Social Influence Flashcards
Describe zimbardos experiment
Aim- to investigate how readily people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner in a role playing exercise that simulated prison life - see if brutality was to do with environment or sadistic personalities
Method - Zimbardo converted a basernent of the Stanford University into a mock prison. He advertised for students to play the roles of prisoners and
guards for a fortnight. 24 male college students (chosen from 75 volunteers) were screened for psychological
normality and paid $15 per day to take part in the experiment.
Participants were randomly assigned to either the role of prisoner or guard in a simulated prison environment
The guards worked in sets of 3and the pnsoners were housed 3 to a room. There was also a solitary confinement cell for prisoners who misbehaved. The prison simulation was kept as real life as possible. Prisoners were treated like every other criminal ,being arrested at their own homes, without waming. and taken to the local pdice station. They were fingerprinted, photographed and ‘booked’. The prison had barred doors and windows, bare walls and small cells. Here the deindividuation process began. When prisoners arrived at the prison they were stripped naked, deloused, had all their personal belongings removed and locked away, and were given prison clothes and bedding. They were issued a uniform, and referred to by their number only. Their clothes comprised a smock with their number written on it,
Guards were issued a uniform, together with whistles, handams and dark glasses, to make eye contact with
prisoners impossible. The guards worked shifts of eight hours each (the other guards remained on call). No
physical violence was permitted.
Zimbardo observed behaviour of the prisoners and guards
Findings -Within a very short time both guards and prisoners were settling into their new roles, with the guards
adopting theirs quiddy and easily.
Within hours of beginning experiment some guards began to harass prisoners. They behaved in a brutal and
sadistic manner, apparently enjoying it Other guards joined in, and other prisoners were also tormented with insulted and petty orders, they were given pointless and boring tasks to
Accomplish , and they were generally dehumanized. The prisoners soon adopted prison like behaviour e.g. Telling tales on each other to the guard. As the prisoners Became more submissive the guards became more aggressive and assertive. One prisoner had to be released after 36 hours because if bursts of screaming , the next few days 3 others left , observation terminated after 6 days
Conclusion - People will readily conform to the social roles they are expected to play, especially if the roles are as
strongly stereotyped as those of the prison guards. The “prison” environment was an important factor in creating the guards’ brutal behavior (none of the participants who acted as guards showed sadistic tendencies before the
study). Therefore, the findings support the situational explanation of behavior rather than the dispositional one.
Zimbardo proposed that two processes can explain the prisoner’s ‘final submission’. The participants became de- individualized and lost their sense of personal identity because of the uniform they wore. Therefore, roles that
People play can shape their behavior and attitudes. Also, learned helplessness could explain the prisoners submission to the guards. The prisoners learnt that whatever they did had little effect on what happened to them.
In the mock prison the unpredictable decisions of the guards led the prisoners to give up responding.
. Many said they hadn’t known this side of them existed or that they were capable of such things. The prisoners, too,
couldn’t believe that they had responded in the submissive, cowering, dependent way they had. Several claimed to be assertive types normally. When asked about the guards, they described the usual three stereotypes that can
be found in any prison: some guards were good, some were tough but fair, and some were cruel.
Evaluations on zimbardos experiment
Strengths -
Debriefing and several years follow up
Development of ethical guidelines
Reform how prisons were run
Weaknesses -
Protection from psychological and physical harm
Demand characteristics, acted how they were expected to act
Not full consent as they didn’t know they would be arrested at there house
Describe aschs experiment
Aim - see is people would conform to judgements when they are clearly wrong
Method - 5 to 7 participant per group , each group were presented with a standard line and 3 comparison lines. Participant had to say aloud which comparison line matched the standard line in length . In each group there was only 1 true participant , the remaining were confederates and were told to give the wrong answer 12 out of 18 times
Results - less than 1% error in control conditions . 37% error rate in experimental conditions, 25% of participants made no error
Conclusion - 37% error rate was due to social influences , even in situations where the judgements of the others appear to be wrong conformity occurs
Evaluate aschs experiment
Strengths
- highly controlled , replicated several times so reliable
- no psychological harm
Weaknesses
- lack ecological validly as not an everyday task and it’s based on people perception of lines and does not reflect the complexity of real life conformity
- not full consent , told about perception not conformity
What is social influence
How people influence and change other people attitudes and behaviours
What is conformity
Changing an attitude / belief / behaviour to go along with a person or majority group
Describe informational social influence
And research example
When people assume the actions of others is right in an attempt to reflect correct behaviour for a given situation , we think people know more because we’re unsure
Eg- jenness
Describe normative social influence
And example
A type of social influence leading to conformity , we go along with a behaviour we know is wrong to avoid rejection and to fit in
Eg - aschs line experiment
What are the 3 types of conformity
Compliance
Internalisation
Identification
Describe compliance
Where a person may agree in public with a group of people but the person really privately disagrees with the groups viewpoint , appearing to share viewpoints to fit in
Describe internalisation
People publicly changing their behaviour to fit in with the group but also agreeing with them privately
Describe identification
A type of conformity where the belief is publicly and privately adopted however goes when removed from group e.g. Army
Describe jenness experiment
His experiment was as ambiguous situation involving a glass bottle filled with beans. He asked participants individually to estimate how many beans the bottles contained . Jenness then put the group in a room with the bottle and asked them to provide a group estimate through discussion . Participants were then asked to estimate the number on their own again to find whether their initial estimate had altered based on the influence of the majority . Jenness then interviewed the participant individually again and asked if they would like to change their original estimate or stay with the group estimates . Almost all changed their individual guesses to be closer to the group estimate
When we are unsure of an answer we look to others for help assuming that a majority figure will be more reliable
what is internal validity
does the research measure what it claims to measure
what is external validity
can you apply the results to different context and different times
what is ecological validity
can you apply results to real life situations
what 3 factors effect conformity
task difficulty
group size
unamity
describe how task difficulty effects conformity
INCREASES CONFORMITY , the more difficult the task
if the group is ambiguous people naturally look to others for guidance
describe how group size effects conformity
INCREASES CONFORMITY, as a larger group because you don’t want to be the odd one out
larger group more likely people will judge them / embarrassment
describe how unamity effects conformity
DECREASES CONFORMITY
- if you break a groups unamity then conformity is reduced
what is obedience to authority
a type of social influence when someone acts in response to a order from authority
describe milgrams experiment
participants believed they were randomly assigned to the role of teacher or learner but they were always assigned to be the teacher. they were asked to give electric shocks to another individual, the learner who was a confederate. starting from 15 volts they had to increase it everytime the learner answered a word pair wrong . no shocks apart from 45 volts given to the real participant to deceive them. the learner indicated their distress by complaining and shouting and then going silent. , but if the participant refused to give a shock they were given orders such as you have no choice you must go on , after the experiment was over they were fully debriefed
results- 100% of the participant gave shocks up to 300v and 65% up to 450v. female obedience levels were slightly lower , his findings suggest that obedience is due to situation not the personality of the participant
evaluation - ethics , deceived , distress , informed consent , psychological harm
volunteer sample
rights to withdraw
ecological validity
