Psychology a level - PART 1 social influence

AO1 and AO3

what is conformity

also known as majority influence: ‘a change in a persons behaviour or opinions as a result of a real or imagined pressure from a person or a group of people’ (Aronson, 2011)

name 3 variables that affect conformity

unanimity, group size, task difficulty

how did Asch investigate the impact of group size on conformity and what did he find

increased number of confederates, thus increasing the size of the majority. conformity increased with group size, but plateaued after 4 confederates

how did Asch investigate the impact of unanimity on conformity and what did he find

he introduced a confederate that disagreed with the other confederates. in one variation this confederate gave the right answer and in another he gave the wrong one. rate of conformity decreased to about 9% (a quarter of what it originally was) in the presence of a dissenter

how did Asch investigate the impact of task difficulty on conformity and what did he find

he made the stimulus and comparison lines closer in length to make the task more difficult. a more difficult task increased conformity because of informational social influence

describe Asch’s baseline study into conformity and his findings

50 American male students used. all in a group with confederates who they thought were real participants. shown line X and then lines A, B, C and asked which one matched X. P’s (and confederates) had to say outline what they thought the right answer was. P’s always seated last or next to last, and in groups of 6-8. all confederates gave the same incorrect answer

37% conformity, and only 25% of P’s never answered incorrectly

3 limitations of Asch’s research

ethical issues (easy to negate), limited sample, artificial stimulus and situation

1 strength of Asch’s research

research support from Lucas et al on task difficulty increasing conformity: p’s conformed more often when a maths task was difficult.

what are the 3 types of conformity

compliance, identification, internalisation

what are the 2 explanations for conformity

normative social influence, informational social influence

what is informational social influence (ISI)

a cognitive process of conformity that leads to internalisation. it suggests people conform because they believe the majority to have better knowledge than themselves. this is likely to occur in an emergency or an ambiguous situation

what is normative social influence (NSI)

an emotional process of conformity that is linked with compliance or identification. people conform to norms to avoid social rejection; to fit in

describe research support for NSI

when Asch interviewed his P’s, some said they conformed because they felt self-conscious and were afraid of disapproval. when P’s wrote down their answers instead, conformity dropped to 12.5%

describe research support for ISI

Lucas et al’s research into task difficulty. P’s were given easy and hard maths problems. conformity higher for harder problems

this could be explained by ISI, as P’s may have believed the confederates had more knowledge than them in an ambiguous situation

limitation of NSI

cannot explain individual differences. some people, known as nAffiliators, are just more likely to conform. others do not accept social norms at all

limitation of both NSI and ISI

the distinction between the two is arguably not meaningful/accurate. In lucas et al’s study, for example, it is not clear which explanation should be used

who investigated conformity to social roles

Zimbardo in the Stanford prison experiment

summarise Zimbardo’s procedure

controlled participant observation within a mock prison in basement of psychology department in Stanford uni. 21 male student volunteers were randomly assigned to act as guards or prisoners. prisoners wore a smock, a cap, and were identified by their numbers that they wore. guards had uniform, mirrored shades, wooden clubs, and handcuffs. uniforms created di-individuation. several steps were taken to help prisoners identify with their role e.g. rather than trying to leave they could ‘apply for parole’. guards were often reminded of their complete power

summarise Zimbardo’s findings

guards conformed enthusiastically, treating the prisoners harshly. the prisoners rebelled, ripping their uniforms and shouting at the guards. the guards retaliated with fire extinguishers. the guards used ‘divide and rule’ tactics. after the rebellion was quashed, many prisoners because subdued and anxious. one prisoner went on hunger strike, and the guards tried to force-feed him, and put him in ‘the hole’ (solitary confinement) for punishment. one man was released soon after the rebellion because of psychological disturbance, two more were released on the fourth day. the study ended after 6 days, rather than the intended 14

what were Zimbardo’s conclusions

social roles heavily influence a persons behaviour. social roles are easily taken on/conformed to

3 limitations of Zimbardo’s study

ethical issues, lack of realism, exaggerated power of social roles as only 1/3 of guards actually behaved brutally

2 strengths of Zimbardo’s study

highly controlled e.g. screened participants, real-world application

what is obedience

a form of social influence where an individual follows a direct order. the person issuing the order is often a person of authority with the power to punish those who do not obey

who investigated obedience

Milgram

describe Milgram’s baseline procedure

volunteer sample of 40 American men who believed the study was on memory. each P was introduced to a confederate who they believed was another P. they believed they were randomly assigned the role or learner or teacher but, in reality, every P was a teacher. an experimenter dressed in a grey lab coat acted as the person of authority. the learner and teacher were in different rooms. the teacher was instructed to give increasingly severe electric shocks every time a leaner got something wrong, which they did not know were not real. the learner’s reactions, like screaming, were pre-recorded

summarise findings of Milgram’s baseline study

while it was anticipated less than 3% of P’s would deliver the last, fatal, 450v shock, 65% ended up doing it. Milgram also observed qualitative behaviours e.g. signs of stress, like sweating. 3 participants had “full-blown uncontrollable seizures”

what % of Milgram’s P’s said they were glad to have participated after the study

84%

what did Milgram conclude based on his baseline study

the German people in WWII were not different: Americans were equally capable of obeying horrific orders. certain factors in a situation affect obedience, as investigated in his later variations

