Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
20 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Internalisation - type of conformity |
When a person genuinely accepts the group norms publicly and privately - attitudes have been 'internalised' |
|
|
Identification - types of conformity |
When a person conforms because they value the group, they want to be a part of the group, even if they privately disagree |
|
|
Compliance - types of conformity |
"going along with others" in public, but disagreeing in private. The behaviour/opinion stops in the absence of group. |
|
|
Informational Social Influence - exps for conformity |
Who has the better information? We conform with the opinions of others because they are likely to be right. |
|
|
When is ISI more likely to happen? |
New situations (u don't know what is right), when it isn't clear what is right, crisis situations where decisions need to be made quickly, when one person is regarded as an expert |
|
|
Normative social influence - exps for conformity |
About social norms, what is "normal" or "typical" behaviour for a social group. We want social approval. |
|
|
When is NSI likely to occur? |
With strangers where concerned about rejection, around friends, stressful situations when there is a need for social support |
|
|
Is ISI an emotional or cognitive explanation? |
Cognitive - to do with what we THINK |
|
|
Is NSI an emotional or cognitive explanation? |
Emotional - fear of rejection |
|
|
What is a strength of explanations of conformity? |
Research support for ISI - maths exam study found more conformity in difficult Q's than easy Q's. Research support for NSI - asch, ppts said they were self conscious |
|
|
What is a limitation of explanations of conformity? |
Individual differences in NSI - not everyone is affected by NSI bc they don't care about being liked Individual differences in ISI - engineering students version of asch |
|
|
Asch - procedure |
Showed two cards, 1. Standard line 2. Three comparison lines. Ppts were then asked which of the 3 lines matched the standard Line. Two of the lines were clearly wrong, but confederates gave the wrong answer to see if genuine ppt would conform. |
|
|
Asch - findings |
Participants gave wrong answer 37% of the time. 25% ppts didn't conform on any trials. 75% therefore conformed at least once. Participants said it was to avoid rejection (NSI) |
|
|
What were Asch's 3 variations? |
Group Size, unanimity (partner), task difficulty |
|
|
Limitations of asch |
Child of its time - conformist America in the 80s Artificial situation and task - demand characteristics w psych students Limited application - only men tested, women may be more conformist? Ethical Issues - deception |
|
|
Zimbardo - procedure |
Mock prison at Stanford University. Volunteer sample. Randomly assigned guards or prisoners. Arrested at homes for realism. Assigned uniform and number, never used names. Guards took shifts 3 at a time. Guards had uniform, wooden club, cuffs, keys and sunglasses. |
|
|
Zimbardo - Findings |
Slow start, but guards then took up their role with enthusiasm. Their behaviour became a physical and mental threat to prisoners so study stopped after 6 days. Prisoners originally rebelled, before becoming subdued depressed and anxious. |
|
|
Strengths of Zimbardo |
Control - zimbardo had full control in selection of mentally stable ppts means high internal validity |
|
|
Zimbardo Limitations |
Lack of Realism - criticised ppts were acting based on stereotypes Dispositional Influences - only a third of the guards were brutal, results over stated. Lack of research support - BBC prison study found different results, where prisoners took control Ethical Issues - refused ppt to leave |
|
|
Milgram - procedure |
40 male ppts 20-50yrs. Rigged draw for the role of "teacher" and "student" (confederate was student everytime). Student strapped in a chair w electric cables. Teacher had a practice shock to show it works. Teacher then had to fake shock student from a different room when the answer was wrong. Levels started at 15 minor shock to 450 severe shock. Experimenter used prods against teacher such as "please continue" "it's essential you continue" "you have no choice" |
