social influence

Question 1

What are the SITUATIONAL explanations of obedience?

Answer 1

-Agentic state
-Autonomous state
-legitimate authority

Question 2

What are the DISPOSITIONAL explanations of obedience?

Answer 2

-Authouritarian personality
-Adorno et al
-F-scale

Question 3

What is the legitimate authority?

Answer 3

-Legitimacy=justified power due to position in social hierarchy
-The legitimate authority is an authority figure that we are socialised to obey because they are higher up in the social hierarchy
-This is heightened when the authority has expertise and credentials we respect so we are more likely to become agents of a legitimate authority

Question 4

Strength of the legitimate authority explanation of obedience
Hint.. cultural differences

Answer 4

-It explains cultural differences
Kilham and Mann (1974) replicated Milgram’s procedure in Australia and found that only 16% went all the way to top of the voltage scale. However, Mantell (1971) found 85% of German participants went to the end. Explain how this may be due to cultural differences towards authority figures

Question 5

weakness of legitimate authority explanation

Answer 5

ignores individual variables and personality. this may mean that some are less likely to obey than others

Question 6

research support for legitimate authority explanation (strength)

Answer 6

uniform:
Uniform is strong symbol of legitimate authority. experimenter wears casual clothes(ordinary member of public seemingly to be) rather than a lab coat from original exp. obedience=20%
original obedience=65%

Question 7

what is:
-the agentic state?
-autonomous state?
-agentic shift?

Answer 7

-Agent does not take responsibility for their actions and believes they are acting on behalf of an authority
-in control and takes personal responsibility for their actions=less likely to obey
-giving up free will in autonomy to an authority figure(shifting the responsibility(consequences) of their actions the authority figure

Question 8

What is the agency theory?

Answer 8

Agents experience anxiety and feel powerless to disobey.
They deal with this by shifting the responsibility(consequences) of their actions the authority figure
‘Moral strain’ is reduced by binding factors - aspects of the situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effects of obeying e.g blaming the victim.

Question 9

strength of agentic state theory
(Research support_milgram)

Answer 9

Most of Milgram’s participants experienced distress when following researcher’s orders= moral strain(when following destructive orders of a legitimate authority)
When the experimenter responded that they were responsible, the teacher often continued giving shocks without any further protest= they adopted agentic state
* they were more likely to obey when they were **further away from the learner **so they could stay in the agentic state and did not have to face the consequences of their actions

Question 10

weakness of agentic state theory

Answer 10

-Limited explanation bc…
- It does not take dispositional factors into account
-Some of Milgram’s participants did not go all the way to 450 volts.

Question 11

What is the authoritarian personality?

Answer 11

type of personality that is more susceptible to obeying people of authority
They have extreme respect to an authority and obedience to it. They have an inflexible outlook on the world(black and white)
–Extreme respect to people of authority and they show contempt (viewing one as worthless) to people of inferior status.

Question 12

Where does the authoritarian personality originate from?
(Psychodynamic explanation—-> displacement=Freud)

Answer 12

-harsh parenting
-conditional love(love of parent depends on how child behaves)
-creates hostility and resentments towards parents onto child, which cannot be expressed directly onto parents because of fear of punishment. Displaced onto others perceived as weaker((by) scapegoating)

Question 13

what does Adorno et al’s research measure

Answer 13

-Adorno believed that a high level of obedience was a pathological condition
-developed the F-scale which measures authoritarian personality and tendency towards fascism/potential for fascism (fascism is extreme right wing ideology-dictatorship support)

Question 14

procedure and findings of Adorno et al’s research

Answer 14

procedure–studied over 2000 white Americans and their unconscious attitudes towards other ethnic groups, and gave statements varying in intensity relatedto fascism as a measurement —–
those who scored high on F-scale:
+identified with the strong and were contemptuous of the weak(saw the weak as worthless). +conscious of status
+extreme respect for those of higher status
+black and white thinking- fixed stereotypes about other social groups
STRONG POSITIVE CORRELATION BETWEEN AUTHORITARIANISM AND PREJUDICE

Question 15

define authoritarianism

Answer 15

overly respectful of an authority

Question 16

strength of dispositional explanation(AP theory) of obedience

Answer 16

-Research support
-Milgram and Elms–> interviewed 20 participants from Milgram’s original study that went to 450 v.
They scored higher on the F-scale than a control group of 20 participants that did not go up to 450v. suggests that high levels of authoritarianism is linked to obedience
counter point—–
complex link between authoritarianism and obedience, Those who went to 450v had very different characteristics to authoritarians e.g. they did not glorify their fathers, or have a harsh childhood. They were very different to authoritarians. authoritarianism may not be a USEFUL predictor of obedience.

