Social Influence

AS Psychology – PSYA2

Name: ______________________

Assignment Title

What you/your teacher/peer said you

did well

What your you/your teacher/peer said you

needed to improve

Your mark/out

ofGrade Over/on/

under

1 /

2 /

3 /

4 /

1 | P a g e

Name: Target Grade:

Class Teacher: Study Buddy’s Name:

PSYA2 Assessment

1 hour 30 minutes exam = 50% of the total AS marks, = 25% of the total A2 marks

Three compulsory structured questions, one based on the Biological Psychology content, one based on the Social Psychology content and one based on the Individual Differences content.

Questions include short answer, stimulus material and one or more: Biological Psychology, Social Psychology, & Individual Differences

12-mark questions requiring extended writing in which QWC will be assessed.

Introduction

We will be working through this booklet in lesson time, it can also be used as a revision aid nearer to the exam. Inside this booklet are resources that have been designed to help you to understand and revise Social Psychology.

Two different areas are covered; Social Psychology Social Psychology in Everyday Life

The booklet also contains a list of the specification requirements which you can use as a checklist to monitor your progress. Past exam questions have also been included so you know what to expect, some of these will be completed during lesson time.

These are useful sites which may help you with your revision; some of them have been used within the booklet.

5 http://psyonline.org.uk/ 6 http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/specifications/alevel/AQA-2180-W-SP-14.PDF 7 http://www.psychlotron.org.uk/newResources/socialConformity.html 8 http://www.psychexchange.co.uk/videos/ 9 http://www.s-cool.co.uk/alevel/psychology/social-influence.html

When preparing resources, the following textbook has been used:Ÿ Cardwell, M. & Flannagan, C. (2012) Psychology AS: The Complete Companion. (Third Edition) Oxford University Press.Ÿ Gross, R. & Rolls, G. (2008) AQA (A) Psychology for AS. Hodder Education.

You will be expected to: develop knowledge and understanding of concepts, theories and studies in relation to social

psychology develop skills of analysis, evaluation and application in relation to social psychology develop knowledge and understanding of research methods associated with this area of

psychology develop knowledge and understanding of ethical issues associated with this area of

psychology.

Knowledge and understanding of research methods should be developed through undertaking practical research activities involving collection, analysis and interpretation of qualitative and quantitative data, and analysis and evaluation of studies relevant to the content for each area of psychology in this unit.

2 | P a g e

Conformity

People are said to conform when they go along with the group majority. If someone goes against the group, or against what is socially acceptable they are said to be deviating.

If the individual is influenced by a group this is known as majority influence, but this doesn’t always mean that the person has changed their point of view (attitude conversion).

Normally compliance occurs (people are agreeing in public, but keep their personal views). So, usually conformity is compliance, rather than a private acceptance as well (internalisation)

Types of conformity

Complete the mind map below about the three types of conformity according to Kelman (1958) – page 162 of the textbook.

Sherif (1935)

3 | P a g e

Identification

Conformity

Compliance (Majority Influence)

Internalisation (Minority Influence)

Background Research into Conformity

Sherif (1936)The first major study of conformity was carried out by Muzafer Sherif. He made use of what is known as the autokinetic effect. If we look at a stationary spot oflight in a darkened room, then very small movements of the eyes make the light seem to move.

In Sherif’s key condition, the participants were first of all tested one at a time, and then in small groups of three. They were asked to say how much the light seemed to move, and in what direction. Each participant rapidly developed his or her own personal norm. This norm was stable, but it varied considerably between individuals.

When three individuals with very different personal norms were then put together into a group, they tended to make judgements that were very close to each other. The fact that a group norm rapidly replaced the personal norms of the members of the group indicates the influence of social influence.

Sherif (1935) also used a condition in which individuals started the experiment in groups of three, and then were tested on their own. Once again, a group norm tended to develop within the group. When the members of the group were then tested on their own, their judgements concerning the movement of the light continued to reflect the influence of the group.

Evaluation of SherifThere are three major limitations with Sherif’s research. 1. He used a very artificial situation, and it is not clear how relevant his findings are

for most everyday situations. 2. There was no “correct” answer in his situation. It is not surprising that

individuals rely on the judgment of others when they have no clear way of deciding what judgments to make.

