social influence

• compliance


  conforms publicly but disagrees privately (NSI)
• internalisation


  the deepest form of conformity: genuinely believes and accepts the group norm, permanent change of behaviour (ISI)
• identification


  conforms to the behaviours of a group because they value them (NSI)
• normative social influence


  agrees w majority to gain social approval and acceptance

  - public agreement

  - emotional process
• informative social influence


  agrees w majority because believe they're right (desire to be right)

  - public and private agreement

  - cognitive process
• Asch's study of conformity


  123 american male undergrads paid $3 to participate in what they though was a visual perception task

  - tested in groups of 7-9, only 1 real ppt in each group who sat at the end of the row and gave their answer last

  shown two pieces of card, one had a 'standard line' on it and the other 3 lines of varying lengths. each person had to state aloud which comparison line was most like the standard line
• Asch's findings


  - naive ppt gave the wrong answer 37% of the time

  - 75% conformed at least once and 25% never conformed

  - <1% gave the wrong answer in the control group which had no pressure as they were tested individually (w/o confederates)
• Asch's conclusion


  people conform for two main reasons:

  1. they wanted to be accepted by the group (NSI)

  2. they believed the group is better informed than them (ISI)

  Overall, there may be a strong group pressure to conform, especially when the group is a unanimous majority
• variations of asch's study


  group size: rose to 32% - conformity reaches its highest level with 3 confederates, any more than 3 the conformity level plateaued.

  unanimity: reduced by 1/4 of original study - if the confederate gave the wrong answer or an alternate wrong answer than the rest of the group it gave the naive ppt to behave more independently.

  task difficulty: rates increased
• legitimacy to authority


  an explanation for obedience which suggests that we are more likely to obey people who we perceive to have authority over us

  - legitimacy is increased by visible symbols of authority (eg uniform)

  - from a young age we learn to obey people higher in the social hierarchy
• what were the 4 prods given when a ppt wanted to withdraw


  'Please continue'

  'The experiment requires that you continue'

  'It is absolutely essential that you continue'

  'You have no other choice, you must go on
• milgrams findings


  Participants showed signs of extreme tension throughout the experiment:

  3 had full-blown seizures

  100% went to 300V

  65% went to 450V - even without a response from learner on the presumption they were dead
• name milgrams situational variations

  proximity to authority, proximity to victim, uniform and location
• proximity of victim


  ppt in same room as learner rather than seperate

  - decreased to 40%

  - ppt experienced the pain being directly inflicted onto the learner
• proximity to authority figure


  experiment gave instructions over the phone

  - decreased to 21%

  - less pressure to obey as authority figure wasn't physically present
• location


  conducted in abandoned building

  - decreased to 48%

  - less pressure associated than when at Yale
• uniform


  researcher replaced by a member of the public dressed in ordinary clothes

  - decreased to 20%

  - lab coat is a symbol of authority compared to someone in everyday clothes
• Bickman - research support


  - conducted a field experiment

  - confederates dress as either a milkman, security guard, or in a jacket and tie

  - confederates individually give demands to people on the streets of NYC such as, 'pick up litter'

  - people twice as likely to obey the 'security guard' than the confederate dressed in a jacket and tie

  - research support that situational variables, such as uniform, has a powerful influence on obedience.
• cross cultural replications of Milgrams research and counter point

  - researchers replicated Milgram’s research using Dutch participants who were ordered to say stressful comments to interviewees- 90% obedience rate however, obedience fell when proximity increased (when the person giving the orders wasn’t in the same room as the participants)- results show that Milgram’s findings aren’t limited to American males but are valid for explaining different obedience levels across culturesHowever,- Smith and Bond- noted that most replications of Milgram’s research took place in societies that aren’t that culturally different from the US such as Spain and Australia- cannot conclude that Mlgram’s findings about situational variables apply in all cultures
• milgram's experiment socially sensitive research

  - Mandel argues that the situational perspective offers an excuse for genocide and that situational explanations hugely oversimplify the causes of the Holocaust

  - suggesting that the Nazi's were simply obeying orders which is offensive to survivors

  - Milgram's explanation ignores dispositional factors, implying that the Nazi's were victims of situational factors only and their behaviour was beyond their control

  - the situational perspective is dangerous as it permits others to excuse destructive behaviour in terms of justifying it by saying they were 'just obeying orders
• milgrams study has low internal validity


  - Milgram reported that 75% of ppts said they believed the shocks were genuine

  - however, other researchers argue that ppts acted due to demand characteristics

  - another researcher listened to tapes of the ppts

  - reported that only half believed the shocks were real and 60% of them disobeyed the experimenter

  - ppts may have been responding to demand characteristics rather than genuinely obeying the authority figure
• destructive authority


  shows in Milgram's study when the experimenter used prods to order ppts to behave in ways that went against their conscience

  - due to the agentic state as ppts no longer feel in control
• agency theory

  people move from the autonomous to the agentic state via the agentic shift when confronted w an authority figure

