Psychology - Social Influence

AQA Social Influence

conformity definition

a change in a person's behaviour or opinions as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or group of people

Compliance

‘going along with others’ in public but privately not changing personal opinions and/or behaviour - e.g. putting on an accent

Identification

The attitude, behaviours and norms associated with a particular social role are adopted e.g. teachers and students

Internalisation

occurs when a person genuinely accepts the group norm e.g. converting religion

informational social influence

believe other people to be right (Sherif - dot in a dark room estimation of movement - individual, group then individual)

normative social influence

to be liked or accepted by the group since public approval is more important than the issue itself (Asch - stimulus line and 3 other lines)

% of conformity for Asch’s experiment

37% of the time the real participant gave the wrong answer with 75% conforming at least once

Jenness (evaluation of conformity - STRENGTH)

estimate number of jellybeans in a jar - individual estimates moved towards estimates of groups (ISI)

Perrin + Spencer (evaluation of conformity - LIMITATION)

reproduced Asch’s study with British students from engineering, maths and chemistry courses - 0.25% compared to 37% (+ lacks time validity - McCarthyism)

Smith + Bond (evaluation of conformity - LIMITATION)

reviewed 31 studies of conformity in different cultures using Asch’s procedure - 14% in Belgium with 51% in Zimbabwe (culture differences - collectivist = more likely to conform)

group size affecting conformity data (ASCH)

1 participant + 1 confederate = 3%

1 participant + 3 confederates = 32%

1 participant + 6 confederates = 37%

unanimity affecting conformity data (ASCH + social support)

if one confederate disagreed = 32% → 5.5%

if one confederate gave a diff wrong answer = 9%

task difficulty affecting conformity data (ASCH)

conformity increases suggesting ISI

Bond (evaluation into variables affecting conformity - LIMITATION)

quick to accept Asch’s findings about size so majority used 3 as max

Abu Ghraib (evaluation of Zimbardo’s research - STRENGTH)

real life application - notorious for the torture and abuse of Iraqi prisoners

Reicher + Haslam (BBC prison study - evaluation of Zimbardo’s research - LIMITATION)

participants didn’t conform automatically as guards failed to identify with their role

individual differences (evaluation of Zimbardo’s research - LIMITATION)

1/3 behaved brutally

1/3 applied rules fairly

1/3 sympathised with prisoners

Banuazizi + Mohavedi (evaluation of Zimbardo’s research - LIMITATION)

merely play acting as was a simulation - demand characteristics - based off character in ‘Cool hand Luke’

obedience vs conformity

findings of Milgrim’s experiment

(learner + teacher + electric shocks)
no one stopped before 300V

65% gave max shock of 450V

dissented verbally but when prodded by experimenter carried on

location affecting obedience (MILGRIM)

Yale = prestigious setting, 65%

run-down office block = 47.5%

proximity affecting conformity (MILGRIM)

in different rooms = 65%

in same room = 40%
push hand down = 30%

instructions over phone = 20.5%

uniform affecting conformity (MILGRIM)

lab coat = 65%

everyday clothes = 20%

Bickman’s study (evaluation of situational variables - STRENGTH)

(made requests on street e.g. pick up rubbish)

guard = 38%

civilian = 19%

Bushman (evaluation of situational variables - STRENGTH)

(give change to motorist)

woman in uniform = 70%

smart clothes = 58%

Miranda (evaluation of situational variables - STRENGTH)

(cultural research + high control as limited extraneous variables = causality)

90% of Spanish students obey

ethical issues (evaluation of situational variables - LIMITATION)

deception, no right to withdraw, no protection from harm (stressed - biting nails, sweating)

BUT had debrief and 84% glad taken part a year later

Hofling’s study

unknown doctor instructed 22 nurses by phone to give 20mg of Astrofen (max 10mg on box + no signature from doctor) - 21 of 22 obeyed

legitimacy of authority

people perceived to be in a position of power so feel obligated to obey e.g. teachers

agentic state

acting as an agent for authority so don’t feel responsible for their actions (authoritative figure is responsible)

Milgrim study supporting agentic state

participants could instruct a confederate to press the switches (65% → 92.5% going to max 450V)

authoritarian personality

Adorno - concluded people with this personality have a tendency to be especially obedient as have extreme respect for it (conventional attitudes to sex, race, gender etc.)

