Social Influence

Question 1

Milgram: Evaluations

Answer 1

large population
manipulated ppt (good and bad)
low chance of demand characteristics
ethical issues - lied to ppt
ethno/androcentric

Question 2

Milgram: What signs did ppt show in Milgram’s study

Answer 2

Ppt can be seen showing nervous laughter, twitching, fidgeting, sweating and smoking after the experiment. 3 ppt suffered seizure with only one of them allowed to go to hospital

Question 3

Milgram: Outline the procedure of milgrams study

Answer 3

• 1961
• 40 white male americans per condition
• paid $4.50 to participate
• Mr Wallace (confederate) played the role of the learner
• ppts played the role of the teacher
• role were allocated “randomly”
• ppts were told Mr Wallace had a heart condition before the study
• ppts told the study was investigating how punishment affects learning
• ppts “electrocuted” Mr Wallace when he got a question wrong

Question 4

Milgram: What were the results of Milgram’s study

Answer 4

• 100% went up to 300 volts
• 65% went up to 450
• 50% continued after reaching 450
• dropped to 47.5% up to 450 in run down office block compared to yale uni

Question 5

Milgram: What were the four prompts the researcher gave the participants to continue the study

Answer 5

• please continue
• the experiment requires that you continue
• it is absolutely essential that you continue
• you have no other choice, you must go on

Question 6

Milgram: What were the different conditions of his study

Answer 6

Location change
proximity to researcher
proximity to Mr Wallace
uniform of researcher

Question 7

Milgram: What were the conclusions of milgrams study

Answer 7

• all humans are capable of becoming nazis
• if it wasn’t germany, it would have been another country

Question 8

Asch: Evaluations

Answer 8

• low chance of demand characteristics
• high control over extraneous variables
• low population size
• entho/androcentric

Question 9

Asch: How is his study unethical

Answer 9

Manipulated ppt, telling them the aim was to test eye sight
Lack of protection from harm - ppt reported feeling stressed when disagreeing with the majority

Question 10

Asch: What were the 3 main conditions in his study

Answer 10

Group size
Social support
Task difficulty

Question 11

Asch: What were the results of his study

Answer 11

35% conformed every time
75% conformed at least once
25% never conformed

Question 12

Zimbardo: What were the advantages of his study

Answer 12

• High ecological validity
• High temporal validity
• All ppt were given a psych eval to ensure they were all mentally healthy

Question 13

Zimbardo: What were the disadvantaged of his study

Answer 13

• Only took place for 5 days
• Zimbardo played the role of the warden
• Demand characteristics

Question 14

Zimbardo: How was his study unethical

Answer 14

• Zimbardo allowed assault on the prisoners
• He acted as the warden allowing him to control what events took place

Question 15

Zimbardo: How were the prisoners treated that could have led to misbehaviour in Zimbardo’s study

Answer 15

Ppt were sent home and told they weren’t right for the study, then arrested the next day. They were booked and dehumanised before being taken to the prison

Question 16

Zimbardo: What were the results of his study

Answer 16

Police brutality towards inmates causing physical, emotional and sexual assault. Got so bad prisoners rioted on the second day

Question 17

What are the three types of conformity and their definitions

Answer 17

Compliance - publicly agree with the majority without a change in personal opinion (temporary)
Identification - development of group behaviour, acting similar to the majority due to valuing group membership (lasts as long as the group)
Internalisation - change of behaviour and/or opinion similar to the group (permanent)

Question 18

What are the two explanations for conformity and their definitions

Answer 18

Informational social influence (ISI) - change in opinion and/or behaviour due to someone else’s response to the same event. You deem them higher in the social hierarchy than you (cognitive)
Normative social influence (NSI) - temporary change in behaviour and/or opinion due to wanting to fit in with the majority (emotional)

Question 19

What are the two states within social influence and their definitions

Answer 19

Agentic state - giving up personal responsibility to an authority figure (blind obedience)
Autonomous state - actions are fully taken responsibility for without diffusing responsibility

Question 20

What is legitimacy of authority and how is it recognised

Answer 20

Legitimacy of authority - based on the social hierarchy, the idea no one is equal and there are some people higher than others. This can be recognised through; job, gender, pay, group dynamics etc.

Question 21

What is an authoritarian personality, what factors contribute to it and how do they contribute

Answer 21

Someone who holds high respect for those higher in the social hierarchy than them, but no respect to those lower in the social hierarchy.
Factors include; might is right - how physical strength determines ones worth, upbringing - if a parent serves then the child will hold higher respect for them and lower respect for people who don’t, personality traits - certain traits such as extreme submission or aggression could alter the extremism, the f scale - whether they are right wing or not.

Question 22

What is resisting to social influence (RSI) and what factors can affect this

Answer 22

RSI - when someone acts as an individual, defying social pressure. This could be temporary or permanent
Factors include; Social support (when a minority is given an ally who also disagrees with the majority), Internal locus of control (Loc) is the extent to which we think we have control over our own behaviour.

Question 23

What is minority influence and what are the three main factors which can boost this

Answer 23

Minority influence - when a minority convinces members of the majority to join them until they then become the majority. This links in with informational social influence and internalisation.
Factors include; Consistency, commitment and flexibility.

Question 24

Describe the three main factors which boost minority influence

Answer 24

Consistency - synchronic consistency is when all members of the group back the same reasons, whilst diachronic consistency is a singular person being consistent with their reasoning.
Commitment - dedication to the same cause over a large period of time. Links in with the augmentation principle (when the minority causes conflict in the majority, convince themselves)
Flexibility - where the minority becomes flexible with their cause, leading to the majority becoming more likely to join.

Question 25

RENEWED CARDS

Answer 25

DO NOT DELETE

Question 26

Types of conformity: Outline what is meant by conformity

Answer 26

altering your behaviour due to social or group pressure (pier pressure)

Question 27

Types of conformity: Outline the three types of conformity

Answer 27

- compliance - identification - internalisation

Question 28

Types of conformity: Outline compliance as a type of conformity

Answer 28

Publicly agreeing with the majority opinion or behaving along with the majority, but privately sharing a different opinion or behaviour superficial and temporary type

Question 29

Types of conformity: Outline identification as a type of conformity

Answer 29

Adopting the opinions and behaviour of the group whilst apart of the group. This includes sharing the opinions and behaviour in private only lasts the duration of the group membership - return to original behaviour upon expiry

Question 30

Types of conformity: Outline internalisation as a type of conformity

Answer 30

Adopting the opinions and behaviour of others publicly and privately in a permanent manner deepest level of conformity due to overwriting ones initial behaviour

Question 31

Outline the aim of Asch's 1951 study

Answer 31

investigating the extent to which social pressure causes people to conform in a majority group

Question 32

Outline the procedure of Asch's 1951 study

Answer 32

- 123 participants - 7 confederates and 1 participant per group sat round a table - instructed to outline which line, a b or c, was the same length as the separate line. - 12 of 18 studies, the confederates gave the wrong answer (critical trials) - 6 of 18 confederates gave the right answer - this was to minimise the likelihood of the participant figuring out the true aim of the study - could have led to demand characteristics or the screw you effect

Question 33

Outline the results of Asch's 1951 study

Answer 33

- 75% of participants conformed at least once - 37% conformed every time - 25% never conformed

Question 34

Outline the conclusions of Asch's 1951 study

Answer 34

with enough social pressure, everyone will conform

Question 35

Outline the main reasons participants gave for conforming in Asch's 1951 study

Answer 35

- whilst they knew they were giving the wrong answer, they didn't want to stand out - some participants doubted their own judgement so agreed with the majority

Question 36

Name the conditions of Asch's 1951 study

Answer 36

- task difficulty - group size - unanimity

Question 37

Outline the differing results in Asch's 1951 study when the task difficulty was changed

Answer 37

the harder the task, the more people conformed the easier the task, the less people conformed doubt yourself more

Question 38

Outline the differing results in Asch's 1951 study when the group size was changed

Answer 38

smaller the group, the less people conformed larger the group, the more people conformed more people to go against/with

Question 39

Outline the differing results in Asch's 1951 study when there was unanimity compared to when there was not

Answer 39

unanimous - increased conformity rate as majority is verbally against you no unanimous - lowered conformity rate as no one verbally tells you you're wrong

Question 40

Give evaluations for Asch's 1951 study

Answer 40

- only men - androcentrism - only white - ethnocentrism - practical applications - jurors are warned not to conform to the other jurors to give a specific verdict - standardised - high internal validity

Question 41

Explanations of conformity: Name the two explanations of conformity

Answer 41

- informational social influence (ISI) - normative social influence (NSI)

Question 42

Explanations of conformity: Outline informational social influence (ISI) as an explanation of conformity

Answer 42

- based on cognitive factors - when you are not certain of your knowledge or ability so look to others you deem more intellectual than you in a particular area for guidance - people are deemed more intellectual than you are done via a social hierarchy which is subjective based on what you think yours and their capabilities are

Question 43

Explanations of conformity: What type of conformity does informational social influence (ISI) lead to and why

Answer 43

internalisation - changing your opinions/beliefs based on people you deem more intellectual than you

