Social Influence

Question 1

conformity

Answer 1

a change in a person’s behaviour or opinions as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or group of people.

a type of majority influence - a persons behaviour is influenced by a larger group of people.

Question 2

what are the types of conformity?

Answer 2

compliance, identification, internalisation

Question 3

compliance

Answer 3

when a person changes their behaviour/opinions to those of the group in order to be accepted by the group or to avoid disapproval.

an emotional process.

we publicly agree/ go along with the group but our private beliefs don’t change - a temporary form of conformity.

Question 4

identification

Answer 4

when an individual changes their behaviour/opinions to those of the group because they want to become a member of that group.

we privately accept & agree with the opinions & behaviours of the group as well as publicly agreeing.

temporary, but stronger than compliance, because we continue to identify with the group until we leave that group.

Question 5

internalisation

Answer 5

this is when a person publicly & privately accepts & maintains the behaviours/opinions of the group.

usually occurs when the groups beliefs are seen as correct.

results in a permanent change in behaviour, as the individual continues to hold these beliefs after they have left the group.

Question 6

what are the explanations of conformity?

Answer 6

normative social influence and informational social influence

Question 7

normative social influence (NSI)

Answer 7

we conform because we like to follow norms - to do what is seen as ‘normal’ within a particular social group.

we don’t like to appear foolish & prefer to gain social approval rather than to be rejected.

it’s an emotional process which results in compliance.

Question 8

informational social influence (ISI)

Answer 8

we conform because we want to be right.

when we don’t know what the right or wrong thing is to do, we look to others/the majority who we think are likely to be right.

it is a cognitive process that results in internalisation.

Question 9

strengths of the explanations of conformity

Answer 9

+ there is evidence to support NSI as an explanation of conformity

Asch found that many of his ppts went along with a clearly wrong answer just because other people did. some of the ppts said they conformed because they felt self-conscious giving the correct answer & they were afraid of disapproval.

when Asch repeated his study but asked ppts to write down their answers, conformity fell to 12.5% as normative group pressure disappeared when answers were given privately.

this shows that some conformity is due to the desire not to be rejected by the group for disagreeing with the majority.

+ research evidence to support the ISI explanation of conformity

Lucas asked students to give answers to mathematical problems that were easy or more difficult.

Lucas found that ppts conformed more to incorrect answers when the maths problems were difficult.

when the maths problems were hard the situation became ambiguous & ppts didn’t want to be wrong, so they relied on the other answers that had been given.

this shows that ISI is a valid explanation of conformity as the results show that people conform because of a need to be right.

Question 10

weaknesses of the explanations of conformity

Answer 10

• NSI does not predict conformity in every case

people who are less concerned with being liked are less affected by NSI than those who care more about being liked.

McGhee & Teevan found that students who have a strong need for affiliation are more likely to conform.

this shows that the desire to be liked underlies conformity for some people but not all, therefore NSI offers a partial explanation of why people conform but it doesn’t explain the individual differences that exist in rates of conformity.

• it is not clear whether it is NSI or ISI that is operating in research studies

Asch found that conformity is reduced when there is one other dissenting ppt.

but it is not clear why a dissenting ppt reduces conformity. it could be because they provide social support which reduces the need to conform for social approval (NSI), or it could be that a dissenter reduces the power of ISI as there is now an alternative viewpoint.

this means that it is very difficult to separate out the effects of ISI & NSI & it seems that they probably operate together in most real-life situations of conformity.

Question 11

Asch’s procedure (baseline study)

Answer 11

there were 123 male ppts & each naive ppt was tested individually with a group of 6-8 confederates who gave unanimous answers. the naive ppt wasn’t aware that the others were confederates.

ppts had to judge which of 3 comparison lines was the same length as a standard line.

confederates gave the wrong answer in 12/18 trials.

Question 12

Asch’s findings

Answer 12

ppts conformed to the wrong answer 37% of the time.

when ppts were interviewed afterwards, most said they conformed to avoid rejection (NSI), but others conformed due to ISI.

