psych social influence evaluation
- Created by: 14lquinn
- Created on: 23-03-20 11:40
View mindmap
- social influence evaluation
- Asch's research
- a child of its time: Permin + Spencer found less conformity in 1980 than 1950s
- artificial situation + task: demand characteristics = p's just played along with trivial task
- limited application if findings: only conducted on american men
- Types + explanations of conformity
- research support for ISI: more conformity to incorrect maths answers when difficult
- individual differences in NSI: affiliators want to be liked more
- ISI + NSI work together: dissenter may reduce power of ISI + NSI
- The Stanford Prison experiment
- control: random assignment to roles increased internal validity
- lack of realism: p's play acting roles according to media-derived stereotyopes
- ethical issues: p's were not protected from harm etc + zimbardo dual role = sometimes acted in favour of experiment
- Situational variables
- research support: Bickman showed power of uniform in field experiment
- lack of internal validity: some of Milgram's procedures contrived so not genuine obedience
- cross-cultural replications: cross-cultural findings support Milgram, but almost all studies in similar cultures to USA so not very generalisable
- Milgram's original obedience study
- low internal validity: p's realised shocks were fake, but replication with real shocks got similar results
- good external validity: findings generalise to other situations such as hospital wards
- supporting replication: Game of Death found 80% gave max shock + similar behaviour to Milgram's p's
- ethical issues: p's didn't know what the true experiment is + emotionally harmed
- Agentic state
- research support: Blass + Schmitt found that people do blame legitimate authority for p's behaviour
- a limited explanation: cannot explain why some of Milgram's p's disobeyed
- Legitimacy of authority
- cultural differences: explains obedience in different cultures because reflects diff social hierarchies
- The authoritarian personality
- research support: some of Milgram's obedient p's had authoritarian personalities
- limited explanation: can't explain increase in obedience across whole culture - better explanation is social identity theory
- political bias: equates authoritarian personality with right-wing ideology + ignores extreme left-wing authoritarianism
- correlation not causation
- Social support
- research support: conformity decreases when one person dissents even if not credible (Allen + Levine)
- research support: obedience drops when disobedient role models are present (Gamson et al)
- Locus of control
- research support: internals less likely to fully obey in Milgram-type procedure (Holland)
- contradictory research: people have become more external + disobedient recnetly (Twenge et al). Hard for LOC to explain
- Minority influence
- research support for consistency: Moscovici's blue-green slides + Wood et al's meta analysis
- research support for depth of thought: minority views have longer effect because more deeply processed (Martin et al)
- artificial tasks: tasks often trivial so tell us little about real life influence
- Social change
- research support: NSI valid explanation of social change e.g reducing energy consumption (Nolan et al)
- only indirectly effective: effects of minority influence limited because they are indirect and appear later (Nemeth)
- role of deeper processing: it is majority views that are processed more deeply than minority views, challenging central feature of minority influence
- Asch's research
Comments
No comments have yet been made