Social Flashcards

1
Q

Define Autonomous state

A

A mindset where we behave independently, make our own decisions about how to behave and take responsibility for the consequences of our actions.

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

Define obedience

A

A form of social influence in which an individual follow direct orders. The person giving the order is an authoritarian figure, who has power to punish when obedient behaviour is not displayed. This usually gives the assumption that the person receiving the orders is made to respond in a way they usually would not have done.

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

Define agentic state

A

A mindset which allows us to carry out orders from an authoritarian figure, even if they conflict with our morals. We absolve ourselves of responsibility, believing that we are acting on someone else’s behalf, blame for any negative consequences lies with the authority.

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

Obedience: Agency theory (how does Milgram define it?)

A

Milgram (1974) said that obedience to authority is necessary for the smooth running of society. Humans live in a hierarchically organised social groups in order for these groups to function successfully, subordinate individuals sometimes have to suppress their personal desires in order to carry out the wishes of their superior.

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

What is moral strain?

A

A mental discomfort or anxiety experienced in the agentic state (acting on behalf of authority and move the responsibility to them) when a person’s actions conflict with their personal morality.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Support of the Agency theory

A

1) It is supported by his 1963 study, where he found that 100% of his participants would administer 300 V to a confederate as a punishment for making a mistake on a word learning task and 65% of those would administer the full 450 V (labelled dangerous) from the orders of authority, a doctor.
2) It can explain events like the Holocaust and Rwanda genocide as they were ordered by authority figures.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Weaknesses of agency theory

A

1) Agentic shift does not appear to be inevitable. Rank and Jacobsen’s (1977) study found that 16 out of 18 (89%) nurses failed to obey the doctors orders of administering an overdose of the drug Valium. Doctors are a source of authority but the majority remained autonomous, and the nurses considered themselves to be responsible.
2) Milgram’s research lacks ecological validity as the event of being asked to electrocute someone is unrealistic.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Application of the Agency theory

A

Milgram maintained that when binding factors outweigh moral strain, obedience follows. This is used in the military to reduce moral strain and increase the chance of them following orders and follow them without question. One way is to use language like ‘collateral damage’ (when you accidentally kill civilians) and dehumanising language to use against the ‘enemy’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Social impact theory: Multiplication and Division of impact

A

The source is depicted in yellow. The size of the yellow dots indicate the strength of the source. The closeness to the target (blue circle) indicates immediacy- The number of black rings around the target shows the amount of influence exerted- created by number, strength, and immediacy of the source.
Division- The source (yellow dots) has a reduced effect because its impact is now divided between several targets. The close the target is to the source, the less influence because the targets impact of the source.
Divisional effect explains the idea that social impact is reduced if there are more targets than there are sources, impact reduced. Shown by formula:

Impact on the target= f(1/(SIN))

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

Social impact theory: Sources and targets

A

‘social impact’ refers to the effect that real or imagined people can have on our behaviour- ‘social’ referring to the fact that the effect come from people. Developed by Bibb Latane. The person doing the influencing is the ‘source’ and the people who are influenced are the ‘targets’. ‘Source’ impacts ‘target’ through change of thoughts, feeling and action of the target.

Impacts on the target= f(SIN)

S= strength, I= immediacy, N=number of sources

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Social impact theory: strength, immediacy, and number

A

Strength (S)= refers to the perceived power of the authority figure and the messages that they convey. Strength can be affected by socio-economic status, age and the nature if any past or future relationships with the target. Strong source= power over target.
Immediacy (I)= reflects to the closeness of the source and the target in the terms of space, but also time, Physical and psychological barriers to communication will affect immediacy.
Number (N)= relates to how many sources are present during the interaction, which determines the level of social impact.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

The law of diminishing returns

A

Latane made a specific point about the number, saying that once the source group is bigger than three, each addition person has less of an influencing effect. Therefore, adding one extra person to a group of 52 people would have less impact than an extra person added to a group of two. Economists call this law of diminishing returns. Doesn’t mean they are less powerful, instead reduces level of impact.

