Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology Flash Cards > Social Influance > Flashcards

Social Influance Flashcards

1
Q

What are the three types of conformity?

A

Compliance
Internalisation
Identification

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

What is the first type of conformity ?

A

Compliance

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

What is compliance ?

A

When an individual changes their behaviour to fit in with the group so that the group see them as normal they don’t agree with the groups behaviour but they go along with it in public and discard the behaviour/belief in private.

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

Compliance is the most ______ form of social influence ?

A

Temporary

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

What explanation of social influence best describes compliance?

A

Normative social influence

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

What is the second type of conformity ?

A

Internalisation

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

What is internalisation ?

A

The behaviour or beliefs of the majority/group is accepted by the individual and becomes an internal part of their own belief system so they conform publicly and privately because it’s part of their behaviour/beliefs

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

Internalisation is the most _____ of social influence

A

Permanent

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

What explanation for conformity best explains internalisation ?

A

Informational social influence

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

What is the third type of conformity?

A

Identification

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

What is identification ?

A

Where an individual behaviour changes to fit specific identity of Image this is done to in order to be seen as a member of the group whose values they don’t believe in they still do it to fit and and seem desirable to the group

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

What explanation (S) best explain identification ?

A

Both normative and informational social influence support this type

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

What are the two explanations for conformity ?

A

Normative social influence and informational social influence.

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

What is normative social influence as an explanation for conformity?

A

We conform because we want to actively appear normal and not disrupt group harmony, conforming to avoid social dissaproval

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

What is informational social influence as an explanation for conformity?

A

We conform because we want to be correct it is the result of desiring to be correct this is done by the individual looming to the group as a source of information

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

Evaluation - positive of normative social influence?

A

+ Research support - Asch found that 33% percent of participants conformed to an obvious wrong answer given by the other 7 confederates however Asch did a variation where the participants were allowed to write their answers in private after discussing with the group conformity dropped to 12.5% so agreed to appear normal to the group but when allowed to answer privately conformity dropped this supports normative social influence and compliance.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Evaluation - positive of informational social influence.

A

Research support - conformity increase when the line task was made more difficult suggesting the participants did real,y look to the group for the correct answer supporting informational social influence

+ Jenness- beans in a jar , when participants were Givin a second try at estimating the beans in a jar they changed their answer closer to the group estimate.

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

Evaluation- Why are these explanations for conformity flawed ?

A
  • they reply on inference it’s impossible to know a person reason for conforming , it relies on observations and inferring what is causing the conformity but impossible to actually know someone’s internal processes
  • the studies lack ecological validity we don’t know how the participants would actually react when faced with a real world situation where they could conform they may actually conform because they are in a experimental environment and they feel it’s what they are supposed to do - demand characteristics
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Study for variables affecting conformity ?

A

Asch variations

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

When and where did Aschs experiment take place ?

A

In 1951 in the US

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Aim of aschs experiment?

A

To discover if the participants will conform to the group/majority when a wrong answer is given even if the correct answer is obvious - to see will people conform to an obvious wrong answer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What was the type and sample number of Aschs experiment?

A

Asch used a volunteer sample of 123 male US citizens.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What was Aschs procedure ?

A

One participant was unknowingly put in a room with 7 confederates (in on the experiment but participants thought the other members where volunteers) the whole group was asked a simple line judging task - given a line and asked which one of the given comparison lines are the same as the original line the correct answer was clear but the confederate on 12/18 trials would give the same wrong answer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What were Aschs findings ?

A

Asch found that on 33% of the trials conformity occurred and that 75% of the participants conformed at least once

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Aschs conclusion ?

A

The result led Asch to conclude that people can and will conform to an easy wrong answer.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Asch performed variations of this study what are his main 4 variations?

A
  • task difficulty
  • group size
  • answers in private
  • unamity of the majoritity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Asch variations - task difficulty and what does it support ?

A

Asch made the task more difficult by putting the lines closer together, conformity did in fact increase this supports informational social influence - looked to the group for answers in hope of being correct

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Asch variations - group size and what does it support ?

A

also found that conformity could be affected by the size of the group. The was more conformity with three confederates at 32% then at 2 confederates 12.5% and with only one other confederate it dropped to 3% conformity - supports normative social influence because only conforming when the is a group to conform to and informational because when the was no group to look for to correct answers the participants gave their own answer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Asch variations - answers in private and what does it support ?

