social influence

• asch evaluation -ve


  - lacks population validity (male American college students) androcentric

  - results unique to one culture and era (child of its time, McCarthyism, Terrin & Spencer, engineer students)

  - lacks mundane realism/has demand characteristics (insignificant, save face, special pressure)

  - deception, thought confederates are genuine participants
• asch evaluation +ve


  - lab study - higher control of variables
• Zimbardo aim


  to investigate how readily people would conform to roles of guards and prisoners in a prison life stimulation
• zimbardo process


  - sampled 21 Ps from 75 volunteers who answered newspaper advertisement run by stanford university

  - accepted those who were interviewed and perceived to be the most mentally stable

  - Ps were randomly assigned the role of either guards or prisoner

  - prisoners were arrested in their homes by the local police and were delivered to the prison

  - they were blindfolded , strip searched and deloused and issued a uniform and a number

  - the guards, to underline their role, had their own uniform complete with a wooden club, handcuffs keys and mirror shades

  - prisoners were given a prison uniform and assigned ID numbers

  - guards were told they had complete power of the prisoners e,g. even deciding when they could go to the toilet
• Zimbardo results


  prisoners - passive, subdued and anxious, experienced extreme psychological distress

  5 released in 5 days, sixth day terminated

  
  

  guards - identified more closely with their role and became verbally hostile, brutal and aggressive, and harassed prisoners and reminded them that they are being monitored all the time, and try to enforce their rules by punishing the prisoners - enjoyed the power they had over the prisoners
• zimbardo conclusion


  they conformed to the roles they were expected to play, both groups became dehumanised in the eyes of the others, supports situational explanation rather than the despositional one, situations are impactful to one's behaviour and people conform to their social roles.
• zimbardo evaluation -ve


  - lack of informed consent (consent given was not what was ensued)

  - lack of population validity (white middle class young men)

  - very little manipulation (cannot identify IV and DV)

  - lack the right to withdraw (were not released as soon as they showed problems)
• factors affecting obedience


  situational variables

  - location

  - proximity

  - uniform
• proximity


  the physical closeness or distance of an authority figure to the person they are giving an order/ instructions to

  
  

  also refers to the physical closeness of the teacher to the learner when administering electric shocks in milgram's study
• location


  the place where an order is issued. the relevant factor that influences obedience is the status or prestige associated with the location

  
  

  - if the location is legitimate and holds authority / social power over us - feels pressured to act appropriately and obey

  
  

  - outside the legitimate location - no longer feels pressured to obey
• uniform


  people in positions of authority often wear uniforms that is symbolic/ signifies of their authority - this indicates to the rest of us who is entitled to expect our obedience

  
  

  - are recognised to covey power and authority which can become symbolised by the social power of the uniform

  
  

  - we are more likely to obey someone dressed in uniform so without the uniform - no longer considered as a legitimate authority figure
• Milgram aim


  to investigate whether ordinary people would obey an unjust order from an authority figure and inflict pain and injure an innocent person
• milgram process


  - 40 male Ps were deceived into thinking they were administering electric shocks to another person

  - the Ps were told the study concerned the role of punishment in learning; the P played the teacher while a confederate played the learner whose task was to memorise pairs of words

  - the teacher has to administer a shock everytime the learner makes a mistake, shocks started at 15 volts, and rose in 15 volts increments to a maximum of 450 volts

  - if the teacher hesitated in administering the shocks, the researcher would encourage him to continue through verbal scripted prompts

  - for example, ' please continue'. 'the experiment requires that you continue' 'it is absolutely essential that you continue', 'you have no other choice, you must go on
• milgram results


  all participants went to at least 300 volts

  65% went to the full 450 volts

  most Ps dissented verbally and found the procedure very stressful and wanted to stop

  
  

  - continued and obeyed the researcher who pleaded them to continue giving shocks
• milgram conclusion


  - most people will obey orders that go against their own conscience under certain circumstances

  - when people occupy a position in a dominant hierarchy, they become liable to lose feelings of empathy, compassion and morality and are inclined to blind obedience
• milgram variations


  - uniform

  - location

  - proximity to authority figure
• uniform


  changed to everyday clothes, obedience rate dropped to 20%
• location


  switched to run down office building, dropped to 48%
• proximity to authority figure


  same room as the learner: 40%

  gave instructions over the phone: 20% (able to resist)

  people are more likely to obey an authority figure in close proximity
• milgram others


  someone else administered it: 92.5%

  the teacher forces the learner's hand on the shock plate: 30%

  participants worked in groups to shock the learner: 10%
• milgram evaluation -ve


  - lacks ecological validity (unrealistic situation, cannot generalise to everyday life)

