Flashcards in Social psychology Deck (29)
What is the definition of conformity?
A change in a person’s behaviour because of real or imagined pressure from a group or individual.
What is the definition of internalisation?
Caused by ISI.
When we genuinely accept the values of a group because we believe they are right. It doesn’t rely on the presence of the group because we accept the view as correct.
Deepest and most permanent type of conformity.
What is the definition of identification?
When we act/ believe in the same way as a group because we want to be a part of the group. This depends on the presence of the group. intermediate level of conformity.
What is the definition of compliance?
Caused by NSI.
When we outwardly agree with a group but privately disagree. This is the most shallow type of conformity.
What is the definition of Information social influence?
‘The desire to be right.’
Leads to internalisation.
What is the definition of Normative social influence?
‘The desire to be liked.’
Leads to compliance.
Who suggested that we conform in three different ways?
Who argued we conformed because of NSI and ISI?
Deutsch and Gerald (1955) = argued it was a 2-process theory.
What are the strengths of ISI?
- Research support = internal validity
Lucas et al (2006) = found increased confomity when they gave participants harder exam questions especially people with low math ability.
- Interactionist approach =
What are the weaknesses of ISI?
- individual differences = low generalisability
It doesn't affect people in the same way. in Asch's 1955 variation experiments = students were less conformist (28%) to other participants (37%)
^ the lack of conformity ≠ ISI bc internalisation hasn't occurred and lead to ISI.
What are the strengths of NSI?
- Research support = internal validity
Asch (1951) = 75% of people conformed at least once. 36.8% all of the time bc the confederate. This shows people want to be liked as confomorty fell to 12.5% when they wrote down their answers on paper.
What are the weaknesses of NSI?
- Individual differences = low generalisability
McGhee and Teevan (1967) found that students are more likely to conform. This is because students are nAffiliators and have a higher need for affiliation.
^ therefore this limits the generalisiabilty bc the desire to be liked is varying between people.
What did Asch do? (Not asked for in the exam)
Sample = 123 male undergraduates
Procedure = participants must match the lines given to them to the line they saw previously. Participant is inbetween 6-8 confederates.
What was the findings of Asch's original study?
They conformed bc of NSI
36.8% conformed all of the time.
75% confomed at least once
25% never conformed.
How did group size affect confomity? (One of Asch's variations)
3 confederates = 31.8%
More confederates and only 1 C = no difference
2 confederates = 12.8%
How did unamity affect confomity? (One of Asch's variations)
Caused less confomity = only 25% conformed
Supports NSI and ISI.
How did task difficulty affect confomity? (One of Asch's variations)
What are the weaknesses of Asch's research?
- 'A child of its time' = low temporal validity
Experiment = 1950s which was peak McCrathyism and therefore the confimty was really high bc htye didn't want to be thought of negatively.
- Experimental paradigm = ETHICS
They deceived the participants and might have led them to feel embarrassed ≠ protection from mental harm. So this lowers the trust in the psychologist.
What happened in Zimbardo's Stanford Prison experiment?
- Basement mock prison, psychology dept, Stanford uni
Sample = 24 physically and mentally tested MALE volunteers who were paid $15 a day. 2 reserves, 1 dropped out = 10 prisoners and 11 wardens.
- Prisoners = standard prison procedure and put into uniforms whereas the wardens were given sunglasses.
- Duration was supposed to be 2 weeks but lasted 6 days 5 participants dropped out early and the guards were growing more tyrannical.
What is the dispositional explanation of behaviour?
People act according to thier individual personalities regardless of their situation.
What is the situational explanation of behaviour?
'Parts' people act that is beffitting of their social role depending on the situation.
What were the findings and conclusions of the Stanford Prison Experiment?
Supports situational explanation of bhvr as both the prisoners and guards conformed to their social role.
What are the strengths of the SPE?
- Abu Ghraib = APPLICATION
In an Iraqi prison, similar events occurred where American soldiers increasingly became more tyrannical. This can help prevention of serious infringing of human rights.
- Control over variables = Internal validity
selection of participants = emotionally and physically stable (increased ethics and most prisoners are like this) and randomly assigned roles = reduced individual differences.
What are the weaknesses of the SPE?
Major depression + trauma were done to the participants. Psychologists failed their responsibility in protecting their participants from harm. Particiapnst asked to leave but Zimbardo bc 'went native' = responded as a superintendent worried about the prison instead of ht wellbeing of the participant.
- Role of dispositional influences = x internal validity
From (1973) argued that they exaggerated conformity through the situational explanation of bhvr. 1/3 of guards = cruel and the others were offering sympathy e.g giving cigarretes.
What is obedience?
A form of social infleunce where we do a direct order from an individual higher than us.
What happened in Milgram's obedience study?
Aim = investigate whether ordinary people will obey in extreme situations.
Sample = 40 MALE = paid $4.50 even if they quit.
Procedure = fixed lots so the confederate was always the learner. Everytime Q was wrong teacher will shock. 3 prods were used to if they asked to stop. 450 was maximum.
What were the findings and conclusions of Milgram's study on obedience?
65% = max 450V
5 participants (12.5%) = stopped at 300V (first time confederate shows pain through objection.
Qualitative data made also made = stuttering
Participants were debriefed after and told bhvr was normal.
Normal people are very obedient to those who have higher authority.
What are the weaknesses of Milgram's study on obedience?
Breaks promise of keeping participants from harm bc they were put under mental strains. Also they are betraying the trust of the participants on them.
- Low internal validity
Orne and Holland (1968) = people went to 450V because they didn't believe that the shocks were real. Gina Perrys (2013) also supports this as Perrys listen to the tapes and saw people were doubtful.