Question 13

Asch’s variations

Answer 13

group size, unanimity, task difficulty

Question 14

Asch’s variations - group size

Answer 14

Asch varied the number of confederates from 1-15.

conformity increased with increasing confederates but only up to 3.

with 3 confederates, conformity to the wrong answer rose to 31.8%, but the addition of further confederates made little difference.

shows that only a small majority is needed for people to conform to group pressure.

Question 15

Asch’s variations - unanimity of the majority

Answer 15

Asch introduced a confederate who disagreed with the others.

conformity was reduced by a quarter from the level it was when the majority was unanimous (ppt conformed less often).

the presence of a dissenter enabled the naive ppt to behave more independently.

if the majority isn’t unanimous we are less likely to conform.

Question 16

Asch’s variations - task difficulty

Answer 16

Asch made the task harder by making the comparison lines closer in length to the standard line.

conformity increased under these conditions.

this suggests that ISI plays a greater role when the task becomes harder - when the ppt is not sure of the right answer, they look to the others for guidance.

Question 17

weaknesses of Asch’s research

Answer 17

• the task & situation were artificial

judging the length of a line is a trivial task that has no consequences, but in real life our decisions about whether to conform are more complex & have consequences.

in addition, ppts were aware they were in a research study & may have guessed that it was on conformity, therefore displaying demand characteristics when deciding whether or not to conform.

this is a limitation because it means that the findings do not generalise to everyday situations because the study doesn’t not resemble real life conformity.

• Asch’s ppts were all men

using just male ppts is a problem because some research suggests that women conform more than men because they are more concerned about being accepted by other people.

furthermore, the men in Asch’s study were from the US, an individualist culture. other conformity studies have shown that conformity is higher in collectivist cultures where people are more concerned about pleasing the social group than they are about themselves.

this means that Asch’s findings may not be providing us with a complete explanation of conformity because he didn’t take gender & cultural differences into account. this makes generalisation difficult.

Question 18

strength of Asch’s research

Answer 18

+ support from other studies for the effects of task difficulty

Lucas gave ppts easy and hard maths problems to solve. ppts conformed to the answers given by confederates, even when they were wrong.

furthermore, ppts conformed more to incorrect answers when the maths problems were more difficult.

this shows that Asch’s findings are valid & that his conclusions about the impact of task difficulty on conformity are true.

counter point:

however, Lucas showed that conformity was more complex than Asch showed.

Lucas found that ppts who had a high level of confidence in their maths abilities conformed less than those who had low confidence levels.

this shows that it’s not just the variables that Asch identified that affect conformity, but individual personality characteristics too. This weakens Asch as he failed to address this.

Question 19

social roles

Answer 19

the parts played by individuals as members of a social group which meet the expectations of that situation.

involves identification - with each social role, behaviour changes to fit the social norms of the situation.

Question 20

social norm

Answer 20

the expected behaviour that is usual for a particular group of individuals

Question 21

aim of Zimbardo’s research

Answer 21

to investigate the extent to which people would conform to social roles of guard & prisoner in a role-playing simulation of prison life, and to test whether this was due to dispositional or situational factors

Question 22

Zimbardo’s procedure

Answer 22

Zimbardo set up a mock prison in the basement of Stanford university.

they advertised for students willing to volunteer & selected 21 men who were deemed ‘emotionally stable’ after extensive psychological testing.

randomly assigned to roles of guards (10) or prisoners (11).

the ‘prisoners’ were arrested in their homes by the police & were blindfolded, stripped & deloused at the ‘prison’.

they had their personal identity removed (deindividuation) & were issued a number.

guards wore khaki uniforms, reflective sunglasses & were issued with handcuffs, keys & truncheons, reflecting the status of their role.

they were told they had complete power over the prisoners, whole daily routines were heavily regulated.

the study was planned to run for 2 weeks.

Question 23

Zimbardo’s findings

Answer 23

guards & prisoners settled quickly into their social roles.

after an initial prisoner rebellion, dehumanisation became increasingly apparent - the guards became even more sadistic, taunting prisoners & giving them meaningless, boring tasks to do, reminding them of the powerlessness of their role.

the prisoners became submissive & unquestioning of the guards’ behaviour.

after 36 hours, 1 prisoner was released due to fits of crying & rage. 3 more prisoners developed similar behaviours & were released on subsequent days.

one prisoner went on a hunger strike - the guards attempted to force-feed him & punished him by putting him in ‘the hole’, a tiny dark closet.

scheduled to run for 14 days, the study was stopped after 6 days when Zimbardo realised the extent of the harm that was occurring & the increasingly aggressive nature of the guards’ behaviour as they identified more closely with their role.

