Social influence AO3 Flashcards
(45 cards)
1
Q
What can we say about the situation and task in Asch?
Conformity
A
- They were artificial
- P’s knew they were in a research study and may have gone along with what was expected
- decreases validity/ ext validity
- Fiske said that the groups were not ‘groupy’ (did not resemble groups you would find irl)
- cannot generalise well
2
Q
What can we say about the generalisability of Asch?
Conformity
A
- P’s were american men
- Research suggests that women are more conformist due to being concerned with social relationships (neto)
- America is individualist, studies in collectivist cultures found that conformity is higher
- findings tell us little about conformity in other cultures
- limited
3
Q
How does research support Asch?
Conformity
A
- Lucas asked p’s to solve easy and hard maths problems
- p’s were given answers from three other confederate students
- the p’s conformed more when the problems were harder
- asch was correct in suggesting that task difficulty is a variable that affects Conformity
4
Q
What is a limitation of supporting research (lucas)?
Conformity
A
- conformity is more complex than asch suggested
- p’s with high confidence in their abilities conformed less on hard tasks
- individual level factor can influence conformity by interacting with situational variables
- Asch did not research the roles of individual factors
5
Q
What is research support for NSI?
Conformity types and ex
A
- When asch interviewed P’s some said they conformed due to feeling self conscious and they were afraid of being wrong
- When p’s wrote answers conformity fell to 12.5%
- no normative group pressure this way
6
Q
What is research support for ISI?
Conformity types and ex
A
- Lucas found that p’s conformed more often to incorrect answers they were given when difficulty increased
- this is because when they were easy the p’s knew their own mind
- when they became ambiguous they went with majority as they are likely to be correct
7
Q
What is a counterpoint of Lucas supporting ISI?
Conformity types and ex
A
- It is unclear whether NSI or ISI is at work in research studies.
- Asch found that conformity is reduced when there is a dissenter present as they may reduce NSI (provide social support) or ISI (provide alternate source of info)
- Hard to separate the two, may even work together in real life
8
Q
What is a limitation of NSI?
Conformity types and ex
A
- Does not predict conformity in every case
- Some people are concerned with being liked= nAffiliators
- Mcghee and teevan found that students who were NA were more likely to conform
- NSi underlies conformity for some people more than others
- There are individual differences in conformity that cannot be explained by one
9
Q
What is a strength of the SPE?
Conformity to social roles
A
- Control over variables
- Selection of participants
- Emotionally stable p’s chosen and randomly assigned
- this helped rule out individual personality differences as an explanation of the findings
- If guards and prisoners behaved differently but were in such roles by chance then the behaviour must have been due to the role itself
- Increased IV
10
Q
What is a limitation of the SPE?
Conformity to social roles
A
- Lacks realism
- Movahedi argued that p’s were merely play acting than conforming to a role
- p’s performances were based on their stereotypes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave
- e.g a guard said he based his role on a brutal character from a film ‘cool hand luke’
- explains why prisoners rioted as they were behaving how real prisoners did
11
Q
Who counters Movahedi’s argument?
Conformity to social roles
A
- McDermott
- Argues that p’s did behave as if the prison was real to them
- 90% of their convos were about prison life
- amongst themselves they discussed how it was impossible to leave before their sentences were over
- Prisoner 416= explained how he believed prison was real and run by psychologists rather than the gov
- did replicate social roles
12
Q
What is another limitation of the SPE?
Conformity to social roles
A
- Zimbardo may have exaggerated the power of social roles to influence behaviour
- 1/3 of guards actually behaved in a brutal manner
- 1/3 tried to apply rules fairly
- Rest tried to actively tried to help and support the prisoners
- They sympathised and reinstated privileges
- most guards resisted situational pressures to conform to a brutal role
13
Q
How is there supporting research for Milgram’s findings?
Conformity to social roles
A
- Findings were replicated in a french documentary
- Focused on a game show mode
- The p’s in the ‘game’ believed they were contestants in a pilot episode for a new show
- They were paid to give fake electric shocks to other p’s in front of a studio audience
- 80% delivered max shock of 460v
- almost identical to Milgram, similar behaviour
14
Q
What is a limitation of Milgram?
Conformity to social roles
A
- May not have been testing what he intended to test
- Milgram reported that 75% of his p’s said they believed shocks were genuine
- Orne and Holland argued that p’s behaved as they did due to not believing in the set up so they were play acting
- perry listened to tapes of the participants, reported that only half believed shocks were real
- may have been responding to demand chars
15
Q
Who countered Perry’s argument that effects were due to demand chars?
Conformity to social roles
A
- Sheridan and King
- Shocks to a puppy in response to orders from experimenter
- 54% of men and 100% of women gave what they thought was a fatal shock
- suggests that the effects in Milg study were real
16
Q
How might SLT provide a better interpretation of findings?
