SOCIAL INFLUENCE

What is conformity

Conformity is a change in a person’s behaviour, beliefs or attitudes as a result of real or imagined pressure from a group.

List 3 types of conformity

• Compliance

• Internalization

• Identification

Describe what is compliance, identification and internalization

Compliance:

• Compliance is a type of conformity where someone publicly changes their behaviour to fit in with the group, but privately they do not agree.

Identification

A type of conformity, typically temporary, where an individual wants to be associated with a particular social group, therefore changing their behaviour and beliefs accordingly

Internalisation:

Internalisation is the deepest type of conformity where a person genuinely accepts the beliefs or behaviour of the group, so there is both a public and private change.

List + explain reasons for conforming

NSI (normative social influence)

• A reason for comformity which explains that people conform under social pressure to fulfill their desire of being liked / to gain social approval, or to avoid social disapproval.

• Associated with compliance and possibly identification (public behavioural change)

• Must feel under surveillance of the group

ISI (informational social influence)

• A reason for conformity which explains that people conform in order to be right/correct. This is where an individual believes the group knows better than them, particularly in ambiguous situations

• Associated with internalization: public + private attitudes/behavior changes

What did Asch investigate

Conformity:

Discriminative task

Comparing 3 lines to a comparison line

variations:

Unanimity

Group size

Task difficulty

What did Asch investigate (short) + briefly how

Variables affecting conformity to a majority

• Task difficulty

• Group size (no. Confederates):

  • The number of confederates / members of the majority who, in Asch’s study, gave deliberately incorrect answers.

• Unanimity of majority:

  • The extent to which the members of the majority all agree with each other.

    • Of MAJORITY = majority agrees

    • Breaking unanimity: people who differ from majority

    • Asch: confederate gave different/ correct answer (allies)

A discriminative task - comparing line lengths

Confederate meaning

A member of the study who knows the true aim of the research but pretends to be a genuine participant.

How did group size in Asch’s variables affect conformity in the study

1. Group size

• Conformity increased up until the majority consisted of three confederates, after which conformity remained relatively stable.

  • 3: jumped to 30% conformity

  • Indicates that group size is important only up to a point

  • According to NSI, the participant would want to avoid the greater pressure of social disapproval from the majority.

How did unanimity affect conformity in Asch study

2. Unanimity

• A confederate would break unanimity by stating the correct answer or a different incorrect answer. This gave the participant !!social support!! and encouraged the participant to also show independence in stating their own answer, decreasing conformity.

  • 5.5% = when one confederate gave the correct answer

    • around 9% = when one confederate gave a different wrong answer

  • CONCLUSION: breaking groups unanimous position is a major factor in conformity

How did task difficulty affect conformity in Asch study

3. Task difficulty

• How ambiguous or difficult a situation is. In Asch’s study, he made the task more difficult by making the three lines much more similar in length, so that the correct answer was less obvious.

  • Task difficulty made the participant rely on the majority to choose an answer, as according to ISI the participant believes the group knows better. == This led to an increase in conformity.

Asch’s study procedure

1. Student volunteers

• 123 male US undergraduates

• Seated around a table

• 8 people in each group ( 7c - 1pp)

1. Visual discrimination task (comparing 3 lines of different lengths to standard line)

2. AIM: to see whether ‘lone’ pp would react to confederate behaviour

3. 12/18 trials confederates instructed to give same wrong answer

• 12 trials = critical trials

4. To confirm lines were ez/unambiguous:

• control group with no confederates giving wrong answers = 1% mistake rate from pp

Asch’s findings

12/18 critical trials (where confederates all gave wrong same answer) = 33% conformity rate.

Half pp conformed on 6+ trials

Also noted individual differences: 1/4 never conformed on critical trials. 1 in 20 conformed in all 12.

