Social Influence Part One Flashcards
(67 cards)
1
Q
Conformity definition
A
Type of social influence where an individual or individuals yield to group pressures, either real or imagined. Conformity can result in a change in a persons behaviour, beliefs or both.
2
Q
Group norms definition
A
Informal rules that groups adopt to regulate group members behaviour
3
Q
Who was the first study into conformity by?
A
Sherif (1936)
4
Q
Sherif (1936) experiment
A
- measured individual and group judgements in an ambiguous situation.
- autokinetic affect, a stationary point of light appears to move
- first asked to estimate how far the light moved alone and then as a group… the group formed a new estimate of how far the light was moving that was different to the judgment of each individual over time, the group decided on how far the light moved, despite the light never moving at all.
5
Q
What psychologist shows strengths and persistence of group norms?
A
Roher et al (1954)
6
Q
Strength and persistence of group norms, Rohrer et al (1954)
A
Used sherrifs method and found that group answers persisted even up to a year after the experiment had taken place…even though that group had never existed.
(Internalisation)
7
Q
Types of conformity
A
- internalisation
- identification
- compliance
8
Q
Who conducted the prison experiment?
A
Phillip zimbardo (1971)
9
Q
Identification and the zimbardo prison experiment. Phillip zimbardo (1971)
A
- commissioned you look at the psychological effects of prison life
- interested to find out if brutality often found in American jails at that time was a consequence of certain personality traits of the prison guards or the roles to which they were assigned too.
10
Q
Zimbardo prison experiment (1971) statistics
A
- 24 male voluntary students
- only most stable selected
- random allocation to either a “guard” or prisoner”
- instruction time guards “keep prisoners under control without using physical violence”
- duration: stopped 6 days out of a proposed 2 weeks
11
Q
Findings of the zimbardo prison experiment (1971)
A
Situations enforce conformity. Those assigned to the role of the guard abused their power and behaved violently, despite being selected for their stability and knowing it was an experiment.
12
Q
Biggest critic of zimbardo
A
Savin (1973)
Believes the benefits resulting from the experienrjt do not outweigh the distress caused to the participants
Zimbardo defends his position by saying all participants were told exactly what would happen and all signed consent forms. He was certain that the distress felt in the experiment did not go beyond the mock prison to affect the participants real lives.
13
Q
What did zimbardo and ruch (1977) believe
A
That the behaviour can be explained by the strong “prisoner” and “guard” stereotypes that we learn from the media, both in real life situations and in fiction.
14
Q
Zimbardo prison experiment was replicated by?
A
Haslam and Reicher (2002)
15
Q
The experiment by Haslam and Reicher (2002)
A
- guards were uncomfortable about excercusing power…they never developed a group identity
- prisoners were unhappy about the inequalities they faced . They supported each other, shared a social identity and challenged the guards authority.
- eventually a commune of ex guards and ex prisoners were established but broke down because some members of the group wished to return to a more tyrannical regime.
16
Q
Historical context
Reicher and Haslam (2006) believe
A
Social roles and the way in which we view authority has changed since the 1970s.
Study proved that a shared social identity need not always lead to negative outcomes.
Zimbardo (2006) participants in the modern study were tougher and more streetwise
Participants had microphones and were aware that their actions were constantly being filmed unlike in the original study where participants were filmed in secret.
17
Q
What did Solomon Asch (1951) believe?
A
There is a different between true conformity and compliance
He claims that the power of social influence would be better demonstrated if he could get participants to confirm by complying with an obviously incorrect answer during a Simple task, simply because the rest of the group did the same.
18
Q
Compliance definition
A
When a person goes along with a group because they wish to be accepted by the group or dies but wish to appear foolish. It unloved a public “out loud” conformity even though the individual does but believe what he is saying.
19
Q
Solomon asch (1951) experiment
A
-Asch told 123 make students that they were taking part in a visual perception test
-Put into groups of between 7 and 9 seated around a table
-Shown two cards with lines drawn on them
-The first cars had a single standard live and participants were asked to match the length of the line to one of three comparison lines (A,B,C) shown on a second card. The task was easy and obvious
-some were non participants, briefed by the experimenter to answer in a certain way (confederates)
The naive particsows were seated second to last around the table so they would hear the incorrect answer repeatedly before giving their own.
20
Q
Solomon Asch (1951) how many trails?
A
18 trails for each group
12 out of the 18 trails, Asch used confederates to give obviously incorrect answers.
