Social Influence
- Created by: MollyPayne
- Created on: 10-05-16 09:43
View mindmap
- Social Influence
- Conformity
- 2 Types of conformity
- Compliance
- Shallowest, public change
- Internalisation
- Deepest, personal and private change
- Compliance
- Why do people conform
- Informational social influence (ISI) RIGHT
- Normative Social Influence (NSI) LIKED
- Uncertainty
- Resisting the pressure to conform
- Exposure to dissent
- Reactance
- Group Unanimity
- Group size
- Sherif ISI
- Static light - how much and which direction
- All together, asked separate, again in 3s of differing norms
- Judgements close together
- Low validty - demand characteristics
- Ethical issues - anxiety
- Ambiguous result
- Lacks ecological validity and mundane rewalism
- Asch NSI
- 1 line vs 3 lines
- P 6th to answer, other 6 confederates
- Answer always obvious, confederates wrong 12/18 'Critical Trials'
- Conformed 32% and 74% conformed at least once
- Low ecological validity
- Demand characteristics - low validity
- Cultural - Only Western society
- 2 Types of conformity
- Obedience
- Why do people obey?
- Graduated commitment
- The agentic state
- Role of buffers
- Perceived authority
- Resisting the pressure to obey
- Autonomy
- Responsibility
- Removing legitimate authority
- Bickman - Obedience
- Validity of Milgram's work realistic setting
- 153 Ps and 3 experimenters - sports coat and tie, milkman and police guard
- Orders = 'pick up the bag' 'pay for parking meter' 'stand on other side of pole'
- More likely to obey guard
- Supports Milgram's variation of perceived authority
- Milgram - Obedience
- 40 men aged 20-50 paid $4.50
- P's teachers and accomplice was learner
- Teacher told to shock learner for wrong answers up to 450 volts
- 65% gave maximum shock, 74% learnt something important, 1 person regretted taking part
- Supported by replication - high ecological validity
- Cross cultural support
- Thorough debrief avoids ethical issue of deception
- Low internal validity
- Yale prestigious environment
- Unethical - stress
- Variation of Milgram
- Ordinary member of public - 20%
- Touch proximity - forcing learners hands onto plate - 30%
- Why do people obey?
- Independent behaviour
- Locus of control
- Rotter - a persons perception of personal control over own behaviour
- Internal - more likely to be independent. Believe in control and take responsibility
- External - Success is due to luck and external factors. Likely to conform
- Gender and Culture
- Eagly and Carli- women most influenced by men when group pressure present. Women more conformist on group pressure tasks
- Bond and Smith - Collectivist cultures showed higher conformity levels than individualist
- Locus of control
- Social change
- implications
- Obedience - no or negative
- Conformity - no or negative
- Civil disobedience and non conformity - Positive
- Minority influence- consistent views of a few, snowball effect. Minority view becomes authority if show personal sacrifice and moral principles and belief in point
- Disobedient role models - variation of Milgram = 2 confederates disobeying fell to 10%
- Importance of moral principles and internal locus of control - strong moral convictions less likely to be influenced
- MOSCOVICI
- Groups of 6 women, 2 confederates asked to describe colour of blue cards
- Confederates said it was green and answered first
- Participants agreed 8% of the time and 32% conformed at least once
- Consistency is key , when confederates answered inconsistently conformity fell to 1.25%
- Lab study
- Gender bias
- Weak data
- implications
- Conformity
Comments
Report