Social Influence

Question 1

What is conformity?

Answer 1

Aronson(2011) defined conformity as a change in a person’s behaviour or opinions as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or group of people

Question 2

Types of conformity?

Answer 2

1. Compliance
2. Identification
3. Internalisation

Question 3

What is compliance?

Answer 3

It is a superficial and temporary type of conformity that involves “going along with others” in public but privately not changing personal opinions and behaviour. The individual changes their behaviour to avoid rejection/to fit in with others

Question 4

Is the change from compliance permanent or temporary?

Answer 4

It is a temporary change and the changed behaviour stops as soon as the external pressure stops. It is due to normative social influence

Question 5

What is identification?

Answer 5

This is when an individual adopts the behaviour or beliefs of a group. The individual accepts the group’s norms out of a desire for a relationship or association with the group rather than a genuine internal agreement with the beliefs of the group

Question 6

What is internalisation?

Answer 6

This is when the individual accepts the behaviour or beliefs of the majority both publicly and privately with the new beliefs becoming a part of the individual’s belief system

Question 7

Is the change from internalisation permanent or temporary?

Answer 7

It is a permanent change because the changed behaviour continues even in the absence of the majority group. It is most likely due to informational social influence

Question 8

Explanations for conformity

Answer 8

Normative social influence -the need to be liked
Informative social influence -the need to be right

Question 9

What is normative social influence?

Answer 9

It is an explanation of conformity which says that we agree with the opinions of the majority because we want to be accepted, gain social approval and be liked.

Question 10

More on normative social influence…

Answer 10

The resulting change is superficial and temporary. It is usually motivated by emotional reasons as people want to feel connected and valued by their peers making them more likely to conform to avoid negative feelings associated with rejection

Question 11

What type of situation is NSI more likely to occur in?

Answer 11

NSI is more likely to occur in situations where the group is more important to the person so the individual is more likely to change their behaviour to gain the social approval of the group.

Question 12

What is informational social influence?

Answer 12

It is conforming to the opinion of the majority because
we believe the majority is right and so we accept it because we want to be correct as well.

Question 13

What situation is ISI more likely to occur in?

Answer 13

ISI is more likely to occur in situations where the task is ambiguous or the situation is new and unfamiliar

Question 14

What is ISI motivated by?

Answer 14

It is motivated by cognitive reasons and the resulting change is genuine and permanent

Question 15

Evaluations on the explanations of conformity- Strengths

Answer 15

There is research evidence supporting Normative Social Influence (NSI) as an explanation for conformity in unambiguous situations.
In Asch’s (1951) classic line study, 75% of the ppt conformed to the incorrect answer at least once despite the correct answer being unambiguous. When interviewed afterward, some participants stated they conformed because they felt self-conscious and afraid of disapproval.
This confirms that people will conform even when they know the group is wrong, simply to avoid rejection. When Asch repeated the study but allowed participants to write their answers down privately, conformity fell to 12.5%. This proves that the pressure to “fit in” is a powerful motivator for public compliance.
Despite this, NSI does not affect everyone in the same way. People who are less concerned about being liked are less affected by NSI, whereas “nAffiliators” (those with a strong need for social relationships) are much more likely to conform. Consequently, the NSI explanation is somewhat reductionist as it ignores individual personality differences that mediate the social pressure.

Question 16

Another strength for ISI…

Answer 16

There is also research evidence supporting ISI. In one of Asch’s variations, he varied the difficulty of the line test by making the comparison lines similar in length to the standard line. This increases the ambiguity of the correct answer; when ppt were unsure of the correct answer due to the task’s ambiguity, they were more likely to rely on others for judgement. This reliance suggests the ppt were seeking information from the group to make the correct decision which supports the ISI explanation of conformity

Question 17

Weaknesses of the explanations of conformity

Answer 17

A significant limitation of the explanations of conformity is that the supporting research is often ethnocentric, relying heavily on WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic) samples.

