Social influence

• Conformity


  a change in behaviour as a result of real or imagined pressure from other people or groups
• What is meant by "types of conformity"

  Kelman (1958) identified three types (levels) of conformity: 1) compliance, the shallowest level 2) identification, the intermediate level and 3) internalisation, the deepest level.
• Define the identification level of conformity


  At this intermediate level of conformity, we conform to the group's behaviour or ideas in order to be a part of the group. we conform because we value group membership, so we will conform even if we don't privately agree with our actions.
• Name and describe the deepest level of conformity


  Internalisation. We conform because our personal opinions have been genuinely changed to match the group. this is a permanent change in beliefs.
• Name and describe the shallowest level of conformity

  Compliance. This is when we conform because we don't want to be rejected by the group. we agree with the group publicly but keep our personal opinions. this results in a temporary change in behaviour
• Describe informational social influence (ISI)

  An explanation of conformity, ISI is when the correct answer is unclear, and we look for guidance because we want to be correct. it is linked to internalisation (deep conformity) as it results in a permanent change in beliefs.
• Describe normative social influence (NSI)

  An explanation of conformity, NSI explains conformity in cases where the individual conforms to appear "normal" because they want approval/fear rejection from the group. often results in compliance (shallow) as the behaviour is temporary.
• Give a very brief description of Aschs (1951) original research


  (7-9) fake participants (confederates) gave the wrong answer to a question on line length (the correct answer was obvious/unambiguous). asch demonstrated nsi by showing the real participants would also give the incorrect line (32% trials) due to group pressure.
• In Asch's original study, 1)how many critical trials were there? 2)what % never conformed once 3) what % conformed every time?

  1 12, 2 = 25%(suggests some people are highly resistant to social pressure), 3 = 5%(means most people will attempt to resist but eventually give in to social pressure)
• Name and briefly describe the three variations of Asch's original study.

  Group size(varied group size from 1-15), unanimity(added a dissenter confederate), task difficulty(made the line lengths closer)
• What happened to Asch's task difficulty variation? Explain why.

  Conformity increased; this is due to less certainty about what is the correct length. Therefore participants are conforming due to informational social influence(ISI) & normative social influence (NSI)
• What % of participants conformed with 1, 2 and 3 confederates(and beyond)?

  1)1 confederate - 3%, 2)2 confederates - 13%, 3)3 confederaters 33%(percentage did not rise much higher that 33% even with 15 confederates)
• What happened when the unanimity of the group was broken in Asch's study, and why?

  Conformity was reduced to 5.5% of critical trials. This is due to the participant having social support in resisting group pressure.
• Describe Perrin and Spencer's (1980) replication.


  Replication of Asch with engineering students, finding only one student conformed in 396. Suggests Asch lacks temporal validity (Cold War conformity) or engineering students are unusual.
• What type of questions did Rosander ask participants on Facebook, and what was found?

  Logic and general knowledge, participants would conform to incorrect responses. 52% conforming at least once. Conformity was higher on difficult questions demonstrating the role of ISI.
• What did Zimbardo's Standard Prison Experiment (SPE) set out to test?

  If the high level of aggression observed in American prisons is due to conformity to social roles.
• Briefly describe the method of Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE)

  Volunteers assessed as mentally stable were randomly assigned as prisoners and guards. Prisoners were given realistic arrest at home and fingerprinted, stripped, deloused and given prison uniforms with a number.Guards were given complete control along with uniforms, mirrored shades, clubs and handcuffs.
• Briefly describe the findings of Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE)

  Prisoners and guards conformed to social roles quickly; however, after two days, the prisoners revolted against their poor treatment.
• Briefly describe the conclusions of Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE)

  Situational environments (such as prisons) can radically alter the behaviour of previously stable individuals. This is due to individuals changing to conform to socially defined roles.
• How long was the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) planned to take, when was it cancelled and why?

  Planned to last l2 weeks, cancelled after 6 days, due to ethical concerns about particants mental health.participant
• Outline Reicher and Haslam's (2011) Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) replication.


  Replicated for TV (BBC), findings did not match with Zimbardo's study. Prisoners were very disobedient, and guards resisted showing authority.
• Why do studies by Zimbardo, Asch and Milgram suffer from gender bias?