Question 24

Zimbardo’s conclusions

Answer 24

the findings suggest that social roles have a strong influence on an individual’s behaviour.

individuals readily conform to the social roles that a situation demands, even when the behaviours associated with these roles go against a person’s moral beliefs about their behaviour.

study supports situational hypothesis not dispositional.

Question 25

strength of Zimbardo’s research

Answer 25

+ control over key variables

for example, the selection of ppts.

emotionally stable individuals were chosen & randomly assigned to the roles of guard or prisoner.

this is one way in which the researchers tried to eliminate individual personality differences as an explanation of the findings.

if guards & prisoners behaved differently, but were in those roles only by chance, then their behaviour must have been due to the pressures of the situation.

this is a strength because control over variables increases internal validity & allows us to confidently draw conclusions about the influence of roles on behaviour.

Question 26

weaknesses of Zimbardo’s research

Answer 26

• exaggerates the power of social roles

only 1/3 of the guards behaved brutally. most of the guards resisted behaving aggressively & actively tried to help prisoners by reinstating their privileges.

this suggests that Zimbardo’s conclusion - that ppts were conforming to social roles - may be over-stated. the differences in the guards’ behaviour indicate that they were able to exercise right & wrong choices, despite the situational pressures to conform to a role. these dispositional influences show that conforming to social roles only offers a partial explanation of behaviour.

• lack of realism of a true prison

some researchers argue that ppts were merely play-acting, not conforming to a role.

it’s possible that the guards’ behaviour was based on stereotypes of how guards are supposed to behave, generated through movies such as Cool Hand Luke. this would also explain why the prisoners rioted - because they thought that was what prisoners did.

this may not tell us much about conformity to social roles in real life like Zimbardo suggested.

counter point:

however, evidence suggests that the situation was very real to ppts. 90% of conversations between prisoners were about prison life, e.g. that they couldn’t leave until their sentence was over. this suggests that perhaps ppts did in fact conform to social roles.

Question 27

obedience

Answer 27

a form of social influence in which an individual follows a direct order. the person giving the order is perceived to have authority. this authority figure has the power to punish disobedience.

Question 28

Milgram’s study (baseline procedure)

Answer 28

40 male ppts volunteered to take part in what was advertised as a memory experiment.

a real ppt was paired with a confederate & they drew lots to be either teacher or learner. draws were rigged so that the real ppt was always the teacher.

the teacher had to give an electric shock every time the learner gave a wrong answer in a learning task - these shocks were fake but the teachers thought they were real.

shocks increased by 15 volts each time up to a max of 450 volts.

Question 29

Milgram’s findings

Answer 29

all ppts delivered shocks up to 300 volts.

65% of ppts delivered shocks at the highest level of 450 volts.

observations showed ppts were experiencing extreme signs of tension, e.g. sweating & trembling.

when questioned prior to the study, only 3% of Milgram’s students thought that ppts would keep going up to 450V - this shows that the findings were unexpected.

at the end of the study, ppts were debriefed & told their behaviour was normal. in a follow up questionnaire, 84% said they were happy they took part.

Milgram concluded that it is situational factors & not dispositional factors that influence obedience.

Question 30

weakness of Milgram’s study

Answer 30

• Milgram’s procedure has low internal validity as he may not have been testing obedience

it is possible that ppts were only acting because they didn’t really believe the set up.

in recordings of Milgram’s debriefs, 50% of the ppts said that they didn’t believe the shocks were real.

this suggests that demand characteristics may have affected the findings - ppts may have delivered electric shocks because they thought that was what was the researchers wanted to see, not because situational factors influenced obedience. this reduces the validity of his conclusions about what causes obedience.

Question 31

strengths of Milgram’s study

Answer 31

+ further supporting research for Milgram’s findings

Sheridan & King used a similar procedure with puppies & found high levels of obedience.

ppts in the experiment gave real shocks to a puppy in response to an order from an experimenter.

54% of male students & 100% of female students delivered what they thought was a fatal shock.

this shows that Milgram’s findings were valid & that situational factors, such as legitimate authority, lead to obedience.

+ Milgram’s findings have been replicated in a French documentary

ppts were led to believe they were taking part in a game show - the Game of Death - & were ordered by the presenter to give electric shocks to other ppts who were actually actors who weren’t really being shocked.

their behaviour was almost identical to that of Milgram’s ppts.

80% of ppts delivered the maximum shock of 460 volts.

this supports Milgram’s findings & demonstrates that individuals obey those who they perceive to be in authority.

counter point:

however, it could be argued that neither Milgram’s study nor the French study show real life obedience.

in Milgram’s study, only 50% thought shocks were real, suggesting that behaviour wasn’t true obedience.

in the French documentary, ppts didn’t perceive the situation as reality as they were seeing themselves as part of a game.

this suggests that experimental research tells us little about real life obedience.

Question 32

what are the explanations of obedience?

Answer 32

the presence of legitimate authority - S

being in an agentic state - S

having an authoritarian personality - D

Question 33

explanations of obedience - the presence of legitimate authority

Answer 33

we are more likely to obey when it is acceptable that the person giving us the order is justified in doing so, because of their position in society, e.g. following orders from the police.

a situational explanation - presence of authority

most societies are structured in a hierarchical way - there will always be people who have authority over us, e.g. a teacher.

we accept that authority figures have to be allowed to exercise social control over others because this allows society to function smoothly.

we learn to accept legitimate authority from childhood, from parents, teachers & other adults.

but sometimes legitimate authority can become destructive, e.g. police abusing their roles in BLM.

Question 34

explanations of obedience - being in an agentic state

Answer 34

sometimes, we obey because we are in an agentic state.

this is a mental state where we feel no personal responsibility for our behaviour because we believe that we are acting for an authority figure (i.e. as their agent).

being in an agentic state leads us to act obediently.

this is a situational explanation because our state is caused by the presence of another individual (authority figure).

the opposite of this is being in an autonomous state.

this means we are acting independently of others.

we are free to behave according to our own principles & take responsibility for our actions.

when we shift from being in an autonomous state to an agentic state, this is called an agentic shift.

this happens when we move from taking personal responsibility for our actions to believing we are acting on behalf of an authority figure.

binding factors can lead a person to ignore or minimise the effect of their actions; include shifting responsibility to the victim or denying the damage they were doing to the victims.

Question 35

evaluation of agentic state

Answer 35

+ Milgram’s own studies support the role of agentic state in obedience

many ppts resisted giving shocks after 300V as the learners were shouting in pain & asking the teacher to stop.

they asked the experimenter if the learner was being harmed & continued to give shocks when the experimenter said that they would take responsibility.

this shows that ppts shifted to an agentic state when responsibility for their actions was removed. instead they believed that they were acting on behalf of the experimenter, who has authority.

being in this state increases obedience, explaining why 65% of ppts delivered the maximum shock of 450V.

• the theory of agentic shift can’t explain findings from other studies

in Hofling’s study, nurses obeyed the order to give twice the recommended dose when the order was given by a phone call.

as the doctor’s were not physically present, obedience of the nurses should be low as the large proximity between the nurses & doctor & the absence of the authority figure makes it more difficult for the nurses to shift responsibility on to them.

however, the obedience of the nurses was still high which suggests that obedience was not due to agentic shift.

this is a limitation of the agentic shift explanation because it can only explain obedience in some situations.

Question 36

evaluation of legitimacy of authority

Answer 36

+ it can explain cultural differences in levels of obedience

many studies show that countries differ in the degree to which people are traditionally obedient to authority.

a replication of Milgram’s study found that only 16% of Australian ppts went all the way to 450V whereas 85% of German ppts went up to 450V.

this shows that societies are structured differently and in some cultures, like Germany, authority figures are perceived as more legitimate which leads to higher obedience levels, while in other cultures, like in Australia, there is less of a social hierarchy.

this increases the validity of the explanation, highlighting that legitimate authority is an important situational explanation of obedience.

