Social Influence

• Variables Investigated by Asch

  1955 extended his baseline study to investigate variables that might influence conformity

  Group size

  Unanimity

  Task difficulty
• Variables Investigated by Asch - Group Size

  Varied number of confederates from 1 to 15

  Curvilinear relationship between group size and conformity rate 

  3 confederates, conformity to the wrong answer rose to 31.8%

  Presence of more confederates made little difference and soon levelled off
• Variables Investigated by Asch - Unanimity

  Introduced another confederate who disagreed with the other confederates

  In one variation they agreed with the confederates and another they disagreed

  Genuine participant conformed less often in the presence of a dissenter

  Rate decreased to less than a quarter of the level it was when the majority was unanimous

  The participant acted more independently regardless of whether the dissenter disagreed with them
• Variables Investigated by Asch - Task Difficulty

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

  Making it harder for the genuine participant to see the difference

  Asch found conformity increased

  The situation is more ambiguous when it is unclear so participants look to others for guidance

  Informational social influence
• Asch's Baseline Procedure

  1951

  Procedure to assess to what extent people will conform to the opinion of others even when a situation is certain

  123 American male participants tested each in a group with confederates

  They saw two large white cards on each trial

  The line X on the left hand side is the standard line and ABC were comparisons

  One of the comparison lines is the same and the other two are substantially different

  On each trial the participant had to verbally say which of the comparison lines was the same length as X

  They were tested in groups of 6 to 8

  Only one a genuine participant

  Always seated last or next to last

  All the rest confederates who gave the same scripted answers

  Participants agreed with confederates incorrect answers 36.8% of the time

  25% of the participants never gave a wrong answer, so they never conformed

  Knew it was a study, demand characteristics, no real consequences
• Types of Conformity

  Kelman 1958

  Internalisation - 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 if the group is absent

  Identification - 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 believes

  Compliance - A superficial and temporary type of conformity where we outwardly go along with the majority view but privately disagree with it, only lasts as long as the group is monitoring us
• Explanations of Conformity

  Deutsch and Gerard 1955Two-process theoryInformational Social Influence (ISI) - need to be right, cognitive process, permenant change in opinion/behaviour (internalisation), if majority gives one answer they seem more likely to be rightNormative Social Influence (NSI) - need to be liked, norms regulate the behaviour of groups and individuals, people prefer to gain social approval than appear foolish and be rejected, emotional process, temporary change in opinion/behaviour (compliance), may be more pronounced in stressful situations as people have a greater need for social support
• Stanford Prison Experiment 

  Zimbardo et al. 1973

  Wanted to understand why prison guards behave brutally

  Based on Norma Jean Orlando's study of 1973

  Mock prison in Stanford University's psychology department

  21 male students

  Volunteers

  Tested as emotionally stable

  Randomly assigned as prison guards or prisoners

  Encouraged to conform to social roles

  Uniforms caused de-individuation 

  Prisoners uniform:

  Loose smock

  Cap to cover hair

  Identified by number

  Guards uniform:

  Wooden clubs

  Handcuffs

  Mirror shades
• Zimbardo's Findings

  Guards enthusiastic, increasingly identified with role, brutal and aggressive

  Within 2 days prisoners rebelled, ripped uniforms, shouted, swore, guards retaliated with fire extinguishers

  Divide and rule tactic

  Played prisoners against each other

  Harassed prisoners constantly to remind them of their powerlessness

  Frequent headcounts, sometimes at night, prisoners stand in a line and numbers called out

  Created opportunities to enforce rules punishments

  After the rebellion prisoners became subdued, depressed and anxious

  One prisoner released because he showed signs of psychological disturbance

  2 prisoners released on the 4th day

  One prisoner went on a hunger strike, guards tried to force-feed and punish him by putting him in 'the hole'

  Ended after 6 days instead of the intended 14

  1/3 brutal, fair, sympathetic (offered cigarettes, reinstated privileges)

  Overstated conformity and minimised dispositional factors
• Zimbardo's Conclusions

  Social roles have a strong influence on individual's behaviour

  Guards became brutal Prisoners became submissive

  Roles were easily taken on by participants

  Volunteers who came in to perform specific functions too

  Behaved as if they were in a prison rather than a psychological study
• 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

  Milgram's interest sparked by Eichmann's trial in 1961 for war crimes

  In charge of Nazi death camps

  Defence was he was only obeying orders
• Agent

  Someone who acts for or in place of another, they experience high anxiety when they realise what they're doing is wrong but have no power to obey
• Autonomous State

  Opposite of agentic state whereby we are free to behave according to their own principles and feels a sense of responsibility to our actions
• Agentic shift

  The shift from autonomous state to agentic 

  Milgram (1974) says this occurs when someone else is perceived as an authority figure, the authority figure has greater power as they have a higher position in the social hierarchy
• Binding factors

  Aspects of the situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effect of their behaviour and thus reduce the 'moral stain' they are feeling