Conformity to social roles
A
- Haslam showed that p’s obeyed when the experimenter delivered the first three verbal prods
- However every p who was given 4th disobeyed
- according to SLT p’s obeyed when they identified with the scientific aims of research (the experiment requires that you continue)
- When they were ordered to blindly obey an AF they refused
17
Q
How do situational variables have research support?
Situational variables: obedience
A
- Field experiment in NYC
- Bickman had 3 confeds dress in different outfits: a jacket and tie, milkman’s outfit and security guard uniform
- Confeds individually stood in the street and asked passers by to perform tasks like picking up litter
- Twice as likely to obey the security guard than the one in jacket in tie
18
Q
How does situational variables have cross cultural replications?
Situational variables: obedience
A
- Meeus and Raaijmakers studied obedience in Dutch p’s
- p’s were ordered to say stressful things in an interview (a confed) to someone desperate for a job
- 90% obeyed
- Researchers also replicated proximity
- when person giving orders was not present, obedience decreased dramatically
19
Q
Were the replications of Milgram really cross cultural?
Counterpoint
Situational variables: obedience
A
- Not very
- Smith and Bond identified just 2 replications between 1968-85 that took place in India and Jordan
- Two countries very different from the US
- Whereas other countries involved are similar to the US (like spain and australia)
- May not be extremely generalisable
20
Q
What can we say about internal validity for situational variables?
Situational variables: obedience
A
- P’s may have been aware the procedure was faked
- Orne and Holland said that it is even more likely in variations due to extra manipulation of variables
- E.g when the experimenter was replaced by a member of the public
- Even milgram recognised that it was contrived so p’s may well have worked out the truth
- unsure whether findings are genuinely due to operation of obedience.
21
Q
How does the agentic state have research support?
Situational explanations
A
- Milgram
- p’s resisted giving shocks at some point and asked the experimenter questions about procedure
- ‘who is responsible if mr wallace is harmed’ E= ‘i am’
- p’s went through with the procedure quickly with no objections
22
Q
What is a limitation of the agentic shift?
Situational explanations
A
It doesn’t explai many research findings about obedience
- does not explain rank and jacobson’s nurse study
- 16/18 nurses disobeyed orders from a doctor to administer excessive drug dose
- almost all nurses remained autonomous despite doctor being a clear AF
23
Q
What did mandel describe?
Situational explanations
A
- an incident in WW2 involving german police battalio 101
- they shot civilians in Poland despite not having direct orders to do so
- they were autonomous
- challenges agentic state
- they were given option of doing other duties but chose to kill
24
Q
What is a strength of the legitimacy explanation?
Situational explanations
A
- useful account of cultural differences in obedience
- Studies show that countries differ in the degree to which people are obedient
- Kilham and Mann= 16% of aus women went to 350V
- Mantell= 85% of german p’s went to 450v
- shows in some cultures authoirty is more likely to be acceped as legit
25
What is a limitation of legitimacy explanation?
| Situational explanations
- Cannot explai instances of disobedience in a hierarchy where LOA is clear and accepted
- Includes nurse study done by rank and jacobson
- most were disobedient despite working in rigid hierarchy
- significant minority of milgram's p's disobeyed the experimenter
- some people may just be more/ less obedient than others
26
How does kelman and hamilton support the LOA explanation?
| Situational explanations
- Argue that a realworld crime of obedience like the My Lai massacre can be understood in terms of the power hierarchy of the US army
- COs operate within a clearer legitimate hierarchy and have a greater power to punish unlike doctors in rank and jacobson's study
27
How does the dispositional explanation have research support?
| Dispositional explanation
- Milgram and Elms interviewed a small sample of original p's
- they completed F-scale
- 20 obedient p's scored higher on the overall F scale than a comparison group of disobedient p's
- supports view that obedient people show similar chars to people who have an AP
28
How might the research support for the Dispositional explanation be countered?
| Dispositional explanation
- when researchers analysed the individual subscales of the F scale they found that the obedient p's had unusual chars for authoritarians
- e.g they did not glorify fathers, did not experience unusual levels of punishment, did not have hostile attitudes towards mother
- link between obedience and authoritarianism is complex
29
Describe how authoritarianism provides limited explanation.
| Dispositional explanation
- cannot explain obedient behaviour in the majority of a country's population
- E.g in pre war germany millions displayed obedient and anti-semitic behaviour despite different personailities
- seems unlikely that they all have an AP
- alternatively the majority identified with the anti semitic state and scapegoated the outgroup of jews, social identity theory
30
How might the F-scale have political bias?
