SOCIAL INFLUENCE

describe free will and determinism

Free will- the idea that we have control over our own destiny and therefore we can change/control our own behaviour and ways of thinking

Determinism- the idea that how we think/behave is controlled by two factors: internal factors such as genetics ect and external factors such as our upbringing and the situations that surround us

what is the agenic state

when an individual does not feel responsible for their actions as they believe they were acting under the orders of an authority figure

Factor 4- authority figures and obedience

describe milgrams study

A- wanted to understand what triggered things such as holocaust , how soldiers with no criminal record could perform such inhumane acts

PP- 40 males , ages 20-50 , new haven

Pr- roles were randomly assigned (rigged that the real pp would always be the teacher) , completed word pairs table and each time wrong teacher would be instructed to shock the person going 15v-450v. Each time the pp wanted to stop , experimenter (wearing a lab coat) verbally prodded them to continue

R- 65% of pps shocked to the max , went very stop and go , nervouse laugher , seizures and extreme stress. They did it because they were scared of punishment , obey and respect authority , the study seemed important

what are situational factors

external factors that influence the way we behave and how likely we are to obey or conform

what is the autonomous state

where individuals feel responsible for their own actions and have power over what they do

what is normative conformity

when people comply with the group norms ,internally keeping their own opinions

E.g lting about liking horror movies even if privately they don’t like that genre at all

what is conformity including majority influence

this involved changing how you behave/think in order to fit in with a group (yielding to group pressure) .

For example students conforming to fit in with their classmates so they don’t feel isolated or different.

what is crowd behaviour

this refers to when a large group of people come together for a common purpose e.g football match. This does not mean they will always exhibit a crowd mentality

what is meant by collective behaviour

refers to the behaviour of two or more individuals who are acting/behaving together individually

Factor 1- majority influence on conformity

Describe Solomon ASCH’s study

Asch investigated whether participants would conform in a situation where the majority are clearly wrong.

P- pps were to match he target line to options by saying which one it was. There was 1 real pps and 5 confederates who purposfullly gave the wrong answers. Asch then studied what answers the real pps would give

R- 37% pps conformed , interviewed after and gave reasons for conforming as “didnt want to be left out” . When one confederate said the correct answer , conformity dropped by 5%

what are nudge and tug factors

nudge - things that encourage people to get involved in something

tug- things that discouraged them from getting involved

describe pro social behaviour

behaviour done with the intention of helping others around you and in peoples communities e.g voulenteering

describe anti social behaviour

behaviour which causes harm , disruption or distress to those around you in your community e.g being drunk , graffiti ect.

what is informational conformity

when people yield to group pressure because they are usure of the answer or the situation they’re in is unclear. E.g being picked on fro a question , a student might go for the one the majority picked as they believe the other students are right

study 1 -bickman

describe experiment 2

M- field exp

pp- 48 ,av age of 46

pr- coin and parking meter scenario was used , two IV : a guard and a vicillian and surveilence and non surveilence

R- surveilence had no affect on whether participants obeyed or not , the guard was significantly obeyed more than the civillian

overall conclusions from bickman study

• wearing a uniform gives people more power and influence over other’s behaviour

• how people think they’d behave in a situation is not a good predicitor of their actual behaviour.

• situational facors have an influence on obedience in a real life setting

study 1 - bickman

describe the experiment 1

A- to investigate the degree of social power that uniform has on people

M- field ep , brooklyn , used civ , milkman and guard uniform

P- 153 civillians who were available at the time in the streets of NYC

Pr- 4 white male confederares , similar build , involved in instructing pedestrians to pick up littler , giving someone else a dime for a coin meter and instructing to stand on other side of the bus stop.

