Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology Edexcel A level > Topic 1 Social - Content > Flashcards

Topic 1 Social - Content Flashcards

1
Q

What are the 3 components of Agency Theory and what do they mean?

A

Autonomous state: Acting on ones own free will

Agentic state: When one acts as an agent for another

Moral strain: Experiencing anxiety because you are asked to do something that goes against your judgment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Why did Milgram develop Agency theory?

A

Looked at Nazi crimes & wanted to see if German ppl committed crimes due to obedience or character

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is Agentic Shift?

A

Switch between the autonomous and agentic state that occurs when we perceive someone to be a legitimate source of authority and allow them to control our behaviour.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What’s the evolution explanation of obedience?

A
  • Obedience is a survival trait that enabled tribes of early humans flourish
  • Early humans who were disobedient → didn’t survive & we haven’t inherited their genes
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

How does conditioning play a part in obedience?

A
  • From an early age, parents, neighbours, etc conditioned us to respect authority figures
  • They reward us when we are respectful & punish when we disobey
  • Later years → condition deeply ingrained
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What are 2 strengths for Agency Theory?

A

Milgram’s first experiment

- 65% participants obeyed to an authority figure & potentially harm an innocent confederate
- Participants shows moral strain when given an order
- Debrief of participants → many reported their behaviour was the responsibility of the experimenter & they did not want to do it

Hofling et al (1966)

- Staged a study in a hospital setting
- Doctor telephone working nurses to administer twice the daily dose of a drug to a patient (against hospital policy)
- 21/22 nurses followed doctors orders
- Most nurses justified their behaviour due to the hierarchy of obedience at the hospital
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What are the weaknesses for Agency Theory?

A

Individual differences

- Does not explain individual differences (why some ppl obey & why do not)
- Disobedience can come from personality, gender & situation → obedience is more complex (than is being explained by agency theory)

Define + Measure

- Hard to define & measure agency & autonomy (as its a state of mind)
- EXTRA: no direct evidence of the evolution of obedience (cannot go back into the past and study the development of obedience)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is Social impact Theory?

A
  • Theory of social influence to explain why people are obedient
  • Target → Person being impacted on
  • Source → Influencer
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Who proposed Social Impact Theory?

A

Bibb Latane (1981)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What are the 3 principles in Social Impact Theory & what do they mean?

A

Social Forces

- Strength → Determined by status, authority & age
- Immediacy → Proximity between the source & target
- Numbers → How many people are in the situation & how much social pressure they put on you

Psychosocial Law

  • The first source of influence has the most dramatic impact on people
  • E.g. One teacher giving you a order generates a lot of social force, but if you resist, bringing in a second & third teacher to repeat the order doesn’t double or triple the social force; bringing in the entire school staff won’t be that effective

Multiplication vs Division of Impact

- Social Force gets spread out between all the people it is directed at
- If all the force is directed at a single person → puts a huge pressure on them to obey
- If the force is directed at 2 people → Only experience half as much pressure each
- If there are ten of them → Only experience one tenth of the pressure
- Diffusion of responsibility → the more ppl there is, the less responsibility each feel
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What are the strengths for Social Impact Theory?

A
  • Can predict behaviour under certain conditions
  • Principles can be observed in everyday behaviour
  • > study: sedikides & Jackson (1990) -> zoo study, told visitors not to lean on railings -> visitors observed to see if they would obey -> if confederate wore uniform, obedience is high & when he left -> obedience was low -> immediacy (proximity) & social force less impactful when asked multiple times & due to group size
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What are the weaknesses for Social Impact Theory?

A

Social interaction - Oversimply human interaction
- Disregards social interaction & what the target themselves bring to social situation

Individual differences
- Ignores individual differences

No explanation
- Doesn’t explain why people are influenced by others

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What’s the aim for Milgram’s (1963) study?

A

Investigate which ordinary people would follow orders that can harming someone with electric shocks

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What’s the procedure for Milgram’s (1963) study?

A
  • Controlled environment
  • Conducted at Yale University
  • Participants = teacher
  • Mr Wallace = Learner
  • Got participants to electrocute a confederate if they answer wrong
  • Volts range from 15-450V and labels say “Danger”, “Slight Shock”
  • Presented with verbal prods; “please continue”, “You have no choice you must go on”
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What’s the results for Milgram’s (1963) study?

