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;
73 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What is conformity? |
- A change in a person's behaviour/opinions due to real/imagined social pressure |
|
|
What are the types of conformity proposed by Herbert Kelman? |
- Internalisation - Identification - Compliance |
|
|
What is the internalisation type of conformity? |
- Deep conformity/accept majority view as correct/permanent change in behaviour/opinion even when group is absent |
|
|
What is the identification type of conformity? |
- Moderate conformity/act like a group we value and want to be a part of/publicly change opinions/behaviour when privately disagree |
|
|
What is the compliance type of conformity? |
- Superficial/temporary conformity/go along with majority view/privately disagree/group pressure stops=change stops |
|
|
What do Morton Deutsch and Harold Gerard propose as an explanation for conformity? |
A two-process theory involving informational social influence (ISI) and normative social influence (NSI) |
|
|
What is informational social influence (ISI)? |
- Agree with majority=we believe they're correct/we desire to be correct too/leads to internalisation/likely in new/difficult situations |
|
|
What is normative social influence (NSI)? |
- Agree with majority to be accepted/desire to be liked [social approval]/leads to compliance |
|
|
What are the evaluation points for the types and explanations of conformity? |
S: Lucas=children answered aloud maths problems=conformity: difficult>easy W: nAffiliators=not applicable to everyone=can't generalise W: difficult to identify NSI/ISI=doubt two independet processes=less validity/reliability S: Asch=participants said wrong answer=afraid of disapproval |
|
|
What was the procedure for Asch's research into conformity? |
- Participants shown 'standard line' and 3 'comparison lines'/correct answer obvious/participants asked to match the standard/group=naive participant+6-8 confederates/naive participant last/18 trials, 12 trials=confederates answered wrong |
|
|
What were the findings for Asch's research into conformity? |
- Naive participant=25% did not conform, 75% did/Asch effect=extent of conformity in trivial task/participant post-interview=conformed to avoid rejection (NSI) |
|
|
What were Asch's variations in research into conformity? |
- Group size - Unanimity - Task difficulty - Private answers |
|
|
How does group size affect the extent of conformity? |
- 3 confederates=conformity up by 31.8%;more confederates=small difference - small majority=no conformity;large majority=no need |
|
|
How does unanimity affect the extent of conformity? |
- Disagreeing confederate=reduced conformity (25% average) - participant could behave more independently |
|
|
How does task difficulty affect the extent of conformity? |
- More similar line length=conformity increased - Greater ISI effect when the task is harder |
|
|
How do private answers affect the extent of conformity? |
- Written answers=conformity down 2/3=less pressure=less NSI effect |
|
|
What are the evaluation points of Asch's research into conformity? |
W: Perrin/Spencer=recreated on UK engineering students [396 trials=one conformer]= Asch effect not consistent W: trivial task=demand characteristics=lack validity/doesn't reflect everyday life W: Only tested US men=women/collectivist cultures more conformist S: replicated 1000s times=same findings=high reliability |
|
|
What was the aim of Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment? |
Whether people will conform to new social roles (situation=behaviour) |
|
|
What was the procedure for the Stanford Prison Experiment? |
- Participants=emotional stable male Stanford Uni psych students;randomly allocated role of prisoner/guard;unexpectedly arrested at home;deindividuation (referred to by number)/spent 23 hours a day locked in cells;prison guards=uniforms,sticks,mirrored glasses;meant to last 2 weeks |
|
|
What were the results from the Stanford Prison Experiment? |
- Stopped after 6 days;guards became brutal;day 2=prisoners rebelled,guards became harsher (harrassment);prisoners became depressed/anxious;one prisoner released=psychological disorder;one prisoner one hunger strike=force fed=shunned by prisoners;guards identified closely with their role;prisoners did as told |
|
|
What was the conclusion drawn from the Stanford Prison Experiment? |
- The situation caused participants to conform to social roles by changing their behaviour |
|
|
What is deindividuation? |
When you become so immersed in the norms of the group you lose your sense of identity/personal responsibility |
|
|
What are the evaluation points of Zimbardo's research? |
S: emotionally stable/random assign=rule out personality=internal validity=confidence W: Banuazizi/Mohavedi=play-acting on stereotypes=lack of realism [Zimbardo=90% convos abt prison life] W: Exaggerates situation/minimises personality W: Reicher/Haslam=BBC replication=not same results |
|
|
What are the ethical issues of Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment? |
Informed consent: Participants volunteered/couldn't fully consent to everything Deception: Informed their rights would be taken/were not told they would be arrested by surprise Right to withdraw: Told they could leave/prison environment made it feel impossible (respond as superintendent) Protection from harm: weren't protected from psychological harm [couldn't be predicted] |
|
|
What is obedience? |
- Form of social influence where a person follows a direct order from an authority figure who can punish disobedience |
|
|
What was the aim of Stanley Milgram's research? |
After the events of the Holohaust Milgram aimed to investigate whether the German's were more obedient |
|
|
What was the procedure of Milgram's obedience study? |
