social influence ao3

• types of social influence

  P research support for normative influence

  E perkins (2003)

  E young people exposed to a message that the majority of their same age peers did not smoke were less likely to take up smoking

  L supports the claim that people shape their behaviour on the desire to fit in
• types of social influence

  P research support for informational influence

  E henley (1996)

  E participants exposed to negative information about African - Americans later reported more negative attitudes towards black individuals

  L demonstrates the importnce of informational influence in shaping social behaviour
• types of social influence

  P normative influence might not be detected

  E nolan et al. (2008)

  E people did not recognise what factors had most impacted their energy consumption

  L whilst it can have an impact on behaviour, most people do not recognise other's influence on their behaviour
• asch's study (variables affecting conformity)

  P high internal validity

  E it was a laboratory study

  E this gave him high control over the variables, and cause and effect could be established

  L therefore, it accurately measured conformity
• asch's study (variables affecting conformity)

  P this study may be a 'child of its time

  E spencer et al. (1980)

  E repeated the study and only got one conforming response in 396 trials. conformity is only likely if perceived costs are high, as they would have been during the mccarthy era in the US

  L results lack historical validity, they are no longer applicable
• asch's study (variables affecting conformity)

  P failed to take into account cultural differences

  E smith et al. (2006)

  E analysed the results of asch - type studies across different cultures. average conformity rate in the US and Europe was 25%, compared to 37% in Africa, Asia and South - America

  L therefore, it cannot be generalisable to all cultures
• zimbardo's research on social roles

  P relevance to Abu Ghraib

  E zimbardo

  E claimed that it could be used to explain the actions of the guards towards victims in the Iraqi military prison in 2003/4. Factors such as lack of training, boredom and no accountability were present in both Abu Ghraib and the Stamford Prison Experiment

  L this gives the experiment application and explanatory power
• zimbardo's research on social roles

  P problem of demand characteristics

  E movahedi (1975)

  E asked a large sample of students who hadn't heard of the Stamford Prison Experiment what they thought the purpose of it was. most accurately guessed it

  L therefore, behaviour could have occured due to demand characteristics rather than the experiment itself
• situational variables affecting obedience

  P research support for the power of uniform

  E jeffrey et al. (2000)

  E children aged 5 - 9 were able to identify men in police uniform as able to arrest people rather than out of uniform

  L supports the idea that perceptions of authority are defined by uniform
• milgram's study on variables affecting obedience

  P low internal validity

  E perry (2012)

  E discovered Milgram's assistant, Murata, identified 'doubters' and 'believers' in who thought they were really delivering electric shocks. doubters had higher obedience rates

  L challenges the validity of the findings
• agentic state (reasons for obedience)

  P research support

  E blass et al. (2001)

  E asked observers who they thought was responsible for the harm in Milgram's study. most said the experimenter

  L supports the agentic state explanation
• agentic state

  P fails to explain real life obedience

  E lifton (1986)

  E doctors in Auschwitz changed gradually from ordinary medical professionals to vile people capable of carrying out the experiments they did. this was an irreversible transition

  L the shift back and forth from autonomous agentic state cannot explain this
• legitimacy of authority (reasons for obedience)

  P research support

  E tarnow (2000)

  E studied data of serious aircraft accidents. when a black box was available, people excessively depended on the captain's expertise, sometimes to tragic consequences

  L demonstrated the power of legitimate authority
• legitimacy of authority

  P does not explain all (dis)obedience

  E jacobsen et al.

  E found different levels obedience in nurses working under the same doctor

  L suggests the importance of other factors, such as individual differences
• authoritarian personality

  P educational attainment plays a role

  E middendorp et al. (1990) & milgram

  E less educated people are consistently more authoritarian than well educated

  L instead of authoritarian personality causing obedience, lack of education could cause both
• authoritarian personality

  P social context may be more important

  E milgram

  E believed that a dispositional basis could not provide a strong explanation for obedience, as social context in his study (eg. proximity, location, uniform) were the primary cause in different levels of obedience

  L suggests that instead of personality, situational variables are more important
• social support (resistance to social influence)

  P real world example

  E rosenstrase protest (1948)

  E german women protested where the gestapo were holding 2,000 Jewish men. their protest was successful

  L they were able to defy authority together
• social support

  P research support

  E rees and wallace (2015)

  E found that individuals with the majority of friends drinking alcohol were able to resist pressures to drink when they also had a friend or two who also resisted

  L demonstrates the power of social support in resisting social influence
• locus of control (resistance to social influence)

  P research support

  E avtgis (1998)

  E meta analysis concluded that there was a positive correlation between scores of internality/externality and scores on measures of persuasion, social influence and conformity

  L demonstrates support for the locus of control
• locus of control (resistance to social influence)

  P may be related only to normative influence

  E spector (1983)

  E measured locus of control and predisposition to normative and informational influence. there was only a relationship with normative influence

  L can only explain some resistance to social influence
• minority influence

  P research support for flexibility

  E nemeth (1987)

  E in a stimulated jury situation, assessing how much compensation should be paid for a ski accident. a confederate who compromised on their view exerted more influence on the group.

  L shows flexibility can be effective in changing majority opinion
• minority influence

  P not always effective, it is still difficult to convince people of the value of dissent

  E nemeth (2010)

  E people may become irritated by the view causing the majority view to persist

  L therefore, minority influence is not that effective
• social change processes

  P real life example

  E the communist manifesto (1848)

  E early communists tried to appear as part of the majority working class which created the impression that they had the potential to bring about social change
• social change processes

  P social norms interventions do not always work

  E bejong et al. (2009)

  E despite recieving information that corrected misperception on drinking norms, students did not report lower alcohol consumption

  L not all are able to bring about social change