21
Q
Findings of the Solomon Asch(1951) experiment
A
Large variations
5% conformed on every trail
25% remained independent
Some participants began to appear self conscious and showed increased signs of stress
Some participants said they doubted their own perception while others admitted they didn’t want to stand out
22
Q
Factors that can affect conformity
A
- size of the group
- unanimity/social support
- privacy
- status of the group
- culture (collective cultures results in a greater degree of conformity)
- age
- features of the situation an individual is presented with
23
Q
Issues with Solomon Asch (1951)
A
- methodological (labatory experiment isolates a particular aspect of behaviour for study, well controlled and easy to replicate….however the groups and tasks are artificial and lack ecological validity.
- ethical (deception was used, true nature of the experiment was not revealed, so fully informed consent was not possible
24
Q
What did crutchfield (1955) do?
A
Replicated aschs work but sat participants in booths so that they could not see each other.
They could see what they thought were other people’s responses on a control panel in front of them.
He recited conformity rates of 30%
Conformity increased when the task was made more difficult.
Shows that unsigned pressure from a group is enough to get people to confirm
25
Historical context in aschs experiment
-experiment was conducted in the early 1950s in the USA during the McCarthy era
High levels of conformity were a reflection of American society in the 1950s
-Nicholson et at (1985) replicates aschs experiment and found lower levels of conformity...may be due to changes in American society, but could also be due to other factored such as individual differences in the participants.
26
Elliot aronson ((1999)
Decades of research indicate that conformity for normative reasons can occur simply because we do not want to risk social disapproval even from complete strangers we will never see again. Aronson 1999
27
Cultural context of aschs experiment
His experiment has been replicated in 13 countries outside the USA.
In the original experiment there was 37% conformity rates, varied from 14% in. Belgium to 51% in zimbabwe.
Social psychologist mske the distinction between individualist and collectivist cultures.
Results from theese experiments show that conformity is higher in collectivist cultures.
28
Individualist cultures
High value placed on individual freedom, self help, self reliance and individual responsibility.
29
Collectivist cultures
More emphasis on collective responsibility, group co operation, collective effort and dependable on social groups.
30
Gender differences and Solomon and Asch and crutchfield experiment
Only used male partners, this reveals nothing about conformity bin women.
Eagly and carli (1981) found that male researchers were more likely to find higher levels of conformity in women than female researchers using tasks that we’re more familiar to male participants.
31
Gender differences and Asch and crutchfield
Sis trunk and mc David (1971)
Male and female participants were asked to identify various objects while being subjected to group pressure to give the wrong answer ( and so to confirm)
Some participants were given traditionally male items, others female and others neutral.
Conformity for women was highest on male items, for men on female items and for neutral items were similar for both sexes.
This study indicates that there are no significant differences in conformity behaviour between men and women.
32
Who made the dual process dependency model?
Deutsch and Gerard (1955)
33
What does the dual process dependency model suggest
Suggest people confirm because they depend on others for two distinct reasons:
- social approval
- information
34
What are the two types of social influence which can lead to conformity?
- normative influence (the need to be accepted and to belong) this tends to lead to compliance . An individual will make a decision according to the influence of the majority because of its normative influence.
- informational influence (the need to get it right and gain information) leads to internalisation
35
Criticism of deutsch and Gerard
Criticised for implying that normative and social influence are separate and independent.
Insko et al (1983) have shown that often the two types of influence can interact and work together to increase conformity.
Also seen to work together in variations of aschs work, where the task is made more difficult, this increased informational influence and therefore conformity increases.
-failing to recognise the importance of belonging to a group. Many studies have shown that conformity to Group norms can persist for many years even if the group has since disbanded.
36
Social identity theory is by
Tajifel and Turner (1979)
37
Social identity theory
| Tajifel and Turner (1979)
Claims that apart from the level of self or personal identity, an individual as multiple social identities
Suggests that group membership creates in group self categorisation.
Once an individual sees himself as belonging to a group, they will seek to achieve positive self esteem by beggining to perceive strong similarities between himself and other members of his group
38
Definition of social identity
The individuals self concept derived from perceived membership of social groups (Hog and Vaughan, 2002)
It is the “us” associated with an internalised group membership
39
What does the social identity theory suggest?
Group membership creates in group self categorisation
Minimal group studies of tajifel and Turner (1986) in which the mere act of individuals categorising themselves as group members was sufficient to lead them to display in group favourism,
40
Social identity theory
| Meta-contrast principle
People’s sense of who they are is defined in terms of “we” rather than “I”
Once an individual sees themselves as belonging to a group, they will seek to achieve positive self esteem by beginning to perceive strong similarities behween himself and other members of his group and to see large differences between his own group and other similar groups.
41
What does social groups provide us with?
Norms or rules which regulate the behaviour of the group members
42
What is conformity dependant on?