Elms + Milgrim (supporting authoritarian personalities)

interviewed 20 of the obedient participants and 20 defiant ones - obedient ones have high levels of authoritarianism and saw experimenter admirably

Altemeyer (supporting studies of authoritarian personalities)

those with this personality type gave themselves higher shocks

Pre-war Germany (limitation to authoritarian personality)

millions obeyed but unlikely all possess authoritarian personality

internal locus of control

they are in control of their destiny and their actions make a difference - higher resistance as less need for social approval

Shute (evaluation of internal locus of control - STRENGTH)

exposed undergraduates to peers who expressed their attitudes to drug taking - those with internal locus of control conformed less to expressing pro-drug attitudes

Spector (evaluation of internal locus of control - STRENGTH)

Measured LoC and predisposition to NSI and ISI in 157 undergraduates and found a significant correlation with internal LoC and NSI as lower need for social approval

Holland (evaluation of internal locus of control - STRENGTH)

repeated Milgrim’s study and measured if internal or external

37% internals didn’t continue to 450V

23% externals didn’t continue to 450V

Oliner + Oliner (evaluation of internal locus of control - STRENGTH)

interviewed 406 German people who had sheltered Jewish people from Nazis and majority internal LoC

Twenge et al (evaluation of internal locus of control - LIMITATION)

analysed data from American obedience studies showed people have become more resistant but also more external LoC

social support

the presence of people who resist pressures to conform or obey can help others do the same

obedience in Milgrim’s experiment for social support

65% → 10% when genuine participant joined by a disobedient confederate

Allen + Levine (evaluation of social support - STRENGTH)

conformity reduced on a task involving visual judgements if with a dissenter even if admit to sight problems

Mullen et al (evaluation of social support - STRENGTH)

disobedient models broke the law by jay walking which caused increase in jay walking even when not around

Rosentrasse protest (evaluation of social support - STRENGTH)

1943 - group of German women protested and demanded for the release of their Jewish husbands + sons

Gamson et al (evaluation of social support - STRENGTH)

discuss fake scenario about an oil company firing an employee for immoral behaviour + filmed + cameraman told participants to argue from one point of view - 29 of the 33 groups didn’t let video be used

minority influence

a minority of people persuade others to adopt their beliefs, attitudes or behaviours leading to internalisation

consistency affecting minority influence

maintain the same belief over time as draws attention to the minority view

commitment affecting minority influence

demonstrate dedication to their position by making personal sacrifices to show not acting out of self-interest

flexibility affecting minority influence

must show you accept the possibility of compromise and be prepared to accept reasonable and valid counter arguments

Moscovici et al (evaluation of minority influence - STRENGTH)

‘calling a blue slide green’ - 23 groups of six women with 2 confederates to say green

consistent minority - 8.2% convinced

inconsistent minority - 1.23% convinced

Wood et al (evaluation of minority influence - STRENGTH)

meta-analysis of almost 100 studies found minorities who were consistent = influential

Nemeth + Brilmayer (evaluation of minority influence - STRENGTH)

studied role of flexibility when discussing amount of compensation to someone in a ski lift accident - the confederate that was open to compromise influenced the group

Papastamou (evaluation of minority influence - STRENGTH)

questionnaire about responsibility for pollution and when the extreme minority view was flexible by compromising they were seen as cooperative and more persuasive

social change

process by which society as a whole adopts a new belief or way of behaving which then becomes widely accept as the ‘norm’

stages of social change

1. attention of majority drawn to an issue

2. cognitive conflict - start to rethink

3. consistency

4. the augmentation principle - minority must be open to suffering

5. the snowball effect - more and more people are persuaded

African American civil rights movement

1. marches drew attention to issue

2. other people began to rethink issue

3. many marches with lots of people

4. walk to work + ‘freedom fighters’ beaten

5. more and more people persuaded until civil rights act passed

Nemeth (evaluation of social change - STRENGTH)

the ‘dissent’ of minorities leads to individuals opening their mind to information and consider other options

Nolan (evaluation of social change - STRENGTH)

messages were hung on the front doors and houses every week for a month about reducing energy usage - caused less energy usage