Social Influence

Question 1

Compliance (types of conformity)

Answer 1

Publicly but not privately going along with majority influence to gain approval, fairly weak + temporary + dependent on the presence of the group

Question 2

Identification (types of conformity)

Answer 2

Public + private acceptance of majority influence in order to gain group acceptance, temporary + not maintained when the individual leaves the group – the individual accepts the attitudes + behaviours are right + true but doing so for the purpose of being accepted

Question 3

Internalisation - true conformity (types of conformity)

Answer 3

Public + private acceptance of majority influence through adoption of the majority groups belief system, not dependent on the presence of the group

Question 4

Normative social influence (explanations of conformity)

Answer 4

The desire to be like + related to the type of conformity known as compliance
As humans are social species they have fundamental needs for social companionship + a fear of rejection – this is what forms the basis of NSI we are motivated by our need to gain acceptance + approval as well as a desire to avoid disapproval
For NSI to take place an individual must feel that they are under surveillance by the group when this is the case individuals ted to conform publically but not necessarily privately

Question 5

Informative social influence (explanations of conformity)

Answer 5

The desire to by right + involves a change in the individuals point of view so that it’s in line with others – therefore it is a change in both public + private attitudes which is an example of internalisation
As well as having a need to be accepted (NSI) individuals also have a need to feel confident that their perceptions + beliefs are correct – if an individual is not able to check the facts about something on their own they must rely on the opinion of others to guide them about the right thing to do
ISI is most likely to occur if the situation is ambiguous or when in the presence of people deemed ‘expert’ this is why the change in attitude/behaviour id often internalised

Question 6

Asch procedure

Answer 6

123 American male student volunteers
Each genuine ppts was tested individually alongside a group of bet. 7-9 confederates, the naïve ppts always answered last or second to last
The task was to say which comparison line (A, B or C) was the same as a stimulus line on 18 different trails
12 of these trials were critical trials where confederates gave identically wrong answers

Question 7

Asch findings and conclusion

Answer 7

Ppts conformed to 32% of the critical trials
75% of ppts conformed at least once
Only 25% of the ppts didn’t conform at all

The judgement of individuals are affected by majority opinions even when the majority are obviously wrong – most ppts conformed publicly but not privately suggesting they were influence by normative social influence where individuals conform to gain acceptance

Question 8

Asch criticisms

Answer 8

The sample was biases as in only included American males (there was no variation of ppts) + the sample was time consuming + inefficient as only 1 ppts was tested at a time
Low ecological validity – unlikely to happen in everyday life
Unethical because Asch deceived his ppts

Question 9

Zimbardo procedure

Answer 9

21 volunteer students rated as the most physically + mental stable, mature + free from anti-social + criminal tendencies were used, they were randomly selected to play the role of guard (10) or prisoner (11)
Prisoners were arrested by local police + fingerprinted, stripped + deloused, they were forced to wear numbered smocks + a chain round one ankle (evidence of dehumanisation – degrading people by removing their individual identity)
Guards wore khaki uniforms + reflective sunglasses + were issued with handcuff, keys + a truncheon
There was a regular prison routine od shifts, meal times etc.
The study was planned to run for 2 weeks but was stopped after 6 days

Question 10

Zimbardo findings

Answer 10

Guards + prisoners settled quickly into social roles
An initial prisoner ‘rebellion’ was crushed – dehumanisation then became increasingly apparent
Guards became increasingly sadistic + abusive – taunting prisoners + giving them meaningless boring tasks to do e.g. they woke prisoners in the night + forced them to clean the toilets with their bare hands + made them carry out other degrading activities
The prisoners became submissive + unquestioning of the guards behaviour although some prisoners sided with the guards against any prisoner who dared to protest
Deindividuation was observed as the prisoners referred to each other’s + themselves by their prison number instead of their names
After 36 hrs one prisoner was released because of fits of crying + rage, three more prisoners developed similar symptoms + were released
The study was stopped after 6 days when Zimbardo realised the extent of the farm that was occurring + the increasingly aggressive nature of the guards behaviour
In later interviews both guards + prisoners said they were surprised at the uncharacteristic behaviours they had shown

Question 11

Zimbardo criticisms

Answer 11

Ethical issues - some prisoners displayed fits of crying + rage with one prisoner developing a severe rash
Individual differences -not all of the guards behaved brutally e.g. some were hard but fair, some were brutal, others rarely showed dominant behaviour towards the prisoners, the behaviour of the prisoners also varied
Demand characteristics