  People remain in the agentic state because of these
• Legitimacy of Authority

  We are more likely to obey people who we perceive to have authority over us, the authority is justified by the individual's position of power within a social hierarchy

  Authority is legitimate because it is agreed by society

  Some people are granted the power to punish others

  Learn acceptance of legitimate authority from childhood

  Charismatic and powerful leaders can use power for destruction

  Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot
• Adorno et al.'s Research - Procedure

  1950

  More than 2000 middle-class white Americans 

  Unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups

  Researchers developed several measurement scales including the F-scale used to measure the nine dimensions of authoritarian personalities

  Fascism essence of the Authoritarian Personality

  Rate their agreement with each item on a 6-point scale ranging from 1 to 6

  'The businessman and the manufacturer are much more important to society than the artist and the professor'

  'Science has its place, but there are many important things that can never be understood by the human mind'

  'Every person should have complete faith in some supernatural power whose decisions he obeys without question'

  'Nobody ever learned anything really important except through suffering'

  'Homosexuals are hardly better than criminals and ought to be severely punished'
• Situational Variables

  Features of the immediate physical and social environment which may influence a person's behaviour, opposite of dispositional variables

  Milgram carried out large numbers of variations in order to consider situational variables that might affect obedience

  Proximity

  Location

  Uniform
• Proximity

  The physical closeness or distance of an authority figure to the person they are giving an order to, also refers to the physical closeness of the Teacher to the victim in Milgram's studies

  In the baseline study the Teacher could hear the Learner but not see him

  Teacher and learner in the same room, obedience dropped from original 65% to 40%

  Touch proximity variation the Teacher had to force the Learner's hand onto an electroshock plate when he refused to answer a question, obedience dropped to 30%

  Remote instruction variation, Experimenter left the room and gave instructions to the Teacher by telephone

  Obedience reduced to 20.5%, participants frequently pretended to give shocks

  Decreased proximity allows people to psychologically distance themselves from the consequence of their action

  When physically separate the Teacher was less aware of the harm they were causing so more obedient
• Location

  The place where an order is issued, the relevant factor that influences obedience is the status or prestige associated with the location

  Variation of Milgram's experiment in a run-down office block rather than prestigious Yale university setting of the baseline

  Obedience fell to 47.5%

  Prestigious university environment gave Milgram's study legitimacy and authority

  More obedient in this location because they perceived that the Experimenter shared this legitimacy and obedience expected

  Obedience quite high in the office block because the participants perceived the scientific nature of the procedure
• Uniform

  People in positions of authority often have a specific outfit that is symbolic of their authority, this indicates that they are entitled to expect our obedience

  In baseline Experimenter wore a grey lab coat as a symbol of his authority

  In one variation Experimenter called away because of an inconvenient telephone call at the start of the procedure

  Role of experimenter taken over by an 'ordinary member of the public' (confederate) in every day clothes

  Obedience lowest of any variation, 20%

  Uniforms encourage obedience because they widely recognised symbols of authority

  We accept that someone in a uniform is entitled to expect obedience because their authority is legitimate
• Milgram's Baseline Procedure

  1963

  Assess obedience

  40 US males aged 20-50 from Connecticut

  Newspaper advert and paid $4.50

  Introduced to other participant (confederate)

  Fixed draw for teacher and learner

  Learner 'Mr Wallace' strapped into a chair and wired up with electrodes

  Teacher (participant) given small shock to experience

  Learner had to remember pairs of words and each time he got it wrong the fake shock became more powerful

  Teacher pressed switches in a different room (hear not see confederate), labelled slight shock to danger - severe shock

  Shocks increased by 15v up to 450v

  300v Learner pounded on the wall and then silent, 315v pounded again, silent for the rest

  Experimenter (confederate in grey lab coat) used 4 standard props to keep the Teacher going:

  'Please continue'

  'The experiment requires you continue'

  'It is absolutely essential you continue'

  'You have no other choice, you must go on'
• Milgram's Baseline Findings

  Every participant delivered all the shocks up to 300v

  12.5% (5 participants) stopped at 300 volts (intense shock)

  65% continued to highest level 450v

  Also collected qualitative data including observations of signs of extreme tension, sweat, trembling, stutter, bite their lips, groan and dig their fingernails into their hands, 3 had full blown uncontrollable seizures

  Before the study Milgram asked 14 psychology students to predict behaviour

  Estimated more than 3% of the participants would continue to 450v

  Findings underestimated

  All participants in the baseline study were debriefed and assured their behaviour was entirely normal

  Sent a follow up questionnaire, 84% glad they participated

  Conducted further studies to investigate certain factors that encouraged obedience
• Code of Ethics and Conduct

  British Psychological Society

  Following Milgram and Zimbardo

  Frequently updated ethical guidelines

  Participants right to withdraw from research

  Need to get fully informed consent from the participants

  Use of deception

  Importance of protecting participants from the risk of psychological and physical harm
• Authoritarian Personality and Obedience

  A type of personality especially susceptible to obeying people in authority, they are also thought to be submissive to those of higher status and dismissive of inferiors

  Theodor Adorno and colleagues wanted to understand antisemitism

  High obedience is a psychological disorder

  Disorder is the person not the situation, dispositional explanation

  View society as weaker than historically and we need strong and powerful leaders to enforce traditional values so more likely to obey source of authority

  Authoritarian personality show contempt for those inferior social status

  Fuelled by inflexible outlook on the world, black and white

  Uncomfortable with uncertainty

  Those that are 'others' are responsible for the ills of society

  Other people are a convenient target for authoritarians who are likely to obey orders from authority figures even when they are destructive
• Origins of the Authoritarian Personality

  Adorno believed the Authoritarian Personality type forms in childhood mostly as a result of harsh parenting

  Strict discipline, an expectation of absolute loyalty, impossibly high standards, severe criticism of perceived failings and conditional love

  Childhood experiences create resentment and hostility in a child

  Child cannot express these feelings directly against their parents because they fear punishment

  Fears are displaced onto others they perceive as weaker, scapegoating

  Explains how hatred towards socially inferior or social groups is a central feature of obedience to a higher authority

  Psychodynamic explanation
• Resistance to Conformity

  Social support

  Asch's research showed confederate dissenting whether right or wrong decreased conformity

  Confederate model of independent behaviour

  Shows majority no longer unanimous
• Resistance to Obedience

  Social support

  Milgram's research, in a variation the rate of obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when the genuine participant was joined by a disobedient confederate

  Participant may not follow disobedient person's behaviour but the other person's disobedience as a model of dissent which frees them to act from their own conscience

  Disobedient model challenges the legitimacy of the authority figure making it easier for the others to disobey
• Locus of Control

  Julian Rotter (1966)

  Refers to the sense we each have about what directs events in our lives

  Internal control - things that happen to them are largely controlled by themselves

  External control - believe things that happen are outside their control

  Scale with internal and external either end of the continuum
• Social Support

  The presence of people who resist pressures to conform or obey can help others do the same, they act as models to show resistance to social influence is possible
• Dispositional Explanation

  Any explanation of behaviour that highlights the importance of the individual's personality, often contrasted with situational explanations
• Adorno et al.'s Research - Findings

  People with authoritarian learnings identified with 'strong' people and were generally contemptuous of the 'weak'

  Very conscious of status and showed extreme respect, deference and servility to those of higher status (traits of obedience)

  Authoritarian people had a cognitive style where categories of people are distinct (black and white thinking)

  Fixed and distinctive stereotypes about other groups

  Strong positive correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice
• Massacre at My Lai

  Milgram's findings used to explain the notorious war crimes at My Lai in 1968 during the Vietnam War

  As many as 504 unarmed civilians were killed by American soldiers

  Women were gang-raped and people shot down as they emerged from their homes with their hands in the air

  Soldiers blew up buildings, burned the village and killed all the animals

  Only 1 soldier faced charges and was found guilty, Lt William Calley

  His defence was he was only doing his duty by following orders
• Obedience

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

  The person issuing the order is usually a figure of authority who has the power to punish when obedient behaviour is not forthcoming
• Abu Ghraib

  From 2003/4

  United States Army Military Police personnel committed serious human rights violations again Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad

  Prisoners were tortured, physically and sexually abused, routinely humiliated and some were murdered

  Remarkable similarities between guards in Stanford Prison Experiment and personnel at Abu Ghraib
• Social Roles

  The parts people play as members of various social groups, these are accompanied by expectations we and others have of what is appropriate behaviour in each role
• Minority Influence

  A form of social influence in which a minority of people persuades others to adopt their beliefs, attitudes or behaviours, leads to internalisation or conversion, in which private attitudes are changed as well as public behaviours

  Moscovici studied this process in his 'blue slide, green slide study'

  3 factors make people think about the minority view and cause: consistency, commitment and flexibility

  Conversion deeper processing which over times if they become the majority means they are converted

  The more this happens the faster conversion, snowball effect
• Consistency

  Minority influence is most effective if the minority keeps the same beliefs, both over time and between all individuals of the minority, effective as it draws attention to the minority view

  Synchronic consistency - they're all saying the same thing

  Diachronic consistency - they've been saying the same thing for a long time

  Makes people rethink their own views
• Commitment

  Minority influence is more powerful if the minority demonstrates dedication to their position, this is effective because it shows the minority is not acting out of self-interest

  Sometimes minority engage in extreme activities to draw attention to their views

  Risk shows commitment so member then pay even more attention

  Augmentation principle
• Flexibility

  Relentless consistency can be counter-productive if it seen by the majority as unbending and unreasonable, therefore minority influence is more effective if the minority show flexibility by accepting the possibility of compromise

  Charlan Nemeth (1986)

  Consistency can be off-putting

  Minority need to be prepared to adapt their point of view and accept reasonable and valid counterarguments

  Key is to strike a balance between consistency and flexibility