Social Influence Flashcards
(56 cards)
1
Q
Conformity
A
A change in a person’s behaviour or opinions as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or group of people.
2
Q
Internalisation
A
- Occurs when a person genuinely accepts the group norms.
- Results in a private as well as public change of opinions/behaviour.
- This change is permanent because attitudes have been internalised.
- Change in behaviour persists even in the absence of other group members.
3
Q
Identification
A
- Sometimes we conform to the opinions/behaviour of a group because there is something about that group we value.
- We identify with the group, so we want to be part of it.
- This may mean we publicly change our opinions/behaviour to achieve this goal, even is we don’t privately agree with everything the group stands for.
4
Q
Compliance
A
- Involves simply ‘going along with others’ in public, but privately not changing personal opinions and/or behaviour.
- Results in only a superficial change.
- Means that a particular behaviour or opinion stops as soon as group pressure stops.
5
Q
Informational social influence (ISI)
A
- An explanation of conformity that says we agree with the opinion of the majority because we believe that it is correct.
- We accept it because we want to be correct as well.
- May lead to internalisation.
6
Q
Normative social influence (NSI)
A
- An explain of conformity that says we agree with the opinion of the majority because we are sent to be accepted, gain social approval and be liked.
- May lead to compliance.
7
Q
Research support for ISI (evaluation)
A
- Lucas et al asked students to give answers to mathematical problems that were easy or more difficult.
- There was greater conformity to incorrect answers when they were difficult rather than when they were easier ones.
- This was most try for students who rated their mathematical ability as poor.
- Study shows that people conform in situations where they feel they don’t know the answer, which is exactly the outcome predicted by the ISI explanation.
8
Q
Individual differences in NSI (evaluation)
A
- Some research shows that NSI does not affect everyone’s behaviour in the same way.
- E.g. people who are less concerned with being liked are less affected by NSI than those who care more about being liked.
- Such people are described as nAffiliators - these people have a greater need to affiliation - a need for being in a relationship with others.
- E.g. McGhee and Teevan found that students high in need of affiliation were more likely to conform.
- Shows the desire to be liked underlies conformity for some people more than others.
- Therefore there are individual differences in the way people respond.
9
Q
ISI and NSI work together (evaluation)
A
- Idea of Deutsch and Gerrard’s ‘two-process’ approach is that behaviour is either due to NSI or ISI.
- Truth is, more often both processes are involved.
- E.g. conformity is reduced when there is one other dissenting participant in the Asch experiment.
- The dissenter may reduces the power of NSI or may reduce the power of ISI.
- Shows that it isn’t always possible to be sure whether NSI or ISI is at work.
- This is the case in lab studies, but is even true in real-life situations outside the lab.
- This casts serious doubt over the view of ISI and NSI as two processes operating independently in conforming behaviour.
10
Q
Individual differences in ISI (evaluation)
A
- ISI does not affect everyone’s behaviour in the same way.
- E.g. Asch found that students were less conformist (28%) than other participants (37%).
- Perrin and Spencer conduced a study involving science and engineering students and found very little conformity.
11
Q
Research support for NSI (evaluation)
A
- Asch found that many his participants went along with a clearly wrong answer just because other people did.
- So he asked them why they did this.
- Some of the participants said they felt self-conscious giving the correct answer and they were afraid of disapproval.
- When Asch repeated his study but asked participants to write down their answers instead of saying them out loud, conformity rates fell to 12.5%.
12
Q
Asch’s procedure
A
- Tested conformity by showing participants two large white cards at a time.
- On one card was a standard line and on the other card there were comparison lines.
- One of the three lines was the same length as the standard and the other two were clearly different:
- The participants were asked which is the three lines matched the standard.
- Participants in study were 123 American male undergraduates.
- Each naïve participant was tested individually with a group of between six and eight confederates.
- Naïve participant was it aware that others were confederates.
- On first few trials all confeds gave right answers but then they started making errors.
- All confeds were unstructured to give same wrong answer.
- Altogether each participants took part in 18 trials and on 12 ‘critical trials’ the confeds caverne wrong answer.
13
Q
Findings of Asch’s research
A
- Naïve participant gave a wrong answer 36.8% of the time.
- Overall 25% of the participants did not conform in any trials- meaning 75% confirmed at least once.
- When participants were interviewed afterwards most said they informed to avoid rejection (NSI).
14
Q
What were Asch’s 3 variations?
A
Group size
Unanimity
Task difficulty
15
Q
What did group size in Asch’s study lead to?
A
- With 3 confeds the wrong answer rose to 31.8%.
