Conformity and social roles

Question 1

Define compliance in the context of conformity.

Answer 1

Compliance refers to a change in behavior or attitudes that occurs publicly but not privately.

Question 2

Explain the concept of identification in social psychology.

Answer 2

Identification is when a person changes their behavior and beliefs only in the presence of a group they identify with.

Question 3

Describe internalisation as a form of conformity.

Answer 3

Internalisation is when a person changes their behavior and beliefs both publicly and privately, indicating a true change.

Question 4

How did Asch’s (1951) study support normative social influence (NSI)?

Answer 4

Asch found that many participants conformed to incorrect answers to avoid disapproval from the group, demonstrating NSI.

Question 5

What did Jenness’s (1932) study reveal about informational social influence (ISI)?

Answer 5

Jenness’s study showed that participants adjusted their estimates of the number of beans in a jar to align with a group estimate, supporting ISI.

Question 6

Discuss the importance of individual differences in conformity.

Answer 6

Individual differences, such as being ‘nAffiliators’, highlight that some people conform more due to the desire to please others, which relates to NSI.

Question 7

Explain the positive implications of understanding conformity in social psychology.

Answer 7

Understanding conformity can be used in marketing and behavior shaping by leveraging normative and informative influences.

Question 8

Define normative social influence.

Answer 8

Normative social influence is the tendency to conform in order to be accepted or liked by a group.

Question 9

What is informative social influence?

Answer 9

Informative social influence occurs when individuals conform to gain knowledge or because they believe someone else is correct.

Question 10

Describe conformity to social roles as a psychological concept.

Answer 10

Conformity to social roles involves adopting specific behaviors and beliefs in particular social situations.

Question 11

What was the aim of Zimbardo’s research on conformity to social roles?

Answer 11

The aim was to examine whether individuals conform to the social roles assigned to them.

Question 12

Summarize the method used in Zimbardo’s study.

Answer 12

Participants were randomly assigned to be either prisoners or guards in a mock prison set up in the basement of Stanford University.

Question 13

What were the results of Zimbardo’s study regarding prisoners and guards?

Answer 13

Participants quickly identified with their roles; prisoners rebelled while guards became abusive and dehumanizing.

Question 14

Discuss the ethical concerns raised by Zimbardo’s research.

Answer 14

The study was deemed unethical as five prisoners left early due to mental and physical torment, and some guards experienced anxiety.

Question 15

How did Zimbardo’s role as superintendent affect the study’s objectivity?

Answer 15

Zimbardo’s involvement as superintendent compromised his objectivity, as he was emotionally invested in the role.

Question 16

Describe the aim of Asch’s 1951 study.

Answer 16

Asch aimed to examine how social pressure from a unanimous majority affects conformity in an unambiguous situation.

Question 17

Explain the participant setup in Asch’s experiment.

Answer 17

One real participant was placed in a room with six to eight confederates, with the real participant always seated second from last.

Question 18

Define the term ‘critical trials’ in the context of Asch’s study.

Answer 18

Critical trials refer to the 12 instances in the experiment where confederates purposely gave incorrect answers.

Question 19

How did the group size affect conformity in Asch’s study?

Answer 19

Conformity increased with group size, peaking at three confederates, where participants conformed in 32% of critical trials.

Question 20

Explain the impact of unanimity on conformity as found in Asch’s research.

Answer 20

Conformity dropped to 5% when there was a dissenter among the confederates.

Question 21

What was the average conformity rate of real participants on critical trials in Asch’s study?

Answer 21

On average, real participants conformed to incorrect answers on 32% of the critical trials.

Question 22

Discuss the ecological validity of Asch’s study.

Answer 22

The study lacks ecological validity because the task was artificial and did not reflect real-life situations where conformity might occur.

Question 23

What ethical issues were present in Asch’s study?

Answer 23

Ethical issues included deception about the study’s aim, the use of confederates, and the distress experienced by participants.

Question 24

How did Perrin and Spencer’s 1980 replication of Asch’s study contribute to its evaluation?

Answer 24

Perrin and Spencer found significantly lower levels of conformity, suggesting Asch’s experiment lacks historical validity.

Question 25

Describe how task difficulty influenced conformity in Asch's study.

Answer 25

When the task was made harder, conformity increased among participants.

Question 26

What effect did anonymity have on conformity in Asch's research?

Answer 26

When answers were given anonymously (written down), conformity decreased.

Question 27

Summarize the overall findings regarding conformity from Asch's study.

Answer 27

People are more likely to conform under social pressure, but this effect diminishes with too many people, and anonymity reduces conformity.

Question 28

Describe the aim of Milgram's original study on obedience.

Answer 28

The aim was to investigate whether ordinary people would obey an unjust order from an authority figure and inflict pain on an innocent person.

Question 29

Explain the role of proximity in Milgram's study.

Answer 29

Proximity affected obedience; when the teacher and learner were in the same room, the number of participants reaching 450 volts decreased to 40%. When instructions were given over the phone, it decreased further to 20%.

Question 30

How did the uniform of the authority figure influence obedience in Milgram's study?

Answer 30

The presence of a uniform increased obedience; when the experimenter wore a lab coat, more participants obeyed compared to when the experimenter wore normal clothes, which decreased obedience to 20%.

Question 31

What were the results of Milgram's original study regarding voltage levels administered by participants?

Answer 31

In Milgram's study, 100% of participants reached 350 volts, and 65% reached the maximum of 450 volts.

Question 32

Define situational factors in the context of obedience.

Answer 32

Situational factors are external influences that affect the likelihood of someone obeying orders, such as proximity, location, and uniform.

Question 33

Explain the significance of the location in Milgram's study.

