tended to be hostile, negative and dehumanising
—The guards took their role seriously (always on time and worked extra hours)
—The guards modified and ignored some rules
—Prisoners rarely discussed their lives outside of the prison, instead spoke about guard harassment and punishment. The same was also found in conversations between guards, they were dominated by ‘problem prisoners’
—Guard aggression increased and intensified daily

Question 25

haney et al

what was concluded

Answer 25

—People will readily conform to thesocial rolesthey are expected to play (especially roles strongly stereotyped as prison guards)
—Because the guards were placed in a position of authority, they began to act in ways they would not usually behave in their normal lives, so the findings support the situational explanation of behaviour rather than the dispositional one
—Although the prisoners originally rebelled, as this broke down they became isolated, anxious and submissive
—The guards and prisoners become so immersed in the norms of the group that they lost their sense of identity and personal responsibility – deindividuation

Question 26

haney et al

what were the strengths of the study

Answer 26

-practical application: the study can be used ti explain the behaviours of prisoners in real prisons
-recordings show that they were acting naturally

Question 27

haney et al

what were the weaknesses

Answer 27

• ethical issues: protection of ppt. ppt recieved psychological and physical abuse
  -cannot be generalised as there were only male ppt
• lab experiment- ppt knew that they were under surveillance. this may lead to unnatural behaviour.

Question 28

what is the difference between obedience and confomity?

Answer 28

—Obedience occurs when you are told to do something (authority), whereas conformity happens through social pressure (the norms of the majority).

—Obedience involves a hierarchy of power / status. Therefore, the person giving the order has a higher status than the person receiving the order.

Question 29

what happened in milgrims shock experiment?

Answer 29

—65% (two-thirds) of participants (i.e., teachers) continued to the highest level of 450 volts. All the participants continued to 300 volts.

—Milgram did more than one experiment – he carried out 18 variations of his study. All he did was alter the situation (IV) to see how this affected obedience (DV).

Question 30

why do poeple obey?

Question 31

what is the agency theory?

Answer 31

Milgram suggested that people have two states of behaviour when in a social situation

—Theautonomous state– people direct their own actions, and they take responsibility for the results of those actions.

—Theagentic state– people allow others to direct their actions and then pass off the responsibility for the consequences to the person giving the orders. In other words, they act as agents for another person’s will.

Question 32

situational factors affectigin obedience

Answer 32

—proximity of victim
—proximity of authority figure
—legitimacy of contect (more obedience level in Yale that a rundown office)
—support of others
—personal responsibility
—authority figure (higher levels of obedience when lab coat was worn)

Question 33

what is the social impact theory?

Answer 33

—The strength of a source of authority (power, status)
—The immediacy of figure to the individual (physical or psychological)
—The number of sources of authority versus number of others present in the environment

Question 34

which personality type is more likely to obey?

Answer 34

people with external locus of contril are more likely that poeple woth internal locus of control to obey as they feel like they are not in control of theor life

Question 35

personality factors affecting obedience

Answer 35

authoritarian personality:
–Respect for authority figures (and so are more likely to obey)
–Rigid beliefs and attitudes
–A strong belief in justice
–Right-wing politics
–Aggressive to those inferior to themselves

internal locus of control

external locus of control

Question 36

what is blind obedience?

Answer 36

doing something because you are told to; you follow the rules because they are the rules given to you by an authority figure.

Question 37

how to prevent blind obedience

Answer 37

—social support
—familiarity (we are less likely to obey if the situation is familiar)
—distance (distance yourself from the authority figure)
—education (identify and resist blind obedience)