Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Pschology > Social Influence > Flashcards

Social Influence Flashcards

1
Q

Conformity

A

A form of social influence where people adopt the behaviour, attitudes and values of other members of a group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Types of conformity

A

Compliance
Internalisation
Identification

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Compliance

A

Agreeing publicly, but not privately
Behaviour stops as soon as pressure stops
Explained by NSI

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Internalisation

A

Deepest type of conformity
Agrees both publicly and privately
Explained by ISI

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Identification

A

Confirm because we value and identify with the group
Publicly and privately accept the behaviour
Temporary - not maintained when individuals leave the group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Explanations for conformity

A

ISI

NSI

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

ISI

A

Results from our need to be correct
Turning to others when uncertain and conforming as they have more knowledge
Happens in unfamiliar and ambiguous situations, where the group is believed to be experts

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

NSI

A

Result of need to be liked and seem as part of the group
Humans are social species with a fundamental need for social companionship
The individual must believe they are under surveillance from the group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Why did Asch do variations of his original study

A

Methodology was varied slightly in order to investigate what factors lead to an increase or decrease in conformity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Consent

A

All ppts need to give informed consent to say that they agree to take part in the study

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Deception

A

Psychologists should avoid misleading/lying to ppts about the nature of the study.
Not always possible

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Confidentiality

A

All ppt’s data must be kept private and confidential. Ppt must be told at the beginning of the study if this isn’t possible

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Debriefing

A

Ppt’s must be told the true nature of the investigation and get told that they can withdraw their data at any point

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Withdrawal

A

Ppts have the right to withdraw at any time

Mustn’t be made to feel like they can’t

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Protection

A

Researchers have a responsibility to protect ppts from physical and mental harm
Any negative effects should be dealt with after the study

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

External validity

A

Whether the findings of a study can be generalised to situations and people other than those in the study e.g. other population, location, time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Ecological validity

A

A specific type of external validity referring to generalisations beyond the immediate setting to the real world

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Internal validity

A

Whether the variables which were manipulated in the study cause the results, or it was due to other circumstances (demand characteristics)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Social roles

A

The ‘parts’ people play as members of various social groups

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Characteristics of authoritarian personality

A

Hostile to those of an inferior status
Obedient and servile to those of an higher status
Highly conventional attitudes towards sex, race and gender
Have traditional values in terms of religion, family, love of country
Inflexible in their outlook

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Origin of the authoritarian personality

A 
Extremely strict discipline 
Expectation of absolute loyalty 
Impossibly high standards 
Severe criticisms of perceived failings 
Conditional love
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What type of conformity does minority influence lead to

A

Internalisation - it affects the private behaviour first

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Processes of minority influence

A

Consistency (within group and over time)
Commitment
Flexibility

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Snowball effect

A

When the minority gains followers

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Tipping point

A

When the minority becomes the majority

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

How does social change occur

A

The snowball effect
The tipping point
Conformity then takes over (ISI/NSI)
Governments then make laws and obedience takes over

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Research support for ISI

A

Sherif

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Negative points of explanations of conformity

A

NSI can’t be used to universally explain behaviour -> nAffiliators/ Teevan and McGhee -> individual differences
ISI doesn’t affect everyone the same way -> Perrin and Spencer (1980) - 1/396 conformed - > high self efficacy
ISI and NSI proposed differently but work together -> unanimity variation reduces NSI and ISI -> not possible to be sure which is causing conformity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Asch’s method (1951)

A

123 male US undergrads asked to take part in perception test - matching ‘standard’ line to substantially diff. comparison lines
Groups of 7-8
Naive ppt sat second to last
Gave answers orally
Confederates asked to give correct answer first 6 times - 18 trials

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Asch’s results

A

Average conformity rate on critical trial - 33%
25% never conformed
50% conformed 6+
5% conformed all 12
Mistakes made only 1% of the time in control condition
In post-study ppts said it was compliance and NSI

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Group size variation

A

Asch altered the number of confederates from 1 to 7/8 increasing by 1 at a time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

How did the results change with the group size variation

A

Very little conformity with 1/2 confederates
However, with 3+ the wrong answer rate rose to 31.8%
Further increase did not increase the level of conformity substantially - size of majority is only important to a point

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Unanimity variation

A

Wanted to know whether the presence of another non-conforming person would affect the naive ppt

Did this by introducing confederate who gave diff. answer (some correct and some incorrect)

34
Q

How did the results change with the unanimity variation

A

Conformity levels dropped significantly from 33% to 5.5% (right answer) and 9% (wrong answer) when unanimity was disturbed