3. Conformity effects can be assessed more directly by arranging for all but one of the participants in an experiment to give the same judgement, and then seeing what effect this has on the remaining participant. This was done by Jacobs and Campbell (1961) using the autokinetic effect and they found strong evidence of conformity.

Jenness (1932) Aim: To investigate conformity according to informational social influence.

Procedure: A bean jar, with an unknown value of beans inside was shown to a group of individuals. First the experimenter would question the participants individually about what their estimate of the number of beans there are in the jar. Then the participants were told to share their estimates in a group. Finally they were asked individually again to estimate the number of beans in the jar.

Results: The participants showed a shift towards a group estimate, rather than their own estimate. Almost all changed their individual estimate, in line with the group estimate.

Conclusion: This confirms the hypothesis that individuals will conform to a group decision when they are looking for information or seeking to be correct.

4 | P a g e

Criticisms: This is a lab study; therefore it lacks ecological validity as the experiment was conducted in an artificial environment. The study does include some deception, as participants were not informed about the aims of the study. Strength: Easy to replicate and therefore we can test its reliability easily.

Conformity (Majority Influence)

Asch (1956)Asch’s aim was to see if participants would yield to majority social influence and give incorrect answers in a situation when the correct answers were always obvious.

Seven male, student participants looked at two cards: the test card showed one vertical line; the other card showed three vertical lines of different length. The participants’ task was to call out, in turn, which of these three lines was the same length as the test line. The correct answer was always obvious. All participants, except one, were accomplices of the experimenter (stooges). The genuine participants called out his answer last but one, or last. Accomplices gave unanimous wrong answers on 12 of the 18 trials. These 12 trials were called the critical trials. In total, Asch used 123 male college students in this study.

Participants conformed to the unanimous incorrect answer on 36.8% of the critical trials. This might not strike you as a very high figure but remember the correct answer was always obvious. 75% of participants conformed at least once. 25% of participants never conformed. Some of these ‘independent’ participants were confident in their judgements. More often, however, they 5 | P a g e

experienced tension and doubt but managed to resist the pressure exerted by the unanimous majority.

You can watch the video of Asch here:

1. Why do people conform? (Use page 162 of the textbook)

2. Give two strengths and two limitations of Asch’s method. State, explain and apply every point (say why it is good or bad). Furthermore, explain in your limitations how Asch’s experiment could have been improved.

Strengths Limitations How could the limitations be improved?

Variations on Asch’s Experiment

Asch carried out a number of variations on his task to find out which variables affected conformity. Make some notes about each of the different variations of Asch’s study:

1. Difficulty

2. Size of the majority

6 | P a g e

TASK: You must work as a group to prepare a radio show. You must discuss research into conformity, and include criticisms of Asch’s research (page 164). We will record the radio shows as a podcast at the end of the lesson.

3. Unanimity of the majority

Evaluating Conformity Research

The time when Asch’s study was conducted is very important. It was the late 1950s and there was an era of McCarthyism (a period of strong anti-communism when people were scared to be different). Perrin and Spencer (1980) repeated the Asch study in England with students. Out of 396 trials there was only one conforming response! In a second study with youths on probation as the participants and probation officers as confederates the rate of conformity was similar to Asch – this could be because the risks to the youths on probation for not conforming were high.

What you have to remember is that even though 1/3 of the participants conformed, 2/3 did not. This shows that humans are actually very independent, rather than overly conformist.

The task Asch asked participants to complete was rather insignificant and the group was made up of strangers. How well you know the group might have an effect on conformity, Williams and Sogon (1984) found…

Tanford and Penrod (1986) looked at the conformity rate in jurors. How can you compare Asch’s study to the situation experienced by a jury? And what are the implications of conformity in this real-life situation?

Can you think of any ethical issues associated with Asch’s experiment?

7 | P a g e

8 | P a g e

Conformity and Culture

Smith and Bond (1998)

You need to draw around your hand in the space below. You thenneed to fill your hand with the APFCC of the Smith and Bond studyon page 165.

