Social Influence

HideShow resource information

Types of Conformity

Internalisation:

  • Occurs when a person genuinely accepts the group norms
  • Results in private and public change of opinion/behaviour
  • Change is likely to be permanent as attitudes have become internalised - attitude persists even in the absense of other group members

Identification:

  • Sometimes we conform to the behaviour/opinions of a group because there is something about the group we value
  • Identify with the group to be a part of it
  • May mean publicly changing opinions to achieve this goal even if we don't privately agree with the group

Compliance:

  • Simply going along with others in public but privately not changing personal opinions/behaviour - stops as soon as group pressure stops
1 of 25

Explanations for Conformity

Informational Social Influence:

  • ISI is about who has better info - you or the rest of the group
  • The reason individuals follow the behaviour of the group (the majority) is beacuse people want to be right
  • ISI is a cognitive process - to do with what you think
  • Most likely to happen in new situations or situations with ambiguity
  • Typical in crisis situations where decisions have to be made quickly

Normative Social Influence:

  • NSI is about norms - what is normal or typical behaviour for a social group
  • Norms regulate behaviour of groups and individuals
  • People follow the norms for social approval and to be liked
  • NSI is an emotional process
  • Most likely to happen with strangers (feeling fear of rejection)
  • We are most concerned about  the social approval of our friends
  • May be more pronounced in stressful situations - in need of social support
2 of 25

Conformity - Evaluation

Research Support for ISI:

  • Lucas et al (2006) asked students to give answers to math problems that were easy or more difficult - greater conformity to incorrect answers when they were difficult
  • This shows that people conform in situations where they don't know the answer - the outcome predicted by ISI

Individual Differences in NSI:

  • People less concerned with being liked are less affected by NSI than those who care more - nAffiliators - McGhee and Teevan (1967) found that students high in need of afiliation were most likely to conform
  • This shows that desire to be like uderlines conformity for some people more than others - individual differneces in the way people respond

ISI and NSI Work Together

  • In the Asch experiment, conformity is reduced when there is one other dissenting ppt
  • This dissenter may reduce power of NSI or reduce power of ISI
  • This shows it isn't always possible to be sure whether NSI or ISI is at work - casts doubt over them being 2 processes operating independently
3 of 25

Conformity - Asch's Research

Procedure:

  • Tested conformity by showing ppts 2 large white cards - 1 with a 'standard' line on and the other with 3 'comparison' lines - 1 of the lines the same others substantially different
  • Ppts were 123 American male undergraduates - each naive ppt tested with a group of 6 and 8 confederates - naive ppt not aware the others were confederates
  • 1st few trials confederates gave correct answer but started making errors - all insrtucted to give the same wrong answer
  • Each ppt took part in 18 trials and on 12 'critical' trials confederates gave the wrong answer
  • A trial was 1 occasion identifying the length of the standard line

Findings:

  • Naive ppt gave a wrong answer 36.8% of the time
  • Overall 25% of ppts didn't conform - 75% did at least once
  • When ppts were interviewed afterwards they said hey conformed to avoid rejection - NSI
4 of 25

Conformity - Asch's Variations

1. Group Size

  • Wanted to know whether group size would be more important than agreement of group
  • Found that with 3 confederates conformity to wrong answer rose to 31.8%
  • Addition of further confederates made little difference - suggests a small minority isn't sufficient for influence to be exerted but no need for a majority of more than 3

2. Unanimity

  • Wanted to know if the presence of another non-conforming person would affect ppts conformity
  • He introduced a confederate who disagreed with others, sometimes giving correct answer
  • Presense of this confederate meant conformity reduced by 9% from when all confederates were unanimous
  • The influence of the majority depends to some extent on the group being unanimous

3. Task Difficulty

  • Asch made line task more difficult by making stimulus line and comparison lines more similar in length
  • Conformity increased under these conditions - suggests ISI plays a greater role when task is harder
5 of 25

