T1: PEEL for Social Influence Flashcards
R2S ISI (Jenness)
Research to support informational social influence as an explanation for conformity was conducted by Jenness. Participants were asked to individual estimate the number of jellybeans in a jar, then decide on a group estimate and finally, have a last private, individual guess. Jenness found participants’ second private estimate was significantly closer to the group’s estimate than their own original estimate. Therefore supporting ISI as an explanation for conformity because as the participants were unsure of the answer they sought information from the group and changed their estimate publicly and privately to be right. Therefore increasing the validity of ISI as an explanation of conformity.
A ISI (lacks eco val)
however the research to support ISI as an explanation for conformity by jenness lacks ecological validity. this is because the study took place in an artificial environment (lab). therefore it is difficult to generalise the findings that individuals conform due to a desire to be right, to real life examples of ISI, as in real life, people may be less likely to conform to a group as there may be consequences for their actions, unlike an artificial lab setting. Thus, further reducing the external validity of the research in to ISI and questioning ISI as an explanation of conformity.
R2S NSI (asch)
research to support NSI as an explanation for conformity was conducted by Asch. participants were asked to state which line a, b or c was closest in line to stimulus X. participants were always last or second to last to answer. Asch found that participants conformed and said the same wrong answer as the confederates 37% of the time. This supports NSI as an explanation of conformity because the task was unambiguous and the participants later stated they knew the answer but conformed in order to avoid ridicule from the group, which is what NSI suggests. Therefore, increasing the validity of NSI as an explanation of conformity.
A NSI (gender bias)
However the research to support NSI as am explanation for conformity, conducted by asch is gender bias, as only males were tested. Therefore it is difficult to generalise the findings to females as it is suggested that females might be more conformist because they are more concerned about social relationships and being liked by their peers than males (neto 1995). Therefore this shows that NSI explains conformity for some people (females) more than it does for others (males). This weakens the external validity of research into NSI as an explanation as to why people conform.
R2S TD (lucas et al)
Research to support task difficultly as a variable affecting conformity was conducted by Lucas et al. He asked students to solve ‘easy’ and ‘hard’ math problems. Participants were given 3 other answers from other students (confederates - not actually real). The participants conformed more often (agreed with the wrong answers) when the problems were difficult rather than easy. This supports task difficulty as a variable affecting conformity because it suggests that when the task is harder, conformity increases. Therefore, increasing the validity of task difficulty as a variable affecting conformity.
A TD (individual level factor)
However, Lucas et al’s study found that conformity is more complex that Asch suggested. Participants with high confidence in their maths abilities conformed less on the hard maths problems than those with low confidence. This shows that an individual level factor can influence conformity and interact with situational variables (such as task difficultly). Limiting Asch’s research into variables affecting conformity, as he did not research the roles of individual factors.
A asch VAC (gender bias)
Asch’s research into variables affecting conformity can be criticised as it is gender bias as only males were tested. Therefore, it is difficult to generalise the findings to females as it is suggested that females might be more conformist, regardless of the variables affecting conformity, because they are more concerned about social relationships and being liked by their peers than males (neto 1995). Therefore, this shows that their are some factors which determine someone’s level of conformity more than the variables suggested, such as gender. This weakens the external validity of research into variables affecting conformity.
A asch VAC (culture bias)
This research can be criticised for culture bias, as it was conducted in America (a western, individualistic culture). Therefore, it is difficult to generalise the findings to non-western, collectivist cultures such as China, where the social group is more important than the individual and may be more likely to conform and agree with the group to be liked by them, regardless of the variable affecting conformity, which is what Bond and Smith found in their 1996 conformity study. This weakens the external validity of research into variables affecting conformity.
R2S Zimbardo C2SR (high control over EV)
One strength of Zimbardo’s research into conformity to social roles is that it has high control over extraneous variables. One example is the way in which the participants were selected. Researchers assessed the emotional stability of the participants prior to the experiment and randomly assigned them to the role of prisoner or guard. If guards and prisoners behaved very differently, and they were in those roles by chance, their behaviour must have been due to the role itself. This allowed Zimbardo to accurately measure the power of social roles on the levels of conformity, rather than it being affected by individual personality differences. Therefore, this increases the internal validity of Zimbardo’s research investigating conformity to social roles.
A zimbardo C2SR (gender bias)
Zimbardo’s research into conformity to social roles has gender bias, as Zimbardo used a male only sample (androcentric). This is a weakness as it is difficult to generalise the findings that people conform to their social roles to women. It could be argued that as the role of a guard is a violent one, females would not conform as much due to stereotypically being more caring and concerned for others. Thus reducing the external validity of the research into conformity to social roles.
discussion Zimbardo gender bias
however when Zimbardo conducted the study he was interested in explaining brutality within American prison systems in which majority of the guards were male which may explain his choice of using a male only sample
A zimbardo C2SR (ethical issues)
a further weakness of Zimbardo’s research into conformity to social roles is that there were major ethical issues. there was a lack of informed consent as the prisoners did not consent to being arrested at their homes and we’re only told they were taking part in experiment investigating prison life. the prisoners were not protected from harm as some showed signs of psychological disturbance as 5 of them had to leave early. also participants will not given full right to withdraw as they had to go through a process before they could leave. therefore some critics may argue that despite the benefits of understanding conformity social roles the breaking of such ethical guidelines means it should not have been conducted in the first place.
discussion Zimbardo Ethical issues
however Zimbardo carried out extensive debriefing sessions with the participants several years afterwards and concluded that there were no long lasting negative effects. in addition, the benefits to our understanding of social roles on human behaviour outweighs the minor cost of ethical issues on participants as the research has been used to improve training for prison staff.
