Social Influence 1

Question 1

Outline and evaluate NSI as an explanation for conformity

Answer 1

•need to be liked to fit social norms
•research support - Asch interviewed ppts= afraid of disappointment
•Individual differences (need for affiliation) cannot be fully explained by 1 general theory of situation pressure

Question 2

Findings of Asch

Answer 2

75% conformed
25% did not

Question 3

Advantages of Aschs studies

Answer 3

Controlled lab conditions, controls extraneous variable, high internal validity, easily replicable

Question 4

Disadvantages to Asch studies

Answer 4

•population validity: gender and cultural bias
•Era dependent
•ethical issues - deceived

Question 5

Findings of Zimbardo

Answer 5

•guards brutal
•prisoner submissive - 1 hunger strike and he was shunned on not hero
•90% prison convo
•threat to prisoners psychological health so stopped after 6 days

Question 6

Minority Influence Consistency

Answer 6

•group need to agree synchronically, all say the same thing and diachronic all say the same thing for long time
•powerful as makes others rethink own views

Question 7

Strengths of Milgram

Answer 7

•Hoffling- nurses, 21/22 obeyed lethal dosage of drug
•Sheridan and King- puppy, 54% men and all women have fatal shock to puppy

Question 8

Strengths of Zimbardo

Answer 8

•Internal validity, control variable, tested for emotional and psychological stability
•Dermott- 90% of convo was about prison life and prisoner 416 thought real prison ran by psychologist, high internal validity

Question 9

Weakness of Zimbardo

Answer 9

•lack of realism, ppts we’re play acting, stereotypes from movies, suppose to act
•exaggerates role, 1/3 brutal, 1/3 were fair and rest actively helped prisoners gave them ciggs
•ethical issue : PFH and RTW

Question 10

Minority Influence Commitment

Answer 10

•group engages in extreme activity to draw attention, some risk to show commitment to cause and not acting from self intersect
•majority pay more attention (augmentation principle) , consider views more seriously

Question 11

Obedience : Dispositional explanations Authoritarian personality

Answer 11

•distinct personality, strict adherence to conventional values, dogmatic to higher status
•harsh to lower status
•measured by f-scale
• developed from strict parenting

Question 12

Obedience: Situational variable Location

Answer 12

•original = 65% obedience
•seedy office = 47.5%
•run down office = less authority as not as prestigie as yale

Question 13

Resistance to social influence: Locus of control

Answer 13

•sense we have to what directs events in our lives
•internal = mostly responsible ,
resist pressure to conform
•external= no control , luck , obey and conform because external factors

Question 14

Obedience: Situational Variables Uniform

Answer 14

instruction by ordinary member of public without uniform = 20% rate
•lab coat and uniform = symbol of authority
•public = no authority

Question 15

Minority Influence : Flexibility

Answer 15

•repeating same arguments is dogmatic and off putting to majority so less likely to result in conversion of view
•adapt points and accept reasonable and valid counter- arguments (compromise)

Question 16

Agentic State

Answer 16

•agent for carrying out another persons wishes, no responsibility
•opposite of autonomous state
•binding factors ignored damaging effects
•Milgrams ppts were agents

Question 17

Conformity Types

Answer 17

Internalisation : genuinely accepts group norms, private and public brief, permanent
•Identification: identity so adapt belief, want to be a part of group and accept attitudes as right
•Compliance: going along for approval, shallow conformity- superficial

Question 18

Social Change steps

Answer 18

1. draw attention
   2.consistency
   3.deeper processing
2. augmentation principle
3. snowball effect
   6.social crypto amnesia

Question 19

conformity explanation

Answer 19

•informational social influence : need to b right, occurs in ambiguous situations, leads to internalisation
•normative social influence: need to b liked, concerns what is normal to fit in, leads to compliance

Question 20

Weakness of Milgram

Answer 20

•Rank and Jacobson - Valium drug (familiar drug),nurses disobeyed (realistic) 2/18 obeyed
•Low internal - Perry shows tapes only 1/2 believed real 2/3 disobedient - demand characteristics
•Ethical issues
•SIT

Question 21

Situational variables : proximity

Answer 21

•teacher + learner in the same room 40% obeyed
•teacher forced learners hand on plate 30% obeyed
• instruction over the phone 20.5% obeyed
• same room so teacher could see and hear learner , rates dropped

