Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Social Influence - Coggle Diagram
Social Influence
Conformity
Types of Conformity
Identification - We identify with a group, so want to be part of it, we publicly change our behaviour/opinions to be part of it, even if privately we disagreed. It is often temporary.
Compliance - going along with others to gain approval/avoid disapproval. Little or no private attitude change.
Internalisation - Going along with others as their point of views is consistent with yours. Private and public acceptance of group's opinion.
Explanations
Informational - You conform as you believe the group has superior knowledge to you and is therefore 'right'.
-
Normative - You conform as you want to be liked or respected by the group and because of the desire to 'fit in'.
-
-
Asch's Study (1951)
Aim - To investigate the effects of conformity to a majority, when the task is unambiguous.
Procedure
- 123 male undergraduates from 3 US Colleges.
- One participant and a group of 6-8 confederates.
- Participant sat last or second to last.
- Shown 2 white cards; one with a single line.
- The other with three lines of various lengths.
- Asked to select the line that is the same length.
Findings
- Control Trials, In ordinary circumstances people mark mistakes 1% of the time.
- Critical Trials, Participants gave incorrect answers 36.8% of the time. 75% conformed at least once.
Variations of Asch
- Groups Size: The more confederates the more likely of conformity.
- Task Difficulty: If the task is made more ambiguous then conformity increases.
- Unanimity: When a confederate gives the correct answer conformity dropped to 5%. If they gave a different incorrect answer to the majority, it dropped to 9%.
Ethics
- Participants were deliberately deceived as they were told it was a vision test.
- Some felt stressed and underwent psychological harm.
Zimbardo's Study (1973)
Aim - To see whether people would conform to the social role of a prison guard or a prisoner, when placed in a make prison environment and to test the dispositional explanation of conformity.
Procedure
- 21 healthy male volunteers; Randomly allocated to 'prisoner' or 'guard'.
- Given uniforms and numbers instead of names.
- The guards were allowed to make up the rules.
Findings
- Guards: Behaved in a brutal and sadistic manner. The prisoners were taunted with insults generally dehumanised. Guards had undergone deindividuation, the decreased sense of self-awareness that can occur in groups or crowds.
- Prisoners: Rebelled, ripped their uniforms and swore at the guards. Some prisoners exhibited passive behaviour, depression, crying and anxiety. The study was meant to last two weeks but was stopped after only 6 days.
Ethics - Zimbardo is criticised for not protecting participants from harm; 5 had to leave the experiment early due to distress, although he did debrief them after.
Conclusion - The study rejects the dispositional hypothesis of conformity. People will readily conform to the social roles they are expected to play in certain situations.
Obedience
-
Milgram's Study (1963)
Aim - To test whether ordinary Americans would obey an unjust order and inflict pain on another person because they were instructed to do so by an authority figure.
Procedure
- 40 American males aged between 20-50 who responded to an advert.
- Two confederates, one was the experimenter in a white lab coat. The other played the role of the 'learner'.
- Participant was allocated the teacher role and sat in front of a shock generator in an adjoining room. It ranged from 150 to 145v.
- The learner had to respond to a set of word pairs. Each time he gave a wrong answer the teacher had to shock the learner. Increased by 15v each time.
- The learner deliberately gave 3 wrong answers to every correct one and made no protest until 300v.
-
Ecological validity - Some have criticised Milgram by saying his study did not reflect a real-life situation.
-
Internal Validity - Orre and Holland argue that the participants did not believe the experiment was real.
-
Social Change
Minority Influence
Flexibility - Aminonty adapts their opinions and accept counter arguments in order to persuade others.
Commitment - When a minority shows commitment, it demonstrates confidence and courage and at a great cost to them. This can persuade others to take their viewpoint.
Consistency - If a minority continues to state the same thing over a period of time, then they are more likely to influence others.
Process leading to social change
- drawing attention.
- Consistency
- Deeper processing
- Augmentation Principle
- Snowball Effect
- Social Cryptomnesia
-
-