8509387
Description
Flashcards by Jessica Mitchell, updated more than 1 year ago
More
| Question | Answer |
| Types Of Conformity | Compliance: Conforming to gain approval Internalisation: Conforming because of an acceptance of views Identification: Accepting influence because of a desire to be associated |
| Explanations For Conformity | Normative Social Influence: Conformity based on the desire for approval More likely to occur when under the belief of surveillance Informational Social Influence: Based on an acceptance of information as evidence about reality More likely when the situation is ambiguous |
| Types of Conformity and Explanations for Conformity (EVALUATION) | 1. Difficulties distinguishing between nsi and isi 2. Research support for normative influence (Smoking- Linkenbach and Perkins) 3. Research supporting for informational influence (Racial attitudes - Wittenbrink and Henley) 4. NSI only affects nAffiliators who have a greater need for relationships with others. |
| Variables affecting Conformity (KEY STUDY) | Asch, 1956 Procedure: Participants view different lengths of lines and compare them to a standard one Group contained confederates with participants being the penultimate Confederates give wrong answer 12/18 trials Findings: Conformity rate was 33% Without confederates, a mistake was 1% Participants conform to avoid disapproval |
| Variable affecting Conformity | GROUP SIZE: increased to 30% when 3 people (Campbell and Fairey - Group size has different effect depending on type of judgement) UNANIMITY OF THE MAJORITY: with one dissenter giving the right answer, conformity 5.5% DIFFICULTY OF TASK: if correct answer is less obvious, conformity increased (Lucas et al. Influence of task difficulty moderated by self-confidence) |
| Variable affecting Conformity (EVALUATION) | 1. Asch's research took place at a time of McCarthyism, conformity was high due to fear of communism therefore historical validity 2. Issue with confederates, Mori and Arai (2010), glasses allowed for convincing confederates 3. Independent behaviour since it was only 1/3 of results conformed |
| Conformity to Social Roles (KEY STUDY) | Zimbardo, The Stanford prison experiment (1973) PROCEDURE: Male volunteers assigned roles of prisoners or guards Prisoners given numbers, guards given uniform and power FINDINGS: Guards became tyrannical and treated the prisoners inhumanly Prisoners conformed to their roles |
| Conformity to Social Roles (EVALUATION) | 1. Ethical Issues of Zimbardo, (Protection of participants, Physical harm, Confidentiality etc) 2.Demand characteristics, being to influential, Banuazizi and Movahedi 3. Not automatic, Guards chose how to act |
| Research on Obedience (KEY STUDY) | Milgram, 1963 PROCEDURE: 40 volunteer participants in each condition Real participant = Teacher Confederate = Learner Teacher administering increasing shock levels up to a fatal 450V FINDINGS: In voice back condition, 65% went to maximum voltage All participants went to 300V The authority figure and its importance |
| Situational Factors in Obedience | Proximity: obedience levels decreased with increasing proximity Location: Obedience levels dropped to 48% in lower-status setting Power of Uniform: People more likely to obey someone in uniform |
| Research on Obedience (EVALUATION) | 1. Ethical issues due to deception and lack of informed consent 2. Internal validity- Orne and Holland claimed many saw through the deception 3. External validity- the obedience alibi |
| The Agentic State | A person sees themselves as an agent for carrying out another person's wishes Binding factors operate to maintain obedience (Look at victims of War and PWS) |
| Legitimacy of Authority | Person must perceive an individual in a position of social control People accept definitions of a situation offered by legitimate authority figure Legitimate commands arise from, institutions |
| Explanations for Obedience (EVALUATION) | 1. The agentic state does not explain gradual transitions 2. Distinguishing between the agentic state and unflattering aspects of human nature 3. Obedience with Tarnow (2000), pilots being the legitimate figure |
| The Authoritarian personality | People scoring high on F scale raised within authoritarian family background See the world in 'black and white' Strict adherence to hierarchy's and social rules |
| Right-Wing authoritarianism RWA | A cluster of personality variables (Conventionalism, submission, aggression) that are associated with a 'right-wing' attitude to life |
| The Authoritarian personality (KEY STUDY) | Elms and Milgram, 1966 PROCEDURE: 20 obedient participants, 20 defiant in Milgram's obedience study. Completed Adorno's F scale and open-ended questions about relationship with parents,ect. FINDINGS: Higher levels of authoritarianism with obedient participants scoring higher on F scale. Obedient participants reported being less close with their fathers CONCLUSION: Milgram concluded that the obedient participants in his original research displayed higher levels of the authoritarian personality, in comparison to disobedient participants. |
| The Authoritarian personality (EVALUATION) | 1. Correlation between RWA scores and maximum voltage shock Dambrun & Vatine 2. Explanations based on authoritarianism lack flexibility 3. Many fully obedient participants had good relationships with their parents |