+ it can explain obedience in real-life

in the My Lai Massacre, which took place during the Vietnam War, unarmed civilians were raped & killed by American soldiers. these soldiers obeyed orders from higher ranking officers in the US Army to completely destroy the villages.

this shows how legitimate authority leads to obedience because the army has a hierarchical structure in which orders given by officers to soldiers are seen as legitimate because the officers have a higher status.

therefore, legitimate authority offers a valid explanation of destructive obedience.

Question 37

explanations of obedience - the authoritarian personality (AP)

Answer 37

high obedience is a personality disorder.

Adorno found that people with AP have certain characteristics such as;

they are submissive to people in authority,

they show contempt towards people they see as being of an inferior status,

they see everything as right or wrong,

very obedient to authority.

the AP comes from childhood as a result of harsh parenting.

a harsh parenting includes extremely strict discipline, impossibly high standards & criticism of failings.

this creates hostility in a child which is displaced onto other people who they perceive to be weaker (scapegoating)

Adorno measured an AP using the F-scale

Question 38

Adorno’s research on the AP

Answer 38

Adorno measured an AP using the F-scale.

F = potential for Fascism

the questionnaire included items that ppts had to rate their agreement with, e.g. ‘nobody ever learned anything really important except through suffering’.

people who scored high on the F-scale showed traits of obedience including;

identifying themselves as ‘strong’ & against those who are ‘weak’,

showing extreme respect & deference to those in authority.

Question 39

strength of authoritarian personality

Answer 39

+ supporting evidence from Elms & Milgram

Milgram’s ppts were interviewed & completed the F-scale.

obedient ppts (who delivered electric shocks at high voltages) had higher overall scores on the F-scale than disobedient ppts.

this supports Adorno’s theory of AP because it shows that there is a strong link between highly obedient individuals & possessing traits of an AP.

even so, this is merely a correlation which makes it difficult to draw conclusions about obedience & having an AP - correlation does not mean causation.

counter point:

• in addition, analysis of sub-scales of the F-scale showed that obedient ppts in Milgram’s study also had characteristics that did not fit with an AP.

for example, some had not experienced harsh punishment in childhood or displayed hostile attitudes towards others.

this weakens the link between obedience & AP characteristics as it means that having an AP is not a predictor of obedience.

Question 40

weaknesses of authoritarian personality

Answer 40

• a limited explanation because it can’t explain how the majority of a population is obedient

in pre-war Germany, many showed obedient & anti-semitic behaviour.

this was despite the fact that they must have greatly differed in their personalities.

it’s extremely unlikely that they all possessed an AP.

this is a limitation of Adorno’s theory because it is clear that an alternative explanation is much more realistic - that social identity explains obedience.

German people identified with the Nazi state & this became the ‘in-group’ while the jews became the ‘out-group’ - this explanation challenges the AP theory.

• Greenstein suggests that the F-scale is flawed because all items are worded in the same direction

this means that it is possible to get a high score by just ticking the same line of boxes down one side.

the scale might be measuring the tendency to agree with everything rather than whether someone has an AP.

in addition, researchers might have been biased when interpreting info given during interviews by using aspects of a person’s childhood experiences that fit with characteristics of an AP.

this weakens AP as an explanation of obedience because the supporting evidence is flawed.

Question 41

situational variables affecting obedience

Answer 41

proximity, location, uniform

Question 42

situational variables - proximity

Answer 42

affects how aware a person is of the consequences of their actions & this in turn affects levels of obedience.

Milgram found that when the physical distance between the learner & the teacher became closer, levels of obedience fell;

when the learner & the teacher were in the same room, obedience levels dropped from 65% to 40%.

when the teacher had to force the learner’s hand on to an electroshock plate, the obedience rate dropped from 65% to 30%.

when the experimenter leaves the room & gives instructions to the teacher my telephone, obedience levels dropped from 65% to 20.5%.

levels of obedience fall when the teacher & learner are in close proximity because teachers take more responsibility for their actions (autonomous).

Question 43

situational variables - location

Answer 43

affects the amount of perceived legitimate authority a person giving the orders is seen to have.

obedience rates are often highest in institutionalised settings where obedience to authority is instilled into ppts.

