Social Influence

Question 1

What is compliance?

Types of conformity and explanations for conformity

Answer 1

• individuals may go along with the group in order to gain approval or to avoid disapproval
• when exposed to the views or actions of the majority individuals may use social comparison so they can adjust there own actions to fit
• fitting in is desirable so it what drives conformity
• does not result in any change in the persons underlying attitude only the views and behaviours they express in public

Question 2

What is internalisation

Types of conformity and explanations for conformity

Answer 2

• individuals may go along with the group because of acceptance of their views
• when exposed to the views of other members of the group individuals are encouraged to engage in validation process examining their own beliefs to see if they or the others are right
• close examination of the group might cause the person to believe that they are wrong and the group is right
• lead to acceptance in public and privately

Question 3

What is identification

Types of conformity and explanations for conformity

Answer 3

• individual may accept influence because they want to be associated with another person or group
• by adopting the groups attitudes and behaviours they feel more of a part of it
• has elements of both compliance and internalisation as the individual accepts the attitudes and behaviours they are adopting as right and true - internalisation - but the purpose of adopting them is compliance

Question 4

What are the two explanations for conformity

(Types of conformity and explanations for conformity)

Answer 4

• Normative social influence

- informational social influence

Question 5

Describe normative social influence

Types of conformity and explanations for conformity

Answer 5

• it Is possible to go along with the majority without accepting their point of view - this is compliance
• humans have a fundamental need for social companionship and a fear of censure and rejection - this forms the basis for normative social influence
• to gain approval and acceptance to avoid censure and disapproval or to achieve specific goals
• important condition for normative influence to occur is that the individual must believe that they are under surveillance from the group

Question 6

Describe informational social influence

Types of conformity and explanations for conformity

Answer 6

• individuals accepts information from others as evidence about reality
• human beings have the need to be right and confident there beliefs are right, if this is not possible then they must rely on the opinions of others
• more likely if situation is ambiguous or where others are experts
• individual does not comply in behaviour alone but alos changes the behaviour in line with the group position
• public and private attitudes change therefore this is an example of internalisation

Question 7

Evaluation of types of conformity and explanations for conformity: Difficulties in distinguishing between compliance and internalisation

Answer 7

• relationship between compliance and internalisation is complicated by how we define public and private acceptance
• acceptance may by in public but may dissipate in private, because they are presented with new information or they have forgotten previous information
• also possible that the individual may actually been merely compiling in public, but as a result of self perception they come to accept that position as their own

Question 8

Evaluation of types of conformity and explanations for conformity: Research support for normative influence

Answer 8

• US research has shown the relationship between peoples normative beliefs and the likelihood of them taking up smoking
• Linkenback and Perkins 2003 found that adolescents exposed to the simple message that the majority of their age peers did not smoke were less likely to take up smoking
• used to influence how people behave when saving energy Schultz et al 2008 found that a hotel guests exposed to the normative message that 75% of guests reused there towels each day rather than using a new tail, they reduced their own towel usage by 25% - support the aim that people shape there behaviour out of a desire to fit in with their reference group

Question 9

Evaluation of types of conformity and explanations for conformity: Research support for informational influence

Answer 9

• some studies have demonstrated how exposure to other peoples beliefs have an important influence on social society
• Wittenbrink and Henly 1996 - found participants exposed to negative information about African Americans and were led to believe that they were the opinion of the majority, later reported more negative beliefs about a black individuals
  Fein et al 2007 - demonstrated how judgements of candidate performance in US presidential debates could be influenced by knowledge of others reactions - participants saw what was supposedly the reaction of their fellow participants on screen during the debate and produced large shifts in participants judgements of the candidates performance

Question 10

Evaluation of types of conformity and explanations for conformity: Normative influence may not be detected

Answer 10

• research on conformity has led to the conclusion that normative influence has a powerful effect on the behaviour of the individual
• researchers have began to wonder whether the individuals do recognise behaviour of others as a casual factor in their own behaviour
• Nolan et al 2008 - investigated whether people detected the influence of social norms on their energy conservation behaviour
• when asked about what factors effected there social influence behaviour they believed that the behaviour of neighbours had the least impact on their own energy conservation - results showed it had the strongest

Question 11

Evaluation of types of conformity and explanations for conformity: Informational influence is moderated by type of task