  - broke several guidelines (deceived, no right to withdraw, psychological harm)

  - lacks population validity (40 male volunteers)

  - lacks internal validity
• social influence


  examines how a person's emotions, behaviours and opinions are affected by others. looks hey conformity, obedience, minority influence, and social change.
• conformity


  when a person changes their attitude or behaviour due to real or imagined group pressure. it occurs when a individual's beliefs are influenced by a larger group of people 'majority influence
• types of conformity


  compliance, identification, internalisation
• normative social influence


  to gain acceptance and approval

  avoid rejection and punishment/ considered an outsider

  
  

  go along with the majority without accepting their point of view - often leads to compliance (comply publicly and superficially change their behaviour/ agreely publicly with the majority but privately do not change their personal opinions

  
  

  (ppl tend to conform to the majority position in public but do not necessarily internalise this view as the private belief is not changed)
• informational social influence


  to be right, to gain knowledge, to act appropriately not stand out and gain social acceptance

  mostly occur with people you know

  
  

  adopt others' opinions because we are uncertain about what to believe and how to behave, so uses the majority as a source of information and become converted - an example of internalisation (change in both public and private beliefs) - often results in internalisation so adopts the views and behaviours of the majority

  
  

  we believe others to be experts who know more than us in that situation and believe they're right
• nAffiliators


  strong need to be liked by others and are found to be more likely to conform

  NSI underlies more in conformity and situational pressure cannot fully explain individual differences, hence limits the extent to which we can apply NSI as an explanation for conformity
• bickman aim


  to investigate the social power of uniform in obedience (civilian, milkman, guard)
• phrases of bickman


  questions were asked by a confederate either dressed as a civilian, milkman or guard to 153 random pedestrians

  
  

  - pick up this paper bag for me

  - this fellow is over parked at the meter but doesn't have any change, give him a dime

  - don't you know that you have to stand on the other side of the pole? it says no standing
• bickman results


  paper bag - guard (82%)

  dime - milkman (57%)

  bus stop - guard (56%)
• bickman conclusion


  people are more likely to obey someone dressed in uniform, compared to someone not dressed in uniform

  bus stop guard - 56%, but civilian 20%, milkman 21%
• hofling


  to show how obedience is found in real life situation
• hofling process


  - an unknown doctor (confederate) telephoned the hospital and spoke to a nurse alone on a night duty

  - he instructed the 22 nurses (ps) to give medication to a patient which is an unknown drug of above recommended dose

  - the doctor said he would sign the relevant authorisation papers when he arrived in the hospital in 10 minutes time
• hofling results


  - 21 out of 22 obeyed the unknown doctor and were preparing the medication before being stopped and explained about the situation

  - it is a social norm for nurses to obey and accept orders from an authority figure (doctor) without questioning their judgement
• hofling conclusion


  - obedience can be found commonplace in everyday life, and nurses are very likely to obey dangerous orders from an unknown person

  - highlights the role of responsibility in obedience. The doctor claimed that he will sign the relevant authorisation papers when he returns to the hospital after ten mins. after ten mins when he arrives, the nurses' responsibility will be removed, making them more likely to obey

  
  

  this study highlights

  - Agentic state

  - legitimacy of authority (social norm, doctor = figure, ability to punish)

  - legitimacy of location (hospital)
• Rank and Jacobson (1977) replicated the study


  unknown doctor - doctor they're familiar with

  alone in night duty - not alone with other nurses

  administer unknown drug - a real drug valium above the recommended dose
• rank and jacobson results


  2 out of 18 nurses obeyed the doctor's order, this shows that in a more realistic setting, the obedience rate is much lower and are less likely to obey a dangerous order
• evaluation of hofling


  - high validity (real life setting, field experiment)

  - lack of informed consent, unethical (unaware of their participation)
• key elements of the study of hofling (what this study highlights)


  - Agentic state

  - legitimacy of authority (social norm, doctor = figure, ability to punish)

  - legitimacy of location (hospital)
• characteristics of conformity


  - conform to a group of peers of similar status

  - emphasis on acceptance

  - behaviour is similar to the source of the group

  - implicit/ unconscious