W6 Social influence

Compare & contrast types of social influence

Social influence is the:

Efforts by one or more individual(s) to change their attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, or behaviours of one or more others. It can also be that someone changes their beliefs, attitudes and perceptions because of the influence of others

Individuals or groups can trade to change the thoughts, feelings and behaviour of others by persuasion, argument, example, command, propaganda or force

The power of norms

One of the main ways we are influenced is through social norms. These norms prescribe attitudes or behaviours for a situation or a group of people

Social norms are shared attitudes and behaviours that define the group membership and differentiate between groups

There are norms for every group from being a student, to working in a café, to what it means to be from Aotearoa versus other countries – not sitting on tables

Reference groups

For social norms to exist there must be a reference group – something that we look for for the reference

The members of our reference groups are the people we compare ourselves and behaviour to; they are the people we look to when deciding what to do or think, and they are the people whose thoughts and opinions we care about and whose approval we want

We will change our behaviour to comply with reference groups but not necessarily our attitudes. If other people are clapping at the end of the show, then I will comply even if I didn't think it was very good – social norm.

Membership groups

In addition to reference groups, we also look to groups that we are a member of

Membership groups are groups to which we belong through social consensus or some other categorisation. We will change our attitudes, norms and behaviours so they are in agreement with our membership group.

Example

Even if you talk a lot as a student, you will restrict your questions in the lecture because of the group norms of being a student.

Once the membership norms are set, they are very hard to change because members adjust their attitudes to fit with these group norms

Social influence also occurs through the assertion of power. Power is where someone has the capacity or ability to influence someone else or yourself.

There are six different kinds of power and influence:

1: Reward power: the ability to give or promise rewards for compliance – parent with pocket money

2: Coercive power: the ability to give or threaten punishment for non-compliance – manager of casual workforce

3: Informational power: the target's belief that the influencer has more information than oneself – team leader for new job

4: Expert power: the target's belief that the influencer has generally greater expertise and knowledge than oneself- general manager

5: Legitimate power: the target's belief that the influencer is authorised by a recognised power structure to command and make decisions – lecturer in your subject, Prime Minister

6: Referent power: identification with, attraction to, or respect for the source of influence – Beyoncé

Three types of social influence

Compliance
A type of social influence involving direct requests from one person to another

Example

You ask me to go over there, I comply by going

Conformity

A type of social influence in which people change their attitudes or behaviour in order to adhere to social norms

Example

No one likes Sally and won't sit with her. I conform by doing the same

Obedience

A form of social influence in which one person follows the orders of one or more others to perform some action(s)

Example

I tell Sally that no one likes her because my mum told me to

Why do people follow orders they don’t agree with?

Obedience to authority – We know that sometimes obedience can cause harm, but generally people will follow it particularly in emergency situations – for example if a surgeon or doctor told you to follow instructions, you would

However, there are also occasions where following orders causes harm, even death

Stanley Milgram (1974) was one of the first to conduct such a broad range of studies that the factors that influence the way people will in a range of different circumstances

He concluded that we all pretty much will obey, at least some of the time even when it causes harm to others 

He did about 18 different experiments over many years, and he wanted to know how far people would go to follow orders. The studies involved giving the participants a fake electric shock, and they were told to do this to the point where it would cause harm to the other person. The other person that was receiving the shocks was a researcher, but they acted as if they had got the shocks

The participants that were recruited were from the community. They were generally males (20-50 year old’s), not at a university and from a range of occupations/socio-economic backgrounds. He wanted people that didn't have any special insight into the study of obedience.

Actual experiment

The core idea of it was that (changed slightly across 18 experiments) the participant administered an electric shock to another participant. (They could sometimes see, sometimes they were behind the wall, sometimes they were in a video). When the participant received to the electric shock they cried out and pretended to feel pain. What happened over the experiment was that there was an experimenter telling the participant what to do. The participant told the experimenter that there were gonna teach them how to do something, and if they get a wrong answer they were going to get an electric shock and there was a console that said mild through to extreme shock. As the experiment went on the participant was told to keep shocking the person, they keep getting it wrong and they kept increasing the voltage of the shock. What happened was a significant number of participants went to the severe shock level (nearly 70%). At this point the participant stop crying out. All participants went to the very strong level where it won't do any long-term harm, but it will provide very strong pain to that participant. The results were very surprising to Milgram and his colleagues.

Why do people still follow orders that are harmful?

The proximity of the victim

How close the victim was to the person getting the shock

When the '‘learner” couldn't be seen or heard – 100% obeyed (shocked to the end of extreme danger)

When the “learner” was visible in the same room – 40% obeyed

When they had to hold the “learners” hand onto the electrode – 30% obeyed right to the end

The proximity and legitimacy of the authority (in the original study they were in the same room)

When the experimenter provided instructions over the phone = 21% obeyed

When the experimenter gave no instructions and free to choose = 2.5% obeyed

When the experiment was in a rundown city office versus a uni = 48% obeyed

The degree of social support (group pressure) for obedience or disobedience

The presence of 2 resistant peers who refused to continue above the 150V (Strong) = 10% obeyed

The presence of two obedient peers = 92.5% obeyed

Obedience to authority – Why did participants follow orders?

