Psychology - Social Influence

What is conformity

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

Which psychologist devised a procedure to assess to what extent people will conform to the opinions of others

Asch (1951)

What variables did Asch investigate in his study that might lead to an increase or decrease in conformity

Group size

Unanimity

Task difficulty

What results did Asch find after changing the group size when studying variables that might lead to an increase or decrease in conformity and what does this suggest

He varied the number of confederates from one to 15 - so the total group size from 2 to 16.

He found a curvilinear relationship between group size and conformity rate.

Conformity increases with group size but only up to a point.

With 3 confederates, conformity rose to 31.8%. But the presence of more confederates made little difference - the conformity rate soon levelled off.

Suggests that most people are very sensitive to the views of others because just one or two confederates was enough to sway opinion

What results did Asch find after changing the unanimity when studying variables that might lead to an increase or decrease in conformity and what does this suggest?

He introduced a confederate who disagreed with the other confederates.

In one variation of the study this person gave the correct answer and another version he gave a different, wrong one.

The genuine participant conformed less in the presence of a dissenter

The rate decreased to less than a quarter of the level it was when the majority was unanimous.

The presence of a dissenter appeared to free the naive participant to behave more independently. This was true even when the dissenter disagreed with the genuine participant. This suggests that the influence of the majority depends to a large extent on it being unanimous. And that the non-conformity is more likely when cracks are perceived in the majority’s unanimous view

What results did Asch find after changing the task difficulty when studying variables that might lead to an increase or decrease in conformity and what does this suggest?

He increased the difficulty of the line-judging task by making the stimulus line and the comparison line more similar to each other in length.

He found that conformity increased. It may be that the situation is more ambiguous when the task becomes harder - it is unclear to the participants what the right answer is.

In these circumstances, it is natural to look to other people for guidance and to assume that they are right and you are wrong

What is unanimity

The extent to which all the members of a group agree

What are the 3 main evaluation points for Asch’s research on conformity

Artificial situation and task

Limited application

Research support (with counterpoint)

Write the evaluation point of Asch’s research on conformity ‘Artificial situation and task’

One limitation of Asch’s research is that the task and situation were artificial.

Participants knew they were in a research study and may simply have gone along with what was expected (demand characteristics). The task was relatively trivial and therefore there was no reason not to conform.

This means that the findings do not generalise to real-world situations, especially those where the consequences of conformity might be important.

Write the evaluation of Asch’s research on conformity ‘Limited application’

One limitation is that all of Asch’s participants were american men.

Research conducted by Neto (1995) suggests that women may be more conformist. Furthermore, the US is an individualist culture. Similar conformity studies carried out in collectivist cultures have found that conformity rates are higher.

This means that Asch’s findings tell us little about conformity in women and people form other cultures.

Write the evaluation of Asch’s research on conformity ‘Research support’

One strength of Asch’s research is support from other studies for the effects of task difficulty.

For example, Lucas et al (2006) asked their participants to solve ‘easy’ and ‘hard’ maths problems. Participants were given answers from 3 other students. The participants conformed more often when the problems were harder.

This shows Asch was correct in claiming that task difficulty is one variable that affects conformity.

Write the counterpoint to the evaluation point ‘research support’ on Asch’s research of conformity

Lucas et al’s study found that conformity is more complex than Asch suggested. Participants with high confidence in their maths abilities conformed less on hard tasks than those with low confidence.

This shows that an individual-level factor can influence conformity by interacting with situational variables. But Asch did not research the roles of individual factors.

What are the limitations of Asch’s research on conformity

The task and situation were artificial. Participants were in a research study and may simply have gone along with what was expected. There was no reason not to conform. The findings do not generalise.

All his participants were American men. His findings don’t tell us about conformity in women and people form other cultures.

What is the strength and counterpoint of Asch’s research on conformity

Research support for the effects of task difficulty. Lucas et al ask people to solve maths problems. They conformed more for harder ones. This shows that Asch was correct in claiming that task difficulty was one variable affecting conformity.