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

Strength of Social Impact theory

A

Backed up by studies like Sedikides and Jackson who gave orders to visitors at the zoo - large groups were more likely to disobey, which shows division impact. The mathematical formula can be used i=f(SIN)
It is much more complex than agency theory

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

Weaknesses of Social Impact theory

A

It ignores moral strain unlike Agency theory.
It pays attention to the person giving orders and their characteristics, however it doesn’t look at the person receiving the orders

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Application of social impact theory

A

To understand how people enhance their social influence like with politicians

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

Milgram’s baseline study: aims

A
  1. To understand the behaviours of Germans who played a role in the killing of over 10 million people in the Holocaust. There was the belief that the Germans were different like they were more obedient and Milgram wanted to explore this.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Milgram baseline study: procedure

A

He recruited a volunteer sample of 40 men aged 20-50 years old, all from New Haven, US. This was done through local newsletters and letters in the post. There were a range of non-skilled workers and professional workers. They were offered $4.50 at the time. They were told they could drop out at any time and would still keep the money. They were introduced to 2 men, one was the experimenter, a confederate of Milgram called Mr Williams. He was dressed in a technicians lab coat. They other man was also a confederate was introduced as the other participant and was referred as Mr Wallace. Lots were drawn to decide whether the real participant would be the teacher or the learner, but the participants were always given teacher.
The teacher role was to shock the learner for every mistake on the word recall task. The voltage increased by 15V each time but were fake. A real one was given to the teacher of 45V. The learner was is a sperate room the the teacher and spoke through a intercom.
Experimenter used a series of prods to get the teacher to keep going. 4 were given and if the teacher kept protesting then they were allowed to leave and they record the maximum shock it went up to. Milgram collect footage to see the participants reaction.

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

Milgram’s baseline study: findings

A

Milgram found that 65% of those went all the way to 450V and 100% went to 350V. Although 12.5% of the sample dropped out. Participants were observed to tremble, sweat, bite their lips and digging fingernails into their flesh. 35% exhibited nervous laughter. 3 participants have full blown seizures.

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

Milgram’s baseline study: conclusion

A

Milgram’s findings show that Americans are obedient to perceived authority figures. This could be due to the perceived competence and knowledge/reputation the of the researcher and the idea that the participants were somehow advancing science.

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

Strengths of Milgram study’s

A

A strength is that the procedure was standardised so every participant had the same experience. This makes it reliable and is shows with Burger who was able to replicate the experiment.
Another strength is that they gathered both quantitative and qualitative data. This means that they were able to find patterns as well as gather unexpected detail or find rich detail about the participants.

21
Q

Weaknesses of Milgram’s study

A

One weakness is that it is not generalisable. They only used men in a certain age group from a certain culture, the US. Different cultures, ages, and genders may respond differently to obedience. This is not representative.
Another weakness is that is lacks ecological validity. This task is not something that is usually asked. It was also carried out in an artificial laboratory experiment, therefore findings cannot be generalised to real life. The artificial environment may make people give desired characteristics.

22
Q

Application of Milgram’s study

A

The application is that it is used in pilot training. Tarnow describes how first officers often fail to monitor and challenge errors made by the captain due to his/her legitimate authority. Tarnow believes that if training first officers were to challenge the authority of the pilot then it could prevent up to 20% of plane crashes. Training led to better cockpit behaviour and potentially save lives.

23
Q

Milgram’s variation: Experiment 10, Rundown office black

A

Many of Milgram’s participants said that the prestigious university setting led them to trust the integrity of the study. Milgram moved the experiment to a rundown office block in the downtown shopping district. Participants were told that this study was being done by a private firm, conducting research for industry. The study found that 47.5% of participants were fully obedient. Interview transcript found that they were doubtful about the legitimacy of the study. The rundown setting reduce legitimacy of the researcher. However the link to ‘scientific research’ seemed to be enough to still encourage relatively high levels of obedience.

24
Q

Milgram’s variation: Experiment 7, Telephonic instructions

A

The ‘experimenter’ gave instructions over the telephone. Milgram states that only 9 out of 40 (22.5%) were fully obedient under these circumstances. Participants also lied on the phone, saying they were raising the shock level when they weren’t and often repeatedly administers the lowest shock level on the machine. Participants seemed to find it easier to resist authority figures in this passive way than openly challenge the authority figure. When the researcher came back into the room, the participants were obedient again. The physical presence of the authority figures is an important situational factor that increases obedience and reduces dissent.