Question 44

Explanations of conformity: Give research support for informational social influence (ISI)

Answer 44

Fein et al (2007): found candidate performance for presidential debates could be influenced by others knowledge or reactions with people showing similar reactions to their peers

Question 45

Explanations of conformity: Outline normative social influence (NSI) as an explanation of conformity

Answer 45

- based on emotional factors - change behaviour due to wanting to fit in and be normal - if we conform, we gain the respect of other people and will therefore be accepted into the group

Question 46

Explanations of conformity: What type of conformity does normative social influence (NSI) lead to and why

Answer 46

compliance - only temporarily changing behaviour whilst around group

Question 47

Explanations of conformity: Give research support for normative social influence (NSI)

Answer 47

Asch's 1951 study

Question 48

Explanations of conformity: give evaluations for explanations of conformity

Answer 48

- research support - Asch, Fein et al - theoretically flawed - doesn't take into account individual differences - some people never conform - practical applications - can be used to make people aware of NSI and to avoid doing it - makes people be themselves

Question 49

Outline the aim of Zimbardo's 1971 study

Answer 49

to investigate the extent to which people conform to social roles through identification

Question 50

Outline the procedure of Zimbardo's 1971 study

Answer 50

- 24 participants - 12 guards, 12 prisoners - all participants were students of Zimbardo - all participants had psych evals completed on them to ensure they were all mentally healthy - participants were told they were chosen for their roles, however they were randomly chosen - all told they weren't a good match for the study and sent home. next day were arrested by the police and taken to booking - treated like actual criminals - prisoners were stripped, searched and shaved before being given their uniform, referred to as numbers - dehumanised - guards given uniforms and batons - no experimenter intervention - purely observatory at beginning - makeshift prison built in the basement of Stanford prison

Question 51

Outline what happened to prisoner #819 in Zimbardo's 1971 study

Answer 51

Prisoner #819, real name Barry, was a 20 year old student who experienced severe emotional distress during the study on day 2 he became agitated and started crying, refusing to talk to the priest and was asking for a doctor once he had calmed down, he was moved to a different room. the other prisoners were ordered by the guards to stand outside the room and shout 'Prisoner #819 is a bad prisoner'. when Zimbardo realised Barry could hear this he went back to check on him, and found him crawled up in a ball crying Barry said he no longer wanted to see the doctor and wanted to go back with the other prisoners to prove he wasn't a bad prisoner. Zimbardo had to remind him that he wasn't a prisoner, and that he was a student and it was just an experiment Barry immediately left the experiment

Question 52

Outline the results of Zimbardo's 1971 study

Answer 52

- only 10% of the conversations between prisoners were about life outside of the prison - the guards rarely exchanged personal information - often talked about 'problem prisoners' - guards regularly beat the inmates - reportedly stood of the prisoner's backs as they were ordered to do push-ups - riot happened on day 2 - only lasted 6 days - was supposed to last 2 weeks

Question 53

Outline the conclusions of Zimbardo's 1971 study

Answer 53

- people will conform to any role given to them - situation based - not dispositional

Question 54

Give evaluations of Zimbardo's 1971 study

Answer 54

- androcentrism, ethnocentrism - poor generalisability - all participants were Zimbardo's students - demand characteristics - standardised - high internal validity - practical applications - prisoners are more violent due to being dehumanised (given numbers) - ethically fucked - led to ethical guidelines - study was so fucked up they made ethical guidelines to stop crap like that happening again

Question 55

Outline the aim of Milgram's 1965 study

Answer 55

to what extent do people obey authority figures

Question 56

Outline the procedure of Milgram's 1965 study

Answer 56

- 40 male participants - participants paid $4.50 - roles include teacher and learner - learner told teacher he had a heart condition before experiment - experimenter (not Milgram) has participant and confederate choose between two pieces of paper - both say teacher, participant told one says teacher, one says learner - confederate, Mr Wallace, says he got learner - the experimenter straps learner to chair with the participant (teacher) watching and explains rules - teacher reads out pairs of words then reads out first word, learner has to say second word back. if they get it wrong, they get electrocuted at increasing voltage (+15V) - experimenter shocks teacher before and has them guess the voltage, was 15, avg. guess 40V - starting voltage - 45V - learner stops screaming and plays dead at 300V onwards

Question 57

Outline the results of Milgram's 1965 study

Answer 57

- 100% of participants when up to 300V, high enough to kill someone - 65% of participants went up to 450V, highest it could go

Question 58

Outline the conclusions of Milgram's 1965 study

Answer 58

- Germans were good people, it wasn't their fault they fucked up the jews - Nazi Germany would and could have happened to any country, just the Germans beat everyone else to it

