Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
PSYCH: SOCIAL INFLUENCES ON BEHAVIOUR - Coggle Diagram
PSYCH: SOCIAL INFLUENCES ON BEHAVIOUR
Social groups
Group: a collection of people who have a common goal and interact with/influence each other
Not just a collection of people
2 or more members
Influence each others thoughts and behaviour
Members must interact with each other
Share a common goal or purpose
Social Groups as a factor influencing behaviour
Group Norms: A standard, value or rule that outlines an appropriate behaviour or experience
Formal group norms: Explicitly outlined rules or regulations e.g. uniform
Informal group norms: Often not explicitly outlined and are instead inferred often through consequences e.g. friends taking turns paying for a meal
Social Loafing: An individual's reduction in effort when work is preferred in a group as compared to individually due to their belief that others will put in the work
Increases when the task is easy and lacks personal/individual meaning
Decreases when individual input is valued and the groups interacts on task
Social Identity: The tendency for people to favour their in-group over an out-group in order to enhance a sense of self
In-group: a group that an individual belongs/identifies with
Out-group: a group that an individual doesn't belong to/identify with
Culture as a factor influencing behaviour
Individualist Cultures: A culture that prioritises the needs and goals of individuals & values independence e.g. US, UK, AUS
Greater emphasis on career development
Greater competition between individuals
Collectivist Cultures: A culture that prioritises the needs and goals of the group & values interdependence e.g. Japan, India, Ghana
Social harmony and group needs are valued higher than individual's needs
Viewed as smaller parts of a larger whole
Power: A person's ability to control and influence another person's thoughts, feelings or behaviours
Status vs power: Status= importance of an individual's position within the group & as perceived by the members of the group. Power= a person or group's ability to control/influence another person's thoughts, feelings or behaviours
Types of Power
Reward: Ability to give positive consequences/remove negative consequences in response to specific behaviour e.g. an employer has the power to give a pay raise or promotion
Coercive: Ability to give negative consequences or remove positive consequences in response to behaviour e.g. an employer can dismiss an employee, a teacher can give detentions
Informational: Having resources or information that are useful and not available elsewhere e.g. librarian
Legitimate: An individual's status or position within a group gives them the authority to exercise power over those with a lower status or with less authority e.g. group leader, team captain or police officer
Referent: Individuals identify with or want to be liked by this person e.g. celebrity/friend you want to be liked by
Expert: Having special knowledge and skills that are desirable or needed e.g. student skilled in using a computer software application that assists other students
Role: Behaviour adopted by an individual/assigned to them. It influences the way that they function and act in different situations. Some are Permanent (birthgiver) and some are temporary (student)
Zimbardo's stanford prison experiment
IV: whether or not participants were a prisoner or guard
DV: Psychological effects as well as the behaviour
Generalisability: these results have limitations in generalisability due to the unique and extreme nature of the simulated environment, the specific participant characteristics and the ethical questions raised
Limitations: lack of experimental control= researcher's involvement introduced bias and compromised experimental objectivity. small sample size= limited to college aged men and raises questions about results' accountability.
Aim: to investigate how individuals' behaviours could be influenced by the roles that were assigned, and the inherent power dynamics between prisoners and guards
Ethical issues: informed consent= didn't fully explain the nature of the study before participating. Harm= participants experienced emotional distress and harm due to conditions. Right to withdraw= participants felt pressured to continue despite their discomfort. Researcher responsibility= researchers became too engrossed in their roles
Conformity: The tendency to adjust one's feelings or behaviour in ways that are in agreement with an individual or group
Accepted standards about how a person should behave in certain situations and social norms
Asch's line experiment
IV: Whether the participant is exposed to a situation where majority of group provides a wrong answer. DV: Whether the participant conforms to incorrect group's answer or provides the correct answer
Generalisability: While there may be some variation in the degree of conformity, the overall phenomenon of conformity & its influence on individuals has shown repeatability and generalisability
Aim: to investigate the extent to which individuals would conform to a group's opinion or judgement
Criticism of research method: doesn't fully reflect different ages/genders very well
Obedience: When we change our behavior in response to direct orders from an authority figure, or the rules/laws of our society
Factors Influencing Obedience
Group pressure: Individuals are more likely to be more obedient if there is no one to rebel with.
Participants who watched other people 'refuse' to give the shocks were more likely to disobey orders themselves
Meaning Individuals are more likely to be obedient if there is group support for the authority figure
Social Proximity: If someone is closer to the consequences of their own actions, obedience to an undesirable order is less likely
Learner in the same room as teacher= level of obedience fell
If participant was asked to hold learner's hand on device to receive the shock= level of obedience fell
Legitimacy of authority figure: People tend to follow orders more willingly from people with signs of authority e.g. uniform, lab coats, suits etc
Participants were more likely to obey a researcher in a lab coat than one who was not
As the uni gave prestige to the study so the white coat seems to give prestige to the authority figure
Milgram's electric shock experiment
IV: level of authority and commands given by experimenter. Manipulated the ability/authority of person giving orders and involved legitimacy and closeness of authority figure. DV: Level of obedience exhibited by participants and investigated how far participants were willing to go in delivering 'harm' to others.
Aim: to investigate how the situational context could lead ordinary people to show obedience to authority and inflict harm upon others