Social Influence

• What was Aronson's definition of conformity?

  a change in a person's behaviour or opinion as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or group of people
• What did Kelman suggest the three types of conformity are?

  internalisation

  identification

  compliance
• Define compliance

  when an individual adjusts their behaviour and beliefs to fit in and avoid rejection and disapproval of a group
• Define identification

  when membership of a group is desirable so individuals adjust their behaviour and beliefs in private and in the presence of the group
• Define internalisation

  when an individual genuinely adjusts their behaviour and their beliefs permanently to those of a group
• What was Asch's aim for his baseline procedure?

  he waste dot asses to what extent people will conform to the opinion of others, even in a situation where the answer is certain (unambiguous)
• In Asch's baseline procedure what was his method?

  • 123 American men were tested, each were in a group of 6-8 confederates
  • each participant was shown two large white cards, on one card was one line labelled X, this was the standard line
  • on the other card was three comparison lines label A,B and C, one of the comparison lines was clearly the same length as X, the other were obviously wrong
  • on each trail the participants had to say out loud which of the comparison lines was the same length as X
  • participants were tested in groups 6-8, only one was a true participants the others were confederates
• In Asch's baseline procedure, what was his baseline findings?

  • the genuine participants agreed with confederates incorrect answer 36.8% of the time (1/3 of the time they conformed)
  • 25% of participants never gave a wrong answer i.e never conformed
• What are a strength of Asch's research into conformity and how can you evaluate this?

  Research support:

  • Asch's Research is supported from other studdies for the effects of task difficulty
  • Lucas et al asked participants to solve 'easy' and 'hard' maths problems, participants where given answers from three other students (confederates), the particpnats conformed more often when the problems where harder
  • this shows Asch was correct in claiming that task difficulty is one variable that affects conformity
  • However Lucas did prove that conformity was more complex then Asch suggested as participants with high confidence in their match abilities conformed less, showing an individual - level factors can also influence conformity, Asch didn't research this factor
• What are two limitations of Ash's reproach into conformity?

  • artificial situation
  • limited application
• Evaluate why a limitation of Asch's research into conformity is the artificial situation.

  • participants knew they were in a research study and may have displayed demand characteristics
  • the task of identify lines was relatively trivial and therefore there was no reason not to conform
  • Fiske argued that 'Asch's groups where not very groupy' as they didn't resemble groups that we would experience in everyday life
  • this means the findings can't be generalised to real world situations, especially those where the consequences of conformity may be important
  • therefore the study lacks ecological validity
• Evaluate why a limitation of Asch's research into conformity is the limited application.

  • His participants where American men
  • Neto (1995) research suggests that women would be more conformist, possibly because they are moor concerned about social relationships and being accepted
  • Furthermore, the US is an individualist culture where people are more concerned about themselves than their social group. Bond and Smith conducted a similar conformity study in collectivist cultures e.g China where the group is more important than the individual, they found that conformity rates are high
  • meaning Asch's findings tell us little about conformity in women and people from other cultures, canon it to have a low population validity
• What were the three variables Asch investigated?

  • Group size
  • Unanimity
  • Task difficulty
• How did Asch investigate the effect of the group size on conformity, and what did he find?

  • he varied the number of confederated from 1 - 15
  • he found a curvilinear relationship between group size and conformity rate, conformity increased with group size but only up to a point
  • with three confederates, conformity to the wrong answer rose to 31.8%, the presence of more confederates made literal difference
  • this suggest that more people are very sensitive to the views of others because just one or two confederates was enough to sway opinion
• How did Asch investigate the effect of unanimity on conformity, and what did he find?

  • he introduced a confederate who disagreed with the other confederates, in one variation this person gave the correct answer in another he gave a different wrong answer
  • the genuine participant conformed less often in the presence of a dissenter
  • the rate decreased to less than 25% of the level it was when the majority was unanimous
  • the presence of the dissenter appeared to free the naive participants to behave more independent
  • this suggests the influence of the majority depends to a large extent on it being unanimous and non conformity is more likely when cracks are perceive in the majority's unanimous view
• How did Asch investigate the effect of the task difficulty, and what did he find?