Question 22

resistance to social influence : social support

Answer 22

•difficult to go against majority, pressure to conform drops if other people present do not conform
•dissent just has to be present not right (Asch)
• presence increases one’s confidence so conformity decreases
• not long lasting, disobedient peers act as role model

Question 23

Findings of Milgram

Answer 23

all went to 300V
65% went to 450V

Question 24

Legitimacy of Authority

Answer 24

•person in position of social control within a situation eg doctor
•symbols of authority e.g uniform
•may be used for destructive purpose eg hitler
•Milgram - researcher from yale obedience increase

Question 25

evaluate agentic state

Answer 25

•milgram support •rank and jacobson- nurses 16/18 disobeyed

Question 26

evaluate legitimacy of authority

Answer 26

•explains cultural differences: Kilham and Mann, 16% of australian women went to 450, Mantell 85% german ppts •cannot explain all, Rank and Jacobson and Milgram has disobedient ppts, innate obedience greater influence than authority

Question 27

conformity types and explanations A03

Answer 27

•research support for NSI, Asch interviewed ppts some conformed bc they felt self-conscious giving the correct answer and afraid of disapproval, writing answers down conformity fell to 12.5% , private answers = no normative group pressure, some conformity is due to desire not to b rejected •support for ISI, Lucas ppt conformed more often to incorrect answers they were given when maths problem were difficult, easy= know their own minds hard= ambiguous, ppts did not want to be wrong, ISI valid explanation •individual differences in NSI, nAffilators strong need for affiliation more likely to conform, conformity not explained by one general theory

Question 28

Evalvate the authoritarian personality

Answer 28

*Milgram *political bias

Question 29

Situational variable A03

Answer 29

*Research support, Bickman field experiment about picking up litter, more likely to obey men in uniform than tie *Cross cultural replication, Raaijmakers te al, repletastes in other cultures got people to say stressful things to someone desperate for a job, 90% obeyed, when person giving order was not present obedience decreased *Low internal, Holland et al said more likely in variations that they were aware it was fake milgram said they may have worked out the truth, so unclear if findings are genuine

Question 30

Resistance to social influence A03

Answer 30

*Research support from Albretch found that pregnant teens in USA who had a buddy in an 8 week program to resist the pressure to smoke were less likely to smoke than a control group, social support can help real world *Research support form Gamson told ppt to produce evidence that would be used to help an oil company run a smear campaign, found higher levels of resistance than Milgram because they were asked to discuss in groups where 29/33 groups rebelled, undermining legitimacy of authority figure *support for LOC, Holland repeated milgrams study and found 37% of internals did not go to max only 23% of external did not, internals have greater resistance, increases validity *contradictory evidence to the link of LOC and resistance, Twenge analysed data of American LOC over 49 years and found over time people were more resistant but more externals, doesn’t predict this, not a valid explanation of how people resist

Question 31

Minority influence A03

Answer 31

*research support for consistency, Moscovic et al blue green slide showed that consistent minority opinion had greater effect on changing the views of other people than an inconsistent opinion, consistent view is a min requirement for minority trying to influence the majority *research support for deeper processing, Martin presented a message supporting a particular view point and measured pots agreement, one group then heard a minority group agree and one heard a majority view agree, they were then presented with a conflicting view and when their attitudes were measured again people were less likely to change their opinion if they had listened to a minority group than a majority *Artificial tasks, Asch and Moscovici far from real life, in jury cases outcomes are more important even life or death, lack external validity, limited application

Question 32

Social change A03

Answer 32

*research support for normative influences, Nolan tried to change energy use habits by hanging messages that most residence were trying to reduce energy usage every week for a month on the front door in California, control only had a msg to reduce energy, first group decreased energy more, conformity can lead to social change through NSI so it’s a valid explanation *minority influence explains change, Nemeth said social change is due to type of thinking that minorities inspire, divergent thinking is broad so search for info to weigh up options, leads to better decisions and more creative solutions, dissenting minorities are valuable as stimulate new ideas majorities can’t * role of deeper processing, Mackie says majority influence may create deeper processing if you don’t share their views, like to believe people share the same belief as us but when majority is different we have to think long and hard about their arguments, central element has been challenged so doubts validity