25
Q

Milgram’s variation: Experiment 13, Ordinary Man gives orders

A

Milgram wanted to disentangle the question of whether people will obey an order due to the strength of the command itself or due to the status of the person giving the orders. Arrives with 2 confederates rather than one. One confederate is assigned the role of the leaner and the other is assigned to record the time on the clock. The real participant is the ‘teacher’. The experimenter explains the task as usual and the ‘teacher’ observes ‘Mr Wallace’ being strapped to a chair.
At this point the experimenter will receive a fake phone call. Apparently flustered, he asks the participant teacher and the confederate recorder to get the leaner to learn all the word pairs. Once he has gone, the confederate recorder enthusiastically suggests administering the shocks that increased by 15V each time the learner make a mistake and insist of following this procedure.
80% of participants refused to continue when the ‘ordinary man’ gives the instructions. This shows that order must been given from a legitimate source of authority and this is an important situational factor that can encourage dissent.

26
Q

How does personality affect obedience?

A

Authoritarian personality- Harsh parenting leads to submissiveness to authority and high levels of obedience (Adorno et al- 1985)
Internal and external locus of control- Miller (1975) showed that externals were more likely to obey dangerous orders that internals

27
Q

Evaluation of how personality affects obedience

A

Strength- Elms and Milgram 1960- fully obedient participants scored higher on the F-scale than defiant participants
Weakness- In Austria, no difference in the LOC between obedient and disobedient participants (Schurz- 1985)
Application- Could people matching jobs

28
Q

How does situation affect obedience?

A

Legitimacy- Reducing authorities figures perceived legitimacy reduces obedience.
Proximity- Increased distance between authority figure and participant decreases obedience
Behaviour of others- witnessing disobedience in other increases definace

29
Q

Evaluation for how situations affect obedience?

A

Strength- Supporting evidence - Milgram and Meeus and Raaijmakers (1995) found obedience drops when the experimenter is absent 33% and two rebel peers by 16%.
Weakness- Personality is also important
Application- Changing wording of countryside rules increases the strength of the message (Gramann et al. 1995)

30
Q

How does gender affect obedience?

A

Women are more likely to be obedient than men- Sheridan and King (1972) 100% of females were obedient to shocking puppies
Men are more likely to be obedient than women- Milgram replication found 16% of females and 40% of males were fully obedient (Killham and Mann 1974)
Moral reasoning- males ‘ethic of justice’ and females ‘ethic of care’ Gilligan 1982

31
Q

Evaluation of gender affecting obedience?

A

Strength- Support for Gilligan- Gilligan and Attanucci (1988) analysed real-life dilemmas and found predicted gender differences.
Weakness- Blass (1999) found that 8 out of 9 studies returned no significant gender difference in obedience.
Application- Predict relationships

32
Q

How does culture affect obedience?

A

Individualism-collectivism- Hofstede (2011) identified six dimensions for culture comparison. Individualist values may make people less obedient than those from collectivist culture.
Power distance index (PDI)- High PDI may make people more obedient who are from low PDI cultures

33
Q

Evaluate how culture can affect obedience?

A

Strength- Culture dimensions do correlate with obedience- Australia (low PDI 36/100) 28% fully obedient. Poland (higher PDI 68/100) 90% fully obedient
Weakness- On average US obedience similar to the rest of the world- obedience may be universal- Blass 2012

34
Q

What is social identity theory?

A

The self and group- social identity and self-esteem derive from our ingroup (Tajfel and Turner 1979, 1986)
Social categorisation- people place themselves in groups
Social identification- Individual changes their behaviour and thinking to fit with the group
Social comparison- self esteem is boosted by perceiving ingroup as superior and outgroup as inferior

35
Q

Evaluate social identity theory?

A

Strengths: Boys tried to maximise the difference between in and outgroup profits (Tajfel-1970) and they discriminated over pennies so they may discriminate more if more valuable items were at stake.
Weakness: The study was artificial and doesn’t take into account personality variables
Application: Decrease prejudice by increasing self-esteem

36
Q

What is realistic conflict theory?

A

Intergroup competition- two or more groups competing for the same goal, prejudice and hostility intensify (Sherif- 1966)
Negative interdependence- outgroup hostility and ingroup solidarity arises in contest where only one group can win.
Limited resources- Competition may be for physical resources like food or symbolic resources like power
Positive interdependence and superordinate goals- when groups work together to accomplish a common goal this can reduce prejudice

37
Q

Evaluate realistic conflict theory?