AimProcedureFindingsConclusionsCriticisms

9 | P a g e

Explanations of why people conformNormative & Informational Social Influence

There are two main reasons why people conform. Read the two scenarios below and outline how you would behave in each. Then you will look at reasons for conformity.

Scenario 1 – It’s your first day at college. You don’t know anyone. After your first lesson a group of classmates ask if you want to hang out with them at break. They seem nice enough so you go along. The conversation soon turns to music, specifically the tunes of Irish pop quartet Westlife. You hate Westlife but before you get a chance to say so the rest of the group each say how much they love them. And they really do love them. Eventually after several minutes of Westlife praise you’re asked what you think of them. Oh dear. What do you do?

Scenario 2 – It’s still your first day at college. You want to use the computers so head to the library. There are several spare machines but they’re all turned off. You don’t know how to turn them on. You feel embarrassed about not knowing and think you’ll look stupid if you ask someone. What do you do?

Missing words:Private, different, alone, copy, liked, permanent, obvious.

The first scenario is an example of normative social influence. This is where we conform due to our desire to be ________, to be accepted by a group or simply to avoid embarrassment. We go along with the majority so we don’t appear _____________ to everyone else.

Normative social influence is a particular type of conformity called compliance. This is where a person’s behaviour changes in public but not in private e.g. just because you say you like Westlife when you’re with your new friends, it doesn’t mean you download their greatest hits and listen to them when you’re ________.

Evaluation Normative social influence has recently been investigated by Garandeau and Cillessen (2006) looking at the role it plays in bullying. Outline what they found below:

10 | P a g e

The second reason for conformity is informational social influence. This is where we conform due to our desire to be correct. In some situations there may be no correct or _________ answer as to how to behave. To solve this problem we _______ what others are doing. The more uncertain people are, the more likely they are to conform for this reason.

This is also a particular type of conformity, called internalisation. This has greater influence over a person’s behaviour as the change occurs in both public and __________. If the behaviour is seen as the correct thing to do then it doesn’t matter if others are around or not, we will do it either way. Internalisation is a more ______________ change in behaviour. Informational social influence is likely to occur when the situation is ambiguous, the situation requires rapid action, or when we believe others to be experts.

Wittenbrink and Henly (1996) carried out some research looking at the influence informational social influence has on social stereotypes. Outline what they found below:

Fein et al (2007) carried out a similar study with the US presidential election, finding that if people saw other people’s reactions to candidates they were more likely to change their own judgements in line with others’ opinions.

Nanking massacre, 1937 • More than ¼ million people murdered,

raped and mutilated in six weeks by Japanese troops in China

• How does the normative social influence theory explain this?

Plan an answer to the essay question on page 167:“Describe and evaluate two explanations of conformity”. (12 marks)

Sort the boxes below into the two categories by using 2 coloured pencils.NORMATIVE SOCIAL INFLUENCE INFORMATIONAL SOCIAL

INFLUENCELooking at the people around you in a posh restaurant to see which knife and

fork to use

You secretly despise video games, but feign interest on the playground when

talk turns to FIFA 14.Smoking because others in your peer group smoke, despite hating the smell

You are going on a night out but you don’t know what to wear so you ring

11 | P a g e

your friends and you wear what they advise.

Putting on car lights in the evening when you see other drivers with theirs

on.Dressing like your friends in order to

avoid bullying

12 | P a g e

Obedience to AuthorityMilgram (1963)

Aims:To discover whether ordinary people will obey a legitimate authority even when required to injure another person. He was testing the ‘Germans are different’ hypothesis, which suggested that the Holocaust could not happen anywhere else in the world because Germans were more likely to commit such atrocities.

