Social Psychology

Question 1

Situational Factors affecting obedience-
Momentum of Compliance definition

Answer 1

Momentum of compliance- Once the participant is doing small and trivial requests they have committed themselves to the experiment so as the requests increase they feel duty bound to continue.

Question 2

Situational Factors affecting obedience-
Proximity

Answer 2

The closer to the authority figure, the higher level of obedience. Distance acts as a buffer to obedience as illustrated by telephonic instructions study.

Question 3

Situational factors affecting obedience- Status of authority figure

Answer 3

Milgram stated that obedience could only be established when the authority figure is perceived to be legitimate. Highest obedience at Yale compared to ordinary man at Bridgeport

Question 4

Situational factors affecting obedience- Personal responsibility

Answer 4

Milgram believed that participants are more obedient when personal responsibility is placed onto an authority figure. Evidence comes from a variation study in which participants signed that they took full responsibility for their actions and obedience fell to 40%

Question 5

Individual differences in obedience- Rotters Locus of Control

Answer 5

Rotters (1966) theory. People with internal locus of control believe they are responsible for their own actions and are less influenced by others. Peoples with external locus of control believe their behaviour is largely beyond their control but due to external factors.
Consistent with Milgrams findings as dissenters took responsibility for their actions while obedient participants blamed experimenter.

Question 6

Individual differences in obedience- Authoritarian personality

Answer 6

Authoritarian personality is submissive to authority but harsh to those subordinate to themselves. Adorno F scale.
Milgram and Elms compared F scores for 20 obedient and 20 dissenting participants. Found obedient participants had higher F scores, indicating authoritarian personality.

Question 7

Individual differences in obedience- Empathy

Answer 7

High levels of empathy are believed to equate to less likely to harm others.
Burger 2009 found that although people who scored highly on empathy were more likely to object against the shocks, this did not equate to lower levels of obedience.

Question 8

Individual differences in obedience - Gender

Answer 8

Milgram found that females were virtually identical to males in obedience- 27.5% broke off at 300v level. However, anxiety levels for women were higher than men (also found in Burgers study)

Kilham and Mann 1974 in a direct replication of Milgrams study in Australia found females to be far less obedient 16% compared to male 40%. Could, however, be due to female pairings

Question 9

Individual differences to obedience- Culture

Answer 9

Individualistic countries such as USA and UK tend to behave more independently and resist conformity to compliance.
Collectivist cultures such as Israel tend to behave as a collective group so cooperation and compliance is more important. Collectivist cultures are more likely to be obedient.

Question 10

what is prejudice

Answer 10

an unfair and unreasonable opinion or feeling, especially when formed without enough thought or knowledge

Question 11

what is a stereotype

Answer 11

an overgeneralised belief about someone or something typically based on limited information

Question 12

what is discrimination

Answer 12

the practice of treating one person or group differently from another in an unfair way

Question 13

superordinate goals

Answer 13

goals that can only be achieved by cooperation of all group members today

Question 14

Factors affecting prejudice- personality
Cohrs et al

Answer 14

Cohrs et al- used self reports. Openness to experience is negatively correlated to prejudice.

Question 15

Factors affecting prejudice- Adorno et al

Answer 15

developed F scale. Authoritarianism. Found high authoritarianism correlated with prejudice.

Developmental psychology- Adorno suggested that authoritarianism develops during childhood due to harsh parenting as when parents are strict and unloving, the negative feelings which the child feels towards

Question 16

what was variation 7 and results?

Answer 16

Telephonic instructions study- experimenter gives instructions directly to P at start, but then leaves the room and gives the rest of the orders over the telephone.

There was a significant drop in obedience, down to 9 (22.5%), and some participants gave lower shocks than they were told to do (because they thought they were unobserved).
Milgram concludes that the physical presence of an authority figure is important for obedience.
Also gives evidence for proximity (situational factor) being crucial in obedience.

Question 17

what was variation 10 and results

Answer 17

the original study was carried out at Yale University but Milgram moved this to Bridgeport where the research was carried out by “a private firm”. There was a drop in obedience to 19 (45.5%), but Milgram didn’t think this was big enough to be significant. Shows that the authority of the figure is important in the obedience.

Question 18

what was variation 13 and the results?

Answer 18

In this Variation, Mr Williams explains the procedure to the participant but then is called away. Crucially, Mr Williams does not tell the Teachers to increase the shock by 15V with each incorrect answer.

There is a second confederate present, who seems to be another participant, given the job of “writing down the times” of each test. With the Experimenter gone, this confederate suggests “a new way of doing the study,” taking the voltage up by 15V each time there’s a mistake.

Only 20 participants did this Variation and only 4 (20%) obeyed by going to 450V.
Milgram concludes that the status of the authority figure is important, but other features of the situation (the instructions, the shock generator) still create obedience.

Question 19

Social identity theory applications and evidence for applications

Answer 19

By making people feel part of a larger community or society can reduce out group discrimination and prejudice.
Deutsch and Collins found that when Black and White housewives were required to share laundry facilities in the 1950s they became much more tolerant of each other and far less prejudice.