A
  • Everyone went to 300V

- 65% went to the full 450V

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What are the strengths for Milgram’s (1963) study?

A

Highly controlled
- Highly controlled laboratory experiment - can be replicated - reliable - similar findings can be established

Results backup the aim of the exp
- Results show people will be carry out destructive obedience if an authority figure gives out orders

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What are the weaknesses for Milgram’s (1963) study?

A

Sample - unrepresentative
- Done with 40 men - unrepresentative as it only represents a certain type of people → cannot be generalised

Lacks Mundane Realism
- Don’t administer electric shocks in a uni and everyday life - not normal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What was the telephonic study (experiment 7)?

A

To test the physical distance between experimenter & teacher by giving orders on the phone

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What were the results for the telephonic study (exp 7)?

A

22.5% were obedient

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What were the strengths for the telephonic study (exp 7)?

A

Milgram’s theory of physical distance affecting obedience can be backed up by this exp 7 as obedience did decreases through telephone - high valid

Replicated finding

- Other research that has gotten the same finding as the this Milgram one
- E.g. Sedikides & Jackson (1990) study conducted at New York zoo -> Demonstrated that when the authority figure is no longer present, obedience decreases significantly.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What was the Rundown office block (experiment 10)?

A

Yale uni could be causing a higher level of obedience, so relocated his experiment to a rundown office building

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What are the results for the Rundown office block (experiment 10)?

A

47.5% were obedient

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What are the strengths for the Rundown Office Block (exp 10)

A

Milgram collected not only quantitative data but also qualitative data in the form of audio recordings of the dialogue between researcher & participants

24
Q

What are the weaknesses for the Rundown Office Block (exp 10)?

A

Not generalisable to other cultures - sample were all American ( this answer can be said for his overall study & other variations)

25
Q

What was the Ordinary man gives orders (experiment 13)?

A

Role of experimenter played by an ordinary (without a lab coat), to test the role of authority & status on obedience

26
Q

What are the results for the Ordinary man gives orders (experiment 13)?

A

80% refused to continue

27
Q

What are the strengths for the Ordinary man gives orders (exp 13)?

A

Levels of anger shown towards ordinary man -> 1 participant throws confederate across the room -> pps really believed the set up -> results are valid

28
Q

What are the weaknesses for the Ordinary man gives orders (exp 13)?

A

Lacks internal validity:

  • Although the aim was to see what happens when the orders come from someone who has no legitimate authority → almost impossible to achieve
  • There were many traces of derived authority as it was the experimenter who had initially described the study & the idea of administering shocks

Suggests obedience may be lower in situations where the person giving orders is unrelated to any authority figure

29
Q

How does Momentum of compliance affect obedience?

A
  • Gradual commitment is linked
  • Start with small & requests - so participant has committed themselves to the experiment
  • As requests increase - participants feel duty bound to continue
  • Situation created a binding relationship which escalated quickly
30
Q

How does Proximity affect obedience?

A
  • Distance affects obedience (e.g. the closer the authority figure, the higher level of obedience)
  • Proximity of victim has an affect to obedience
31
Q

How does Status of authority affect obedience?

A
  • Obedience only appears if the authority figure is seen as legitimate
32
Q

How does Personal responsibility affect obedience?

A

More obedience = personal responsibility is removed & responsibility is placed onto authority figure

33
Q

How does Authoritarian personality affect obedience?

A
  • Theodor Adorno et al (1950) devised the F-scale to detect authoritarian personality traits
  • Milgram & Elms (1966) compared F-scale scores with obedience & defiant participants (involved in his experiments)
  • Obedience participants = higher f-scale scores → Have authoritarian personality type → More submissive to authority
  • Less likely to withdraw to orders
34
Q

What’s a strength of Authoritarian personality?

A

That Milgram & Elms (1966) findings of the study show that obedience is related to the personality characteristic of authoritarianism

35
Q

What’s a weakness of Authoritarian personality?

A
  • Cannot claim there’s a relationship between childhood experiences & authoritarianism/obedience
  • As other factors may be involved - obedience & authoritarian personality can be caused by lower lvls of education - Hyman & Sheatsley (1954)
36
Q

What is (Internal/External) Locus of control & how do these affect obedience?

