SOCIAL INFLUENCE

• CONFORMITY

  What is majority influence?

  When a large group of people (majority) changes the behaviour,beliefs and attitudes of a smaller group

  This is usually linked to compliance
• CONFORMITY

  What is minority influence?

  When a smaller group of people (minority) changes the behaviours, beliefs and attitudes of a larger group

  This is usually linked to internalisation
• CONFORMITY

  What is Jenness' study?

  pts were asked to estimate the number of beans in a jar

  the individual estimates tended to converge to a group norm

  in ambiguous situations (not clear) you are likely to look to others for guidance as to how to behave
• CONFORMITY

  What is the norm?

  an unwritten rule about how to behave in a social group or situation that members accept as correct
• TYPES OF CONFORMITY

  What are the types of conformity?

  COMPLIANCE

  Temporarily publicly acting in accordance with the wishes or actions of others while privately maintaining our own views

  e.g. going along with others to gain their approval or avoid their disapproval

  (Low)

  
  

  IDENTIFICATION

  A moderate type of conformity where we act in the same way as a group because we value it and want to be part of it

  You may identify with someone/something about the group

  We don't necessarily agree with everything they believe

  (Mid)

  
  

  INTERNALISATION

  Privately changing views permanently

  A deep type of conformity where we take on the majority view because we accept it as correct

  (High)⁰
• EXPLANATIONS OF CONFORMITY

  How is informational social influence (the desire to be right) an explanation of conformity?

  1. individuals go along with the majority because they believe it's genuinely correct

  2. you accept that behaviour/views of others is right

  3. you can conform because you want to be right

  4. involves changing both public and private views/behaviour, and so is an example of internalisation

  5. informational social influence is most likely when:

  .the situation is new/you don't know what is right

  .ambiguous situations

  .crisis situations where a rapid decision/behaviour is needed

  .when you believe the person/the group are more of an expert than you
• CONFORMITY

  What is the Lucas et al

  . asked students to give answers to mathematical problems that were easy or more difficult

  .there was greater conformity to incorrect answers when there were difficult questions

  .this was most true for students who rated their own mathematical ability as poor

  
  

  this shows that people conform in situations where they feel they don't know the answer-they look to other people and assume they know more than us so they must be right-showing informational social influence
• EXPLANATIONS OF CONFORMITY

  What was Wittenbrink and Henleys (1996) study?

  found that pt.'s exposed to negative information about African Americans (which they were led to believe was the view of the majority) later reported more negative beliefs about a black individual
• EXPLANATIONS OF CONFORMITY

  Individual differences


  ISI does not affect everyone in the same way. For example Asch(1955) found that students were less conformist (28%) than other pt.'s (37%)

  Perrin and Spencer (1980) also found that science students showed very little conformity
• EXPLANATIONS OF CONFORMITY

  How is Normative Social Influence (the desire to be liked) an explanation of conformity?

  1.NSI is about norms-what is normal/typical behaviour for a social group.

  2.When we want to be liked by the other people in a group,we want to feel accepted by them and not be left out.

  3.Humans are social spec8es
• EXPLANATIONS OF CONFORMITY

  How has US research found a link between people's Normative beliefs and the likelihood of them taking up smoking?

  linkenbach & perkins (2003)

  found that adolescents exposed to the simple message that the majority of their age peers did not smoke were subsequently less likely to take up smoking
• EXPLANATIONS OF CONFORMITY

  How has Normative Social Influence been used successfully to manipulate people to behave more responsibly when it comes to energy conservation?

  schultz et al (2008) found that hotel guests exposed to the Normative message that 75% of guests reused their towels each day (rather than requiring fresh towels) reduced their own towel use by 25%
• VARIABLES AFFECTING CONFORMITY

  What is Aschs study and procedure and findings?