35
Q

Task difficulty variation

A

Asch made the task harder by making the stimulus line and comparison lines more similar

36
Q

How did the results change with the task difficulty variation

A 
Conformity increased (ISI?)
Shows that situational differences (task difficulty) and individual differences (self-efficacy) are both important in determining conformity
37
Q

Weaknesses of Asch’s research

A

Application is limited due to cultural differences in conformity —> 14% - Belgium, 58% - Fiji (individualistic vs. collectivist)
Ecological validity —> trivial and artificial, consequences not as severe
Findings were exaggerated —> 67% didn’t conform&raquo_space; 33%
Only applies to certain situations —> with strangers, answered aloud
Lacks generalisability —> not representative

38
Q

Method of Zimbardo’s SPE (1971)

A

Set up mock prison in psych dept.
Screened volunteers through extensive psychological testing, chose 24
Prisoners arrested at home, blindfolded, strip searched, deloused and numbered
Zimbardo was prison superintendent

39
Q

Zimbardo’s results

A

Rebellion on day 2
Increasingly sadistic; woke up prisoners at night, made to do menial tasks, sexually degraded
8612 asked to leave, asked to be informant
4 prisoners broke down
Study terminated after 6/14 days

40
Q

Weaknesses of Zimbardo’s research

A

Unethical, exacerbated by dual role —> violated protection by not thinking as psychologist
Lack of realism —> David Eschelman (Cool Hand Luke)
Exaggeration, down-playing dispositional influence —> 1/3 - brutal, 1/3 - fair, 1/3 - helped prisoners
Lack of replicability —> Harlass and Reicher (2006) - opposite findings

41
Q

Strengths of Zimbardo’s research

A

Ppts thought situation was real — 90% of convos were based on prison life
High level of control — had complete control (screening and random allocation - no bias)

42
Q

Proximity variation

A

Learner and teacher sat in same room
Touch proximity - teacher forced learners hand on electric plate
Experimented in other room, giving instructions over the phone

43
Q

How the results changed

A

Obedience dropped to 40% - same room
Obedience dropped to 30% - touch
Obedience dropped to 21% - phone

44
Q

Location variation

A

Studies moved from Yale to run down office - obedience dropped to 48%

45
Q

Uniform variation

A

Experimented wore everyday closures as opposed to a grey lab coat - obedience dropped to 20%

46
Q

Weaknesses of Milgram’s original research

A

Lack of internal validity - Orne and Holland (1968); ppt’s didn’t believe shocks were real
Unlikely, really stressed - ppts ‘stutter, tremble, groan’, 3 had ‘uncontrollable seizures’
Issues in terms of generalisability - only conducted on men
Relevance of research has been challenged (atrocities of WW2) - carried out 50 years ago, times change
Violated ethical guidelines - 4th prod ‘you have no other choice’

47
Q

Strengths of Milgram’s research

A

Criticised for lacking external validity due to artificial lab conditions, however research by Hofling suggest that the artificial nature had little impact on the results - 21/22 nurses

48
Q

Weaknesses of Milgram’s variations

A

Influence of uniform supporter by Bickman (1974) - ppt’s 2x as likely to obey security guard than confederate in ordinary clothes
Variations susceptible to internal validity - more likely to work out aim (more manipulation)
Hofling contradicts effect of proximity - 21/22
Support ‘obedience alibi’ - proves situational explanations, criticised by David Mendel

49
Q

Strengths of Milgram’s variation

A

High level of control - only altered one variable at a time, able to find conclusion

50
Q

Social-psychological factors affecting obedience

A

Agentic state

Legitimacy of authority

51
Q

Weaknesses of social-psychological factors affecting obedience

A

Agentic shift cannot be used to explain other findings (Hofling) - nurses should’ve shown high levels of anxiety, passed responsibility to doctor
Not as quick as agentic state, more gradual and irreversible - Lifton found that Auschwitz doctors changed from medical professions to those capable of torture
Ethical implications of ‘obedience alibi’ - David Mendel (unfair to survivors of holocaust)

52
Q

Strengths of social - psychological factors of obedience

A

Agentic state supported by Blass and Schmitt (2001) - students shown Milgram’s experiment all blamed him
Legitimacy of authority explains cultural differences - 16% Australia, 85% Germany
Influence of legitimate authority supported by research into aviation accidents - Tarnow (2000) - 19/37 accidents caused by ‘lack of monitoring’

53
Q

Adorno’s research

A

Interested in nazi Germany
Didn’t believe that situational factors alone could explain atrocities
Study of >2000 middle-class, white Americans
Developed F-Scale (higher score, more obedient)

