Social Influence Full Topic

What was the Aim and Procedure of Asch’s study?

AIM: wanted to measure the extent to which people would conform to the opinions of others in different conditions

PROCEDURE:

• 123 American male ppts

• Presented with a line test in which they had to say which line was the same length as the one they were given

• Asch presented ppts with 3 conditions: group size, group unanimity and task difficulty

What was the Group Size variation of Asch’s study and what did he find from it?

• Asch varied the number of confederates in each group from 1-15

FOUND

• when 2 confederates, conformity to wrong answers was 13.6%

• when there was 3 confederates, conformity rose to 31.8%

• 3+ confederates showed no change in conformity rate

SO there was a linear correlation between group size and rates of conformity

What was the Unanimity variation of Asch’s study and what did he find from it?

• introduced a dissenting confederate who sometimes gave the correct answer and sometimes gave a different incorrect answer but ALWAYS disagreed with the majority

FOUND

• conformity reduced to less than a quarter of what it was when group unanimity was broken

• as Asch introduced a confederate who went against the majority, conformity decreased as there was less of. fear of social rejection and so ppts felt more confident to share their answer

What was the Task Difficulty variation of Asch’s study and what did he find from it?

• Asch made lines more similar in size so that they would be harder to distinguish

FOUND

• as task difficulty increased so did conformity

• this was because the situation was more ambiguous and so ppts were less certain of their own answers/ beliefs —> they look to others for reassurance/ answers due to ISI

What is compliance?

• conforming publicly but continuing to disagree privately

• shallowest form of conformity

e.g. may laugh at a joke someone made but privately not find it very funny

What is internalisation?

• conforming publicly and privately because they have accepted and internalised the views of the group

• deepest level of conformity

e.g. becoming vegetarian after sharing a flat with veggies at uni

What is Normative Social Influence?

• occurs when we wish to be liked by the majority group

• complying to their ideas in order to fit in to the norm and be liked by the group —> stems from a fear of social rejection

• emotional process that leads to compliance

• need for social support

What is Informational Social Influence?

• looking to the majority group for information when you are unsure of how to behave

• conforming because you believe the majority is right and you look to them for the right answer —> stems from fear of being wrong

• cognitive process which leads to internalisation

What’s a strength for NSI (supporting evidence from Asch)?

+Supp ev from Asch

• ppts in his study conformed to the clearly wrong answers of others despite the task being relatively straightforward

• this is ev for NSI as it shows how ppl conform out of a desire to fit in and be liked by the group

What research support did Jenness provide for ISI (strength)?

• Jenness asks ppts to make independent judgements about the number of beans in a jar and then were asked to discuss their guesses in groups

• ppts then made second individual guess

FOUND

• second guess moves closer to group estimate

• SHOWS how internalisation of group beliefs will occur in ambiguous situations

What’s a strength for NSI from Schultz?

• gathered data from hotels where guests were randomly allocated to rooms

• some rooms had a hanger informing ppts of environmental benefits of reusing towels

• in the other rooms there was additional info stating “75% of guests chose to reuse their towels every day”

FOUND

• guests who were told normative info reduced their need for fresh towels by 25%

• SO ppl more likely to conform due to NSI

What’s a double weakness for Asch’s study?

SITUATION AND TASK WERE ARTIFICIAL

• ppts knew they were in study (DC) AND task was trivial so there was no need to not conform

• Fiske - Asch’s groups didn’t represent real life groups well

• SO findings can’t be generalised to every day life

LITTLE APPLICATION

• only tested American men

• Neto — suggested woman may be more conformist as more concerned with social relationships

• US is an individualistic culture, Bond and Smith suggested that collectivist cultures are more likely to conform

• SO Aschs findings can’t be applied across cultures or gender

What’s a double (pos + neg) for Asch’s research?

+ Lucas et al

• asked ppts to complete easy and hard maths problems and gave them answers which were falsely claimed to be from three other students

• Found ppts conformed more often when problems were harder

• SO Asch correctly identified task difficulty as a variable affecting conformity rates

- Perrin + Spencers Research

• repeated Aschs study in the UK with engineering ppts

• only one conforming reponse out of 400 trials

• Therefore, ppt variables such as intelligence and confidence may impact their rate of conformity more than factors identified by Asch

What is identification?

• aligning views to those of a group you identify with

• publicly changing behaviours even if we don’t fully agree

What was the aim of Zimbardos experiment?

To see whether people will conform to new social roles

What was the procedure of Zimbardos experiment?

• set up a mock prison in the basement of Stanford University

• 21 male student volunteers researched all tested as ‘mentally and emotionally stable’ previous to the experiment

• randomly allocated to the role of prisoner or guard

PRISONERS:

• arrested at home and strip searched

• they were given a prisoner uniform with a number on it and were from then referred to only by their number

• spent 23 hours a day in their cell

GUARDS:

• given uniforms, batons and mirrored sunglasses

• worked In shifts and were allowed to go home at the end of a shift

• told they had power over the prisoners but not to harm them physically

What were the findings of zimbardo’s experiment?

• experiment had to be called off after 6 days

• guards became so brutal that prisoners had nervous breakdowns, went on hunger strike with some even developing pathological prisoner syndrome

• prisoners revolted on the 2nd day

• guards became aggressive

• prisoners became institutionalised

What were the findings of Zimbardos experiment?

most conformed strongly to their role in prison —> guards became aggressive and authoritative whilst prisoners became submissive

What’s a double weakness of Zimbardo’s experiment?