A zimbardo C2SR (DC)
one criticism of Zimbardo’s research into conformity to social roles is that it is prone to demand characteristics. This is because within his procedure, Zimbardo took on the role of the prison superintendent. therefore, Zimbardo could have influenced how the participants acted within the study. For example, they may have conformed to their role because this is what they believed Zimbardo wanted them to do (demand characteristics), rather than because they were actually conforming to their social role of prisoner or guard due to the prison environment. Therefore, lowering the internal validity of the research into conformity to social roles.
think further Zimbardo demand characteristics
the fact that participants were paid for taking part in this experiment may have influenced this further.
R2S SVAO (bickman)
research to support uniform as a situational variable affecting obedience was a field experiment conducted by a bickman. he had confederate dress in three different outfits (a security guard, a milkman and a businessman) and asked passers-by to give money to pay for parking or pick up litter. it was found that participants were twice as likely to follow the instructions of the confederate wearing a security guard uniform than the businessman. this supports the power of uniform as participants were more likely to follow these orders because uniform acted as a visual cue for legitimate authority so obedience increases. therefore increasing the validity of uniform as a situational variable affecting obedience
A SVAO (gender bias)
Milgram’s research into situational variables affecting obedience has gender bias as a male only sample was used. This may mean it is difficult to generalise the findings to females as they may have obey differently to the variables affecting obedience for example some research suggests females may be more obedient regardless of situational variable because of their gender roles may dictate that they be more submissive. for example Sheridan and King found that when ordered to give electric shocks to a puppy females obeyed 100% of the time compared to 54% of male participants. this weakens the external validity of research into situational variables affecting obedience as the variables may affect obedience in some people more than others.
A SVAO (dispositional factors)
An alternative explanation for obedience is dispositional factors (internal factors) e.g. the authoritarian personality. This would argue that obedience is due to internal characteristics of the person e.g. their personality, rather than situational factors. Therefore, this suggests that obedience may not just be due to proximity, location and uniform (external factors). This weakens the research into situational variables affecting obedience, as it is not the sole explanation.
R2S EOO2A (AS - Milgram’s obedience studies)
research to support the agentic state as an explanation of obedience to authority was shown in milgrams obedience studies. most of milgram’s participants resisted giving the shocks at some point and often asked the experimenter questions such as ‘who is responsible if the learner is harmed?’. when did the experimenter responded ‘I am responsible’ the participant often continued to obey and give the electric shocks. this supports the agentic state as an explanation of obedience as once the participants no longer believed they were responsible due to the experimenter taking responsibility they were more obedient as an agentic shift had occurred. therefore, increasing the validity of agentic state as an explanation of obedience.
R2S EOO2A (Hofling)
further, research to support the explanations for obedience to authority was conducted by Hofling. he conducted a study using nurses on a hospital ward who are ordered by unknown doctor to give a dangerous dose of a drug to patients via a telephone. 21 out of 22 nurses agreed to give the medication even though they knew not to take orders over the phone (they were stopped before hand). therefore supports legitimacy of authority as an explanation of obedience because the doctor had more authority than the nurses. moreover it could also support the agentic state as the nurses may have felt that the doctors were ultimately responsible as the AF, and this is why they obeyed. therefore increasing the validity of agentic state and legitimacy of authority as explanations of obedience.
R2S EOO2A (Hofling practical applications)
one strength of hofling’s research into agentic state / legitimacy of authority as an explanation of obedience is that it has practical applications. it is based on the principle that the nurses obeyed because they felt they had to obey the authority figure due to the doctor’s legitimate authority and felt reduced responsibility for their actions of giving the medication. this has led to the use of this research in the training of nurses to reduce the likelihood of engaging in blind obedience so they feel confident to challenge the legitimate authority of doctors. therefore research into agentic state / legitimacy of authority as explanations of obedience are important parts of applied psychology.
A EOO2A (situational factors)
An alternative explanation for obedience is dispositional factors (internal factors) e.g. the authoritarian personality. This would argue that obedience is due to internal characteristics of the person e.g. their personality, for example having extreme respect for authority due to their upbringing. rather than obeying due to perceiving the AF as legitimate / losing a sense of personal responsibility. Therefore this suggests that obedience may not just be due to legitimacy of authority and agentic state. This weakens the explanations of obedience as they are not the sole explanations.
R2S DEOO2A / AP (milgram + F-scale)
research to support the authoritarian personality was conducted by Milgram and elms. They had interviewed participants who had taken part in milgrams experiment and ask them to complete the F scale questionnaire to measure their levels of authoritarianism. they found higher levels of authoritarianism among those participants classified as obedient (who gave electric shocks to 450V) compared with those classed as defiant. this supports the dispositional explanation because it shows how internal factors such as personality can lead to increased levels of obedience. therefore increasing the validity of the dispositional explanation for obedience.
A AP (characteristics not typical)
however the obedient participants in milgram’s research had a number of characteristics not typical in someone who has an AP. for example milgrams obedient participants did not experience high levels of punishment in childhood. this suggests the link between obedience and AP is more complex and may not be a useful predictor of obedience.
