Social Influence studies / evaluation

Question 1

What is compliance

Answer 1

Publicly conforming to group behaviour while privately disagreeing. Change is superficial and temporary.

Question 2

What is identification

Answer 2

Temporarily adopting behaviours or attitudes of a group because membership is valued. Change is stronger than compliance but may not be permanent.

Question 3

What is internalisation

Answer 3

Deepest form of conformity where private beliefs change to match the group, leading to permanent change.

Question 4

Strengths of the types of conformity

Answer 4

Explains different motivations and depths of conformity.

Question 5

Limitations of the types of conformity

Answer 5

Some behaviours may not fit neatly into one category.

Question 6

Asch’s Conformity Study (1951) aim

Answer 6

To investigate the extent to which individuals conform to a majority opinion even when it is clearly wrong.

Question 7

Asch’s Conformity Study (1951) procedure

Answer 7

Participants were asked to match line lengths in a group where confederates gave incorrect answers. The true participant answered last or second last.

Question 8

Asch’s Conformity Study (1951) conclusion

Answer 8

36.8% conformity rate to incorrect answers.
75% conformed at least once.
Conformity decreased when a non-conforming confederate was present or group size was reduced.

Question 9

Asch’s Conformity Study (1951) strengths

Answer 9

Demonstrated normative social influence clearly; controlled lab setting

Question 10

Asch’s Conformity Study (1951) limitations

Answer 10

Artificial task and setting; low ecological validity; cultural bias

Question 11

Obedience: Milgram’s Study (1963) aim

Answer 11

To investigate obedience to authority figures even when orders conflict with personal conscience.

Question 12

Obedience: Milgram’s Study (1963) procedure

Answer 12

Participants were instructed to deliver electric shocks to a learner for wrong answers, with shocks increasing in intensity. The learner was a confederate.

Question 13

Obedience: Milgram’s Study (1963) findings

Answer 13

65% of participants administered the highest shock level.
Obedience influenced by proximity, location, and authority legitimacy.

Question 14

Obedience: Milgram’s Study (1963) strengths

Answer 14

Revealed powerful situational influences on obedience; replicable.

Question 15

Obedience: Milgram’s Study (1963) limitations

Answer 15

Ethical concerns (stress to participants); artificial task; some argue participants guessed shocks were fake.

Question 16

Agentic state as explanation for obedience

Answer 16

People obey authority because they believe the authority is responsible for their actions.

Question 17

Agentic state explanation strengths

Answer 17

Supported by Milgram’s participants’ reports.

Question 18

Agentic state explanation limitations

Answer 18

Does not explain why some disobey.

Question 19

Legitimacy of authority explanation for obedience

Answer 19

People obey those seen as having legitimate authority due to social hierarchy.

Question 20

Legitimacy of authority explanation strengths

Answer 20

Explains cultural differences in obedience.

Question 21

Legitimacy of authority explanation limitations

Answer 21

Does not explain disobedience in some contexts.

Question 22

Social support as explanation to resisting social influence

Answer 22

Studies found that conformity and obedience drop when others dissent

Question 23

Social support strengths

Answer 23

Supported by Asch’s variations and Milgram’s obedience variations.

Question 24

Social support limitations

Answer 24

Effect may be temporary and context-dependent.

Question 25

Rotter (1966) Locus of control for resisting social influence aim

Answer 25

To explain individual differences in resistance based on belief about control over life events.

Question 26

Rotter (1966) Locus of control for resisting social influence findings

Answer 26

Individuals with a high internal LOC are more likely to resist social influence.

Question 27

Rotter (1966) Locus of control for resisting social influence

Answer 27

Supported by correlational studies linking internal LOC with resistance.

Question 28

Rotter (1966) Locus of control for resisting social influence

Answer 28

LOC may change over time and situation; not the sole factor.

Question 29

Moscovici (1969) aim

Answer 29

To explain how a smaller group can influence the majority to change beliefs or behaviours.

Question 30

Moscovici (1969) procedure

Answer 30

Moscovici’s (1969) blue-green slides study showed consistent minorities influenced participants to say green.

Question 31

Moscovici (1969) findings

Answer 31

Consistent confederates causes 8.42% of PP to say green, inconsistent caused 1.25% and control group only 0.25%.

Question 32

Moscovici (1969) strengths

Answer 32

Supported by research; explains social change movements.

Question 33

Moscovici (1969) limitations

Answer 33

Minority influence is slow and fragile; majorities often resist, lack of ecological validity.