psychology social influence

• Social influence


  The process by which an individual's attitudes, beliefs or behavior are modified by the presence or action of others
• Areas of social influence


  • Conformity
  • Compliance
  • Obedience
  • Minority influence
• Conformity


  A type of social influence defined as a change in belief or behavior in response to real or imagined social pressure. It is also known as majority influence.
• Compliance


  Instances where a person may agree in public with a group of people, but the person privately disagrees with the group's viewpoint or behavior. The individual changes their views, but it is a temporary change.
• Internalisation


  Publicly changing behavior to fit in with the group while also agreeing with them privately. An internal (private) and external (public) change of behavior. This is the deepest level of conformity were the beliefs of the group become part of the individual's own belief system.
• Identification


  Conformity to the demands of a given social role in society. This type of conformity extends over several aspects of external behavior. However, there still be no changed to internal personal opinion.
• Normative influence


  Where a person conforms to fit in with the group because they don't want to appear foolish or be left out. Normative social influence is usually associated with compliance, where a person changes their public behavior but not their private beliefs.
• Informational influence


  Where a person conforms because they have a desire to be right, and look to others who they believe may have more information. This type of conformity occurs when a person is unsure of a situation or lacks knowledge and is associated with internalisation.
• Jenness' Bean Jar Experiment


  1. Participants were asked to estimate how many beans they thought were in a jar. Each participant had to make an individual estimate, and then do the same as a group.

  2. Participants would report estimates of roughly the same value (even though they had previously reported quite different estimates as individuals).
• Asch's Line Study


  • Participants had to say aloud which comparison line matched the standard line in length. In each group there was only one real participant the remaining 6 were confederates. The confederates were told to give the incorrect answer on 12 out of 18 trails.
  • Real participants conformed on 32% of the critical trials where confederates gave the wrong answers. Additionally, 75% of the sample conformed to the majority on at least one trial.
• Group size


  The bigger the majority group (number of confederates), the more people conformed, but only up to a certain point.
• Group unanimity


  A person is more likely to conform when all members of the group agree and give the same answer.
• Difficulty of task


  The more difficult the task, the greater the conformity.
• Answering in private


  Conformity decreases when participants were allowed to answer in private (so the rest of the group does not know their response).
• Stanford Prison Experiment


  • Participants were randomly assigned to either the role of prisoner or guard in a simulated prison environment.
  • Within a very short time both guards and prisoners were settling into their new roles, with the guards adopting theirs quickly and easily. Within hours of beginning the experiment some guards began to harass prisoners. They behaved in a brutal and sadistic manner, apparently enjoying it.
• Demand characteristics could explain the findings of the Stanford Prison Experiment as most of the guards later claimed they were simply acting.
• The study may also lack population validity as the sample comprised US male students.
• The study has received many ethical criticisms, including lack of fully informed consent by participants as Zimbardo himself did not know what would happen in the experiment.
• example, juveniles accused of federal crimes are no longer housed before trial with adult prisoners (due to the risk of violence against them)
• The study has received many ethical criticisms, including lack of fully informed consent by participants as Zimbardo himself did not know what would happen in the experiment (it was unpredictable)
• Also, the prisoners did not consent to being "arrested" at home
• Also, participants playing the role of prisoners were not protected from psychological harm, experiencing incidents of humiliation and distress
• One prisoner had to be released after 36 hours because of uncontrollable bursts of screaming, crying and anger
• However, in Zimbardo's defence the emotional distress experienced by the prisoners could not have been predicted from the outset
• Zimbardo did conduct debriefing sessions for several years afterwards and concluded they were no lasting negative effects
• Another strength of the study is that the harmful treatment of participant led to the formal recognition of ethical guidelines
• Studies must now gain ethical approval before they are conducted
• An ethics committee review whether the potential benefits of the research are justifiable in the light of possible risk of physical or psychological harm
• They may request researchers make changes to the studies design or procedure, or in extreme cases deny approval of the study altogether
• Obedience


  A type of social influence where a person follows an order from another person who is usually an authority figure
• Milgram wanted to know why Germans were willing to kill Jews during the Holocaust
• He thought that Americans were different and would not have followed such orders
• Milgram's Shock Study

  1. Assign roles of teacher and learner

  2. Teacher administers electric shocks to learner

  3. Shocks increase with each wrong answer

  4. Experimenter gives a series of prods when participant refuses to administer a shock
• All participants went to 300 volts and 65% were willing to go all the way to 450 volts
• Milgram did more than one experiment – he carried out 18 variations of his study
• When the experimenter instructed and prompted the teacher by telephone from another room, obedience fell to 20.5%
• This study lacked ecological validity as it was carried out in a lab under artificial conditions
• The sample was biased as Milgram only used males in his study
• Milgram's work gives an insight into why people under the Nazi reign were willing to kill Jews when given orders to do so
• It also highlights how we can all be blind to obedience often doing things without question