54
Q

Weaknesses of Adorno’s research

A 
Overly deterministic
Flaws with F-Scale - 
questionnaire, acquiescence bias 
Correlation doesn’t equal causation - tested serveral variables, 3rd variable (education) 
Lacks external validity - sample used
55
Q

Strengths of Adorno’s research

A

Link between obedience and Authoritarian personality demonstrated by Milgram and Elms (1966) - those who scored higher went to a higher voltage

56
Q

Locus of control

A

Extent to which individuals believe they can control events affecting them
It is a continuum

57
Q

Internals

A

Rely less on opinions of others
Better able to resist social influence
Believe we control events in our lives
Everything is consequence of abilities and effort

58
Q

Externals

A

Approach things with a more passive and fatalistic view
Things are determined by external factors, ‘just happens’
Less likely to display independent behaviour
More likely to accept influence of others, obedient

59
Q

Strengths of LOC

A

Research by Holland (1967) - measured whether Milgrams ppts were internal or external (37% internals continued, 23% external)

60
Q

Weaknesses of LOC

A

More recent research by Twenge et al (2004) - analysed data over 40 year - more resistant yet more external
Impact of resisting conformity is limited to NSI - Spector (1983) found correlation between externals and NSI- no link with ISI (LOC insignificant in conformity)
Role of LOC exaggerated - Rotter (1982) LOC only comes into play in new situations, previous experiences more important

61
Q

Social support

A

Perception of assistance and solidarity from others

62
Q

Effect of social support on conformity

A

Supports in resisting conformity
Supports view that resistance isn’t just motivated by following what someone else says but it enables someone to be free of the pressure of the group

62
Q

Effect of social support on obedience

A

Research supports the role of dissenting peers in resisting obedience

62
Q

Strengths of social support

A

Research support by Gamson - 29/33 groups rebelled when oil company wanted to produce a smear campaign
Historical real life examples - Rosenstrasse protest

63
Q

Synchronic consistency

A

When all members of the group say the same thing

64
Q

Diachronic consistency

A

When the group says the same thing over some time

65
Q

Consistency in Suffragettes

A

Movement lasted 17 years (1897-1914)

Focused only on women’s right to vote

66
Q

Commmitment

A

Minorities engage in extreme activities at risk of themselves to draw attention
Augmentation principle - majority group members pay more attention

67
Q

Weaknesses of social support

A

Not enough to resist social influence, needs to be ‘valid’ - someone needs to have the knowledge, skills or abilities
Impact of social support is dependant on response order - Allen & Levine (1969); support was significantly more effective in position 1 than 4

68
Q

Commitment in Suffragettes

A

Hunger strikes
Vandalism, bombing, burning - risk of imprisonment
Christabel Pankhurst shouted at politicians and got arrested for obstruction and assault

69
Q

Flexibility

A

Being extremely consistent can be dogmatic
Off putting to majority and unlikely to cause conversion
Minority should accept valid and reasonable counter-arguments

70
Q

Flexibility in Suffragettes

A 
Emeline instructed Suffragettes to stop when WW1 started to support govt. 
Only wanted white middle-class women to vote - aligned with other ideals
71
Q

Moscovici et al (1969)

A

4 ppt’s 2 confederates shown 36 different slides which were clearly diff. shades of blue and asked to announce colour aloud
Confederates answered green 36/36 times and had 8.25% effect on majority
Confederates answered green 24/36 times and had 1.25% effect on majority

72
Q

Strengths of minority research

A

Research to support flexibility - Nemeth and Brilmayer (1987)
Minority opinion more effective at changing minds than a majority, as it leads to deeper thought - Martin et al (2003)

73
Q

Process of social change

A 
Drawing attention 
Cognitive conflict 
Consistency of position 
Augmentation principle
Snowball effect 
Social cryptonmesia
74
Q

Drawing attention

A

Civil right marches drew attention by providing social proof of the problems (segregation)

75
Q

Weaknesses of minority influence

A

Still difficult to convince people of the value of dissent
All research in this area involves artificial tasks - all lack external validity
Limited real life application - majorities have more power and status, face hostile opposition

76
Q

Cognitive conflict

A

Minority create conflict between what majority group members currently believe (status quo) and the position advocated by the minority
Majority think more deeply

77
Q

Consistency of position

A

Many marches took place in 1959s-60s. Showed consistency in message and intent

78
Q

Augmentation principle

A

Number of incidents where individuals risked their lives (Rosa Parks). Makes the majority take minority seriously as they’re willing to sacrifice everything

79
Q

Social cryptonmesia

A

People have a memory that change occurred but don’t remember how it happened

Pschology (6 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions