Summary of social influence.

Question 1

What are the 3 types of conformity?

Answer 1

Compliance (shallow)

Identification (intermediate)

Internalisation (Deep)

Question 2

What is compliance?

Answer 2

When you agree with the group externally but keep personal opinions . The change in behaviour is only temporary.

Question 3

What is identification?

Answer 3

Behaviour and private values change only when with the group, as membership is valued.

Question 4

What is internalisation?

Answer 4

Personal opinions genuinely change to match the group, this results in a permanent change in behaviour.

Question 5

What are the two explanations for conformity?

Answer 5

Informational social influence

Normative social influence.

Question 6

What is informational social influence?

Answer 6

If correct behaviour is uncertain, we look to the majority for guidance on how to behave because we want to be correct. Informational social influence results in internalisation.

Question 7

What evidence is there supporting normative social influence explanation of conformity?

Answer 7

Asch (1951) when given an unambiguous line length test with confederates choosing the incorrect response, participants gave the incorrect response on 32% of trails. When interviewed, participants suggests they conformed to avoid rejection from the group, the majority.

Providing evidence for normative social influence.

Question 8

What evidence is there supporting informational social influence explanation of conformity?

Answer 8

Jenness 1932 who asked participants first alone, then in groups, then making a second guess alone the number of beans in a jar an ambiguous task.

Individuals second private guess moved closer to the group guess.

Providing evidence for Informational social influence.

Question 9

What evidence is there against normative and informational social influences explanations for conformity?

Answer 9

There is evidence some people are more able to resist social pressures to conform such as locus of control.

In many cases of real-life conformity there is an overlap between informational social influence and normative social influence.

Question 10

What was Asch 1951 experiment on?

Answer 10

Variables affecting conformity.

Question 11

What was the procedure for Asch 1951 study on variables affecting conformity?

Answer 11

Participants deceived were asked to take part in a “visual perception task” and tested with 7-9 confederates.

1st card had a standard line, 2nd had three comparison lines, one the same length as the standard line.

Group were asked on 18 trials which comparison line was the same as the standard. On 12 ‘critical’ trials confederated gave wrong answers.

Question 12

What were the generic results of Asch 1951 study on variables affecting conformity?

Answer 12

Conformity was 32% in comparison to 0.04% in control group.

75% conformed at least once.

5% all 12 times.

Question 13

What were the results when Asch changed the group size in his study on variables affecting conformity?

Answer 13

3% conformity with 1 confederate.

13% conformity with two confederates.

33% conformity with three confederates.

Increasing the confederates passed this didn’t increase conformity.

Question 14

What were the results when Asch changed the unanimity of the group, in his study on variables affecting conformity?

Answer 14

If one confederate gives the correct response (disagreeing with the majority( conformity drops to 5.5%, due to the role of social support.

Question 15

What were the results when Asch changed the task difficulty, in his study on variables affecting conformity?

Answer 15

When difference between the line lengths is small conformity increased due to the role of informational social influence.

Question 16

What were the 3 variables Asch investigated when study which variables may affect conformity?

Answer 16

Group size

Unanimity

Task difficulty.

Question 17

Basically what was shit with Asch’s study? A03

Answer 17

Perrin and Spencer 1980 who did a replication of Asch study on British engineering students found only one student conformed in 396 trials. This suggests that Asch’s study lacks temporal validity as it is based in 1950’s cold war America or engineering students are a biased sample.

Only men were used in Asch’s study, therefore it may have suffered from beta bias, minimising gender differences.

Mundane realism may occur as the task used in Asch’s investigation is not like a task performed in day to day life involving conformity, conformity may be different in crowds, business meetings and social gatherings with friends.

The study also has ethical issues, participants were deceived by Asch and might have felt humiliated as there was no protection of participants from psychological harm.

Question 18

Who conducted a study on conformity to social roles?

Answer 18

Zimbardo

Question 19

What was the procedure of Zimbardo’s study on conformity to social roles?