However, his study found that conformity is more complex than Asch suggested. Confidence levels affected conformity. This shows that an individual level factor can influence conformity.

what are the 3 ways that Kelman (1958)suggested that people conform to the opinion of a majority

Internalisation

Identification

Compliance

What are the 3 types of conformity

Internalisation

Identification

Compliance

Who suggested that there are 3 ways in which people conform to the opinion of a majority

Kelman (1958)

What is the definition of internalisation as a type of conformity

A deep type of conformity where we take on the majority view because we accept it as correct . It leads to a far reaching and permanent change in behaviour, even when the group is absent

What is the definition of identification as a type of conformity

A moderate type of conformity where we act in the same way as the group because we value it and want to be part of it . But we don’t necessarily agree with everything the group/majority believes.

What is the definition of compliance as a type of conformity

A superficial and temporary type of conformity where we outwardly go along with the majority view, but privately disagree with it. This change in behaviour only lasts as long as the group is monitoring us.

What are the 2 explanations for conformity

Informational social influence (ISI)

Normative social influence (NSI)

What did Deutsch and Gerald (1955) say were the two explanations for conformity are

Informational social influence (ISI)

Normative social influence (NSI)

What is informational social influence (ISI)

An explanation of conformity that says we agree with the opinion of the majority because we believe it is correct. We accept it because we want to be correct as well. This may lead to internalisation.

What is Normative social influence (NSI)

An explanation of conformity that says we agree with the opinion of the majority because we want to gain social approval and be liked. This may lead to compliance.

When is informational social influence most likely to occur

In situations that are new to a person or where there is some ambiguity. It also occurs in crisis situations where decisions have to be made quickly and we assume that the group is more likely to be right

when is normative social influence most likely to occur

In situations with strangers where you may feel concerned about rejection. It may also occur with people you know because we are most concerned about the social approval of our friends. It may be more pronounced in stressful situations where people have a greater need for social support.

Is informational social influence a cognitive or emotional process

cognitive

Is normative social influence a cognitive or emotional process

emotional

Which explanation for conformity is a cognitive process

Informational social influence

Which explanation for conformity is an emotional process

Normative social influence

What are the 3 main evaluation points for explanations for conformity

Research support for NSI

Research support for ISI (with counterpoint)

Individual differences in NSI

Write the evaluation point ‘Research support for NSI’ for the explanations of conformity

One strength of NSI is that evidence supports it as an explanation of conformity.

For example, when Asch interviewed his participants, some said they conformed because they felt self-conscious giving the correct answer and were afraid of his disapproval. When participants wrote their answers down, conformity fell to 12.5%. This is because giving answers privately meant that there was no normative group pressure.

This shows that at least some conformity is due to a desire to not be rejected by the group for disagreeing with them.

Write the evaluation point ‘Research support for ISI’ for explanations for conformity

One strength is that there is research evidence to support ISI from the study by Lucas et al.

Lucas et al found that participants conformed more often to incorrect answers they were given when the maths problems were difficult. This is because when the problems were easy the participants ‘knew their own minds’ but when the problems were hard the situation became unclear. The participants did not want to be wrong, so the relied on the answers they were given.

This shows that ISI is a valid explanation of conformity because the results are what ISI would predict.

Write the counterpoint to the evaluation point ‘Research support for ISI’ for explanations for conformity

It is often unclear whether it is ISI or NSI at work in research studies or in real life.

For example, Asch found that conformity is reduced when there is one other dissenting participant. The dissenter may reduce the power of the NSI because they provide social support, or they may reduce the power of ISI because they provide social support. Both interpretations are possible.

Therefore, it is hard to separate ISI and NSI and both processes probably operate together in most real-world conformity situations.

Write the evaluation point ‘Individual differences in NSI’ for explanations for conformity

One limitation is that NSI does not predict conformity in every case.