A

The levels of conformity significantly dropped when participants when allowed to write down their answer in private to 12.5% this supports Normative social influence not disagreeing publicly as to not upset group dynamic but disagreeing in Private

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Asch variations - unanimity of the majority and what does it support ?

A

One of the 7 confederates broke from the group to give the correct answer each time, conformity dropped to 5% supports normative social influence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Evaluation of Asch - 2 positives of Aschs experiment ?

A

+ highly controlled and reliable - the experimental design was a lab design meaning all of the independent variables were controlled including the confederates being the same means it’s more valid and reliable
+ face validity- Asch also carried out a control group and found that 711/720 of the answers were correct when the answer is obvious allows for the wrong answers the participants gave to be put down to conformity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Evaluation of Asch - 2 negatives of Aschs experiment ?

A
  • lacks temporal validity - Aschs experiments were conducted in the 1950s this time is sometimes known as the McCarthy era = a very anti communist mindset and high conformist times,it isn’t really applicable to nowadays Perrin and spencer conducted the a very similar experiment in the 19080s in the uk found on,y one conformity in 1/396
  • lacks ecological validity- lab experiment means the conditions were not realistic to real life furthermore the may of been participant suspicion meaning they didn’t think it was real so conformed to help out the experiment also the behaviour may of just been the individuals independent behaviour they may have thought the wrong answer was correct
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

What is conformity to social roles and who investigated them ?

A

Behaviours that are expected of an individual who occupies a given social position or status
Zimbardo investigated conformity to social roles.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

When and where and what was a zimbardos experiment.

A

Zimbardo conducted the Stanford prison experiment at Stanford University in America in 1973

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

What was the aim of Zimbardos Stanford prison experiment (1973)

A

To find out if participants would conform to a new social role, in the prison given a uniform + role to what extent they would conform - role play

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

What was Zimbardos sample ?

A

He used a sample of 24 US male university students

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

What was the procedure and planned length of Zimbardos Stanford prison experiment?

A

24 male participants were allocated randomly to either a prisoner or guard role to play in a Mock prison situation. The participants were placed in this mock prison at standard university the prisoners being arrested at home and taken to the mock prison and given prison uniforms and allocated an ID number the guards were givin a smock uniform and reflective sunglasses and refereed to prisoners only by number the study was planned to last for 2 weeks.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

What where the findings/results of Zimbardos Stanford prison experiment?

A

The experiment had to be stopped easily after only 6 days - 1 in 3 guards became aggressive and sadistic one even wanted to do more hours unpayed. The prisoners has actual rebellions and looked as though they took the prison as real at times and it looked like the participants has forgotten it was a psychological experiment 5 prisoners has to be realised early because of extreme reactions like rage and anxiety after 2 days .

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

What did Zimbardo conclude?

A

Zimbardo concluded that people will conform to social roles if given the right cues showing people can be made to conform to their social role and new ones - people descent into tyranny when they conform unthinkingly to their social roles prescribed by their authority without the need for specific orders - gourds behaviour was said to be a natural consequence of being allocated the role of guard and the power they were givin over people

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

Evaluation of Stanford prison experiment - 2 positives ?

A

+ real world applications - has helped reform prisons showed how bad it is when both guards and prisoners are dehumanised to each other and that guard abuse was made more likely by situational factors.
+ hours of footage- the whole experiment was pretty much recorded so the is lots of footage this is observational data not just snapshots of behaviour can be rewatched and inferred from

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

Evaluation of Stanford prison experiment - 2 negatives ?

A
  • ethical implications the participants has a severe emotional response and possible psychological strain or trauma the prisoners where also discouraged and made to feel like they couldn’t leave during her study zimbardo didn’t hold a debrief till several years later
  • demand characteristics and investigator effects - the behaviour may of not be down the the compelling prison environment rather it was in response to guessing what/how the experiment wanted them to behave and behaved that way zimbardo also acted as a superintendent and it’s clear from the records of the experiments that he actively influenced the guards to be aggressive they were just acting the way they had been told by the experimenter their conformity was not automatic
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

What is obedience to authority and who studied it ?

A

Obedience refers to the type of social influence where somebody acts in response to an directed order from a figure or situation with perceived authority and act in a way that they wouldn’t of without the order

  • Milgram
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

What was milgrams experiment and what year did happen ?

