Social Influence: Paper 1 Flashcards
(115 cards)
What is compliance?
When an individual adopts a belief publicly to fit in with the group, even though they may disagree with the belief privately.
What is internalisation?
When an individual adopts a belief publicly and eventually it becomes a part of their belief system, leading them to believe it privately too in the long-term.
What is identification?
When an individual adopts a belief publicly and agrees with it privately but this belief may only be adopted in the short term in the presence of a group.
What is informational social influence?
When a person conforms when they do not know the answer and or wants to be right, so they look to others for this information.
What is normative social influence?
When an individual follows the norms and values of the group, adopting the belief of the group publicly in order to fit in with the group and avoid disapproval, even if they disagree with the belief privately. (punishment)
Research Support for NSI (2)
A03: Conformity: Types & Explanations
Asch’s study into conformity provides research support for Normative Social Influence. This is because when asked to judge the lengths of lines and match them to a standard line, many of the participants went with the majority who obviously had wrong answers.
When Asch asked participants in a post-experimental interview why they did this, they changed their answer to avoid disapproval from the rest of the group, which clearly shows NSI occurred as they conformed to ‘fit in’.
This was further demonstrated in a later variation, whereby the pressure to conform publicly is removed as participants had to write down their answers on a sheet of paper and conformity rates fell to 12.5% as the fear of rejection became far less.
Individual differences in NSI (2)
A03: Conformity: Types & Explanations
For example, McGhee and Teevan found that students high in need of affiliation were more likely to conform. This shows that the desire to be liked underlies conformity for some people more than others. Therefore, there are individual differences in the way some people respond.
Perrin and Spencer: They carried out an exact replication of the original Asch experiment using engineering, mathematics and chemistry students as subjects. They found that on only one out of 396 trials did an observer join the erroneous majority. May have been more confident in their answers as their subjects involve precise and accurate calculations
Research Support for ISI
A03: Conformity: Types & Explanations
Lucas et al asked his 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 study demonstrates ISI as people conform in situations where they feel they don’t know the answer.
ISI and NSI work together.
A03: Conformity: Types & Explanations
For example, conformity is reduced when there is one other
dissenting participant in a variation of the Asch experiment, even if dissenter wears thick glasses and has trouble with his vision.
This dissenter may reduce the power of NSI (because the dissenter provides social support) or may reduce the power of ISI (because there is an alternative source of information.
This supports the view that resistance is not just motivated by
following what someone else says but it enables someone to be free
of the pressure from the group.
Research support for informational influence
A03: Conformity: Types & Explanations
Studies to demonstrate how exposure to other people’s beliefs and opinions can shape many aspects of behaviour and beliefs
Wittenbrink and Henley found that ppts exposed to negative information about African Americans later reported more negative attitudes towards black individuals
This info produced large shifts in their judgements of the candidates’ performance and shows importance of informational influence in shaping behaviour
Normative influence may not be detected
A03: Conformity: Types & Explanations
Although normative influence has a powerful effect on the behaviour of the individual, it is possible they do not actually recognise the behaviour of others as a causal factors in their own behaviour
Nolan et al. investigated whether people detect the influence of social norms on their energy conservation behaviour.
When asked about what factors had influenced their own energy conservation, people believed that the behaviour of neighbours had the least impact on their own energy conservation, yet results showed that it had the strongest impact.
Suggests that people rely on beliefs about what should motivate their behaviour and so under-detect the impact of normative influence.
Research support for normative influence for smoking
A03: Conformity: Types & Explanations
This showed a relation between people’s normative beliefs and the likelihood of them starting smoking
Linkenbach and Perkins (2003) found that adolescents who were told that most of their peers didn’t smoke were less likely to start
This supports the claim that people shape their behaviours to fit in with a group.
Lacks ecological validity
A03: Conformity: Types & Explanations
The task in Asch’s line experiment was unusual and not like a task performed in day to day life, therefore lacks mundane realism.
