Summary (2) Social influence Zimbardo

What did Asch find about the effect of group size on conformity

Conformity was 3% with one confederate, 12.8% with two, and 31.8% with three. This shows that a small majority is enough to exert pressure, but adding more people beyond three does not increase conformity further, meaning majority influence plateaus.

Why does group size affect conformity

A larger group increases perceived social pressure, making people more likely to doubt themselves. This matters because it shows how group dynamics amplify normative influence.

What is unanimity in Asch’s study

Unanimity refers to all confederates giving the same incorrect answer. This creates strong majority pressure, making conformity more likely.

What happened when Asch broke unanimity

When one confederate gave the correct answer, conformity dropped to 5%. This shows that social support makes resisting pressure much easier, reducing both NSI and ISI.

What happened when a dissenter gave a different wrong answer

Conformity dropped to 9%. This matters because even disagreement that isn’t correct still disrupts group pressure, showing the importance of reduced consensus.

What does the unanimity variable show about conformity

It shows that people conform less when they feel supported, highlighting the role of social allies in resisting influence.

How did task difficulty affect conformity in Asch’s study

When line lengths were made more similar, conformity increased. This shows that ambiguity strengthens ISI because people rely more on others when unsure.

Why does task difficulty increase ISI

Harder tasks create uncertainty, making people assume the group knows better. This demonstrates how cognitive doubt increases informational influence.

What was Zimbardo investigating in the Stanford Prison Experiment

He wanted to see how readily people conform to social roles when placed in a simulated prison. This matters because it explores how environment and assigned roles shape behaviour.

How were participants recruited for Zimbardo’s study

24 male students were recruited through volunteer sampling and screened for emotional stability. This increased internal validity by reducing individual differences.

How were participants assigned roles

They were randomly allocated to prisoner or guard. This strengthens the study because differences in behaviour can be attributed to the situation, not personality.

How were prisoners introduced to the study

They were unexpectedly arrested at home and taken to the mock prison. This increased realism and encouraged them to adopt their roles more fully.

What uniforms did guards wear

Khaki uniforms, mirrored sunglasses, and carried handcuffs and batons. This created authority and anonymity, increasing deindividuation.

What uniforms did prisoners wear

Smocks, caps, and ID numbers instead of names. This stripped personal identity and reinforced their lower status.

What behaviours did guards show during the study

They became increasingly aggressive, controlling, and abusive. This shows how power and anonymity can lead to oppressive behaviour.

What behaviours did prisoners show during the study

They became passive, anxious, depressed, and obedient. This demonstrates how quickly people internalise low‑status roles.

Why was the study stopped early

It was planned for 14 days but stopped after 6 due to extreme psychological distress. This highlights the powerful impact of situational factors on behaviour.

What did Zimbardo conclude about social roles

People conform rapidly to roles when the situation strongly defines them. This supports situational explanations of behaviour over dispositional ones.

What did Zimbardo conclude about power

Power corrupts when legitimised by the environment, leading to abusive behaviour. This is relevant to real institutions like prisons.

What did Zimbardo conclude about deindividuation

Uniforms and anonymity reduced personal responsibility, increasing aggression. This shows how identity loss can intensify harmful behaviour.

What is a strength of Zimbardo’s study regarding control

Participants were screened for emotional stability and randomly assigned roles. This increases internal validity because behaviour can be attributed to the situation, not personality.

How does random allocation strengthen Zimbardo’s conclusions

It reduces participant variables, meaning differences in behaviour were due to the prison environment. This supports situational explanations.

What is a strength of Zimbardo’s study regarding realism

Participants behaved as if the prison was real, discussing prison life in private conversations. This gives the study high mundane realism and ecological validity.

What is a major ethical issue in Zimbardo’s study

Participants were not fully protected from harm, experiencing extreme stress and humiliation. This raises serious concerns about psychological risk.

Why was informed consent inadequate in Zimbardo’s study

Participants did not know they would be arrested at home or subjected to harsh treatment. This violates ethical guidelines and reduces trustworthiness.

Why was the right to withdraw compromised

The prison environment made it difficult for participants to leave, even when distressed. This undermines ethical standards and participant autonomy.

How does psychological harm affect the validity of Zimbardo’s study

Extreme distress may have altered behaviour, meaning findings may not reflect natural role adoption. This reduces internal validity.

What is a limitation regarding demand characteristics

Participants may have acted according to stereotypes of guards and prisoners. This reduces validity because behaviour may not reflect genuine role conformity.

What evidence suggests demand characteristics occurred

A prisoner who appeared to have a breakdown recovered instantly when reminded the prison wasn’t real. This suggests acting rather than genuine distress.

How does demand characteristics challenge Zimbardo’s conclusions

If behaviour was performed rather than natural, the study may not show true situational influence, weakening the explanation.

What is a limitation regarding generalisability

The sample was all male American students, limiting population validity. Behaviour may differ across genders, cultures, or age groups.

How does Zimbardo’s dual role weaken the study

He acted as both researcher and prison superintendent, creating bias and reducing objectivity. This threatens internal validity.

What real‑world relevance does Zimbardo’s study have

It helps explain behaviour in real prisons and institutions, showing how environments can create abuse. This increases the study’s applied value.