SOCIAL INFLUENCES 2.0

Question 1

what is the agency theory

Answer 1

argues that less resp u feel for actions
-> more obedient u will be
-> there are 2 psychological states
Autonomous state
agentic state
ppl move from auto to ag when confronted w an authority fig
-> shift from autonomy to agency called agentic shift
.. become more obedient

Question 2

waht is autonomous state?

Answer 2

where ppl aware of conseq of actions
+ feel resp for them + remain independant
.. less liekly to obey

Question 3

waht is agentic state?

Answer 3

person sees themselves as an “agent”
-> who simply carry out orders
+ do not feel resp for their actions
.. more liekly to obey

Question 4

what happens when someone obeys use agency theory

Answer 4

when ppl obey to immoral acts
thyeve undergone an agentic shift from autonomous state to agentic state
… become agents to autority figure
binding factors cause agentic shift + cause ppl to stay in agentic state

Question 5

what is a binding factor

Answer 5

e.g politeness, respect

these emotions help bind subjects into obedience

Question 6

pos for agency theory (3)

Answer 6

supported by hoffling 21/22 nurses obeyed to inject a patient 2x dose of unknown drug from unknown doctor
-> these were agents carrying out orders from authority fgure
.. undergone agentic shift
+ nurses duty to help act as binding factor .. causing agentic shift
Bickman 1974 89% ppl obeyed p dressed as guard
.. shows BF like respect .. lead ppl to obey
Blass and Schmitt 2001
showed filmof milgrams study to students + asked them who felt resp for harming learner
-> students blamed experimenter bc of high status as expert
.. shows most ppl feel authority fig is resp .. support AT

Question 7

neg for agency theory 2

Answer 7

Not the only edxplanation -> legitimate authority
One problem is that not all ps in m exp obeyed
-> 35% did not all p should have been in agentic state as exp said “i am resp for health of mr wallice”
-> there were still 35% who disobeyed
.. must be other reasons why ppl obey

Question 8

what is legitimate authority?

Answer 8

reffers to amountof social power held by the person giving orders

• > most human socieities are organised in hierarchy w indiv at top
• > have legitimate social power who give instr to ppl lower down hierarchy
• > as children we r taught to respect this power of authority

Question 9

how else may ppl have legitimate auhtorty?

Answer 9

if we trust them
if they have power to punish
if they are experts
if they have status, unfiorm, locatin, proximity

Question 10

how can LA be demonstrated

Answer 10

thru milgrams variations

Question 11

waht are the 3 main factors to explain obedience? LA

Answer 11

legitimacy of system
leg of authority within system
leg of demands order orders given

Question 12

POS OF LA 2

Answer 12

supported by hoffling
nurses obeyd bc of legitimacy of authroity within system
-> doctor
LA supported by m exp + variations
-> in og exp r wore lab coat 65%
in variation r wore normal plain clothes dropped to 20%
.. shows ppl questioned legitimacy of r

Question 13

neg of LA 2

Answer 13

not all ps in milhrams exp obeyed
.. all the ps will have viewed experimenter as most powerful + authoratative .. can be other expl for obedince
May be multiple exppl working all at once
-> situation variables + LA

Question 14

what is another explanation for obedience

Answer 14

dispositional factors

• > the authoritarian personality
• > locus of control
• > social support (situational factor)

Question 15

AP background

Answer 15

1974 M believed ther was a complex personality basis to obedience + disobedience
M + Adorno became interested in wether indiv’s obed beh emerged only under spec conditions or wether it resp to a spec personality pattern -> Authoritarian personaliy

Question 16

what is the AP?

Answer 16

collection of traits developed from strict parenting
-> exmaples of these traits are conformist, hostile towards those of lower status (scapegoating), conventional
ppl w AP are obed towards ppl of perceived higher status

Question 17

how can AP be assessed?

Answer 17

self report techniques

-> questionnaire called F-scale

Question 18

waht was procedure of milgram adn adorno 1974

Answer 18

inv 2000 middle class white americans
and their unconscious attitudes towards racial grps
-> they dev several scales to inv the potential for fascism (F scale) used to measure the AP
F scale contained ststaments such as “rules are they for ppl to follow, not change”
-> agreeing w statements like these indicate AP

Question 19

what were the findings f adorno and m 1974

Answer 19

inidv with AP had extreme respect for authority + submissive to it
they showed contempt for ppl who have inferior social status + highly conventional attitudes towards sec, age and gender
inflexible in their thinking + believe strong powerful leaders needed to enforce traditional vslues
-cog style of no fuzziness w fixed and distinctive stereotypes
->Adorno found ppl scorehigh in f scale-> raised by strict parenting styles e.g physical punishment

Question 20

origin of AP?