A

Milgrams experiment is known as - Milgrams shock experiment and it happened in 1963

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

Aim of milgrams shock experiment 1963?

A

After the atrocities of WW2 milgram wanted to see how ordinary people who have become soliders committed atrocities beyond their morals because of blind obedience to authority wanted to see if ordinary American citizens would obey beyond their morals to a person with higher status.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

Milgram 1963 sample ?

A

40 mentally stable and ordinary USA male citizens

46
Q

Procedure of Milgrams shock experiment 1963 -

A

studied one individual participant at a time the participants were introduced to two confederates the experimenter and a confederate man who was introduced as another volunteer the participants believed the study was on how punishment effects learning the participant and confederate drew roles out of a hat to either be a learner or teacher with it being rigged that the participant also drew teacher. The leaner was tested on his ability to remember word pairs and evertine the learner got something wrong the participant was told to shock the learner with the electric shocks going up each time in intivals of 15v the max was 450v and it was labelled with extreme danger and warning signs up until 300 the learner was silent and then at 300 the learner screamed and banged on the wall and did the same at 315 v after that the leaner become silent if the teacher asked to stop the experimenter would give a serious of prompts to make them continue like “ you have no choice you must go on”

47
Q

Findings of milgrams shock experiment 1963?

A

Every participant went up to 300 volts and only 4 participants stopped then a further 65% went all the way up to 400 volts 26/40

48
Q

What did his shock experiment leave miligram to conclude - Milgram 1963?

A

When give firm order by a figure of perceived authority people will obey beyond their morals

49
Q

Milgram conduced variations of his shock experiment what are the 4 main ones? (Pulp)

A
  • proximity to both victim
  • location
  • uniform
  • presence of allies
50
Q

Milgrams variations 1963 - proximity ?

A
  • proximity to authority, when the experimenter gave orders over the phone obedience to 450v was only 21%
  • proximity of victim - when forced to make the learner touch electric shock plate obedience was 40%
51
Q

Milgrams variations 1963 - location ?

A

When Milgram conducted the same experiment in a run down office instead of Yale - obedience dropped to 20%

52
Q

Milgrams variations 1963 - presence of allies ?

A

When the other two teachers rebelled obedience dropped to 10% when they obeyed instead obedience rose to 92.5%

53
Q

Evaluation of Milgram - 2 positives ?

A

+ real world applications - helps us to understand extreme obedience and what can be done to prevent situations of following blind authority
+ highly controlled - lab experiments and used the same learner and voice recording all variables were controlled and variations were tested to see what caused extreme obdience

54
Q

Evaluation of Milgram - 2 negatives ?

A

X unethical - had ethical implications and it was found that the experimenter on average would use more then 4 verbal prods once as much as 26 was used meaning that the right to withdraw wasn’t as accessible as it should be forcing participants who didn’t want to to go on the was also the use of deception as the participants believed they were shocking a real person this lead to extreme psychological trauma and stress 3 participants even had uncontrollable seizures
X lacks validity, population validity- only males and ecological validity - highly unlikely as the participants would doubt reality of situation so would conform knowing they are not harming anyone

55
Q

An example of research support for Milgram and how it supports Milgram study ?

A

Hofling studied obedience in real life situation - in a hospital 21/22 nurses severely broke ruled because of an unknown doctor told them to - shows that milgrams study didn’t lack ecological validity beaucse extreme obedience against morals happened even in a field study

56
Q

What are the two main situational explanations for obedience?

A
  1. Legitimacy of authority
  2. Agentic state
57
Q

Define legitimacy of authority as an situational explanation of obedience?

A
  • legitimacy of authority is a situational explanation for obedience
  • we obey because the authority giving us orders is higher on the social hierarchy
  • we believe the authority’s legitimacy because they are supported by institutional framework, features of the authority that’s supported by something that proves their position in the hierarchy
  • Milgram said these were situ all things like uniform or location
58
Q

Example of institutional framework?

A

A doctor in a white lab coat telling a person what to do in a hospital - backs up their authority and hierarchy where as if same doctor was dressed in ordinary clothes and gave someone orders in the street not likely to obey

59
Q

Research support for legitimacy of authority?

A

Milligrams variations - Uniform- when the experimenter didn’t wear uniform (white lab coat) the obedience to maximum authority dropped from 65% to 20% - supports the idea of institutional framework and that gives authority and a legitimate authority means we are more likely to obey in a situation

60
Q

Define agentic state as a situational explanation of obedience?

