Social Influence Evaluation

Social Psychology: Evaluation

Conformity: Types and explanations  Research support for ISI- Lucas(2006) asked students to give answers to mathematical problems that were easy or difficult. Greater conformity to incorrect answers when the questions were more difficult in comparison to when they were easy- most true for those who rated their mathematical ability as poor. Shows people look to those they believe understand more than us. Individual differences in NSI- does not affect everybody's behaviour in the same way.  Those less concerned with being liked are less likely to conform. Naffiliators- greater need for affiliation. This shows there are individual differences in the way that people respond.  ISI and NSI work together- often both processes are involved. Example, in Asch's experiment conformity is reduced when there is one other dissenting participant. It is hard to tell if this dissenter is reducing the power of NSI(via social support) or ISI(providing an alternative source of information).  Research support for NSI- Asch's experiment showed participants clearly going along with the incorrect  answer. When interviewed afterwards many admitted to feeling self-conscious and afraid of disapproval. When study repeated and participants able to write down their answers conformity rates dropped. 

Conformity: Asch's Research  A child of its time- conducted the study in 1951-55. When repeated in the UK by Perrin and Spencer with engineering students only one student conformed out of 396 trials. Possible that in 1950's it was a very conformist time in America, and made me sense to conform to social norms. Societal changes mean that people are possibly less conformist today. This means Asch's research may not be applicable to the modern day.  Artificial situation and task- participants knew they were part of a study so demand characteristics may have come into play. Task of identifying lines is very artificial and does not reflect an everyday situation reducing the external validity.  Limited application of findings- only men tested by Asch, women may react differently. American men coming from an individualist culture(more concerned about themselves than social group). Studies in collectivist cultures such as China have shown higher conformity rates. This suggests that Asch's findings may be culture bound.  Ethical issues- participants were deceived because they thought other people involved in the procedure were also genuine participants but they were confederates. Though this ethical cost must be weighed up with the benefits of the study. 

Conformity to social roles: Zimbardo's Research  Control- Zimbardo and his team held a large amount of control over the variables of the study. The selection process of participants: emotionally stable people selected and randomly assigned role of prisoner or guard, this helps rule out any individual differences that may affect the findings. If guards and prisoners behaved very differently but were put in those roles by chance it indicates that the behaviour must have been due to the pressure of the situation.  Lack of realism- participants play-acting rather than genuinely conforming to the roles. Based on stereotypes of prisoners and guards. One of the guards claimed he based his role on character from film Cold Hand Luke. However, Zimbardo argued against this, providing evidence that 90% of prisoner conversations were based on prison life- giving study high degree of internal validity.  Role of dis-positional influences- Zimbardo minimized the role of dis-positional influences/personality factors. Only a minority of the guards behaved in a brutal manner, the others were keen on applying the rules fairly with some actively helping and supporting prisoners. Suggests conclusion may be over-stated.  Lack of research support- partial replication of study. BBC prison study found very different findings. Prisoners took control of the mock prison and subjected guards to harassment and abuse. Guards failed to develop cohesive social identity, but prisoners did.  Ethical issues- some suffered from psychological harm. When one prisoner was desperate to be released, rather than acting as psychologist Zimbardo acted as superintendent worried about the running of his prison rather than as a researcher with responsibilities. 

Obedience: Milgram's original obedience study  Low internal validity- participants behaved the way that they did because they did not believe the set-up of the study- guessing that they were not real electric shocks. This means Milgram was not testing what he intended to test and reduces the validity. However, the same experiment conducted on real puppies (Sheridan and King) found that 100% of females delivered the full shock and 54% of men. This suggests results were genuine.  Good external validity- lab environment with researcher and participant accurately reflected wider authority relationships. Research supports this (Hofling) Nurses on a hospital ward obeyed to doctors unjustified demands. Suggests Milgram's findings can be generalised to real life.  Supporting replication- The game of death- French TV. Replication of Milgram's study: Participants believed they were taking part in a pilot episode for a new TV show and were paid to give electric shocks when ordered to by the presenter to other participants (actors) in front of studio audience. 80% delivered the max shock of 460 volts. Their behaviour was almost identical to those in Milgram's study(nail biting, nervous laughter and anxiety).  Ethical issues raised- Milgram deceived his participants: random allocation of learner and teacher which was in fact fixed and the false electric shocks. This could potentially damage the trust of psychologists and potential research may be affected. 

Obedience: Situational Variables  Research support- field experiment in NYC. Bickman had three confederates dress in different uniforms: Milkman,security guard and jacket/tie. They had to ask passers by to pick up litter or give them a coin for the parking meter. People were twice as likely to obey the security guard than jacket and tie. This supports the idea that uniform conveys authority.  Lack of internal validity- likely that the participants saw through the deception particularly during the variable aspect of the experiment. For example, when the researcher was replaced by a member of the public it was very contrived and easy to work out the truth behind the experiment. Therefore, it is unclear whether the results are down to obedience or not.  Cross-cultural replications- cross-cultural research generally supportive. (Miranda) obedience rate of 90% among Spanish students. Although, most replications have taken place in Western cultures which are not that different to the USA. Not applicable to everywhere e.g China.  Obedience alibi- Mandel argues that the research offers and excuse for evil behaviour such as that in Nazi Germany suggesting their obedient behaviour was due to situational factors beyond their control. This can be very in-sensitive towards Holocaust associates (Family of victims of survivors). 