Answer 19

Fake prison created in the basement of Stanford university. 21 male students rated as physically and mentally stable chosen from 75 volunteers who responded to a newspaper advert. Of which there was a random selection of 10 guards and 11 prisoners.

Prisoners given realistic arrest by local police, fingerprinted, stripped, deloused and given prison uniform and number to dehumanise them. They had to follow strict rules during the day. Guards had complete control and given a uniform, clubs, handcuffs and sunglasses to avoid eye contact.

Question 20

What was occurred during Zimbardo’s study on conformity to social roles?
(Stanford Prison Experiment).

(Basically what actually happened after the procedure was put in place)?

Answer 20

Prisoners and guards conformed to their social rules quickly, buy after two days prisoners revolted against the poor treatment guards. In day six the experiment was cancelled early due to fears for the prisoner’s mental health as they were becoming passive, depressed and stressed due to guards exercising power over prisoners.

Extreme behaviour of previously stable students suggests prison environments have situational power to change behaviour to conform to socially defined roles.

Question 21

What basically makes Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison experiment shit?

(All bad things with it?)

Answer 21

Reicher and Haslam 2011 attempted recreation in a BBC study, their findings were inconsistent with Zimbardo’s. Prisoners became disobedient/dominant over the guards who were unable to control their behaviour.

Prisoners and guards in the Stanford prison experiment may have been acting according to stereotypes of prisoners / guards in the media rather than conforming to social roles, this may have been due to demand characteristics.

Zimbardo played a dual role in the experiment, head investigator and prisoner superintendent. This resulted in a loss of both scientific objectivity and concern for the ethical treatment of the participants who suffered emotionally.

Zimbardo used his study to argue that the prison situation causes guards to become aggressive, however only 1/3 of the participant guards were excessively aggressive. Also while the prisoners started submissive they did rebel.

Question 22

Is there anything saying that Zimbardo study was good?

Answer 22

The behaviour of guards in the study has been witnessed countless times in total institutions such as in Abu Graib prison in Iraq where a number of American soldiers were found to have sadistically abused Iraqi prisoners.

Question 23

What are the two explanations for obedience?

Answer 23

Agentic state

Legitimacy of authority

Question 24

What is Agentic state?

Answer 24

A state of mind in which the individual believes they don’t have responsibility for their behaviour as they are the agent of an authority figure. This allowing the individuals to commit acts that they personally morally oppose. They may feel discomfort as a result of their actions but feel they are unable to resist the demands of the person in authority.

Question 25

What is Legitimacy of authority?

Answer 25

Individuals accept that other individuals who are higher up the social hierarchy should be obeyed, there is a sense of duty to them and these people have the right to punish / harm others such as in the case of the police force. This is learnt in childhood through socialisation processes. It’s accepted by most people that legitimacy of authority is needed for society to function properly.

Question 26

What evidence is their supporting the agentic state explanation for obedience?

Answer 26

Milgram 1963, in this study the professor occupies a high level in the social hierarchy due to education and respect for science. Participants often agreed to continue with shocks after the professor clarified that he was responsible supporting the idea of the agentic state. Obedience also dropped when the instructor had no uniform.

Question 27

What evidence is their supporting the legitimacy of authority explanation for obedience?

Answer 27

Bickman 1974 demonstrated legitimacy of authority in the real world using a field study, as 39% of the public would pick up litter if asked by an investigator dressed as a security guard, but only 14% if dressed as a milkman.

Question 28

What evidence is there against the explanations for obedience?

Answer 28

The Agentic state has been used to justify war crimes. For example, death camp Nazi Eichmann

There are individual differences in the agentic state and respect for the legitimacy of authority. 35% of participants resisted the authority of the experimenter and refused to deliver the 450 volt shock to the “learner” In Milgram’s study.

Question 29

What is obedience?

Answer 29

Following the commands of authority figures who hold social power/status. Some form of punishment usually results from disobedience.

