SACE Stage 2 Psychology: Comprehensive Social Influence Study Guide

Introduction to Social Influence

• General Definition: The study of social influence examines the impact of the presence or absence of other people on individual or group behavior.

• Social Nature of Humans: Human beings are inherently social; the behavior of individuals and groups both influences and is influenced by others.

• Topics Covered in Social Influence:

  • Obedience

  • Compliance

  • Conformity

  • Attitude formation and change

  • Prejudice and persuasion

  • Social media effects

Obedience and the Milgram Experiment ($1963$)

• Definition of Obedience: A form of social influence involving the performance of an action under the direct orders of an authority figure.

• Distinguishing Obedience:

  • Compliance: Changing behavior at the request of another person.

  • Conformity: Altering behavior to align with the rest of a group.

• Research Rationale: Psychologists sought to understand situations where individuals act against their own moral judgment because an authority figure ordered them to do so.

• Historical Context: Stanley Milgram ($1963$) aimed to understand why German citizens followed Hitler's orders to exterminate Jewish people during the $1930s-1940s$. The research was published $6$ months after the execution of Adolf Eichmann, who claimed he was "only obeying orders."

• Milgram Experiment Aim: To observe participant obedience in a situation where orders required breaking a personal moral code and hurting an innocent person.

• Milgram Experiment Procedure:

  • Participants: $40$ men aged $20-50$ recruited via advertisement.

  • Premise: Told it was a study on the effects of punishment on learning.

  • Roles: Participants drew straws for "learner" or "teacher." The genuine participant was always the teacher; the learner was "Mr Wallace," a confederate.

  • Setup: Mr Wallace was strapped to a chair behind a screen with a shock generator. The teacher tested Wallace on word pairs.

  • Task: The experimenter (in a grey lab coat) ordered the teacher to flick a switch for every wrong answer or non-response.

  • Voltage: Increments of $15\,V$ up to a lethal $450\,V$. Mr Wallace cried out and begged for release relative to shock intensity.

  • Silent Threshold: At $300\,V$, Mr Wallace went silent except for occasional knocking on the screen.

  • Sequential Verbal Prods (Given if the participant protested):

  1. "Please continue"

  2. "The experiment requires that you continue"

  3. "It is absolutely essential that you continue"

  4. "You have no other choice but to continue"

• Milgram Experiment Results:

  • $100\%$ of participants continued to at least $300\,V$.

  • $65\%$ of participants (teachers) continued to the maximum $450\,V$.

  • Prior predictions suggested $0\%$ would reach $450\,V$ and only $4\%$ would reach $300\,V$.

• Milgram Conclusion: Humans have a strong tendency to obey orders even against their morals. Crimes against humanity may result from situational factors rather than dispositional ones.

The Stanford Prison Experiment (Zimbardo)

• Overview: Philip Zimbardo ($1971$) explored the psychological effects of perceived power in a mock prison in the basement of Stanford University.

• Aim: To investigate if brutality among prison guards was due to situational factors (the environment) or dispositional factors (internal personality).

• Participant Selection:

  • $75$ applicants screened via interviews and personality tests to eliminate psychological/medical issues or criminal/drug history.

  • $24$ men selected as the most physically/mentally stable and least antisocial.

  • Randomly allocated as "guard" or "prisoner." Participants were paid $15$ per day.

• Zimbardo Experiment Procedure:

  • Arrests: Prisoners were "arrested" at home by real police, handcuffed, and booked at a station.

  • Induction: Prisoners were blindfolded, transported to the mock prison, stripped, deloused, and given smocks, nylon caps, ID numbers, and ankle chains.

  • Guard Attire: Khaki uniforms and reflective sunglasses (to prevent eye contact).

  • Authority: Guards were told to assert authority however they wanted except through physical violence.

  • Reality Shift: Participants lost sight of the study nature and believed it was a real prison. Deindividuation occurred rapidly.

• Emergencies and Termination:

  • Prisoner #$8612$: Suffered acute emotional distress and uncontrollable crying within $36$ hours. Zimbardo initially refused release, calling him "weak," but eventually released him.

  • Escalation: Hunger strikes and rumors of escapes led to increased guard brutality and humiliation.

  • Ethical Intervention: Dr. Christina Maslach insisted the study end after seeing the conditions.

  • Duration: Intended for $14$ days; terminated after only $6$ days.

• Zimbardo Conclusion: Situational factors play a dominant role in behavior. Replications like the "BBC Prison Experiment" suggest situations can also lead to cooperation rather than tyranny.

Factors and Types of Social Influence

• Dispositional vs. Situational Factors:

  • Dispositional: Internal qualities (genetics, personality traits, self-esteem).

  • Situational: Environmental elements (work, school, people around us).

• Factors Influencing Obedience:

  • Status of Location: Yale University provided prestige; moving to a rundown office dropped obedience.

  • Personal Responsibility: When an assistant pressed the switches (less personal responsibility), obedience rose to $95\%$. This involves Milgram's Agency Theory (seeing oneself as an agent of the authority).

  • Legitimacy of Authority: Recognition of authority as morally/legally right (learned in school/work).

  • Status of Authority Figure: Symbols like lab coats increase status. Obedience dropped when the experimenter wore everyday clothes.

  • Deindividuation: Losing individuality and group-thinking. Enhanced by anonymity and group size.

• Individual Differences in Obedience:

  • Gender: Women obeyed fully $65\%$ of the time (identical to men), despite reporting higher stress levels.

  • Culture: Replications show differences, and culture plays a role, especially in individualist vs. collectivist comparisons.

  • Cross-Cultural Obedience Rates: US Mean = $60.94\%$, Foreign Mean = $65.94\%$.

Conformity and Solomon Asch

• Definition of Conformity: Yielding to group pressure; a change in behavior or belief due to real or imagined group pressure fueled by a fear of appearing "different."

• Asch Conformity Experiment ($1950s$):

  • Aim: To see how social pressure from a majority affects a person's behavior.

  • Procedure: $123$ undergraduate participants told it was a "vision" test using line lengths. Group of $7$ ($1$ genuine participant, $6$ confederates) were used.

  • Results: Real participants conformed to incorrect answers on $32\%$ of trials. $74\%$ conformed at least once. Only $26\%$ never conformed.

  • The Ally Effect: Conformity dropped by two-thirds if the participant had one "ally" giving the correct answer.

• Factors Impacting Conformity:

  • Group Size: Increases with size up to $4$ ($1$ person = $3\%$, $2$ people = $13\%$, $3+$ people = $32\%$). Optimal size is $4$.

  • Group Unanimity: Lack of unanimity (even one ally) reduces conformity by $80\%$.

  • Task Difficulty: Harder tasks increase conformity as people look to others for confirmation (ISI).

  • Anonymity/Privacy: Writing answers down or private responses decrease conformity (less NSI).

  • Status of Majority: High-status individuals (bosses, teachers) increase informational conformity.

Types and Motivations of Conformity

• Compliance: Publicly going along with the majority to gain approval while privately disagreeing. Shallow, short-term change (e.g., eating broccoli at a grandparent's house).

• Identification: Publicly and privately accepting influence to gain group acceptance, but only while in the group's presence. Mid-level conformity (e.g., drinking with friends but not alone).

• Internalisation: Deepest level of conformity. Adoption of the group's belief system into one's own, both publicly and privately, long-term (e.g., becoming a vegetarian because a partner is, and maintaining it alone).

• Why People Conform:

  • Normative Social Influence (NSI): To be accepted, avoid ridicule, or seek social rewards. Associated with compliance and identification.

  • Informational Social Influence (ISI): To gain knowledge or because others are believed to be "right." Often in ambiguous situations (e.g., cults) and leads to internalisation.

• Individual Differences:

  • Personal Characteristics: Newcomers (students, staff, teammates) are more likely to conform.

  • Personality Trails: Neuroticism (wanting to be liked) and conscientiousness (wanting to be right).

  • Culture: Collectivist cultures may value harmony over individual expression.

Attitudes and the ABC Model

• Definition of Attitudes: A learned tendency to evaluate people, objects, issues, or events in a specific way.

• Evaluation Types:

  • Positive (Liking)

  • Negative (Hating)

  • Neutral (No interest)

  • Ambivalent (Mixed feelings)

• Tricomponent/ABC Model:

  • Affective: Emotional reactions/feelings (e.g., "I hate the AFL").

  • Behavioural: Actions/behaviors toward the object (e.g., "I do not watch AFL").

  • Cognitive: Beliefs or thoughts (e.g., "I believe the AFL is boring").

• Bidirectional Relationship: Attitudes influence behavior, but behavior can also influence attitudes (e.g., playing tennis leads to a positive attitude, and a positive attitude leads to playing tennis).

• Factors Strengthening the Link:

  • Strength: Stronger attitudes (from direct experience) are more resistant to change.

  • Accessibility: Attitudes that come to mind quickly.

