social influence

• what is the authoritarian personality? AO1 [3marks]

  ✩ the dispositional explanation was proposed by ADORNO.

  ✩ it is an internal explanation suggesting that certain characteristics are associated with higher levels of obedience

  ✩ it is developed from strict parenting in an individual's childhood for example .. extremely high standards & harsh punishments

  ✩ individuals with authoritarian personalities have extreme respect for those with perceived authority and submission towards them as they view them as superior.

  ✩ they also disapprove of people with perceived low status and direct anger towards them as they view them as inferior.

  ✩ they have strict adherence towards social rules & hierarchies
• RTS authoritarian personality as an exp 4 obedience? AO3

  ✩ comes from MILGRAM& ELMS

  ✩ they interviewed ppts from MILGRAM'S original study and asked them to complete an F-scale questionnaire to measure their levels of authoritarianism.

  ✩ they found that those with high levels of authoritarianism were classed as obedient as they delivered electric shocks up to 450V

  ✩ therefore suggesting that the authoritarian personality is associated with obedience, supporting the dispositional exp (auth pers) as a valid exp 4 obedience.
• WEAKNESS of dispositional exp 4 obedience?? AO3

  ✩ research conducted by ADORNO ET AL into the authoritarian personality can be criticised 4 SOCIAL DESIRABILITY

  ✩ this is bc they may have exaggerated their fascist views 2 present themselves in the best way possible

  ✩ as when they completed the questionnaire just after WW2 they may have maximised any fascist views to look more obedient

  ✩ therefore ADORNO may not be measuring what he set out 2 measure, reducing internal validity into auth pers as exp 4 obedience!
• outline zimbardo's research in2 conformity to social roles!! AO1

  ✩ zimbardos' aim was to investigate how freely individuals would conform to roles of either prisoner or guard

  ✩ his sample was 24 emotionally stable male american uni students who had volunteered

  ✩ experiment took place in basement of stanford uni which was remodelled to a mock prison

  ✩ volunteers randomly allocated to role of prisoner or guard

  ✩ the prisoners were arrested @ their homes & given a smock uniform ,, they were referred to as numbers to create a loss of personal identity

  ✩ guards given uniform + mirrored glasses + nightsick

  - they were instructed to keep prisoners under control but no resort to violence at all

  ✩ zimbardo given role of superintedant

  ✩ if prisoners wanted 2 leave they had to go thru parole process
• 1st weakness of zimbardo's research into conformity 2 social roles? AO3

  ✩ a weakness is gender bias as he used a male only sample

  ✩ this makes it difficult to generalise our findings to females as they are typically seen as more caring and gentle and so won't conform to the role of the guard

  ✩ thus reducing external validity of the research

  
  

  HOWEVER!!! zimbardo was interested in explaining the brutality within american prison systems where majority of guards were male which could explain the use of a male-only sample
• 2nd weakness of zimbardo's research into conformity 2 social roles AO3

  ✩ major ethical issues as there was a lack of informed consent as they didn't have prior knowledge to being arrested at their homes

  ✩ they were also not protected from harm as they showed signs of psychological disturbances

  ✩ didn't have right to withdraw so when ppt asked zimbardo if they could leave, he replied as superintendent instead of experimenter with responsibility

  ✩ this reduces the credibility of the research
• define compliance :

  ✩ most superficial & least permanent type of conformity

  ✩ individuals will publicly change their beliefs or behaviours 2 fit in with a group but revert back to their own in private when group pressure stops

  ✩ linked to NSI

  ✩ they may not agree w what the group is doing
• define identification :

  ✩ stronger type of conformity

  ✩ involves possible private & public acceptance

  ✩ individuals will conform to a role model within the group BC membership is desirable + they take on a role within the group

  ✩ when group is no longer seen as valuable they revert back
• define internalisation :

  ✩ strongest & most permanent type of conformity

  ✩ individuals will publicly and privately change their beliefs and behaviours to go along w a group norm bc they accept their attitudes in2 our own cognitions

  ✩ linked to ISI

  ✩ behaviour lasts when majority are no longer present
• ISI


  ✩ driven by desire to be right

  ✩ when individual lacks knowledge ab how 2 behave they conform by seeking info from group

  ✩ cognitive process

  ✩ leads 2 internalisation
• NSI

  ✩ driven by desire 2 be liked

  ✩ emotional process, individuals will conform to gain acceptance, fit in and to avoid ridicule

  ✩ leads 2 compliance
• variables affecting conformity??

  1) GROUP SIZE

  2) TASK DIFFICULTY

  3) UNANIMITY
• how does GROUP SIZE affect conformity?

  as group size increases , conformity rates increase

  HOWEVER size of group stops having effect on conformity once it reaches a certain size!!
• asch's findings regarding group size?

  1 ppt & 1 confed = conformity dropped to 3%

  1 ppt & 2confeds = conformity dropped to 13%

  1 ppt & 3 confeds = conformity dropped to 32%
• what is UNANIMITY ?

  complete agreement from a group
• how did ASCH vary his study with UNANIMITY?

  ✩ he had one confed give the correct answer thru out research n conformity dropped to 5.5%

  ✩ he also had one confed give an incorrect answer n conformity dropped to 9%
• how does UNANIMITY affect conformity?