Answer 20

AP comes from parent who have impossibly high standards -> always get A
strict w disipline + often uneven -> late home .. gounded for month
criticise failings when dont meet their high standards .. lowering self worth -> giving conditional love
-> harsh parenting means u fear + hate parents sme time
-> but u cant show hatred to parents so u respect them out of fear + displace ur anger to those ‘below u’

Question 21

pos AP 2

Answer 21

1 elms and M 1966 conducted interviews w small sample of fully obedient ps who scored high on f scale
-> found more authoritarian ps were more obed
.. supports dispositional expl of obedience

4. educ lvls not controlled but despite when Elms + M controlled variable
   - > more obed ps still more authoritarian on F scale
   - > supporting dispositional explanation on obed

Question 22

neg AP 3

Answer 22

2. however its only a link.. no cause and effect can be established .. imposs draw concl that AP causes obed
   .. may be a third v involved
   ->e.g lower lvl of education Hyman and sheatsley 1954
3. r shown this could be the case Middendorp and meloen 1990 found less educated ppl consistently more aUTHORITARIAN than well educated.
   Milgram also found ps less educated more obed .. findings of both match
   -> presence of AP does not cause obed lvls incr but lower education lvls do
4. M found situational v affect obed .. not only factor affecting proximity, location, uniform

Question 23

waht is social support? conformity

Answer 23

Asch 1956 found presence of social support enabled an indiv to resist confomirty pressure from majority
-> in 1 variation when naive p was given support from another confed who gave the right answer
-> conf lvls dropped from 37% to 5.5%
Asch’s r also showed that if confed started conforming again so did the naive p

Question 24

what does SS do?

Answer 24

SS breaks unanimous pos of maj .. raise the possibility that there are other equally legitimate ways of thinking or responding
-> other p acts as a ‘model’

Question 25

social support obedience

Answer 25

ss helps ppl resist obeience
-> in one of M variations obed dropped from 65% to 10% when naive p joined by a disobedient confed
-> the p may not follow the disobed confed’s beh but other peoples disobed act as a ‘model’ for p to copy
… frees him to act from his own conscience
.. if model disobedient -> may lower obed lvls

Question 26

pos ss? 2

Answer 26

CONFORMITY- allen and levine found conf decr when there was one dissenter in an asch type study
another v where confed who provided the support wore thick lenses .. proved invalid ss as it was a test of visual discrimination
in second v the supporter had normalvision .. provided valid social support
-> altho both conditions reduced conf rates the valid social support provider more effective + helpful as an ally to resist conf
.. show presence of model lowers conf rate
OBED - Mullen et al 1990 found when disobed models broke law by jaywalking p more likely to jay walk themselves compared to when jaywalking models were not present
… supports idea that disobed models increasing disobed rates or resistance to social influence

Question 27

neg 1

Answer 27

could be other expl …legitimate authority

or authoritarian personality

Question 28

what is locus of control?

Answer 28

dispositional factor
refers to ppls perceptions of personal control over their own beh
its measured along a continuum of “high internal” and “hgih external”

Question 29

what is high internal locus of control?

Answer 29

a strong internal LOC assoc w belief that we control events in our life
.. believe things that happen to them are largely conseq of their own abiltiy and effort
you make things happen
.. more liekly to display independance in thougtt + beh
-> encourages hard work
these ppl have higher self confid .. more liekly to base decisions on own beliefs
ppl with hgih internal LOC rely less concerned w social approval
.. better able to resist soc infl .. obey/conform less

Question 30

waht is high external locus of control?