Question 17

weaknesses of dispositional explanation of obedience

Answer 17

-AP cannot explain the obedience of an entire population, such as Germans during the Nazi regime.
There would be differences in personalities within such a large group. unlikely for all of them to possess AP.
Social identity theory is a better explanation- they identified with the anti-semetic Nazi state, and scapegoated the ‘outgroup’ of Jews.
-Flawed F-scale
response bias- individual gets a high score on F-scale by agreeing with every item(cos they cant be asked) they are not thinking about their responses properly. F-scale lacks internal validity because it is not accurately measuring authoritarianism therefore authoritarian personality is not a valid explanation of obedience

Question 18

define social roles

Answer 18

-the parts people play as members of a specific social group
* - conforming to social roles would involve behaving in the way you would deem as appropriate for that role

Question 19

why did zimbardo carry out the stanford prison experiment?

Answer 19

-investigated conformity to social roles.
Do prison guards behave brutally and conform to this behaviour because they have sadistic personalities (dispositional explanation)
or is it the situation that creates such behaviour (situational explanation)?

Question 20

procedure and findings of stanford prison experiment

Answer 20

-‘Mock prison’ set up in the basement of Stanford university.
-Advert asked for male volunteers.
-24 most ‘psychologically healthy’ selected.
-Participants randomly allocated to role of ‘prisoner’ or ‘guard’.
‘Mock prison’ set up in the basement of Stanford university.
-Prisoners - unexpectedly arrested at home, deloused, given a uniform and number.
-Guards - given uniforms, clubs, whistles & reflective sunglasses.
-Prisoners can only be referred to by number.
-Prisoners have rules to follow.
-Guards enforce the rules.
-Zimbardo took the role of prison superintendent(prison manager- he gave the gaurds rules on how to treat prisoners)
findings
Some guards became increasingly tyrannical
Within 2 days, the prisoners rebelled
The guards retaliated with harsher and treatment - night time headcounts and punishments.
Prisoners became subdued, depressed and anxious.
3 prisoners were released in four days. some prisoners forgot that it was an experiment. Not all gaurds were sadistic, some were kind and gave prisoners food, some were tough but not extreme.
One prisoner went on hunger strike.
The guards attempted to force feed him. Instead of being considered a hero, he was shunned by the other prisoners.
Research was planned for 14 days but had to be stopped after 6 days.

Question 21

conclusion of stanford prison expetriment

Answer 21

• The guards with the most sadistic behaviour conformed the most to their social roles
  -Social roles have a strong influence on behaviour – brutal guards, submissive prisoners.
  -social roles are easily adopted e.g. zimbardo was so immersed in his role as superintendent that it took another researcher’s alert to stop the experiment
  -The simulation revealed the power of the situation to influence people’s behaviour.(shows how situational factors strongly influence people’s behaviour)

Question 22

strengths of zimbardo’s prison experiment

Answer 22

-high level of control over variables. Participants were randomly assigned to roles of guard or prisoner. reduces individual differences/participant variables. =high internal validity

Question 23

weaknesses of zimbardo’s prison experiment

Answer 23

-ethical issues. The prisoners were deceived because they didn’t know they were going to be arrested which may have lead to psychological harm. Some prisoners displayed disorganised thoughts and mental trauma during the 6 day experiment
-dispositional factors may also influence the extent to which a person conforms to social roles. the behaviours of guards varied significantly-some were sadistic whereas others were kind. situational factors may not be the only factor influencing conformity to social roles.
-contradictory research by Reicher and Haslam. eplicated Zimbardo’s research by randomly assigning 15 men to the role of prisoner or guard. In this replication, the participants did not conform to their social roles automatically.
For example, the guards did not impose their authority; the prisoners identified as a group to challenge the guard’s authority, which resulted in a shift of power and a collapse of the prison system.

