Social Influence Flashcards
Conformity
A change in a person’s behaviour or opinion as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or group of people.
3 types of conformity
Identification, compliance and internalisation
Compliance
Going with other people’s ideas/to go along with the group to gain their approval or avoid disapproval.
-You publically agree but privately disagree An individual’s change of view is temporary.
likely to occur as a result of NSI
Internalisation
Making the beliefs, values, attitude and behaviour of the group your own (the strongest type of conformity, and often occurs as a result of ISI). An individual’s change of view is permanent
Identification
Short term change of behaviour and beliefs only in the presence of a group (middle level and ISI)
2 explanaion of conformity
Informational Social Influence (ISI) and Normative Social Influence (NSA)
ISI
Informational Social Influence is an explanation of conformity that says we agree with the opinion of the majority because we believe it is correct. We change both our private and public views because we want to be right. ISI is Identification but mainly internalisation.
NSI
Normative Social Influence is an emotional process rather than a cognitive one. NSI is an explanation of conformity that says we want to be accepted, gain social approval and be liked. This person will publicly change their behaviour / view but will privately disagree. NSI is compliance.
Acsh’s study 1951
The lines experiment
5 confederates and 1 participate (all males). The study revealed the degree to which a person’s own opinions are influenced by those of a group. Asch found that people were willing to ignore reality and give an incorrect answer in order to conform to the rest of the group. This is an example of NSI
Factors that effect the levels of conformity in Aschs study
Group size (larger group more conformed) social support (caused conformity to decrease) and task difficulty (harder task more conformity)
Zimbardo’s study 1973
The prison experiment at Stanford Uni
Zimbardo concluded that people quickly conform to social roles, even when the role goes against their moral principles. Furthermore, he concluded that situational factors were largely responsible for the behaviour found, as none of the participants had ever demonstrated these behaviours previously. Zimbardo felt it was all justified despite most feeling it was immoral.
Orlando’s Study
Mock Psychiatric Ward
29 staff members of the hospital volunteered to be ‘patients’ and were held in the ward. Patients started behaving like real patients conforming to the roles given to them. Felt dehumanised afterwards and lost their identity.
Sherif’s study 1935
Moving dot experiment
Sherif used a visual illusion called the autokinetic effect where a stationary dot appeared to move in a dark room. The study demonstrated that individuals confronted with a group norm will often conform to that norm, even if it is obviously incorrect.
Obedience
a form of social influence that involves acting on the orders of an authority figure.
Milgrams study 1973
Electric shock experiments
An authority figure ordered participants to deliver what they believed were dangerous electrical shocks to another person. Obedience was measured by the level of shock that the participant was willing to deliver. While many of the subjects became extremely agitated, distraught, and angry at the experimenter, they nevertheless continued to follow orders all the way to the end.
Situational Variables of Milgrams study
Location- at Yale Uni a prestigious place before moving to a run down office block lost authority and obedience dropped. Uniform- a uniform is a symbol of authority and when scientists weren’t in lab coats obedience dropped. Proximity- the distance between them but also how well they knew each other. Remote proximity caused obedience to drop.
The obedience experiments on nurses (Holfling et Al)
1st study didn’t know the doctor. Delivered double the dosage of astrogen alone. 21/22 obeyed
2nd study did know the doctor. Delivered triple the dosage of valium in a group with discussion allowed. 2/18
Agentic state
A mental state where we feel no personal responsibility for our behaviour because we believe ourselves to be acting for an authority figure as if we are an agent for them
Legitimacy of authority
An explanation of obedience which suggests that we are more likely to obey people who we perceive to have more authority over us. The persons authority is awarded by the social hierarchy
Autonomous state
Means to be independent or free to behave in accordance with their own principles. Therefore taking responsibility for their own actions
Self- image
Once they move into the agentic state worrying about their own image is no longer relevant due to actions no longer being their responsibility. Links to Mai Lai massacre where 500 were killed but accepted no guilt. Was commanding officers fault
Who were the participants in Asch’s study
123 male American undergraduates in groups of 6;
- consisting of 1 true participant and 5 confederates (actors/people in on the experiment)
What were the aims of Asch’s study?
To investigate conformity and majority influence
What was the procedure in Asch’s study?
Participants and confederates were presented with 4 lines; 3 comparison lines and 1 standard line
They asked to state which of three lines was the same length as a stimulus line
The real participant always answered last or second to last
Confederates would give the same incorrect answer for 12 out of 18 trials
Asch observed how often the participant would give the same incorrect answer as the confederates versus the correct answer
What were the statistical findings of Asch’s study?
36.8% conformed
25% never conformed
75% conformed at least once
In a controlled trial, only 1% of responses given by participants were incorrect (which eliminates eyesight/perception as an extraneous variable, thus increasing the validity of the conclusions drawn)