Question 30

What was the procedure of Milgram’s obedience study?

Answer 30

Milgram 1963 study was to test obedience in response to the holocaust.

40 male 20-50 year old volunteered to a newspaper advert for a study on ‘memory’. Participants were given the role of teacher and introduced to confederates “professor” in a lab coat and “learner”.

Learner was strapped to a chair in another room and had electrodes attached. Participants were told to deliver electric shocks, becoming intense between 15-450 volts, when “learner” answered incorrectly.

At 300 volts the “learner” made noise and refused to go on, after 315 volts the “learner” made no more noise, indicating unconsciousness or death. If the participant/teacher resisted the “professor” encouraged them to continue.

Question 31

What were the results of the Milgram obedience study 1963?

Answer 31

Participants were distressed but sill obeyed.

100% continued to 300volts.

12.5% stopped at 300volts

65% continued to the maximum 450volts.

Question 32

What three variations did Milgram do to his obedience study?

Answer 32

Proximity-Learner is in the same room

Location-At office block in run down area.

Uniform-Professor replaced with confederate in normal clothes.

Question 33

How did the proximity replication of Milgram’s study affect obedience results?

Answer 33

When the learner was in the same room the obedience rates dropped down to 40%, when holding hand on shock plate variation occurred it fell further to 30%

Question 34

How did the location replication of Milgram’s study affect obedience results?

Answer 34

When it took place at a office in a run down area instead of Yale University this caused obedience rates to drop to 48% due to lack of legitimacy of authority.

Question 35

How did the Uniform replication of Milgram’s study affect obedience results?

Answer 35

When the professor was replaced by a confederate in normal clothes. Obedience dropped to 20% due to a lack of legitimacy of authority.

Question 36

What evidence is supporting that Milgram’s obedience study was bad? A03

(Basically what is bad about it)?

Answer 36

There are several ethical issues with Milgram study such as he didn’t get informed consent. It is likely they would not have given consent had they known the true aim.

Milgram deceived participants about the aim of the study he told them it was about the effects of punishment on learning.

Participants were exposed to high levels of psychological stress. It could be argued that the study caused long-lasting damage to self-esteem.

The study lacked ecological validity and thus could not be generalised beyond the labatory setting, this is because the obedience task that Milgram’s participants performed was artificial and had no social ‘context’, for example the participants didn’t fear punishment if they disobeyed as soldiers would.

Participants may have showed demand characteristics- they didn’t believe the shocks were real and played along. Although post-experimental interviews seem to indicate participants did take the study seriously, a research assistant of Milgram’s claimed that quite a number of participants believed the shocks to be fake, and it was these participants who gave the highest intensity shocks.

Question 37

What evidence is there supporting that Milgram’s obedience study was actually good?

A03

Answer 37

Hofling 1966 study on 22 real nurses found that 21 obeyed “Dr Smith’s” phone call order to give double the maximum dose of a unfamiliar drug. This was a field study with familiar task, as a result having high ecological validity and mundane realism.

Sheridan and King (72) participants gave real shocks to a puppy, seeing the puppy suffer behind a one-way mirror. 54% of males and 100% of females gave full “450v” shocks. This avoided participant guessing aims and shows the same results as Milgram’s obedience study.

Bickman (1974) demonstrated obedience to authority in the real world using a field study, as 39% of the public would pick up litter if asked by an investigator dressed as a security guard, but only 14% if dressed as a milkman. Supporting uniform affecting obedience.

Question 38

What are the two explanations of resistance to social influence?

Answer 38

Social support

Locus of control

Question 39

What is social support?

Answer 39

Seeing others resist social influence reduces pressure to obey or conform, increasing the individual’s confidence. Either providing a disobedient role model or creating a small alternate group to belong to (conformity). Breaks the unanimity of the groups and challenges the legitimate authority of the authority figure.

Question 40

What is Locus of Control?