40 male participants (recruited=newspaper ad/flyers);participants between 20-50 from range of jobs;paid $4.50;in Yale Uni lab;fixed draw:confederate=learner/participant=teacher; experimenter=actor in lab coat;participants told they could leave at anytime;learner strapped to chair/wired with electrodes=shocked when wrong[not real];15-450 volts=learner no response after 315;4 prods for teacher unsure |
|
|
What were the finding of Milgram's obedience study? |
No participants stopped below 300 volts;12.5% stopped at 300 volts;65% continued to highest 450 volts;qualitative data:participants showed extreme tension (sweat, tremble etc.);Prior: 14 psych students predicted no more than 3% would go to 450 volts (findings unexpected);all participants debriefed, assured behaviour was normal;follow up questionnaire=84% glad to have participated |
|
|
What are the evaluation points for Milgram's obedience study? |
W: Didn't believe shocks=lack internal validity [Sheridan/King=real shocks=same behaviour] S: Holfing=21/22 nurses obeyed doctor demands=external validity S: Le Jeu de La Mort replicated=80% max 460 volts=similar behaviour=support W: Only white male Americans (unrepresentative) [participant backgrounds mixed/replicated in other cultures] |
|
|
What are the ethical issue with Milgram's obedience study? |
Deception: Believed role allocation random/real shocks=could affect behaviour [necessary for internal/ecological validity;participants debriefed] Protection from harm: Adequate proportions not taken;participants exposed to extreme distress [follow-up questionnaire=84% glad to take part] Right to withdraw: Money/prods=no right to withdraw [made clear participants would still be paid if they didn't continue] |
|
|
How does proximity affect the extent of obedience? |
- teacher/learner in same room=obedience 65% to 40% - touch proximity (teacher forced learners hand on electroshock plate) [30%] - remote instruction (instructions by telephone) [20.5%] |
|
|
How does the location affect the extent of obedience? |
- Yale Uni to run down building=obedience 65% to 47.5% - less professional=takes away legitimacy of authority |
|
|
How does uniform affect the extent of obedience? |
- experimenter replaced with ordinary member of public (confederate in everyday clothes);obedience down 20% - ordinary clothes=no legitimacy of authority=less pressure to obey |
|
|
What are the evaluation points of the situational variables of Milgram's research? |
S: Bickman uniform NYC experiment=supports uniform authority W: participants worked out procedure was fake=unclear if results are genuine S: Obedience 90% Spanish students=not limited to US males S: highly controlled/replicated 1000+ participants=accuracy up
|
|
|
What is the agentic state? |
- A mental state where you feel no personal responsibility for behaviour because you're acting on behalf of an authority figure. Frees us from conscience and allows us to obey a destructive authority figure |
|
|
What is the autonomous state? |
- Opposite of agentic state/person is free to behave on their own principles so feels a sense of responsibility for their own actionsW |
|
|
What is the agentic shift? |
- Autonomy to 'agency'/Milgram=occurs when person sees another as a figure of authority (greater power=position in social hierarchy) |
|
|
What are binding factors? |
- Aspects of the situation which allow a person to ignore/minimise damaging effect of their behaviour (shifting responsibility to victim/denying the damage) |
|
|
What is the legitimacy of authority? |
- Authority figures are allowed to exercise social power over others (agreed by society) - some granted power to punish powers=we give up our independence and hand control to authority figures we trust to use their power appropriately |
|
|
What is destructive authority? |
- Authority figures who use their legitimate powers for destructive purposes (ordering people to behave dangerous/cruel) |
|
|
What are the evaluation points of social-psychological factors causing obedience? |
S: Students showed Milgram study/blamed experimenter=recognised legitimate authority W: Doesn't explain why some participants don't obey=limited explanation S: Cross-cultural research=increase validity W: Mandel [German Battalion incident]=can't apply to all situations=lacks validity S: Practical applications [My Lai Massacre] |
|
|
What is the authoritarian personality? |
Adorno: Type of personality susceptible to obeying authority (submissive to high status, dismissive to inferiors) |
|
|
What was the procedure for Adorno's authoritarian personality study? |
Studied 2000+ M/C white Americans' unconscious attitudes to other racial groups;developed several scales to investigate (F-scale to measure authoritarian personality);items from F-scale include 'obedience and respect for authority are the most important values children should learn' |
|
|
What were the findings for Adorno's authoritarian personality study? |
People with authoritarian leanings (high F-scale score) identified with 'strong' people and looked down on 'weak';very conscious of status;showed respect to higher status;authoritarian=cognitive style (distinct categories of people with fixed stereotypes);positive correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice
|
|
|
What are the characteristics of an authoritarian personality? |
Extreme respect/submissiveness to authority;looked down on those with inferior status;conventional attitudes to sex, race, gender;inflexible outlook;everything either right or wrong |
|
|
What is the origin of the authoritarian personality? |
- In childhood from harsh parenting (strict discipline/absolute authority/high standards/severe criticism/conditional love) - creates resentment/hostility child cannot express to parents=displaced to weaker people - psychodynamic explanation |
|
|
What are the evaluation points of the dispositional explanations of obedience? |
W: link only correlation not causal=may be third factor (low level education)=lacks validity W: Can't explain mass obedience (Germany)=alternative explanations more realistic W: F-scale based on right-wing ideology=cannot account for obedience for all political views W: F-scale items in same direction=acquiescers=lacks validity W: Adorno conducted interviews themselves=demand characteristics |
