IB Psychology Paper 1 – Social Level of Analysis

(SCLA)Carlos Cardini May

Table of contents Principles Studies supporting principles Research methods used in SCLA Limitations of research methods How to overcome limitations Ethical considerations in research methods Situational and dispositional factors in explaining behaviour Two errors in attribution Social Identity Theory Formation of stereotypes and effect on behaviour Social Learning Theory Compliance techniques Conformity

Principles1. Human beings are social animals and thus

have a need to belong2. Culture influences behaviour3. Humans have a social self4. People’s view of the world is resistant to

change

1. Human beings are social animals and thus have a need to belong

Asch (1951)Aim: Test the extent of conformity in a non-

ambiguous taskProcedure: 1 participant and 7 confederates were

asked to judge which of the three lines on the right corresponded to the one on the left (in length). Confederates we asked to give obviously incorrect answers.

Findings: 32% conformity rate. 74% of subjects conformed at least once

Conclusions: People change their behaviour in order to belong

2. Culture influences behaviour Zimbardo et al (1971) Aim: Investigate how people react in difficult situations.  Procedure: Zimbardo simulated a prison in Stanford University

basement. He randomly assigned the participants to be either the guard or prisoner in the prison simulation.

Findings: After a while, the volunteers playing the role of guards started to show acts of empowerment, aggression and a more confident attitude compared to the volunteers playing the role of the prisoners who became passive, depressed, anxious and experienced loss of control over life. The participants acted like what their roles in their situation/predicament would be in real life prison conditions. 

Conclusion: People will conform to the roles their culture imposes them and therefore modify their behaviour. 

Humans have a social selfCan relate to both Tajfel’s Social Identity

Theory and Asch’s Theory of Conformity.

People’s view of the world is resistant to changeHoward and Rothbart (1980) found that

people have better recall for facts that they are critical of out-group members than facts that are favourable: negative memory bias.

Research methods used in SCLAThe SCLA main research methods are:

Experiments -> See Sheriff (1995) or Asch (1955)Observations (overt and covert) -> See Festinger et

al. (1956) or Kolo and Baur (2004) Interviews Questionnaires

Ethical considerations in research methods5 Ethical concerns:

Informed consent is mandatory.Withdrawal – Right to withdraw is obligatory.Deception – Intentional deception must be

avoided.Debriefing – Participants must leave the

experiment in the same mental state.Protection of participants – There should not be

any physical or mental harm.Animal ethics – Welfare of subjects is

compulsory.

See Zimbardo (1971), Milgran (1963), Asche (1955)

Ethical considerations in research methods - exampleZimbardo -Stanford prison experiment- (1971)

simulated a prison in Stanford’s basement to analyse how people react to difficult situations and power.Ethical concerns:

Informed consent: Participants were not told they would be arrested and taken to the police station.

Deception: Prisoners were “arrested” by real police and driven to a police station where they were booked and fingerprinted.

Privacy: Participants were blindfolded, stripped and deloused.

Participant protection: guards became aggressive towards prisoners and withdrew their rights. Zimbardo waited for six days to end the experiment even though participants were distressed.

Situational and dispositional factors in explaining behaviourSituational: One’s behaviour is assumed to be dependent upon

their current circumstances. Generally we attribute own negative outcomes and others’ positive outcomes to situational factors.

Dispositional: One’s behaviour in terms of factors which are specific to them as a person. Generally we attribute own positive outcomes and others’ negative outcomes to dispositional factors.

Supporting study: Zimbardo Stanford Prison Experiment (1971): found that

situational rather than dispositional factors caused negative behaviour and thoughts found prison settings.

2 errors in attribution – 1) fundamental attribution error1) Fundamental attribution error: The tendency

to attribute another’s behaviour to dispositional characters rather than the situation itself.

Ross et al (1997) found that participants ranked the host of a show as the most intelligent, even though they knew he were randomly assigned this role.

Jones and Harris (1967) found that, even when knowing that a specific role was assigned, participants tend to credit disposition.

2) Self-serving bias1) Self-serving bias: the tendency of attributing

success to dispositional factors and failures to situational factors.

Lau and Russel (1980) found that American football coaches and players tend to attribute wins to internal factors and losses to external factors.

Johnson et al. (1964) found that individuals attributed pupil’s success to the teacher’s abilities and failure to pupil’s lack of ability.