R- people were more likely to obey the guard , nearly 3 times more than civilian .

criticisms of bickmans study

-opportunity sampling can lead to research gathering a bias sample . Only accessed to pps in brooklyn at that time which will not be a cross-section of the whole society. researchers also tend to approach more ‘approachable’ people so results may not be generalisable

-gender bias as all confederates were males , people might react differently to women and might of had a different level of obedience

strengths of bickman

+field experiment meaning it is in a natural/everyday sitation so people will have shown natural obedience to requsts , meaning that the results will have good ecological validiti as they’re a realistic representation of how people will react to the requests

+Independent measures means guessing the aim and showing demand characteristics would be less likely as people would only see the uniform

theory 1 situational factors

Majority influence on conformtiy .

How can majority influence conformity

In some cases people can outwardly change their views to fit in with the group , but will retain their personal opinion .

in other cases they will actually change their personal views aswell

factor 3- culture

what is collectivist behaviour

where the needs of the group are seen as more important then the needs of the individual. The indivudal in the society see themselves being connected to ohers

factor 3- culture

what is individualistic culture

when the needs of the individual are seen as more important than the needs of the group. they see themselves as being independent

factor 2- collective and crowd behaviour

what has been explained to happen when in a crowd, what doess reicher suggest

when people are in a crowd they lose their sense of self, the crowd works together with a group mentalitiy , suggested that this behaviour is unconcious and driven by instinct.

Reicher suggests that crowds act under common social identity , meaning they may have a common behaviour

criticisms of the situational factors theory

-extremely deterministic as SFT suggests our beh are simply controlled by whats happening around us. E.g if an authority figure gives us an order we blindly obey , or we will deindividulate in crowds , so this ignores the capacity for free will and ability to make our own choices.

-Reductionist , says SF are reason for our behaviour which ignored ind diff such as personalitiy e.g extravert may stick to their own choices

-not useful , suggests sit controls us which may give people an ‘excuse’ for terrible behaviour. E.g milgrams study concluding they werent ‘evil’ maybe bad as absolves peopls of the real responsibility for their actions

strengths of the situational factors theory

+theory could also be seen as useful as if we now behavour is impacted by the situation, we can manipulate the situation to gain desireable behaviours e.g in schools using authority figuers to gain obedience , teahers having ability to punish and can wear uniforms/suits

+Validated by research , evidence showing the situation does effect behaviour e.g milgrams study . Shows authority caused pp to be obedient , argues we shift into agenic state and let authority control us

factor 1- crowd behaviour and collective beh

what is deindivualation

when people are in a crowd , they tend to lose their sense of individuality and feel more anonoymous . This can also happen when wearing a costume or a unifrom. E.g music fest , football match ect.

theory 2- dispositional factors

Factor 1 - selfesteem and conformity

-self esteem is how we percieve and value ourselves. someone with low self esteem will have a low opinion of themselves and someone with a high self esteem will be confiednet in themselves. Someones esteem can make them less/more likely to conform

-Less likely to conform have high self esteem as more proud of who they are

-More likely to conform have low self esteem as not really confiedent, so want to fit in by following others opinions ect.

dispositional

factor 2- locus of controls and crowds

describe what it means to have an internal locus of control

Internal

these people believe they have the ability to make decisions about their own lives. Any success or failure is due to their decisions/choices they’ve made. They tend to be more motivated and confident.

In crowds , people with internal locus of control are less likely tobe influenced by how the crowd is behaving , as they have more confidence in own beliefs and control of own behaviour

dispositional

factor 2 -locus of control

describe what it means to have an external locus of control

-people who have this believe they have little or no control over their own lives and how people around them act. They also believe other people control and therefpre they have to obey them. Passive and accepting of what fate stores for them.