Question 12

Milgram procedure

Answer 12

Ppts (40 American males ages 20-50 yrs.) responded to a newspaper ad to volunteer for a study of memory + learning at Yale uni
Inc. two confederates (an actor who participates in a psychological experiment pretending to be a ppts but in actuality working for the researcher): confederate experimenter and the confederate ppts introduced to the volunteers as ‘Mr Wallace’
The two ppts drew straws to see who would act as the ‘teacher’ and the ‘learner’ – this was rigged so that the real ppts was always the teacher and the confederate (Mr Wallace) the learner
The teacher was required to test the learner in his ability to remember work pairs, every time he got one wrong the teacher had to administer increasingly strong electric shocks (15-450 volts)
At 150 volts the learner began to protest + demanded to be released, the protests became gradually more consistent + at 315 volts screamed loudly, from 330 volts no response from the learner was given
Anytime the teacher seemed reluctant to continue he was encouraged to go on through a series of verbal prods e.g. ‘the experiment requires you continue’ + ‘you have no choice you much go on’ – if the teacher questioned the procedure he was told that the shocks wouldn’t cause lasting damage + was instructed to carry on

Question 13

Milgram findings

Answer 13

Qualitative results:
100% of ppts went up to 300 volts
65% (26/40) went up to 450 volts

Quantitative results:
Ppts showed distress e.g. twitching, sweating or giggling nervously, digging their nails into their flesh + were verbally abusive to the experimenter
3 ppts had uncontrollable seizures
Some ppts did not show any distress

Question 14

Agentic state (explanations for obedience)

Answer 14

When a person obeys an authority figure + so gives up some of their free will they entre an agentic state – the way in which an individual may obey an order perhaps to do something wrong because the individuals hands over responsibility for the outcome of the action to the authority figure, individuals seen themselves as acting as an agent for the authority figure + therefore doesn’t feel responsible

Question 15

Autonomous state (explanations for obedience)

Answer 15

Opposite side of the agentic state where individuals are seen as personally responsible for their actions

Question 16

Research into the agentic state (explanations for obedience)

Answer 16

Milgram altered his original study so that the confederate researcher wasn’t in the same room as the teacher giving orders/verbal prods on a phone link + found that obedience fell from 62.5% to 20.5% - ppts fell out of an agentic state + into an autonomous state
In Milgram’s debriefing many ppts admitted that they knew what they were doing was wrong + were under moral strain BUT they continued to obey which suggests that they were in an agentic state + felt that had to obey orders of a high ranked authority figure

Question 17

Legitimacy of authority (explanations of obedience)

Answer 17

Someone who is perceived to be in a position of social control within a situation
The power of this legitimate authority stems from perceived position in a social situation
From an early age ppl experience examples of social roles relating to master + servant relationships e.g. student + teacher, child + parent

Question 18

Research into legitimacy of authority (explanations of obedience)

Answer 18

Milgram found that come ppts in his study ignored the learners apparent distress, showing little signs of harm themselves but instead focused on following procedure e.g. by pressing the button properly – they could be seen to be doing their duty + thus recognising the legitimate authority
When Milgram changed the location of his study from the prestigious environment of Yale uni to a run-down office block obedience fell from 65% (delivering 450v shock) to 47.5% - this suggests at in order for an authority figure to appear legitimate hey must occur within some sort of situational structure (e.g. military or uni)

Question 19

Proximity (situational variables of obedience)

Answer 19

Proximity involves how aware individuals are of the consequences of their actions in obeying authority figures

Question 20

Research into proximity (situational variables of obedience)

Answer 20

When the teacher + learner were in the same room as each other Milgram found that obedience declined from 62.5% to 40% as the teacher could see the learners distress
When the teacher had to force the leaners hand onto an apparent shock plate obedience fell another 30% - it increased the ppts realisation of their actions
The closer the teacher is the more aware the learner is of their actions and so obedience decreases therefore supporting the idea that proximity affects willingness to obey

Question 21

Location (situational variables of obedience)

Answer 21

The location of an environment can be relevant to the amount of perceived legitimate authority a person giving orders is seen to have – in locations that add to the perceived legitimate authority of an authority figure obedience rates are likely to be higher
Obedience rates are often highest in institutionalised settings where obedience is installed into its members

Question 22

Research into location (situational variables of obedience)

Answer 22

Milgram performed a variation of his study in an office block in a run-down part of town + found obedience dropped from 62.5% to 47.5% (compared to Yale uni)

Question 23

Uniforms (situational variables of obedience)

Answer 23

The wearing of uniforms can add to the perception of legitimate authority e.g. in Milgram’s study the experimenter wore a lab coat to give an air of authority