A
  • obey orders (especially wrong actions) because the individual is in a mindset where they don’t feel personally responsible or to blame for our own actions because they see themselves as an agent carrying out someone else’s wishes
  • the responsibility is therefore attributed to the authority this process of shifting responsibility is called the agentic shift and it is motivated because of the the need for a positive self image if the actions and consequences won’t be there’s but the person who gave them orders
  • able to obey to extreme lengths because moral strain is reduced by binding factors guilt is not felt instead it’s transferred
61
Q

What are binding factors and example ?

A

Factors that operate to maintain out obedience when moral stain is felt, guilt is removed by providing an excuse and shifting responsibility away from ourselves to the situation and the authority
- Milgram participants justify actions by shifting blame to the fact that the leaner gave consent to the experiment so shocking him is ok one participant justified their actions by saying “I was just following orders”

62
Q

Research support for agentic state ?

A

Milgrams varations - proximity of victim when the victim was in close proximity obedience dropped to 40% and then to 30% when the participant was forced to place the participants hand on the shock plate - shows that being nearer to the victim meant that moral strain couldn’t be ignored and it was harder to shift the responsibility to the experimenter when they could see the leaner

63
Q

Evaluation of situational explanations for obedience - two negatives ?

A
  • ignores dispositional factors and only looks at the situation when obedience may be down to a persons disposition or it may be a combination of both so it’s reductionist because it ignores other explanations Milgram - while 65% obeyed it can’t explain why 35% in the same situation disobeyed it must be down to individual differences
  • deterministic - excuses moral responsibility by suggesting that people only commit atrocities that are clearly wrong because they are obeying a authority or in the agentic state.
64
Q

What does dispositional means - in terms of explanations for obedience?

A

It means something about and or specific to a persons nature that makes them obey more or less meaning it stays with the person from situation to situation it’s because of their personality

65
Q

What is the dispositional explanation for obedience?

A

Having an authoritarian personality

66
Q

What is an authoritarian personality?

A

A personality type that makes someone more likely to obey - because they have extram respect for authority and are obedient to those who they perceive to have powers over them

67
Q

Who created came up with the authoritarian personality type and how was it tested for ?

A

Adorno and he came up with the F scale

68
Q

What is the F Scale ?

A

The F scale is a personality test that tested different components that make up an individual who is obedient e.g conservatives and authoritarian a way of measuring how right wing someone was or F = fascist

69
Q

Adorno outlined 3 characteristics of an authoritarian personality what are they
Extra - how what characteristics did the the right wing authoritarian personality refine ?

A
  • admire strength and power -
  • highly aware of hierarchy
  • look down on people with low status
  • conventionalism, adherence to norms and values no question just obey to social norms
  • authoritarian aggression - aggressive feelings towards people who violate these norms
  • authoritarian submission - uncritical submission to legitimate authorities
70
Q

What kind of upbringing would someone with an authoritarian personality had and how would they gain a authoritarian personality ?

A

A Strict upbringing and parents who use physical punishments they grow up in an authoritarian environment/way and learn the same authoritarian attitudes though processes of learning and imitation

71
Q

name key reaseach study for authoritarian personality ?

A

Elms and Milgram

72
Q

What was elms and Milgram study on the authoritarian personality ?

A

Used 20 obedient participants from his original shock experiment and 20 Disobedients and made each group take the F scale test and were asked open end questions on their attitudes and childhood experiences.

73
Q

Evaluation - How did elms and Milgrams study support the authoritarian personality as a dispositional explanation for obedience ?

A

The obedient group of participants had high F scores so implies the presence of an authoritarian personality. Milgram - Those who obeyed the experimenter has authoritarian personality so …. Supports the authoritarian personality as an explanation to being more obedient

74
Q

Evaluation - Evidence that Elms and Milgram found that doesn’t support the authoritarian personality explanation?

A

They found no link between F scores and relationship with parents so explanation of development could be flawed

75
Q

Evaluation of the authoritarian personality as an explanation for obedience - 2 positive points ?