  Male-centric samples. All three only used males in their study. Assuming the same results would be found with women is Beta bias. Women may have responded very differently if tested
• What does it mean to say Zimbardo played a "dual role" in the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE)?


  Zimbardo was both the head investigator and the prison superintendent; this resulted in a loss of objectivity and likely resulted in psychological harm for the participants.
• What is another explanation (not conformity to social roles) for the behaviour observed in the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE)?

  The prisoners and guards were play-acting according to TV stereotypes of prisoners and guards, so their behaviours could have been due to demand characteristics.
• Referring to the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE), what film is it claimed that the most aggressive guard may have based personality on?

  Cool hand Luke. This guard's behaviour may have been due to acting a role rather than a natural change due to the situation.
• Why does Zimbardos own data not support his claim that people perform social roles?

  Only one third of the participants assigned to be a guard displayed aggression, and the prisoners attempted a rebellion.
• What about American prisons today may mean that Zimbardo's study may have failed?

  American prisons are still as aggressive today. This means it's unlikely that the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) had any real-world impact.
• What is an alternate explanation for the aggression seen in American prisons?

  Zimbardo argues that aggression is situational due to conforming to social roles, however, the aggression may be dispositional. Violent offenders bring aggression to the prison. Also officers need to use aggression as a required method of contr
• Why is the sample in Zimbardos Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) considered a volunteer sample, and why could this be a problem?

  It is a volunteer sample because the participants saw an advertisement in the newspaper and put themselves forward. An issue with this is that volunteer samples are often not like the general population, meaning results are not generalisable.
• Zimbardo's research is considered unethical. If it was to be repeated, who would authorise a replication, and how would they decide?

  An ethics committee would need to approve such a controversial replication; they would base their decision on a cost-benefit analysis, weighing up the potential harm vs potential benefits to society.
• Define the Agentic state as an explanation for obedience.

  Agentic state: State of mind in which the individual believes they don't have responsibility for their behaviour as they are the agent of an authority figure. This allows the individuals to commit acts that they personally and morally oppose.
• Describe what happens to people in the agentic state and what the opposite state is.

  In the agentic state, they may feel discomfort because of their actions but feel they cannot resist the demands of the person in authority. The opposite is an autonomous state, where an individual's actions are free from control. Moving from one to the other is an Agentic shift.
• What historical event means the agentic state is problematic?

  The Agentic state (following orders) has been used to justify war crimes.

  For example, the Nazi who oversaw the death camps, Eichmann, claimed he only followed orders.
• How does Blass & Smitt's research support agentic state and Legitimacy of Authority?

  When shown videos of Milgram's original study, many participants also placed the responsibility for the electric shocks not with the participant, but with the authority figure.
• Define Legitimacy of Authority as an explanation for obedience.

  Individuals accept that others higher up the social hierarchy should be obeyed. There is a sense of duty to them, and these people have the right to punish others, such as the police force and criminal justice system.
• Why do people accept Legitimacy of Authority?

  Legitimacy of Authority is learnt in childhood through socialisation, for example relationships such as parent/ child, teacher/student. Most people accept that Legitimacy of Authority is needed for society to function pro
• Why is it argued that obedience is dispositional (personality), not situational?

  There are individual differences in agentic state and respect for the legitimacy of authority. E.g., in Milgram's study, 35% of participants resisted the authority of the experimenter and refused to deliver the

  450-volt shock to the "learner."
• How does Bickman's (1974) research support Legitimacy of Authority?

  Bickman (1974) demonstrated

  Legitimacy of Authority in the real world using a field study. 39% of the public would pick up litter if asked by an investigator dressed as a security guard, but only 14% if the investigator was dressed as a milkman.
• How does Milgram's (1963) research support agentic state & Legitimacy of Authority?

  The professor occupies a high level in the social hierarchy (Legitimacy of Authority). Participants often agreed to continue with shocks after the professor said he was responsible (supporting the agentic state). Also obedience dropped when the instructor had no uniform.
• Outline Milgram's original (1963) study (Method only).

  Forty males (volunteers to a

  newspaper ad) were given the role of teacher, and a confederate was given the role of "learner". Another confederate dressed as a professor instructed the participant to give electric shocks (fake ones) to the learner when they answered incorrectly. The electric shocks became more intense (15-450 volts) with each incorrect answer. If the participant (teacher) resisted, the

  "professor" encouraged them to continue with prompts.