Milgrim and his colleagues came up with various reasons about why people obeyed to such a high level:

Authority’s commands involved gradual escalation of commitment: sunk costs, foot-in the- door technique (they've done it before)

Immediacy of the victim: When they weren't seen/heard it may have led to dehumanisation or the sense that that person wasn't real

Immediacy of authority: reduced when instructions were given by phone – having authority in person (often wearing a white coat) seemed to increase following orders

Peer pressure: actions of others had an influence 

Authority assumes responsibility: People would do what they were asked because they weren't responsible 

Participants have little time for reflection or systematic processing

The downside of obedience

Milgrams research started to question why we follow orders

1) What they are being asked to do – people will follow orders without thinking about what they're being asked to do

2) The consequences of their actions (the consequences of their obedience for other people)

Impact of Milgrams research

Participants really believed they were and ministering shocks and causing harm to others – now we need ethical approval

We must now get participants fully informed consent

Participants must be told they can withdraw

Participants also need to be fully and honestly debriefed

Questions that arose from Milgrams research:

Was the research important?

Was the stress to participants justified?

Were the participants really free to choose and to be freely consent to participate?

 

Define and discuss conformity

What is conformity?

Conformity is a type of social influence in which individuals:

Change their attitudes or behaviour in order to adhere to social norms

Less direct than obedience and compliance  NOT when someone is telling you to do something

Often involves enduring change in attitudes and behaviour – mainly because we have freely chosen to do it

We we look to others on how we should behave. This is referred to as frame of reference – because we look around and look for the frame of reference

Usually the frame of reference is the average or central position of the norm. We don't usually look for fringe positions on what is the norm – you would look for what the majority of others are doing

Most people behave in accordance with social norms most of the time. In other words, they show strong tendencies towards conformity

We feel much more comfortable when we are similar to our friends and family than when we are different from them

Do we recognise just how much we are influenced in this way? Research findings indicate that we don't

Experiments related to conformity

Sheriff (1936) was one of the original researchers on conformity. He argued we conform to group norms when there is uncertainty

To investigate the idea he did multiple studies using an optical illusion where a fixed pinpoint of light in a dark room appears to move

People were asked to estimate how much the light had moved

Sheriff found that when doing the experiment alone, people generally answered in a similar way creating their own frame of reference or norm –1cm

When participants were brought together in groups of 2 or 3 they used each other's answers as the frame of reference or group norm

When participants start and then continue as a group the group norm is what they will use to make their final estimate when their asked to do it by themselves again.

Sheriff (1936) noticed people looked to others to feel confident and certain that what they were thinking, feeling, or doing was appropriate

People used others as a frame of reference and to determine the broad range of (answers) acceptable behaviours or attitudes possible in a given context

The middle or average central positions are what are usually taken

Asch (1952) argued that…

Conformity reflects a rational process in which people make a norm from others’ behaviour

If you are confident in your actions, attitudes, or feelings, the opinions of others are largely irrelevant

Asch argued that when there was certainty, the group would have no effect on behaviour

Conformity – yielding to majority group pressure

Line test – participants were asked to say which line was bigger or smaller than the other lines – this was called a visual discrimination task. Students were seated with 7 – 9 others and were instructed to indicate which of the 3 lines were the same as the standard line

There were 18 trials, in reality only one of the 9 students were a knave to the study and answered second to last

In some trials the group picked a line that was too short and others too long –and of course people conformed.

1 in 4 stuck to the correct and did not conform

75% of participants conformed to the group's false judgement at least once with 50% conforming on more than 6 trials

The average conformity rate was 1 in 3 (33%)

Why did they conform?

Interviews suggested that participants felt uncertain and had self-doubt because of being different

Others didn't believe the group and thought they were wrong but went along so as not to stand out

Participants felt self-conscious, fear of disapproval and feelings of anxiety and even loneliness

Who conforms?

When people don’t conform – it's possible that there is some personality/individual differences that appear related to conformity

These include: people with low self-esteem, low IQ, high need for social support or approval, need for self-control, high anxiety and feelings of self blame and insecurity (correlational studies)

Although the sinning and situation is a much stronger influence on whether someone conforms

Situational factors in conformity

Group size: appears to reach maximum conformity in a group of 3 to 5 person majority

Group unanimity: conformity is reduced if the majority is not unanimous – if you have the dissenter generally people will start to question their own views

Three types of influence

Informational social influence: An influence to accept information from another as evidence about reality. Check perception and opinion is right

Normative social influence: an influence to conform to the positive expectations of others. To get social approval or to avoid social disapproval

Referent informational influence: pressure to conform to a group norm that defines oneself as a group member. Validate identity as a member.

The role of minorities in influencing majority 

Social influence, particularly conformity, has focused on individuals yielding to direct or indirect social influence, most often from a numerical majority

dissenters, deviates or independence have mainly been of interest indirectly, either as a way of investigating the effects of different types of majority or in the role of conformist personality attributes

Minority influence and social change

Minority groups are typically at a disadvantage relative to majorities – there is fewer people

Often, they are less numerous, and in the eyes of the majority, they have less legitimate power and are perceived to be less worthy of serious consideration

Minorities can have an influence. This influences usually how things change over the years. Generally, a majority view doesn't suddenly turn and prompt social change, it comes from a single person and how

Usually the prompt to persuade change is difficult if you're not part of that majority – eg anti vaxers because they don’t tend to represent the majority

To be effective, minorities should be consistent but not rigid, should be seen to be making personal sacrifices and acting out of principle, and should be perceived as being part of the ingroup

Minorities may be effective, because unlike majority influence which is based on ‘mindless’ compliance, minority influence causes people to think about what they're doing and the challenges posed by the novel minority position

Minorities can be more effective if they are treated by the majority group as ingroup minorities rather than outgroup minorities – if you want to affect change on campus as a student, you would identify as a student and say that we need change as a group and then persuade some sort of change that you want as being part of that group