Social Psychology Flashcards
Authoritarian personality
Define authoritarian Comes from parenting styles Adorno, a researchèr suggested that people who were raised very harshly would develop a personality that makes them submit to authority. His argument was that the lessons on how to behave children learn from their parents affect them when they grow up. strict- more authoritarian open- less authoritarian
Elms and milgram- found in more obedient people in milgrams studies have much authoritarian scores , so personality affects obedience
Counter- we cannot claim there is a causal relationship between childhood experiences and authoritarianism because they are correlations
Hyman and sheatsley - lower level of education, make you more authoritarian
Locus of control effect on obedience
high external loc- more likely to conform
believe you behave off other peoples directing
high internal loc- less likely to conform
you believe you choose things in
Opposing- Grete Schurz (1985) did similar task to milgram in australia but here ppt were instructed to give painful doses of US to a female student, those who obeyed’s locus of control wasn’t diff
Burger (2009) - found those with higher locus of control were more obedient
Situational factors on obedience
situation u are in directly effects obedience
evidence- Milgrams variations
-ao1 depending on situation u may or may not obey someone, legitimacy and proximity, if authority is legitimate and closer to you and environment is legitimate u are more likely to listen
proximity- milgram 7
authority giving direction from another room
65 to
depending on situation u are more or less likely to obey
Culture affecting obedience
AO1 , diff culture- diff obedience
people in uk people are more individualistic meaning culture emphasise you as an individual in places like china they are a more collectivist culture which is a society emphasises obligation to a group and then group more
they obey in more collectivist cultures as they want to fit in with the group
Kilnam and mann investigated australia has 20% obedience rate ( australia more collectivist)
In jordan the rate is
Situational factors for prejudice
AO1- explain realistic conflict theory
evidence- sherifs study shows when you are in conflict over limited resources you will prejudiced supporting that competition over limited resources causes prejudice
Realistic conflict theory explains prejudice
for example prejudice
Individual/ developmental differences for prejudice
wetherell replicated tajfel study, in new zealand, she found fairer polynesian were
Authoritarian personality in prejudice
people w this personality , perceive those inferior to them with higher prejudice
children who have been exposed to fear and punishments , express this onto others
Adorno’s (1950) Authoritarian personality can be used
to explain obedience.
But it can also be used to explain prejudice. Children
who have been subject to the fear and punishment
of strict parents may have a need to express those
frustrations on others. He argued those others would
be those who appear to be socially inferior.
But they are still submissive to those in authority.
divison of impact and diminishing
diminishing returns
influence of social force decreases as there is more
Social impact theory evidence
Sedikikes and jackson
Zookeeper- strength
when instruction was given- immediacy
size of group- number
Sherif et al Classic
A- to investigate how behaviour of groups in competition leads to prejudice
robbers cave camp- oklahoma
22nd aged 11 (1 was 12) , middle class protestant
stage 1 - groups were created by facilitating tasks, hiking together, creating flag
(in group cooperation)
Stage 2- groups were made to compete one another for a reward , like winner title in tug of war, treasure hunts,baseball games
called eachother names like pigeon
Stage 3- subordinate goals, were encouraged to cooperate to reduce in group hostility such as fixing water tank or starting broken down bud they both need
F- Ppt when exposed to another group became in hostile and unfriendly wanting to compete
once they worked together in tasks w positive interdependence, degree of friendships increased
C- when separate groups are in competition , prejudice increases , this prejudice can be seen in the fact that they didn’t not interact with the other group much , it also does prejudge can be reduced with cooperative goals and activities
SHERIF AO3 WEAKNESS
Low pop validity
all 11 , from oklahoma and boys
prejudiced behaviour displayed may be unique to their own social group? and increased prejudice in presence of competition may not be applicable to women , other ages or cultures
Circumstances that sherif study suggests are oversimplified
Tyerman and spencer conducted a similar experiment with sea scout troops , these boys all knew eachother, over course of two week there was no increase in prejudice suggesting competition only creates prejudice if they are unfamiliar with eachother
Sherif AO3 STRENGTH
Internal validity , they were matched
familiar in terms of personality skills ability interests,eliminates any pre-existing group identity , the group identity and prejudice can be a directly linked to competition, and it deals with extraneous variables
High mundane realism
list tasks
apply to real life, reduce tension at school by making them clean classroom
together
Realistic conflict theory principles
negative interdependence- two groups of people want same goal but only one can achieve it, causing opposing groups to become hostile and within group to become friendly
Limited resources- when they want materials there is an increase in conflict unless the resource is common
Positive interdepence- a goal two groups have to rely on eachother reduces
prejudice
Subordinate goals- goals that can happen if two groups work together
Social identity theory pt1
Tajfel and Turner (1979) suggest that prejudice comes from the formation of two
groups, without any other factor being present. The mere existence or
perception of another group’s existence can lead to prejudice and
discrimination.
Individuals strive to achieve a positive self-image so that they look good in the
eyes of others. This leads to high personal self-esteem and forms an
individual’s personal identity.
It is also a human trait to distinquish ourselves by our membership of certain
groups (our in-groups). This is called our Social identity.
Social identity can impact on personal identity because group members are
often a source of our self-esteem. This means that when the social identity is
favourable, personal identity of group members are positive. However, if social
identity is not favourable, personal identity will be negative and this lowers the
self-esteem of individuals within the group
In order to reconcile this, the positive attributes of the in-group need to be
raised. This is achieved via
1) In-group favouritism - the tendency of group members to see the
individuals within their group as unique (heterogeneous) and favourable
(positive prejudice)
2) Negative out-group bias - the tendency to view members of the out-
group as ‘all the same’ (homogenous) and in an unfavourable light
(negative prejudice)