Smith and Bond (1996) conducted a meta-analysis of conformity studies and found that conformity rates were much higher in collectivist cultures (e.g., China, 37%) than in individualist cultures (e.g., USA, 25%).

This suggests that the “laws” of NSI and ISI proposed by Deutsch and Gerard may not be universal. Therefore, it could be argued that the current explanations may suffer from imposed etic, where Western psychological constructs are unfairly applied to non-Western cultures.

Question 18

Another weakness of explanations of conformity ….

Answer 18

It is difficult to distinguish between NSI and ISI. In many real-life situations, both processes operate at the same time. For example, in Asch’s study, participants may have confirmed both because they wanted to gain social approval (NSI) and because they doubted their perception and believed others were right (ISI). This overlap reduces the clarity and usefulness of the two-processes explanation.

Question 19

Asch’s Experiment

Answer 19

Procedure: He tested conformity by asking ppt to identify which of the comparison lines matches the standard line. The ppt were 123 American male undergraduates and each of them were tested individually with 6-8 confederates, and they were not aware that the others were confederates. Initially, 6 control trials were conducted where the confederates gave the correct answer but in 13 critical trials, the confederates were instructed to give the incorrect answer unanimously.

Question 20

Findings of Asch’s research

Answer 20

The measure of conformity was how often the ppt conformed to the majority’s incorrect answer despite the task’s unambiguity. 75% of the ppt conformed at least once and 25% did not conform at all. The overall conformity rate in the critical trials is around 33%. These findings suggest that people will confirm due to NSI to avoid rejection and gain social approval

Question 21

Variations to Asch’s Experiment

Answer 21

The variations he carried out were: task difficulty, unanimity and group size

Question 22

Asch’s variations: Group size

Answer 22

He wanted to know whether the size of the group would be more important than the agreement of the group. He varied the # of confederates from 1-16. With only one confederate, conformity rate was only 3%, with two confederate conformity rate was 13% but with 3 confederates, conformity rate rose to 33% but remained steady with the addition of another confederate. This suggests that a small majority is not sufficient for influence to be exerted(as it is easy to disagree against 1 or 2 ppl than it is with 3 or more)

Question 23

Asch’s variations: Unanimity

Answer 23

He wanted to know whether the presence of another, non-conforming person would affect the naive’s ppt conformity. To test this, he introduced a confederate who broke the group’s unanimity by responding correctly. The presence of a dissenter reduced conformity by 5.5% as the dissenter enabled the naive ppt to behave more independently and also provided social support as the ppt would be able to give the correct answer without feeling the need to gain social approval so they conform less
These findings suggest that the influence of the majority depends to some extent on the group being unanimous. This means that when a group is unanimous, the influence of the majority becomes stronger as it becomes harder for individuals who have different opinions to speak out so they’ll conform more

Question 24

Asch’s variations: Task difficulty

Answer 24

Asch made the line-judging task more difficult by making the standard line and the comparison lines similar in length. Conformity increased under these conditions as Asch argues this was due to ppt being more uncertain about their judgement making them susceptible to ISI

Question 25

Evaluations of Asch's research- Strengths

Answer 25

A significant strength of Asch’s research is its high internal validity, achieved through the use of a strictly controlled laboratory setting that minimized the influence of extraneous variables. By using a standardized procedure—where the clear nature of the line-judging task, and the scripted incorrect responses of the confederates were identical for every participant—Asch ensured that the only variable being changed was the social pressure of the group. This control allowed Asch to establish a clear cause-and-effect relationship between the independent variable (group unanimity) and the dependent variable (conformity). Because the lines were so clearly different in length (making the task unambiguous), any errors made by the participant could be attributed specifically to NSI rather than a genuine confusion about the task. This makes the findings highly replicable, as evidenced by the numerous variations Asch later conducted to test group size and task difficulty.

Question 26

Weaknesses of Asch's research.

Answer 26

Another major criticism is that the research lacks ecological validity because the task and the setting were highly artificial and did not reflect real-life conformity. Judging the length of a line is a trivial task with no real-world consequences; there was no reason not to conform. This means the findings may tell us very little about how people conform in high-stakes situations—such as a jury room or peer pressure involving drugs—where the costs of conforming (or not) are much higher. This limits the mundane realism of the study.

Question 27

Another weakness of Asch's research

Answer 27

A limitation of Asch's research is that it suffers from cultural and gender bias, as his original sample consisted entirely of American men. As established by Bond and Smith (1996) in their meta-analysis, the US is an individualistic culture where people are more concerned with themselves than their social group. In collectivist cultures such as China, conformity rates were found to be significantly higher. Neto (1995) also suggests that females are more conformist than males possibly because they are more concerned about social relationships than men are. This indicates that Asch’s results are from "WEIRD" (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic) samples. As a result, Asch's findings may only be generalisable to American men as he didn't take gender and cultural factors into account, reducing the finding's external validity.

Question 28

What are social roles?

Answer 28

They are behaviours, responsibilities and expectations associated with a particular position in society

Question 29

Why did Zimbardo design the Stanford Prison experiment?

Answer 29

He was concerned about the intense aggression within the US prison system and thought the reason for the aggression was not dispositional(the personality of the guards and prisoners) but situational, the environment of the prison itself and conformity to the social roles created by the prison environment

Question 30

What is Deindividuation?

Answer 30

This refers to the loss of personal identity and a diminished sense of personal responsibility.

Question 31

0Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment

Answer 31

24 "emotionally stable" male university students were recruited and randomly assigned to the role of either "guard" or "prisoner". To heighten the realism of the study, the prisoners experienced unexpected arrests at home, were deloused, given prison uniforms and ID numbers. The prison guards were given uniforms, wooden clubs, handcuffs and keys to establish authority and were told they had complete power over the prisoners.

Question 32

Findings of Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment

Answer 32

Ppt had quickly lost their sense of identity and adapted to their assigned roles. Prisoners after an initial failed attempt at resistance, showed signs of stress, anxiety and discomfort; some were released early after showing signs of emotional breakdowns and psychological disturbance. Guards empowered by their uniforms and anonymity displayed sadistic aggression and domineering behaviour. The study was halted after just six days due to the ethical concerns raised by the intense reactions.

Question 33

Conclusion of the Stanford Prison Experiment

Answer 33

His research suggested that situational factors rather than individual personality traits can drive behaviour as ppt who were considered "normal" and "healthy" engaged in aggressive or submissive behaviours as a result of their assigned social roles and the prison experiment. This demonstrates the power of deindividuation and conformity to social roles

Question 34

Evaluations of Zimbardo's experiment - Strengths

Answer 34

A major strength of the SPE was the high level of control Zimbardo maintained over participant variables, which increased the internal validity of the study. Zimbardo used extensive psychological testing to select only "emotionally stable" individuals. These participants were then randomly assigned to their roles as either guards or prisoners. This was crucial because it meant that the brutal behavior observed could not be explained by the participants' original personalities (dispositional factors). If the "guards" and "prisoners" behaved differently despite being similar at the start, the difference must have been due to the social roles they were given. This provides strong evidence for the power of the situation over the individual. However, some researchers argue that the "control" was compromised by Zimbardo’s own involvement as the Prison Superintendent. Ultimately, while the selection process was rigorous, Zimbardo’s lack of objectivity may have subtly influenced the participants to act in a way they thought he wanted, leading to demand characteristics.

Question 35

Weaknesses of Zimbardo's research

Answer 35

A limitation of Zimbardo’s research is that he may have exaggerated the power of the situation to influence behavior while simultaneously minimizing the role of dispositional (personality) factors. As noted by Fromm (1973), only a minority of the guards (about a third) actually behaved in a brutal manner. Another third were keen on applying rules fairly, and the remaining third actively tried to support the prisoners by sympathizing with them. This suggests that Zimbardo’s conclusion—that participants were simply "forced" to conform to social roles by the environment is overstated. If the situation were the sole cause of behavior, all guards in the same environment should have acted identically. The fact that their behavior varied so significantly indicates that the participants were still able to exercise free will and make individual moral choices based on their own personalities, despite the situational pressure to conform to their social roles.