A

+ Explains individual differences in obedience, Milgram found only 65% obedience if situational explanations were correct, then conformity would be 100% but it wasn’t meaning individual differences like the authoritarian personality.
+ research support - Elms and Milgram participants, who were particularly obedient in the shock experiment had higher F scores and authoritarian personality’s

76
Q

Evaluation of the authoritarian personality as an explanation for obedience - 2 negative points ?

A
  • correlation doesn’t equal causation - meaning the link between authoritarian personality and obedience could just be correlational not causational, just because the us a link doesn’t necessarily mean one caused the other the could be a third factor - one study found that people with low levels of education tend to be both authoritarian and obedient
  • situational variables have higher impact on obedience- milgarm said that in his study the biggest predictors of behaviour were the situational factors e.g massive fluctuations - when allies disobeyed obedience dropped to 10% but when they obeyed it rose to 92.5%
77
Q

What are the two main explanations for resistance to social influence?

A
  • social support
  • locus of control
78
Q

Define social support as an explanation of resistance to social influence ?

A
  • Social support is a situational explanation as to why we are more able to resist to conformity and obedience
  • if others are willing to or rebelling with us creating a supportive network so the responsibility and consequences are divided between more people and resistance is easier
79
Q

Evaluation 2 cases of research that support social support as an explanation for resistance to social influence ?

A

+ research support
1. Asch variations found that conformity dropped to from 33% to 5% when a confederate gave the right answer = ally for right answer participant conformity to the group dropped.
2. Milgram found obedience dropped to 10% when the were two other teachers who rebelled

80
Q

Evaluation - negative of social support as an explanation for resistance to social influence

A
  • Only situational doesn’t take into account dispositional factors
    Individual factors as to why people don’t obey
81
Q

Define locus of control as an explanation of resistance to social influence ?

A

Locus of control is a dispositional explanation (personality related) to resistance to social influence
The are two types of locus of control internal and external locusus of control.
A. internal locus of control - people with internal locus of control believe their actions are there own and they are personally responsible for their behaviour they believe their life outcome and experiences are dependent on themselves and that their own success.
B. external locus of control - people with external locus of control see their experiences as out of their own control and that their behaviour is influenced by other things they are more likely to believe in luck and fate.
Those with an internal locus of control are more likely to resist social influence.

82
Q

Why are people with internal locuses of control more able to resist social influence?

A

Responsibility for behaviour and actions is all on them - they have more independent behaviour and are less likely to be influenced by others

83
Q

Evaluation - research support for locus of control ?

A

Avtgis - conducted a meta analysis of studies into the real between locus of control and resistance and found a strong positive correlation between high external locus of control and how easily they were influenced/conformed

84
Q

Evaluation of locus of control - negative ?

A

Dispositional explanation - ignores situational factors

85
Q

Minority influence - why do minority’s find it harder to influence.

A

Minority’s views/beliefs are not established social norms and they have significant less power as the majoritys beliefs are different to their belief meaning they can’t use normative social influence because the belief is not a social norm so in order for a minority to influence they need to influence people though the use informational social influence e.g internalisation they need to influence peoples actual beliefs systems.

86
Q

In order to be influential minorities need to adopt a particular behaviour system made up of three characteristics what are they ?

A
  • consistency
  • commitment
  • flexibility
87
Q

What is consistency in realation to minority social influence?

A

The minority must stick to their behaviour and values and should be continuously expressing the views they must not be hypocritical and should consistently stick to the views they set

88
Q

What is commitment in realation to minority social influence?

A

The minority must dedicate themselves and their lives to belief and must be willing to make sacrifices for the cause as it’s hard to dismiss them when they show unwavering commitment and compromise themselves for the sake of their cause

89
Q

What is flexibility in realation to minority social influence?

A

Minority’s are typically powerless over the majority meaning they can’t make high demands so they need to take a softer approach to influencing them the minority must be willing to compromise and be reasonable, change takes time and thus way they will be seen as pragmatic NOT dogmatic which is a bad thing

90
Q

Name and date of Key study for minority social influence and consistency ?

A

Moscovici 1969

91
Q

What was moscovcis 1969 procedure and findings ?