Some people are greatly concerned with being liked by others. These people are called nAfflilators. McGhee and Teevan found that students who were nAffiliators were more likely to conform.

This shows that NSI underlies conformity for some people more than it does for others. There are individual differences in conformity that cannot be fully explained by one general theory of situational pressures.

What is an nAffiliator

people that have a strong need for ‘affiliation’ - they want to relate to other people

Who carried out the Stanford prison experiment

Zimbardo et al (1973)

What are social roles

The parts people play as members of various social groups

Write the procedure for Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment

He set up a mock prison in the basement part of the psychology department at Stanford university.

Selected 21 male student volunteers who tested as ‘emotionally stable’

Students were randomly assigned to play the role of prison guard or prisoner.

They wore uniforms based on their roles

What were the different uniforms worn in the Stanford prison experiment

The prisons had prison uniforms and were identified by number

The guards had a separate uniform with a wooden club, handcuffs and mirror shades

The uniforms created a loss of personal identity and meant they would be more likely to conform to the perceived role

What were the instructions about behaviour given in the Stanford prison experiment

Rather than leaving the study, the prisoners could apply for parole.

The guards were encouraged to play their role by being reminded that they had complete power over the prisoners

What were the findings of the Stanford prison experiment

The guards treated the prisoners harshly. Within two days, the prisoners rebelled. They ripped their uniforms and shouted and swore at the guards who retaliated with fire extinguishers.

The guards harassed the prisoners constantly, to remind them of the powerlessness of their role. The guards created opportunities to enforce the rules and administer punishments.

After the rebellion was put down, the prisoners became subdued, depressed and anxious.

One was released because he showed symptoms of psychological disturbance. Two more were released on the fourth day. One prisoner went on a hunger strike. The guards tried to force-feed him and then punished him by putting him in the hole.

The guards identified more closely with their role. Their behaviour became more brutal and aggressive, with some of them appearing to enjoy the power they had.

The study ended after 6 days instead of the intended 14.

What were the conclusions of the Stanford prison experiment

Social roles appear to have a strong influence on individuals’ behaviour. The guards became brutal and the prisoners became submissive.

The roles were very easily taken on by all participants. Even volunteers who came in to perform specific functions found themselves behaving as if they were in a prison rather than in a psychological study

What are the evaluation points for the Stanford Prison Experiment

Control over key variables

Lack of realism (with counterpoint)

Exaggerates the power of roles

Write the evaluation point ‘control over key variables’ for the Stanford prison experiment

One strength is that Zimbardo and his colleagues had control over key variables.

One example was the selection of participants. Emotionally stable individuals were chosen and randomly assigned to the roles of guard and prisoner. This was one way that the researchers ruled out individual personality differences as an explanations for the findings. If the guards and prisoners behaved very differently, it must have been due to the role itself.

This amount of control increased the internal validity of the study. Therefore we can be much more confident in drawing conclusions about the influence of roles on conformity.

Write the evaluation point ‘Lack of realism’ for the Stanford prison experiment

One limitation is that it did not have the realism of a true prison.

Banuazizi and Movahedi (1975) argued that the participants were merely play-acting rather than genuinely conforming to a role. Participants’ performances were based on their stereotypes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave. One guard claimed he had based his role on a brutal character from a film he had watched. This also explains why the prisoners rioted.

This suggests that the findings tell us little about conformity to social roles in actual prisons.

Write the counterpoint to the evaluation point ‘lack of realism’ on the Stanford prison experiment

McDermott (2019) argues that the participants did behave as if the prison was real to them. 90% of the prisoners’ conversations were about prison life. They discussed how it was impossible to leave before their sentences were over. Prisoner 416 later explained how he thought the prison was a real one, but run by psychologists rather than the government.

This suggests that the experiment did replicate the social roles of prisoners and guards in a real prison, giving the study a high degree of internal validity.

Write the evaluation point ‘Exaggerates the power of roles’ in the Stanford prison experiment

One limitation is that Zimbardo may have exaggerated the power of social roles to influence behaviour.

