Chapter 1- Social Influence Flashcards
(45 cards)
Define the term: Conformity:
Conformity is the tendency to change what we do/think/say (behaviours, attitudes) in response of others/social pressure (real/imagined).
What are the 3 types of conformity?
Compliance, Identification, Internalisation.
Define “Compliance” in terms of conformity:
Compliance is when one agrees publicly but privately does not alter personal views. This can be said to be “superficial”, behaviour stops as soon as group pressure ceases.
Define “Identification” in terms of Conformity:
Identification is where one feels group membership and both public and private views change- this is temporary. It is a deeper form of conformity.
Define “Internalisation” in terms of Conformity:
Internalisation is where there is a conversion of views that are adopted from a group- both public and private views are changed permanently. This is the deepest level of conformity. Change persists in the absence of the group members, attitude adopted.
What is NSI?
Normative Social Influence- when one conforms in order to be accepted into a group and feel a sense of belonging. It may be socially rewarding and some may undergo NSI to avoid punishment. Emotional process rather than cognitive process.
NSI often occurs when in a situation where the social norms are not well known, so others become an example of how to behave. May be more common in stressful situations.
What is ISI?
Informational Social Influence- when one conforms in order to gain knowledge. Most undergo ISI in order to be “right” and avoid standing out.
ISI is a cognitive process- people want to be right.
ISI likely to occur in ambiguous situations where it isn’t clear what is right, or when decisions need to be made quickly.
What was the aim of Asch’s Line Study?
Aim- to see if individual changes views to agree with majority (even if incorrect).
Give 6 Procedures that occured in Asch’s Line Study:
123 male PPs
Small group 7-9
2 cards- standard and comparison
Answer was always obvious
18 trials per group
Confederates- only 1 real PP per group
What were the findings in Asch’s Line Study?
Overall conformity rate was 37%
5% conformed every trial
25% remained completely independent
What was the conclusion to Asch’s Line Study?
People conformed due to NSI- many PPs said that they didn’t want to stand out.
Give 3 possible positive evaluations of Asch’s Line Study:
- “Real” pressure felt by PPs
- Tightly controled lab experiment- high internal validity
- Reliable- exact details of study are given, so in theory, experiment can be replicated to get similar results
= High Validity!!
Give 6 possible negative evaluations of the Asch Line Study:
- Lacks Mundane Realism
- Only 123 PPs- small sample
- Only male PPs- gender bias
- Unethical because of deception.
- Maybe lacks internal validity- PPs may have understood the real aim of the experiment and went along with it to please the experimenters.
- Cannot interpret if NSI or ISI.
- PP from USA only, individualist culture- Smith+Bond (1998) suggest that conformity rates in collectivist culture are higher (more concerned for group needs). Asch findings limited to American men.
In the Variations of Asch, what were the aims, procedures and findings of “Group Size”.
Aim- “How does size of majority affect rate of conformity?”
Procedures- 1-15 confederates
Findings:
1 confederate: 3% conformity rate
2 confederates: 12.8% conformity rate
3 confederates: 32% conformity rate (same as original Asch expt where there was 6-8 confederates
15 confederates: 29% conformity rate (dropped, PPs suspicious of experiment)
In the Variations of Asch, what were the aims, procedures and findings of “Group Unanimity”.
Aim- “to see how agreement between confederates affects conformity”
Prodcedures and Findings:
1 confederate says correct answer: 5% conformity rate
1 confederate says different incorrect answer: 9% conformity rate
Therefore, if you break/disrupt group unanimous position, comformity is reduced.
In the Variations of Asch, what were the aims, procedures and findings of “Task Difficulty”.
Aim- to see if the difference in line lengths (smaller, closer together, ambiguous) i.e. making the task more difficult will increase the rate of conformity
Procedures- making the lines on cards smaller, closer together
Findings- happens due to ISI, conformity rate increased
What were the procedures of the Stanford Prison Study…? Include details on uniform and instructions on the roles.
Procedures:
- Zimbardo (1973)
- mock prison at Stanford Uni.
