Social Psychology

Question 1

What does the social approach look at?

Answer 1

The influence of individuals, groups, and culture.

Question 2

What was the main aim of Milgram’s original study?

Answer 2

To investigate how obedient naive participants would be when ordered to give increasingly intense electrical shocks by an authority figure.

Question 3

What was the participant selection of Milgram’s original study like?

Answer 3

40 white males, all from New Haven Connecticut, and were all chosen by volunteer sampling. They were a variety of ages.

Question 4

In Milgram’s original study, what percentage of participants obeyed up to 300 volts?

Answer 4

100%

Question 5

In Milgram’s original study, what percentage of participants obeyed up to 450 volts?

Answer 5

65%

Question 6

In Milgram’s original study what signs of moral strain were shown and by how many participants?

Answer 6

14 out of 40 participants showed nervous laughter and smiling.

Question 7

What did Milgram conclude from his original study?

Answer 7

He concluded that social influence is strong and people obey orders even when this causes them distress.

Question 8

What is the specified variation for Milgram’s variation experiment 7?

Answer 8

Telephonic instructions.

Question 9

What is the specified variation for Milgram’s variation experiment 10?

Answer 9

Run down office.

Question 10

What is the specified variation for Milgram’s variation experiment 13?

Answer 10

Orders given by an ordinary man.

Question 11

What was different in variation 7 from the original?

Answer 11

Instructions were delivered over the telephone as opposed to them being delivered in person in the original.
Obedience dropped to 22.5% from 65% obedience with the 450 voltage shock.
Some participants lied to the experimenter saying that they were giving Mr Wallace a higher shock than they actually were.
Milgram concluded his study differently he noted that when there is no physical authority present obedience is lower.

Question 12

What was different in variation 10 from the original?

Answer 12

The study was carried out in a rundown office building compared to the original that was carried out in a psychology lab at Yale university.
Participants were led to believe the study was being carried out by the ‘research associates of Bridport’ compare to the original where they knew it was Yale.
48% of participants obeyed to the maximum voltage compared the original which was 65%.
To participants refused to give any shocks even on the minimum voltage however this didn’t happen in the original study.
The participants were from Bridgeport rather then Connecticut in the original study.
Programs conclusions were different from the original study concluded that social influences were strong where as setting has little influence.

Question 13

What was different in variation 13 from the original?

Answer 13

Instructions were given from an ordinary man who the participant believed was another participant was actually a confederate.
Obedient dropped to 22.5% compared to 65% obedience up with the 450 voltage shock.
Three people drew lots rather than two original study.
No going concluded his study differently he noted that when there is no physical authority present obedience is lower.

Question 14

What theory did Milgram devise from his studies?

Answer 14

Agency theory.

Question 15

What are the two states in agency theory and what do they mean?

Answer 15

The agentic state and autonomous state.
The agentic state is when we follow the orders of an authority figure and act as an agent of their will and defer responsibility for our actions on to them.
The autonomous state is when we act as individuals of our own free will and we make our own decisions following our conscience.

Question 16

According to agency theory what is moral strain and when can it occur?

Answer 16

Moral strain refers to the unpleasant feelings, e.g. signs of stress or distress, that we experience when pressure to do something that goes against our feelings are right and wrong.
Moral strain can occur when we follow orders and do something we believe to be in moral in order to function as an agent of society or to benefit society for the greater good.

Question 17

What is a different theory to agency theory?

Answer 17

The social power theory by French and Raven says that people obey because of the power of us they have over them. This may be legitimate power due to their position, coercive power (meaning they can punish you), or expert power (meaning they have the knowledge).
Social impact theory is also a different study to this.

Question 18

What theory did Latané propose that contrasts Agency theory?

Answer 18

Social Impact Theory (SIT) a social influence theory.

Question 19

According to social impact theory, what three aspects have an impact on the source’s influence?

Answer 19

Strengths, how important the sources to you e.g. the status authority or age.
Immediacy, how was the source is to the target e.g. proximity. For example someone asking you to do something over text has less of an effect that if they ask you over the phone which has less of an effect than if they asked you face-to-face.
Number, how many sources and targets are in the social situation.

Question 20

What are principles two and three in social impact theory?

Answer 20

2) psychosocial law.

3) the divisional effect.

Question 21

What is a supporting study of social impact theory?

Answer 21

Milgram’s original study.
Berkowitz, Bickman, and Milgram found that although increasing the number of Confederates craning their necks did increasing numbers of person by imitating their actions the number of passes by grew smaller relative to the size of the confederate group.

Question 22

What is an opposing study of social impact theory?

Answer 22

Woman 1985 found that source strength and immediacy were only supported in studies in which tension was self reported and not when behaviour was measured. He concluded that the effects of source strength and immediacy were weak and may just be a result of demand characteristics.

Question 23

What are some general points about social impact theory that can be used in a SODA evaluation?

Answer 23

It doesn’t take into account individual differences, such as the fact that some of us are more resistant to social influence while others are more easily persuaded.
The theory views individuals as passive receivers of others behaviour towards them, disregarding the active nature of social interaction, and what targets themselves can bring to the situation.

Question 24

What theory did Tajfel propose in 1970?

Answer 24

Social identity theory.

Question 25

The central idea of the social identity theory is based on there being two groups, what are these two groups?