A

Internal locus of control: Responsible for own actions & less influenced by others
External locus of control: Take less responsibility (behaviour is beyond their control) & more influenced

  • Obedient ppl/more influenced/not responsible for actions = external locus of control
  • Dissent/defy orders/take personal responsibility = internal locus of control
37
Q

What’s a weakness of the Locus of control explanation?

A
  • Grete Schurz (1985): participants instructed to give painful doses of ultrasound to a female student
  • Participants who were fully obedient didn’t differ to participants who resisted in terms of scores on a questionnaire measuring locus of control
  • Suggests personality have little impact on obedience
38
Q

How can Locus of Control explanation be applied in the real world?

A
  • In jobs when they require higher/levels of obedience
  • E.g. organisations that require employees to follow procedures may want more obedient ppl
  • Use a scale assessing LOC
  • Personality tests are part of the recruitment process - result successful matching of people → greater productivity & job satisfaction
39
Q

How does Empathy affect obedience?

A
  • Higher empathy = less likely to harm another person
  • Replication of Milgram’s exp - Burger et al (2009): participants more likely to protest (giving electric shocks) but NOT less obedient
40
Q

Does Gender affect Obedience?

A

Females more obedient than males

  • Sheridan & King’s (1972) study: Participants ordered to give real life shocks to a puppy
  • 100% females complied

Males more obedient than females

  • Kilham & Mann’s (1974) study: Milgram replication in Australia
  • Males more obedient than women (40% obedient males)
41
Q

How can culture affect obedience?

A

Individualistic?

- Behave more independently & resist conformity
- E.g. Britain or America

What’s Collectivistic?

- Behave as a collective group
- Depend on each other
- Compliance is important for stability
- E.g. China or Israel

Collectivistic cultures are more obedient

42
Q

What is Realistic Conflict Theory about?

A

Explains prejudice as arising from conflict (for resources) between 2 or more groups

43
Q

What are the strengths for Realistic Conflict Theory?

A

Supported by Robbers Cave Experiment
- The experiment found that competition increases hostility between groups

Anthropological study

- Carol & Melvin Ember (1992) - anthropologists - in tribal societies, intergroup hostility increases when there’s a short supply of necessary resources due to social/natural conditions → increases competition
- This study is evidence being applied to real-life → high ecological validity
44
Q

What evidence supports Realistic Conflict Theory?

A

Robbers Cave experiment - formed the basis of his realistic conflict theory

45
Q

What are the weaknesses for Realistic Conflict Theory?

A

Robbers Cave experiment
- Groups showed hostility even before the competitive events → the presence of another groups was enough to bring about prejudice (the competitive tasks weren’t even needed)

46
Q

What is Social Identity Theory about?

A
  • The mere presence of another group (the absence of competition) can lead to prejudice
  • Out group = rival group
  • In group = someone is part of
47
Q

What are the social identities (in Social Identity Theory)?

A

Personal Identity
- Our own unique qualities, personality & self-esteem

Social Identity
- The attributes of the group we belong to

If social identity is not favourable → personal identity will be negative → lowers self esteem of individuals

48
Q

What is Social Identification, Categorisation & Comparison?

A

Social Identification:
Individual behaves in accordance with the norms & values of a group

Social Categorisation:
Decide which group they belong to

Social Comparison:
Perceiving the in-group as better than the out-group

49
Q

What evidence was backed up for Social Identity Theory?

A

Tajfel conducted a series of studies to demonstrate groups to form social identities & produce prejudice

Experiment 2 ‘Klee and Kandinsky’

- Where boys showed outgroup discrimination even though they weren’t in competition with the outgroup
- They would choose options from the matrix booklets that offered them less points (limited resource)*in order to create competition,*rather than the options that would give their ingroup more points.
50
Q

What are the strengths for Social Identity Theory?

A

Tajfel’s Minimal group studies
- Offer evidence that we have a natural tendency to favour the in-group & discriminate the out-groups

Replication study - Jane Elliot

- School lesson - divided blue eyes & brown eyes students
- First part: Blue eyes were favoured and brown eyes were unfavoured
- Later: Switched roles
- Findings: dominant group performed better academically & showed discrimination towards the inferior group
- Supports social identity theory - shows how social categorisation leads to prejudice
51
Q

What are the weaknesses for Social Identity Theory?