Question 36

Another weakness of Zimbardo's research..

Answer 36

Ethical issues: The ppt experienced significant psychological harm; Zimbardo's decision to continue the experiment despite signs of emotional breakdown and the extreme reactions of both guards and prisoners demonstrates the need for strict ethical controls in psychological experiments, especially those that may put participants in distressing situations

Question 37

What is obedience?

Answer 37

It is a form of social influence in which an individual follows a direct order being issued by an authority figure who has the power to punish when obedient behaviour is not forthcoming

Question 38

Why did Milgram carry out his research?

Answer 38

He sought an answer to the question of why such a high proportion of the German people supported Hitler's plan to slaughter over 6 million Jews in the Holocaust as well as 5 million Romani homosexuals, poles and members of other social groups during the second world war.

Question 39

Procedure of Milgram's Obedience Research (1963)

Answer 39

Milgram recruited 40 male volunteers aged 20-50 from various occupations ranging from unskilled to professional through newspaper adverts. The advert said that they were going to take part in a study on learning and memory. When participants arrived at Yale's university, they were assigned their roles but unknown to them, the selection process was rigged as the Confederate always ended up as the "learner" while the true participants ended up as the "teacher". There was also an "experimenter" who was also a confederate dressed in a lab coat. The learner was strapped to a chair and wired with electrodes and the teacher was required to give the learner increasingly severe electric shocks ranging from 15V - 450V each time a mistake was made. The shocks were not real but the participants believed they were because at the onset of the experiment, the shocks were demonstrated on the participants. If the ppts hesitated, the experimenter gave a sequence of standard prods which were "Please continue", "the experiment requires that you continue", "it is absolutely essential that you continue ", and "you have no other choice, you must go on"

Question 40

What were the findings from Milgram's Obedience Research?

Answer 40

• 100% of the ppt shocked up to 300 volts, 12.5% of the ppt stopped at 300V and 65% continued to the highest level of 450 volts. • Qualitative data was also collected and many of them were seen to show signs of extreme tension and three of the participants even had "full blown uncontrollable seizures"

Question 41

Conclusion of Milgram's obedience research

Answer 41

These findings suggest that the majority of ppl will follow the orders of an authority figure even if that order goes against their personal morals.

Question 42

Evaluations of Milgram's research- Strengths & Weaknesses

Answer 42

One limitation of Milgram's research is that it may lack internal validity. This means the study might not have accurately measured what it intended to measure- real obedience to authority. Orne and Holland (1968) argued that many participants did not believe the electric shocks were real and were simply acting to please the experimenter. If the ppt were not truly convinced that they were harming someone, then their behaviour may not reflect genuine obedience but rather demand characteristics. This challenges the validity of Milgram's conclusions, as the high levels of obedience might be exaggerated and not a true reflection of how people behave under real moral pressure. However, Milgram defended his findings by citing research from Sheridan and King(1972) who conducted a similar study using real shocks on a puppy. Despite the shocks being real, 54% of the male ppt and 100% of the female ppt delivered what they thought was a fatal shock to the puppies. This suggests that Milgram's results were valid and that people do obey authority figures even when it causes distress to others.

Question 43

Another Weakness evaluation point for Milgram's research...

Answer 43

One major criticism of Milgram’s research is the presence of serious ethical issues. The study involved deception, as participants were misled about the type of study they were taking part in, the "random" allocation of roles and they also thought they were delivering real electric shocks. Additionally, participants were exposed to psychological harm, showing visible signs of stress such as sweating, with some having full blown seizures. This raises concerns about the lack of informed consent and the potential for long-term emotional effects. Although Milgram debriefed participants afterward, and many reported they were glad to have taken part, these ethical breaches have helped shape modern ethical standards in psychology and also our understanding of obedience to authority figures.

Question 44

Milgram's Variations

Answer 44

The variations to the situational variables that might affect obedience were **proximity, location and uniform **

Question 45

Milgram's variations: Proximity

Answer 45

Proximity variation #1: The teacher and the learner were kept in the same room. In this condition, obedience rate dropped from 65% to 40% Proximity variation #2: The experimenter left the room and gave instructions to the teacher by telephone. This increased proximity decreased obedience rate from 65% to 20.5% Proximity variation #3: In an even more dramatic variation, the teacher had to force the learner's hand onto an "electroshock plate" when he refused to answer a question. In this touch proximity condition, the obedience rate dropped further to 30%

Question 46

Explain why the obedience rate decreased when proximity increased between the experimenter and the teacher

Answer 46

Milgram argued that due to the increased distance, ppt were less likely to remain in an "agentic state" and more likely to return to an "autonomous state"

Question 47

Milgram's variations: Location

Answer 47

In this variation, Milgram changed the location of the study from the prestigious Yale university setting to a rundown building. The obedience rate dropped to 47.5%. This is still a quite high level of obedience but it is less than the baseline 65%.

Question 48

Explain why the obedience rate dropped when the location of the study changed.

Answer 48

This is because the low status run down building reduced the legitimacy of authority of the setting and the experimenter, so the ppts felt less pressured to obey.

Question 49

Milgram's variations: Uniform

Answer 49

In the baseline study, the experimenter wore a grey lab coat as a symbol of his authority, but in this variation the experimenter was replaced by an "ordinary member of the public" played by a confederate who was in everyday clothes rather than a lab coat. The obedience rate dropped to 20%

Question 50

Evaluations of Milgram's variations- Strengths

Answer 50

One strength of Milgram's variations is that there is supporting research evidence. Bickman(1974) conducted a field experiment in New York where confederates dressed as either a civilian, milkman or security guard and asked passersby to follow simple instructions like picking up litter or giving money for parking. The study found that people were twice as likely to obey the person in a guard's uniform compared to the other outfits. This supports Milgram's finding that uniform acts as a powerful symbol of authority, which increases obedience. Because Bickman's study took place in a natural setting, it also adds ecological validity to Milgram's conclusions, showing that the effect of situational variables like uniform is not just limited to lab conditions but applies to everyday behaviour.

Question 51

Limitation of Milgram's variations (cultural bias)...

Answer 51

One limitation of Milgram's variations and original baseline study is that they may suffer from cultural bias. His studies were conducted in the United States during the 1960s, a time and place known for high respect for authority, especially in formal institutions like universities. This raises concerns about whether the findings can be generalised to other cultures. However, there have been cross-cultural replications where their findings have been generally supportive of Milgram. Miranda et al(1981) found an obedience rate of over 90% among Spanish students supporting the idea that Milgram's conclusions about obedience are not limited to one culture but are valid across cultures and apply to females too.

Question 52

What are the two explanations of obedience?

Answer 52

1. Agentic state and; 2. Legitimacy of authority

Question 53

What is the agentic state?

Answer 53

This is a mental state where we feel no personal responsibility for our behaviour because we believe ourselves to be acting for an authority figure, i.e. as their agent. This frees us from the demands of our conscience as we feel that the responsibility lies with the authority figure that gave the order.

Question 54

What is an autonomous state?

Answer 54

It is when an individual is free to behave according to their own principles and therefore feels a sense of responsibility for their own actions.

Question 55

What is the agentic shift?

Answer 55

This is when an individual shifts from their "autonomous state" to their "agentic state".

Question 56

Why does an agentic shift happen?

Answer 56

Milgram (1974) suggested that this occurs when a person perceives someone else as a figure of authority with them having greater power because of their position in a social hierarchy.

Question 57

What are binding factors?

Answer 57

They are aspects of the situation that allows a person to ignore or minimise the damaging effect of their behaviour and thus reduce the "moral strain" they are feeling.

Question 58

What is the legitimacy of authority explanation?