A

He used a colour perception test, confederates were minority in the group and tried to influence the rest of the group to change their mind in what coulor the card was used an independent groups design the first condition involved the confederate calling the blue card green in every trial 36/36 and the second condition involved the confederate only saying the card was green 24/36 times he found in the first condition the majority gave green as an answer 8% of the time and in the second condition the majority gave green as an answer 1.25% of the time meaning a consistent minority has more influence

92
Q

Evaluation - positive of moscovicis study for minority social influence

A

+ real world application - minority groups groups who want to create influence, consistency must be present minority influence exposes people to different information must be consistent

93
Q

Evaluation - negative of moscovicis study for minority social influence

A

Low validity- minorities, usually have lower social status and therefore less influence this controlled study doesn’t show the real lengths minorities will have to go to. It is not just being consistent.

94
Q

Evaluation - research that support’s flexibility ?

A

Nemeth and brilmayer - found that jurors were more likely to be influenced by a confederate juror who was willing to compromise over the level of compensation the victim was given in the first condition the confederate was not willing to compromise and strongly stuck to his original figure in the second condition the confederate was willing to compromise on his original figure

95
Q

Evaluation - what was the conclusion of nemeth and brilmayers research give both a both positive and negative ?

A

When minorities are flexible with their view and willing to make a pragmatic compromise their influence improves - however nemeth and brilmayer discovered that the confederate had to compromise late in the negotiation or it would be seen as weakness

96
Q

Why do minority’s struggle to influence social change and what must they try to do to make head way ?

A

The minority’s view is not an established norm so they must conceive the majority though informational social influence specifically internalisation meaning they have to get people to actually take the veiw into their personal beliefs and fully believe in what they minority are trying to achieve

97
Q

What are the three/four parts of how minoritys influence the majority on social change

A
  1. Draw attention to the issue - then a secondly Create a cognitive conflict between the majority’s veiw and theirs
  2. Use their characteristic in their behaviour system - consistency commitment and flexibility
  3. Snowball effect to social change
98
Q

What is the first and second thing a minority must do when they are trying to make a social change?

A

They must first draw attention to their issue as it’s not an established social norm of the majority this means that the will be a conflict created between the established norm and their veiw, the majority may be motivated to reduce this conflict so may think more deeply on the issue and consider it but they need convincing….

99
Q

What do the the minority do after the attention has been drawn to the issue and a conflict has been created ?

A

The minority must convice the majority of their side of the argument they must show three specific characteristics in their position- consistency, commitment and flexibility by being all three of these things the minority convinces some poeple of their position

100
Q

What is the argumentation principle?

A

If the minority are willing to suffer + sacrifice for their beliefs they are taken more seriously by others

101
Q

What is the effect of the minority becoming the majority called ?

A

Snowball effect

102
Q

How does the snowball effect work ?

A

The minority at first have a small effect by just convinceing a certain portion of people of their beliefs but once they have convinced a small portion of people these people do the same so on and so forth and many people start to take the minority’s veiw into their beliefs system the influence of the minority grows exponentially and more and more will consider the issue until a tipping point is reached at which point a wide scale change happens and the minority veiw becomes a majority view this is called the snowball effect because it’s like a snowball making it’s way up a hill and getting bigger and bigger unil it’s gets the the brow of the hill and it then rolls without force getting bigger and bigger.

103
Q

What happens after the snowball effect ?

A

Once the snowball effect occurs the minority is now the majority meaning majority influence can be used and social change for the rest of society can occur though normative social influence the veiw becomes a wide spread social norm that people will conform to because they want to appear normal and neutral in society

104
Q

How can the minority now majority use obedience further thus social change ?

A

In the new majority most people will agree on the belief and those who don’t are now in the minority, the majority see the issue as one of importance and influence law makers to make or change laws and now the veiw has a legitimate authority social change has fully occurred

105
Q

Example of social change ?

A

Suffragettes

106
Q

What are group norms and how does it effect our conformity - majority influence

A

Group norms are what we perceive to be a norm and when change our behavioural choices based on what we believe others do.

107
Q

What are the two types of norms ?

A

Perceived and actual norm

108
Q

The is a ___ between the perceived and actual norm?

A

Gap

109
Q

What is this gap between perceived and actual norm called and give an example of this gasp what consequences this could cause ?

A

Misconception- widespread e.g frequency of alcohol, consumed by peers is misperceived so drink more and engage in risky behaviour that is justified because it’s a social norm

110
Q

Majority influence- How our these dangerous misconceptions combated and how does this cause social change ?

A

Though perception correction strategies - shows the actual norm and mortivate people to modify their behaviour to fit the safe social norm causing a social change of behaviour

Psychology Flash Cards (12 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions