Social influence

• what are dispositional factors?

  an individual's personality determines their engagement in aggressive behaviour not their situation
• what is deindividuation?

  the pps were made to internalise their role as guards/prisoners by stripping them of their individual identity
• what was the conclusion for Zimbardo's study?

  those who played the guard role and had no predispositions for violence became aggressive due to situational factors in the prison system rather than dispositional
• what ethical limitation was there for Zimbardo's research?

  • Z failed to protect pps from psychological harm
  • pps experienced extreme stress + anxiety during the study
  • Z admitted to a conflict of interest and that when pps requested to leave he responded as a superintendent rather than a responsible researcher
  • however study was stopped early and carried out several debriefing sessions after so there was no long term harm
• what is resistance to social influence?

  ability of people to withstand the social pressure to conform to the majority or obey authority which is influenced by both situational and dispositional factors
• what is social support?

  a situational explanation which suggests the presence of allies affects resistance as non - conformity and disobedience is more likely to occur if others are seen to resist as it enables the naive pp confidence to resist too
• how does Asch's research support the theory of social support?

  P - supporting evidence

  E - prior conformity rate = 36.8% , dissenter introduced = 25%

  E - presence of ally helped naive (acted as a model to dissent) pp feel more confident in their own judgement ; making it easier to resist pressure to conform

  L - ss valid ex of resistance to conformity
• how does Milgrim's study support the theory of social support?

  P - supporting evidence

  E - pp was with 2 other confeds testing learner , one after other refused to continue delivering shocks + withdrew , obediences fell from 65% to 10%

  E - disobedient role model challenged authority of researcher by leaving = easier for pp to disobey + leave

  L - ss valid explanation of resistance to obedience
• what is locus of control?

  a persons belief about personal control over their own behaviour and the events in their lives
• what is internal locus of control (Julian Rotter)?

  • believe that they themselves are in control and responsible for the events in their lives
  • whatever happens is a consequence of their own ability and efforts
  • usually more resistant to SI (independent , self-confident = characteristics of leaders )
  • more likely to be leaders as do not seek social approval and not followers of majority
  • less dependent , more confident in their own self
• what is external locus of control?

  • individual who believes that events in their lives are out of their control as are caused by others or luck
  • less likely to take responsibility for actions and more likely to seek social approval
  • these traits = less resistant to SI than internals
• are people either or just internal or external of LOC?

  • no
  • LOC is a scale and individuals vary in their positions
• Strength of LOC as an ex for resistance of obedience:

  P - supporting evidence

  E - Holland repeated Milgrim's study and measured LOC of pps: 37% of internals didnt continue to 450V ; 23% of internals did

  E - internals showed greater disobedience to experimenter's orders as (+ definition of internal LOC)

  L - thus supports idea LOC plays role in resisting SI
• why does LOC have a limited role?

  • LOC role depends on the situation as it is based on how well an individual is able to resist SI (Rotter)
  • if you have conformed or obeyed in a specific sitch in the past chances are you WILL do so again regardless of your level of LOC
• what is minority influence?

  type of social influence where those in the minority group persuade the large group of people in the majority to change their views through internalisation so change is permanent
• what was Moscovici's aim in his study?

  to investigate the effect of consistency on minority influence
• what was Moscovici's procedure?

  • 192 females (32 groups of 6)
  • 4 pps + 2 confeds
  • shown series of blue sides
  • had to judge the colour
  • experiment condition : consistent (confeds alw said green) inconsistent (confeds alw said green 66% of time )
  • control con = all pps said what the thought , no confeds
• what were the findings of Moscovici's study?

  • consistent minority = 8%
  • inconsistent minority = 1.3%
  • control = 0.25%
• what was the conclusions of Moscovici's study?

  • minorities not very influential (Moscovici 8% vs Asch 36.8%)
  • however consistent minority more likely to be influential than inconsistent
  • change caused by minority influence is internalised
• what 3 factors did Moscovici's study show the importance of?