Conformity - Asch's Research Evaluation

A Child of it's Time

  • Perrin snd Spencer (1980) repeated Ach's study with engineering students in the UK - only 1 student conformed in a total of 396 trials
  • Could be that the students were more confident or that the 1950s were a particulary conformist time, especially in America
  • Society has changed are people tend to be less conformist today
  • Limitation of Asch's research because it mean's that the Asch effect isn't consistent and so in't a fundamental feature of human behaviour
  • Artifical Situation and Task
  • Ppts knew they were in a research study - demand characteristics in place
  • The task was trivial - no reason to conform
  • The groups didn't resemble those of everyday life
  • Limitation because it means that findings don't generalise to everday situations
  • Limited Application of Findings
  • Only men tested by Asch - other research suggests women may be more conformist than men (Neto 1995)
  • Men were from the US - individualist culture - similar studies in collectivist cultures show higher conformity rates
  • Shows that conformity levelsare sometimes hiher than what Asch found - his findings may only apply to American men
6 of 25

Conformity - Zimbardo's Research

Zimbardo set up a mock prison in the basement of thepsychology department at Stanford Uni

  • Avertised for students willing to volunteer and selected those deemed 'emotionally stable' after psychological tests
  • Student randomly assigned to the roles of prisoners and guards - to increase reality the prisoners were arrested at their homes by local plice and talen to the prison - they were blindfolded, strip searched, deloused and issued a uniform and number - prisoners' names never used, only their numbers
  • The social roles of the prisoners and guards were stricty divided - prisoners' daily routines heavily regulated - 16 rules they had to follow which were enforced by guards who worked in shifts, 3 at a time
  • The guards had their own uniform - wooden club, handcuffs, keys and mirror shades - were told they had complete power over prisoners
  • Findings:
  • The study was stopped after 6 days instead of the intended 14 - guards'behaviour became a threat to prisoners' psychological and physical health
  • 2 days in the prisoners rebelled against the harsh treatment - ripped their uniforms and shouted/swore at guards -retaliated with fire extinguishers
  • Guards employed 'divide-and-rule' tactics by playing prisners against one another - harassed prisoners constantly e.g. conducting frequent headcounts (sometimes in the middle of the night) when the prisoners would stand in line and call out their numbers
  • 1 prisoner released after 1st day showing symptoms of psychological disturbance - 2 more released on day 4 - 1 prisoner went on hunger strike, guards atempted to force feed him and punished him by putting him in 'the hole' - shunned by other prisoners
7 of 25

Conformity - Zimbardo's Research Evaluation

Control

  • A strength is that Zimbardo and colleagues had some control over variables - obvious example is selection of ppts - emotionally stable people chosen and randomly assigned to roles
  • This was one way in which researchers tried to rule out individual personality differences as an explanation of the findings - behaviour must have been due to pressures of situation
  • Having such control increases internal validity - more confident in drawing conclusions about influence of roles on behaviour
  • Lack of Realism 
  • Banuazizi and Mohavedi (1975) argued ppts were play-acting rather than genuinely conforming
  • Performancs were based on stereotypes of how prisoners and guards should behave - e.g. 1 guard claimed he based his role on a brutual character in a film 'Cool Hand Luke'
  • This could explain the rioting as it's what they thought prisoners did
  • Quantitative data gathered during procedure showed that 90% of prisoners conversations were about prison life - Prisoner '416' expressed the view that the prison was a real one - situation real to ppts giving study higher degree of internal validity
  • Role of Dispositional Influences
  • Fromm (1973) accused Zimbardo of exagerating power of the situation to influence behaviour and minimising role of personality factors - only 1/3 of guards behavedin a brutal manner, another 1/3 applied rules fairly and the rest tried to help and support prisoners
  • Suggsts conclusion may be over-stated - guards were able to exercise right and wrong choices
8 of 25

Obedience - Milgram's Study Procedure

Procedure:

  • 40 male ppts recruited through adverts and flyers in the post - ad said he was looking for ppts for a study about memory - those recruited were 20-50yrs old with jobs ranging from unskilled to professional - offered $4.50 to take part
  • Money was given at the beginning and then there was a rigged draw for the role - a confederate always got the learner and the ppt got the teacher - the experimenter was also a confederate - ppts told they could leave the study at any time
  • Learner was strapped in a chair and wired with electrodes - the teacher was required to give a shock everytime the learner got an answer wrong - the task was to do with word pairs
  • The shocks were demonstrated to the ppt but after this they were false
  • Shocks went from 15volts and rose 30 levels to 450volts (labelled 'danger severe shock')
  • At 300v the learner banged on the wall and did not answer the next question - after 315v the learner banged again and did not give any responses after this
  • When turning to the experimenter for guidance the teacher was given a standard instruction 'An absense of response shold be treated as a wrong answer'
  • If the teacher felt unsure about continuin the experimenter would use 1 of 4 prods:
  • 'Please continue'
  • 'The experiment requires you to continue'
  • 'It is absolutely essential that you continue'
  • 'You have no other choice, you must go on'
9 of 25

