Psychology AS - Social Influences

Compliance: "Going along with others" in public but disagree privately

Identification: Conform to opinion of group due to valueing something in the group

Internalisation: Take on majority view because they accept it to be true - far reaching and permanent behaviour change

Normative Social Influence: Agree to gain Social Approval - leads to Compliance

Informative Social Influence: Agree because they believe it to be correct - leads to Internalisaton

Procedure: Mock prison in Psychlogy department with Volunteers selected after extensive Psychoogical testing - roles in Prison were randomly assigned

Findings: Behaviour became threat to psychological and physical health (become subdued, depressed and anxious - shows that when given a role, people will conform

- Control over variables (Lab Study) - high internal validity

- Lack of realism: Performances based off of stereotypes - doesn't show how people would realisticy act in situation

- Ethics: Psychological harm done to participants

Procedure: Group actors (who would purposely give wrong answer) was One Volunteer - choose a line out of three different sizes that matched te one shown

Findngs: Majority (75%) conformed their answers (Normative Social Influence)

    - Small group soze increases conformity

    - Harder tasks increase conformity

Artificial Tasks: not representative of everyday tasks

Non-Generalisability: All American men participants - could be biological differences that cause women t conform more or less than men

Lab Environment: High control and high internal validity

Obedience: Person acts in response to an order given by a person of authority

Procedure: Volunteer (Teacher) asks Memory questions to student (Confedrate) - electric sock given for wrong answer and charge increase - at 315 Volts no response and participants will look to Experimenter for guidence

Findings: 65% continued to end - Qualitative data showed Tension (Nail biting and seizures) and Obedience  - Uniform, Proximity and Location affected Obedience levels

- Low internal Validity: Participants didn't belev shocks were real

- Generalisability: All Male participants - biological differences between men and women could cause women to obedient nore or less

-Reliability: Similar experimenter with real shocks - same results (didn't stop and similar behaviour)

-Suporting Research: Gave shocks as ordered by presenter - 80% continued and same behaviour

- Agentic State: Mental state where we feel no personal responsibility for our behaviour - be acting for Authority due to Social Hierarchy       

- Binding Factors: Allow person to ignor or minimise damaging effect

- Legitimacy of Authority: More likely to obey people who we perceive to have authority - justified by position of power within Social Hierarchy

- Research Support: Students blamed experimenter in Milgram's study - recognised autority as cause of Obedience

- Limited Explanation: Only account for some situations of Obedience

- Cultural Differences: Cross-cultural research shows culture has influence - validity

Procedure: Adorno - 2000 middle-class, white Americans (Unconscious attitudes) F-scale to measure Authoritarian Personality

Findings: People with Authoritarian leanings identify with "Strong" People - very conscious of their own and other's status - have fixed stereotypes

Characteristics: Extreme respect for Authority wth highly conventional views

- Origins: Result of harsh parenting with Conditional Love (children behaviour)

- Demand characteristics: May not give truthful answers and may not be accurate

- Ethics: Social sensitivity - affects relationship with parents

-Real Life Applications: Explain why soliders obeyed Hitler

Social Support: Other disobedient people are present (Model)

Obedience: Disobedience (model) - lets participants act from own conscience

Internal Control Vs External Control: Internal-own actions and External-without own control

Internal LOC more likely to resist pressure - take responsibility and more likely base decisions on own beliefs

- Resistant to Conformity: Resistant is not motivated by following other people

- Resistant to Odedience: Similar research show groups more easily disobeyed

- Validity: 37% internal did not continue (greater resistance)

Minority Influence: Minority persuade others to adopt beliefs, attitudes and behaviour - leads to Internalisation

Consistency and Commitment: Minority Influence more effective if they hold same belief over a long time - personal sacrifices show dedication

Flexibility:Relentless Consistency (unbending and unreasonable) - Minority more effective when showing comprimise and flexibility

- Research Support: Moscovici blue slides- confedrates would call them green - Consistant group 8.42% conformity and Non-Consistant 1.25% conformity

- Artificial Tasks: Far removed from how minorities change behaviour - lacking external validity

- Limited real-world applications