- 21 ‘emotionally stable’ male student volunteers
- PPs randomly assigned either prisoner or guard
- To increase realism, ‘prisoners’ were arrested at their homes and delivered to prison blindfolded, strip-searched, deloused and issued uniform and number.
Uniforms:
- Prisoners: loose smock, cap to cover hair, identified by number (no names used)
- Guards: police uniform, wooden club, handcuffs and mirror shades.
- These uniforms created loss of personal identity = de-individuation, more likely to conform to social role.
Instructions about behaviour:
- Prisoners encouraged to identify with role, e.g. instead of opting to leave study, ‘apply for parole’
- Guards were encouraged to play their role by being reminded that they had complete power over prisoners.
Describe a study that supports Zimbardo’s theory of conformity to social roles:
Abu Ghraib:
- Supports Zimbardo’s theory
- American Prison- US soldiers beat + abused Iraqi prisoners
- Real life! Not made up/fake. Good evidence
- Prisoners were tortured, physically + sexually abused, routinely humiliated and murdered,.
*
Define Obedience:
Obedience- a form of social influence where individual follows direct order. Person issuing order is usually figure of authority who h as power to punish when obedient behaviour is not forthcoming.
What were the procedures in Milgrim’s obedience experiment:
- 40 Male PPs (20-50 y/o)
- volunteers obtained thru newspapers advert
- when each volunteer arrived, he was introduced to another PP (confederate)
- drew lots to determine who would be Teacher / Learner
- real PP always teacher
- experimenter was involved.
- The Learner (Mr Wallace) was strapped into chair + wired up w/ electrodes (confederate)
- The Teacher (real PP) was given small shock to experience- only real shock of expt.
- Leaner tasked to remember pairs of words, every time error made, electric shock became stronger + more painful
- Teacher administered shocks through ‘shock machine’.
- At 300 volts, Learner pounded on wall + no response to next Q
- At 315 volts, Learner pounded on wall + silent for rest of procedure.
There were 4 standard prods that Experimenter used to ORDER teacher :
- ‘please continue…’
- ‘the experiment requires that you continue..’
- ‘it is absolutely essential you continue’
- ‘you have no other choice, you must go on’
What were the findings to Milgrim’s Obedience Expt?
- every PP delivered all shocks up to 300 volts
- 12.5% stopped at 300 volts (intense shock)
- 65% continued to 450 volts (highest level)- fully obedient
- Qualitative data recorded too (sweat, tension, tremble, stutter, lip biting, groan)
- 3 PP had seizures.
Other data:
14 psychology students asked by Milgrim to predict the participants’ behaviour.
students estimated that no more than 3% of the participants would continue to 450 volts.
All participants in the baseline study were debriefed and assured that their behaviour was entirely normal
follow-up questionnaire - 84% said they were glad to have participated.
What were the conclusions of Milgrim’s obedience expt:
Ordinary people are likely to follow orders given by an authority figure even to the extent of killing an innocent human being.
Outline a study that supports Milgrim’s Theory of Obedience to a figure of authority:
- Hofling et al (1966)
- 22 nurses working a various American hospitals received calls from confederate ‘Dr Smith’
- He instructed them to give Mr Jones (also confederate) 20mg of made up drug.
- Dr said he was in hurry and would sign drug form when he saw patient in 10 mins.
- Label on made up drug stated maximum dose was 10mg
- If nurse obeyed Dr Smith- they would be exceeding maximum dosage.
- Also is she obeyed, she would break rule requiring authorisation before any drug administered so nurse is sure Dr Smith is genuine doctor.
- 21 out of 22 nurses obeyed without hesitation and 11 later said they had not noticed dosage discrepancy.
Outline a study that doesn’t support Milgrim’s theory:
Rank + Jacobson (1977)
- replicated Hofling’s expt
- BUT instructions were to administer Valium at 3 times the recommended dose,
- telephone instruction came from real, known doctor
- nurses were able to consult with other nurses before proceeding
- Under these conditions, only 2 / 18 nurses prepared medication as requested.