A
  • Tajfel’s Minimal group studies
    • The boy’s wanting rewards for their group may be due to competition rather than favouritism
    • Competition giving rise to conflict can be better explained by Realistic Conflict Theory
  • Studies are a Lab-based experiment → encourages demand characteristics → unreliable

👇 ANOTHER WEAKNESS - Extra:

  • Study replication - Weatherell (1982)
    • Observed New Zealand Polynesians
    • Found them much more likely to favour the out-group than show bias towards their in-group
    This is because…
    • Cultures that emphasise collectivism → less group prejudice
52
Q

How does Authoritarian Personality affect prejudice?

A

More likely to be hostile to people that are different
Ethnocentrism?
- Belief that one owns ethnic groups is superior
Conservatism?
- A belief in tradition and social order - dislike for change - submissive to authority
Anti-democratic beliefs?
- Views that oppose the fair election of gov + majority rule

53
Q

How does culture affect prejudice?

A

Katz and Braly:

  • A questionnaire on students about stereotypes about other countries
  • Culture does affect prejudice BUT as the cultures change so do the prejudices they hold
  • Individualistic?
    • Care only about yourself - self (have interpersonal prejudice)
  • Collectivistic?
    • Value Family - working together (have intergroup prejudice)

Prejudice can be affected by culture - comes from environmental effects

54
Q

How can situation affect prejudice?

A

Social Norms:

- Unwritten rules about what is socially acceptable in society
- People follow the norms created by their ingroup because it may lead to rejection - so wish to avoid rejections - as group belongings is a strong motivator - links with self-esteem
55
Q

what types of Authoritarian personality’s are there?

A

Allports view:

  • think in rigid ‘black & white’ categories
  • not necessarily prejudiced
  • receptive to political arguments -> target their inner fears & insecurities

Right wing (RWA) - Altemeyer: focused on 3 Adornos nine authoritarian traits: submission, aggression & conventionalism - 3 traits don’t heavily link to other 6 traits

  • not a product of early parental experiences - develops due to a learned set of beliefs on the world (world is dangerous & threatening) -> causes RWA
  • develops as a reaction to fear & uncertainty
  • ppl high on RWA seeks security through existing social order -> hostile towards anyone who defies social norms -> closed to new experiences

Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) ->
Pratto et al. created SDO to describe ppl who seek ingroup power, dominance & superiority
- prefer hierarchy’s rather equal distribution of power
- SDO view different to RWA -> SDO sees world as competitive jungle; ppl have to be ruthless & fight for their share of limited resources & power
- RWA worldview through role models (socialisation process)
- SDO linked to key personality characteristics (tough-mindness)
- SDO common in men -> exposure to social situations of inequality & competition (sibley et al. 2007)

56
Q

What are the strengths for Authoritarian personality?

A

relationship between personality & prejudice:

  • Cohrs et al. 2012 -> RWA & SDO positively correlated with prejudice
  • RWA negatively correlated with agreeableness
  • suggests lvl of prejudice accurately predicted from ppls personality traits

Application to reducing prejudice:

  • Allport & Altemeyer-> prejudice learnt through exposure to specific worldviews & prejudicial rhetoric -> greater regulation of media sources (social media promoting prejudice views) may be beneficial
  • strategies (international exchanges, school twinning projects) that challenge the dangerous, threatening world view combat SDO & RWA
57
Q

What are the weaknesses for Authoritarian Personality?

A

[Counterpoint] on first point in strengths:
- RWA & SDO not consistent over time
- Levin (1996) -> Jewish pps to think about their social identity in Israel -> shows Ashkenazi Jews showed higher SDO scores compared to other types of Jews
BUT -> differences in SDO disappeared when asked to think about the relationship between Israel & Palestine
- suggests change in SDO

Prejudice ignores social norms & situational factors:

  • Louis et al (2013) -> RWA & SDO scales don’t include items which are heavily affected by social attitudes/norms -> role of these factors is ignored
  • > Australian study strongly disagreed with statement ‘The white race is the best race’ but agreed with exclusion of asylum seekers
  • suggests it’s important to understand the social as well as individual factors in order to address the consequences for prejudice effectively

Hyman & sheatsley -> other factors may be involved : authoritarian personality can be caused by lower lvls of education

Psychology Edexcel A level (14 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions