Social Influence

Question 1

What evidence supports informational social influence (ISI)?

Answer 1

Lucas et al. found greater conformity to incorrect answers on difficult maths problems when participants rated their ability as low.
→ Suggests people conform more when they lack confidence or knowledge, supporting ISI as a mechanism in ambiguous situations.

Question 2

How does normative social influence (NSI) explain real-world behaviour like bullying?

Answer 2

Garandeau & Cillessen found boys may bully to gain group approval and avoid rejection.
→ NSI helps explain conformity driven by social acceptance and fear of disapproval in peer groups.

Question 3

What is a limitation of viewing ISI and NSI as separate explanations?

Answer 3

Deutsch & Gerrard’s two-process model may oversimplify — Asch’s unanimity variation showed that a dissenting confederate reduced both ISI (by offering info) and NSI (by offering support).
→ ISI and NSI likely operate together, not separately.

Question 4

What is an alternative explanation for conformity beyond ISI and NSI?

Answer 4

Locus of control (LOC): People with high internal LOC are less likely to conform due to greater confidence (resist ISI) and less need for approval (resist NSI).
→ Suggests both dispositional and situational factors are needed for a full explanation of conformity.

Question 4

What was a strength of Asch’s study in terms of internal validity?

Answer 4

High control of variables — participants first completed a baseline trial without confederates to confirm they knew the right answer.
→ Ensures results reflected conformity, not confusion or guessing.

Question 5

What ethical issue did Asch’s study raise?

Answer 5

It involved deception (ppts were unaware of the true aim), meaning they couldn’t give fully informed consent.

→ However, they were debriefed afterwards, which improves ethical acceptability without affecting validity.

Question 6

Why does Asch’s study lack ecological validity?

Answer 6

Judging line lengths is an artificial task that doesn’t reflect real-world conformity situations.
→ Findings may not generalise to complex, emotionally significant group decisions.

Question 7

Why is Asch’s research considered culturally and temporally biased?

Answer 7

Conducted in 1950s America during McCarthyism — a time of high conformity pressure.
→ Perrin & Spencer (1980) found much lower conformity in UK engineering students, suggesting Asch’s findings lack temporal and cultural validity.

Question 8

What are the main ethical issues in Milgram’s study?

Answer 8

Milgram deceived participants and did not obtain fully informed consent — ppts believed they were giving real shocks.

High levels of psychological distress (sweating, trembling, seizures).

Counterpoint: Milgram argued that 84% of participants were glad to have taken part, and a full debrief was provided — making it ethically controversial but justified by its insights.

Question 9

How might Milgram’s study lack ecological validity?

Answer 9

The task (shocking strangers in a lab) is artificial and unlikely in real life.

However, Milgram argued the social situation was realistic and later real-world parallels support it.
E.g. Hofling et al. found 21/22 nurses obeyed unethical instructions from doctors — real-world obedience can be high.

Question 10

How does Milgram’s sampling affect generalisability?

Answer 10

All 40 participants were American males aged 20–50, limiting population validity.

Can’t generalise to women, other cultures, or personality types.

Counterpoint: Replications (e.g. Burger 2009) found similar results with women and across different ages, increasing generalisability.

Question 11

What evidence supports the reliability of Milgram’s findings?

Answer 11

The study has high reliability — strict controls and standardised procedures (same prompts, shock machine, roles).

Replicated in a French TV show (2010): 80% of contestants gave max voltage, reinforcing findings across cultures and contexts.

Question 12

How has Zimbardo’s study contributed to real-world prison reform?

Answer 12

Led to changes in how prisons are run (e.g. separating young and adult inmates, avoiding panopticon-style designs).
+Real-world application supports the practical value of the research.

Question 13

What is a major criticism regarding the ecological validity of Zimbardo’s study?

Answer 13

Participants knew it wasn’t real, which could’ve influenced behaviour (demand characteristics).
+One guard said he based his actions on a movie character (Cool Hand Luke).

Question 14

What limitation does the sample in Zimbardo’s study present?

Answer 14

All American male students = ethnocentric and androcentric sample.
+Cannot generalise to collectivist cultures or female participants.

