Social Influence

?
View mindmap
  • Social Influence
    • Conformity types and explanations
      • Compliance
      • Identification
      • Internalisation
      • NSI
      • ISI
      • Compliance or internalisation? may agree publicly but later forget; difficulty identifying types of conformity
      • Evidence for NSI; teens exposed to the message that most of their-age-peers did not smoke were less likely to smoke; suggests that they wanted to fit in
      • Evidence for ISI; people exposed to negative info about African Americans later reported negative opinions about a black individual; suggests they thought that the informer was correct/an expert
    • Variables affecting conformity (Asch)
      • Groups of 7; 6 confederates and 1 participant
      • 2/3 confederates answered incorrectly
      • Matching lines
      • 75% conformed at least once
      • Control group; participants answered alone
      • 37% conformed overall
      • Conclusion; conformity was due to NSI
      • Evaluation
        • High internal validity; high control over EVs; cause and effect
        • Artificial task; wouldn't happen in real life; lacks mundane realism; lacks ecological validity
        • Unethical; deception; no informed consent
        • 'Child of its time'; McCarthyism anti-communist period; people too afraid to not conform with the majority; results may be different now
    • Conformity to social roles (Zimbardo)
      • Basement corridor of Stanford university converted into mock prison
      • Male student volunteers
      • Prisoners and guards wore uniforms
      • Initially, prisoners rebelled against guards but soon grew passive
      • Guards grew increasingly tyrannical and abusive
      • Study was terminated after 6 days
      • 5 prisoners went home early due to extreme reactions, e.g. acute anxiety, crying, etc.
      • Guards would make prisoners carry out debillitating tasks, e.g. wash toilets with bare hands
      • One prisoner actually asked for parole
      • Conformity to social roles may not be automatic like Zimbardo proposed; some guards actually did favours for the prisoners; therefore, it seems they chose how to behave
      • Demand characteristics; Zimbardo was actively involved as the warden so may have influenced participants; therefore, not remained objective
      • Ethical?; it met standards of the Stanford University Ethics Committee; however, Zimbardo acknowledged that it should have been shut earlier due to the distress caused
    • Situational variables affecting obedience (Milgram)
      • Experimenter and learner were confederates
      • Real participant was the teacher
      • If learner got word pairs wrong, the teacher shocked them
      • Max = 450V
      • 65% gave 450V
      • 100% gave 300V
      • If participants were close to the learner, conformity dropped
      • If participants were in a run-down office, conformity dropped
      • Bickman found that people were more likely to follow orders from a guard than a civillian
    • Agentic state and legitimacy of authority
      • Agentic state
        • Blame people with higher authority
        • Don't feel responsible for their actions
        • Moving from the autonomous state to the agentic state is called the agentic shift
        • People may carry out tasks due to an increase in demands; e.g. Nazi doctors started doing horrible operations but eventually consented to murder; can't explain gradual changes
        • You can apply the agentic state to real life; Lt William Calley and his soldiers murdered 500 unarmed villagers, he said later in court that he was only following his superior's orders
      • Legitimacy of authority
        • Condition for the agentic shift to occur
        • People feel rude if they break commitment from a person in authority
        • E.g. Milgram's confederate experimenter
        • Positive result is that people generally follow police in an emergency; however, it can justify the harm of others; this kind of extreme influence may occur in places like the army
    • The authoritarian personality
      • F-scale; assesses authoritarian characteristics
      • Traits: stick to traditional values, dislike those of a lower social class, submissive towards authority figures, etc.
      • Milgram and Elms
        • Follow-up from Milgram's electric shock study
        • 20 obedient ps and 20 disobedient peers
        • Higher levels of authoritarian traits among obedient ps (high F-scale scores)
        • No differences between MMPI scores
        • Obedient ps reported being less close to their fathers during childhood and were more likely to view authority figures as admirable
        • All ps were male; sample not representative; gender bias
      • Testing characteristics; they aren't changed by the experimenter; can't claim cause and effect
      • Other research has found evidence to suggest that authoritarian traits are caused by poor education; contradicting Milgram's findings
    • Resistance to social influence
      • Social support
        • Allies make you feel more confident to stand your ground
        • Asch found that conformity levels dropped if you had an ally
        • Milgram found the same as Asch
      • Locus of control
        • Internality; people who are likely to take responsibility for their actions, fate, etc
        • Externality; people who are likely to blame external forces, e.g. luck, for their fate, actions, etc.
      • Evaluation
        • Allen and Levine; response position of ally affects conformity; if ally answered first, conformity with the majority was lowest; first answer either confirms or discourages the person's opinion
        • Allen and Levine investigated the validity of social support; visual task, ally wearing glasses was less effective than ally without; suggests social support doesn't have to be valid but valid social support is more effective
        • Locus of control is related only to NSI; externals are more likely to conform; he didn't find this link between ISI and internality
        • People have become more external; young Americans increasingly believe that their fate is sealed by luck; this may be due to young people experiencing alienation
    • Minority influence
      • Consistency
      • Commitment
      • Untitled
      • Moscovici et al
        • Groups of 4 ps and 2 confederates
        • 1st condition; confederates always said green
        • Shown series of blue slides in varied shades
        • 2nd condition; confederates said green on 2/3
        • Consistent minority influenced ps to say green 8%
        • Inconsistent minority influenced 1%
        • Control group; no one said green
      • Evaluation
        • Research evidence for flexibility; found confederate who compromised influenced more than the one who didn't; however this was only effective if the confederate compromised later in the negotiation
        • Nemeth said minorities 'open the minds' of the majority; found improved decision quality if exposed to a minority; suggests minorities are important influencers
        • Minorities may not influence as effectively as majorities; minority members seen as 'deviant'; means people are less likely to join a minority and are much more likely to join a majority so they are accepted
    • Social change
      • Minority influence
        • 1. Drawing attention to an issue
        • 2. Cognitive conflict
        • 3. Consistency
        • 4. The augmentation principle; willingness to suffer
        • 5. Snowball effect; more and more join the minority
          • Social influence through minority influence may be very gradual; strong tendency to conform to majority; groups are less likely to engage in social change
            • Evaluation
              • The fear of being perceived as 'deviant' limits the effect of minorities; members of the majority may avoid alligning with the minority; majorities may be able to more effectively create social change
                • Minority influence
                  • 1. Drawing attention to an issue
                  • 2. Cognitive conflict
                  • 3. Consistency
                  • 4. The augmentation principle; willingness to suffer
                  • 5. Snowball effect; more and more join the minority
                    • Social influence through minority influence may be very gradual; strong tendency to conform to majority; groups are less likely to engage in social change
                      • Evaluation
                        • The fear of being perceived as 'deviant' limits the effect of minorities; members of the majority may avoid alligning with the minority; majorities may be able to more effectively create social change
                          • Not all social norms interventions have led to social change; no one showed lower levels of drinking at uni after a campaign against it
                            • Social norms interventions
                • Not all social norms interventions have led to social change; no one showed lower levels of drinking at uni after a campaign against it
                  • Social norms interventions
        • Majority influence

      Comments

      No comments have yet been made

      Similar Psychology resources:

      See all Psychology resources »See all Conformity resources »