Only one third of the guards actually behaved in a brutal way. Another third tried to apply the rules fairly. The rest actively tried to help and support the prisoners. They sympathised, offered cigarettes and reinstated privileges. Most guards were able to resist situational pressures to conform to a brutal role.

This suggests that Zimbardo overstated his view that the participants were conforming to social roles and minimised the influence of dispositional factors.

What is obedience

A form of social influence in which an individual follows a direct order.

Who carried out a study on obedience involving a participant giving a learner an electric shock

Milgram (1963)

Write the baseline procedure for Milgram’s study on obedience.

40 American men volunteered to take part in the study

When each volunteer arrived at the lab they were introduced to a confederate who they thought was another participant.

The participant was given the role of teacher and the confederate was the learner

The experimenter gave the instructions

The experimenter ordered the teacher to give a shock to the learner in 15 volt steps up to 450 volts

The teacher did not know the shocks were fake

What were the baseline findings to Milgram’s study on obedience

Every participant delivered all the shocks up to 300 volts.

12.5% stopped at 300 volts

65% continued to the highest level

What were the ethical issues for Milgram’s study on obedience

The participants did not feel they had the right to withdraw

They were deceived

They were not protected from psychological harm

What were the four standard prods the experimenter used to get the teacher to continue

‘please continue’ or ‘please go on’

‘the experiment requires that you continue’

‘it is absolutely essential that you continue’

‘you have no other choice, you must go on’

What were the evaluation points for Milgram’s baseline study on obedience

Research support

Low internal validity (with counterpoint)

Alternative interpretation of findings

Write the evaluation point ‘research support’ for Milgram’s baseline procedure on obedience

One strength is that Milgram’s findings were replicated in a French documentary that was made about reality TV.

It focused on a game show that was made especially for the programme. The participants believed they were in a pilot episode for a new game show. They were paid to give (fake) electric shocks to other participants (actors) in front of a studio audience. 80% delivered the maximum shock to an unconscious man. Their behaviour was almost identical to Milgram’s participants.

This supports Milgram’s original findings about obedience to authority, and demonstrates that the findings weren’t due to special circumstances.

Write the evaluation point ‘Low internal validity’ for Milgram’s baseline procedure for his study on obedience

One limitation is that the procedure may not be testing what was intended.

Milgram reported that 75% of participants said that they believed that the shocks were real. Orne and Holland argued that participants behaved the way they did because they didn’t really believe the set up so they were ‘play acting’. Perry’s research confirms this. She listened to tapes of Milgram’s participants and reported that only about half of them believed that the shocks were real. Two-thirds of these participants were disobedient.

This suggests that participants may have been responding to demand characteristics, trying to fulfil the aims of the study.

Write the counterpoint to the evaluation point ‘Low internal validity’ for Milgram’s baseline procedure for his study on obedience

Sheridan and King conducted a study using a procedure like Milgram’s. Participants gave real shocks to a puppy in response to orders from an experimenter. Despite the real distress of the animal, 54% of the men and 100% of the women gave what they thought was a fatal shock.

This suggests that the effects in Milgram’s study were genuine because people behaved obediently even when the shocks were real.

Write the evaluation point ‘Alternative interpretation of findings’ for Milgram’s baseline procedure for his study on obedience

One limitation is that Milgram’s conclusions about blind obedience may not be justified.

Haslam et al (2014) showed that Milgram’s participants obeyed when the experimenter delivered the first three verbal prods. However, every participant who was given the fourth prod disobeyed. According to the social identity theory, participants in Milgram’s study only obeyed when they identified with the scientific aims of the research. When they were ordered to blindly obey an authority figure, they refused.

This shows that social identity theory may provide a more valid interpretation of Milgram’s findings, especially as Milgram himself suggested that identifying with the science is a reason for obedience.

What were the 3 situational variables that Milgram changed in the variations of his study on obedience

Proximity

Location

Uniform

Write about Milgram’s proximity variation of his study on obedience.

