Social influences
- Created by: Holly Morris
- Created on: 31-05-13 13:47
View mindmap
- social influnce
- conformity
- occurs when a majority influences the beliefs and/or behavior of the minority
- compliance - public agreement with the groups beliefs and behavior, in order to gain acceptance or avoid disapproval.
- identification - public or private agreement with a groups beliefs and behavior because membership of that group is beneficial
- internalization- going along with the group because we accept their beliefs and attitudes into our own cognition's
- Asch
- investigated whether individuals conform to an obviously wrong answer. one real participant who either answered last or next to last, the other group members were all confederates.there was a 32% rate conformity, 75% of participants conforming at least
- unethical - involves deceit
- time-consuming
- investigated whether individuals conform to an obviously wrong answer. one real participant who either answered last or next to last, the other group members were all confederates.there was a 32% rate conformity, 75% of participants conforming at least
- occurs when a majority influences the beliefs and/or behavior of the minority
- explanations of conformity
- Deutsch and Gerard
- informal social influence
- no clear correct way of behaving, involves social comparison with others in order to reduce uncertainty. conforming because we want to be right
- normative social influence
- a need to belong, by being accepted and avoiding rejection and ridicule. therefore individuals agree with other because they want to be liked.
- informal social influence
- difficult to separate normative social influence from informal social influence
- Deutsch and Gerard
- obedience
- complying with the demands of an authority figure
- milgram
- 40 volunteer males, testes their willingness to obey increasingly destructive orders. real participant was teacher, confederate was the learner. shocks sent up in 15 volt intervals. 100% of participants obeyed up to 300 volts. 62.5% went up to lethal 450 volts
- unethical - causing distress and even seizres
- valuable insight into obedient behavior was gained
- unethical - deceit, no right of withdrawl
- 40 volunteer males, testes their willingness to obey increasingly destructive orders. real participant was teacher, confederate was the learner. shocks sent up in 15 volt intervals. 100% of participants obeyed up to 300 volts. 62.5% went up to lethal 450 volts
- milgram
- complying with the demands of an authority figure
- explanations of obedience
- perception of legitimate authority; participants obey as they accept the status and power of the researcher, making it hard to disobey
- Agentic state; participants see themselves as agents of the authority figure, thus giving up responsibility on to the researcher.
- personal responsibility; anything detracting from the status of authority figures increases the participants sense of responsibility for their actions.
- entrapment; milgrams particiapnts were gradually drawn into obeying. initial demands were mild, before becoming progressively destructive, participants found it increasingly harder to disobey orders
- dehumanisation; where the learner was belittled as being 'so stupid he deserved to get shocked'
- proximity; where the closer the participants were to the consuquences of the behaviour, the less obedient they were
- Locus of control
- rotter
- high internal locus of control
- people who believe they can influence outcomes of situations
- high external locus of control
- people who believe that they cannot influence the outcomes of situations
- too simplistic
- high internal locus of control
- rotter
- independent behavior
- individuals resist pressures to conform and obey
- positive explanatory style
- non-independent behavior
- individuals are likelier to conform and obey
- depresses attributional style
- individuals are likelier to conform and obey
- individuals resist pressures to conform and obey
- conformity
Comments
No comments have yet been made