Question 24

Research into uniforms (situational variables of obedience)

Answer 24

Bickman found that when ordering people in a New York street to pick up rubbish, loan a coin to a stranger or move away from a bus stop: 19% obeyed when he was dressed normally, 14% when dressed as a milkman and 38% when dressed as a security guard
People would even obey the guard when he walked away after giving the order suggesting that they obeyed not because they felt forced to but because they believed he had legitimate authority

Question 25

Authoritarian personality (dispositional variables of obedience)

Answer 25

Authoritarian personality describes someone who holds rigid beliefs, is intolerant of ambiguity, submissive to authority + hostile towards those of lower stays or members of an out group

Question 26

Research into authoritarian personality (dispositional variables of obedience)

Answer 26

Zilmer at al. reported that 16 Nazi war criminals scored highly on three of F-scale dimensions but not all nine (as expected) giving only limited support for the concept

Elms + Milgram found that ppts in Milgram’s study who were highly obedient were significantly more authoritarian on the F-scale than disobedient ppts – this supports the idea of a link bet. personality factors + obedience

Question 27

Issues with the F-scale (dispositional variables of obedience)

Answer 27

Although it has some research support, supposedly authoritarian individuals do not always score highly on all the dimensions as the theory would predict
It suffers from response bias as the scale is worded in a conforming direction therefore if individuals agree with items they are rated as authoritarian – Altermeyer produced a less biases right wing authoritarian scale (KWA) which has an equal number of pro + anti-statements

Question 28

Social support and conformity (resistance to social influence)

Answer 28

The presence of other who dissent has proven to be a strong influence of defiance

In a variation of Asch’s study the real ppts saw a (confederate) dissenter disagreeing with the majority wrong answer on critical trails he found that conformity dropped sharply – dissenters provided the ppts moral support, the ppts was more likely to give the correct answer
Asch found if a confederate dissenter answers correctly from the start of the study conformity drops from 32% - 5.5% however of a confederate dissenter starts later in the study conformity drops to 8.5% - this suggests that social support received earlier is more effective than support received later

Question 29

Social support and obedience (resistance to social influence)

Answer 29

The presence of a disobedient model has been shown to be a powerful source of social support – the reduce the unanimity of a group making to easier for individuals to act independently such people seem to demonstrate that disobedience is actually possible as well as how to do it

Milgram altered his study to test the effect of social support of obedience as two other ppts (confederates) were also teachers but refused to obey (1 stopped at 150 volts + the other at 210 volts) – the presence of others who are seen to disobey the real authority figure reduces the level of obedience to 10%

Question 30

Locus of control (resistance to social influence)

Answer 30

LoC was identified as a personality dimension by Rotter – it concerns the extent to which ppl perceive themselves as being in control of their own lives

Question 31

Hight internal LoC (resistance to social influence)

Answer 31

Individuals believes they can affect the outcomes of situations (the belief that things happen as a result of an individual’s choices + decisions)

Rotter believed that having internal LoC makes individuals more resistant to social pressure with those seeing themselves in control of a situation more likely to perceive themselves as having a free choice to conform or obey

Question 32

High external LoC (resistance to social influence)

Answer 32

Individuals believe things turn out a certain way regardless of their actions (the belief that things happen as a result of luck, fate or other uncontrollable external forces)

Question 33

Locus of control and conformity (resistance to social influence)

Answer 33

Spector gave Rotter’s LoC scale to 157 uni students + found that ppts with a high external LoC did conform more than those with a low LoC BUT only in situations that produce normative social pressure, both types of ppts did not conform in situations that produced informational social influence – this suggests that having a lower external locus of control does help to resist the urge to conform to normative social influence

Question 34

Locus of control and obedience (resisting social influence)

Answer 34

Holland tested for a link bet. LoC + obedience but found no relationship bet. the two
BUT Blass reanalysed Holland’s data using more precise stat analysis + found that ppts with an internal LoC were more able to resist obedience than those with an external LoC, those with an internal LoC were especially resistant if they thought the research was trying to force or manipulate them to obey – this suggests that the aspect of personal control in a situation is important as those with a high internal LoC like to feel they have choice over their behaviour

Question 35

Minority influence

Answer 35

− Minority influence – where a persuasive minority exerts pressure to change the attitudes beliefs or behaviours of members of the majority
− The suffragettes + Martin Luther King are both examples of where change has been brought about through minority influence

Question 36

Moscovici et al (minority influence)