Answer 11

• features of the task moderately impact the majority of influences
• some material can be established within the realm of physical reality - deciding whether a town in a county is the highest populated
• however judgements cannot be made using objective criteria, e.g deciding whether the town is the most fun in the county - made on the basis of social consensus - majorities exert greater influence on issues of social rather than physical reality

Question 12

Describe the procedures Asch’s study (Variables affecting conformity)

Answer 12

• 1956
• asked volunteers to take part in a visual discrimination task, but unknown to the volunteer all but one of the participants were confederates
• 123 US male undergraduate participants were tested.
• asked to look at 3 lines of different lengths
• took turns to call out the line that was the same length as a standard line with the real participant always answering second to last
• for 12 of the 18 trials the confederates were instructed to give the same incorrect answer
• Asch was interested to see if they would all give the same incorrect answer

Question 13

Describe Asch’s findings (Variables affecting conformity)

Answer 13

• on 12 critical trials the average conformity rate was 33%
• discovered individual differences in conformity rates - one quarter of the participants never conformed on any of the critical trials, half conformed of 6 or more of the critical trials and one in 20 conformed on all of the 12 trails
• to confirm that the lines were unambiguous he conducted a control condition without the distraction of the confederates - participants made mistakes about 1% of the time
• when Asch interviewed his participants afterwards he discovered that the majority of participants continued to privately trust there own views but changed there public behaviour to avoid disapproval from the group

Question 14

What are the variables that affect conformity (Variables affecting conformity)

Answer 14

• Group size
• The unanimity of the majority
• The difficulty of the task

Question 15

Describe how group size affected Asch’s findings

Variables affecting conformity

Answer 15

• Asch found very little conformity when the majority was just 1 or 2 confederates
• however under the pressure of a majority of three confederates the proportion of conforming responses jumped up by 30%, when the majority was further increased the level of conformity did not increase
• size is influencing but only to a point
• Campbell and Fairey 1989 - suggested that the group size may have a different effect depending of the type of judgement being made and the motivation
• when there is no objectively correct answer the subject may want to fit in and be part of the majority
• but when there is a correct answer the individual is concerned about being correct so the views of others will be sufficient

Question 16

Describe how the unanimity of the majority affected Asch’s findings
(Variables affecting conformity)

Answer 16

• in Asch’s original study the confederates unanimously gave the same wrong answer
• when the real participant was given the support of another real participant or confederate then the conformity rates drops from 33% to 5.5%
• if the confederate gave an answer that was different from the rest and the true answer then conformity rates dropped to 9%
• breaking the unanimity of the majority was the major factor in conformity reduction

Question 17

Describe how the difficulty of the task affected Asch’s findings
(Variables affecting conformity)

Answer 17

• one variation made in differences between the line lengths much smaller so the task was more difficult
• under these circumstances the conformity increased
• Lucas et al 2006 - investigated this further and found that the influence on task difficult is moderated by the self efficiency of the individual
• when exposed to maths problems high self - efficacy participants who were confident in there own abilities were more independent than low self-efficacy participants even under conditions of high task difficulty
• shows situational differences and individual differences

Question 18

Evaluation of variables affecting conformity: Asch’s research may be a “child of its time”

Answer 18

• research took place in a particular period of US history therefore findings may be unique
• in 1956 US was in an anti-communist period when people were scared to go against the majority so are more likely to conform
• Perrin and Spencer 1980s, tried to repeat Asch’s findings and study using students who were studying science and engineering - in initial study they one obtained one conformity out of 396 trials
• then they used youths on probation and probation officers and found similar levels of conformity by those such as Asch
• conformity due to the likely of preconceived costs of not conforming

Question 19

Evaluation of variables affecting conformity: Problems with determining the effect of group size

Answer 19

Bond 2005 - suggests a limitation of research in conformity is that studies have only used a limited range of majority sizes

• 3 may not be a sufficient number for maximal influence, but subsequent studies have used the number 3
• Bond points out that no other study has used a majority greater than 9 and majority sizes used are much narrower between 2 and 4
• suggest we know very little about majority sizes

Question 20

Evaluation of variables affecting conformity: Independent behaviour rather than conformity

Answer 20

• two thirds of the participants stuck to the right answer despite an overwhelming majority
• Asch study showed that human beings have a tendency for participants to stick to what they believe in the correct judgement