Answer 58

It is an explanation which suggests that we are more likely to obey people who we perceive to have authority over us with this authority being justified by the individual's position of power within a social hierarchy.

Question 59

Evaluations of the legitimacy of authority explanation for obedience- Strengths

Answer 59

A strength of the legitimacy of authority explanation is that it is a useful account of cultural differences in obedience. Kilham and Mann(1944) replicated Milgram's procedure in Australia and found that only 16% of the ppt went to 450V whereas Mantell(1971) found that 85% of German participants had gone all the way to 450V. This shows that in some cultures authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate and demand obedience from individuals and such supportive findings from cross-cultural research increase the validity of the explanation.

Question 60

Another strength for the legitimacy of authority explanation to obedience...

Answer 60

One major strength of the legitimacy of authority explanation is its ability to explain real-world obedience, especially in military and political settings. For example, during the My Lai Massacre in the Vietnam war, American soldiers followed orders to kill hundreds of unarmed civilians. Research suggests they obeyed because they saw the commanding officer as a legitimate authority, operating within a recognised military hierarchy which supports the theory that individuals often defer responsibility to someone they perceive as having legal or institutional power.

Question 61

Weakness of the legitimacy of authority explanation to obedience...

Answer 61

The theory does not explain why some people resist obedience even when an authority figure is legitimate. This is evident from Milgram's research as 35% of the participants disobeyed and didn't give shocks up to 450V. This behaviour cannot be explained by the situation alone and so the theory may be too simplistic/reductionist, ignoring dispositional factors like ppt having an Authoritarian personality which influences obedience.

Question 62

What is the Authoritarian personality?

Answer 62

This is the type of personality that Adorno argued was especially susceptible to obeying people in authority. They have an extreme respect for authority and submissiveness to them, contempt for people they perceive as having inferior social status to them, and have a "black and white views" believing everything is either right or wrong.

Question 63

Origins of the Authoritarian personality identified by Adorno et al

Answer 63

Adorno et al identified the origins of an Authoritarian personality from childhood due to harsh parenting. The features of the parenting style identified were strict discipline, impossibly high standards, an expectation of absolute loyalty and conditional love which is when the parents love and affection for their child depends entirely on how they behave. He further argued that these experiences create resentment and hostility in the child, but the child cannot express these feelings directly against their parents so their fears are displaced onto others who are perceived to be weaker.

Question 64

Adorno's research on Authoritarian personality- Procedure

Answer 64

Adorno et al (1950) investigated the causes of the obedient personality in a study of more than 2000 middle class, white Americans and their unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups. They developed the Fascism scale which is used to measure authoritarian personality

Question 65

Findings from the Authoritarian personality research

Answer 65

People with authoritarian leanings (i.e.those who scored higher on the F-Scale) identified with "strong" people and were generally contemptuous of the "weak". They were very conscious of their own and others status showing excessive respect, servility and deference to those of higher status. Adorno et al also found that Authoritarian people had a cognitive style where there was no "fuzziness" between categories of people with fixed and distinctive stereotypes about other groups showing a strong positive correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice.

Question 66

Evaluation of the Authoritarian personality explanation to obedience- A strength and a counter-argument.

Answer 66

A strength of Adorno's theory is that there is supporting research evidence. Elms and Milgram (1966) took 40 ppt from Milgram's research; 20 of which had disobeyed and the other 20 who obeyed. All the ppt completed a series of questionnaires that were designed to measure their personality which includes their relationships with their relationship with their parents as well as the Fascism scale. They found that the ppt who had obeyed scored higher on the F scale and were less close to their fathers which shows a link between authoritarianism and obedience to authority. However, this link is merely a correlation between two measured variables which makes it impossible to draw the conclusion that Authoritarian personality causes obedience. It may be that a "third factor" is involved. for example Hyman and Sheatsley (1954) found that both obedience and authoritarian personality may be associated with a lower level of education.

Question 67

Another evaluation point for authoritarian personality as an explanation for obedience...