| Dispositional explanation
- Only measures tendency towards an extreme form of right wing ideology
- Christie and Jahoda argued that the F scale is a politically biases interpretation of AP
- they point out the reality of left wing authoritarianism in the shape of russian bolshevism or chnese maoism
- both lef/ right wing ideologies emphasise the importance of complete obedience
- adorno's theory is not a comprehensive dispositional explanation that accounts for the whole political spectrum
31
What does Greenstein say about the F-scale?
| Dispositional explanation
- Called it 'a comedy of methodological errors' because it is a seriously flawed scale
- it is posible to get a high score by just selecting agree answers
- anyone with this response bias is assessed as having an AP
32
How does social support have real world support?
| Resistance to social influence
- Albrecht evaluated Teen fresh start USA
- 8 week programme to help pregnant adolescents resist peer pressure to smoke
- social support was provided by an older mentor
- people who had a buddy were less likely to smoke compared to a control group
33
How is there research support for dissenting peers?
| Resistance to social influence
- Gamsom's participants were told to produce evidence that would be used to help an oil company run a smear campaign
- found high levels of resistance because p's were in groups so they could discuss
- 29/33 groups rebelled against their orders
34
What was Allen and Levine's study and what did it show?
| Resistance to social influence
- Showed that social support can help individuals to resist the influence of a group
- In an Asch style task the dissenter had good eyesight, 64% refused to conform
- when there was no supporter only 3% resisted
- Study also showed that social support does not always help
- when dissenter had poor eyesight resistance was 36%
35
Explain research support for LOC and resistance to obedience
| Resistance to social influence
- Holland replicated Milgram's study and measured if people were iLOC or eLOC
- 37% internals did not continue to highest level
- 23% external did not continue
- Internal showed greater resistance to authority
- increases validity
36
What is a limitation for LOC and its' link to resistance?
| Resistance to social influence
- Twenge analysed data fro american LOC studies conducted over 40 year period
- data showed that over this time span people became more resistant to obedience but also more external
- surprising outcome
- if resistance is linked to iLOC we would expect people to have become more internal
37
Who says the LOC has a limited role and why?
| Resistance to social influence
- Rotter
- points out LOC is not necessarily most important factor in determining whether someone resists social influence
- depends on situation
- LOC only significantly affects behaviour in new situations
- if you conformed in the past you most likely will in the future regardless of LOC
38
Describe some support for consistency.
| Minority influence
- Mosovici's blue/green slide study showed that a consistent minority had a greater effect on changing views
- Wood carried out a meta analysis of 100 similar studies and found that consistent minorities were most influential
39
Explain research support for deeper processing.
| Minority influence
- Martin presented a message supporting a viewpoint and measured agrement
- one group heard a minority agree with initial view while another group heard majority
- p's were exposed to conflicting view and attitudes were measured again
- people less willing to change opinions if they listened to minority instead of maj
- means that min message had been more deeply processed
40
What is a limitation of Martin's research study?
| Minority influence
- makes clear distinction between maj and min
- real world social influence situations are more complicated
- e.g maj usually have more power and status than min
- min are committed to their causes to face hostileopposition, these features are usually absent from minority influence research
- limited
41
What is a limitation of minority influence research?
| Minority influence
- Artificial task including Mosovici's research
- Research is far removed from how mis attempt to change maj in real life
- in cases like jury decision making the outcomes are vastly important
- findings of MIS are lakcing in EV and are limited in what they tell us about real world social situations
42
Describe support for social influence processes
| Social influence and social change
- Nolan aimed to see if they could change energy use habits
- researchers hung messages on front doors of houses every week for a month
- as a control some residents had a different message which asked them to save energy but made no reference to others behavour
- sig decreases in energy use in first group
- shows that conformity can lead to social change through normative social influence
43
Counteract supporting evidence for social influence processes
| Social influence and social change
- studies show that people's behaviour is not always changed through exposure to social norms
- Foxcroft reviewed social norms interventions as part of the gold standard collaboration
- involved 70 studies where social norms approach used to reduce student alcohol use
- found only a small reduction in quantity, no effect on frequency
44
What is a strength of social change?
| Social influence and social change
- Psychologists can explain how min influence brings about social change
- Nemeth claims social change is due to type of thinking inspired by minorities
- when people consider min arguments they engage in divergent thinking which is broad, not narrow
- this leads to better decisions and more creative solutions
- shows the value of dissenting minorities
45
Evaluate deeper processing
| Social influence and social change
- may not play a role in how minorities bring about social change
- MAckie disagrees and presents evidence that it is maj influence that creates deeper processing if you do not share their views
- we like to believe that other people share our views and thinkin the same way as us
- if the maj believes something different we are forced to go along
- challenges the element in min influence