Procedures40 male volunteers were recruited as participants by advertising to take part in a study of how

punishment affects learning, to take place at Yale University. Participants were paid $4.50 and told that they would receive this even if they quit the study.There were two confederates: an experimenter and a ‘learner’ (a 47 year old accountant). The participant drew lots with the confederate and always ended up as the ‘teacher’. He was told that he must administer increasingly strong electric shocks to the participant each time he got a question wrong. The machine was tested on the participant to show him how it worked.The learner, sitting in another room, gave mainly wrong answers and received his (fake) shocks in silence until they reached very strong shocks (300 volts). At this point he pounded on the wall and then gave no response to the next question. He repeated this at 315 volts and from then on said/did nothing. If the ‘teacher’ asked to stop, the experimenter had a set of ‘prods’ to repeat, such as saying: ‘It is absolutely essential that you continue’ or ‘You have no other choice, you must go on.’ FindingsBefore the study Milgram asked psychology students to say how far they thought participants would go. They estimated that fewer than 4% would go to the maximum level. The main finding was that 65% of the participants continued to maximum voltage (450 volts), far beyond what was marked ‘Danger, severe shock’. Only 5 participants (12.5%) stopped at 300 volts, the point when the learner first objected. 100% of participants went up to 300 volts. ConclusionsThe findings suggest that ordinary people are astonishingly obedient to authority when asked to behave in an inhumane manner. This suggests that it is not evil people who commit evil crimes but ordinary people just obeying orders. In other words, crimes against humanity may be the outcome of situational rather than dispositional factors. It appears that an individual’s capacity for making independent decisions is suspended under certain social constraints– namely being given an order by an

13 | P a g e

authority figure.One of the most striking cases of total obedience was that of Pasqual Gino, a 43-year-old water inspector. Towards the end of the experiment, he found himself thinking, “Good God, he’s dead. Well, here we go, we’ll finish him. And I just continued all the way through to 450 volts”.

Other participants found the experience very distressing. They were seen to “sweat, tremble, stutter, bite their lips, groan and dig their finger-nails into their flesh”. Milgram reported that three participants had “full-blown uncontrollable seizures”.

Variations of Milgram’s Study

Milgram (1974)

Milgram (1974) carried out several variations on his basic experiment.

In Milgram’s original study, there were two confederates, an experimenter (the authority figure), and a 47 year-old accountant, who played the part of the ‘learner’. Milgram found that 65% of participants delivered the maximum 450 volts!

Task:1. Cut out the studies on the separate handout. Each describes a variation of

Milgram’s research.2. Estimate the percentage of participants you think gave the maximum 450

volts in that variation of the study.3. Place onto the ‘Obedience barometer’ on the next page.4. Briefly explain why you think the level has increased/decreased in the left

column. 5. Now research the actual results using the internet and your textbook.

Stick the variations onto the correct place and make notes in the right hand column about what was actually found.

14 | P a g e

Practice Questions

Milgram’s experiments into obedience can be criticised as being unethical. Describe two ethical issues that can be illustrated by Milgram’s research. (4 marks)

Choose one of the ethical issues identified in your answer to (a) and explain a way of dealing with it. (2 marks)

Apart from ethical issues, give one strength and one limitation of Milgram’s methodology. (4 marks)

15 | P a g e

Percentage (%) of Milgram’s participants

administering maximum shock (450

volts)

Why do you think that theobedience level has increased/

decreased from Milgram’soriginal study?

What did Milgram find when repeating the

experiment with a slight variation?

16 | P a g e

17 | P a g e

Explanations of why people obey

Legitimate Authority: Bickman (1974)

Leonard Bickman (1974) tested the ecological validity of Milgram’s work by conducting an experiment in a more realistic setting. In this study three male experimenters gave orders to 153 randomly selected pedestrians in Brooklyn, New York. The experimenters were dressed in one of three ways: a sports coat and tie, a milkman’s uniform, or guard’s uniform that made them look like a police officer. The experimenter gave 1 of 3 orders:

Pointing to a bag on the street, “Pick up this bag for me.” Nodding in the direction of a confederate “This fellow is over parked at the

meter but doesn’t have any change. Give him a dime.” Approaching the participant at a bus stop, “Don’t you know you have to

stand on the other side of the pole? This signs says ‘No standing’”.

Bickman found that participants were most likely to obey the experimenter dressed as a guard than the milkman or civilian. This supports one of the variations of Milgram’s findings, that obedience can be related to the amount of perceived authority.

Who would you obey?

