Katie Mortley
Mind Map by , created more than 1 year ago

Psychology Mind Map on Social Influence, created by Katie Mortley on 08/04/2013.

220
1
0
Katie Mortley
Created by Katie Mortley almost 12 years ago
Rate this resource by clicking on the stars below:
1 2 3 4 5 (0)
Ratings (0)
0
0
0
0
0

0 comments

There are no comments, be the first and leave one below:

Close
Social InfluenceConformityIndependentBehaviourUnderstanding SocialChangeObedienceWhy Do PeopleObey?Why Do PeopleConformKelman (1985): Types ofConformityCompliance: going along withother to gain approval despitenot agreeing privatelyInternalisation: goingalong with others becauseyou have accepted theirpoint of view privately aswell as publicallyIdentification: thechanging ofattitudes orbehaviors due tothe influence ofsomeone that isliked in desire tobuild arelationshipResearch IntoConformityAsch(1956)A- To investigatewhether majorityinfluence worksM- 3 lines, ppts(male USstudents) askedto identify whichline was thesame length asthe 4th line,whilstconfederatesanswered wrongR- 36% of responses made by true pptswere incorrect, 1/4 of ppts neverconformedWhy did Asch's pptsconform?Distortion of Perception: a small number of ppt cameto see the lines the same as the majorityDistortion of Judgement: ppts doubtedaccuracy of their judgementDistortion of Action:publically agreed to avoiddisapprovalVariationsEasier task = lowerlevels of conformityLucas et al: High self efficacy= less conformityMajority of 3 led tooptimum level ofconformityImportance of unanimity- one dissenter =conformity dropped to 5.5%, or dropped to9% if dissenter gave a different wronganswerLimitationsValidityInsignificant task-conformity simply to savefaceWilliam and Sogon: higher conformity withpeople they knewEthicsDeception, lack of informed consent,some stressMight have been overcome bydebriefingEagly +Carli:femalesmoreconformistthanmalesSmith + Bond metaanalysis: Collectivistcultures are moreconformistRelated toera ofMcCarthyismMori + Arai:overcame problem ofunconvincingconfederates byusing polarisedlensesAsch's results show moreindependence than conformityNormative SocialInfluenceInformational SocialInfluenceSocial ImpactTheoryresult of wanting to be liked and bepart of a groupHumans have natural need forcompanionship and fear of rejectiongoing againstconformityisn't easy e.gAschEvaluationGarandeau +Cillessen: NormativeSocial Influenceexplain bullyingfound groups with lowquality of interpersonalfriendships may bemanipulated by askillful bullyvictimisation ofanother childprovides groupwith a commongoalcreates pressureon all children tocomply so they'renot cast outShultz et al: NSI used toincrease conservationbehaviour among hotelguestsLinkenbach + Perkins: Success of NSIin reducing smoking among youngpeopleresult of wanting to be right, looking toothers for the right answersome cases we go along withothers because we believe themThis leads us to changeour own opinion(internalisation)Likely to occur whensituation is ambiguous/acrisis/others are expertsEvaluationWitterbrink + Henly:changed socialstereotypes ofAfrican Americansppts exposed to negative info laterreported more negative beliefs abouta black target individualFein et al (2007): important inshaping political opinionjudgements on US Presidentcandidate could be influencedthrough others reactionsNumber:morepeople=moreinfluenceStrength: more important people=moreinfluenceImmediacy:morelikelytolistenattentivelyinsmallgroupsSupport- Sedikides+ Jackson:high strength + imediacyexerted more impact thanlow stregth + immediacyBehaving as instructed, usuallyin response to an individualrather than group pressure.Usually takeplace in ahierachywhen thepersonordering isof higherstatus.It is unlikely toinvolve a change inprivate opinionMilgram(1963):A- To investigate whetherordinary people will obey alegitimate authority even whenrequired to injure anotherM- 40 male ppts, 2confederates,experimenter + 'learner'.Ppts were the teacher.Told to administershocks each time theppt got question wrongR- 65%continuedelectricshocks to amaxvoltageC- This showsthat ordinarypeople areastonishinglyobiedientVariationsProximity of Victim:62.5% obedience invoice feedback, 40%in proximity, 30% intouch proximityProximity of authority figure:21% obedience whenexperimenter absentPresence of allies:10% obedience with2 peers rebel studyIncreasingteacher'sdiscretion-95% refusedto obeyValidityRealism- Orne+ Holland:ppts knewstudy wasfakeMilgram pointed to pptsdistressSheridan +King:repeatedexperimentwith a realpuppy +shocksfound 20/26 participants compliedto the endthe 6 that refused weremale (54% of males wereobedient, 100% of womenobeyed)Blass: looked at historicalrelevance and found nodifference over timeObedience alibi- Mandel: looked at WWII policebattalion who obeyed despite presence ofMilgrams inhibitory factorsGeneralisability- Hofling et al: found highlevels of obedience in nursesRank + Jacobsen: found opposite in morerealistic studyEthicsDeception: Lack of informedconsentOK because 74%said they learnedsomething ofpersonalimportanceRight To Withdraw: Prods madethis difficultBaumrind: Psychologicalharm wasn't justifiedStudycriticisedbecause offindings ratherthanproceduresGradual Commitment: Becauseparticipants had already given lower levelshocks it was harder to resist request todeliver higher shocksAgentic Shift: ppt sees himself as anagent carrying out another personswishesBuffers: the screen thelearner and teacher areseparated byprotectsteacherfromseeingthem beshocked.Obediencelowered whenbuffer wasremovedJustifying Obedience: makes people morewilling to surrender their freedom of actionin the belief they're serving a justifiablecausee.g 'needed for scienceadvancement'EvaluationMonocausal emphasis- Mandel arguedthat by focusing on obedience Milgramignored other explanationsGoldhagen: e.g AntiSemitismAgentic Shift: importantdifferences between Milgram's laband Holocaust crimesTherefore