Social Influence

• Conformity


  A type of social influence where a person yields to group pressures and changes their behaviour or opinion as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or group
• Types of conformity (Kelman)


  • Internalisation
  • Identification
  • Compliance
• Internalisation


  Making the beliefs, values, attitude and behaviour of the group your own (the strongest type of conformity, often occurs as a result of informational social influence)
• Identification


  Temporary/short term change of behaviour and beliefs only in the presence of a group (middle level)
• Compliance


  Following other people's ideas/going along with the group to gain their approval or avoid disapproval (lowest/weakest level of conformity)
• Informational social influence


  When someone conforms because they want to be right, so they look to others by copying or obeying them, to have the right answer in a situation
• Normative social influence


  When someone conforms because they want to be liked and be part of a group; when a person's need to be accepted or have approval from a group drives compliance
• NSI and ISI may not be completely exclusive, as suggested by Deutsch and Gerrard's 'Two Process Model'
• It may be more beneficial to look at NSI and ISI as complementary, as opposed to mutually exclusive mechanisms
• Asch's study


  • 123 male American undergraduates in groups of 6; 1 true participant and 5 confederates
  • Participants and confederates were presented with 4 lines; 3 comparison lines and 1 standard line
  • Confederates would give the same incorrect answer for 12 out of 18 trials
  • Asch observed how often the participant would give the same incorrect answer as the confederates versus the correct answer
• Factors affecting level of conformity

  • Size of majority/Group size
  • Unanimity of majority
  • Task difficulty
• Size of majority/Group size

  An individual is more likely to conform when in a larger group
• Unanimity of majority


  An individual is more likely to conform when the group is unanimous i.e. all give the same answer, as opposed to them all giving different answers
• Task difficulty


  An individual is more likely to conform when the task is difficult
• Zimbardo's study


  • 24 American male undergraduate students
  • Participants were randomly issued one of two roles; guard or prisoner
  • Prisoners were only referred to by their assigned number
  • Guards were given props like handcuffs and sunglasses
  • No one was allowed to leave the simulated prison
  • Guards worked eight hour shifts, while the others remained on call
  • Prisoners were only allowed in the hallway which acted as their yard, and to the toilet
• Agentic state


  When a person believes that someone else will take responsibility for their own actions
• Agentic shift


  When a person shifts from an autonomous state (the state in which a person believes they will take responsibility for their own actions) to the agentic state
• Legitimacy of authority


  How credible the figure of authority is. People are more likely to obey them if they are seen as credible in terms of being morally good/right, and legitimate
• Expert authority


  When the authority figure is seen as legitimate because they are a knowledgeable expert, like a scientist
• Agentic state


  When people believe they are acting on behalf of an authority figure, rather than taking personal responsibility for their actions
• Students are more likely to listen to their parents or teachers than other unknown adults
• Expert authority


  When the authority figure is seen as knowledgeable and responsible, like a scientist
• Uniform


  A person is more likely to obey someone wearing a uniform as it gives them a higher status and a greater sense of legitimacy
• Milgram admitted that many participants could see through the deception of the lab coat
• Experimenter is in the same room as the participant

  Obedience is higher (62.5%) compared to being in a different room and speaking over the phone (20.5%)
• 70% of participants believed the electric shocks were real
• The My Lai Massacres can be explained by agentic state and legitimacy of authority theories
• Decreased obedience in the 'normal citizen' condition may have been due to demand characteristics
• Proximity - Participant and experimenter in same room

  Obedience higher (62.5%) compared to separate rooms (40%) and touch proximity (30%)
• Location - Study conducted at prestigious university


  Obedience higher compared to rundown office
• Uniform - Experimenter wears lab coat

  Obedience higher compared to normal clothes
• The F-scale used to measure authoritarian personality is susceptible to acquiescence bias
• Scapegoating


  Child with overly harsh and disciplinarian parents displaces their anger with their parents onto seemingly 'inferior' others
• The child would be more likely to target their displaced anger on those who seem weak and unable to defend themselves, such as minority groups
• The F-scale is particularly susceptible to acquiscence bias, which describes the phenomenon of respondents always responding in the same way using the scales provided, regardless of the content shown in the scales
• The Authoritarian Personality has little ecological validity because it cannot explain many real-life examples of mass obedience, such as the whole German population during Nazi occupation, who likely shared the same struggles in life and displaced their fear about the future onto a perceived 'inferior' group of people, through the process of scapegoating
• The locus of control explanation is only valid for novel situations, as previous experiences are always more influential than LOC when an individual is making a decision as to how to act
• Asch found that when one of the confederates did not conform, and gave the actual correct answer, conformity levels in the participant dropped to one quarter of what they were when the majority had been unanimous
• The presence of the other person (who was actually a confederate) in Milgram's study caused the level of obedience to reduce to 10%, showing that the social support provided from the other participants gave them the confidence to reject the position of authority
• Gamson et al found that when participants where placed in groups, 88% resisted the pressure to conform to the same smear campaign which other confederates had developed, demonstrating the significant influence of social support systems