Question 20

social psychology experiment aim

Answer 20

The aim of this study was to use a self report in the form of a questionnaire to investigate whether people with an internal or external locus of control were more obedient

Question 21

social psychology hypotheses (alternate and null)

Answer 21

HA- There will be a significant difference in obedience (measured by scores on a self report questionnaire) between participants with an internal or external locus of control (self report)

HO- any significant difference in obedience (measured by scores on a self report questionnaire) between participants with an internal and external locus of control (self report) will be due to chance.

Question 22

Latane and Darley- division of impact

Answer 22

Demonstrated the division of impact when looking at bystander behaviour. They found that a lone person was more likely to help someone in need compared to a group of people as there was a diffusion of responsibility similar to a divisional effect.

Question 23

Evidence for SIT- Jane Elliot

Answer 23

“Blue eyes brown eyes experiment”. Through the course of one week, Jane Elliot divided her pupils based upon eye colour, telling one group that they were better than the other which led to discrimination and prejudice. Supports SIT as it evidences that social categorisation could lead to prejudice and discrimination.

Question 24

Evidence for SIT- Deustch and Collins

Answer 24

Conducted an experiment into equal status contact, looking at social identity theory as a basis for its research. Studied a desegregated housing block and argued that desegregation would reduce negative out group bias and intergroup conflict between the black and white housewives. Compared this to a segregated housing block to find that there was ingroup favouritism and outgroup bias contributing to higher discrimination and prejudice.

Question 25

Lemyre & Smith (1985) - SIT evidence for

Answer 25

Replicated Tajfel’s findings, and also found that discriminating group participants had higher self-esteem after the study.

Question 26

Arendt- obedience

Answer 26

Describes obedience as an ingrained behaviour which is established through a process of socialisation. This behaviour manifests as we are exposed to authority figures under certain environmental conditions conductive to compliance such as closeness and status of authority figure.

Question 27

Evidence in support of agency theory- Hofling et al

Answer 27

Demonstrated that 21/22 nurses would follow a doctors orders within a hospital to give a patient twice the dose of a drug. The majority of the nurses displaced their responsibility, thus proving milgrams agency theory.

Question 28

Blass- gender differences in obedience

Answer 28

Found that obedience between males and females was consistent across 9/10 studies.

Question 29

Blass 2021- the effect of culture on obedience

Answer 29

Reviewed studies done in the US and elsewhere and arrivated at an average percentage of obedience in the US od 60.94% and 65.94% everywhere else which suggests cross-cultural similarities. Blass concluded that this similarity across culture is a universal symptom of social behaviour.

Question 30

Ember and Ember- evidence for realistic conflict theory

Answer 30

Observed that in tribal societies intergroup hostility increases when competition for natural and social resources increases eg after natural disasters. Cross cultural evidence in suppourt.

Question 31

Aronson- suppourting evidence for RCT and application

Answer 31

Showed that the removal of competition in a classroom and working towards a shared goal could reduce conflict. They found that using the Jigsaw technique, levels of competition seemed to reduce in the classroom.

Question 32

Lalonde 1992- support in favour of realistic conflict theory

Answer 32

Studied a hockey team that was not doing very well. The team said that the others were winning because they were dirtier in their tactics, thus claiming moral superiority and showing ingroup favouritism and bias.

Question 33

Evidence against culture affecting prejudice- Weatherell 1982

Answer 33

found that New Zealand Polynesians were more likely to favour the out-group than to show bias towards their own in-group. Cultures which emphasise collectivism and cooperation are less likely to show group prejudice.

Question 34

Culture and Prejudice- Al Zahrani and Kaplowitz

Answer 34

found Saudis to self report more ingroup favourtism and negative out-group bias than Americans, suggesting that the type of culture may influence prejudice.

Question 35

assumptions of social psychology

Answer 35

-assumes that other people can affect our thought processes and emotions
-it also suggests that social situations can affect our behaviour, thought processes and emotions
-being in groups affects our behaviour
-our position that we play in society also affects our behaviour.

Question 36

cultural differences in obedience- Anacona and Pareyson

Answer 36

Conducted a replication of Milgram’s study in Italy and found it produced an 80% obedience rate.

Question 37

Prejudice and Culture- Guimond et al

Answer 37

Found that prejudice was lower in countries which had a pro- diversity policy which favoured multi-culturalism compared to countries that favoured assimilation. The lowest level of prejudice they found was in Canada.

Question 38

terrorism definition

Answer 38

Terrorism can be defined as the use or threat of action to influence a government or intimidate the public for a political or religious cause.

Question 39

why is terrorism an important issue for society (key question)

Answer 39

The causes of terrorism is an important question for society because it is at an all-time high, affecting public safety, our economy and quality of life- especially considering that MI5 have stated that the threat of terrorism is at an all time high.

Question 40

An alternative explanation to Milgrams agency theory

Answer 40

An alternative explanation to Milgrams agency theory is put forward by French and Raven which suggests that there are 5 bases of power that can influence and motivate obedient behaviour