Question 24

procedure of Milgram’s experiment

Answer 24

-40 white american male volunteers obtained via advertising
-participants=teacher
experimenter and learner confederates
experimenter and teacher in same room. learner in diff room so teacher cannot see learner. teacher gives learner an electric shock each time learner makes a mistake on a memory task
shocks range from 15v-450v and increase each time learner makes a mistake
if teacher does not want to continue, they are prompted by the experimenter to go on and continue giving shocks
the shocks weren’t real but teacher participant did not know that. Screams and shouting were pre-recorderd, again, not real :)

Question 25

why did Milgram conduct a study on obedience?

Answer 25

-To what extent do people obey an authority figure
-why did many germans and nazis obey hitler’s cruel orders which lead to the death of many Jews?

Question 26

Findings and conclusion of Milgram’s experiment

Answer 26

-65% went to 450v
-100% went to 300v
-many pps displayed physical signs of stress ie. sweating, fidgeting, nervous laughing
-before experiment psychology students predicted 3% would go to 450v
conclusion- they were debriefed after experiment and ensured their behaviour was normal
situational factors made germans and nazis obey hitler’s orders.

Question 27

weaknesses of milgram experiment

Answer 27

-Ethical issues-use of deception-deceived participants into thinking electric shocks were real Psychological harm of participants. breached right to withdraw because participants were forced to continue by experimenter
-methodological issues-
lacks internal validity(due to demand characteristics)—many of Milgram’s pps did not believe the shocks were real(it was an experiment after all….) they figured out the shocks were fake and simply went along with it
lacks ecological validity–Milgram’s research is too artificial and doesn’t reflect obedience in the real world.
lacks population validity

Question 28

strength of Milgram experiment

Answer 28

laboratory experiment
establish cause and effect relationship

Question 29

what are the SITUATIONAL VARIABLES that explain obedience and what are they based on?

Answer 29

-proximity
-uniform
-Location
===Milgram’s variations of his original experiment

Question 30

situational variables are…

Answer 30

external circumstances

Question 31

explain milgarm’s variations for proximity, location and uniform

Answer 31

original obedience(to 450v)= 65%
location:
Prestige of Yale University gave the setting more credibility and legitimacy than run-down office.
Obedience to 450v= 47.5% in run-down office building.
proximity:
Proximity means Teacher cannot psychologically distance self from consequences of actions. teacher and learner in same room. obedience=40% down from 65%

uniform:
Uniform is strong symbol of legitimate authority. experimenter wears casual clothes(ordinary member of public seemingly to be) rather than a lab coat from original exp. obedience=20%

Question 32

strengths of situational variables of obedience

Answer 32

• Research support by Bickman
  conducted a field experiment. confederates were dressed as a guard, a milkman or a jacket and tie.They asked passers by to pick up litter or give a coin for a meter.
  Participants were twice as likely to obey the confederate dressed as a guard than the one with jacket and tie.
  This supports the uniform aspect of the situational explanation of obedience.
  -research is scientific. Milgram systematically altered one variable a ta a time in each of his , standardised and scientific research which obtained empirical evidence. This allowed him to formulate the situational explanations of obedience.

Question 33

weaknesses of situational variables of obedience

Answer 33

-offers an excuse for destructive obedience. offensive to survivors of holocaust by suggesting that the Nazis were simply obeying orders. Implies that NAzis were victims of situational factors beyond their control and ignores effects of dispositional factors on obedience

Question 34

evaluate social support

Answer 34

-Allan and levine. They set up an Asch type task. Conformity
decreased with a dissenter. This was also true when the dissenter wore thick glasses(to imply vision difficulties)
-in Milgram’s variations, obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when participant teachers ere joined by a disobedient confederate. their behaviour acts as a model for the participant to copy and also challenges the legitimacy of the authority figure, making it easier for others to disobey.

Question 35

evaluate locus of control

Answer 35

-Holland repeated milgram’s stuidy and measured if opppl were internal or external locuses of control. 37% of internals did not continue to highest shock level compared to 23% of externals. shows that internals showed more resistance to social pressures(by experimenter). increases validity of LOC as an explanation of obedience
-contradictory evidence shows that people became more resistant to obedience but also more external. supposed to be internal not external therefore reduces the validity of LOC.