Obedience - Milgram's Study Findings

Findings:

  • No ppts stopped below 300v
  • 12.5% (5 ppts) stopped at 300v
  • 65% continued to 450v
  • Qualitative data was also collected - e.g. observations that the ppts showed signs of extreme tension (sweat, tremble, stuter, bite their lip, groan, dig fingernails into hands) - 3 ppts had 'full-blown uncontrollable seizures'
  • Prior to the study Milgram had asked 14 psychology students to predict the ppts behaviour - they estimated that no more than 3% of pts would go to 450v
  • All ppts were debriefed and assured their behaviour was normal
  • A follow-up questionnaire was also sent around after the experiement - 84% of pptsfelt glad they had participated in the study
10 of 25

Obedience - Milgram's Study Evaluation

  • Low Internal Validity
  • Orne + Holland (1968) argud that ppts behaved the way they did because they didn't really believe in the set up - guessing it wasn't real electric shocks
  • Perry's (2013) research supports this - listened to tapes of milgram's ppts + reported many of them doubting that the shocks were real
  • Sheridan + King (1972) supports Milgram as he found that 54% of males + 100% of females gave real 'fatal' shocks to puppies
  • This suggests the effects in Milgram's study were genuine as people behaved the same with real shocks
  • Good External Validity
  • Milgram argued that the lab setting accurately reflected wider authority relationships
  • Hofling et al (1966) studied nurses and found that 21/22 nurses obeyed unjustified demands from a doctor
  • Suggests that the processes of obedience to authority that occured in Milgram's lab can be generalised to other situations
  • Supporting Replication
  • Le Jeu de la Mort (The Game of Death) is a documentary about reality tv including a replication of Milgram's study
  • Ppts believed they were contestants in a pilot episdoe for a new game show - they were paid to give fake electric shocks, when ordered by the presenters, to other ppts (actually actors) in front of a studio audience
  • 80% of ppts gave max. shoch 460v - behaviour almost identical to Milgram's ppts - supports Milgram
11 of 25

Obedience - Situational Variables

Proximity

  • The teacher and learner were in the same room - obedience rate dropped from 65% to 40%
  • Also a 'touch proximity' variation - teacher had to force learner's hand onto an 'electroshock plate' - obedience rate dropped further to 30%
  • Another proximity variation involved the experimenter leaving the room and giving instructions over the phone - obedience rate dropped again to 20.5% - ppts also pretended to give shocks or gave weaker ones than they were supposed to

Location

  • The study was originally based at Yale University, a prestigious setting - it was repeated in a run-down building - the experimenter had less authority in this situation - obedience ates dropped to 47.5%

Uniform

  • In the original study the experimenter wore a grey lab coat as a sign of authority - in the variation the experimenter was caled away to a telephone call and the role was taken over by an 'ordinary member of the public' in everyday clothes and not a lab coat
  • Obedience rate dropped to 20% - the lowest of all the variations
12 of 25

Obedience - Situational Variables Evaluation

  • Research support
  • Other studies demonstrated the influence of situational variables on obedience
  • Field experiment in NYC - Bickman (1974) had 3 confederates dress in 3 outfits - jacket + tie, milkman + a security guard - confederates stood in the street and asked passers-by to perform tasks e.g. picking up litter - people twice as likely to obey the security guard tha the one dressed in a jacket + tie
  • Supports Milgram's conclusion about uniform conveying authority
  • Lack of Internal Validity
  • Even more likely that ppts in the variations realised shocks were fake due to extra manipulation
  • Milgram himself recognised that the 'member of the public' was so contrived that some ppts may have worked out the truth
  • Limitation of all studies as it's unclear whether results are actually due to operation of obedience or because the ppts saw through the deception and acted accordingly
  • Cross-Cultural Replications
  • A general strength is that findings have been replicated in other cultures
  • Miranda et al (1981) found an obedience rate of over 90% amongst Spanish students - suggesting conclusions aren't limited to American males
  • Smith and Bond (1998) made a point that most replications are in western, developed societies - culturally not that different to USA - premature to conclude Milgram's findings on variables apply to people everywhere
13 of 25