  Procedure

  .123 American male undergraduates

  .7 male students tested at one time

  .showed series of lines-1 line had to be compared to and matched to 1 out of another 3 lines

  .all but one participants were confederates who were instructed by give the same wrong answer on 12 critical trials

  .the true participant was always one of the last to answer

  
  

  findings

  .participants conformed and said the same incorrect answer as the confederates on 36.8% of the critical trials

  .25% of the participants never gave a wrong answer

  .75% conformed at least once

  .in the control trials-people made mistakes 1% of the time

  
  

  the majority of participants who conformed said they continued privately to trust their own perceptions and judgements,but changed their public behaviour, giving incorrect answers to avoid disapproval from other group members.
• VARIABLES AFFECTING CONFORMITY LEVELS

  Group size

  .Asch found very little conformity when the majority consisted of less than 3

  .When the majority go to 3, the conformity to the wrong answer jumped up to 31.8%

  .The addition of more confederates made little difference

  .This suggests that a small minority is not sufficient for influence to be exerted but also that there is no need for a majority of more than 3

  
  

  Task difficulty

  .Asch made the line-judging Task more difficult by making the stimulus line and the comparison lines more similar in length

  .He found that conformity increased under these conditions

  .As the Task was more difficult the pt's were less sure on their answers and so appeared to turn to the confederates for guidance as they assumed they were right-this shows informational social influence.

  
  

  Unanimity

  .Asch also wanted to know if the presence of another, non-conforming person would affct the real pt.'s conformity

  .He introduced a confederate who disagreed with the others-when the confederate gave the correct answer throughout the real pt.'s level of conformity dropped to only 5.5%

  .Asch concluded that if there is not a unanimous answer/behaviour then conformity will drastically reduce-the pt felt he had some support and so felt more able to go against the majority.
• What is the evaluation of Asch's study?

  -A child of its time

  In the 1950's when Asch conducted his study, the USA was very conformist so it made sense to conform to societal norms

  Society has changed since then so results may be very differen meaning asch's study is only relevant to the 1950's

  Perrin and Speencer (1980) replicated Asch's study with engineering students in the UK and only 1 conformed out of 360 trials-students may have had more confidence in measuring lines so less conformist

  
  

  -Artificial research

  .Asch's study was conducted in a lab, not a setting reflecting real life so lacked ecological validity, findings can't be generalised to real world conformity

  .Pt.'s knew they were in a research study and may have given same answer as they thought they were supposed to-results down to demand characteristics and not conformity

  
  

  -Limited application of findings

  .Asch only tested males so findings can't be generalised to females

  .Neto (1995) found that women were more conformist then men possibly due to being more concerned with social relationships

  .Men in Asch's study were all from the USA which is an individualist culture where people are concerned about themselves rather than collectivist cultures where the whole group is more important meaning findings can't be generalised

  .Bond and Smith (1996) found conformity rates are higher in collectivist cultures than in individualistic cultures

  
  

  -Ethics

  .The real pt was decieved right from the start as Asch didn't tell them the true aim of the study

  .Asch didn't tell the pt.'s the other people in the room were confederates so he decieved them
• What is the study into conformity to social roles?

  Social roles= The 'parts' people play as members of various social groups & the expectations people have of what is appropriate behaviour in each role

  
  

  Zimbardo's Stanford Prson Study

  
  

  Procedure

  .Mock prison set up in basement of Stanford University

  .Male students volunteered for study on 'prison life' and paid $15 a day. They were psychologically and physically screened and he 24 most stable were randomly selected to be either 'prisoner' or 'guard'

  .After unexpected arrest had to be put through delousing procedure and given a prison uniform and assigned a number

  .The guards only referred to the prisoners by their ID numbers throughout the study

  .The prisoners were allowed certain rights including 3 meals a day, 3 supervised toilet visits a day and 2 family visits per week

  .Participants assigned role of guard were given uniforms including clubs,whistles, and reflective sunglasses to prevent eye contact

  .Zimbardo took on the role of prison superintendent and study was planned to last for 2 weeks

  
  

  Findings

  .Over the 1st few days guards grew increasingly abusive towards prisoners- woke them up at night,force them to clean toilets with bare hands & other degrading activities

  .Some guards so enthusiastic volunteered to do extra hours without pay

  .Prisoners seemed to forget it was an experiment- still conformed to roles and unaware of being watched

  .5 prisoners released early because of extreme reactions

  .Some prisoners went on a hunger strike and some said they were experiencing psychological harm

  
  

  The study had to be stopped after 6 days

  The study clearly demonstrated that the guards and prisoners had conformed to their social roles
• What is the evaluation of Zimbardo's study?

