Social Influence

• conformity is a change in a persons behaviour or opinions as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or group of people
• group size - asch increased the size of the group by adding more confederates, thus increasing the size of the majority. conformity increased with group size but only up to a point, stopping when the majority was more than 3
• unanimity is the extent to which all the members of a group agree. in asch’s studies the majority were unanimous when all the confederates selected the same comparison line
• task difficulty - asch’s line-judging task is more difficult when it becomes harder to work out the correct answer. conformity increased because naive participants assume that the majority is more likely to be right
• Asch Base Line Procedure:

  • 123 american men were tested
  • three comparison line and one standard line
• Asch Baseline findings:

  • pps agreed with confederates incorrect answers 36.8% of the time
  • 25% of the pps never gave a wrong answer
• Asch (1951) procedure assessed what extent people will conform to the opinion of others even when the answer is obvious
• asch (1955) extended his baseline study to investigate variables that might increase or decrease conformity
• group size - asch wanted to know if the size of the group would change conformity. he varied the number of confederates from 1 to 15. with 3, conformity rose to 31.8% but no change after 3
• unanimity - asch wanted to know if the presence of a non conforming person would affect the pps conformity. conformity decreased with a dissenter
• task difficulty - asch wanted to know if making the task harder would affect conformity. he made the stimulus line and comparison lines more similar. conformity increased
• negative - asch research’s task and situation were artificial
• negative - asch research’s pps were american men so it couldn’t be generalised
• positive - asch research is supported by other studies such as Lucas et al (2006) who asked their pps to solve easy and hard maths problems but were given answers from other students. these pps conformed more often
• Keenan (1958) suggested that there are 3 ways in which people conform
• internalisation is a deep type of conformity where we take on the majority view because we accept it as correct. change our behaviour and beliefs internally and externally
• identification is a moderate type of conformity where we act in the same way as a group because we want to be a part of it but don’t necessarily agree with it
• compliance is a temporary type of conformity where we externally go along with the majority view but privately disagree with it
• informational social influence (ISI) is when we conform to be right and have the correct information. it is a cognitive process
• normative social influence (NSI) is when we conform to fit in to the norms. it is an emotional process
• strength - NSI - there is evidence that supports it for example Asch (1951) interviewed his pps and some said they conformed because they felt self conscious
• strength - ISI - evidence to support it such as Lucas et al (2006) who found that pps conformed more to incorrect answers they were given when the problems were difficult and they wanted to be right
• limitation - NSI - it doesn’t predict conformity in every case
• Zimbardo (1973) method:

  • set up a mock prison in the basement of the psychology department at stanford university
  • 21 male students were randomly assigned to play roles
  • prison guards had uniforms and sunglasses
  • prisoners had id numbers
• Zimbardo (1973) wanted to investigate social roles
• social roles are the parts people play as members of various social groups
• findings of Zimbardos (1973) research:

  • guards were enthusiastic and brutal
  • prisoners rebelled within 2 days
  • prisoners were anxious and depressed
  • prisoners went on hunger strikes and were force fed
• conclusion of zimbardo (1973) research:

  • social roles have a strong influence
• strength - Prison experiment - zimbardo and his colleagues had control over key variables such as choosing emotionally stable individuals
• limitation - prison experiment - it didn’t have the realism of a true prison. Banuazizi (1975) said that pps were play acting on stereotypes
• limitation - prison experiment - zimbardo may have exaggerated the power of social roles to influence behaviour. 1/3 of the guards actually were brutal
• obedience is a form of social influence where an individual follows a direct order from an authoritative person
• Milgram (1963) wanted to assess obedience levels
• Milgram (1963) baseline procedure:

  • 40 american men volunteered
  • in a lab
  • pps was the teacher
  • confederated were the learner and experimenter
  • sent shocks through a wall from 15 volts to 450
• Milgram (1963) baseline procedure:

  • pps were paid 4.50 for particpating
  • were given prods from the experimenter : 1. please continue 2. the experiment requires you to continue 3. it is essential that you continue 4. you have no other choice you must go on
• Milgram (1963) baseline findings:

  • every pps delivered the shocks up to 300 volts.
  • 12.5% stopped at 300 volts
  • 65% continued to highest level of 450 volts
  • pps showed tension like sweating stuttering trembling
• before the study Milgram asked 14 psychology students to predict the pps behaviour. the students estimated that no more than 3% of the pps would go to 450 volts. all pps were debriefed and sent a questionnaire
• strength - Milgrams study - the findings were replicated in a french documentary by Beauvois et al (2012) and the results were almost identical
• limitation - milgrams study - the procedure may not have been testing what he intended to test for example Orne and Holland (1968) argued that pps were play acting
• situational variables are features of the immediate physical and social environment which may influence a persons behaviour eg proximity, location and uniform