  Asch found that when a dissenter (person who goes against group) breaks the group's unanimous position, conformity decreases
• how did ASCH research task difficulty as a variable affecting conformity?

  ✩ he made the comparison lines and standard line 'X' more similar in length so the correct answer was less obvious

  ✩ suggests that ISI plays a greater role when task is harder as when situations become unclear we look to others 4 guidance

  ✩ as the right answer becomes less obvious we lose confidence and are more likely to conform
• RTS variables affecting conformity


  ✩ conducted by LUCAS ET AL

  ✩ asked students to solve easy & hard maths questions

  ✩ ppts conformed more (with the wrong answers from other 'students') when the problems were difficult

  ✩ therefore supporting ASCH'S ... bc it suggests that when task is harder conformity increases !
• weakness in ASCH'S study

  ✩ gender bias

  ✩ difficult to generalise findings to females

  ✩ according to NETO they are more concerned w social relationships n being liked by peers making them conform more

  ✩ therefore, this shows there r some factors which determine some1's level of conformity more than variables ... weakens external validity
• what is social support

  ✩ people can resist pressures to obey or conform when they receive social support

  ✩ having an ally gives us the confidence to resist & remain independent in our behaviour
• resisting conforming w SOCIAL SUPPORT

  ✩ individual must identify w the ally n see them as a role model of independent behaviour

  ✩ if they have support for their pov they no longer fear ridicule allowing them 2 avoid NSI
• resisting obedience w SOCIAL SUPPORT

  ✩ ally acts as model of dissent 4 individual to copy

  ✩ having allies leads to diffusion of responsiblity
• diffusion of responsibility

  individual will feel less responsible 4 their actions if there r others acting the same way so consequence of resisting is shared !
• RTS social support? AO3


  ✩ albrecht

  ✩ evaluated 8 week programmed to help pregnant adolescents resist peer pressure to smoke

  ✩ they were provided w a slightly older mentor

  ✩ he found that those w a mentor were less likely to smoke therefore supporting social support as a valid explanation of resistance
• locus of control


  a personality trait which refers to an individual's perception of control over their behaviour
• what are the 2 types of locus of control


  internal & external
• internal locus of control

  ✩ an individual believes they control what happens to them + their behaviour is caused by their own decisions

  ✩ they are more likely to resist social influence because they trust their own judgement and are independent
• external locus of control

  ✩ individuals believe external factors such as luck or fate affect their lives

  ✩ they put their trust in2 authority figures

  ✩ they are less likely to resist social influence as they take less responsibility 4 their actions + r less likely to remain independent
• conformity (2 marks): ‘Changes in individuals’ behaviours and/or beliefs because of real or imagined group pressure’
• Define Obedience to authority: This is a type of social influence where somebody acts in response to a direct order from a figure with perceived authority. The person who receives the order may also respond in a way that they would have not done without the order.
• Milgram aim

  Investigated if individuals would obey orders of authority figure even if led to negative consequences
• Milgram experiment


  • Conducted at Yale University
  • Involved 40 American males aged 20-50
  • Participants were recruited through a newspaper advert for a "memory on learning" experiment and paid $4.50
• Milgram experiment procedure

  1. They drew lots (rigged) real ppt was the 'teacher'

  2. Confederate always assigned role of the 'learner'

  3. Teacher's job - administer learning task and deliver 'electric shocks' to learner if they got a question wrong

  4. Shocks began at 15 volts, increased in increments of 15 volts to maximum 450 volts

  5. Experimenter used prompts if the 'teacher' refused, to test obedience to authority
• Experimenter prompts

  • "Please continue (or please go on)"
  • "The experiment requires that you continue"
• Findings: All ppts went to at least 300 volts, with only 12.5% stopping at that point. 65% of ppts continued to the maximum 450 volts, showing high levels of obedience. Conclusion: Ordinary people are obedient to authority when asked to behave in an inhumane way. It is not necessarily evil people who commit evil crimes but ordinary people who are just obeying orders.
• 1. Proximity: How near or far (close) the ppt (teacher) is to the victim (learner) or experimenter (authority figure).
• Situational variables are an external explanation of obedience, where features of an environment affect levels of obedience including proximity, location and uniform.
• Milgram’s OG exp- teacher couldn't see learner, only hear = obedience 65%. When both teacher and learner in same room obedience fell to 40% = bc the teacher directly see how their behaviour was having unpleasant consequence on learner. when teacher force the learners hand onto the electric shock plate (touch proximity) obedience dropped further to 30%. In one proximity variation (remote instruction), experimenter left room +gave instructions to teacher by phone= obedience fell to 20.5% suggests the closer authority figure is to an individual= more obedient that individual will be.
• Location. original experiment was conducted in a prestigious university (Yale University). Milgram wanted to test what would happen to obedience when the location of the experiment was changed.

  · When the location was changed to a run-down office in a run-down part of town obedience fell from 65% at Yale University to 48% in the run down office.

  · Milgram argued that this was because when the experiment was conducted in a run-down office the amount of perceived legitimate authority of the experimenter was reduced.