  +Control

  .Zimbardo had some control of variables e.g. only selecting emotionally stable individuals

  .Randomly selected pt.'s so if behaviour was very different only in the roles by chance

  .Behaviour only down to pressure of situation

  .This meant Zimbardo could be more confident when drawing conclusions

  
  

  -Ethics

  .A major ethicsl issue was that Zimbardo tok on a dual role as a superintendent and a psychologist

  .This meant when a prisoner asked to be released he'd respond as a superintendent and not a psychologist

  .This created major issues with wirhdrawal and protection from harm

  
  

  -Lack of Realism/demand characteristics

  .Researchers argued pt.'s were play acting rather than conforming to roles

  .Their performances were based on stereotypes of how guards and prisoners behave

  .One guard claimed he based his role on a brutal character

  .This would also explain why prisoners rioted like real prisoners did

  
  

  However...

  .Zimbardo maintains that the situation was very real to the pt.'s

  .Data he gathered showed that 90% of prisoners conversations were about real prison life

  .Prisoner 46 expressed the view that the prison was a real one but run by a psychologist rather than a government

  .Seems the study was real to pt.s

  
  

  ​
• What are the other studies into conformity?

  Orlando(1973)

  .Set up a mock psychiatric ward in a hospital for 3 days

  .29 staff members of the hospital volunteered to be 'patients' and were held in the ward

  .Another 22 staff members were involved, but they were just asked to carry out their normal daily roles

  .It only took a little while for the 'patients' to start behaving like real patients of the hospital. It became very difficult to tell them apart from 'real patients'-they seemed to be conforming to the roles they had been given. Many showed signs of depression and withdrawal, and 6 even tried to escape from the ward.

  .After the study the mock patients reported they had felt frustrated, anxious and despairing. Some felt they had 'lost their identity', that their feelings were unimportant and that they weren't being treated as people

  
  

  The BBC Prison Study-Recher and Haslam (2006)

  -Controlled observation in a mock prison which was filmed for TV.

  -Pt.'s were 15 male volunteers who had responded to an advert-they were randomly assigned to 2 groups-5 were guards and 10 were prisoners

  -They had daily tests to measure levels of depresson,compliance with rules and stress.

  -The prisoners knew that 1 of them, chosen at random, would become a guard after 3 days.

  -An independent ethics committee had the power to stop the experiment at any time

  
  

  .The key findings was that pt.'s did not conform automatically to their assigned roles unlike in Zimbardo's sutdy

  .Over the course of the study, the prisoners increasingly identified as a group and worked collectively to challenge the authority of the guards and establish a more equal set of social relations within the prison

  .The guards also failed to identify with their role, which made them reluctant to impose their authority on the prisoners

  .This led to a shift in power and the collapse of the prisoner-guard system

  .The study was abandoned early on the advice of the ethis committee

  ​w
• What is the definition of obedience to authority?


  -A type of social influence where somebody acts in response to a figure with some type of authority

  -Made to respond in a way they wouldn't without the order
• What is the study into obedience to authority?