Answer 40

This concept refers to how much control a person thinks they have over their own behaviour and events in their life. Someone with a high internal locus of control feels that their own actions control their lives, they are less concerned with social approval. Someone with a high external Locus of Control feel their lives are controlled by external forces, such as others, fate, or the government.

Most people are near the middle of the scale. A high internal locus of control results in ability to resist pressure to conform or obey

Question 41

What evidence is there supporting Locus of control as an effective resistance to social influence?

Answer 41

Holland 1967 replicated Milgram obedience study and assessed participants for Locus of control. 37% of those with an internal locus of control refused to continue to the shock level, compared to 23% of those with an external locus of control.

Supporting the idea that a high locus of control results in an ability to resist pressure to conform or obey.

Question 42

What evidence is there supporting social support as an effective resistance to social influence?

Answer 42

Asch 1951 unanimity variation showed with social support conformity dropped significantly, from 32% of critical trials to just 5.5% of critical trials.

Showing that with social supporting there is a greater resistance to social influence.

Question 43

What is a minority influence?

Answer 43

A change in beliefs or behaviours by a larger group to fit in with a minority group or individual’s views and behaviours.

For example, Emmeline Pankhurst and the suffragettes a minority challenging mainstream (the majority) sexist views in the UK and eventually won the right for women to vote. Thus minority influence can lead to social change.

Question 44

What is the snowball effect of minority influence?

Answer 44

Minorities changing majority opinions start as a slow process. However as more of the majority convert to the new view the process speeds up in a process called the snowball effect, causing an increase in acceptance of the minority view.

Question 45

What are the three ways a minority influence must behave in order to cause change?

Answer 45

Consistency

Commitment

Flexibility

Question 46

What does consistency refer in the context of minority influence?

Answer 46

The minority needs to demonstrate it is confidence in its view, if they repeat the same message over time the argument seems more powerful.

Question 47

What does commitment refer to in the context of minority influence?

Answer 47

If the minority are willing to suffer for their views but still hold them, this is likely to cause members of the majority to take them seriously. This is know as the augmentation principle.

Question 48

What flexibility refer to in the context of minority influence?

Answer 48

Must be flexible if seen as dogmatic, minorities will not be persuasive, they need the ability to appear to consider valid counter arguments, and slightly compromise.

Question 49

What evidence is there supporting that consistency helps minority influence cause change?

Answer 49

Moscovici conducted a study where 4 genuine participants (the majority) were put into a group with 2 confederates (the minority). The group were shown a series of 36 slides of different shades of blue and asked to state the colour of each slide.

In condition 1, the 2 confederates consistently responded that the slides were green rather than blue.

In condition 2, the confederates responded that the slides were green 24 out of 36 times (inconsistent).

The number of genuine participants who agreed with the minority was 8% in condition 1 and 1.25% in condition 2. This suggests that a consistent minority can change a majority’s viewpoint even when asked to agree to an obvious answer.

Question 50

What study is there supporting that flexibility helps minority influence cause change?

Answer 50

Nemeth 1986, When a confederate (minority) was inflexible in arguing for a low level of compensation for a ski accident, 3 participants were less likely to change their amount than if a confederate was flexible.

Question 51

What is there supporting that minorities must have commitment if they want change?

Answer 51

Minorities groups often show commitment by suffering. E.g. gay rights, environmental activists and the Suffragettes.

Majorities are much more likely to be persuaded by minorities if the minority view is seen to arise from commitment to a higher moral principal.

Question 52

What is social change?

Answer 52

Social change is the change that happens in a society and not at an individual level. Minorities can change the positions of members of the majority via consistency, flexibility and commitment.

Question 53

How can social change occur via minorities?

Answer 53

Drawing attention to the issue.

Cause cognitive conflict

Consistency

The augmentation principle

The snowball effect.

Question 54

What is the augmentation principle?

Answer 54

If a minority appears to suffer for their views they are seen as more committed and taken more seriously by the majority.