Discussion with pp after:

Majority privately maintained their own perceptions / judgements but changed public behavior = to avoid social disapprovals

What is a social role + conformity to social roles

Social role:

Behaviours, attitudes and responsibilities expected from an individual based on their social status in a social group

• Behaviour = actions/what you do

• Attitudes = mentality — how you think/feel

• Responsibilities =  expectations/ duties and role within a group

Conformity to social roles :

When an individual changes their behaviour to match their social role, this includes:

• Behaviour

• attitudes 

• == to fit their social role 

• Often unconsciously/automatically 

Sate social roles study

Zimbardo - prison

• guard role

• Prison role

Strengths of Asch study

Advantages:

1. Research for NSI

• after interviewing pp found that they only changed public behaviour

• Increased validity for the explanations; pp reasoning matched theory

2. Lab experiment: highly controlled

• standardised + variables were managed

  • = replicable - researches can repeat study to assess its reliability

Disadvantages

1. Lacks ecological validity: artificial environemnt

• people wont judge line lengths in social situatuons

• Controlled environment = demand characteristics

• Decisions are meaningful + have consequences: asch’s study was none of those = not representative

• =limited generalisability

2. Time bound study, counter study: Perrin + Spencer

• did same in Britain w engineering students

• Found low levels of conformity

• Suggests that 1950s America (a time where it was feared to stand out) = time periods

  • Reduces temporal validity

COUNTER TO P + S

• On the other hand, some psychologists argue that Perrin and Spencer’s participants were engineering students, who may have been more confident about making accurate judgements than the general population.

• ethical concerns: deception

• Don’t know true aim

• Psychological stress/ embarrassment

• Partial informed consent = criticism

Limitations of Asch study

Disadvantages

1. Lacks ecological validity: artificial environemnt

• people wont judge line lengths in social situatuons

• Controlled environment = demand characteristics

• Decisions are meaningful + have consequences: asch’s study was none of those = not representative

• =limited generalisability

2. Time bound study, counter study: Perrin + Spencer

• did same in Britain w engineering students

• Found low levels of conformity

• Suggests that 1950s America (a time where it was feared to stand out) = time periods

  • Reduces temporal validity

COUNTER TO P + S

• On the other hand, some psychologists argue that Perrin and Spencer’s participants were engineering students, who may have been more confident about making accurate judgements than the general population.

• ethical concerns: deception

• Don’t know true aim

• Psychological stress/ embarrassment

• Partial informed consent = criticism

What is Perrin + Spencer study

Repeated Asch study in Britain engineering students

• found lower conformity

• Shows Asch lacks temporal validity

Aim of Zimbardo study

To investigate whether people would conform to their newly assigned social roles (prisoner + guard) when placed in a prison like environment.

Pp of Zimbardo study + how they were assigned to study, then roles roles

Male American uni students

• volunteers

Assignment

Study:

• screened to ensure psychologically + physically fit

• 24 most fit were randomly allocated to be either prisoner or guard (12 g, 12p)

Zimbardo procedure study

Mock prison setup

• basement of Stanford uni

• Realistic features:   Cells, solitary confinement, uniforms

Prisoners unexpected arrest AT HOME

Prisoners : stripped — de-individualisation

• Numbererd - de-individualisation

• prisoner rights: 3 toilet/day - supervised, 2 visits/week

Guards:

• Uniforms  = symbols of authority 

• Reflective sunglasses  ===  anonymity + no eye contact

• Recieved authority over the prisoners

• Told to maintain the order —- no physical violence tho

Zimbardo:

Took role of prison superintendent (manager/ overall authority)

• personal involvement (loss of objectivity perhaps)

De-individualisation meaning in Zimbardo

Prisoners treated like a category; a prisoner - not as unique individuals

• lost sense of personal identity ; name (numbered)

• Wore same uniform

• Lost autonomy, dignity and individuality

What happened to guards behaviour later on in Zimbardos study

 

• Quicklty became dominant + exploitative

• agressive

• abusive

• Psycholigcal harmed the proisoers

• some enjoyedit

What happened to guards behaviour later on in Zimbardos study

• PRISONERS

• Passive

• anxious

• depressed

• emotional distress

• loss of identity 

• Some had to be released early 

Duration of Zimbardo study

Study planned for 14days, stopped after 6 due to ethical issues 

• psychological harm of prisoners: breakdowns

• Lack of full informed consent

  • Home arrest

  • Humilliation

  • Dehumanization

  • Abuse

• Right to withdraw not fully protected

  • Prisoners couldn’t easily leave

Zimbardo conclusion

Rapid conformity to social roles occurred due to the prison environment and the authority given to the guards. Social roles can lead to deindividuation and a loss of personal responsibility. This supports the situational explanation of behaviour, as people conformed to their social roles.