  Milgram (1963)

  
  

  Procedure

  -40 male teachers recruited via volunteers sample using adverts in papers

  -One person was teacher and one was learner (learner was a confederate and p.t was always a teacher)

  -Pts showed learner being strapped to electrical device-learner was in earshot not eyesight

  -Prior to start, the teacher was delivered 45V and learner commented he hoped shocks weren't too strong as he had a weak heart

  -The teacher was told to read word pairs to the learner

  -The teacher tested the learner by reading thee first word of a pair and learner had to pick next out of 4 options if answer was wrong the teacher gave the learner a shock via a generator

  -The generator was labelled with the voltage of each shock and shocks increase by 15V each time from 15-450V

  -The generator was also labelled with the intensity of each shock e.g. 15 volts=slight sock and 450 volts= XXX

  -Throughout the experiment as shocks increased so did the confederate learner's agony going from a grunt to a scream to pleas and an ominous silence

  -Whenever the teacher expressed concerns, the experimenter would say a series of prompts including 'it is absolutely essential that you continue' or 'you have no other choice you must go on'

  
  

  Findings

  . 26/40 pt (65%) went all the way to 450V

  . Al pt.'s went to at least 300V
• What is the evaluation of Milgram' study?

  +Supporting replication

  .Le jeu de la mort (the game of death) documentary about reality TV

  .pt.'s believed they were contestants for a new game show- they were paid to give (fake) electric shocks when ordered to do so by presenters to other pt.'s who were actors

  .80% of pt.'s delivered the maximum 460V and their behaviour was identical to that shown in Milgram's study

  
  

  -Low Internal Validity/lack of realism
• What are the situational variables that Milgram changed in his study?

  ​

  1. Proximity

  -the physical closeness or distance of an authority figure to the person they are giving an order to.

  
  

  .the teacher and learner were in the same rom and in this variation the obedience level dropped to 40%

  .in the more dramatic version when the teacher had to force the learners hand onto the shock plate obedience dropped to 30%

  .When the proximity or experimenter changed and he was in a different room obedience dropped to 21%

  
  

  Location

  -The place where the order is issued. The factor linked to this is the status/prestige associated with the location

  
  

  .In this variation where Milgram changed the location from the prestigious Yale University to a run-down building obedience dropped

  .In the original study at Yale University several participants remarked that the location of the study gave them confidence in the integrity of people involved, and many indicated they would not have shocked the learner if the study was conducted somewhere else

  .In this situation obedience dropped to 47.5%

  
  

  Uniform

  -People in positions of authority often have an outfit that is symbolic of their authority

  
  

  .Milgram carried out a variation in which the experimenter was called away because of an inconvenient telephone call right at the start of the procedure

  .The role of the experimenter was then taken over by a member of public (confederate) in everyday clothes rather than a lab coat and obedience dropped to 20%

  .Bushman (1988) carried out an experiment where a researcher dressed either in a 'police-style' uniform, as a business executive or as a beggar stopped people in the street and told them to give change to a male researchr for an expired parking meter

  .When in uniform 72% obeyed,48% when dressed as a business executive and 52% as a beggar.

  .When interviewed afterwards the pt.'s indicated they obeyed the woman in uniform because she appeared to have authority
• What is the Hofling et al real life obedience to authority study?

  .would a nurse intentionally do serious harm to a patient if a doctor ordered her to?

  -hofling et al had a nurse recieve a phone call from a doctor she hadn't met

  -he told her to administer a drug

  -promised to come over in 10 mins with appropriate documents

  -doctor violated several rules

  -nurse aware she would give overdose

  -21/22 nurses gave medication before nurse

  -nurses indicated orders had been given before

  -similar nurses had procedure of study described and 10/12 said they'd refuse orders
• What is agentic state as an explanation for obedience?

  *Agentic State

  -mental state where you feel no personal responsibility for our behaviour

  -as we beieve we are acting as an 'agent' for the authority figure and just carrying out their wishes

  -frees us from our demand conscience/guilt

  
  

  -common way of thinking for an obedient person is thinking they're not responsible

  -attribute responsibility to someone else particularly an authority figure

  -milgram referred shifting responsibility to someone else as agentic state

  
  

  .self-image and the agentic state

  -may assess consequences of actions on self-image

  -however once person moves to agentic state no longer affects self-image

  
  

  .Binding factors

  -socia etiquette that plays a part in regulating behaviour

  -in order to break off experiment pt has to break commitment which may seem rude which helps bind the pt to obedience
• What is the evaluation of the agentic state explanation?