Conformity is dependant on the nature of the group if the confederate are perceived as belonging to the naive participants “in group”, conformity is higher if they are perceived as belonging to the “out group”
-Hogg and Turner (1987)
43
Obedience is defined as?
As a form of social influence that causes an individual to comply with a direct order given by another individual who is usually regarded as an authority figure.
44
Who conducted the situational determinates of obedience experiment?
Stanley Milgram (1963)
45
```
Situational determinats of obedience
Stanley milligram (1963)
```
He wanted to find out what factors could make a person obey an authority figure to the point of harming (perhaps even killing) another human being.
His starting point was to look at the justification offered by those accused of acts of genocide during WW11 (the Nuremberg war criminal trails)
The defence of the accused was based on “obedience” in that the accused were following orders given.
46
Milgram situational determinates experiment
- Selected a range of male participants, from different occupations and backgrounds, who had responded to an advert into “punishment and learning”
- each participant arrived at the lab in Yale, where they were introduced to annother participant (Mr Wallace) who was a conferedrate, a 31 year old man in a white lab coat.
- then explained they would each be allocated to the role of “teacher” or “learner” (it was rigged so they would always be the teacher)
- had to teach the learner a series of word pairs
- the learns recall would be tested
- if the learner got any of the word pairs wrong they would be given an electric shock
- the participant was given a small shock to prove it was real.
- the teacher was told the “shocks may be painful but are not dangerous”
- teacher watched the learner have the electrodes strapped to their wrists and was then led into a delegate room where they could hear but not see the learner.
- the learner gave a predetermined set of answers (3 wrong answers for every 1 correct)
- as the shocks increased, the pre recorded screams of the learner became more intense and dramatic
- at 180V The learner complained of a weak heart and at 300V they banged on the door and demanded to be let out. At 315V They refused to answer.
47
What where the prompts in Stanley Milgrams experiment?
- please continue
- the experiment requires you to continue
- it is absolutely essential that you continue, teacher
- you have no other choice but to continue
48
Findings of the Stanley Milgram experiment
- many participants expressed extreme agitation and many argued with the experimenter, they usually continued to obey
- all 40 participants went to 300V and 65% administered the Maximum shock of 450V
49
Methodological issues of Stanley Milgrams experiment
Orne and Holland (1968) criticised Milgram for lacking
- internal validity (the participants couldn’t have thought the shocks were real)
- external validity (Milgrams lab and elaborate deception was unlike anything seen in real life, participants would never behave like that in real life setting.
However...
Sheridan and king (1972) replicated Milgrams experiment but replaced the learner with a real life puppy . The puppy yelped and struggled but most of the participants carried on shocking to the end of the scale.
Hofling et al (1966) Got a bogus doctor to telephone nurses on a ward and ask them to give a patient three times the max stated dose of a drug (astroten). The request broke hospital rules since the dr wasn’t identified and the drug was not signed for. 21 out of the 22 nurses obeyed the request.
Shows blind obedience can occur in a real life setting.
...this was criticised for lacking ecological validity (real life nurses wouldn’t be asked to break the rules In this way, also they had no knowledge of the fictional drug.
Rank and Jacobsen (1977) replicated this study but replaced the drug with Valium, only two out of the 18 nurses obeyed.
50
One of Milgrams Fierest critics
```
Diane Baumride (1964)
She published a paper in 1964 in which she levelled a number of ethical charges against his work
1)participants could not give informed consent as they were not aware of the true nature of the experiment.
Milgram got around this by obtaining presumptive consent.
```
2) deception. Milgram told his participants that his study was about the effects of punishment on learning when in fact it was to see how far someone would go in obeying an authority figures instructions to harm another individual.
Milgram says the experiment would’nt have worked without this deception.
The finding that an ordinary human given the right situational determinates is a huge benefit to mankind and has far-reaching social implications for how we might be educated to resist such pressures.
51
What does John darley (1992) believe
Evil is latent in all of us. Innocent people can be turned into tortures by taking part in the kind of activities that Milgram asked of his participants. As people get used to commuting such acts, they are asked to carry out more and more depraved ones untill thru are able to torture others without empathy of remorse.
Darley believes that, by taking part in his experiments, Milgrams participants could have undergone a process that morally altered them and started them on the “road to evil”.
52
Who is the obedience alibi created by
David mandel (1998)
53
```
What is the obedience alibi?
David mandel (1998)
```
Argues that claiming the atrocities committed during war are simply due to someone following orders is mis leading and over simplified.
It ignores other factors which may motivate the perpetrators of atrocities, including personal gain.