Answer 67

It explains individual differences as it accounts for why some people disobeyed in Milgram's research even tho the authority was legitimate. This adds depth to our understanding of obedience

Question 68

What is resistance to social influence?

Answer 68

It is the ability of people to withstand social pressure to conform to the majority or obey authority.

Question 69

What are the two explanations for resistance to social influence?

Answer 69

1. Social support which is a situational explanation and; 2. Locus of control which is a dispositional explanation

Question 70

What is social support?

Answer 70

This is how the presence of other people who resist pressures to conform to the majority or obey authority can help you do the same as they act as models showing that resistance is possible.

Question 71

In what research is social support visible?

Answer 71

Social support is visible in Asch's unanimity research where he introduced a dissenter who broke the group's unanimity by responding correctly. Conformity rate reduced by 5.5% as this shows that the presence of a dissenter enabled the ppt to behave more independently and conform less.

Question 72

What is locus of control?

Answer 72

It refers to the amount of control we perceive to have over situations in our lives.

Question 73

Types of locus of control

Answer 73

Internal locus of control and External locus of control

Question 74

What do people with internal locus of control believe?

Answer 74

They believe that they are mostly responsible for what happens to them.

Question 75

What do people with external locus of control think?

Answer 75

Externals believe that they have no control over what happens to them and it's only a matter of luck or other outside factors

Question 76

Difference between internals and externals

Answer 76

People who have an internal LOC are more likely to be able to resist pressures to conform or obey. This is because they are more likely to base their decisions on their own beliefs and thus resists pressures from others. People with a higher internal LOC also tend to be more self-confident, more achievement-oriented, have higher intelligence and have less need for social approval which leads to greater resistance to social pressure.

Question 77

Evaluations of Social support as an explanation of resistance to conformity. Strength

Answer 77

A significant strength of the explanation for resistance to social influence is the role of Social Support in resisting conformity. Allen and Levine (1971) found that conformity decreased when there was one dissenter in an Asch-type conformity study. This occurred even if the dissenter wore thick glasses and said he had difficulty with his vision so he was clearly in no position to judge the length of the lines. This supports the view that the individual resisting doesn't have to be "right" to help others resist, they simply need to provide a "model" of defiance that breaks the group's unanimity. This allows the individual to feel more confident in their own judgment, proving that social support is a vital situational factor in maintaining independent behavior.

Question 78

Strength of LOC explanation

Answer 78

There is strong empirical evidence supporting the link between an Internal Locus of Control (LOC) and the ability to resist pressure to obey authority figures. Holland (1967) replicated Milgram’s obedience study and measured whether participants were "internals" or "externals." He found that 37% of internals refused to continue to the highest shock level, whereas only 23% of externals resisted. This supports the dispositional explanation that people with a high Internal LOC are more likely to resist social influence. Because they believe they are responsible for their own actions and the consequences that follow, they are less likely to shift into an agentic state and are more likely to base their decisions on their own moral principles rather than the orders of an authority figure. Despite this, we must consider the role of temporal validity. Twenge et al. (2004) analyzed American LOC studies over a 40-year period and found that people have become more resistant to obedience but also more external in their LOC. Consequently, this challenges the simple link between internal LOC and increasing resistance, suggesting that the relationship is more complex and may be influenced by changing societal norms.

Question 79

What is minority influence?

Answer 79

It is a form of social influence in which a minority of people (sometimes just a person) persuade others to adopt their beliefs, attitudes or behaviours.

Question 80

What type of conformity is minority influence most likely to lead to?

Answer 80

It is most likely to lead to internalisation as both public and private beliefs are changed by the process.

Question 81

Factors affecting minority influence

Answer 81

1. Consistency 2. Commitment and; 3. Flexibility

Question 82

What is consistency?

Answer 82

This is when the minority keeps the same beliefs over a long time (diachronic consistency) and between individuals that make up the minority group (synchronic consistency). This draws attention to their beliefs and creates uncertainty in the mind of the majority, making them rethink their own views.