Strengths of Zimbardo study

ADVANTAGES

HIGH ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY:

• Realistic prison setting:

• prison cells (mock prison)

• arrested at home, stripped and numbered—- de-individualizing the pps

• uniforms to symbolize authority 

• realistic prison system including solitary confinement

• mant pp shows intense emotional distress, showing genuine responses to the environment, reflecting true conformity to the prisoner role

• Some guards were seen enjoying / embracing their roles suggest true immersion in the situation and to the high authority social roles.

• ==INTERNALISED the guard roles — indicating a degree of psychological realisms 

Limitations of Zimbardo study

DISADVANTAGES

RESEARCHER INFLUENCE

• Zimbardo acted as a neutral prison observer = INVESTIGATOR EFFECT

• His presence may have influenced the guards to take their roles seriously 

• may have delayed ending the study when prisoners are distressed 

• == may haveresulted in extreme behaviour 

• = weakens internal validity : results may have been effected by Zimbardo rather than the conformity to social roles 

DEMAND CHARACTERISTICS 

• Pps may have guessed the aim of the study 

• guards may have acted as guards based on stereotypes 

• =behaviour could be performed rather than acted upon due to the situation 

• =reduces internal validity 

• cause an over estimation of the power of conformity in social roles `pp

ETHICAL CONCERNS

• Psychological harm

• Anxiety, distress, breakdowns from degrading activities

• prison environment created ambiguity on whether the Pps could use their right withdraw (prisoners may feel resitricted on their ability to leave)

• Deception

• Pps were unaware of the severity/extent to which the experiment could be

• (arrested at their homes)

• Major criticisms that the ethical issues were too high to accept findings 

What is Situational explanation of behaviour

Behaviour caused by environment the person is in (rather than personality)

• situational = surrounding situation/ environment

Situational behaviour + Zimbardo link

Prison setting + social roles caused the pp behaviour:

• the guards did not necessarily act cruel because they were naturally cruel people

• the prisoners did not become passive because that was their normal personality

• instead, the prison environment, uniforms, loss of identity, and power of the roles caused the behaviour

So Zimbardo argued that people conformed because of situational factors.

Obedience meaning

A type of social influence where you follow orders/instructions from an authority figure

• authority figure: someone of higher status/power in the social hierarchy

Conformity vs obedience

Conformity is changing behaviour, beliefs or attitudes due to social pressure, typically from a majority, whereas obedience is following orders from an authority figure.

• Study of obedience

Milgram 1963

AIM: To see how many people, or the extent to which people, would obey the orders of a legitimate authority figure, even when this involved harming another person.

Pp of Milgram

male American volunteers

Recruited from newspapers advert : opportunity sampling

• 20-50 yrs old

Cover story (false) of Milgram S study

In Milgram’s study, the cover story was:

The study was supposedly about memory / the effects of punishment on learning.

• Participants were told the research was investigating whether punishment, such as electric shocks, affects a person’s ability to learn word pairs.

Roles of pp in Milgram

Randomly assigned:

• teacher: electric shock partner when upon asking questions they got it wrong

• Learner

Milgram study details

1. 40 pp selected via newspaper advert (volunteer sample)

• age 20-50

• paid

2. pp decieved cover story: told that the study was about how punishment affects learning

3. roles: teacher / learner

• real pp = always teacher

• learner = confederate

• selections were rigged

• The teacher was told to ask the learner word-pair questions. Every time the learner got one wrong, the teacher had to give an electric shock.

4. teacher (pp): tests learners ability to remember word pairs

• when wrong: increasingly strong electric shocks

5. learner was silent until 300 volts (very strong)

• at 300 volts, he banged on the wall

• then he gave no answer to the next question

• at 315 volts, he banged on the wall again

• after that, he was silent and gave no more responses

6. milgram used sequenced prods:

• “Please continue”

• “The experiment requires that you continue”

why did milgram investigate obedience

Psychologists wanted to understand how events like atrocities in war could happen. The question was:

Are cruel acts caused by evil personalities, or can ordinary people obey harmful orders if the situation pushes them to?

Aim of milgrams study

Milgram aimed to investigate how far ordinary people would go in obeying an authority figure, even when asked to harm another person.

describe shock system in milgrams study

4. Shock system

• The switches increased in 15-volt steps

• min: 15, max: 450

• words written next to volt = seem more serious (warnings) — to make study believable

why did milgram use prods

prod: standardised verbal prompts used by the experimenter to encourage the participant to continue

That shows the authority figure was actively pushing obedience.