  • 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
  • this meant it became harder for the genuine participant to see the differences between the lines
  • Asch found that conformity increased, it may be that the situation is more ambiguous when the task is harder, it is unclear to the participants what the right answer is
  • in this circumstance it is natural to look to other people for guidance and to assume that they are right and you are wrong (called informational social influence)
• What did Deutsch and Gerard develop?

  the two processes theory which argues there are two main reasons people conform, this is now used as an explanation for conformity
• What aspects make up the two process model which is used as an explanation for conformity?

  • informational social influence
  • normative social influence
• What is informational social influence?

  • When we follow the behaviour of the group (majority) because we want to be right, this is therefore a cognitive process because it is to do with what you think
  • it leads to permanent change in opinion/ behaviour (internalisation)
• What is normative social influence?

  • when a person conforms to gain social approval rather than be rejected so this is an emotional process
  • it leads to a temporary change in opinions/ behaviour (compliance)
• In what three situations is NSI most likely to occur?

  • when you are with strangers where you feel concerned about rejection
  • it may also occur with people you know because we are most concerned with the social approval of our friends
  • may be more pronounced in stressful situations where people have a greater need for social support
• What is one strength of both NSI and ISI?

  Both have research support
• Evaluate why a strength of normative social influence as an explanation of conformity is the research support.

  • Asch interviewed his participant after his experiment, some said they conformed because they felt self conscious giving the correct answer and they where afraid of disproval
  • when participants wrote their answers down in another variable of the study, conformity fell to 12.5%
  • this is because giving answers privately meant there was no normative group pressure
  • this shows that at least some conformity is due to a desire not to be rejected by the group for disagreeing with them
• Evaluate why a strength of informational social influence as an explanation of conformity is the research support.

  • Luca found that participants conformed more often to incorrect answers they were given when the maths problems were difficult
  • this is because when the poblems were easy the participants 'knew their own minds' but when the problems were hard the situation became ambiguous.
  • the participants didn't want to be wrong so relied on the answer they are given
  • this shows that ISI is a valid explanation of conformity because the results are compatible with what ISI would predict
• What is one limitation for NSI and how can you evaluate this?

  Individual differences:

  • it can not predict conformity in every case
  • some people are greatly concerns with being liked by others, these popped are called nAffiliators as they have a strong need for affiliation
  • McGhee and Teen found that students who were nAffiliators were more likely to conform
  • this shows the NSI underlies conformity for some people more than it does for others
  • there are individual difference in conformity that cannot be fully explain by one general theory os situation pressures
• What is one limitation of the explanations of conformity and how can you evaluate this?

  NSI and ISI are not mutually exclusive:

  • its often unclear if NSI or ISI is at work
  • e.g in Asch's study he found that conformity is reduced when there is one other dissenting anticipant
  • the dissenter may reduce the power of NSI because they provide social support
  • or they may reduce the power or ISI as they provide an alternative source of social information
  • both interpretations are possible, therefore a couple explanation of conformity would suggest both processes operate together in most real world conformity situations
• What inspired Philip Zimbardo to carry out the Stanford prison experiment?

  There had been many prison riots in America and Zimbardo wanted to know why prison guards behaved so brutally - he believed it could have been there social role as a prison guard
• What was the procedure for Zimbardos Stanford prison experiment?

  • a mock prison was set up in the basement of Stanford University
  • 21 out of 75 male students who had volunteered where chosen, each were tested to be emotionally stable
  • there were randomly assigned to play the role of a prisoner or guard
  • they were encouraged to conform to social roles both through uniforms and instructions about they behaviour
• In Zimbardo's procedure, how did he encourage participants to conform through uniform?

  • the prisoners were given a loose smock to wear and a cap to cover their hair
  • they were identified through numbers never names
  • the guards had their own uniform which reflected the status of their role, they where also given wooden clubs, handcuffs and mirror shades
  • these uniforms created a loss of personal identity (de-individuation) and meant they where more likely to conform to their perceived social role
• In Zimbardo's procedure, how did he encourage participants to conform through instructions given about behaviour?