-Reicher + Haslam → replicated Zimbardos research by randomly assigning 15 men to the role of prisoner or guard

FOUND guards did not identify with their status and refused to impose authority AGAINST Zimbardo as shows ppts won’t always conform to social roles

-Zimbardos experiment doesn’t consider individual differences

• guards behaviour varied dramatically - some were sadistic BUT some were sympathetic and offered support

• SUGGESTING dispositional factors may play a larger role than situational factors in determine rate of conformity

Whats a further weakness of Zimbardos experiment? (ethics)

-Heavily criticised for breaking ethical guidelines esp protection from harm

• 5 prisoners had to leave early and some experienced psychological harm e.g. hunger strike, pathological prisoner syndrome

• furthermore some guards felt anxiety and guilt following the experiment

THEREFORE the benefits of the experiment may not outweigh the negative effects on ppts

Whats a strength of Zimbardo’s experiment?

RWA

• Improved the US prison system

• beneficial reforms in the way that prisoner were treated by guards e.g. juvenile detainees

• HOWEVER US prison system is arguably worse now than before the experiment so impact is questionable

What is meant by pathology of power?

the oppressive behaviour often displayed by people when they are given control over the lives of other human beings and do not have to justify their displays of power

What was Milgrams investigation into obedience?

• 40 American males

• a conf was always the learner whilst the true ppt was the teacher

• another conf was the experimenter and wore a lab coat

• the teacher (real ppt) had to give the learner an increasingly severe electric shock each time the learner made a mistake on a question

• shocks ranged from 15 - 450 volts

• teacher believed they were actually shocking learner

What was the proximity variation of Milgram’s experiment?

• varied how close the teacher was to the learner

• when the teacher and learner were in the same room obedience rate for full 450V dropped from 65% to 40%

• obedience dropped as teacher understood learners pain more

• when the experimenter gave instructions over the telephone obedience fell to 20.5%

What was the location variation of Milgram’s experiment?

• experiment originally in Yale University

• retested in a rundown building

• when the experiment was conducted in a rundown building, obedience to go to 450V dropped from 65% to 47.5%

• suggests the high brow location created an atmosphere of respect and obedience

What was the uniform variation of Milgram’s experiment?

• in most variations the experimenter wore a white lab coat indicating status

• in uniform variation the experimenter was called away and replaced by another confederate in normal everyday clothes

• in this variation obedience to turning up the voltage to 450V dropped from 65% to 20%

Whats a double strength for Milgram’s experiment? (Sheridan and king)

+Sheridan and King —> students train puppy to learn a discriminatory task by punishing it with increasingly real electric shocks - although puppy only received a small shock the students could still hear it squeal

• FOUND even though some ppts complained abt experiment and even cried 75% of ppts delivered the maximum shock possible

+LE JEU DE LA MORT recreated Milgram’s experiment but asked ppts to perform the tasks under the guise of a fake television show

• volunteers given 40 euros to take part in the fake shows ‘pilot’

• in pilot they had to administer increasingly stronger electric shocks to trained actors posing as players as punishment for incorrect answers

• ppts were encouraged to administer the shocks by the audience and host

• only 20% contestants chose to end the game before giving highest voltage

Whats a weakness of Milgrams experiment?

-Hofling et Al

• 22 nurses working at various US hospitals received phone calls from a conf “dr smith”

• the conf instructed them to give Mr Jones 20mg of a made up drug Astrofen

• Dr Smith said he would sign the drug authorisation form when he came to see the patient in 10 mins time

• the label on the ‘drug’ clearly stated the maximum dose was 10mg So if nurses obeyed dr smith they would be breaking authorising rules and administering more than the maximum dose

FOUND

• 21/22 nurses obeyed without hesitation

Whats a strength for the uniform variation of Milgrams experiment?

Bickman

• 3 male researchers gave orders to 153 randomly selected pedestrians in NY

• researchers were dressed in either a milkman uniform, a suit and tie or a guards uniform

• they gave various orders such as “pick this bag up for me”

FOUND

• ppts most likely to obey the demand when the researcher is dressed as a guard (80%) than milk man or civilian (40%)

Whats a further weakness of Milgram’s experiement?

• offers an alibi to those who have committed atrocities in the name of obedience

• e.g. those who committed atrocities in the holocaust may claim that they committed the atrocities they did out of obedience to their officers or being in the agent state

• therefore Milgrams findings have both positive and negative application which could be harmful to even those who weren’t ppts

What is a weakness for Milgram’s experiment?

• breaks numerous ethical guidelines

• e.g. milligram deceived ppts as they thought they were really harming the learner causing them psychological stress and physical harm

What is meant by agentic state?

• the condition someone is in when they see themself as an agent for carrying out someone else’s wishes

• feel no responsibility for their actions

Autonomous State

behaving according to someones own principals - acting independently

• feeling responsibility for own actions

Agentic Shift

• the shift from autonomy to being an agent for someone else’s doing -

• this occurs when we perceive someone as having more authority than us

Binding Factors

aspects of a situation that allow a person to ignore or minimise the damaging effect of their behaviour and reduce the moral strain they feel

shifted responsibility to victim e.g. its their fault for getting the answer wrong