Milgram’s findings

1. Obedience was very high.

• 65% of participants obeyed all the way to 450 volts
  = 26 out of 40 participants.

• All participants went up to at least 300 volts.

• Only 12.5% stopped at 300 volts, which was the point where the learner first strongly objected.

2. Another important finding

Before the study, Milgram asked people like:

• psychiatrists

• college students

• colleagues

to predict what would happen.

Predicted: few go beyond 150V + 1/1000 = full 450V

But the actual result was much higher: 65% reached 450V.

Why this matters:

This showed that people underestimated how strongly situational pressure can make people obey.

What are situational variables

Situational variables are features of the environment or situation that affect a person’s behaviour.

So in obedience, situational variables are things in the surroundings that make a person more or less likely to obey an authority figure.

Proximity

Location

Uniform

Who investigated situational variables of obedience

Milgram

Explain proximity in Milgrams study

Proximity: how close someone is.

There are really 2 proximities :

• how close the learner/victim is

• how close the authority figure is

Findings

In the textbook:

• same room as learner → obedience fell to 40%

• touch proximity (teacher had to force learner’s hand onto shock plate) → obedience fell further to 30%

• experimenter absent / giving orders by telephone → obedience dropped to 21%

==

The closer the learner is, the harder it is to ignore the harm being caused, so obedience falls.

The further away the experimenter is, the weaker their authority feels, so obedience also falls.

Explain location in Milgrams study

Location: where the study takes place.

Milgram’s og study : Yale University = very prestigious place.

Finding

When the study was moved to a run-down office in Bridgeport, Connecticut: obedience dropped to 48%.

• Yale gave the study more legitimacy.

Legitimacy = being seen as proper, valid, official, or having the right to give orders.

So when the study was in a less impressive place, the authority figure seemed less powerful and believable, and obedience dropped.

Explain uniform in Milgrams study

A uniform: symbol of authority.

Bushman (1988) = support the effect of uniform.

Findings

When the female researcher was dressed as:

• a police-style officer → 72% obeyed

• a business executive → 48% obeyed

• a beggar → 52% obeyed

People were most likely to obey when the person looked like they had official authority.

So the uniform itself communicates:

• power

• status

• right to give orders

Advantages of milgrams study

lab experiment = high control over variables

• standardised = replicable : test for consistent results

• the same fake shock generator was used

• the same learner responses were used

• the same procedure was followed

• the same prods were given in the same order

Research support from situational variables : found consistent patterns

• proximity, location and legitimacy of authority

• Shows they do affect obedience and the results aren’t random + they r predictable changes

• =higher validity

Disadvantages of Milgrams study

1. Internal validity: a lack of realism What this means

Internal validity = whether the study really measures what it claims to measure.
maybe participants did not truly believe they were giving real electric shocks.

If they did not believe it, then Milgram may not really have been measuring genuine obedience involving harm.

• Perry (2012) said many of Milgram’s participants were doubtful that the shocks were real.

Counterpoint

• they did believe the set up as they were sweating + trembling + showed visual tension

Ethical issue

• Deception: mislead pp abt true nature of study

• Psychological harm : sweating, nervous laughter, seizures sometimes

• Right to withdraw issue: investigator was urging pp to continue = discouraging autonomy

Population validity

• male

• American ‘volunteers

• =not generalisable

Strength of situational variables

Milgram research support

Milgram found that obedience changed when aspects of the situation were altered:

• when the learner was closer, obedience fell

• when the experimenter was further away, obedience fell

• when the study moved from Yale University to a less prestigious location, obedience fell

• when authority appeared more clearly through uniform, obedience was stronger

This supports the view that obedience is strongly affected by the environment, not just by personality.

Historical validity

Recent studies replicated Milgram investigation=gstion ; found similar levels of obedience

• Milgram findings aren’t fixed to 60s

Limitations of situational variables

Lack of realism: pp may not have thought shocks were real.

• If participants did not truly believe the learner was being harmed, then the study may not really measure genuine obedience involving real moral conflict.

However, Milgram argued that the strong signs of tension shown by participants suggest many did believe it.

Doesn’t fully explain irl atrocicties : reductionistic

• suggests that large-scale acts of destructive obedience cannot be explained only by factors such as proximity, location and uniform. Real-life atrocities often involve:

• ideology

• training

• dehumanisation

• group processes

• long-term social pressures

This means Milgram may oversimplify obedience in the real world.

outline agentic state

An agentic shift:

An agentic state is a mental state where a person sees themselves acting as an agent for someone else.