When the teacher and the learner were in the same room, the obedience rate dropped from the original 65% to 40%.

When the teacher had to force the learner’s hand onto an electroshock plate, obedience dropped to 30%

When the teacher received the instructions through a telephone, obedience dropped to 20.5%

Write the explanation for the results of Milgram’s proximity variation for his study on obedience.

Decreased proximity allows people to psychologically distance themselves from the consequences of their actions.

When the teacher and the learner were separated, the teacher was less aware of the harm they were causing and so were more obedient.

What was the obedience rate in Milgram’s baseline study on obedience

65%

What was the obedience rate when the teacher and the learner were in the same room in Milgram’s study on obedience

40%

What was the obedience rate when the teacher had to force the learner’s hand on a plate in Milgram’s study on obedience

30%

What was the obedience rate when the teacher was receiving instructions through a telephone in Milgram’s study on obedience

20.5%

Write about the variation of Milgram’s study on obedience involving a change in location

The variation was carried out in a run down office block rather than in the Yale University setting of the baseline study.

Obedience fell to 47.5%

What was the level of obedience when Milgram’s study was carried out in a run down office block

47.5%

Write the explanation for the results of the location variation of Milgram’s study on obedience

The university environment gave Milgram’s study legitimacy and authority.

Participants were more obedient because they perceived that the experimenter shared this legitimacy and that obedience was expected.

However, obedience was still quite high in the office block because the participants perceived the scientific nature of the procedure.

Write about the uniform variation of Milgram’s study on obedience

The experimenter wore a grey lab coat in the baseline study.

In one variation, the experimenter was called away and replaced by a confederate in everyday clothes.

The obedience rate dropped to 20%

What was the obedience rate in Milgram’s study on obedience where the uniform was changed

20%

Which variation of Milgram’s study on obedience had the lowest obedience rate

The uniform variation - 20%

Write the explanation for the results of the Uniform variation for Milgram’s study on obedience

Uniforms encourage obedience because they are widely recognised symbols of authority.

We accept that someone in a uniform is entitled to expect obedience because their authority is legitimate.

Someone without a uniform has less right to expect our obedience

What are the evaluation points for the variations of Milgram’s study on obedience

Research support

Cross-cultural replications (with counterpoint)

Low internal validity

Write the evaluation point ‘Research support’ for Milgram’s variations of his study on obedience

One strength is that other studies have demonstrated the influence of situational variables on obedience.

In a field experiment in New York, Bickman had 3 confederates dress in different outfits - a suit and tie, a milkman’s outfit and a security guard uniform. The confederates asked people to pick up litter or hand over a coin for a parking meter. People were twice as likely to obey the security guard that the suit and tie.

This supports the idea that a situational variable, like uniform, does have a powerful effect on obedience.

Write the evaluation point ‘cross-cultural replications’ for Milgram’s variations on his study of obedience

One strength of Milgram’s research is that his findings have been replicated in other cultures.

Meeus and Raaijmakers (1986) studied obedience in Dutch participants. They were ordered to say stressful things in an interview to someone desperate for a job. 90% of participants obeyed. The researchers also replicated Milgram’s findings concerning proximity. When the person giving orders was not present, obedience decreased dramatically.

This suggests that Milgram’s findings about obedience are not just limited to Americans or men, but are valid across cultures and apply to women too

Write the counterpoint for the evaluation point ‘cross cultural replications’ for Milgram’s variations on his study on obedience

Replications of Milgram’s research are not very ‘cross-cultural’.

Smith and Bond (1998) identified just 2 replications between 1968 and 1985 that took place in india and Jordan - both countries culturally different from the US. The other countries involved are culturally quite similar to the US.

Therefore, it may not be appropriate to conclude that Milgram’s findings apply to people in all or most cultures.

Write the evaluation point ‘low internal validity’ for Milgram’s variations of his study on obedience

One limitation is that participants may have been aware that the procedure was faked.