Answer 33

Changing the location from Yale University, a prestigious setting, to rundown offices, which suggested questionable authority, resulted in a decrease in obedience, with only 47.5% of participants reaching 450 volts.

Question 34

Describe the findings of Bickman's 1974 study related to uniform and obedience.

Answer 34

Bickman's study found that people were more obedient to a uniformed person asking them to pick up litter compared to when the person was dressed in civilian clothes.

Question 35

How did the responsibility factor influence obedience in Milgram's study?

Answer 35

When someone else administered the shocks on behalf of the participant, obedience increased significantly to 92.5%.

Question 36

Evaluate Milgram's methodological approach in his experiments.

Answer 36

Milgram's approach was praised for high reliability due to systematically changing one variable at a time, ensuring consistency in the variations except for the independent variable.

Question 37

Contrast situational factors with dispositional explanations of obedience.

Answer 37

Dispositional explanations focus on individual characteristics and personality traits that influence obedience, while situational factors emphasize external influences and context.

Question 38

What was the outcome of Kilman and Mann's replication of Milgram's study in Australia?

Answer 38

Kilman and Mann found that only 16% of participants reached 450 volts, indicating cultural differences in obedience.

Question 39

Describe the traits associated with the authoritarian personality.

Answer 39

The authoritarian personality is characterized by extreme respect for authority, a tendency to be obedient to those in power, and often includes a belief in rigid, traditional values.

Question 40

Explain the aim of Adorno et al.'s research in 1950.

Answer 40

The aim was to investigate unconscious views towards other racial groups and to identify traits associated with the authoritarian personality.

Question 41

How was the F-scale used in Adorno et al.'s research?

Answer 41

The F-scale was a questionnaire designed to measure fascist tendencies and included statements like 'Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues children should learn'.

Question 42

What were the findings of Adorno et al. regarding individuals with high F-scale scores?

Answer 42

Individuals with high F-scale scores identified with 'strong' people, showed disrespect towards the 'weak', and exhibited excessive respect for those in higher power.

Question 43

Define the conclusion drawn from Adorno et al.'s research about obedience.

Answer 43

The conclusion was that individuals with an authoritarian personality are more obedient to authority figures, displaying extreme submissiveness and respect.

Question 44

What was the aim of the research conducted by Elms and Milgram in 1966?

Answer 44

The aim was to determine if obedient participants in Milgram's study were more likely to exhibit authoritarian personality traits compared to disobedient participants.

Question 45

How many participants were involved in Elms and Milgram's study, and how were they categorized?

Answer 45

There were 40 participants in total, with 20 categorized as obedient (who administered the full 450 volts) and 20 as disobedient (who refused to continue).

Question 46

What method was used in Elms and Milgram's research to assess personality traits?

Answer 46

Each participant completed several personality questionnaires, including Adorno's F scale.

Question 47

What did the findings of Elms and Milgram's research indicate about obedient participants?

Answer 47

The findings indicated that obedient participants scored higher on the F scale compared to disobedient participants, suggesting a link between obedience and authoritarian personality traits.

Question 48

Discuss the limitations of Milgram and Elms' research regarding obedience.

Answer 48

The research relies on correlational data, meaning only a relationship can be inferred between obedience and dispositional factors, rather than establishing a cause-and-effect relationship.

Question 49

What alternative explanations for obedience are mentioned in the content?

Answer 49

Situational factors such as uniform and proximity are mentioned as alternative explanations for obedience, suggesting that both situational and dispositional factors may need to be considered together.

Question 50

Summarize the findings of Middendorp and Meleon (1990) regarding education and authoritarian personality traits.

Answer 50

Middendorp and Meleon found that less-educated individuals are more likely to display authoritarian personality characteristics compared to well-educated individuals.

Question 51

Describe the role of social support in resisting conformity.

Answer 51

Social support involves having an ally or someone who also resists conformity or obedience, which increases confidence and decreases fear of ridicule, making individuals more likely to resist social influence.

Question 52

Explain the concept of locus of control.

Answer 52

Locus of control refers to the extent to which individuals believe they have control over their own lives, with an internal locus indicating belief in personal control and an external locus indicating belief in control by external factors.

Question 53

How does an internal locus of control affect resistance to social influence?

Answer 53

Individuals with an internal locus of control believe that their actions determine outcomes, making them more independent and likely to resist social influence.

Question 54

What effect does social support have on obedience according to Milgram's research?

Answer 54

In Milgram's variations, when participants were paired with others who refused to continue, the percentage of participants who reached 450 volts dropped to 10%, indicating that social support helps resist obedience.

Question 55

Define normative social influence and its relation to locus of control.

Answer 55

Normative social influence is the pressure to conform to the expectations of others. Research suggests that locus of control is more influential in resisting normative social influence than informational social influence.

Question 56

How did Spector's research contribute to understanding locus of control and conformity?

Answer 56

Spector (1983) found that individuals with a high internal locus of control were less likely to conform than those with a high external locus of control, particularly in situations of normative social influence.

Question 57

Explain the findings of Oliner & Oliner (1998) regarding locus of control and resistance to authority.

Answer 57

Oliner & Oliner (1998) found that non-Jewish survivors of WWII who resisted orders to help Jewish people were more likely to have a high internal locus of control compared to those who obeyed the Nazis.

Question 58

Describe a scenario illustrating the impact of internal locus of control on behavior.

Answer 58

In a scenario where John sees his friends bullying someone, his internal locus of control leads him to hold himself responsible for his actions, prompting him to resist the pressure to join in.

Question 59

What was the outcome of Asch's (1951) variation regarding social support and conformity?

Answer 59

In Asch's variation, when a confederate consistently gave the correct answer, the rate of conformity among participants dropped to 5%, demonstrating the effectiveness of social support in resisting conformity.