• Agent: An agent is someone who carries out another person’s wishes.

= they think they arent responsible as they are acting on behalf of an authority figure

Outline agentic shift

The agentic shift is the change from an autonomous state, where a person feels responsible for their own actions, to an agentic state, where they see themselves as carrying out another person’s orders.

• shifting responsibility for ones actions onto someone else

why is agentic stage an explanation for obedience

Because it explains why people obey authority figures even when the act seems wrong.

Normally, if a person had full personal responsibility, they might refuse.

But if they enter the agentic state, they can hand responsibility over to the authority figure.

Agentic state x Milgram

In Milgram’s study, participants were asked to give electric shocks to the learner.

Many participants looked uncomfortable and anxious, which suggests they did not naturally want to continue.

But many still obeyed. = agentic state:

• “The experimenter is in charge”

• “He is responsible, not me”

• “I am just following instructions”

Agentic state strength

Socially useful + realistic

• explains why people obey everyday

• Students - teachers

• Patients - doctors

• Citizens - police

• Maintains order + allows society to function

Limitation to agentic state

Doesn’t explain irl obedience well

• study done on nazi doctors at Auschwitz’s suggested thst: it is not a simple shift, but it is gradual and if reversible

• This means obedience in real life may develop slowly over time through repeated immoral actions, rather than through one sudden psychological shift. So the theory may be too simple to explain serious real-life atrocities.

Doesn’t explain all obedience ; some is due to cruelty

• Zimbardo prison study:

• Guards became cruel, no authority figure direclrty present / ordering to do it

• So behaviour may come from malicious intention and willingness to inflict harm

Can justify harmful obedience

• excuses people as they weren’t using their own moral judgement

outline autonomous state

Autonomous: acting independently.

In the autonomous state, a person:

• acts according to their own conscience

• makes their own decisions

• feels personally responsible for what they do

importance of authority figure + agentic state

legitimacy of authority

• legitimacy of authority = why the authority is accepted

• The authority figure matters because the person must believe that the authority figure has the right to give orders.

• If the authority figure seems legitimate, it becomes easier for the person to hand over responsibility.

Binding factors agentic state + ex in milgrams study

Binding factors: aspects of a situation that keeps someone in agentic state

They “bind” the person to obedience.

xamples in Milgram:

• the participant had agreed to take part in the study

• the experimenter used prods like “The experiment requires that you continue”

• stopping might feel rude, embarrassing, or like letting the experimenter down

• the situation had an official, scientific atmosphere

These factors reduced the chance that the participant would return to an autonomous state.

Self image: agentic state

Self-image

A person’s view of themselves.

If someone sees themselves as decent, kind, and moral, hurting another person would damage that self-image.

But in an agentic state, they can protect their self-image by telling themselves:

“This isn’t really my responsibility.” = no longer reflects self image

So the agentic state helps them avoid feeling fully guilty.

Explain legitimacy of authority

First condition for an agentic shift

LOA: someone percieved to be in a position of social control in a situation

People are more likely to obey when the authority figure is seen as:

• official

• credible

• high status

• socially sanctioned: approved by society or backed up by accepted rules and institutions.

We are taught to obey people of authority through a social hierarchy

• Social hierarchy: system where some people have higher status and more power than others.

Strengths of legitimacy of authority

Explains everyday obedience

• A strength of legitimacy of authority is that it makes sense in everyday life and explains why obedience is often socially necessary.

• Society depends on people recognising some authority figures as legitimate, for example:

• pupils obeying teachers

• patients obeying doctors

• citizens obeying police in emergencies

This gives the explanation real-world value, because it shows that obedience to legitimate authority is not always harmful. It often helps maintain order and allows society to function efficiently.

what does agentic shift/state suggest

Milgram’s participants were not necessarily cruel people.

Instead, the theory says ordinary people may obey destructive orders because the situation causes them to enter an agentic state.

So this is a situational explanation, not mainly a dispositional one.

Situational explanation

An explanation that behaviour is caused by the environment or situation, rather than by personality alone.

Legitimacy of authority + Milgram

In Milgram, Yale University gave the experimenter more legitimacy because it was a respected institution.

That helps explain the location variation:

• at Yale → obedience was higher

• in a run-down office → obedience dropped

Why?