Orne and Holland made this criticism of his baseline study. They point out that it is more likely in his variations because of the extra manipulation of variables. An example is when the experimenter is replaced by a ‘member of the public’. Even Milgram recognised that this situation was so contrived that participants may have worked out the truth.

Therefore, in all of Milgram’s studies it is unclear whether the findings are genuinely due to the operation of obedience or because the participants saw through the deception and just ‘play acted’.

What is the agentic state

A mental state where we feel no personal responsibility for our behaviour because we believe ourselves to be acting for an authority figure. This frees us from the demands of our consciences and allows us to obey even a destructive authority figure

What is legitimacy of authority

An explanation for obedience which suggests that we are more likely to obey people who we perceive to have authority over us. This authority is justified by the individuals position of power within a social hierarchy.

Who came up with the idea of the agentic state

Milgram

What is the autonomous state

When someone is free to behave according to their own principles and feels a sense of responsibility for their own actions.

The opposite of being in an agentic state

What is the shift from being in an autonomous state to the agentic state called

The agentic shift

When did Milgram suggest that agentic shift occurs

when a person perceives someone else as an authority figure

What is the definition of binding factors in obedience

aspects of a situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effect of their behaviour and therefore reduce the ‘moral strain’ they are feeling

What are the evaluation points for the Agentic state

Research support

A limited explanation

Write the evaluation point ‘research support’ for the agentic state

One strength is that Milgram’s own studies support the role of the agentic state in obedience.

Most of Milgram’s participants resisted giving the shocks at some point, and often asked the experimenter questions about the procedure. One question was asking who was responsible. When the experimenter replied that they are responsible the participants often went through the procedure quickly with no further objections.

This shows that once participants perceived that they were no longer responsible for their own behaviour, they acted more easily as the Experimenter’s agent, as Milgram suggested.

Write the evaluation point ‘A limited explanation’ for the agentic shift

One limited explanation is that the agentic shift doesn’t explain many research findings about obedience.

For example, it doesn’t explain the findings of Rank and Jacobson’s study. They found that 16 out of 18 of the hospital nurses disobeyed orders from a doctor to administer an excessive drug dose to a patient. The doctor was an obvious authority figure. Almost all the nurses remained autonomous, as did many of Milgram’s participants.

This suggests that the agentic shift can only account for some situations of obedience.

What are the evaluation points for legitimacy of authority in obedience

Explains cultural differences

Cannot explain all (dis)obedience

Write the evaluation point ‘Explains cultural differences’ for legitimacy of authority in obedience

One strength of the legitimacy explanation is that it is a useful account of cultural differences in obedience.

Many studies show that countries differ in the degree to which people are obedient to authority. For example, Kilham and Mann found that only 16% of Australian women went al the way up to 450 volts in a Milgram style study. However, Mantell found a very different figure for German participants - 85%.

This shows that, in some cultures, authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate and entitled to demand obedience from individuals. This reflects the ways that different societies are structured and how children are raised to perceive authority figures.

Write the evaluation point ‘cannot explain all (dis)obedience’ for legitimacy of authority in obedience

One limitation is that legitimacy cannot explain instances of disobedience in a hierarchy where the legitimacy of authority is clear and accepted.

This includes the nurses in Rank and Jacobson’s study. Most of them were disobedient despite working in a rigidly hierarchial authority structure. Also, a significant minority of Milgram’s participants disobeyed despite recognising the experimenter’s scientific authority.

This suggests that some people may just be more (or less) obedient than others. It is possible that innate tendencies to obey or disobey have a greater influence on behaviour than the legitimacy of an authority figure.

What is the dispositional explanation in obedience

Any explanation of behaviour that highlights the importance of the individual’s personality. Such explanations are often contrasted with situational explanations.

What is an authoritarian personality

A type of personality that Adorno argued was especially susceptible to obeying people in authority. Such individuals are also thought to be submissive to those of higher status and dismissive of inferiors