16 marker evaluation

informational/normative social influence

-assumed it can only be one or the other=doesn’t fit real life situations

-research suports nsi as explanation (mcghee and teaghan high nAffiliators)=empirical ev

-fails to consider individual differences (spencer and perrin) engineering students 1/369 conformed=confidence

asch’s conformity research

-artificial task=can’t generalise (ca=high control)

-low population validity (123 american students)+ eagly and carli found females conform more= can’t generalise to other demographics

-lacks internal validity (no consequences for their choices)= lacks real-life application

-cultural differences and asch only considered the us (belgium= 14%, Fiji =58%)

milgram’s obedience research

-supported by replication studies (game of death shows consistent results)=temporal validity

-milgram’s study lacks internal validity (perry went through and thought people didn’t believe shocks)= could be just demand characteristics

-varied levels of external validity (some doubt rerlation, hoflings nurses and holocaust verify= strength as demonstrates it in real life situations= generalisability high

milgram’s variations

-bickman’s field experiment supports uniform=scientifically credible

-high control =more valid and can establish causation

-internal validity questioned, could be measuring demand characteristics

the agentic state

-studies about public opinion support it (video shown) peole explained agentic state as reason

(ca= no control)

-key findings that challenge it (35% didnt obey in milgrams experiment)= individual differences = dispositional factors= incomplete explanation

-research to support -hofling’s nurses

legitimacy of authority

-can explain cultural differences (germany=85% vs australia=16%)= explanatory power

-this creates alibi= ethical weakness as protects wrongdoing+ theoretical weakness (free will)

authoritarian personality

-research support (using f-scale correlated to high authoritarian) but just correlation

-limited explanation, situational factors change things (germany war)

-political bias