Answer 25

The in group, this is the group that you’re in or that you belong to.
The outgroup, these are the groups that you’re not in or don’t belong to.

Question 26

According to social identity theory, there are three stages in prejudice formation. What are these categories?

Answer 26

Social categorisation, this is putting people into categories and is generally based on appearance.
Social identification, this is where you decide which group you belong to or which you associate with.
Social comparison, this is comparing the in group to the outgroup and comparing the in group more favourably to the outgroup.

Question 27

According to social identity theory, social comparison can include in group favouritism or out group bias, what does this mean?

Answer 27

In group favouritism is focusing on your in groups good points and ignoring its bad points.
Outgroup bias is focusing on other groups bad points and ignoring their good points.

Question 28

What was the aim of Sherif et al’s robbers cave experiment?

Answer 28

They wanted to test the idea that if you create in group/outgroup situation and then create conflict between them, prejudice will arise.
They also wanted to see if prejudice would be reduced if the two groups were set superordinate goals that required their cooperation in order to achieve.

Question 29

What was the participants sample of the robbers cave experiment like?

Answer 29

22 boys aged 11 to 12 years old took part. They were all white Americans from Oklahoma and they came from middle-class Protestant backgrounds. They were matched as far as possible individual differences wise. The participants believed that they were attending a normal summer camp and were not previously informed that they were part of the study.

Question 30

In the procedure of the robbers cave experiment there were three stages, what was the first stage?

Answer 30

Stage one was in group formation.
After arriving at the camp the two groups were kept separate from a week to allow for group identities and norms to develop. To help with the group was given a common goal and a name and encouraged to come up with a group motto and flag to help strengthen identity.

Question 31

In the procedure of the robbers cave experiment there were three stages, what was the second stage?

Answer 31

Stage two was inter-group relations - the friction phase.
This was when the two groups were made aware of each other at the end of the first week and they immediately became hostile. The tournament was set up to put the two teams against each other, this was done to create frustration and increase hostility between the groups.

Question 32

In the procedure of the robbers cave experiment there were three stages, what was the third stage?

Answer 32

Stage three intergroup relations - the integration phase.
After introducing the hostility, the research just wanted to see whether they could achieve harmony between the two groups. To do this the groups were brought together to complete tasks that would get them communicating with each other, they were then introduced to superordinate goals. These were goals that could only be achieved if the two groups worked together.

Question 33

What were the results of the robbers cave experiment?

Answer 33

In stage one when the groups are made aware of the other they expressed a dislike of the other group. In stage to the introduction of competition immediately lead to hostility. When they were together they called each other names and were reported by the participant observers to get close to physical violence. They used positive adjectives to describe their own group but negative to describe the other. In stage three it was found that simply bringing them together did not decrease the hostility however getting the boys to work together to achieve the superordinate goals did reduced the hostility.
Outgroup choices increased from 6.4% and 7.5% at the end of stage 2 to 36.4% and 23.2% at the end of stage three.

Question 34

What did Sherif et al conclude from the robbers cave experiment?

Answer 34

The findings suggest that the competition is a factor that leads to discrimination between groups but that some discrimination takes place even without competition. When groups work together on cooperative test the benefit the both of them prejudice and discrimination can be reduced.

Question 35

What was the aim of the study conducted by Cohrs et al 2012?

Answer 35

They wanted to find out if there was a relationship between ideological attitudes (specifically right wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation), personality dimensions, and prejudice.

Question 36

What was the participant sample like in the study conducted by Cohrs et al (2012)?

Answer 36

In part one, 193 participants took part, 125 women and 64 men. They were aged between 18 and 67 years old oh participants were of German nationality, lived without a disability and were of heterosexual orientation.
In part two, 424 participants took part in 103 were men and 321 were women. The participants were aged between 18 and 82 years old. The sample was gathered from the Jena Twin Registry and the other half from volunteers who were approached.

Question 37

The procedure of the study conducted by Cohrs et al 2012 was split into two parts, what was part one?

Answer 37

In part one, personality dimensions were measured. Participants were provided with one self-report and one peer-report questionnaire which were marked with a unique code to allow independent completion and anonymous return of the questionnaires. Participants were told to answer spontaneously and honestly and were reassured that the data would be treated confidentially.

Question 38

The procedure of the study conducted by Cohrs et al 2012 was split into two parts, what was part two?

Answer 38

One twin completed the self-report questionnaire, and two other questionnaires were given to the twin and an acquaintance to complete about the participant. The questionnaires were slightly modified versions of the ones used in part one.

Question 39

What were the results of the study conducted by Cohrs et al 2012?

Answer 39

Cohrs et al found significant relationships between ideological attitudes, personality dimensions, and prejudice.
In relation to personality traits and ideological attitudes, the less open to experience the participants were, the higher the RWA score would be. Cohrs et al also found that RWA score correlated positively with prejudice. Cohrs et al found that peer-reports correlated with self-reports which suggests that the self-reports are a valid tool for investigating personality, attitudes, and prejudice.

Question 40

What did Cohrs et al conclude about their 2012 study?

Answer 40

They found that both the self and peer report data suggested openness and conscientiousness attitudes predicted RWA and RWA predicted prejudice which was consistent with previous research. Also that agreeableness and openness to experience where predictors of prejudice. The researcher’s concluded that peer-reports are of value when studying personality and prejudice as they can reduce the effects of social desirability.