social influence

• social influence is the influence of majority or minority group (conformity) or an individual (obedience) that causes a change in thinking, attitudes and behaviour
• conformity is a type of social influence where you change a belief/behaviour due to real or imagined pressure
• compliance is where you agree in public but not private and is not a permanent change

  it is usually to gain approval

  investigated by Asch line study
• internalisation is where you change your belief publicly, privately and permanently and is the deepest level of conformity

  this was studied by jennes
• identification is when you conform to meet the demands of a social role

  you change your public and private beliefs but only as long as you are part of the group

  zimbardo investigated this
• the three type of conformity are compliance, internalisation and identification, identified by Kelman (1958)
• the explanations for social influence are normative and informational
• normative social influence is where you conform to fit in, be seen as normal and avoid ridicule

  this is an emotional process and usually involved compliance
• informational social influence is where we conform to fulfil the desire to be right, so we look to others with more information

  it is a cognitive process and usually involves internalisation
• Jennes ISI and internalisation

  101 psychology students estimated how many beans (811) in a jar

  divided into groups of 3 and gave an individual and group estimate

  on average males changed their answer by 256 beans and females changed their answer by 382 beans

  this was because individuals went with the most common answer as they perceived other to be more correct
• Sherif autokinetic effect (1935)

  lab experiment where a dot of light appeared to move in a dark room

  participants asked to estimate how much it moved

  first they made individual, group and final estimates

  individual guesses varied by 20-80cm but in groups and afterwards they compromised with the most common estimate

  this shows ISI
• evaluate sherif study

  lacks mundane realism and ecological validity

  high internal validity as variables are controlled

  standardised procedures can be replicated for reliability

  the sample was males, unrepresentative so cannot generalose, low population validity
• Asch 1951 line test

  50 male students in America thought they were doing a vision test

  each participant did 18 trials, confederates gave the wrong answer on 12 critical trials

  participants conformed on 32% of critical trials, 74% conformed on at least one critical trial, 26% never conformed

  after being interviewed participants said they knew it was wrong but conformed to avoid ridicule, this shows normative social influence
• Asch used a control group with no confederates

  here less than 1% of participants gave an incorrect answer
• Asch evaluation

  unrepresentative sample so low population validity

  1950s America was conservative so research lacks temporal validity

  confederates were not convincing leading to demand characteristics

  low mundane realism, low ecological validity
• Asch group size variation used 1-15 confederates

  with 1 confederate there was 3% conformity, with 2 confederates there was 12.8% conformity, with 3 confederates there was 32% conformity

  size of majority affects conformity but at a certain level the rate will drop as participants start showing demand characteristics
• Asch did a variation where he broke the groups unanimity

  if participant has support for different belief even if incorrect, they are more likely to resist pressure to conform

  when confederate gave the correct answer throughout conformity dropped to 5%

  when confederate gave different incorrect answer conformity dropped to 9%
• Asch did a variation where the task was more difficult and line lengths were shorter

  participants looked to others as it was more ambiguous

  showed informational social influence
• evaluate explanations of social influence

  evidence to support like sherif and asch

  methodological issues with evidence

  individual differences in NSI and ISI as highly intelligent and confident less likely to conform

  ISI and NSI are interlinked so we don't know which is working when
• social role is roles people play as part of social groups

  accompanied by expectations we and others have of what is appropriate behaviour in each role
• dispositional explanation suggests behaviour is caused by internal characteristics, motives and beliefs
• the situational explanation says behaviour is caused by the external environment

  proximity, location and uniform
• Zimbardo procedure

  lab experiment on male psychology students from Stanford university

  participants volunteered and assigned guard or prisoner

  prisoners were arrested at home, stripped, deloused and given prison number as well as uniform whilst guards were given sticks and mirrored sunglasses
• zimbardo results

  guards were tyrannical and abusive, woke prisoners up in the middle of the night to clean toilets with their bare hands

  prisoners initially rebelled but gave in after becoming apathetic

  two prisoners had a nervous breakdown

  experiment called off after 6 days

  this showed conformity to social roles
• Zimbardo evaluation

  lacks population validity and ecological validity

  ethical issues of deception, protection from harm, informed consent

  researcher bias as Zimbardo played warden
• deindividuation is where you become immersed in group norms and lose sense of identity/personal responsibility
• obedience is a form of social influence where one person performs an action under the orders of someone you perceive to be an authority figure
• Milgram 1963 procedure

  40 American volunteers thought it was a punishment/learning study

  2 confederates- experimenter and learner

  learner told to remember word pairs and if incorrect teacher shocks

  shocks were at 15V intervals until 450V

  at 300V learner pounded on wall and stopped responding to further shocks, the experimenter used prods like 'it is essential to continue'
• Milgram 1963 findings

  65% did full 450V

  all went to 300V and only 5 stopped there at the first objection

  this shows people obey authority figures even if it goes against morals
• Bickman 1974 investigated obedience to uniform

  field experiment with 153 passing adult pedestrians

  3 scenarios had young white male experimenter as milkman, guard and civilian

  1. pedestrian asked to pick up paper bag due to bad back
  2. pedestrian asked for change at parking meter
  3. asked to stand at other side of bus stop due to new law
• Bickman results

  bag: 36% obeyed civilian, 64% obeyed milkman, 82% obeyed guard

  change: 33% obeyed civilian, 57% obeyed milkman, 89% obeyed guard

  bus: 20% obeyed civilian, 21% obeyed milkman, 56% obeyed guard
• Bickman evaluation

  high ecological validity

  low internal validity, lack control so cannot establish cause and effect

  bias in people approached

  cultural bias as US in individualistic

  only male authority so cannot generalise to females
• autonomous to agentic state is known as agentic shift
• autonomous state is where you take responsibility for your actions
• agentic state is where you act as an agent, allowing an authority figure to direct your actions

  you pass blame, don't perceive yourself as responsible, and experience moral strain
• agency theory suggests we are conditioned from a young age to follow rules of society and surrender some of our free will
• legitimacy of authority is where we see authority as morally right or legitimate so we are more likely to obey
• Agentic state and legitimacy of authority in Milgram's study

  the experimenter wore a white lab coat, the university was prestigious, moral strain between scientific research benefits and pain caused, shift blame to researcher and deny damage as they were told shocks 'powerful not dangerous'
• Milgram proximity variation

  people see the consequences of their actions closer

  teacher and learner in the same room: obedience dropped to 40%

  experimenter in different room: obedience dropped to 20.5%
• milgram location variation

  moved to run down office to reduce legitimacy of authority

  obedience dropped to 47.5%