| Resistance to Social influence (Social Support and resisting conformity) | Asch, 1956 found that social support enables us to resist conformity (Unanimity) Raise the possibility of them coming to an equally legitimate way of thinking Causes confidence in ones own answer (already seen as a self moderation) |
| Resistance to Social influence (Social Support and resisting obedience) | Difficult to take a stand against authority, Especially in the situation of others participating in obedient behaviour More confident in disobeying with an ally, who acts as a role model Milgram, one variation involves two participants and one is a disobedient confederate, conformity reduced to 10% rather than 65% |
| Locus of Control-ROTTER | Internal LOC = greater independence and less reliance on the opinions of others. they take responsibility for their own behaviour (Confidence, skill)- links to free will External LOC = more passive attitude and greater acceptance of the influence of others (Luck, fate). they believe external events control their behaviour and links to determinism. High internals less vulnerable to influence! |
| Locus of Control (EVALUATION) | 1. Holland- repeated Milgram's baseline study and found 37% of internals did not continue to highest shock level and only 23% of externals did. supports LOC. 2. Nature VS Nurture 3.Free will VS Determinism 4. Twenge et al: a meta analysis over 40 years of LOC studies and found that people are becoming ==g more external but less obedient. therfore disagreeing with LOC - Outdated idea? |
| Minority Influence | Minority influence effective with a consistent, committed and flexible style Wood et al - minorities who were especially consistent were most influential Commitment important as it suggests certainty and confidence Flexibility more effective at changing opinion than rigid arguments Snowball effect is crucial to this process. |
| Minority Influence (KEY STUDY) | Moscovici et al, 1969 PROCEDURE: Groups of four naive participants and two confederates Shown blue slides varying in intensity but confederates called them green Group 1 confederates - consistently Group 2 confederates - inconsistently FINDINGS : Consistent minority influenced naive participants to say green on 8% of trials Inconsistent minority exerted very little influence EVAL:Also Moscovici (1969) used female students as participants (i.e. unrepresentative sample) |
| Minority Influence (EVALUATION) | 1. the research conducted in this area has limited real life application as social situations are more complicated than the studies . In addition the tasks are often artificial and lack ecological validity. 2. The real value of minority influence is that it 'opens the mind' - Nemeth 3. Practical application/example with the Sufferegettes. 4.Minority influence doesn’t always lead to social change• Minorities are not only lacking in social power but may also be seen as ‘deviant’ by the majority eg-subcultures |
| Social influence processes in social change | Through minority influence: 1. Drawing attention to an issue 2. Cognitive conflict 3. Consistency of position 4. The augmentation principle 5. The snowball effect 6. social cryptomnesia |
| Social change through minority influence, Conformity | If people percieve something as the norm, they alter their behaviour to fit that norm Correcting misconceptions about 'actual norms' using social norms interventions 'Most of us dont drink and drive' - 13.7% drop Nolan et al and energy consumption study |
| Social Influence processes in Social Change (EVALUATION) | 1. Influence of minority more likely to be latent rather than direct. they are slow to occur. Nemeth argues the majority only look at the issue at hand rather than the central issue therfore causing indirect and delayed effects. 2. Being percieved as 'deviant' limits the influence of minorities 3. Role of deeper processing- Moscovici arhues minority influence involves deeper thinking but Mackie argues that majority influence requires deeper thinking. |
| Linkenbach and Perkins (support for NSI) | Smoking – Linkenbach and Perkins (2003) • Found that US teenagers exposed to normative message that the majority of their peers did not smoke were subsequently less likely to take up smoking. Suggesting a correlation between people’s normative beliefs and their behaviour. |
| Wittenbrink and Henley | Development of social stereotypes – Found that exposure to negative information about African Americans were likely to shape social stereotypes if represented as ‘view of the majority’. P's later reported more negative beliefs about a black individual.- ethical issues! |
| Research support for resistance to conformity-Allen and Levine | Allen and Levine found that in Asch's study conformity decreased when there was a non-conforming confederate. Even with the confederate having thick lens glasses it still encouraged people to not conform and be free. |
| Support for resistance to obedience - Gameson | Gameson repeated Milgram's study but in groups and found that 29 out of 33 groups rebelled and resisted the pressure to obey and deliver electric shocks to the learner. |
| Nolan et al | 2 streets- one told that "most people were reducing their energy consumption" the other just asked to reduce their energy. the first street reduced their energy more than the 2nd group supporting that conformity can lead to social change. |
Want to create your own Flashcards for free with GoConqr? Learn more.