  • the prisoners were further encouraged to identify with their role by several procedures e.g they had to 'apply for parole'
  • the guards were constantly reminded they had complete power over the prisoners
• What were Zimbardo's findings related to social roles?

  • the guards immediately started treating prisoners harshly
  • within 2 days the prisoners rebelled by verbally abusing the guards, who then responded with fire extinguishers
  • the guards used a divide and rule tactic by playing the prisoners of against each other
  • the guards constantly harassed the prisoners to remind them of how powerless they where e.g they would conduct headcount in the middle of the night
  • many prisoners soon became depressed and anxious, one was released as he was showing signs of psychological disturbance, on the fourth day two more where released
  • the guards started to identify more and more with their role and became increasing aggressive, because of this the study ended after 6 days rather than the intended 14
• What were Zimbardo's conclusions relating to social roles?

  • social roles have a strong infleunce on an individuals behaviour, the guards became brutal and the prisoners became submissive
  • such roles were very easily taken on by all participants
• What is one strength of Zimbardo's research into social roles and how can this be evaluated?

  Control:

  • Zimbardo and his colleagues had control over key variables
  • an obvious example of this was that the participants chosen where all emotionally stable individuals who were randomly assigned to each role
  • this was one way in which the researchers rule out individual personality differences as an explanation of the findings
  • if guards and prisoners behave very differently, but where in these roles purely by chance, their behaviour must have been due to the role
  • the degree of control over variables increases the internal validity of the study, so we can be much more confident in drawing conclusions about the influence of roles on conformity
• What are two limitations of Zimbardo's research into social roles?

  • lack of realism
  • conclusion too simplistic
• Evaluate why a limitation of Zimbardo's research into social roles is the lack of realism.

  • Banuazizi and Movahedi argues the Npartipnts were merely play-acting rather then genuinely conforming to a role
  • participants performances were based on stereotypes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave
  • this would also explain why the prisoners rioted, they thought that is what real prisoners did
  • this suggests that the findings of this experiment tell us little about conforming to social roles in actual prisons
• Evaluate why a limitation of Zimbardo's research into social roles is that the conclusion is too simplistic.

  • Fromm argues that Zimbardo exaggerated the power of the situation, he did this to influence behaviour
  • he largely ignored the role of personality factors (dispositional influenced) when really only 1/3 of guards behaved in a brutal manor, the rest were keen to apply the rules fairly and sometimes even tried to help the prisoners
  • these observations suggest that Zimbardo's conclusions that participants were conforming to social roles, may be overstated
  • the differences in the guards behaviours indicate that this explanation is too simple and that both dispositional and situational factors have to be taken into account
• What was Milgram's aim?

  to investigate how far people would obey even if it involved harming someone and to use this to understand Nazi's behaviour in WW2
• What was Milgram's baseline procedure?

  • 40 American men volunteered to take part in a study that though was testing memory , each was paid $4.50 before the study began
  • each volunteer arrived at Milgram's lab and was introduced to Mr Wallace (confederate)
  • they then drew straws to determine who would be the teacher and the learner, this was fixed so the participant was always the teacher, an experimenter was also involved (another confederate in a lab coat)
  • Mr Wallace was strapped to a chair with electrodes attached to him, each time he gave an incorrect answer the participant (teacher) gave a stronger electric shock (fake)
  • when the teacher reached 300 voltes the learner would pound on the wall and give no repose to the remaining questions
• What were the 4 prods the experimenter used to order the teacher to contuse in Milgrams baseline procedure?

  1. please continue
  2. the experiment requires that you continue
  3. its absolutely essential that you continue
  4. you have no other choice, you must go on
• What were Milgram's baseline findings?

  • every participant delivered all the shocks up to 300volts
  • 12.5% (5 participants ) stopped at 300 volts
  • 65% continued to the highest level of 450 volts
  • Milgram also collected qualitative data including observations such as the participants showing signs of extreme tensions (they would sweat, bit their lips, dig their fingernails into their hands and 3 had seizures)