Question 83

What is commitment?

Answer 83

This is when the minority demonstrates dedication to their positions by engaging in activities that are at risk to the minority e.g. by making personal sacrifices. This is effective because it causes the majority to pay even more attention as it shows that the minority are not acting out of self interest.

Question 84

What is flexibility?

Answer 84

Nemeth (1986) argued that consistency is not the only important facts in minority influence because it can be interpreted negatively; the minority group can be seen as rigid, dogmatic and inflexible which is unlikely to result in any influence. Instead, members of the minority need to be prepared to adapt their point of view and accept reasonable counter arguments to appear balancing and cooperative.

Question 85

Research on consistency by Moscovici et al (1969) : Procedure

Answer 85

Moscovici et al (1969) demonstrated minority influence in a study where a group of six people was asked to view a set of 36 coloured slides that varied in intensity and then stated whether the slides were blue or green. In one of the groups, there were two confederates who consistently said all 36 slides were green and in the other group, the two confederates were inconsistent with their answers.

Question 86

Evaluations of Moscovici et al research- Strengths

Answer 86

A significant strength of minority influence is the research support for the importance of consistency. Moscovici et al. (1969) showed 36 blue-colored slides to a group of participants. Two confederates (the minority) consistently claimed the slides were green. In this condition, the participants gave the same wrong answer on over 8% of the trials. However, when the minority was inconsistent, agreement fell to almost zero (1.25%). This proves that consistency is a vital factor in minority influence. A consistent minority is far more influential than an inconsistent one because it creates a sense of "cognitive conflict" in the majority, forcing them to question their own perceptions. However, a major limitation of Moscovici’s research is the use of an artificial task. Judging the color of a slide is a trivial matter with no real-world consequences. In actual social change movements (like climate activism), the stakes are much higher and the minority often faces extreme hostility. Ultimately, while the study establishes the importance of consistency, it may lack ecological validity and fail to reflect the complexity of how minorities influence people in the real world.

Question 87

Evaluation on Flexibility as a factor affecting minority influence

Answer 87

Further research suggests that flexibility is just as important as consistency to avoid being perceived as unreasonable. Nemeth (1986) created a mock jury situation where participants discussed the amount of compensation to be paid to a victim of a ski-lift accident. When a confederate (the minority) was rigid and refused to change their "low" figure, they had no effect on the group. However, when they showed flexibility and compromised slightly, the majority also compromised and moved towards the minority's figure. This supports the idea that the minority must strike a balance between being firm and being cooperative. If a minority is perceived as "dogmatic," the majority will simply ignore them. Flexibility allows the minority to be seen as valid and thoughtful members of the conversation. Nevertheless, it is difficult to determine the "optimum" level of flexibility. If a minority is too flexible, they may be seen as inconsistent or weak, losing their influence entirely. Consequently, the success of a minority is highly situational, and the theory may be over-simplifying a very delicate social "balancing act.

Question 88

What is social change?

Answer 88

This occurs when a while society adopts a new belief or behaviour that then becomes widely accepted as the norm.

Question 89

Steps in how social change occurs.

Answer 89

1. Drawing attention 2. Cognitive conflict 3. Argumentation principles 4. Snowball effect 5. Social cryptomnesia

Question 90

What is drawing attention all about?

Answer 90

Minorities can bring about social change by drawing the majority's attention to an issue

Question 91

What is cognitive conflict?

Answer 91

Cognitive conflict: The minority creates a conflict between what the majority currently believes and the position of the minority. This makes the majority think more deeply about the issues being challenged

Question 92

What is the augmentation principle?

Answer 92

This is when a minority appears willing to suffer for their views so they are seen are more committed and so are taken more seriously by the majority

Question 93

What is the snowball effect?

Answer 93

This is when there are small effects at first but the effect then spreads until it reaches a tipping point at which it leads to wide scale social change

Question 94

What is social cryptomnesia?

Answer 94

This is when people have a memory that changes have occurred but don't remember how it happens.