Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Social Influence - Coggle Diagram
Social Influence
Types of conformity and explanations of conformity
Kelman (1958) suggested three types of conformity - compliance, internalisation and identification
Compliance (shallow) - agreeing with the group but keeping personal opinions
Identification (intermediate) - we value membership of a group so we will conform to their opinions and ideas to be a part of the group (even if don't agree)
Internalisation (Deep) - Personal opinions genuinely change to be apart of the group - a permanent change in beliefs
Conformity - Yeilding to group pressures
Explanations
Informational Social Influence - When someone conforms because they want to be right - usually leads to internalisation and occurs in situations where we do not have knowledge or expertise to make our own decisisons
Evidence: Fein et al. asked participants to vote for a US presidential candidate after they saw others voting for somebody else. Most of the participants changed their mind because they wanted to be ‘correct’, thus demonstrating the impact of informational social influence as a mechanism for conformity.
Normative social influence - When someone conforms because they want to be liked and be a part of a group
Asch (1951) - Pptc's were shown a line with an unknown length - they were then shown lines ABC and had to say which they thought was the same length as the first unknown line - Pptc's would chose the incorrect answer when the confederates also chose the incorrect answer - when interviewed after pptc's said they conformed to avoid rejection from others proving that people will show compliant behaviour in order to fit in and be approved by the majority
Eval: :no_entry: Lacks mundane realism
Evaluation: :check: There is evidence supporting the link between NSI and bulling - real-life application - Garandeau and Cillissen found that a boy can be manipulated by a bully into victimising another child - bully provides a common goal for the boy’s group of friends, the goal is to victimise the other child, so the boy would most likely also victimise the child to avoid disapproval from his friends. :check: Also evidence to support ISI - Lucas et al found that conformity to an obviously incorrect maths answer was greater when the maths question and the participant rated their own maths ability unfavourably - individuals are more likely to turn to others when they lack the information to make their own informed decisions
Explanations for obedience
Angentic State
This is the idea that the individual believes they don't have responsibility for their actions because they are the agent of an authority figure - opposite to an autonomous state where an individuals actions are free from control
Evaluation: :check: Real life applications - Kilham and Mann put forward the example for the My Lai Massacres where American soldiers pillaged through Vietnamese villages and killed many civilians - Agentic state (soldiers obeying orders from the generals so shifted their responsibility over to them) Legitimate authority (justified because of high positive in army social rank) :check: Milgrams study (1963)
Legitimacy of authority
The idea that individuals accept that individuals who are higher up on the social hierarchy should be obeyed - learnt in childhood through socialisation processes in relationships such as parent/child, teacher/student - also the idea that some people have the right to punish them/ others such as police
Situational factors
This includes the appearance of the authority figure/ location and proximity - as investigated by Milgram
Milgrams Electric shock study: Randomly selected pptc's - 40 male volunteers
Aim: To observe whether people would obey a figure of authority when told to harm another person i.e. evaluating the influence of a destructive authority figure.
Procedure: The pptc was given the role of teacher and the confederate given the role of the learner. Pptc had to ask the confederate a series of questions - whenever C got an answer wrong Pptc had to give them an electric shock - the electric shocks increase by 15 volts at a time ranging from 300v - 450v where 330v was marked 'lethal' - pptc's thought shocks were real (C) was acting - the shocks were falsely demonstrated to be real prior to the study - pptc's assessed on how many shocks they were willing to give the C - the experimenters role was to give a series of orders when the pptc's refused to give out an electric shock - the same 4 orders used each time , the first 3 demanded obedience to science - the final one ordered obedience to the C
Findings: All pptc's went put to 300v and 65% went up to 450v - majority of the pptc's were prepared to give a lethal electric shock
Variations: Proximity - Learner and teacher in the same room obedience dropped to 40% - When the teacher had to place the learners hands onto the shock pads obedience dropped to 30%
Location - Legitimate authority influences how likely someone is to obey. The original research was conducted at Yale university, when replicated in an office block obedience dropped to 47.6%
Uniform - the use of appropriate uniform demonstrates legitimate authority - in the original study the experimenter was wearing a grey lab coat. in a variation the lab experimenter stepped out on a call and a different confederate in normal clothing stepped in - obedience dropped to 20%
Evaluation: :check: pptc's thoroughly debriefed after deception and not being able to give informed consent - in a follow up study 84% of pptc's said they were glad they were apart of the study 74% felt they learnt something
:check: real-life applications - This research opened our eyes to the problem of obedience and so may reduce future obedience in response to destructive authority figures
:check: Highly replicable - The procedure has been repeated all over the world, where consistent and similar obedience levels have been found.
