Primary socialisation: an attachment (emotional bond) occurs. Affection and approval from caregivers is highly valued which provides strong motivation for changing behaviours as the young child learns rules and expectations

Culture: the shared rules that govern the behaviour of a group of people and enable members of a group to coexist.

Secondary socialisation: the influence of family decreases as friends and peers become increasingly important. Hopefully the person was accepted unconditionally during primary socialisation but now they will need to significantly conform and learn to operate in large groups in order to be accepted.

Gender: the psychological meaning of being male or female which is influenced by learning. A separate concept from sex: sex describes the biological attributes of a person, and includes categories like male, female or intersex.

Gender roles: the range of behaviours considered appropriate for particular genders.

Social learning theories: children learn about gender roles from observation of others in their environment. Bandura's model of social learning suggests that the learner is more likely to imitate someone similar to them - thus, learners are more likely to imitate models of the same sex. Furthermore, differing consequences are applied to individuals based on their gender which further influences behaviour.

Biology-based theories: gender arises as a consequence of sex i.e. hormones and genetics. Evolution is used to explain differences between genders i.e. it is more evolutionary advantageous for women to seek higher quality partners and more advantageous for men to seek a higher number of partners explaining why women may be more selective about their partners and men being more promiscuous.

Gender constancy (>5yrs): Child realises that sex is a fixed state that will not change, and that even if someone's appearance or behaviour change, it does not make them a member of the opposite sex.

Compliance: when someone changes their behaviour at the request or direction of another person due to consequences of changing behaviour. E.g. child swearing at school will likely be punished for swearing and rewarded for not, thus, stop behaviour at school to comply with rules, not because the want to.

Identification: when someone changes their behaviour not because it is intrinsically rewarding but because of how it impacts a relationship the have with a person or group. Unlike compliance person believes in behaviour change (but only around group or person), thus, is based on the perceived importance of the relationship. E.g. if in a group where most people are vegan/vegetarian, meat eaters may discuss reducing meat intake around group but then return to normal dietary patterns after.

Internalisation: when a person changes their behaviour because the behaviour is intrinsically rewarding to them. More likely to occur if influencer is credible, change is consistent with preconceptions and is beneficial to the person being influenced.

Limitations: findings could be explained by demand characteristics - post - study interviews asserted that they were just acting, thus, acting as a potential extraneous variable and lowering the ecological validity of the experiment. Lacked population validity - only male college students in USA, as well as small sample size (22). Highly unethical.

Strengths: recorded conversations suggested that prisoners reacted to the situation as if it was real. Useful in deducing how status and power operate in groups.

Coercive power: being able to give negative consequences

Expert power: having wanted or necessary special skills or knowledge.

Informational power: having access to useful info or resources not readily available elsewhere.

Legitimate power: a status or position which gives authority over those with less status or authority.

Referent power: others wanting to be like them or liked by them.

Reward power: Being able to give positive consequences or remove negative consequences.

Strengths: provides influence for situational factors on behaviour. Highly controlled variables e.g. participants believed: the were being randomly assigned, were administering electric shocks and experimenter, learner and apparatus were real, increasing the internal validity of the study.

Limitations: Highly unethical - despite being debriefed participants were deceived, measures were not taken to protect participants from emotional stress (experiment ma have long-term effects of a participants self-perception) and participants were given prods throughout the experiment which suggested that withdrawal was not possible. Lack of population validity (however, several cross-cultural experiments have been conducted and gained same results). Conducted in laboratory - lacks ecological validity. Conducted in 1960s (particular political climate), thus potentially lacks historical validity.

Social proximity: increasing the social proximity/closeness of learner and teacher decreased obedience (e.g. to test proximity of teacher/learner in one scenario the teacher forced the learners hand on shock plate. To test proximity of authority figure experiments were ran where the experimenter gave instructions to the teacher via the phone.

Legitimacy of authority figure: decreasing legitimacy of authority figure decreased obedience (e.g. figure not wearing lab coat or looking dishevelled/unprofessional.

Group pressure: group pressure could either increase or decrease obedience depending of whether other members of the group also conformed. In another experiment Milgram introduced additional confederates who acted as teachers. when these confederates 'rebelled' and stopped administering shocks, participants were significantly more likely to follow. Conversely, when confederates administered shocks all the way through, participants were also more likely to do this. (Influence of conformity).

Strengths: all participants were debriefed., its replicability - in further trials (1952, 1956) changed procedure to investigate which situational factors influence the level of conformity.

Limitations: Unethical - deception (told they were doing a vision test and that other participants were genuine), did not take measures to protect participants from stress or harm they may experience if the disagree with the majority. Unrepresentative sample - lacked population validity, findings were a reflection of 1950s culture - lacked historical validity.

Unanimity: decreased unanimity = decreased conformity (even if only one person). This is known as ally effect which was shown in repetitions of Asch's experiment where having one confederate disagree reduced conformity by 80%.

Group size: groups up until 4 showed lower conformity, however in groups beyond 7 conformity slightly decreases as group size increases.

Deindividuation: this is a psychological state where people lose their sense of individuality and become anonymous as part of a group situation. Important factor in extreme behaviours e.g. riots/violence in sport stadiums. The size of the group leads people who would not usually participate in these behaviours to join in. An important contributor to this is anonymity: when part of a large group people can lose their sense of responsibility as its harder for them to be individually identified. Another factor is shift in attention: in large groups attention is shifted from the less and thus individuals focus less on reviewing their own actions and more on the behaviour of the crowd.

Culture: when Asch's experiment was repeated in different cultures it was found that conformity was lower in more individualistic cultures and higher in collectivist cultures.

Social loafing: occurs when people put less effort into an activity conducted as a group than they would if done individually causing them to outwardly conform with the group without considering their won opinion. More likely to occur when a task is perceived as easy/unimportant, the group is large, there is high social distance between group members, members are men, individual performance won't be judged and the task doesn't require maximum effort from everyone.

Informational influence: occurs when people conform due to wanting information ad guidance from others. HAs a higher influence on people who perceive being right as important, see themselves as being incompetent in that area and see the tsk as difficult.

Normative influence: occur in any situation where someone's actions are influenced by social norms. Conformity increases when people change their behaviours to match others to the are liked and accepted by the group.

Descriptive norms: what is commonly done and which motivate by providing evidence of what is likely to be effective action

Injunctive norms: what is commonly approved/ disapproved and which motivate by promising social rewards/punishments.

Strengths: use of naturalistic experiment increases ecological validity, large sample (n = 2655) and fact that they used convenience sampling increases population validity as they were genuine park users.

Limitations: Use of naturalistic experiment also makes it difficult to establish cause and effect due to relatively uncontrolled variables e.g. no evidence to suggest that park visitors altered their behaviour because of the sign or that they even read the signs.