2. Addition of confeds made little difference.
16
Q
What did unanimity in Asch’s study lead to?
A
- Introduced confed who disagreed with others - sometimes gave wrong answer and sometimes gave right answer.
- Presence of dissenting confed meant conformity was reduced by a quarter from the level it was when majority was unanimous.
- Dissenter enables naïve participant to behave more independently.
17
Q
What did task difficulty in Asch’s study lead to?
A
- Made line judging task more difficult by making stimulus line and comparison lines more similar in length.
- Found conformity increases under these conditions.
- Suggest ISI plays greater role she task difficulty becomes harder.
- Because situation is more ambiguous, so we are more likely to look to other people for guidance and to assume that they are right and we are wrong.
18
Q
Strengths and limitations of Asch’s research (evaluation)
A
- artificial situation and task
- limiter application of findings
- Perrin and spencer
- findings only apply to certain situations
- ethical issues
19
Q
Why was Asch’s research artificial? (Evaluation)
A
- Participants knew they were in a research study and may simply have gone along with the demands of the situation (demand characteristics).
- Task of identifying lines was relatively trivial and therefore there was no reason not to conform.
- The naïve participants were members of a ‘group’, it didn’t really resemble groups we are in everyday lives.
- This is a limitation because it means that findings don’t generalise to everyday situations - especially true where the consequences of conformity might be more important, and we interact with other people in groups in a much more direct way.
20
Q
Why is Asch’s research a limited application of findings? (Evaluation)
A
- Only men were tested by Asch.
- Other research suggests that women might be more conformist, possibly because they are more concerned about social relationships (and being accepted) than men are.
- Mean in Asch’s study were from US - an individualist culture - where people are mor concerned about themselves than their social group.
- Similar conformity studies conducted in collectivist culture have found conformity rates are higher.
- Shows that conformity levels are sometimes even higher than Asch found - findings may apply to American men because he didn’t take gender and cultural differences into account.
21
Q
Who do Asch’s findings only apply to certain situations? (Evaluation)
A
Participants had to answer out loud and were with a group of strangers who they wanted to impress - may mean that conformity was higher than usual.
On the other hand Williams and Sogon found conformity was actually higher when majority of group were friends than when they were strangers.
22
Q
What are the ethical issues in Asch’s research? (Evaluation)
A
Naïve participants were deceived because they thought other people involved in procedure was also genuine participants like themselves.
However ethical cost should be weighted up against the benefits gained from the study.
23
Q
Reasoning behind Zimbardo’s experiment
A
Wanted to know if prison guards behave brutally because they have sadistic personalities or if it’s because of the situation that creates such behaviour.
24
Q
Stanford prison experiment procedure
A
- Zimbardo set up mock prison in basement of psychology department at Stanford university.
- Advertised for students willing to volunteer and selected those who were deemed ‘emotionally stable’ after psychological testing.
- Students were randomly assigned the roles of guards or prisoners.
- Prisoners were arrested in the homes by the local police and were deprived to the prison to heighten realism of study.
- Were blindfolded, strip searched, deloused and issued uniform and number.
- Roles of prisoners and guards were strictly divided.
- Prisoners’ fault routines were heavily regulated.
- Guards had their own uniform, with wooden club, handcuffs, keys and mirror shade.
- Were told they had complete power over the prisoners.
25
Stanford prison experiment findings
1. Guards slowly took up their roles with enthusiasm.
2. Behaviour became a threat to prisoners’ psychological and physical health.
3. Study was stopped after 6 days instead of the intended 14.
4. Prisoners rebelled against their harsh treatment by guards - ripped uniform, shouted and swore at guards.
5. Guards harassed prisoners constantly.
6. After rebellion prisoners became subdued, depressed and anxious.
7. One prisoner was released on the first day because showed symptoms of psychological disturbance.
8. Two more were released on fourth day.
9. One prisoner went on hunger strike - guards attempted to force feed him and punished him by putting him in ‘hole’ - a tiny dark closet.
10. Instead of being considered a hero - was shunned by other prisoners.
11. Guards identified more and more closely with their role.
26
Stanford prison experiment conclusion
1. Power of situation influences people’s behaviour.
2. Guards, prisoners and researchers all confirmed to roles in prison.
3. Roles were easily taken on by participant - even volunteers who came in to perform functions found themselves behaving as if they were in prison then psychological study.
27
Strengths and limitations of SPE (evaluation)
+ control
- lack of realism
- lack of research support
- ethical issues
28
How was SPE experiment controlled? (Evaluation)
Emotionally stable individuals were chosen and randomly assigned to roles of guard and prisoner - rules out individual personality differences.