Because the authority figure looked less legitimate in the less prestigious setting.

Agentic state vs legitimacy of authority

Legitimacy of authority

Explains why the authority figure is obeyed.

Agentic state

Explains why the obedient person no longer feels personally responsible.

How can legitimacy of authority be useful

Legitimacy of authority can be beneficial because it helps society function smoothly.

• pupils obeying a teacher allows lessons to be organised, teaching to take place, and work to be completed efficiently.

How can legitimacy of authority be dangerous

People may obey harmful or immoral orders if they come from someone seen as a legitimate authority figure.

• Nazi germany - hitler

what is authoritarian personality

Dispositional explanation for obedience

Explains how people are more likely to obey due to their personality type

F scale was used

What does dispositional in an explanation mean + what topic is it used in

Behaviour explained thru personality/ individual characteristics, not a situation (proximity/ location/ uniform)

Authoritarian personality

Characteristics of authoritarian personality

Respectful/ submissive to authority

Hostile to people they see as a lower status as them in the social hierarchy

believes in strict rules

Conventional: follow traditional, socially accepted/standard values

What is the F scale

Fascist scale: a personality test designed by Adorno et al. (1950).

People were given statements such as:

• “Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues children should learn.”

• “Rules are there for people to follow, not change.”

If a person agreed with lots of these statements, they were seen as having a more authoritarian personality.

Strengths of authoritarian personality

Research supports: Milgram + elms

• higher f score = more obedient

• =more likely to obey bc of personality traits

Limitations of authoritarian personality

Doesn’t explain wide spread obedience

• not everyone can have authoritarian personality

• Situational factors have more influence

Political bias : rwa

• suggest authoritarian personality only accounts for one side of politics

• While other side can also be dogmatic and highly obedient to superiors

• Not generalisable

ignores situaltional factors

• not full explanation for obedience

• reductionist

F-scale = lacks validity

• self report

• socially desirable answers

• Not accurate

Explain right wing authoritarianism (RWA)

Personality variables of the authoritarian personality

1. Conventionallism

2. Authoritarian aggression - aggression to people who disobey norms

3. Authoritarian submission - to legitimate authorities

Using a questionnaire / scale measuring authoritarian attitudes; higher agreement = higher RWA score.

Experinent:

Altemeyer found that people with higher RWA scores were more obedient.

• participants were told to give themselves increasingly strong shocks when they made mistakes

• there was a significant correlation between RWA score and how strong a shock they were willing to give themselves

• when told to press a big red button for an extra strong shock, people high in RWA were especially likely to obey without questioning it

• = supports that people are more obedient due to their personality

Personality variables for authoritarian personality

Personality variables of the authoritarian personality

1. Conventionallism

2. Authoritarian aggression - aggression to people who disobey norms

3. Authoritarian submission - to legitimate authorities

Conventionalism meaning

A personality trait of authoritarian personality

Conventionalism means strong adherence to traditional social rules and values.

So the person believes:

• people should behave properly

• society should follow traditional standards

• rules should be respected

• people who do not fit the norm are wrong

Authoritarian aggression and submission meaning

Submission: willing to obey/yeild to someone more powerful

• strong respect for authority figures

• willingness to obey people of higher status

• belief that authority should not be challenged

Aggression: hostile, dogmatic and harsh towards people below them

• hostility towards people who break rules

• harsh attitudes to those seen as lower status

• punishment for people who do not conform

What causes authoritarian personality

Harsh parenting : children who grow up like this feel anger towards their parents, but they cannot express it because the parents are too powerful.

• rules are rigid

• punishment is used a lot

• affection may be conditional

• children are expected to obey without question

Displacement means redirecting feelings from the real source onto a safer target.

So instead of being hostile to powerful parents, the child becomes:

• submissive to authority

• hostile towards weaker people

what is social influence

The effect a group/ a person has on the beliefs, behaviour and attitude of an individual

• conformity

• obedience

Resistance to social influence meaning

the ability to resist pressure to conform or obey

State the explanations to resist social influence

(a) Social support

(b) Locus of control

what is social support

Social support: others who support your position

• another person who isnt conforming or obeying

What is social support in conformity

Researcher : Asch

Breaking unanimity

• an ally

• Said either correct answer or different wrong answer

correct answer : conformity dropped 33% —> 5.5%

It helps because:

• the participant feels less isolated

• the majority is no longer unanimous

• the participant gains more confidence in their own judgement

• pressure to conform becomes weaker

So social support in conformity works by making independence seem possible.