|
|
What is resistance to social influence? |
The ability to withstand social pressure to conform/obey. Influenced by both situational and dispositional factors |
|
|
What is social support? |
Presence of people who resist conform/obey pressures, helping others do the same |
|
|
How does social support enables people to resist conformity? |
- Pressure to conform reduced by non-conformer - e.g Asch experiment - non-conformer conforms=so does participant |
|
|
How does social support enable people to resist obedience? |
- obey pressure reduced when other person disobeys - e.g Milgram: participant + confederate=obedience 10% - freedom of conscience |
|
|
What is the locus of control? |
- Julian Rotter: the sense we each have about what directs events in our lives |
|
|
What if a person has an internal locus of control? |
- They believe things that things that happen are largely controlled by themselves |
|
|
What if a person has an external locus of control? |
- They believe things that happen are out of their control (luck/outside forces) |
|
|
How does an internal locus of control enable a person to resist social influence? |
- internal: more likely to resist pressure to conform/obey - take personal responsibility for actions=base actions on own beliefs - more self confident=less need for social approval |
|
|
What are the evaluation points for the resistance of social influence? |
S: Asch type study;dissenter=lower conformity;occurred when dissenter wasn't in a position to judge (bad vision) S: Milgram type study;participants in groups=higher resistance;88% rebelled |
|
|
What are the evaluation points for the locus of control? |
S: Milgram's study;measured internal/external;37% internals not give highest shock;LOC link to obedience=increase validity W: Twinge: Analysed data from US obedience studies;showed people are more external W: Rotter: LOC only comes to play in novel situations;little influence over behaviour in familiar situations (previous experiences more important) |
|
|
What is minority influence? |
- The form of social influence where one/few people influence the beliefs/behaviours of others - Leads to internalisation |
|
|
Describe Serge Moscovici's study on minority influence. |
- blue/green slide study=group of 6 judge slides;two confederates consistently said slides were green;32% gave same answer as minority on 1st trial;2nd group=inconsistent minority=agreement 1.25% - Control: No confederates=wrong answer 0.25% |
|
|
What are the main processes in minority influence identified by Moscovici? |
- Consistency - Commitment - Flexibility - The process of change - The Snowball effect |
|
|
How does consistency aid minority influence? |
- Minority keep same beliefs over time (diachronic consistency) and people (synchronic consistency) - other people start to rethink their own views |
|
|
How does commitment aid minority influence? |
- extreme activities/personal sacrifices demonstrate dedication - draws attention from others to their cause (augmentation principle) - shows minority is not acting out of self-interest |
|
|
How does flexibility aid minority influence? |
- relentless consistency can be negative (rigid) - minority need to be able to adapt their view/accept compromise |
|
|
What is the process of change in minority influence? |
- Consistency/commitment/flexibility cause deeper processing, and some of the majority are converted to the minority view |
|
|
What is the Snowball effect in minority influence? |
- One person converts to the minority view=more people convert=faster rate of conversion - gradually the minority view becomes the majority view |
|
|
What are the evaluative points for minority influence? |
S: Wood: 100 study meta-analysis=consistent minorities most influential=validity S: Martin: participants given a viewpoint (support measured);1 group=minority agree with message;2 group=majority agree;exposed to conflicting view (attitudes measured) W: Moscovici/Asch study artificial=doesn't reflect how minorities attempt to change majority in real life S: variation of Moscovici's study:participants responses written=minority agreement greater W: real-life social influence situations more complex=difference between minority/majority more than numbers |
|
|
What is social influence? |
The process by which individuals/groups change each other's attitudes/behaviours - includes conformity/obedience/minority influence |
|
|
What is social change? |
- When whole societies adopt new attitudes/beliefs/ways of doing things - e.g. gay rights/women's suffrage/environmental issues |
|
|
What are the stages of social change? |
- drawing attention - consistency - deeper processing - augmentation principle - The Snowball effect - social cryptomnesia |
|
|
What is social cryptomnesia? |
- people have a memory that change occurred but don't remember how |
|
|
What lessons about social change do we learn from Asch's research into conformity? |
- confederate broke majority power, cause others to dissent - environment campaigns exploit conformity=appeal to NSI=provide info of what other people are doing - social change encouraged by drawing attention to what majority are doing |
|
|
What lessons about social change do we learn from Milgram's research into obedience? |
- confederate teacher refuses to shock learner=obedience down - obedience creates social change through gradual commitment - small instruction obeyed, harder to resister bigger one, drift into new behaviour |
|
|
What are the evaluative points of social influence and social change? |
S: Nolan: investigated social influence processes would reduce energy consumption;hung messages (used NSI) W: Diane Mackie: disagrees;majority influence may create deeper processing if you don't share views W: Bashier: investigated why people resist social change even when necessary(viewed negatively) W: (Moscovici/Milgram/Asch)methodology issues=decrease validity=undermine link |