Answer 30

ppl w hgih ext loc believe waht happens to them is determined by ext factors
->eg influence of other or luck
-> they sense that things ‘happen to them’ + largely out of their control
ppl high in externality tend to approach events w more fantalistic and passive attitude than internals
.. taking less personal responsibility for their actions
+ less likely to display independatn beh .. more likely to accept soc infl of others

Question 31

pos LOC 2

Answer 31

CONFORMITY - avtgis 1998 conducted meta analysis of studies inv LOC+ conformity
-> found that internals were less likely to conform
.. supports idea of difference inloc + linked to differences in ability to reist soc infl
OBED - Holland 1967 replicated M’s r but b4 took part measured LOC
->37% OF internals refused to obey up until 450V
23% of externals refused to obey until 450V
only 64% of internals obeyed comp to 77% of ext who obeyed
… supports internal able resist pressure as hold themsleves resp for own actions

Question 32

NEG FOR LOC 3

Answer 32

BOTH - Spector 1983 gave Rotter’s LOC scale to 157 uni students + found p w high ext loc conformed more than those w low ext loc but only in situations that produced normative social pressure
.. suggests ppl w less need for acceptance in soc grp more able to resist soc infl
-> may be other factors that infl resistance for soc infl ratehr than just loc
OBEDIENCE - Holland 1967 tested link betw loc + obed but found no relationship betw the 2
.. going against the LOC expl for resistance to obedience
Blass 1991 reanylysed H data found p w internal loc more able to resist obed than those who ex
-> this was esp tru if thought r was trying to manipulate or force them to obey.. suggetss personal control in a situation is important in wether smone resist soc infl
Can be other factors eg Legitamate authority

Question 33

what is minotity influence?

Answer 33

a form of soc infl in which minority grp of ppl or 1p
persuades others to adopt their benefits, attitudes and beh
-> eg suffrogettes

Question 34

how does the minority exert infl? (3)

Answer 34

thru bring consistent
committed
flexible
when minority influences the maj
-> it leads to internalization rather than complaince

Question 35

waht is consistency?

Answer 35

keeping sme views over long p of time
->all m of grp holding sme views as each other despite critism
when ppl first exposed to a minority w diff view -> assume minoirty is wrong
-> if M consistent-> others may rethink carefully
Nemeth 2010

Question 36

waht is commitment?

Answer 36

being dedicated to their cause by mkaing personal sacrifices

-> not giving up when thing get hard

Question 37

waht are some eg of personal sacrifices?

Answer 37

time
money
life
hunger strike

Question 38

how does committed help minority grps infl the majority ?

Answer 38

-> c suggests certainty, confidence and courage in face of a hostile maj
-> if activity more extreme more likely ppl going to believe that they really think what they believe
-> called the Augmentation principle
.. ppl take u more seriosuly .. drawing more attention

Question 39

waht is felxibility?

Answer 39

being open to change some of their demands or compromises

Question 40

r into flexibility?

Answer 40

Mugny 1982
-> flex is more effective at changing maj opinion than rigidity of arguments
-> bc minorities r typically powerless comp to maj -> must negotiate their pos w maj rather than try to enfore it
-> M found rigid minority that refuses to compromise risk being perceived as narrow minded
->but if minority too flexible + too prep to compromise risk -> seen as inconsistent
M some degree of flexibility more effective than none

Question 41

what is an eg of being consistent

Answer 41

all members need to have same views over long p of time

Question 42

eg of commitment?

Answer 42

dedictae own time print leaflets

Question 43

eg flexibility

Answer 43

suggest a meat free day

Question 44

pos for min infl (2)

Answer 44

Moscovici 1969
grps 6 women asked view set of 36 blue coloured slides
->varied in intensity + had to state wether slides blue or green
->each grp 2 confeds who consistenly said slides green 36/36 times
or said they were green on 24/36 trails (inconsistent condition)
-> in consistent condition psmyielded to the minority on 8.42% comp to only 1.25 % inconsistent
.. supports important consistency is when min infl maj
Despite lack ec v -> Wood et al 1994
meta-analysis of 97 studies of min infl
-> inv the importance of consistency
-> found min who were perceived as being esp consistent were particularly influential
… such consistent findings sugg the effect is representaive

Question 45

NEG MIN INFL (3)