3 limitations of Milgram’s study

ethical issues, low internal validity, lack of realism results in low external validity e.g. no punishment for disobeying

1 strength of Milgram’s study

research support from puppy study by Sheridan and King: 100% women and 54% of men obeyed and delivered what they thought was a fatal shock to a puppy

what are situational variables

features of the immediate physical and social environment which may influence a persons behaviour, such as proximity, uniform, and location

how did Milgram investigate the situational variable of proximity

in the remote instruction variation, the experimenter left the room and gave orders over the phone. obedience dropped to 21%, and P’s often pretended to give shocks

how did Milgram investigate the situational variable of uniform

an one variation, the experimenter was “called away” for a phone call, and replaced with a (confederate) “member of the public” who was wearing normal clothes. obedience dropped to 20%

how did Milgram investigate the situational variable of location

conducted a variation in a run-down office building in the centre of town rather than at Yale university. obedience fell to 48%

strength of Milgram’s uniform variation

research support from field study by Bickman in New York. Had confederates either dressed in a jacket and tie or as a security guard give people on the street orders e.g. pick up that litter. people twice as likely to obey the man dressed as a security guard

strength of the proximity variation and a counterpoint

cross-cultural replications suggests it can be generalised e.g. similar but more realistic procedure done in a study in Denmark, and 90% of people disobeyed

HOWEVER Smith and Bond pointed out that few studies have been done in culturally dissimilar countries

limitation of the uniform variation

strange nature of this variation may have caused investigator effects, resulting in demand characteristics

strength and limitation of situational perspective on obedience

research on situational variables supports the situational explanation

Mandel argues that the SE is dangerous, offering an “alibi” for evil behaviour

what are the two situational explanations of obedience

agentic state, legitimacy of authority

what is agentic state

a mental state where people do not feel responsible for their behaviours because they believe themselves to be acting as an agent for an authority figure

what is agentic shift

a change from an autonomous state to an agentic state

what are binding factors in an agentic state

aspects of a situation that allow a person to ignore or minimise the destructive nature of their behaviour, reducing their feeling of moral strain

what is legitimacy of authority

the suggestion that people are more likely to obey figures they believe to be credible and trustworthy. this authority is justified by their high-up, position of power in the hierarchy

what is an example of destructive authority in Milgrams study

experimenters used prods to make p’s act in a way that was against their moral conscience

strength of agentic state

research support from Milgram’s studies e.g. p’s would ask who was responsible if the learner was harmed, and when the experimenter said that they were the one responsible the p would continue

limitation of agentic shift

not supported by all research e.g. 16 out of 18 nurses in a study refused to deliver lethal dose of a drug even when instructed by a doctor, an authority figure; they remained in an autonomous state

strength of legitimacy of authority

explains cultural differences because different cultures have different levels of respect and therefore obedience for authority figures e.g. when Milgram’s research was replicated in Germany 85% obeyed

limitation of legitimacy of authority

cannot explain much disobedience e.g. 35% of Milgram’s participants disobeyed

what does the F-scale investigate

authoritarian personality, it is a potential-for-fascism scale

what is the dispositional explanation for obedience

an explanation that focuses the importance of personality on behaviour. Adorno argues that the Authoritarian personality is the most likely to obey, as they’re submissive to authority and dismissive of those who they perceive to be inferior

three characteristics of an Authoritarian personality

a belief that society is “weaker” that it once was, a respect and submissiveness for authority, contempt for those of inferior social status

are people with Authoritarian personalities flexible or inflexible in their views

inflexible

how does Adorno suggest authoritarian personalities come about

harsh parenting in childhood, which may consist of impossibly high standards, conditional love, or strict discipline

these experiences create resentment and hostility in a child, and they displace these feelings onto people they believe to be inferior: a scapegoat

is Adornos’ approach to authoritarian personality psychodynamic or behaviourist?

psychodynamic

summarise Adorno’s procedure for his 1950 study on the authoritarian personality

2,000 white, middle-class American males. studied their unconscious attitudes towards other ethnic groups using the F-scale

summarise Adorno’s findings in his 1950 study on the authoritarian personality

people who scored highly on the f-scale, who therefore had authoritarian personalities, identified with “strong” people and showed contempt for the “weak”. they were also more aware of their own status, and showed respect for those of higher status

give two examples of agree/disagree statements on Adorno’s F-scale

nobody ever learned anything really important except through suffering, obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues for children to learn

did Adorno find a strong positive or negative correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice

positive

1 strength of dispositional explanation for obedience

support from Milgram, as 20 of the obedient p’s interviewed retrospectively received higher scores on the F-scale than 20 disobedient p’s

3 limitations of the dispositional explanation of obedience

F-scale is politically biased

cannot explain the obedience of large groups like a country

COUNTERPOINT TO STRENGTH obedient p’s in Milgram’s study did not show all signs of authoritarianism e.g. high respect for their father