Obedience - Agentic State

  • Milgram proposed that obedience to destructive authority e.g. the Nazis occurs because a person doesn't take responsibilty - they believe that they are acting on behalf of somebody else
  • An 'agent' is someody who acts for or in place of another

Autonomous State

  • Opposite of being in an agentic state - autonomy means indpendent or free
  • A person in an autonomous state is free to behave according to their own princples - a sense of responsibility for actions
  • The shift from autonomy to agency is the agentic shift - Milgram suggested this occurs when a person percieves someone else as a figure of authority - other person has greater power due to their position in the social heirarchy

Buffers

  • Milgram raised the question of why people stay in the agentic state - had observed that many of his ppts spoke as if they wanted to quit but seemed unable to do so
  • Buffer - aspects of a situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effect of their behaviour and thus reduce the 'moral strain' they're feeling
  • Milgram proposed a number of strategies the individual uses e.g. shifting responsibility to victim or denying damage they were doing to the victim
14 of 25

Obedience - Legitimacy of Authority

  • Most societies structured in a heirarchial way - people in certain positions hold authority over the rest
  • The authorty they wield is legitimate because it is agreed by society - most of us accept that authority figures have to be allowed to exercise social power over others because it allows society to funtion smoothly
  • One of the consequences is that some people are grated power to punish others - most people accept that police and courtshave the power to punish criminals/wrongdoers
  • We are willing to give up some independence and hand control of our behaviour to those e trust to exercise their uthoriy appropriately - we lean acceptance of authority in childhood from parents and teachers

Destructive Authority

  • Problems arise when legitimate authority becomes destructive
  • History as shown that powerful leaders can use their legitimate powers for destructive purposes and ordering people to behave in ways tht are cruel, stupid and dangeous
  • Destructive authority shown in Milgram's study when the experimenter used prods to make the ppt do something they didn't want to
15 of 25

Obedience - Agentic State and Legitimacy of Author

  • Research Support
  • Blass and Schmitt (2001) showed a film of Milgram;s study to students and asked them to identify who they felt was responsible for the harm to the learner
  • Students blamed the experimenter rather than ppt - they also indicated the responsibility was due to legiimate authority but also due to expert authority
  • A Limited Explanation
  • Agentic shift doesn't explain many of the resarch findings - doesn't explain why ppts didn't obey
  • Agentic shift doesn't explain findings from Hofling et al's study with nurses - it predicts that as nurss handed over responsibility to the doctor, they should have shown similr levels of anxiety as Milgram's ppts (not the case)
  • This suggests that, at the most, agentic shift can only acount for some situations of obedience
  • Cultural Differences
  • A strength of legitimacy of authority explaation is that it's useful account of cultural differences in obedience
  • Many studies show countries differ in degree to which people are traditionally obedient to authorityKilham and Mann (1974) replicated Milgram's stud in Australia and found only 16% of people went to full voltage
  • Mantell (1971) found a very different figure for Germany - 85%
  • This shows that some in some cultures authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate and entitled to demand obedience from individuals - relects the ways that different societies are structured and how children are raised to percieve authority figures - such supportive findings increase validity
16 of 25