  1. consistency
  2. commitment
  3. flexibility
• what are the 2 types of consistency?

  Synchronic and diachronic
• what is diachronic consistency?

  they've been saying the same thing for a long time
• what is synchronic consistency?

  the minority all say the same thing
• how does consistency effect minority influence?

  the minority have to be consistent in their view in order to persuade as it makes the majority rethink their view
• how does consistency effect minority influence?

  • the minority have to demonstrate commitment to the cause/their beliefs
  • take risks to show what they believe is is worthwhile and strengthen their argument
  • augmentation principle - majority pay more attention and consider to do so
• why is flexibility important for minority influence Charlan Nemeth?

  • consistency can sometimes be interpreted negatively
  • too consistence = off putting (rigid)
  • need to be flexible and accept counter arguments
  • balance between consistency and being able to adapt their point of view
• what is the snowball effect?

  when the minority persuade more and more of the majority to convert to their point of view increasing the rate of conversion and minority becomes the majority
• Limitation of Moscovici's study:

  P - ecological validity

  E - lab with artificial task

  E - majority may have agreed as the outcome of the group decision isnt important to their everyday life

  e.g in a jury the group decision more important than minority

  L - minority influence of majority may be different in real life
• Strength for Moscovici's study:

  P - research evidence demonstrating importance of consistency

  E - Wendy Wood et at carried out meta-analysis of almost 100 similar studies + found minorities being consistent were most influential

  E - Moscovici's study showed consistent minority had a greater effect on changing views than people with inconsistent ops

  L - presenting con view is minimum requirement for minority influence
• why may minority influence not be a valid form of social influence?

  Moscovici's study, conformity due to minority influence was very low (8%) suggesting it is quite rare and not a useful or applicable concept in public (privately people agree more with minority view)
• what is social influence?

  process by which individuals and groups change each other's attitudes and behaviours
• what is social change?

  when whole societies rather than individuals adopt new attitudes , beliefs and ways of doings things
• how does Asch's research on conformity be an explanation for social change?

  when a confederate gave a contradicting answer, it broke the power of the majority and encouraged others to do likewise ; such dissent could potentially lead to social change
• how do environmental health campaigns exploit conformity processes by appealing to normative social influence?


  drawing attention to what the majority actually do to encourage change through normative messages such as ''bin it - others do''
• how does Milgrim's study demonstrate the importance of disobedient role models for social change?

  when a confederate teacher refused to give shocks to learner the rate of obedience in genuine pps plummeted
• how did Zimbardo suggest obedience can be used to create social change?

  through the process of gradual commitment as once a small instruction is obeyed it becomes more difficult to resist a bigger one as people essentially drift to a new kind of behaviour
• what are the 6 steps lead to social change?

  1. draw attention to issue - social proof prob exists as forced to consider prob once exposed to it
  2. cognitive conflict - not able to dismiss minority ; have to think more deeply
  3. consistency - make people believe its true over a period of time
  4. augmentation principle - taken more seriously when risk involved to express the view to show extent of prob
  5. snowball effect - more and more influenced until tipping point = minority become majority
  6. social crypto-amnesia - people remember change occurred but not how
• Strength of normative social influences:

  P - social influence processes bassed on psychological research do work

  E - Nolan hung messages on people's front doors every week for a month stating that they were trying to reduce their energy consumption

  E - found decrease in amount of energy people used ; purely as they thought their neighbours were doing the same

  L - conformity can lead to social change thru operation of normative social influence
• Strength of minority influence brings about social change:

  P - minority influence inspires social change

  E - Nemeth claims social change is due to type of thinking minorities inspire ; encouraging active thinking to consider more options and views rather than narrow

  E - leading to better decisions + creative solutions to societal issues

  L - dissenting minorities are valuable - stimulate new ideas and open minds in a way majorities cannot
• what does obedience mean?

  a type of social influence where a person responds to a direct order given by a perceived authority figure where they would not have normally done without the order