Question 21

Evaluation of variables affecting conformity: unconvincing confederates

Answer 21

• difficult for the confederates to act convincingly when giving the wrong answer - low validity
• Mori and Arai 2010 - overcame the confederate problem where participants wore glasses with polarising filters - 4 of the group wore identical glasses whereas one wore a different pair of glasses with a different filter therefore were judging a different line from the rest
• female participants closely matched the findings of Asch’s study although not the male participants showing that the confederates did act convincingly

Question 22

Evaluation of variables affecting conformity: cultural differences in conformity

Answer 22

• research suggests that there are important cultural differences in conformity and we may experience different results depending on the culture that the study takes place in
• Smith et al 2006 - analysed the results of Asch type studies across different cultures
• average conformity rate across different cultures was 31.2%
• individualist cultures - this was 25% conformity rates
• collectivist cultures - this was 37% rate - viewed more favourably as a social guide which binds communities together

Question 23

Describe the procedure of Haney et al 1973

Answer 23

• Mock prison set up in the basement of the psychology department at standard university in California
• Male students were psychologically and physically screened, and 24 of the most stable of these were randomly assigned to play role of prisoner or guard
• Prisoners were unexpectedly arrested at home and then they were put through a delousing procedure and given uniform and ID number, the guards referred to them as there ID number
• Prisoners were allowed certain rights these were 3 meals and 3 supervised toilet trips a day and two visits per week
• Participants who were give the role of the guard was given uniforms, clubs, whistles and wore reflective sunglasses in order to remove eye contact
• Zimbardo took the role of prison superintendent

Question 24

Describe the findings of Haney et al 1973

Answer 24

• Over the first few days the guards grew tyrannical and abusive towards the prisoners – woke prisoners up in the night and forced them to clean toilets with there bare hands as well as carry out other degrading activities
• Guards were so enthusiastic they volunteered to do extra hours without pay
• Pariticipants forgot that it was a psychological study and they were acting even when they were unaware that they were being watched they still acted in their roles
• When one prisoner had enough he asked for parole and not to leave the study
• Five prisoners were released early due to there extreme reactions which appeared only after two days
• The study was terminated after 6 days following the intervention of postgraduate student Cristiana Maslcach who reminded the researchers that this was a psychological study and this did not justify the abuse being meted out to the participants
• The study demonstrated that both gaurds and prisoners conformed to there social rules
• The guards became increasingly sadistic and prisoners became increasingly passive and accepting of their plight

Question 25

Describe the procedure of Reicher and Haslam 2006

Answer 25

- Randomly assigned men to the role of guard or prisoner and examined there behaviour within a specially created prison - 15 male participants were divided into five groups of 3 people who were matched as possible on key personality variable and from each group of 3 one person was randomly assigned to be guard and other two prisoners it was supposed to run for 8 days

Question 26

Describe the findings of Reicher and Haslam 2006

Answer 26

- Participants did not conform automatically to there assigned role - Prisoners increasingly worked as a group to challenge the authority of the guards and establish as more egalitarian set of social relations within the study - Guards failed to identify with there role which made them reluctant to impose their authority on prisoners - Lead to a shift of power and collapse f the prisoner – guard system

Question 27

Evaluation of conformity to social roles: Conformity to social roles in not automatic

Answer 27

- Zimbardo believed the guards sadistic behaviour was an automatic consequence of embracing their role and suppressed the ability to realise what they were doing was wrong - There were a few good guards these did not degrade or harass the prisoners and did small favours for them this should that the guards chose how to behave rather than completely conforming – Haslam and Reicher 2012

Question 28

Evaluation of conformity to social roles: The problem of demand characteristics

Answer 28

- Banuazizi and Movahedi 1975 – argued that the behaviour of Zimbardo’s guards and prisoners was not due to their response to a compleeing prison environment but a response to powerful demand characterstic in the experimental situation - The particiapants guessed how the researchers wanted them to behave - [resented the details of the SPE experimental procedure to a large sample of students who had never heard of the study they guessed that the role was to show the ordinary people assigned to guards and prisoners would behave like them - Predicted that the guards would behave hostile and the prisoners would be passive

Question 29

Evaluation of conformity to social roles: Were these studies ethical

Answer 29

- Zimbardos studied was considered ethical as it followed the lines of Standford University ethics committee that had approved it, for example there was no deception and particpants were told in advance that some of there rights would be suspended - Zimbardo acknowledges that his study should have been stopped earlier because so many participants were experiencing emotional distress – carried out debriefing sessions for years afterwards and concluded that there were no lasting effects - Reicher and Haslam’s study used same set up as Zimbardo but had greater measures to protect participants from harm

Question 30

Evaluation of conformity to social roles: SPE and its relevance to Abu Ghraib

Answer 30

- Zimbardo argues that conforming to a social role in SPE was evident in Abu Ghraib, a US prison in Iraq were American soldiers tortured and abused Iraqi prisoners in 2003 and 2004 - The guards who committed to the abuses were victims of situational factors that made abuse more likely for example lack of training, boredom, no accountability to higher authority, opportunity to misuse power associated with the assigned role of guard led to prisoner abuses

Question 31

Evaluation of conformity Zimbardos conclusion

Answer 31

- Zimbardo’s conclusion from SPE was that people descend into tyranny as they conform unthinkingly to the roles that authority prescribe without the need for specific orders - Brutality of the guards is a natural consequence of being allocated the role of guard and asserting the power associated with that role - Reicher and Haslam reject the idea that group behaviour is mindless and tyrannical, and the BBC prison study suggest the way in which members of strong groups behave upon the norms and values associated with their specific social identity

Question 32

Describe the Procedures of Milgram's 1963 study (Situational variables affecting obedience)

Answer 32

- 40 participants at a time over a series of conditions, each varying some aspect of the situation to calculate its effect on obedience - told it was a study about how punishment effected learning - two experimental confederates - an experimenter and a 47 year old male who was introduced as another volunteer participant - the real participant was always the teacher and the confederate volunteer participant was the learner - teacher tested the learner on his ability to remember word pairs, every word they got wrong the teacher had to administer an electric shock, this was increased every time more word pairs were wrong - continued to 450 volts - the learner gave fake shock reactions until 300 volts when he pounded on the wall and did or said nothing - if the teacher wanted to stop - the experimenter told them that they had to continue by saying you have no other choice or it is absolutely essential that you continue

Question 33

What did Milgram find

Answer 33

- asked psychiatrists, college students and colleagues to predict how long participants would go on for before refusing to continue - they predicted that very few would go beyond 150 volts and 1 in 1,000 would administer 450 volts - however 26 of the 40 participants continued to the 450 volts despite shock generator being labelled danger serve shock at 420 and XXX at 450 - all participants went to 300 with only 5 stopping there, this is the point where the learner first objected

Question 34

What are the situational factors in obedience

Answer 34

- proximity - location - the power of the uniform

Question 35

Describe proximity as a situational factor in obedience

Answer 35

- in proximity study both the teacher and learner were seated in the same room - obedience levels fell to 40% as the teacher was now able to experience the learners anguish - in more extreme cases the teacher had to force the learners hand on a shock plate - touch proximity and obedience levels dropped to 30% - when the experimenter left the room and gave instructions over the telephone obedience levels dropped with only 21% continuing to the maximum shock level - some of the participants only gave the weak shock level and told the experimenter that they were following instructions

Question 36

Describe locations as a situational factor in obedience

Answer 36

- studies conducted in psychology lab in Yale uni - location of the study gave them confidence in the integrity of the people involved - would not have shocked the learner if they were somewhere else - Milgram moved the study to run down office in Bridgeport when no obvious affiliations with Yale, and the rate of obedience dropped slightly but not significantly with 48% delivering 450 volts

Question 37

Describe the power of the uniform as a situational factor in obedience

Answer 37

- research has shown that uniforms have a powerful effect on obedience as they are recognisable as authority - Bushman 1988 - carried out a study where a female researcher dressed either as a police style uniform, business executive or beggar stopped people in the street and told them to give change to a male researcher for a expired parking meter - in uniform 72% obeyed whereas obedience rates were much lower when she was dressed as a business executive 48% or as a beggar 52% - when interviewed later people said that they obeyed the woman in uniform because she had authority

Question 38

Evaluation of situational variables effecting obedience: Ethical issues

Answer 38

- Milgram's study was critiscised by other psychologists such as Diana Baumrind for his lack of concern for the well being of his research participants - hid the true reasoning of the research topic, - made it impossible for participants to give there consent on taking part in the study - although Milgram claims that participants were free to leave at any time prods from the experimenters made it hard to leave as participants thought they had no choice but to continue