Obedience - The Authoritarian Personality

  • Procedure
  • Adorno et al (1950) investigated the causes of the obedient personality in a study of more than 2000 middle class, white Americans and their unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups
  • Developed scales to investigate this, including the F scale (the potential for fascism) - still used to measure authoritarian personality
  • Findings
  • People with authoritarian learnings (those who scored highly on the F scale) identified with 'strong' people and were generally contemptuous of the 'weak'
  • They were conscious of their own and others' status - excessive respect to those of higher status
  • Authoritarian people had a cognitive style where there was no 'fuzziness' between categories of people, with fixed and distinctive stereotypes about other groups - strong positive correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice
  • Authoritarian Characteristics and Origin
  • People with an authoritarian personality had the tendency to be especially obedient to authority - extreme respect for authority and submissive to it
  • Show contempt for thos with inferior social status and conventional attitudes towards race and gender - believe we need powerful leaders to enforce tradition values e.g. religion and love for country
  • Authoritarian personalities are inflexible in their outlook - everything is right or wrong
  • Forms in childhood from harsh parenting - characterised by unconditional love - creates resentment and hostility in the child - fears displaced onto those percieved to be weaker
17 of 25

Obedience - The Authoritarian Personality Evaluati

  • Research Support
  • Milgram and Elms (1966) conducted interviews w/ a small sample of fully obedient ppts who scored highly on the F scale - thought there was a link between obedience and AP
  • Link is a correlation between 2 measured variables - impossible to draw a conclusion that AP causes obedience on the basis of this
  • May be that a 3rd factor is involved - both obedience and AP may be due to a lower level of education and aren't directly linked with one another (Hyman and Sheatsley 1954)
  • Limited Explanation
  • Pre-war Germany millions of people all displayed obedient, racist and anti-Semitic behaviour - despite the fact they mjust have differed in personalities in all ways - extremely unlikely they all had an AP
  • Limitation of the theory as it's clear that an alternative explanation is more realistic - social identity explains obedience
  • Political Bias
  • F-scale measures tendency towards an extreme form of right-wing ideoogy
  • Christie and Johoda (1954) argued this is a politically biased interpretation of AP - point out the reality of left-wing authoritarianism in the shape e.g. Chinese Maoism
  • Extreme left and right-wing ideologies have much in common  - both emphasise importance of complete obedience to political authority
  • Limitation because it's not a comprehensive dispositionl eplanation that can account for obedience across the whole political spectrum
18 of 25

Resistance to Social Influence - Social Support

Conformity

  • Social support can help people resist conformity - pressure to conform reduced if there are non-conforming peers
  • Asch's research - person not conforming doesn't have to be giving right answer but the fact someone isn't following majority appears to enable person to be free to follow own conscience - ISI = less likely to assume you're wrong
  • Asch's research also showed that if the non-conforming person starts conforming again so does the naive ppt - NSI = less uncomfortable being in minority of 2 than 1

Obedience

  • Pressure to obey can be reduced if there's another person seen to obey
  • Milgram's variation conformity dropped from 65% to 10% when there was a disobedient confederate
  • Ppt may not follow disbedient person's behaviour but the disobedience acts as a model for ppt to copy
19 of 25

Resistance to Social Influence - LOC

  • Rotter (1966) first proposed concept of locus of control
  • It's concerned w/ internal vs. external control
  • Internals believe that the things that happen to them are controlled by themselves e.g. doing well in an exam because you revised a lot
  • Externals believe that things happen without their control e.g. doing well in an exam because they had a good textbook or they failed because of bad luck
  • Continuum
  • People differ in the way they explain their successes and failures - isn't simply a matter of being internal or external
  • There is a contiuum w/ high internal LOC at one end and high external LOC at the other end - low internal and external lying in between
  • Resistance to SI
  • Internals more likely to be able to resist pressures to conform/obey - they take personal responsibilty for the things they do
  • Internals tend to be more self-confident, achievement-orientated, have higher intelligence and less need for social approval
20 of 25

Resistance to Social Influence - Evaluation

  • Research Support - resistance to conformity
  • Allen + Levine (1971) found conformity decreased when there was 1 dissenter in an Asch-type study - this occured when dissenter wore thick glasses + said he had difficulty w/ his vision
  • Supports view that resistance isn't just motivated by following someone else but enables someone to be free of pressure
  • Research Support - resistance to obedience
  • Gamson et al (1982) found higher levels of resistance in their study than Milgram - probably because ppts in Gamson's study were in groups - 29/33 groups of ppts rebelled; peer support linked to resistance
  • Research Support - LOC
  • Holland (1967) repeated Milgram's study + measured whether ppts were internal or external
  • 37% of internals didn't continue to highest shock - only 23% of externals didn't continue
  • Increases validity of LOC and its explanation of resistance
  • Contradictory Research - LOC
  • Twenge et al (2004) analysed data from American obedience studies over a 40 year period - data showed that people have become more resistant to obedience but also more external
  • If resistance were linked to internal LOC we would expect people to be becoming more internal 
  • Challenges the link between internal LOC + resistance - results may be due to a changing society where many things are out of personal control
21 of 25

