Paper 1 social influence

• Myers


  A change in behaviour as a result of real or imagined group pressure.
• Zimbardo


  Stanford Prison Experiment

  Tendency for people to adopt behaviour, attitudes and values (identification)
• Kelman (1958)


  3 types of conformity:

  Compliance - publicly conform, privately disagree.

  Identification - Behave as expected role would

  Internalisation - Publicly and privately agree, permanent.
• Deutsch and Gerard (1955)


  Argued that conformity is the result of:

  Informational social influence - Conform due to superior knowledge. Genuinely believe others are right (internalisation)

  Normative social influence - Wants to be liked, avoid rejection (compliance)
• Linkenbach and Perkins (2003)


  Normative influence (the majority of peers don't smoke) reduces the number of adolescents who take up smoking.
• Asch (1950s)


  Conformity - line test (show 1 line and 3 comparison lines)

  - Tendency to go along with the views and actions of others, even if you know they are wrong (75% conformed once).

  - Variations : group size (3 confederates rose wrong answer to 31.8%) ; unanimity (sometimes agree and disagree, reduce conformity by 1/4) ; task difficulty (conformity increase when test is harder)
• Asch AO3


  - 1950s people were highly conformist

  - White middle class, male, undergraduates - unrepresentative (Bond and smith)
• Sherif (1935)


  Used autokinetic effect (visual illusion) when stationary spot of light moves and people have to say how far.

  They estimated in private and in groups, estimates came more alike when grouped.
• Milgram (1963)


  Procedure :

  - Participants given fake electric shocks to a 'learner' in obedience to instructions from the 'experimenter'

  Findings :

  - 65% gave highest shock of 450v

  - 12.5% stopped at 330v
• Milgram variations


  - Proximity (physical closeness of authority figure)

  teacher and learner same room 40%

  teacher forces hand to plate 30%

  - Location (where order is issued)

  from yale to run down office 47.5%

  orders by phone 20.5%

  - Uniform (Authorities dress attire)

  dressed like member of public 20%
• Milgram AO3 :

  Hofling (1966)

  Rank and Jacobson (1977)

  Bickman (1974)

  Orne and Holland (1968)

  Hofling - 22 nurses received call to increase dosage to something lethal. Doctor said not to wait until arrived. 21/22 did it.

  Rank and Jacobson - Hoflings was unusual over phone and by someone who they don't know. Doctor told nurse overdose of Valium, doctor known and drug 2/18 obeyed.

  Bickman - Jacket and tie, milkman, security guard 2x as likely to conform to security guard than jacket and tie.

  Orne and Holland - participants knew shock wasn't real
• Milgram individual differences :

  Shanab and Yahya (1977)

  Burger et al (2009)

  Kilham and Mann (1974)

  Shanab and Yayha - replicated Milgram and compare 6-8, 10-12 and 14-16 year olds - no difference

  Burger et al - No statistical diff between men and women

  Kilham and Mann - women ordered to shock another woman by a man - group favouritism
• Legitimate authority


  Legitimate social power held by authority figures, role defined by society.

  Assume they know what they are doing
• Agency theory


  Milgram proposed theory to explain findings

  2 levels of action:

  - Autonomous individuals (aware of consequences)

  - Agentic state (not responsible for consequences)
• Authoritarian personality


  Adorno's term for people who are prejudiced and rank high on scales of conformity, intolerance, insecurity, respect for authority, and submissiveness to superiors
• Internal locus of control

  Take personal responsibility, less likely to rely on others, resist pressure (less likely to obey to things which are wrong)
• External locus of control


  Life is determined by external factors (luck)
• Holland (1967)


  Repeated Milgram study

  Measured whether ppts were internals or externals

  37% internals did not continue to the highest shock level (showed independence)

  Only 23% externals did not continue

  Internals showed greater resistance
• Twenge (2004)


  Analysed data, people more resilient to obedience but more external.

  If internal and resistance linked, we would expect internal not external
• 3 factors affecting obedience


  Consistency = Minority keeps same beliefs over time and between all

  Flexibility = Minority accept possibility of compromise

  Commitment = Make personal sacrifices
• Snowball effect


  Something grows significantly in size over time and between all minorities.
• Moscovici study (1969)


  Unambiguous task - were slides blue or green (always different shades of blue)

  2/6 were confederates and always said green (8.5%) or all participants or 2/6 confederates were inconsistent (1.25%).
• Mosocovici AO3

  Martin (2003)

  Mackie (1987)


  Martin - less likely to change opinions if listening to minority group

  Mackie - More affected by majority if we find out they disagree with us.
• Bashir (2013)


  People resist social change even if they privately agree, they don't want to be associated with negative minority labels.
• My Lai Massacre


  1968, in which American troops had brutally massacred innocent women and children in the village of My Lai.

  Authoritarian personality