  • Specificity: Specific attitudes (enjoying running on a beach) have a stronger link than general ones (liking exercise).

Persuasion and Attitude Change

• Yale Communication Approach: Factors determining persuasion effectiveness:

  • The Source: Expertise, trustworthiness, attractiveness, and talk speed/volume impact persuasion.

  • The Message: Aim to evoke emotion (fear, joy, sadness). Music/sound effects are used.

  • The Audience: $18-25$ year olds are highly susceptible. Intelligence levels also matter.

• Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM):

  • Central Route: High motivation/ability. Evaluates message quality, logic, and facts. Leads to lasting change.

  • Peripheral Route: Low motivation/ability. Focuses on superficial cues (attractiveness, celebrity, bright colors). Leads to temporary change.

• Experience Factors:

  • Direct Experience: Stronger, more resistant attitudes (e.g., riding a rollercoaster yourself).

  • Indirect Experience: Exposure through ads or stories; less emotionally intense and more susceptible to change.

• Persuasion Strategies:

  • Norm of Reciprocity: Obligation to return a favor (e.g., a "free trial" feels like a favor).

  • Door in the Face: Starting with a large, rejected request, then making a smaller compromise that the target accepts.

  • Foot in the Door: Starting with a small request to increase the likelihood of agreeing to a followed-up larger request (e.g., upselling a phone warranty).

Cognitive Dissonance and Consistency

• Definition: Cognitive discomfort caused by holding inconsistent attitudes, behaviors, or cognitions (e.g., smoking while knowing it is unhealthy).

• Dissonance Reduction Techniques:

  • Change behavior (stop smoking).

  • Justify behavior by changing thoughts (donuts are an occasional treat).

  • Justify behavior by adding new cognitions (working out longer at the gym).

  • Ignore/deny conflicting information (denying sugar content).

• Self-Monitoring: High self-monitors adjust behavior to social cues to fit in; low self-monitors are guided by true feelings/beliefs regardless of the crowd.

• Consequences of Inconsistency:

  • Mental Distress: Stress from behavior-attitude misalignment (e.g., staying in a job with a bully boss).

  • Inability to Predict Behavior: Surveys show attitudes, but people may not follow through (e.g., saying "yes" to an event online).

  • Social Desirability Bias: Reporting attitudes society frowns upon inaccurately to appear better.

Prejudice, Stereotyping, and Discrimination

• Stereotyping (Cognitive): Specific beliefs/assumptions about individuals based solely on group membership (e.g., "Collingwood fans are arrogant").

• Prejudice (Affective): A negative attitude/feeling toward an individual based on their social group.

• Discrimination (Behavioural): Negative treatment or exclusion of individuals based on prejudice.

• Unintentional Biases:

  • Confirmation Bias: Favouring information that fits existing beliefs.

  • Attribution Bias: Attributing success to self and failure to external factors.

  • Gender Bias: Preference for one gender.

  • Conformity Bias: Tendency to behave like the group.

• Effects of Prejudice:

  • Social Stigma: Disapproval leading to depression and low self-esteem.

  • Internalisation: Absorbing negative stereotypes into self-identity.

  • Stereotype Threat: Risk of conforming to negative stereotypes, which hinders performance (e.g., Pygmalion effect).

• Changing Prejudice:

  • Intergroup Contact: Requires ongoing interaction, mutual interdependence, equal status, and explicit social norms.

  • Superordinate Goals: Working together toward a common goal.

  • Education: Programs like "Harmony Day" or "Bullying No Way."

Self-Presentation and Social Media

• Self-Presentation: Managing shared information to control how others perceive us (Impression Management).

• Functions:

  • Facilitate interaction.

  • Attain rewards.

  • Construct desired identities.

• Carl Rogers' Self-Concept Components:

  • Ideal Self: Who you want to be.

  • Self-Image: How you see yourself.

  • Self-Worth: How much you value yourself.

• Communication:

  • Verbal: Semantic (content) and Expressive (tone). Only $30\%$ of impressions.

  • Non-Verbal: Distance, gestures, posture, eye contact, physical appearance.

• First Impressions:

  • Primacy Effect: Information received first carries the most weight.

  • Recency Effect: Most recent information is weighted more.

• Social Media Effects:

  • Benefits: Prosocial behavior, vicarious learning, strengthening interpersonal relationships.

  • Mental Health: High correlation with peer comparisons; $97\%$ of teens ($13-17$) have accounts. Passive use correlates with depression; active use correlates with better well-being.