Question 15

How did Reicher and Haslam’s replication challenge Zimbardo’s findings?

Answer 15

In their BBC Prison Study, guards didn’t conform to roles and prisoners united.
+Suggests conformity to roles isn’t automatic and may depend on individual/group differences.

Question 16

What real-world event supports agentic state and legitimacy of authority?

Answer 16

My Lai Massacre: US soldiers committed atrocities following orders, claiming “just obeying”.
+Illustrates destructive obedience due to legitimate authority.

Question 17

How does Milgram’s study support the agentic state explanation?

Answer 17

Participants continued giving shocks after being told the experimenter would take responsibility.
+Demonstrates agentic shift and reduced personal accountability.

Question 18

What study undermines the agentic state explanation?

Answer 18

Rank & Jacobson: Nurses disobeyed doctor’s harmful orders.
+Shows not everyone obeys legitimate authority; some remain in autonomous state.

Question 19

What critique does Mandel make of the agentic state theory?

Answer 19

WWII soldiers killed civilians voluntarily despite having other options.
+Suggests obedience may be due to personality/motivation, not just authority.

Question 20

What research supports the link between authoritarian personality and obedience?

Answer 20

Elms & Milgram: Obedient participants scored higher on the F-scale than disobedient ones.
+Suggests authoritarian traits linked to greater obedience.

Question 21

Why can’t authoritarian personality explain all obedience?

Answer 21

Millions obeyed Nazis, but unlikely they all had authoritarian personalities.
+Social identity theory may offer a better explanation.

Question 22

Why is authoritarian personality theory considered reductionist?

Answer 22

Focuses solely on personality, ignoring situational factors (e.g. proximity, social support).
+May oversimplify obedience behaviours.

Question 23

What is a methodological issue with the F-scale?

Answer 23

Acquiescence bias – people may agree with statements regardless of content.
+Reduces internal validity of results.

Question 24

How does social support help people resist conformity?

Answer 24

Asch’s variation: conformity dropped from 32% to 5.5% with a dissenting confederate. +Provides confidence and breaks unanimity.

Question 25

How does social support help resist obedience?

Answer 25

Milgram’s variation: obedience fell to 10% when a disobedient peer was present. +Disobedience acts as a model for resisting pressure.

Question 26

What real-world evidence supports the role of social support?

Answer 26

Albrecht et al. (2006): Teen pregnancy smoking rates reduced with supportive mentors. +Demonstrates application of social support to real-world behaviours.

Question 27

How does the Rosa Parks case demonstrate social support?

Answer 27

Her refusal to move seats was planned with support from others (NAACP). +Shows resisting authority is more likely with group support.

Question 28

What research supports the role of LOC in resisting obedience?

Answer 28

Holland (1967): 37% of internals resisted full shocks vs 23% of externals. +Suggests internals more likely to resist pressure.

Question 29

What criticism did Rotter (1982) make of LOC?

Answer 29

LOC is more relevant in new situations than familiar ones. +Limits its explanatory power for real-world behaviour.

Question 30

How does LOC explain individual differences in SI?

Answer 30

Internals = more independent, rely on own judgment, less influenced by ISI or NSI. +Dispositional factor in resistance.

Question 31

Why might LOC be an incomplete explanation of resistance?

Answer 31

Ignores situational variables like group size or social support. +Needs to be combined with other theories for full picture.

Question 32

What real-world research supports NSI in social change?

Answer 32

Nolan et al. (2008): energy use reduced when people saw others were conserving. +Demonstrates NSI can lead to behavioural change.

Question 33

What does Bashir (2013) say about minorities and social change?

Answer 33

People avoid associating with minorities (e.g. environmentalists) to avoid negative stereotypes. +Minorities need to avoid deviant image to influence majority.

Question 34

What is a criticism of minority influence in social change?

Answer 34

Often slow and indirect – decades for movements like civil rights to gain traction. +May be less powerful than majority influence.

Question 35

What does Foxcroft et al. (2015) suggest about NSI’s limits?

Answer 35

Found only small changes in alcohol consumption when NSI was used in campaigns. +Suggests NSI has limited effectiveness depending on behaviour targeted.