Milgram’s study took place at Yale University which is a well known institution.

he performed a variation of his original study in a run-down office block.

obedience dropped from 65% to 47.5%

the change in location reduced the legitimacy of the authority figure because they lost power/status - order is no longer legitimate.

Question 44

situational variables - uniform

Answer 44

the wearing of uniform can give the perception of adding legitimacy to authority figures when delivering orders. leads to an increase in obedience.

Milgram carried out a variation of his experiment where the experimenter received a telephone call at the start & was called away.

he was replaced by an ordinary member of the public in everyday clothes (played by a confederate).

the rate of obedience dropped from 65% to 20%.

this is because the legitimacy of the authority figure decreased - no longer seen as powerful.

Question 45

strengths of situational variables

Answer 45

+ support from Bickman’s study

3 confederates were dressed in different outfits - jacket & tie, milkman’s outfit & a security guard’s uniform.

they stood in the street & asked people passing by to pick up litter or hand over change for a parking meter.

people were twice as likely to obey the confederate dressed as a guard than the one wearing a jacket & tie.

this supports Milgram’s conclusion that a uniform conveys legitimate authority & that it is important for obedience.

+ Milgram’s findings have been replicated in other cultures

Dutch ppts were ordered to say stressful things in an interview to someone (a confederate) who was desperate for a job.

90% of ppts obeyed.

in a variation of the study where the researcher giving the orders wasn’t present in the room, obedience dropped dramatically.

this shows that proximity is an important situational variable that affects obedience & can be applied in all cultures.

Question 46

weaknesses of situational variables

Answer 46

• studies on situational variables lack internal validity

in the Dutch experiment, it is highly likely that ppts guessed that the situation of the interview was fake due to the unusual bombardment of stressful Qs.

in addition, many of Milgram’s ppts worked out that the procedure was faked as 50% thought the shocks weren’t real. it is even more likely that the ppts in Milgram’s variations realised this due to the extra manipulation. For example, when the experimenter was replaced by a member of the public even Milgram himself thought ppts would work out the truth about what was being tested.

this is a limitation of Milgram’s study & others like it because it is unclear whether the results are genuinely due to obedience or because of demand characteristics.

• explaining obedience in terms of situational variables is problematic

situational explanations can provide excuses for evil behaviour & are reductionist because they don’t take into account the dispositional influences on obedience.

Holocaust survivors may find this explanation offensive because the situational explanations simply suggest that horrific acts were committed just because people were obeying orders to do so. this ignores the sadistic personalities that Nazi’s had & the detrimental impact this would have had on the survivors.

this is a limitation because the situational explanations are too simplistic & completely ignore influential personality factors. recent evidence suggests that characteristics such as being conscientious makes people more obedient - something the situational explanations cannot explain.

Question 47

resistance to social influence

Answer 47

the ability to withstand the social pressure to conform to the majority or obey authority

two explanations - social support and locus of control

Question 48

social support (resistance to SI)

Answer 48

if there are others present who do not conform or who disobey, then conformity & obedience in the ppt decreases.

e.g. dissenter in Asch’s study.

the other person acts as a model of independent behaviour. this enables the ppt to act independently & in relation to their own conscience.

Question 49

locus of control (resistance to SI)

Answer 49

proposed by Rotter.

the LoC is a scale; high internal ⟷ high external

internal LoC: you believe that you are in control of what happens to you.

external LoC: you believe that the things that happen are outside of your control.

internals are more likely to resist SI because they take more personal responsibility for their actions.

high internals rely on their own decisions & not the opinions of others. they also tend to have more self confidence & have less need for social approval.

Question 50

evaluation of social support (resistance to SI)

Answer 50

+ supporting evidence for the role of social support in resisting SI

Allen & Levine replicated Asch’s study. they found that when a dissenter was introduced, this allowed ppts to act more independently & conformity decreased.

in a variation, the dissenter was made to appear as if they had very poor vision by wearing thick glasses - not fit to judge the length of a line.

conformity still decreased, showing that social support helps people resist SI as they were free of pressure from the group.