:no_entry: Ethical issues - deception and therefore unable to give informed consent - also caused distress (psychological distress)
:no_entry: Lacks ecological validity
:no_entry: Socially sensitive research - people who killed innocent citizens giving them the excuse that it is because of the situation they are in and that its difficult to obey
Variables affecting conformity - investigated by Asch
Group size, unanimity and task difficulty
Asch's study (1951) - 123 male American undergraduates in groups consisting of 1 pptc and 5 confederates - Pptc and confederates were presented with 4 lines; 3 comparison lines and 1 standard line - they were asked to state which of the three lines was the same as the standard line - the real pptc always answered last or second to last - the confederates gave an incorrect answer for 12 out of 18 of the trials - Asch observed how often the pptc gave the same incorrect answer as the confederates vs the correct answer
Findings: 36.8% conformed - 25% never conformed - 75% conformed at least once
Group Size: An individual is more likely to conform when in a larger group - there was a low conformity rate with a group size of confederates of less than 3 - anymore than 3 the conformity rose by 30% - conformity does not seem to increase in groups larger than 4 (optimal group size)
Unanimity: An individual is more likely to conform if the group is unanimous with their answer - When joined by another pptc who gave the correct answer conformity fell to 5.5% - if different answers are given conformity fell to 9% - consistent majority view increases conformity as individual will have more confidence that they are right
Task Difficulty: An individual Is more likely to conform if the task is difficult - Asch altered comparison lines ABC so they were more similar lengths (harder to judge the length) - conformity increased (informational social influence)
Evaluation: :check: High internal validity - strict control over extraneous variables such as timing of the assessment and the type of task used = valid conclusions
:check: Lab experiment - confounding and extraneous variables are strictly controlled - easily replicated (successful replication increases validity of findings) :check:Supports normative social influence - pptc's reported that they conformed to fit into the group :no_entry: Lacks ecological validity - does not reflect the complexity of real life conformity :no_entry: Lacks sample issues - sample was all American male undergraduates - gender bias - cannot generalise findings to females (beta bias) :no_entry: ethical issues - deception into thinking the study was about perception and not conformity therefore unable to give informed consent - cost benefit analysis required
:no_entry: Perrin and Spencer (1980) - carried out an exact replication of Asch's experiment using British engineering students and found one conforming response in 396 trials - suggests Asch's experiment lacks temporal validity (Cold War conformity)
Conformity to social roles: Zimbardo
Zimbardo's Prison experiment: 24 American University graduates - Aim: To investigate how readily people would conform to social roles in a simulated environment and specifically to investigate why 'good people do bad things'
Procedure: In the basement of Stanford University's psychology building a simulated prison was built - American student volunteers were paid to take part in the study; they were randomly assigned one of two roles, prisoner or prison guard - both had to wear uniforms - prisoners were only referred to by their assigned number - guards were given props like sunglasses and sunglasses (to make eye contact with the prisoners impossible - reinforcing the boundaries of their social roles) - No one was allowed to leave the simulated prison - Prisoners were only allowed in the hallway which acted as their yard, and to the toilet - Guards allowed to control behaviour emphasising complete power over prisoners - no physical violence permitted - behaviour was observed
Findings: Identification occurred very fast as everyone took on their roles in a short period of time.
Guards began to harass and torment prisoners in harsh and aggressive ways - later they reported they enjoyed doing so and relished in their new-found power and control.
Prisoners spoke about prison issues (forgetting their real life) and snitched on other prisoners to please the guards.
The guards became more demanding of obedience and assertiveness towards the prisoners while the prisoners become more submissive. This suggests that the respective social roles became increasingly internalised.
Evaluation: :check: Real - life application - changed the way US prisons are set up and un e.g. young prisoners no longer kept with adult prisoners to prevent the bad-behaviour perpetuating
:check: Pptc's were fully debriefed after about the aims and results of the experiment - pptc's were deceived and unable to give informed consent so dealing with ethical issues
:no_entry: Lacks ecological validity - demand characteristics - pptc's knew the study wasn't real so claimed they acted according to the expectations associated with their role
:no_entry: Lacks population validity - the sample only consisted of American male students and therefore we cannot generalise the findings to other genders and cultures
:no_entry: Ethical issues - Lack of fully informed consent due to deception - Psychological harm - pptc's weren't protected from stress, anxiety , emotional distress and embarrassment e.g. one pptc had to be released due to distress and uncontrollable crying - One prisoner was released on the first day due to showing signs of psychological disturbance, with a further two being released on the next day. This study would be deemed unacceptable according to modern ethical standards.