  +Real life obedience

  *Lifton

  .found doctors had changed from profession of being concerned about the welfare of patients into men and women carrying out lethal experiments on prisoners

  *Staub

  .rather than agentic sate being possible for transition in doctors and carrying evil acts over a long period of time changes the way an individual thinks

  
  

  -why didn't all pts go up to 450V

  
  

  -agentic state or just plain cruel?

  .milgram detected signs of cruelety

  .zimbardos guards beame increasingly cruel even though no authority figure
• What is legitimacy of authority as an explanation for obedience?

  .Legitimacy of authority

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

  -mot likely to be of higher status than yourself

  -legitimate=real

  
  

  -many sitiations do ordinarily have a socially controlling figure

  -power of legitimate authority comes from persons percieved position in social situation not personal characteristics

  -in milgrams study pt enters with expectation someone will be in charge and experimenter fills this role

  -he does this by making introductory remarks

  
  

  .Legitimate authority requires an institution

  -must occur in an institution e.g. university/military

  -true in milgram's study as 65% obeyed in yale university

  -48% still obeyed in run down office due to fact experiment was still lab based which shows lab can still be competent place to do research
• What is the evaluation of the legitimate authority explanation?

  +Research ssupport

  *Black and Schmitt

  .showed a film of milgrams study to students and asked them to identify who was responsible for harm to learner

  .student blamed experimenter rather than pt

  .also indicated responsibility was due to legitimate authority due to top of hierarchy and status as a scientist

  
  

  +Obedience in the cockpit-a test of legitimate authority

  *tarnow

  .provided support for legitimate authroity for aviation accidents

  .studied data from a US national transportation safety board

  .where black box available and flight crew actions were contributing factor in crash

  .tarnow found excessive dependence on captains authority and expertise

  .one officer noticed captain took risky approach but did nothing as assumed captain must know

  .shows captain wasnt questioned about his training

  
  

  -Cultural differences

  .many studies show obedience rates differ per culture

  *Kilham and Mann

  .replicated milgrams study in australia

  .found only 16% went to full 450V

  *Mantell

  .found that 85% of german pts wnt to 450V

  .shows in some cultures authroity is more likely to be accepted as legitimate and entitled to demand obedience from individuals

  ​
• What are the dispositional explanations for obedience?


  *not all psychologists accept that obedience can be explained by situation/social factors

  *suspect must be role in personality for obedience

  *e.g. not all of milgrams pts obeyed in same situation so may have disobeyed because of personality

  
  

  .Dispositional Explanation

  -any explanation of behaviour that highlights importance of individuals personality

  
  

  .Authoritarian Personality

  -a type of personality adorno argued was especially susceptble to obeying people in authority

  -submissive to those of a higher status and dismissive to those inferior
• What are the causes of an authoritarian personality?

  -forms in childhood as the result of harsh parenting

  -parenting style is extremely strict discipline,expectation of loyalty,impossibly high standards,severe criticism of percieved failings

  -characterised by conditional love and affection for child depending on how they behave

  .experiences create hostility and resentment in child but can't express feelings against parents because of fear of punishment

  .fears displayed onto others percieved as weaker

  .show aggression to those with lower social status and blindly obedient
• What is the research into the authoritarian personality?

  *Adorno et al

  .investigated causes of obedient personality in 2000 middle class white americans and there unconscious attitudes to other racial groups

  .devloped scales to investigate this including potential for fascism scale (F scale) to measure authoritarian personality

  .typical questions:

  -obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues children should learn

  -a person who has bad manners,habits,and breeding can hardly expect to get along with decent people

  -young people sometimes get rebellious ideas, but as they grow up they ought to get over them and settle down

  -an insult to our honour should always be punished
• What was Adornos findings in research into the authoritarian personality?

  .Findings

  -people who scored highly on F scale identified with 'strong people' and were contemptious of the 'weak'

  -very conscious of their own and others status

  -showed excessive respect,submission and willingness to please those of a higher status

  -cognitive style where there was no 'fuziness' between categories of people, they were stereotypical towards other groups

  -strong positive correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice
• What are the authoritarian characteristics?