Obedience: Social-psychological factors Agentic State-  Research support- Blass and Schmitt showed a film of Milgram's study to students and asked who they thought was responsible for the harm to the learner. The students blamed the experimenter rather than the person actually projecting the electric shocks. Also highlighted that the responsibility was due to legitimate authority (experimenter at top of hierarchy) and expert authority (because he was a scientist).  Limited explanation- Agentic shift does not explain all research findings. Why did some participants not obey? Why in Hofling's study did nurses not show signs of anxiety similar to Milgram's participants? Agentic shift can only account for some situations of obedience.  Obedience alibi- Batallian 101-German me obeyed orders to shoot civilians but they did not have to as they were told they could be assigned different duties if preferred.  Legitimacy of authority-  Cultural differences-useful account of cultural differences in obedience. Countries differ in degree to which people are obedient: replicated Milgram in Australia and found only 16% went to the full voltage whereas Germans was 85%. Shows different ways society is structured and the way children are raised to perceive authority figures. Cross-cultural studies increase validity of explanation.  

Obedience: Dispositional Explanations  Research support- Milgram conducted interviews on participants who scored highly on the F-scale test believing that there might be a link between obedience and authoritarian personality. However, link is merely a correlation between two variables and is impossible to draw conclusion that AP causes obedience. Third factor may be involved such as lower education.  Limited explanation- explanation for individual personality does not explain majority. Unlikely that all the Nazi's had authoritarian personality. This suggests against Adorno's theory and suggests social identity theory is more realistic.  Political bias- F-scale tendency towards extreme right wing ideologies when there is left-wing authoritarianism for example Bolsheviks. Adorno's theory not comprehensive and applicable to the whole political spectrum.  Correlation not causation- Just because there is a correlation between harsh parenting and AP does not mean it is the sole cause. Other factors may influence AP. Methodological problems- can achieve high score just by ticking all the same boxes. Interviewers asking about childhood experience knew the results of the F-scale and the hypothesis of the study- researcher bias. 

Resistance to social influence  Social support- Research support  for resistance to conformity-Allan and Levine found that conformity decreased in an Asch type experiment when a dissenter was present, even when the dissenter wore thick glasses and said he had difficulty with his vision. Resistance is not just motivated by following what someone else says but also having the freedom of pressure from the group.  Research support for resistance to obedience- Gamson found higher levels of resistance in study than Milgram- probably because ppts were in groups and 29/33 rebelled. Shows peer support is linked to greater resistance.  Locus of control- Research Support- Holland repeated Milgram's study and found 37% of those with internal LOC did not continue to the highest shock level whereas only 23% of externals didn't. Internals showed greater resistance to authority increasing the validity of the explanation. Contradictory Research- Twenge analysed data from American LOC studies over a 40 year period and found that people have become more resistant to obedience but also more external but we would expect people to be more internal- though could be due to changing society where many things are out of our control.   

Minority Influence Research support- Evidence to suggest the importance of consistency shown in Moscovici's blue slide,green slide study where a consistent opinion had a greater effect than an inconsistent opinion.  Research support for depth of thought- Martin gave ppts a message supporting a particular viewpoint and measured their support. One group of ppts then heard a minority group agree with the initial view while another group heard this from the majority and then finally exposed to a conflicting view. If they had listened to the minority view they were less willing to change their opinions. This suggests the minority message had been more deeply processed.  Artificial tasks- the research into minority influence such as that of Moscovici is very unrealistic in terms of being able to generalise it to real-life situations such as jury decision making and political campaigning. Therefore the study lacks external validity. 

Social Influence and social change  Research support for normative influences- Nolan investigated whether social influence processes could lead to reductions in energy consumption in a community. Hung messages on doors of house in San Diego every week for a month stating that most residents were trying to reduce energy usage. Control- some residents asked to save energy but no reference to other peoples behaviour. Significant decrease in energy usage from the first group.  Minority influence only indirectly effective- Takes a very long time for social changes to happen (e.g smoking). Effects of minority likely to be indirect and delayed. Majority only influenced on issue at hand. Suggests role in social change is very limited.  Role of deeper processing- Moscovici suggested that minority influence causes individuals to think more deeply about an issue than majority influence however Diane disagrees and states that it may be majority influence that causes deeper processing because we are forced to think long and hard about why the majority disagrees with us. This casts doubt on validity of the theory.  Barriers to social change- despite agreeing with the minority many people resist social change due to fears of being stereotyped. Best way to for minority to influence change is to avoid the negative stereotypes (tree hugger, raging feminist)