One could argue that conformity would act differently in real world situations
What is Authoritarian Personality?
Certain individuals are more likely to obey authority figures due to their personality traits, such as following orders without questioning them.
Adorno et al suggested that authoritarian personality develops due to harsh parenting styles that do not encourage independent or critical thinking,
More likely to obey authority figures even when following orders that they do not agree with.
What is the F-scale?
Questionnaire used to measure an individual’s potential for fascist beliefs. People who score more highly on the F-scale are more likely to be rigid in their beliefs and tendency to follow authority figures (authoritarian personality)
They are more likely to engage in behaviours that are consistent with fascist ideologies such as belief in having a strong military.
Research support for Authoritarian Personality
Altemeyer reported in 1988 that participants with an authoritarian personality type were more likely to give themselves higher voltage shocks when asked to, in comparison to those who did not have the personality type.
That people with an authoritarian personality type are more likely to obey, even if this is in detriment to themselves.
Large sample size & biased sample (2)
- Adorno research had a large sample size making his research representable to a larger population.
- However, Adorno’s study has been criticised for focusing exclusively on a sample of white, middle-class, and college-educated participants. This limited the generalizability of the findings to other populations or cultures, as individuals from different backgrounds may have different experiences or beliefs that could affect their attitudes towards authority.
However, psychologists found a major limitation to the study - that flawed methodology was used to explain authoritarian personalities
The researchers in Adornos Study knew the hypothesis, conducted the interviews and knew the results so they already knew who had an authoritarian personalities.
This suggests that Adornos study suffered from confounding variables like investigator bias.
This means that we are unable to generalise findings to real life situations as the various flaws in methodology may have had a heavy impact on explaining authoritarian personalities.
Impractical to explain German public behaviour regarding the Nazis (2)
Another limitation is that it cant explain a whole countries behaviour.
For example, almost all individuals in Germany displayed obedient and Anti Semitics views to jews but we cant say that all of them had authoritarian personalities.
Its highly unlikely that Germany’s population all had this personality.
However we can say that Germans identifies with a Nazi state. Therefore, alternative explanations such as the social identity theory could be a better explanation for this.
Research support from Hyman (2)
Milgram interviewed participants with a high score on the f scale and found a correlation between obedience and people who have an authoritarian personality.
However, the link is merely a correlation between two variables and thus a cause and effect relationship cannot be established, and a third factor could be involved. Hyman suggested that this third factor could be associated. with lower levels of education.
But, It has been found that when participants’ education level is controlled in studies and experiments, the more obedient participants were still those with higher levels of authoritarianism.
Therefore, can see authoritarian personality is a very strong explanation for obedience and has many links to it across the research.
Political Bias
Adorno’s study has been criticised as his F-scale had a degree of bias towards right-wing questions. For example, the F-Scale overemphasised right-wing political beliefs and values, such as obedience to authority and traditionalism, while underemphasizing left-wing political beliefs and values.
This potential bias could affect the accuracy of the F-Scale as a measure of authoritarianism, particularly for individuals who have an authoritarian personality and also hold left-wing political beliefs or values.
Further methodological weaknesses (lack of validity)
Unlike Milgram’s study which was carried out using a lab experiment, Adorno measured attitudes using an attitude scale, which is limited because participants may not be telling the truth.
This reduces the validity of the dispositional explanation for obedience.
Predictions from the theory are not always upheld.
Pettigrew found that F-scale scores were no higher among Southerners in USA than Northerners, even though anti-black prejudices were more common in south than the north at that time.
As prejudice is meant to be a component of the authoritarian personality, this simply does not fit with the theory.
What is the agentic state theory?
The agentic state is a mental state in which individuals view themselves as carrying out the wills of others.
They do not see themselves as responsible for the actions they commit because they are following orders rather than making their own decisions.
This shift in mindset can occur when they perceive someone as a legitimate authority figure and have a clear hierarchy of structure.