Evaluation of Bickman (1974)

Field experiments may have increased ecological validity and mundane realism but the cost is decreased control. They also raise more ethical concerns because informed consent cannot be sought and it is difficult to debrief participants without alerting others to the experiment. Bickman’s study differs from Milgram’s in one important way. The orders were not quite so unreasonable; therefore obedience was more understandable.

Practice Questions

Explain one or more reasons why people obey authority. (6 marks)Outline two explanations of why people obey. (4 marks)

18 | P a g e

Milgram’s work into obedience provided us with valuable insights into why people obey, even though it was carried out in a laboratory. Outline two explanations of why people obey. (4 marks)

19 | P a g e

Milgram (1974) decided to investigate why people obey and came up with four suggestions (page 172). You need to make some evaluation notes about why people obey using page 173 of the textbook. Make sure you also read the ‘real-world applications’ on page 172.

Gradual commitment - Participants get ‘sucked into’ a situation and in the case of the shocks, they had volunteered for a harmless study of learning, once they were told that shocks were to be administered it is then difficult to escape – the deeper you are in a situation, the more effort it takes to leave.

Agentic shift - When we obey we are the ‘agent’ of the authority figures wishes, and place ourselves in the ‘agentic state’. We give up personal responsibility for our actions (e.g. like the Nazi war criminals). People switch between this state and an ‘autonomous’ state (when we are in personal control).

Buffers - When the experiment was originally conducted in the lab the teacher and the learner were in different rooms and the teacher was protected (e.g. buffered). When the learner and teacher were in the same room the effect of the buffer reduced – the obedience level decreased.

Justifying obedience - If participants are given a role and told that ‘the experiment requires them to continue’, people seem to surrender their freedom and believe that they are serving a justifiable cause. In Milgram’s experiment knowledge of science was furthered by the research so people were compelled to continue.

Evaluation

Mandel (1998) suggests that by using Milgram’s obedience research to explain atrocities, such as those conducted by the Nazi’s, other potential explanations are ignored. What did Goldhagen (1966) identify as a better explanation of the actions of the Nazi’s?

How does Milgram’s research in a lab differ from the actions of the Reserve Police Battalion 101 in terms of agentic shift?

What are the three negative consequences of the obedience alibi, according to Mandel (1998)

Essay Practice Question

20 | P a g e

1.2.3.

Outline and evaluate one or more explanations of why people obey. (12 marks)

Explanations of Independent Behaviour

I’m sure that some of you are wondering why people conform, having now learned a little about conformity. You may think of yourself as being independent and not easily influenced by others. We will now look at some of the strategies used by people to help them resist the pressures to conform.

Gender differences in conformity

Griskevicius et al (2006) discovered gender differences in conformity. Outline the differences below:

Resisting Pressures to Conform

The role of alliesIn one of Asch’s variation he showed that the presence of a dissident (ally) led to a decrease in the conformity levels in true participants – this is thought to be because the presence of a dissident gave the true participant social support and made them feel more confident in their own decision and more confident in rejecting the majority position. This is a form of informational social influence. Allen and Levine (1971) conducted a study in a task similar to Asch. There were three conditions, outline the procedure and findings below:

21 | P a g e

The nonconformist personality

People who do not respond to majority influences are normally independent and unconcerned with social norms, and sometimes they do not even know what the social norm is. Some people are predisposed to actively oppose the norm and are said to have an anti-conformity personality. Such people would deliberately dress in a way that is different from others.

Evaluation

People will conform to a majority in order to be liked (normative social influence) when they are asked to judge something in physical reality (e.g. in the Asch study where lengths of lines are judged.

However, when moral judgements are to be made, the costs to one’s personal integrity is higher.

Hornsey et al (2003) found that there was little movement towards a majority on attitudes of moral significance to the individual (e.g. cheating) even when this involved public (not just private) behaviours.

Resisting Pressures to Obey

Insights from Milgram’s studiesIn Milgram’s study 65% of participants went to the full 450v, yet others defied the experimenter and stopped before this point. What did Milgram find when he carried out variations of his experiment to show why people could resist the pressures to obey?