In crowds , they are more likely to be influenced by how the crowd is behaving

dispostional

Factor 3 - morality and pro/anti social behaviour

how can pro/anti be applied to kholberg study

pro social - doing things that help others , the conventional stage would be more pro social as their morality is based on following law and being ‘good’

anti- doing things that harm others , pre-conventional has the potential to be this more as their sense of right /wrong is about whats good for them and not others.

dispositional

factor 3 - morality ,pro and anti soc behaviour

what were the stages and findings in kholbergs study

pre conventional- stage 1 (oreintation towards punishment) child focused on actions and consequences rather than its value

S2- orientation towards self interst - actions based on whatever suits ones needs

Conventional- S3- good boy/girl orientation , main focus is approval from others

S4- orientation towards authority, rules are super important , show respect , do what they’re told e.g adults

Post conventional - S5- social orientation - right agreed upon whole society , there is room for personal opinions.

S6- oreintation towards conscience and etical principles , human respect and rights are the most important , behaviour based on abstract ideas ect.

what did langdon suggest according to kholbersgs study

• anti social beh is the most common in moral developemtn , where morality is egocentric

• meaning the person is more focused on what is right for them rather than those aroud them

• when moved onto next stage , of getting approval from others , levels f anti - social beh drop and people start behaving in a much more pro-social manner.

the influence of the brain on dispostional factors

what has been found with self esteem and morality

• peope with a low self esteem have been found to tend to have reduced amounts of grey mattter in the hippocampus , assosciated with emotions , maybe biological element to conformity

• research also indicated an association with damage in the pre-frotnal cortex and a faulty moral reasoning

• two individuals found to have suffered brain damage in pre-frontal cortext as babies were unable to show differences betwen right and wrong.

dispositional

factor 4 - authoritatan personality and obedience

what is this theory (ardono)

• ardono wanted to provide somesort of explanation for inhuman behaviour e.g holocaust, wanted to discover the state of mind these people had to commit these acts. He believed there is a certain personality type - more prone to obedience than others , likely to obey

• involved interviews and use of personality tests with over 2000 college students in USA

• known as ‘f’ scale - facism

• Pps completed on a sliding scale to indicate their support/opposition , from slight to strong in relation to a number of statement

results of adorno into obedience

• typical characteistics person with this personality type - active dislike to lower class , fixed conventional ideas of right and wrong , always willing to be ‘bossed’ by higher staturs

• adorno believes origin of this personality is bc of childhood upbringing , children learn fear of authorirty e.g parents

• some may repress the hatred for parents only later to displace it towards minority groups - way of dealing.

criticisms of dispostinal factors theory

• because these theories focus on indv factors that affect beh, it is more diffucult to make predictions about how ppl will act in given situations. Psycholoy attempts to generalise about why ppl conform/obey ect. so interventions can be placed to gain desireable behavious so this makes it harder to do if beh varies from indv to indv

• Locus of control can vary based on situation , so therefore not a reliable explanation

strengths of dispostitional factors

need to know

describe Morrel’s study into august riots

A-study , report what triggered riots and extent and nature of youth involvement . What how who why

M- report prepared by cabinet office on behalf of natcen

S- 36 interviewd

P- data gathered via interviews 5 weeks after, pps interviewd in groupd ofs 2/4 . Consent gained, past crimes not reported but had to report any potention for future crimes

R- normal rules did not seem to apply as where based on nudge/tug factors

C- anti social beh based on - collective behavioure, dispostional factors. Morality , assesement on risk and benefits of involvement

situational factors affecting decision making in riots

Deindividualation

N-swept along by power of the group

T- actively thinking about future goals

Conformity

N-friends involved

T-friends not involved

dispostional factors affecting decison making in riots

Atts towards authority (personality/morality)

N-lack of respect to police and policions ect

T-brought up to respect authority

Prospects(Locus of control)

N-limited hope for the future

T-work/future expectations for future work

evaluation of morrell

-pps may answer in socially desireable ways , in interviews to either under/over their involvement depending what makes them ‘look better’ e.g “didnt throw anything at police” shows them abiding law awhen they did / or opposite (daring). This reduces the validity of the data gathered.

NEED TO FIND STRENGTH OR ANOTHER CRIT