+ real world applications of social support

a study was carried out on the role of social support in improving health behaviours.

adolescent pregnant women who were smokers were split into 2 groups.

one group were given a slightly older mentor but in a control group they had no mentor.

after 8 weeks, those with a mentor were less likely to smoke than the control group.

this shows that social support can be used as part of intervention measures to resist unhealthy behaviours. this practical application increases the validity of this explanation.

Question 51

evaluation of locus of control (resistance to SI)

Answer 51

+ supporting evidence for the role of high LoC in resisting SI

Holland replicated Milgram’s study & measured whether people were internals or externals.

37% of internals didn’t continue beyond 300V whereas only 23% of externals didn’t continue beyond 300V - this tells us that internals showed greater resistance to authority.

this suggests that there is a link between a persons LoC & their ability to resist SI. the higher the internal LoC score, the greater the resistance. this finding increases the validity of the LoC explanation.

• support for LoC may not be valid because LoC is difficult to measure

responses to measuring tools that assess LoC, i.e. Rotter’s questionnaire, may not be honest due to social desirability bias.

the ppt is forced to choose from fixed options which may not apply to them.

this means that a high LoC may not explain resistance to SI.

Question 52

minority influence

Answer 52

a form of social influence in which a minority of people persuades others to adopt their beliefs, attitudes or behaviours.

leads to internalisation or conversion, in which private attitudes are changed as well as public behaviours.

Question 53

Moscovici’s procedure

Answer 53

a group of 6 people were shown 36 slides that were all varying shades of blue & ppts had to state the colour of each slide.

2 of the 6 ppts were confederates, and in one condition they said that all the slides were green, and in a second condition they said that 24 were green & 12 were blue.

Question 54

Moscovici’s findings

Answer 54

in the first condition, real ppts gave the same wrong answer on 8.2% of trials while in the second condition, real ppts only agreed on 1.25% of trials.

this shows that a consistent minority is 6.95% more effective than an inconsistent minority & therefore consistency is an important factor in minority influence.

Question 55

what are the 3 processes in minority influence?

Answer 55

consistency, commitment, flexibility

Question 56

consistency (MI)

Answer 56

the minority must be consistent in their views.

this increases the amount of interest from other people.

consistency can take the form of agreement between people in the minority group and/or consistency over time.

a consistent minority makes other people start to rethink their own views.

Question 57

commitment (MI)

Answer 57

the minority must demonstrate commitment to their cause or views.

they may engage in extreme activities to draw attention to their views & this shows that are dedicated to their views.

the augmentation principle: majority group members may pay more attention to the minority when they make sacrifices because this shows they are commitment.

Question 58

flexibility (MI)

Answer 58

members of the minority need to be prepared to adapt their point of view & accept reasonable & valid counterarguments.

this is because someone who is extremely consistent may be seen as rigid - this is unlikely to gain many converts to the minority.

Question 59

the role of deeper processing & the snowball effect in minority influence

Answer 59

when you hear something new, you might think more deeply about it, especially if the source of the view is consistent, committed & flexible.

this deeper processing is important in the process of conversion to a different minority viewpoint.

the faster the rate of conversion, the greater the snowball effect - the minority view has become the majority view.

Question 60

strengths of minority influence

Answer 60

+ support for consistency

Moscovici’s study showed that a consistent minority opinion had a greater effect on changing the views of other people than an inconsistent opinion.

Wood carried out a meta-analysis of around 100 similar studies & found that consistent minorities were the most influential.

this suggests that a consistent view is needed for a minority to try & influence a majority.

+ support for the role of deeper processing

Martin presented a message supporting a particular viewpoint & measured ppt’s agreement.

one group then heard a minority group agree & another group heard a majority group agree. they were finally exposed to a conflicting view & attitudes were measured again.

people were less willing to change their opinions if they listened to a minority group.

this suggests that the minority message has been more deeply processed & had a more enduring effect, supporting how minority influence works.

Question 61

weaknesses of minority influence

Answer 61

• real world social influence situations are more complex

features such as the fact that majorities usually have more power & status and that minorities are very committed to their cause due to opposition are absent from minority influence research.

this means that Martin’s findings are very limited in what they can tell us about minority influence in real-world situations.