  -highly conventional attitudes towards sex,race and gender

  -view society as 'going to the dogs' and believe we need a strong powerful leader to enforce traditional values such as love of country,religion and family

  -everything is right or wrong, they are uncomfortable with uncertainty

  -they will obey

  ​
• What is right-wing authoritarianism?

  *Robert Altemeyer

  .identified cluster of 3 personality factors that he referred to as right-wing authoritarianism (RWA)

  .high RWA people possess 3 important personality characteristics that predispose them to obedience:

  
  

  -Conventionalism=an adherence to conventional norms/values

  -Authoritarian aggression=aggressive feelings toward people who violate these norms

  -Authoritarian Submisssion=uncritical submission to legitimate authorities
• What is the evaluation of the research into the authoritarian personality as an explanation to obedience?

  +Milgram and Elms

  *Procedure

  .carried out a follow up study using pts who previously took part in milgrams study 2 months before

  .selected 20 obedient pts who went to full 450V and 20 defiant pts who refused to continue to final shock level

  .each pt completed MMPI scale (measuring range of personality variables) and F scale to measure authoritarianism

  .pts were asked range of open questions about relationship with parents during childhood and attitude to 'experimenter' and 'learner' during participation in milgrams original study

  
  

  *Findings

  .researchers found higher levels of authoritarianism in pts classified as obedient rather than those defiant

  .found significant differences between pts classed as obedient and defiant who were consistent with authoritarian personality. e.g. obedient pts less close to fathers during childhood and more likely to describe them negatively

  .obedient pts saw experimenter in original study as more admirable than learner

  .findings suggested to elms and milgra that obedient group were higher on authoritarianism and this linked to original study

  
  

  -Education may determine authoritarianism and obedience

  .less educated are consitently more authoritarian than the well educated

  .milgram found pts with lower level of education tended to be more obedient

  .suggests instead of authoritarianism causing obedience that lack of education could be responsible for authoritarianism and obedience

  
  

  -Research is correlational

  .adorno and colleagues found significant correlation between factors such as authoritarianism and prejudice

  .however no matter how strong correlated variables are, doesn't show that 1 variable caused another (can't establish cause and effect)
• What is resistance to social influence?

  -ability of people to withstand social pressure to conform to majority/obey authority

  -ability to withstand social pressure is influenced by situational and dispositional factors

  ​
• What is conformity as a factor of social support?

  .Conformity

  -pressure to conform reduced if other people present who don't conform

  -in asch when real pt had some support less likely to conform (5.5%)

  -however in asch's research if 'non-conforming' pt starts to conform again so does real pt meaning effect of not conforming isn't long lasting

  ​
• What is Allen and Levine's study into conformity?

  -found conformity decreased when there was one dissenter on asch style study

  -occured even when dissenter wore thick glasses and said he had difficulty with vision

  -supports resistance isn't just motivated by what someone says but it enables person to be free of pressure from group
• What is obedience as a factor of social support?

  .Obedience

  -pressure to obey reduced if other person seen to disobey

  -in one of milgrams variations obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when genuine pt was joined by a disobedient confederate

  -pt may not follow disobedient persons behaviour but persons disobedience acts as a model for pt to copy as it frees themself from own conscience
• What is Gamson et als study into obedience?

  -found high levels of resistance to obedience (higher than milgrams)

  -in gamsons study pts were in groups and had to produce evidence used in court that would help an oil company run a smear campaign against manager of petrol station complaining about high oil prices

  -29/33 groups of pts (88%) rebelled and wouldn't do it

  -shows peer support/social influence is linked to resistance to obedience
• What is the locus of control as resistance to social influence?

  *Internal-resist

  .associated with belief we can control events in our life

  .what happens to them is a consequence of their own ability/effort/action

  .take responsibility for actions

  
  

  *External-will obey/conform

  .what happens is determined by external factors such as influence of other or luck/fate

  .have a sense of 'things to them and are largely out of their control'

  .take little personal responsibility