Explain social support for obedience

OBEDIENCE:

Researcher: Milgram

Disobedient peer: confederates (2) refusing to obey = social support

• If the participant sees another person refuse, it becomes easier for them to refuse too.

• acts a model

• obedience dropped to 10%

why:

• disobedience is possible

• the authority figure is not all-powerful

• refusing does not automatically destroy the situation

• encourages independence

state why social support works for conformity and obedience

Conformity: broken unanimity

Obedience: Reduced authority figures power - shows disobedience is possible

What is locus of control? LOC

The extent to which someone believes that events occuring in their life is under their own control OR controlled by external forces

• locus = place

Where a person believes control lies

Types:

Internal locus of control

External locus of control

noone is 100% of either, it is like a continuum

Who came up with locus of control

Rotter

(then outline loc cuz he introduced the idea)

Describe types of locus of control

1. INTERNAL

Person believes that what happens in their life is mainly due to their own actions, choices and effort.

• taking more personal responsibility

2. EXTERNAL

Believes what happens to them is due to external forces:

Passive + fatalistic

• luck / fate / chance / other people

• they believe it is out of their control

How does locus of control affect social resistance

High internal LOC = likely to reisist social influence

• active seekers of information

  • they think things through

  • they do not just copy others

  • they are less likely to rely on others’ opinions

• more achievement-oriented

  • more self-confident

  • more independent

  • more willing to stick to their own judgement

• better able to resist coercion

THEY TRUST THEIR OWN JUDGEMENT

External LOC = less likely to resist

• more likely to look to others for guidance

• more likely to accept pressure from authority

• less confident in acting independently

MORE VULNERABLE TO CONFORMITY + OBEDIENCE

social support vs locus of control

• social support = resistance because of the situation

• SITUATIONAL EXPLANATION (presence of others)

• locus of control = resistance because of the individual

• DISPOSITIONAL EXPLANATION (mindset of individual)

Strengths of social support

explanation for resistance to social influence

• conformity: Asch vsraibitons

• Broken unanimity (correct) 33-5.5%

• obedience : Milgram variations : dropped 10% when there were disobedience=t peers

Real life application

What is minority influence

When a small group of people persuades the larger majority to accept their beliefs, attitudes, or behaviour.

Outline how minority influence is achieved

• consistency

• commitment

• flexibility

= internalisation

why is minority influence important + examples

Explains social change: A minority can create change if they behave in the right way.

• civil rights movements

• suffragettes

• environmental activism

• animal rights campaigns

Exlain consistency in minority influence

Keeping the same view / message over time

fixed

why:

Makes the minority seem:

• serious

• confident

• committed

• certain of their position

This makes the majority pay attention and think:

“Maybe they really believe this.”

HARDER TO IGNORE

What should minority avoidto influence

Dogmatic: very rigid and unwilling to consider any other view.

A dogmatic minority may come across as extreme or unreasonable.

Explain commitment in minority influence

Commitment means showing dedication to the cause.

• harder for majority to dismiss

• make sacrifices

• take risks

• give up time, comfort, or safety

• continue even when it is difficult

Because commitment makes the minority seem:

• sincere

• brave

• devoted

• morally serious

This can make the majority stop and think:
“If they are willing to go that far, maybe their message matters.”

Explain flexibility in minority influence

Flexibility means being willing to listen, negotiate, compromise a little

• Not mean abandoning the whole message.

It means the minority is not completely dogmatic.

Flexibility matters because it makes the minority seem:

• reasonable

• cooperative

• less extreme

• more persuasive

If the minority is consistent and flexible, the majority is more likely to consider their view.

Minority influence study

Moscovici et al ‘69

AIM: investigate if consistent minority can influence majority

6 pp

• 4 real pp

• 2 confederates

36 blue slides w different brightness

Confederates said green

• consistent and inconsistent conditions

  • inconsistent: The 2 confederates called the slides “green” on two-thirds of the trials and “blue” on the remaining one-third.

• (a control group was also used)

Findings:

Consistent minorty = more influence than inconsistent

what is social change

Social change means a change in the way a society thinks or behaves.

So it is when a belief, attitude, law, or pattern of behaviour becomes different across a large group of people.