Question 59

Outline the physical destress signs shown by participants in Milgram's 1965 study

Answer 59

nervous laughter twitching fidgeting sweating smoking after the experiment 3 participants suffered seizures, only 1 allowed to go to hospital - other 2 told to get up and continue with the study

Question 60

Outline the prompts used by the experimenter in Milgram's 1965 study

Answer 60

- please continue - the experiment required that you continue - it is absolutely essential that you continue - you have no other choice but to continue these were used whenever the participant would refuse to continue. after the 4th one, participants were allowed to leave

Question 61

Name the conditions of Milgram's 1965 study

Answer 61

- uniform - location - learner proximity - experimenter proximity

Question 62

Outline uniform as a condition in Milgram's 1965 study

Answer 62

obedience level of 20% (-45%) when experimenter wasn't wearing a uniform likely due to less authority as participants believe themselves as equal to the experimenter loss of legitimacy

Question 63

Outline location as a condition in Milgram's 1965 study

Answer 63

originally in Yale university (respected institution) obedience dropped to 47.5% when held in a run down office block loss of locational status

Question 64

Outline learner proximity as a condition in Milgram's 1965 study

Answer 64

obedience dropped to 30% when learner was in the same room as the teacher likely due to teacher having to hold the learner's hand on the metal plate after 150V

Question 65

Outline experimenter proximity as a condition in Milgram's 1965 study

Answer 65

reduced obedience when experimenter gave instructions from a different room (via telephone) even further reduced obedience when the teacher never met the experimenter and all instructions were delivered via a recording

Question 66

Give evaluations for Milgram's 1965 study

Answer 66

- poor generalisability - androcentrism, ethnocentrism - standardised - high internal validity - reliable - Derren Brown replicated his study getting similar results in 2006 - practical applications - if we instil authority successfully, we can use it to reduce crime

Question 67

Explanations of obedience: Name the different explanations of obedience

Answer 67

- agentic state - legitimacy of authority - authoritarian personality

Question 68

Explanations of obedience: Outline the agentic state as an explanation of obedience

Answer 68

- surrendering ones personal responsibility to an authority figure - diffused responsibility - opposite of autonomous state - you make decisions for yourself - relieved responsibility also relieves moral strain

Question 69

Explanations of obedience: Outline legitimacy of authority as an explanation of obedience

Answer 69

- socialisation - learning the norms and values of society and obeying them - leads to social cohesion - social hierarchy - blindly obeying those you deem above you in the social hierarchy

Question 70

Explanations of obedience: give evaluations for the agentic state and legitimacy of authority as explanations of obedience

Answer 70

- research support for agentic state - Milgram - research support for LoA - Bickman found people were more than twice as likely to obey someone in a security guard outfit when asked to pick up litter than someone in a jacket and tie - problem as it leads to the 'obedience alibi' - practical applications - knowing we obey so easily allows us to prevent bad shit from happening e.g. Nazi Germany

Question 71

Explanations of obedience: Outline an authoritarian personality as an explanation of obedience

Answer 71

- might is right - the physically stronger someone is, the more they are worth and therefore the more you should obey them - upbringing - if you are raised with an authoritative parent then you are more likely to hold higher respect for people higher than you in the social hierarchy. however, you are also more likely to treat everyone below you like scum - personality traits - extreme submission or aggression influence the extent to which you obey - the f scale - the more right winged you are the more you believe in the social hierarchy

Question 72

Explanations of obedience: Give evaluations for authoritarian personalities as an explanation of obedience

Answer 72

- research support - Elms and Milgram found those who fully obeyed in the original 1965 study scored highly on the f scale compared to the disobedient shits - lack of cause and effect - we don't know if an authoritarian personality causes obedience or if obedience causes an authoritarian personality - practical applications - explains why certain personality traits make you more prone to obeying

Question 73

Outline factors into the social hierarchy

Answer 73

job gender group dynamics pay age

Question 74

Explanations of resistance to social influence: Name the explanations of resistance to social influence (RSI)

Answer 74

- social support - internal locus of control (iLoC)

Question 75

Explanations of resistance to social influence: Outline what is meant by resistance to social influence (RSI)

Answer 75

when people defy social pressure for conformity and/or obedience this does not mean they resist entirely, it could be temporarily and they eventually conform or obey with enough social pressure

Question 76

Explanations of resistance to social influence: Outline social support as an explanation of resistance to social influence (RSI)

Answer 76

when there is at least one other person who agrees with you, you are more likely to non-conform the more people that side with you, the less likely you are to conform or obey

Question 77

Explanations of resistance to social influence: Give evaluations for social support as an explanation of resistance to social influence