Minority Influence

  • Consistency
  • The consistency in the minority's views increases the amount of interest from others - consistency may be agreement between those in minority and/or consistency over time
  • This makes others rethink their views (maybe they have a point etc)
  • Commitment
  • Sometimes minorities engage in extreme activities to draw attention to their views - important that these are at some risk to the minority because it shows commitment to the cause
  • Majority group members pay more attention  - augmentation principle
  • Flexibility
  • Nemeth (1986) argud that consistency isn't the only important factor as it can be interpretated negatively - being extremely consistent can be seen as rigid and unflexible
  • This is off-putting to the majority and is unlikely to convert them to the minority
  • Minority need to be prepared to adapt their point of view and accept reasonable and valid counter-arguments - balance between consistency and flexibilty
  • The Process of Change
  • Hearing something new makes you think about it, specially of view is consistent/passionate
  • It's this deeper processing which is important in the process og converting to a different, minority viewpoint
  • The more people who are converted the faster the rate of conversion - the snowball effect
  • Gradually minority view becomes the majority
22 of 25

Minority Influence - Evaluation

  • Research Support for Consistency
  • Moscovici et al showed that a consistent minority opinion had a greater effect on other people than an inconsistent opinion
  • Wood et al (1994) carried out a meta-analysis of almost 100 similar studies and found that minorities who were seen as consistent were most influential - suggests consistency is a major factor in minority influence
  • Research Support for Depth of Thought
  • Martin et al (2003) gave ppts a message supporting a particular viewpoint and measured their support
  • 1 group then heard a minority group agree w/ initial view and another group heard this from a majority
  • Ppts finally exposed to a conflicting view and attitudes measured again - peple less willing to change opinion if they'd listened to minority group - suggests that minority message had been more deeply processed and had a more enduring effect
  • Artificial Tasks
  • Limitation is that tasks used were artificial e.g. coloured slides
  • Research far removed from how minorities attempt to change behaviour in real life
  • Findings lack external validity because they can't be generalised to real-life situations such as jury decision making and politicl campaigning
23 of 25

Social Change

The Special Role of Minority Influence

  • Examples: Black Americans, suffragettes, gay rights
  • Drawing attention
  • Consistency
  • Deeper Processing
  • The augmentation principle
  • The snowball effect
  • Social cryptomnesia - people have a memory that a change has occured but don't remember how it happened

Lessons from Conformity Research

  • Environmental and health campaigns increasingly exploit conformity processes by appealing to NSI - do this by providing info about what others are doing e.g. Bin it - others do

Lessons from Obedience Research

  • Gradual commitment - once a small instruction is made it is difficult to resist a bigger one; people drift into a new kind of behaviour
24 of 25

Social Change - Evaluation

  • Research Support for Normative Influences
  • Nolan et al (2008) invesigated whether social influence processes led to a reduction in energy consumption in a community - hung messages on doors in Sand Diego every week for a month
  • Key message was that more residents were trying to reduce their energy usage - some residents were just asked to save energy (no reference to others)
  • Found significant energy reductions in the first group -strength as it shows conformity can lead to social change
  • Minority Influence is Only Indirectly Effective
  • Nemeth (1986) argues that the effects of minority influence are likely to be mostly indirect and delayed - indirect because majority is influenced on matters only related to the issue at hand, not the central issue itself - delayed because effects may not be seen for some time
  • Limitation as it could show that minority influence's effects are fragile and its role in social change is limited
  • Role of Deeper Processing
  • Moscovici's conversion explanation of MI argues that minority and majority influences use different cognitive processes
  • Mackie (1987) disagrees and presents evidence that majority influence may cfreate deper processing - we like to believe that others share our views, when a majority believes something different you are forced to think why
  • A central part of minority influence is challenged by this and casts doubt on the validity of Moscovici's theory
25 of 25

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Social Influence resources »