Having control over variables is a strength because increases internal validity of the study. So we can be more confident in drawing conclusions about the influence of roles on behaviour.
29
How was there a lack of realism in SPE experiment? (Evaluation)
Banuazizi and Mohavedi argues that participants were play acting than conforming to role.
Performances were based on stereotypes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave.
For example, one guard said he based his role on brutal character from Cool Hand Luke. - explains why prisoners rioted - they thought that’s what real prisoners do.
30
Why was there not a lack of realism on SPE experiment according to Zimbardo? (Evaluation)
Claimed situation was v real to participants.
Quantitative data showed that 90% of prisoners’ conversations were about prison life.
One prisoner said that view of prison was real but run by psychologists than government.
Seems situation was real to participants which gives study high degree of internal validity.
31
Why is there a lack of research support in SPE experiment? (Evaluation)
Reicher and Haslam partially replicated SPE and was broadcasted on BBC TV - known as BBC Prison Study.
Findings were v different to Zimbardo’s and colleagues - prisoners eventually took control over prison.
Researchers used social identity theory - guards did not form a shared social identity as group but prisoners did.
32
Ethical issues w SPE experiment (evaluation)
Zimbardo’s dual roles in study.
For example, one student who wanted to leave the study spoke to Zimbardo in his role as superintendent.
Whole conversation was conducted on the basis that student was prisoner in prison asking to be released.
Zimbardo responded as superintendent worried about running the prison than researcher w responsibilities towards participants.
33
Social roles
The ‘parts’ people play as members of various social groups.
Everyday examples include parent, child, student, passenger and so on.
These are accompanied by expectations we and others have it what is appropriate behaviour in each role, for example caring, obedient, industrious, etc.
34
Obedience
A form of social influence in which an individual follows a direct order.
The person issuing the order is usually a figure of authority, who has the power to punish when obedient behaviour is not forthcoming.
35
Reason of milgram’s obedience study
Why German population followed orders of hitler and slaughtered over 10 million jews, gypsies, and members of other social groups during holocaust during Second World War.
Wanted to know if germans were different - were they more obedient.
36
Milgram’s procedure
1. Recruited 40 male participants through newspaper adverts and flyers in post.
2. Said he was looking for participants for study about memory.
3. Participants recruited were aged between 20 and 50 years, jobs ranged from unskilled to professional.
4. Were offered $4.50 to take part.
5. When participants arrived - given $4.50 and there was rigged draw.
6. Confederate aka Me Wallace always ended up as leaner and true participant was always teacher.
7. Was also experimenter dressed in lab coat played by actor.
8. Learner was strapped to chair in another room and wired w electrodes.
9. Teacher was required to give leaner increasing electric shock every time learner got answer wrong on learning task.
10. Shocks were not real.
11. Shock level started at 15 volts and rosed through 30 levels to 450 volts.
12. When teacher got to 300 volts learner pounded on wall and gave no response.
13. After 315 volt shock leaner pounded on wall again but gave no further response.
14. When leaner turned to experimenter for guidance, experimenter told teacher that if no response it’s an incorrect answer so must be shocked.
15. If teacher felt unsure about continuing, experimenter used four standard prods.
37
Findings of Milgram’s study
1. No participants stopped below 300 volts.
2. 12.5% (five pps) stopper at 300 volts.
3. 65% continued to highest level of 450 volts.
4. Qualitative data - observations - pp showed tension, sweating, trembling, stutter, lip biting, groaning and digging fingernails into hands, three had seizures.
5. Prior to study Milgram asked 14 psychology students to predict pps behaviour.
6. Students estimated that no more than 3% of pps would continue to 450 volts - shows findings were not expected.
7. All pps were debriefed, ensured that behaviour was normal. Were also sent follow up questions and 84% reported they felt glad to have participated.
38
Strengths and limitations of Milgram’s study (evaluation)
```
- low internal validity
+ good external validity
+ supporting replication
alternative explanation
- ethical issues
```
39
Why does milgram’s experiment have low internal validity? (Evaluation)
Orne and Holland argued that pps behaved the way they did because they didn’t believe in the set up - pps guessed that electric shocks weren’t real.
Means milgram was not testing what he intended to test so study lacked internal validity.
Gina Perry’s research confirms this - listener to tapes of milgram’s pps and reported many of them doubted the shocks.
However Sheridan and King conduced similar study where shocks were real given to puppy - despite real shocks 54% of male stident participants behaved same way with real shocks.
Milgram himself reported 70% of pps said they believed shocks were genuine.
