- Replicable (French TV) - High control - Real world application (Holocaust)

Social Influence Flashcards by Ellis Unknown

Asch’s Study Aims + Procedures

Gave participants an ambiguous task
To measure the extent people conformed to opinions of others
7-9 people
1 naive participant

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Asch’s Findings

32% conformity rate
25% did not conform
75% conformed once

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Asch’s Study - Limitations

Situation and task were artificial
Ethical issues (stress + consent)
Little real world application (only men tested)

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Asch’s Study - Strengths

Task difficulty (increase line similarity)
Research support (Lucas et al)
High internal validity (lab experiment)

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Lucas et al - Research support Asch

Maths questions
Given false answers
Higher difficulty higher conformity

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

3 types of conformity

Identification - public + private (temp)
Compliance - public
Internalization - deep + permanent

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

2 explanations for conformity

Normative Social Influence - need to be liked (conformity)

Informational Social Influence - need to be right (Internalization)

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

3 factors affecting conformity

Size of majority: conform to confederate
2 Confederates: 13%
3 confederates: 32%
Unanimity: non conforming participant decreases conformity
Conformity: dropped > 5.5%
Task difficulty: more ambiguous higher conformity

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment - Procedure

Effect of social roles on conformity
Mock prison
10 guards - uniform + power
11 prisoners - given number
Regular prison routine

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment - Findings

Dehumanisation increased
Prisoners extreme distress (submissive)
Guards became brutal
Stopped after 6 days

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Zimbardo’s - Strengths

High ecological validity
Informed consent
Reality of roles

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Zimbardo’s - Limitations

Based on role-playing (TV/movies)
Zimbardo’s loss of objectivity
Ethical issues

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Milgram’s Obedience Study - Procedure

‘Germans are different’ hypothesis
40 American male participants
Yale University
Confederate: ‘Learner’ + ‘Experimenter’ (lab coat)
> Told must continue
Participant: ‘Teacher’
Teacher fake shock everytime mistake

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Milgram’s Obedience Study - Findings

65% obedience rate 450V
Obey authority figures even if harmful

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Milgram - Strengths

Replicable (French TV)
High control
Real world application (Holocaust)

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Milgram - Limitations

Ethical issues
Lack of ecological validity
Cultural bias (ethnocentric)

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

3 situational variables in obedience

Proximity: different room (40% conformity)
Location: moved to run down office (48% conformity)
Uniform: Bushman (72% obeyed in uniform)

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Social Psychology Factors - Agentic State

Study These Flashcards

Shifting responsibility for one’s actions onto someone else
Autonomous state (independent) > agentic state (behalf of authority)
Maintain positive self-image (no responsibility
Binding factors: shift blame to victim (reduce moral strain)

Social Psychology Factors - Legitimacy of authority

Study These Flashcards

Obey people further up a social hierarchy
Authority figures trusted + respected
Give authority figures control
Power abuse: eg Hitler

Social Psychology Factors - Strength

Study These Flashcards

Research support (Milgram)
Real world application (Holocaust)

Social Psychology Factors - Limitations

Study These Flashcards

Doesn’t explain all obedience (Milgram not %100)
Ignores individual differences
Cultural differences

The Authoritarian Personality - Adorno et al

Study These Flashcards

Type of personality that is susceptible to obeying authority
Submissive to those of higher status
Aggressive towards those with lower status
Due to strict upbringing
2000 white middle class Americans
F scale
Interview
Observation

Adorno et al - findings

Study These Flashcards

High scores:
- Rigid thinkers
- Hostile towards inferior (Prejudice minority)
- Extreme respect authority

Authoritarian Personality - Strengths

Study These Flashcards

Research support (Elms & Milgram)
Explains individual differences

Authoritarian Personality - Limitations

- F-Scale politically biased (right wing - Response bias - Can't generalise

Resistance to social influence - Social support

- Conformity Resistance: dissenter reduces conformity (eg: Asch) - Obedience Resistance: dissenter reduces obedience (eg: Milgram: 65% >10%)

Resistance to social influence - LOC

Rotter: Internal LOC: - Control with themselves - Greater resistance to social influence External LOC: - Behaviour caused by things outside their control - Less personal responsibility

Twenge et al - Research support LOC

- Meta analysis - Externality > poor school achievement - Increase in divorce rates/crime

Resistance to Social Influence - Strengths

- Research support (Holland) - Real world application (Rosenstrasse Protest)

Resistance to Social Influence - Limitations

- More externals (Twenge et al) - Cultural differences - Doesn't fully explain - Redutionalist

Holland - Resistance to social inlfuence: Research support

- Repeated Milgram - 37% internals not continue - Internal LOC more likely to resist obedience

Minority Influence

Small group influence majority Lead to internalisation **Consistency**: consistent message **Commitment**: dedication + confidence **Flexibility**: adapt + cooperate

Snowball effect

'More' people become converted Over time

Moscovici et al's study - Minority Influence - Procedure

6 participants 4 naïve, 2 stooges Shown 36 blue slides 3 groups (consistent, inconsistent, no confederates)

Moscovici et al's study - Minority Influence - Findings

Consistent: 8% wrong Inconsistent: 1.25% wrong Control: <1% Importance of consistency in minority influence

Minority Influence - Strengths

- Research support (Moscovici et al) - Real world application (suffragettes) - Research support (Martin et al)

Minority Influence - Limitations

- Artificial tasks - Limited sample (females) - Cultural bias

Social Change through minority infleunce

Eg: Suffragettes 1: Attention 2: Cognitive Conflict 3: Consistency 4: Argumentation Principle 5: Snowball effect > Social cryptomnesia

Social change through majority influence (conformity)

-Normative influence eg: think heavy drinking is norm, will drink more -Social Norms Interventions eg: don't drink and drive campaigns

Social Change through minority/majority influence - Strengths

- Real world application - Research support (Milgram/ Moscovici) Nolan et al - normative influence research support - Social influence leads long term change

Social Change through minority/majority influence - Limitations

- Oversimplification - Cultural bias - Minority influnce slow + ineffective - Ethical issues

Marin et al - Minority Influence Research Support

Role of deeper processing Gave participants message Heard endorsement of view Heard conflicting view Less willing change opinions to conflicting view

Elms and Milgram - Authoritarian Personality Research Support

Interview 20 obedient from Milgram study Scored higher on F-Scale

Nolan Et Al - Normative social influence > Social change Research support

Households received messages: environmental benefits or showing that neighbors were saving energy Those told about others’ behavior were significantly more likely to reduce their own usage. (Normative social influence)

Social Influence Flashcards

(44 cards)