• lack of external validity

the tasks involved in minority influence research are very artificial, such as Moscovici’s task of identifying the colour of a slide.

research is therefore very far removed from how minorities attempt to change the behaviour of majorities in real life.

the outcomes of minority influence can be vastly important, such as in jury decision-making, & this can’t be represented in research studies.

this means findings of minority influence studies are lacking in external validity & are limited in what they can tell us about how minority influence works in real-world situations.

Question 62

social change

Answer 62

when a whole society, rather than just a few individuals, adopt new attitudes, beliefs & ways of doing things.

Question 63

examples of minority groups who brought about social change

Answer 63

the suffragettes - changed society’s beliefs about women’s right to vote.

campaigners for gay rights - changed society’s beliefs about same-sex couples having the right to get married.

Question 64

processes involved in social change

Answer 64

drawing attention to the issue, e.g. through a march/protest which provides social proof of the problem.

consistency - always putting forward the same viewpoint.

deeper processing - providing reasoned arguments that enable the majority to think deeply about the issue.

the augmentation principle - being willing to take a risk or make a sacrifice for your cause to show how serious you are about it.

the snowball effect - more & more people start to back the minority position so that it grows & grows.

the tipping point - the old minority view now becomes the majority view. the new belief/behaviour is put forward as the new social norm that people should conform to.

a change in the law - it becomes necessary to obey legislation about something that originally started off as a viewpoint held by a minority group.

social cryptomnesia - people know there has been a social change but are unable to pinpoint when this came about; no memory of events leading to change.

Question 65

processes in conformity and obedience that have led to social change

Answer 65

1) Asch’s research - in a variation, one confederate acted as a dissenter & gave correct answers throughout the procedure. this broke the power of the majority, encouraging others to dissent. this shows that a dissenter in the minority has the potential to ultimately lead to social change.

2) Milgram’s research - in a variation, a confederate teacher was introduced who was a disobedient role model. this ‘teacher’ refused to give shocks to the learner leading to a drop in the rate of obedience in the genuine ppts. this further suggests that a dissenter, and therefore the minority, has the power to lead to social change.

3) environmental and health campaigns - campaigns aimed at encouraging people to be more aware of the importance of the environment may suggest to recycle - a social norm. they may put up notices or circulate messages that say ‘most people recycle - do you?’. this draws people’s attention to what the majority is doing & so encourages them to conform in order to fit in - NSI processes are operating here. this shows the role that conforming to social norms has in bringing about social change.

Question 66

strength for social change

Answer 66

+ research shows that NSI plays a role in social change

Nolan hung messages on front doors of houses. the key message was that most residents were trying to reduce energy usage.

significant decreases in energy use were found compared to a control group who saw messages to save energy with no reference to other people’s behaviour.

this shows that exposing people to messages portrayed as social norms can lead to social change as people are more likely to conform to this behaviour due to NSI.

COUNTER;

However, some studies show that people’s behaviour is not always changed as a result of being exposed to social norms.

Foxcroft carried out an analysis of studies where social norms were used to reduce alcohol consumption in students.

this research showed that social norms led to a small reduction in the amount students drank, but didn’t reduce how often they drank.

this suggests that exposure to social norms doesn’t always result in long term social change & that NSI may not play as great a role as first thought.

Question 67

weaknesses of social change

Answer 67

• a problem in trying to understand the processes involved in social change is that it often takes many years to turn a minority view into a majority view.

e.g. it took decades for attitudes about drink-driving to change.

because of this, it is difficult to establish whether a consistent minority or the following of social norms was the most effective in bringing about this change.

there may also have been a number of other factors that might have had an impact on this change, such as education, which are difficult to rule out.

this means we cannot be certain about the role that minority influence plays in social change.

• deeper processing may not play such a big role in social change as first thought.

Mackie argues that majority influence leads to deeper processing by the minority & not the other way around.

as the minority view is only shared by a few, the majority are unlikely to be converted to this view as they don’t spend much time thinking about it & therefore don’t deeply process it.

on the other hand, if we are in the minority & the majority holds a different view, we will think long & hard about this view as it is different to ours and is supported by many.

this therefore challenges the role that minority influence is believed to play in social change.