40
How did Milgram’s study have good external validity? (Evaluation)
Milgram said lab environment accuractky reflected wider authority relationships in real life.
Supported by other research - Hofling et al studied nurses on hospital ward and found levels of obedience to unjustified demands by doctors were very high.
Suggests processes of obedience to authority that occurred in Milgram’s lab study can be generalised to other situations. Findings have something valuable to tell us about how obedience operates in real life.
41
Supporting replication of milgram’s study (evaluation)
Le jeu de la mort - documentary about reality TV was presented on French television - includes replication of Milgram’s study.
Pps believed they were contestants in pilot episode for new game show called La Zone Xtrême. - were paid to give fake electric shocks when told by the presenter to other pps who were actors in front of studio audience.
80% of pps delivered maximum shock of 460 volts to unconscious man. Behaviour was almost identical to milgram’s participants - nervous laughter, nail biting and other signs of anxiety.
Replication supports milgram’s original conclusions about obedience to authority.
42
Alternative explanation of milgram’s obedience study - social identity theory (evaluation)
In milgram’s study partipangs identified with experimenter - identified with science of study.
When obedience levels fell it was because participants identified less with science and more with the victim.
Haslam and Reicher analysed behaviour of pps in milgram’s study - looked at how person behaved every time one of four profs were used.
First three prods don’t demand obedience they appeal for help with the science. The fourth prod demands obedience and every time 4th was used - pp quit.
43
Ethical issues w milgram’s study (evaluation)
Milgram deceived his pps.
led pps to believe allocation of roles was random but it was fixed.
Most significant deception was letting pps believe shocks were real.
Baumrind saw this as betrayal of trust that could damage reputation of psychologists and their research.
44
Situational variables in milgram’s study
Proximity
Location
Uniform
45
Proximity in milgram’s study
Original study - learner and teacher were in different rooms - teacher could hear leaner but not see him.
Proximity variation - were in same room - obedience rate dropped from 65% to 40%.
46
Location in Milgram’s study
Original study - yale uni - prestigious
Location variation - run down building
Means experimenter had less authority
Obedience fell from 65% to 47.5%
47
Uniform in milgram’s study
Original study - experimenter wore grey lab coat - symbol of authority (kind of uniform)
Uniform
48
One strength and limitation of milgram’s variations
+ research support - bickman did field experiment in new york- had 3 confeds dressed in three different outfits - jacket and tie, milkman’a outfit and security guards uniform. Stood in street and ask passer bys to perform tasks such as picking up litter. People were twice as likely to obey assistant dressed as security guard than one dressed in jacket and tie. Supports milgram’s theory that uniform conveys authority of its wearer and is situational factor likely to produce obedience.
- lack of internal validity - orne and Holland critised milgram’s study saying it was fake. More likely pps realised this because of extra manipulation especially in uniform variation. Limitation because unclear whether results are genuinely due to obedience or because pps saw through deception and acted accordingly.
+/- cross cultural replications - findings have been replicated in other cultures. Findings of cross cultural research have found obedience rate of over 90% amongst Spanish students - suggests milgram’s conciliations about obedience are not limited to american males, but are valid across cultures and apply to females too.
However smith and bond pointed out that most replications film place in western, developed societies which are not that culturally different from the USA so shouldn’t be so quick to assume milgram’s findings about proximity, location and uniform apply to people everywhere.
49
Agentic state
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 consciences and allows us to obey even a destructive authority figure.
50
Legitimacy of authority
An explanation for obedience which suggests that we are more likely to obey people who we perceive to have authority over us. This authority is justified by the individual’s position of power within a social hierarchy.
51
Autonomous state
Opposite of being in an agentic state. Person is free to behave according to their own principles and therefore feel a sense of responsibility for their own actions.
52
Dispositional explanation
Any explanation of behaviour that highlights the importance of the individual’s personality. Such explanations are often contrasted with situational explanations.
53
Authoritarian personality
A type of personality that Adorno argues was especially susceptible to obeying people in authority. Such individuals are also thought to be submissive to those of higher status and dismissive of inferiors.
54
Resistance to social influence
Refers to the ability of people to withstand the social pressure to conform to the majority or to obey authority. This ability to withstand social pressure is influenced by situational and dispositional factors.
55
Social support
The presence of people who resist pressures to conform or obey can help others to do the same. These people act as models to show others that resistance to social influence is possible.
56
Locus of control (LOC)
Refers to the sense we each have about what directs events in our lives. Internals believe they are mostly responsible for what happens to them (internal locks of control). Externals believe it is mainly a matter of luck or other outside focus (external locus of control).