Answer 36

− Procedure:
→ Ppts were told the study was about perception
→ 128 ppts were placed in groups consisting of 4 ppts + 2 confederates
→ They were shown 36 slides which were different shades of blue + asked to state the colour of each slide out loud
→ Consistent condition – in the first part of the experiment the 2 confederates answered green for all of the 36 slides
→ Inconsistent condition – in the second part of the experiment the confederates answer green 24 times + blue 12 times
− Findings: The consistent minority had a greater effect on the majority (8.2% of ppts said the slide was green) compared to an inconsistent minority (only 1.25% of ppts said the slide was green), 1/3 of all ppts judged the slide to be green at least once
− Conclusion: Minorities can influence a majority but not all the time + only when they behaviour in certain ways – this study shows how a consistent behaviour style is important in influencing majority members

Question 37

Moscovici et al (minority influence) criticisms

Answer 37

→ Ecological validity – the study was a lab experiment testing minority influence in an artificial way making it difficult to generalise the findings to everyday life
→ Pop. validity – Moscovici used female students as ppts (unrepresentative sample) so it would be difficult to generalise his results to men as they only tell us about the behaviour of female students (estrocentric)

Question 38

Factors that affect minority influence - some of the minority

Answer 38

→ Moscovici + Nemeth argue that a minority of 1 may be more influential than a minority of 2 or more because one person can be more consistent over time + will not divide the majorities attention
→ However more recent research has found that a minority of 1 is less effective than a minority of 2

Question 39

Lift of behavioural styles of influential minorities

Answer 39

Consistency 
Flexibility 
Commitment
Confidence 
Persuasiveness
Relevance

Question 40

Behavioural styles of influential minorities: Consistency

Answer 40

→ Confronted with a consistent opposition members of the majority will sit up, take notice + rethink their position
→ Consistence gives the impression that the minority are convinced they are right + are committed to their viewpoint
→ Also when the majority is confronted with someone with self-confidence + dedication to take a popular stand + refuse to back down they may assume that he or she has a point
→ A consistent minority disrupts established norms + creates uncertainty, doubt + conflict – this can lead to the majority taking the minority view more seriously the majority will therefore be more likely to question their own views
→ Research – Moscovici

Question 41

Behavioural styles of influential minorities: Flexibility

Answer 41

→ A flexible minority will demonstrate an ability to be moderate, cooperative + reasonable – if they adopt a rigid position then this could lead to perception of the minority as dogmatic + narrow minded which will not be persuasive of shifting the views of the majority
→ Nemeth – created groups of 3 ppts + 1 confederate who had to decide how much compensation to pat to the victim of a ski list accident – when the confederate acting as a consistent minority argued for a low amount + refuse to change position he had no effect on the majority BUT when he compromised a little + moved to offering a slightly higher amount the majority changed their opinion to a lower amount

Question 42

Behavioural styles of influential minorities: Commitment

Answer 42

− minorities can exert influence by showing dedication i.e. being willing to make sacrifices if necessary, this gives the minority’s message credibility because ppl are unlikely to prepared to suffer for a cause which is not worthwhile

Question 43

Behavioural styles of influential minorities: Confidence

Answer 43

this involves sending a message to the majority that the position is a serious one which is not going to go away

Question 44

Behavioural styles of influential minorities: Persuasiveness

Answer 44

this is when the minority try to win over ppl form the majority + attract others to its position + really depends on the strength of their argument

Question 45

Behavioural styles of influential minorities: Relevance

Answer 45

this means that the minority view is one which had meaning at one particular time + place

Question 46

Social change

Answer 46

− Social change – when society adopts a new belief or way of behaving which then becomes widely accepted as the norm
− Social change can occur when a minority influences a majority – this is a slow process which requires ppl change their thinking, changing opinions + explaining them to others requires understanding – this results in internalisation where members of the majority adopt the view of the minority as their own (conversion)
− Over time the minority can gather momentum + become the majority – social change can occur when a majority influences a minority because ppl are just passive + comply by going along (compliance)
− Role of conformity – once social change has occurred conformity will serve to consolidate + maintain the new beliefs + behaviour as party of a social order
− Role of obedience – like conformity obedience generally serves to maintain the existing social order therefore as social change occurs obedience will oversee + uphold the new social order e.g. governments may enforce new social norms

Question 47

Social change: Snowball effect

Answer 47

− This is when the minority gathers momentum as more + more ppl adopt the minority’s view internalising it as their own

Question 48

Social change: Social cryptoamnesia

Answer 48

− When the minority ideas are adopted by the majority but without those in the majority remembering where the ideas came from the content + the source become dissociated