Evaluation Kohlberg (1969) presented Milgram’s volunteers with imaginary moral

dilemmas. The dilemmas were not about what people would do, but why they would behave in a certain way. Kohlberg found that when decisions were based on morals (e.g. justice) people were more defiant. Those people with restricted moral development were more likely to follow Milgram’s orders.

Milgram looked back at his participants’ characteristics. Less educated people were less likely to resist commands; as were Roman Catholics compared to Protestants.

22 | P a g e

Locus of Control

What is meant by the term ‘locus of control’?

Label the diagram below of the locus of control:

How does a ‘high internal’ perceive their behaviour?

How does a ‘high external’ perceive their behaviour?

Key characteristics of an internal locus of control:1. High internals seek information that is useful to them and are less likely to

rely on others’ opinions.2. High internals are more achievement orientated and are more likely to be

leaders and entrepreneurs.3. High internals are more likely to resist the coercion of others.

Evaluation

Linz and Semykina (2005) carried out a Russian study of 2600 employees; they found men were more likely to have an internal locus of control, and women external. High internals were also likely to earn more money.

Twenge et al. (2004) carried out two meta-analyses of 97 studies from 1960-2002. They found young Americans (aged 9-14) are becoming more external, believing their behaviour is controlled by outside forces (fate or luck) and not in their own control. The outcome of this is negative (poor school achievement, decreased self-control and depression). The positives of this are that people are becoming more tolerant of others, regardless of background.

23 | P a g e

Locus of Control

Understanding Social ChangeWhat is social change?

Minority Influence and Social ChangeYou briefly studied Minority Influence (as shown by Moscovici) on page 24. Moscovici believed that conformity was not only due to a majority. He believed that a minority could change ways of doing things and bring around social change. Moscovici explained that if an individual is exposed to a persuasive argument then their views may change to that of the minority, this is also known as ‘conversion’.

In order to bring around social change through minority influence, certain conditions must be met...

Drawing attention to an issue: Minorities can draw our attention to the issues being addressed. If the views are different to the majority then a conflict is created, which the majority is motivated to reduce. The image on the rights shows ‘Fathers 4 Justice’, a group which dress in costumes to bring attention to the issues of fathers’ rights after divorce.

The role of conflict: We cannot simply think of a minority as being ‘different’. Sometimes we will analyse their argument more closely. This doesn’t always result in us changing our opinions, but imagine that you are given information on animal testing and cosmetics. After reading the leaflet you may accept that animal testing is wrong, you may then buy products not tested on animals, and ultimately your behaviour has changed. This is social change.

Consistency: In order to be successful a minority must be consistent over time and with each other, this helps them to be taken more seriously. Wood et al. (1994) carried out a meta-analysis of 97 studies and found that a consistent minority is most influential.

The augmentation principle: This states that if there is a risk when putting forward your point of view then you will be taken more seriously. This is because the minority is willing to suffer in order for the views to be increased (or augmented) and then is more likely to influence social change. Publicly the views of the minority can oppose the majority, leading to jail or even death. An example of this can be found in a Polish trade union called ‘Solidarity’. They stood up for workers’ rights, against government censorship, intimidation and imprisonment. Solidarity grew and led to over 10 million members, who eventually overthrew the communist government in 1989.

Evaluation

Create a revision mind map about the evaluation of social change. You must include... The Suffragettes Why a minority doesn’t always lead to social change How minority influence can help us to understand terrorism

24 | P a g e

PSYA2 – Social Psychology: Social Influence Checklist

Use this checklist to ensure that you have covered all the areas needed for success in your exams. The following topics will be covered in class.

However, it will be your responsibility to catch up with any topics you miss and to actively revise the different areas.

Topic AreaCovere

d in Class

Revised

Social Influence

Conformity (majority influence)

Explanations of why people conform, including informational social influence and normative social influence

Types of conformity, including internalisation and compliance

Obedience to authority, including Milgram’s work

Explanations of why people obey

Social Influence in Everyday Life

Explanations of independent behaviour, including locus of control, how people resist pressures to conform and resist pressures to obey authority

How social influence research helps us to understand social change; the role of minority influence in social change

25 | P a g e