A

Strengths- It is supported by the Robber’s cave experiment. It can be applied to the real world to reduce prejudice with superordinate goals
Weaknesses- Competition may not be necessary. Can’t generalise the Robber’s Cave experiment as it only used boys from a certain demographic in a certain cutlure.
Application: Using superordinate goals to reduce prejudice

38
Q

How does personality affect prejudice?

A

Authoritarian personality- Harsh parenting creates hostility, displaced onto inferior groups.
Allport’s authoritarian personality- ‘black and white’ thinkers, who prefer ‘cognitive closure’
Right wing authoritarianism- See the world as a dangerous place, closed to new experiences (Altemeyer 1988)
Social dominance orientation- Sees the world as a competitive jungle, tough-minded, lacking empathy (Pratto et al. 1994)

39
Q

Evaluate how personality affects prejudice?

A

Strength- RWA and SDO predict generalised prejudice and relate to openness and agreeableness
Weaknesses- RWA and SDO may not be consistent over time. Most participants were anti-asylum seekers, not predicted by RWA and SDO (Louis et al. 2003)
Application- Regulation of social media pages that promote prejudices and, combat certain worldviews

40
Q

How does situation affect prejudice?

A

Social norm- Identification with group norms
Competition with resources- Competition escalates prejudice, may be resource stress between groups

41
Q

Evaluate how situation can affect prejudice?

A

Strength- Akrami et al (2009) changed social norms and so he changed the views.
Weakness- RWA and SDO influence people
Application- Immigration, challenging zero-sum beliefs (Esses et al. 2003)

42
Q

How does culture affect prejudice?

A

Norm intolerance- even tolerant cultures show micro-aggression (Baldwin 2017)
The norm fairness- Fairness linked to collectivist values (Wetherell 1982)

43
Q

Evaluate how does culture affect prejudice

A

Strength- susceptibility to cultural pressure predicted prejudice against black South Africans (Orpen 1971)
Weakness- The participants were only 16 year old school children

44
Q

Classic study: Sherif et al. (1954/61)

A

Aims: Explore how competition can increase outgroup hostility and increase ingroup solidarity
Procedure: Divide the boys into Rattlers and Eagles. Stage 1: group formation. Stage 2: Friction (created through competition). Stage 3: reducing friction
Findings: Prejudice, relations improved following superordinate goals.
Conclusion: Competition increased ingroup favouritism and outgroup hostility. Prejudice not decreased just through contact.

45
Q

Evaluate the classic study

A

Strengths: Valid as he used different methods like tap-recording and observing and it was ecologically valid.
Weaknesses: Didn’t know they were being observed so it was unethical and some of it was unethical like councillors not imposing discipline.
Application- reduce prejudice with superordinate goals

46
Q

Contemporary study : Burger (2009)

A

Aims: Conform previous findings and assess gender roles
Procedure: Replication of Milgram’s study but only going to 150 V and other ethical safety guards
Findings: 70% pressed 150V compared to Milgram’s 82.5%. No gender difference
Conclusion: Milgram’s study is not ear-bound

47
Q

Evaluate the contemporary study

A

Strengths: Strong internal validity- Check for prior knowledge of psychology and it was more ethical
Weaknesses: Poor generalisability as 38% were excluded, thus the sample may have been unrepresentative. It is still not ecologically valid
Application: How authority increases obedience and is used in schools, workplace and prisons

48
Q

Key Question: How can knowledge of social psychology be used to explain the rise of ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement?

A

Facts:
- ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement was started in 2013 after the death of 17-year-old Treyvon Martin, who was followed and then fatally shot by George Zimmerman when he disregarded police orders.
- In 2017, exactly 1147 people were killed by police. 25 of those were African-American but they only make up 13% of the US population. 99% of those didn’t result in a criminal charge.

Psychology:
- Protested- demonstrated by social identity theory by Tajfel and Turner. The police may see themselves as an ingroup and the protesters as an outgroup.
- agency theory- athletes who are taking the knee are in an autonomous state, where they perceive themselves as responsible for their behaviour and feel it is important for them to take action. This could be opposing what authority figures want as they aren’t commanding them, wanting them to be in an agentic state.
- Donald Trump threatened protestors with a military response- irrational and unjust as most of the protests were peaceful- demonstrated by the realistic conflict theory, where prejudice and hostility is created when there is a competition for resources- resources in this case may be media coverage and political goals to try to get people to see what is happening to African American people and what can be put in place to make them feel safe and put in place laws that can protect them.