comparison notappropriateObedience explanation asalibi: negativeconsequences becauseexonerates war criminalsdoes an obedience alibi act as an excuse for actions rather than ajustification?Resisting Pressure to ConformRole of Allies- Asch: showed how introduction of anotherdissident gave social support to an individual and causedconformity rates to plumetprovides individual with independentassessment of reality that makes themfeel more confident in rejectingmajority positionValid Social Support- Allen + Levine:A- To investigatevalidity of supportM- Asch type study, 3 conditions, 1 had invalidsocial support (bad vision -thick glasses), 2 hadvalid support (normal vision), 3rd was a lone pptR- Conditions 1 + 2 were sufficient to reducethe amount of conformity compared to 3rdcondition. However 2 had much more impact.C- an ally is helpful in resisting conformitybut more so if they are perceived asoffering valid social supportEvaluationmore willing to maintaintheir judgement if they haveto make a moral rather thanphysical judgementHornsey et al (2003): found remarkablylittle movement towards the majority onattitudes that had moral significance forthe individual (e.g cheating)Even whenthis involvedpublicbehavioursResisting Pressures to Obey: Statusand awareness of consequencesincreases resistanceMilgram: investigated the situational conditionsunder which people felt able to defy the ordersof an authority figureWhen the study was moved from Yale Uni to adowntown office more people felt able to resistauthoritytells us that status is a keyfactor inobedience/resistance.Resistance was also increased when the victimcould be seen or when other confederates werepresentThis shows being madeaware of the effects ofyour actions and havingsocial support are meansof increasing resistanceLocus of Control: An aspect of ourpersonality, internals rely less on othersopinions, better able to resist coerciondiffer in beliefs whether theoutcomes of their actions arecontingent on what they do(internal)or events outside theirpersonal control (external)research into this has found a number ofcharacteristics that have an effect on independentbehaviour1- High internals are active seekers of info thats usefulto them, so they're less likely to listen to others2- High internals tend to be more achievement-oriented,so are more likely to become leaders3- High internals are better able to resist coercion fromothersEvaluationEvaluationKohlberg: Resistance greater in people whobase decisions on moral principles e.g MartinLuther KingMeta Analysis Twengeet al: Externality isincreasingfound young Americans believe their lives are controlledLOC scores had become more external instudent and child samples between1960+2002Twenge et al: implications are almostuniformly negative, externality iscorrelated with poor schoolachievement, poor self control +depressionLinz + Semykina: genderdifferences in LOC with womenmore internal than men.LOC made no difference to success of men, but 'internal'women more successful than 'external'since 1960s increase in social factors such as rise indivorce, violent crime, mental health and suicidecould explain increase in externality as people see many aspectsof their lives as beyod their controlMinority Influence: where peoplereject the established norm of themajority group members and moveto the position of the minoritySocial Change: When awhole society adopts a newbelief or way of behavingwhich then becomes widelyaccepted as the 'norm'Role of MinorityInfluencewithout it we wouldhave noinnovation/socialchangeConversion- Moscovici: individual exposed to apersuasive argument under certain conditions, theymay change their own views to match the minorityConditions for socialchange through minorityinfluenceDrawing attention toan issuecreates conflictthat we aremotivated to reducewidens audience e.gFather4Justice, costumedhigh profile stuntsRole of ConflictEvalutationcan't dismiss aminority as 'odd'or 'abnormal'examining arguments more closely meanswe think more deeply about the issues beingchallengede.g Animal Rights may create conflict about whatwe accept as inappropriate and our currentbehaviour supporting the industry by buyingproductsThis may changebehaviour which couldspread across other peopleAs more peoplechange their opinion tothe minority it loosensthe pressure toconform to themajorityConsistencyminorities are moreinfluential and taken moreseriously if they areconsistentWood et al: Metaanalysis of 97studies of minorityinfluencefound those who wereconsistent were moreinfluencialAugmentation Principleif there are risks involved in puttingforward a point of view, they takenmore seriouslyBy taking up a position opposing themajority, may be subjected to abuse,this could be publically/throughmedia/imprisonment/deathe.g Solidarity, emerged from astrike for workers rights.Despite Gvt initiatedcensorship, intimidation +imprisonment of its leadersGrew to a social movement of10m members.Led to overthrow of Communist Gvtin 1989+ SuffragettesDrawing attention: used a variety of educational, political andoccaisionally millitant tactics to draw attention to the issueRole of Conflict: those in the majority would experienceconflict between the norms and the suffragettes views.Some dismissed the suffragettes as troublemakers, othersmoved towards the suffragette positionConsistencypersistent regardless of attitudes around themtheir fight for the vote continued 15 years even when imprisoned for civildisobedience their protests continued in jailAugmentation Principlewilling to suffer to make their point, riskinginprisonment/death from hunger stikes meant they weretaken seriouslye.g Emily Davidson ran out infront of horses at the Derby of 1913,she died 4 days laterx Minority influencemay have latentrather than directeffect on majoritybecause of fears ofbeing labeled asdeviant or rejectedby the majorityDouble click this nodeto edit the textClick and drag this buttonto create a new node