  
  

  to avoid moral strain, people will obey authority when they believe that the authority will take responsibility for the consequences of their actions (they act as an agent on behalf of the authority figure when obeying destructive orders)
• social hierarchy


  social group where the power construct is unequal
• authoritarian personality


  a personality type that is especially susceptible to obeying authority figures

  > show extreme respect to authority figures and contempt for those of inferior social class

  > believe that people who belong to different ethnic groups are responsible for the ills in society

  
  

  derives from childhood as a result of strict parenting and conditional love

  
  

  adorno created this theory to explain obedience in World War II - German Nazi's obeyed Hitlers orders to kill those of the Jewish faith
• f-scale


  Adorno et al. studied more than 2000 middle class white Americans and their attitudes towards other racial groups by developing and using the F-scale to measure authoritarian personality

  - f-scale is a a questionnaire designed by adorno to identify authoritarian personalities or traits

  
  

  - those w authoritarian personalities scored high on the F-scale

  - researchers found that many of the Nazi's scored highly
• Milgram and Elms - research support


  - interviewed a small sample of people who had participated in the original obedience studies who had been fully obedient or disobedient- all ppts completed the F-scale- the 20 obedient ppts scored higher overall on the F-scale than the 20 ppts who had been disobedient- support Adorno’s view that obedient people may show similar characteristics to people who have an Authoritarian personality

  However,this only shows a relationship between two variables meaning we cannot conclude the authoritarian personality is the cause of the obedience levels found by Milgram- eg, Milgram’s obedient ppts didn’t experience punishment in their childhoods unlike authoritarians- therefore authoritarianism is unlikely to be a useful predictor of obedience as the link between the two is complex
• adorno's theory does not account for extraneous variables


  there may be individual differences that contribute to the development of the authoritarian personality

  - researchers found that less-educated people are more likely to display authoritarian personality characteristics than well-educated people

  - it's possible to conclude that levels of education contribute to levels of obedience

  - undermines the authoritarian personality explanation for obedience
• authoritarian personality is a limited explanation


  cannot explain obedient behaviour in the majority of a country's population

  - eg, in pre-war Germany millions of individuals displayed obedient, racist and anti-semitic behaviour

  - despite the fact they must have different personalities in many ways as it seems unlikely that they all possessed an Authoritarian personality

  
  

  alternative view

  - the majority of Germans identified with anti-semitic Nazi state and scapegoated Jews

  - therefore Adorno's theory is limited because an alternative explanation is more realistic
• political bias - f-scale


  the F-scale is bias as it only measures right wing ideology

  - isn't enough research into left wing ideology which can be just as obedient to authority as right wing
• minority influence


  minority rejects the established norm of the majority and persuades them to move to the position of the minority

  - through commitment, consistency, flexibility
• consistency


  over time consistency in the minority's view increases the amount of interest from other people, making them rethink their own views

  
  

  - the minority repeatedly expresses their argument over time (diachronic) and between each other (synchronic)

  - minorities are more influential when they're consistent in their argument
• synchronic consistency


  people in the minority all say the same thing
• diachronic consistency


  the minority have been saying the same thing for a long period of time
• commitment


  minorities may engage in extreme activities to draw attention to their cause

  - must have an element of risk to demonstrate the minorities commitment to the cause and increases the amount of interest from the majority (the augmentation principle)
• flexibility


  repetition of the same argument and behaviours can be off-putting to the majority and therefore are unlikely to convert to the minorities position (cannot be dogmatic)

  - must be a balance between consistency and flexibility to be effective

  
  

  - the minority need to be prepared to adapt their point of view and accept reasonable and counter-arguments
• 12 Angry Men - minority influence


  Clark replicated the film to depict minority influence

  - ppts acted as a jury and were asked to decide on defendant's guilt

  - given 4 page booklet of evidence of guilt

  - varied whether he gave ppts info about the defence or counterarguments
• findings of 12 angry men study


  minority jurors only led people to change their minds when they had counterevidence to support their argument

  
  

  majority also influenced by the amount of defectors who moved to the minority position

  - 4 deflectors was the amount needed to have an influence

  
  

  Clark concluded that the type of information was crucial to a minority and that a ceiling of influence is reached in terms of defectors
• moscovici et al. (minority influence)


  ppts placed in groups consisting of 5 genuine ppts and 2 confederates

  - ppts were given eye tests prior to ensuring they weren't colour blind

  - shown 36 slides of different shades of blue and asked to state the colour of each slide out loud.

  
  

  there were 3 conditions:

  - the consistent condition: confederates repeatedly called the blue slides 'green'

  - inconsistent condition: confederates answered 'green' to two-thirds of the slides

  - the control condition: 6 real ppts therefore called the slides 'blue' everytime.
• findings of moscovici's study


  found that a consistent minority of confederates were significantly more influential than an inconsistent one in a colour perception test

  - 8% in the consistent group responded with green- 1.25% responded incorrectly in the inconsistent groupminorities can influence the majorityhowever,indicating that this influence is much more effective when the minority are consistent with their responses- support for the role of consistency in minority influence