Greenberg et al (1982) stated that humans use SSB to protect our self-steem.

Social Identity Theory SIT is based on 4 main concepts:

Social categorization - categorise individuals into groups.

Category accentuation effect – Exaggeration of intergroup differences and intragroup similarities.

Social identification – Adopt identity of in group.

Social comparison and positive distinctiveness – Social identity contributes to our self-image so we seek positive social identities. We compare in-group with out-groups to establish superiority.

Tajfel (1970) found that even without competition, participants tend to favour their in-group over their out-group.

Jane elliot (1968) blue eye/brown eye: found that being part of a group affects self view and therefore behaviour towards out-groups.

Formation on stereotypes and effect on behaviour – grain of truth hypothesis Campbell (1967) stated that having personal experiences with

a group and the influence of gate keepers (parents, media, etc) lead to stereotypes.

The Illusory Correlation states that cognitive bias leads to stereotypes (Hamilton and Gifford); that is a person’s tendency to make errors in judgements based on cognitive factors.

Snyder and Swann (1978) found that when participants were told information about a person (i.e. Introvert or extrovert) they changed their behaviour and questions to confirm the stereotypes (i.e. “What do you dislike the most about parties?” and “What do you like the most about parties?”)

-> Link to misleading questions (Loftus and Palmer)

Formation on stereotypes and effect on behaviour – Stereotype threat and spotlight anxietySteele (1997) demonstrated that

students may suffer from emotional distress and thus underperformance due to stereotype threat and spotlight anxiety.

Stereotype threat: The fear of being judged under a stereotype.

Spotlight anxiety: The emotional distress and underperformance caused by stereotype threat.

Aronson and Steele (1995) found that stereotype threat in African Americans can lead to underperformance in verbal skills. Sunukar effect seen with women

Social Learning Theory Bandura (1961) described SLT as the way in which society or

culture passes on its norms to individuals within the group is through social learning theory; humans learn behaviour through the environment, but most specifically through observational learning.

Components of SLT: Attention, Retention, Motor Reproduction and Motivation.

Bandura – Bobo Doll Experiment (1963). Findings exposed that children were significantly more aggressive if they observed aggressive models and that they tended to follow same sex role models.

Gergely et al (2002) found that young infants have the ability to observer and infer model’s intention on his behaviour.

Saint Helena Island study brought evidence static levels of violence after the introduction of T.V. in contrast to countries like USA, Canada, UK, etc. This means there was no motivation to reproduce the behaviour of models.

Compliance techniques - definitions

Defining compliance techniques: Authority – people comply more often with those in

positions of authority Commitment – once people have agreed to something,

they are likely to comply with similar requests Liking – people comply with requests from people they

like  Reciprocity – people often feel they need to return a

favour Scarcity – opportunities seem more valuable to people

when they are less readily available  Social Proof – people view a behaviour as correct if they

see others performing it 

Compliance techniques – foot-in-the-doorDefinition: Getting people to make a commitment

and thus increase compliance by first asking a small request and then a larger one.

Supporting study: Freedman and Fraser (1966) compared

% rate of compliance between a group of individuals that was asked to display a small sign in their property and after two weeks a big ugly one; and a group of individuals that was asked for the big display directly. In the first condition there was over 76% compliance rate while in the second condition there was only 17%.

Compliance techniques – low-balling Definition:

Changing an offer to make it less attractive after individuals have agreed. Supporting studies:

Cialdini (1974) compared a group of students that were asked to volunteer to be part of a study that involved them to wake up at 7am to a group of students that were told the same except for the time until they had agreed. In the first group, 24% of pts were willing to participate while in the second group 56% agreed.

Burger and Cornelius (2003) analysed the effect of offering free ice-cream coupons in exchange of donations and after agreement telling the participants that she ran out of coupons. They found that 77.6% would still agree to make a donation in comparison to a control group were only 42% agreed.

Conformity 3 levels of conformity:

Compliance: temporal public appearance Identification: temporal public and private appearance Internalisation: permanent public and private appearance

Asch (1955): Asch (1951) Aim: Test the extent of conformity in a non-ambiguous task Procedure: 1 participant and 7 confederates were asked to

judge which of the three lines on the right corresponded to the one on the left (in length). Confederates we asked to give obviously incorrect answers.

Findings: 32% conformity rate. 74% of subjects conformed at least once

Conclusions: People change their behaviour in order to belong