Answer 45

Study involved using artificial task in artificial lab setting
… unrepr min infl irl
-> liekly to hear min views on TV such as news + their views liekly to affect things we consider to be important
->e.g human rights rather than colour of slide
.. r lacks ecological v
.. limits generalisability of findings
Mackie 1987 argues views on min dont nec lead to greater processing
-> but is the maj who more liekly to make us think more about views
-> tend to believe that maj of grp members share similar beliefs to ours
-> if maj expreses a diff view from us we must consider it carefully to understand why this is case
..suggest view of maj lead to greater processing
-> as ppl tend to not waste time trying to process why a min m is diff .. tends to be less influential rather than more
Overall appl of min infl r is limited
studies make a clear distinction betw min + maj but irl situations more complicated
-> the diff is more about just numbers
Maj usually have power + status, min committed in tight knit grps where support each other
.. min infl r rarely reflect dyna,ic of these grps .. findings may not apply to real life min infl sit which exert powerful infl

Question 46

what is social change?

Answer 46

refers to change in attidues, beh or laws that take palce on a large scale + affect soc

• > when the minority view changes to become the maj view
• > inv all soc infl

Question 47

eg of social change? (3)

Answer 47

recycling
homosexuality
smoking

Question 48

waht are the stages in process of conversion

Answer 48

stages in process of conversion
Moscovici 1980
drawing attnetion
cog conflict
consistency of pos
augmentation principle
the snowball effect
social cryptoamnesia

Question 49

s1 drawing attention?

Answer 49

min can bring about SC by drawing maj’s att to an issue
if views diff to those held by maj -> this creates conflict that they r motivated to reduce
-> the suffragetes used educational, political, militant tactics draw attention
to fact women denied sme voting rights as men

Question 50

s2 cog conflict

Answer 50

the minoritty creates a confl betw what maj grp m currently believe + the new idea
… deosnt nec result in a move towards min pos
-> but does mean that maj m will think more deeply about it
-> the suffro created a confl for maj grp m between how only men allowed to vote
and the new idea (votes for w)
-> sme ppl dealt w conflict by moving toward pos advocated by suffrog
-> some simply dismissed it

Question 51

s3 consistency of pos

Answer 51

r on minority infl has established that min tend to be more infl in bringing about SC when thye express their argumentes consistently
-> Moscovici
suffrog consistent w views
-> protests went on for years + w played a clear role in ww1
.. event managed to convince soc some w were ready for the vote

Question 52

s4 the augmentation principle?

Answer 52

–

Question 53

s5 the snowball effect?

Answer 53

min infl initially has a rel small effect but this spreads more widley as more and more ppl consider the issues which are being brought up
-> until it reaches a point where min view now changes to become maj view
.. SC has occurred
-> universal suffrage was finally acceptged by maj in uk

Question 54

s6 social cryptoamnesia?

Answer 54

ppl have a memory that changes have occured
but dont remeber how it happened
.. dont remember the events that led to it
..makes it easier to accept change

Question 55

how does scial change occur thru maj infl

Answer 55

Perkins and Berkowitz 1986-> suggests that if ppl perceive smth to be the norm -> they change their bhe to fit socia norms
-> thru conforming isi or nsi
Asch 1956 37% -5.5% min grp is ss -> breaks unanimous pos of maj .. ally can encourgae others udnergo conversion to min grps ideas

Question 56

pos of social infl + social change 2

Answer 56

r supporting consistencty moscovici 1969
if min consistent -> go thru SC
Nolan 2008 conf can lead to SC
-> thru NSI 
-> hung messages on front doors of hosues
-> saying ppl trying to reduce energy usage
-> found signif decr in energy usage
.. conf can lead to SC

Question 57

neg of social infl + social change 3

Answer 57

Mackie 1987 maj leads to more deeper processing rather than min
The potential for min to infl maj is limited bc may be seen as abnormal or deviant
-> maj members may not want to align themselves to the same views as min
-> means that having soc support from celebrity makes min seem “less as a deviant”
-> valid SS
… difficult to bring about SC-> rely on well known celebs
Not all min grps successful even if do all of commitment, flex, consistency
-> .. not every min grp bring about soc change
eg w drinking norms -> students did not lower their drinking to these norms
-> DeJong 2009

Question 58

HOW eating healthily affets econmy

Answer 58

less time being offsick.. reduces amoumt of ppl who has sick pay
… reduces economys costs
more ppl will go to work … pay tax
wasting the nhs resources
-> when can be used on diseases that not self inflicted
+ resources cost money .. financial burden to economy