Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Social Influence (Key words (conformtity (change in behaviour/opinion as…

- - - - internals
        
        they are responsible for what happens to them
      - externals
        
        matter of luck
- - - - confederates gave wrong answers to see if participant conforms
      - judging lengths of lines
    - - naïve participants conformed on 36.8% of trials
      - 25% never conformed
    - - conformity increased to group size 4
      - dissenter reduced conformity
      - conformity increased when harder
    - - Perrin and Spencer found less conformity in 1980 than 1950
      - artificial situation
        
        demand characteristics meant participants played along
      - limited application
        
        only conducted on American men
      - findings only apply to certain situations
      - ethical issues
  - - - mock prison with students assigned as guards or prisoners
    - - guards became increasingly brutal, prisoners more withdrawn and depressed
    - - good internal valididty
        
        random assignment to roles increases internal validity
      - lack of realism
        
        participants play-acting their role according to media stereotypes
      - dispositional influences
        
        only 1/3 guards were brutal, conclusion exaggerated
      - lack of research support
      - ethical issues
    - - participants conformed to their social role
  - - - participants give fake electric shocks in obedience to instructions from experimenter
    - - 65% gave highest shock
      - 100% went over 300v
      - many showed signs of anxiety
    - - low internal validity
        
        participants realised they were fake, replication with real shocks got similar results
      - good external valididty
        
        generalise to other situations, hospital ward
      - supporting replication
        
        game of death, 80% gave max shock, similar behaviour to Milgram's participants
      - social identity theory
        
        key to obedience lies in group identification
      - ethical issues
  - - - used F-scale to study unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups
    - - people with authoritarian personalities identify with strong and have fixed cognitive style
    - - extreme respect for authority and obedience to it
    - - harsh parenting creates hostility that cannot be expressed against parents, so displaced
    - - research support
        
        some of milgram's participants had authoritarian personalities
      - limited explanation
        
        cant explain increase in obedience across whole culture
        
        better explanation social identity theory
      - political bias
        
        equates authoritarian with right-wing ideology and ignores extreme left-wing
      - methodological problems
        
        all items are worded in the same direction
        
        can get high score by ticking down 1 side of the page
        
        people who agree with items are therefore acquiescers, scale is measure tendency to agree with everything
      - correlation not causation
        
        lots of correlations
        
        doesn't follow that one causes the other
        
        Adorno could not claim harsh parenting caused authoritarian personalities
- - - - private and public acceptance of group
    - - change behaviour to be a part of a group we identify with
    - - go along publicly but no private change
  - - - informational social influence
        
        conform to be right, assume others know better
    - - normative social influence
        
        conform to be liked/accepted by group
  - - - more conformity to incorrect maths answers when difficult as predicted by ISI
    - - nAffiliators want to be liked more
    - - Dissenter may reduce power of ISI and NSI
    - - not affect everyone in the same way
      - Perrin and Spencer study with engineering students found very little conformity
        
        Asch found students were less conformist than other participants
    - - Asch found many participants went along with a clearly wrong answer bc others did
      - felt self conscious giving correct answer, afraid of disapproval
- - - - obedience decreased to 40% when teacher could hear and to 30% in touch proximity
    - - obedience decreased to 47.5% when study moved to run-down office block
    - - obedience decreased to 20% when member of public was experimenter