Question 39

Evaluation of situational variables effecting obedience: Internal validity: a lack of realism

Answer 39

Orne and Holland 1968 - claimed participants in psychological studies have learned to distrust experimenters because they know that the true aim of study is disguised - in Milgram's study the participant remained calm and distant even though the other participant/confederate was crying out in pain so they must have known that the other participant was ok - Perry 2012 discovered that many of Milgrams participants had been sceptical of whether the participants were actually being shocked or not - Milgram's research assistant divided the participants into those who believed that the shocks were real and those who had doubts, the first group were less likely to give anything more than low shocks

Question 40

Evaluation of situational variables effecting obedience: Individual differences: the influence of gender

Answer 40

- underestimated the importance of individual differences in obedience - commonly held assumption is the idea that woman are more susceptible to social influences then men, therefore there would be gender differences - Milgram had one condition in which the participants were female and he found self reported tension in females who went to max shock level was higher than for men but there rate of obedience was the same for males in a comparable condition

Question 41

Evaluation of situational variables effecting obedience: External validity: the obedience alibi

Answer 41

Mandel 1998 - challenges obedience research as an explanation of real life atrocities - there not borne by real life events - 1942 the reserve police battalion 101 in Poland received orders to carry out mass killings of jews, the commanding officer made an offer to the men that anyone who did not feel up to it could be assigned other duties, despite the presence of factors to increase defiance such as close contact to their victims only a small few disobeyed and the rest carried out there orders

Question 42

Evaluation of situational variables effecting obedience: Historical validity: would the same thing happen today?

Answer 42

- Blass 1999 - carried out a statistical analysis of all of Milgrams obedience experiments and studies conducted between 1961 and 1985 - correlational analysis relating each study's year of publication with the level of obedience found and found no relationship whatsoever - Burger 2009 - found levels of obedience almost identical to the ones conducted by Milgram 46 years earlier

Question 43

What is the agentic state | Agentic State and Legitimacy of Authority

Answer 43

This is when a person sees himself or herself as an agent for carrying out another persons wishes

Question 44

Describe the agentic state | Agentic State and Legitimacy of Authority

Answer 44

- the obedient individual likes to see themselves as not being responsible for their own actions instead they pass on responsibility to a figure of authority - the process of shifting the responsibility of ones actions is called an agentic shift, this is when one moves from seeing themselves responsible for their actions and into an agentic state to where they see themselves carrying out another persons wishes - shown by milgram

Question 45

Describe self image and the agentic state | Agentic State and Legitimacy of Authority

Answer 45

one explanation of why people adopt an agentic state is the need to maintain a positive self image - if the person sees themselves as responsible they will evaluate the consequences but once they move into the agentic state they no longer evaluate the consequneces as they are no longer responsible for the action - they see this as being guilt free

Question 46

Describe binding factors and the agentic state | Agentic State and Legitimacy of Authority

Answer 46

There are factors which keep them binded to the agentic state - social etiquette - this is when the participant or person fears that if he breaks off he will appear arrogant and rude so binds them to obedience

Question 47

What is the legitimacy of authority | Agentic State and Legitimacy of Authority

Answer 47

a person who is perceived to be in a position of social control within a situation

Question 48

Describe the legitimacy of authority | ( Agentic State and Legitimacy of Authority)

Answer 48

- the first condition needed for a person to shift into the agentic state is the perception of a legitimate authority - this is a person perceived to be in a position of social control Milgram - he believed that the power of legitimate authority stems not from any personal characteristics but his or her perceived positon in a social situation

Question 49

Legitimacy of Authority: the definition of the situation | Agentic State and Legitimacy of Authority

Answer 49

- although it is the participant himself who performs the action he allows the authority figure to define its meaning - for example the suffering of the learner convinces the teacher that they should quit but the authority figure the experimenter orders hum to continue reassuring the participant that the learner is not hurt

Question 50

Legitimacy of Authority : requires a institution | Agentic State and Legitimacy of Authority

Answer 50

- to be properly accepted they must occur in some kind of institution, but this does not have to be reputable or distinguished - it is the category of institution rather than its relative status within that category that causes participant to obey e.g scientific lab