Analysis of the behaviours if those killed and tortured Jews during WW11 reveals some findings which do not concur with Milgram:
1) perpetrators would often torture and kill in the absence of supervision by their supervisors
2) they were not inhibited by seeing the pain and suffering of their victims,
3) they were often willing to continue killing even when offered the chance to quit.
54
Support for Milgram
Has potential to inculcate a healthy septicism in all of us (so that we don’t blindly obey authority)
55
Criticism of Milgrams findings
```
David mandel (1998) believed that the findings were oversimplified and that people could misuse them as an excuse for atrocities was recognised by Milgram himself.
He pointed out that his study could not provide an adequate explanation of the nazis behaviour towards the Jews during the Holocaust. He himself said we “must be cautious in generalising”
```
56
Why do people obey?
Legitimate authority
People tend to obey authority figures whose role is defined by society because they are seen as legitimate and therefore people believe they know what they are doing.
In Milgrams experiment the authoritative figure wore a technicians coat, when the experiment was transferred to a less prestigious down town office, obedience fell.
57
Who did the experiment on the power of uniforms?
Bickman (1974) and sedikides and Jackson (1990) on the power of uniforms.
On both studies a researcher was able to get passers by to perform tasks such as picking up little or refrain from leaning on a zoo exhibit l, simply by being dressed in the appropriate uniform.
58
Why do people obey?
Gradual commitment
Foot in the door affect
Once people have complied with a small request it is difficult for them to refuse a subsequent similar request, comes from a desire to appear consistent.
Contractual obligation, having agreed to take part and accepted the role.
59
Milgram explained that the participants responses suggest we operate on one of two levels in a social situation. Either we are:
- autonomous (behaving independently. Aware of the consequences of our actions and being responsible for their own actions.
- agentic ( acting as the agents of others and, therefore not responsible for our actions, allowing oneself to be directed by others, passing on the responsibility l, another by claiming to “follow orders”.
60
Why do we undergo an agentic shift in certain circumstances?
Because we have been trained from an early age to “do as we are told” by figures of authority, where we obey, we become “agents of authority”
61
Another reason for people obeying in Milgrams experiment?
By refusing to continue with the experiment, we risk appearing rude like if arrogant. Something we are taught is socially unacceptable....
Even when people were distressed, their protests was always coached in the politest language
E,g, with all due respect to your experiment, would you please look at the guy in that room, sir?
62
Buffers?
Describe any aspect of a situation that protects people from having to confront the consequences of their actions.
Eg, it’s easier for a person to launch a missle by pressing a button in a control room, if they can’t see the devastation it causes.
63
Who created the authoritarian personality?
Adorno 1950
64
The authoritarian personality
| Adorno 1950
Adorno was among a group of European psychologists who fled navy prosecution during WW11.
He believed that an authoritarian personality was developed in an early childhood as a result of being raised by parents who were rigid and strict...was the result of an individuals personality type.
He believed people with this personality were often hostile to authority, they were extremely obedient to people in positions of power,
However, they would often project their feelings of hostility towards their parents onto another (safer target (often a group of different race or religion.
He constructed a number of scales designed to measure various personality characteristics. F scale (fascism) which means the authoritarian personality.
65
Adorno 1950 and the F Scale
Adorno suggests that some deep rooted personality traits predisposed some individuals to be highly prejudicial.
He used case studies( F scale and finically interviews to support his theory)
Those with authoritarian personalities exhibited:
- hostility to those they consider to be of inferior status
-obedience to those they consider to be of a higher status
- inflexible and rigid beliefs and opinions
-conservative and traditional values
These individuals were more likely to develop an “us and them” mindset.
This could be traced back to a strict childhood, upbringing by authoritarian parents and not being able to express frustration or hostility to the parents...later exhibited itself through aggression towards those considered weaker.
66
What does smith and mackie (2000) and cardwell (2001) believe?
(Obedience and obedience atrocities)
Believe that obedience alone Cannot explain these atrocities and that other important factors must be considered in explaining such acts.
67
What are the three main factors identified by smith and mackie (2000) and cardwell (2001) as important factors to explain atrocities
1) the context of inter group hostility (social identity theory argues that people see themselves as members of groups and tend to maximise differences between their own group and others.
2) the importance of self justification (people who carry out atrocities often convince themselves that their victims deserved their fate, the perpetrators are able to view themselves as decent, moral people...some of Milgrams participants argued that the learners deserved to be shocked for failing to learn, Milgram 1974)
3) the role of motivational factors, cardwell (2001) argues that Milgrams research ignores the role of motivational factors in extreme obedience. He argues that personal gain was an important motivational factor in nazi Germany where jewerly, hold and even hair was looted.
