Obedience 1.1.1 Social Impact Theory

Question 1

Define ‘sources’

Answer 1

The person influencing

Question 2

Define ‘targets’

Answer 2

The person being influenced

Question 3

Three Laws of Behaviour?

Answer 3

1. Social Force
2. Psychosocial Law
   3.Diffusion of responsibility

Question 4

Define ‘Social Force’
(hint: three factors!)

Answer 4

• The pressure put on ppl to change their behaviours via threat, persuasion, humour/embarrassment
• Factors:
  Strength(how much power you believe the person influencing you has)
  Immediacy(how recent + close the influence is to you)
  Numbers (the amount of ppl putting pressure on you)

Question 5

Give an example of Social Force: Numbers influence affecting an individual

Answer 5

The more students eg louder, there are in a social situation the less the social impact of the teacher.

Question 6

Give an example of Social Force: Immediacy influence affecting an individual

Answer 6

If a teacher emails a student about their homework they’re less likely to complete it as opposed to being told in person.

Question 7

Give an example of Social Force: Strength influence affecting an individual

Answer 7

A boss is seen as an authority figure due to their level of expertise, this means they have a higher influence over their employees and so a greater social impact.

Question 8

Define ‘Psychosocial Law’

Answer 8

Idea that 1st source of influence has most dramatic impact on ppl, 2nd 3rd 4th generate less social force

Question 9

Define ‘Diffusion of Responsibility’

Answer 9

• Social Force gets spread out between all the ppl it’s directed at
• The more ppl there are, the less personal responsibilty each person feels so there’s less pressure to conform

Question 10

EACH-Evidence

Answer 10

1.P- Hofling’s (1966) supports
E- 95% of nurses respected the Doctor’s order to overdose the patient
E- This supports the law of social force under the strength perspective as the nurses would obey seeing the Doctor as a figure of higher power therefore having more influence to pressure the nurses, as well as immediacy as the Nurses had one on one contact with the Doctor, increasing the influence felt to obey.
2.P- Milgram’s variations supports
E- Rebellious stooges, telephonic instructions, run down office block
E- Large number of people rebelling supported the numbers aspect of increasing social force, the experimenter wasn’t in a close proximity and gave instructions over a telephone so the aspect of immediacy shows social force decreased, and the environment was familiar and not intimidating so the showed the strength aspect of decreasing social force.

Question 11

EACH-Application

Answer 11

P- Yes
E- It can help explain the events of WW2 through social force aspects: numbers as many people obeyed Hitler, immediacy through the guards patrolling the streets to increase proximity, use propaganda to increase social force through power
E-S, easily applicable to other life situations, if we apply social impact theory to situations, we can understand how people are influenced and put interventions in place to allow for autonomy or to apply to influence to places in need of structure and regulation eg healthcare, schools(!)

Question 12

EACH-Criticisms

Answer 12

1.P- Reductionist
E-Assumes social behaviour can be understood purely through the interaction of individuals
E- A weakness as the theory ignores individual differences such as gender, personality and upbringing as a reasoning of people acting obediently.
2.P- Doesn’t focus on obedience
E- Studies the influence of groups on behaviour
E-Only the features of obedience that involves groups are addressed

Question 13

EACH-How?

Answer 13

P-Milgram’s (1963) has low external validity
E- The study was situated in a lab setting whereby a teacher and learner were in one room with the learner being told to administer electric shocks to another on the other side of the wall.
E- A weakness as the study has low mundane realism as this is not an common task to be told to do in order to be obedient to an authority figure.