Question 36

3 ways in which minority influence is strengthened

Answer 36

-commitment
-consistency
-flexibility

Question 37

what is minority influence

Answer 37

+form of social influence
+ minority of people (or one person) persuade others to alter their majority viewpoint and instead adopt their beliefs, attitudes or behaviours.
+ leads to internalisation whereby private attitudes are changed as well as public behaviours.
+ process can be slow and take place gradually over time.

Question 38

outlline research into minority influence

Answer 38

-Moscovici- identified whether consistency increased minority influence
pps shown blue slides in varying shades of blue. they had to identify whether the set of ‘slides’ were blue or green. 6 pps, 2 were confederates. confederates always said the slides were green(consistent minority). other group, the 2 confederates said blue and green sometimes (inconsistent minority). control group had all participants and no confederates
The participants gave the same wrong answer on 8.4% when the minority were consistent.
The participants gave the same wrong answer on only 1.25% when the minority were inconsistent in their answers
this suggests consistency is important feature of minority influence.

Question 39

explain the effects of consistency,commitment and flexibility

Answer 39

consistency—> minority is consistent in their views.It draws attention to the minority view.
Diachronic consistency - minority keeps the same beliefs over time
Synchronic consistency - all members of the minority share the same belief, makes majority start to rethink their own views
commitment—->Augmentation principle-minority demonstrates genuine dedication to their position, perhaps by making personal sacrifices . shows the majority that minority is not acting out of self-interest
flexibility—> nemeth argued that consistency may be off-putting. they may also appear inflexible. therefore, minority should be prepared to adapt their viewpoint, compromise and be open to counter-arguments(flexibility)

Question 40

snowball effect is….
(minority influence)

Answer 40

gradually, the minority VIEW (not ppl) has become the majority VIEW and change has occured

Question 41

strength of minority influence

Answer 41

-research support by wood et al…carried out a meta analysis of 100 studies similar to moscovici’s and found that minoritioes who were seen as being consistent were the most influential. suggests that consistency strengthens minority influence

Question 42

weaknesses of minority influence

Answer 42

-moscovici study uses artificial tasks which does not accurately reflect how minority influence operates in the real world. For example, in jury decision making and political campaigns, the outcomes could be different because they are dealing with life changing situations-lacks external validity(ecological)
pls do exam questions for more evaluation points….

Question 43

social change is…

Answer 43

rocess whereby whole societies, rather than individuals, adopt new attitudes, beliefs and values.
This can result in new legislation or changes to existing law.

Question 44

steps in which social influence and social change occurs

Answer 44

1)Minority group draws attention to their cause through consistency, commitment and flexibility
2)The augmentation principle results in deeper processing(thinking deeply)of the minority viewpoint by the majority.
3)The change happens gradually through the snowball effect- minority viewpoint slowly changes into majority viewpoint- by gaining momentum.
4)During the final stages of the snowball effect, normative social influence may be used to make remaining members aware of what the new majority are doing.
5)f the social change results in a change in legislation, obedience is involved in ensuring the law is obeyed.
6)social crytomnesia may occur whereby people have a memory that social change occurred but don’t remember how it happened or where it originated from

Question 45

strength of social change

Answer 45

-research support to show that social change can occur through NSI. Nolan et al (2008) - found a significant decrease in energy consumption when members of a community had weekly notices that other residents were already doing this. This was compared to a group who simply had notices asking them to save energy.

Question 46

weaknesses of social change

Answer 46

-minority influence is indirectly effective. Nemeth (1986) argues the effects of a minority are indirect because the majority is interested on matters most related to the issue at hand, rather than the central issue. Therefore the effects can be delayed.This suggests the role minority influence plays in social change is fragile and limited.
-Mackie (1987) suggests it is majority influence that results in deeper processing rather than minority influence. This is because when a majority thinks something different, we are forced to think long and hard about their arguments. This challenges the view that minority influence involves deeper processing and undermines the validity of the theory.

Question 47

define undermine

Answer 47

to lessen the effectiveness of something