Social influence

Socially facilitated influence - Sherif 1936 autokinetic study

optical illusions, pitch black room with a point of light 5m away and it appears to move, P took part individually and part of groups, give a spoken statement of how much they thought the light had moved

Compliance

public change in behaviour but no private change in attitude

compliance - foot in door technique

small request to a big request

freedman & fraser 1966- can our researchers come to your home to do a 2h survey of household product use? 20% compliance. When the same question was asked after P had agreed to take part in a phone survey, 50% compliance.

compliance - door in face technique

big request first, unlikley to be successful, followed with a reasonable request which leads to a greater compliance

Cialdini 1975- will you volunteer at a young offender’s institute for 2 hours a week for the next 2 years? = minimal compliance. Will you take them to the zoo? 1^st request 50% compliance, without 17%. 2^nd request perceived as a concession on the part of the requester.

Conformity

yielding to group pressure, whether real or imagined.

conformity - informational influence

desire to be right

sherifs study- assume other members have a more accurate judgement than them

conformity - majority influence

Asch - people conformed to majority answer in a line judgement experiment

conformity - normative influence

occurs due to pressures to fit in with a group with what we perceive to be expectations about what we should do

conformity - minority influence

lack the numerical strength, a consistent influence can act as a big influence (moscovici)

moscovici 1969- 6 P presented with a series of slides unambiguously blue and different only in light intensity. P had to say the colour of the slide. In 1 condition there were 2 confederates who answered green on every trial. Incorrect guesses rose from 0.25% to 8.42%.

conformity - conversion theory

group discussion - minority influence - validation

group discussion - majority influence - comparison

why do some minorities fail?

dissociation theory- social categorisation can disrupt validation process

non dissociative processing- social categorisation contaminates validation

dissociative processing- social categorisation and validation are processes seperate

normalisation of RW policies

vetois 2026- P were presented with a nativist learning news story. It contained a far-right logo or didn’t (high/low salience). Emotional discomfort measures and shame/pride was felt if they believed to hold the same views as the article. Support- to what extent does the article reflect your personal views on the subject?

obedience - milgram 1963

agentic state- not responsible for the actions, responsibilities lie with legitimate authority figure and become agent of the external authority.

Incremental nature of the task- P started with the lowest voltage switch 15V with no effect on the learner. An effective tactic for changing attitudes and behaviour. The need to maintain consistent perceptions of the self in relation to behaviour. Agreeing to small requests can change the way people think about themselves.

Responsibility- In Milgram's study the experimenter assumed responsibility for the actions of the participants leading to agentic shift. What if obeying wasn't automatically seen as the social norm? Would people still obey today?

Burger’s modelled refusal condition: a confederate starts reading word pairs and administering “shocks”. At 75 volts they refuse “I don’t think I can do this” and the P is asked to take over the experiment while the confederate sits and watches.

Ethics

screening

P informed 3 times they can withdraw and still have payment

informed the learner wasnt being shocked

 in milgrams condition 5 (new baseline condition) 79% of P who continued past 150v (learners first demand to be released) continued to the end. Burger therefore suggests that by stopping at 150v we can get a decent idea of how likely people are to go on.