Social Influence

Social Influence

100

Define Blind Obediance

Following orders of an authority figure without question

200

Define Internalisation

Goign along with the majority because we do not know how to behave in a situatuon - we adopt the beliefs of the group

300

What is Crowd Behavior and what are the types of crowds ?

• a large group of individuals behaving collectively (a mob mentality)
• Reduction in personal responsibility
• Anonymous within a crowd (deindividuation)

Types of crowds:

Active crowds – taking part in a protest

Passive crowds – listening at a religious service

Anti social behaviour: behaviour that is unhelpful, destructive and aggressive

Pro social behaviour: behaviour that is seen as kind, helpful, co-operative and peaceful

400

State and define the three personal factors that contribute to the bystander effect: 

1. Competence: if we feel competent (able) enough then we will help.
2. Mood: we are more likely to help if we are in a good mood than in a bad mood.
3. Similarity: the more we see ourselves as similar to a victim, the more likely we are to help them

500

State and define the four situational factors that contribute to the bystander effect: 

1. Diffusion of responsibility: we feel less personally responsible when there are more people around to potentially help. We assume others will help and we diffuse our responsibility onto them.
2. Noticing the event: We are less likely to notice events in a large crowd compared to when we are on our own. 
3. Pluralistic ignorance: when in situations, we often look to others and react based on what other people are doing. We look to others to help us interpret the situation. If no one is helping, we assume the event is not an emergency. If other people are helping, we are likely to offer assistance as well.
4. Cost of helping: the higher the costs, the less likely we are to help. Costs can include time, effort, danger. We will help if the costs to the victim are higher than the costs to ourselves – however, this is often to avoid guilt.

Conformity

100

Define Deindividuation

Loss of personal self-awareness and responsibility as a result of being part of a group.

200

State the situational factors that affect conformity 

- Size of group

- Unanimity

- Task difficulty 

300

State and define the two personal factors that affect conformity:

Locus of Control:

INTERNAL LOCUS OF CONTROL - belief that we are in control of our behavior

EXTERNAL LOCUS OF CONTROL - belief that something else controls our behavior (fate/religion)

Age: Adolescents are more likely to conform than older people (Steinberg and Monahan, 2007)

400

What is Informational Social Influence?

This occurs when we look to the majority group for information as we are unsure about the way in which to behave. A person will conform because they genuinely believe the majority to be right as we look to them for the right answer.

500

What is Normative Social Influence?

This occurs when we wish to be liked by the majority group, so we go along with them even though we may not agree with them. This is really just following the crowd in order to fit in with the ‘norm’ and be liked by the group.

Zimbardo

100

Describe the two aims of the study: 

Aim 1: to test the dispositional hypothesis

Aim 2: To show how the taking of social roles would lead to excessive conformity to those roles

200

How many participants took part in the experiment? 

24 males

300

State four findings of the experiment 

• The experiment disintegrated very quickly
• The guards began to humiliate & punish the prisoners and many prisoners began to show signs of mental & emotional distress.
• On the second day, the prisoners organized a mass revolt & riot, as a protest about the conditions.
  • Guards worked extra hours & developed a plan to stop the riot, using fire-extinguishers.
• After this, prisoners began to react passively.
  • They began to feel helpless and no longer in control of their lives.
• The guards became more aggressive. Every guard at some point behaved in an abusive, authoritarian way.  Many seemed to really enjoy the new found power & control that went with the uniform. Some of them volunteered to work extra shifts. They continued to behave in an authoritarian way even when they believed the cameras were not on.
• All prisoners’ rights were redefined as privileges
• They punished the prisoners with little or no justification
• They verbally insulted the prisoners
• The prisoners became institutionalized very quickly and adapted to their roles.

400

State the conclusions of the experiment

1.Rejects dispositional hypothesis

2.The prison environment changed the guards behaviour

3.People conform to the roles they are expected to play

4.The roles we are given can shape our behaviour and attitudes

500

Evaluate Zimbardo using GRAVE

G: The sample was limited – only males took part, it was a small sample and they were all university students

R: There were lots of controls in place – the experiment was recorded so there could be inter-rater reliability. There were rules put in place (although these were broken)

A: The study tells us about prison behaviour – it tells us that the situation in a prison can lead to negative behaviour

V: The prison was not real life – the prisoners had not committed real crimes and the guards had limited power. The participants all knew it was part of the study and may have shown demand characteristics

E: The study was unethical – there was lots of psychological harm, and it was very difficult for the prisoners to withdraw, despite asking for “parole”

Piliavin

100

What type of experiment was the study?

Field experiment

200

Define Covert observation

Covert observation is a particular type of participant observation in which the identity of the researcher, the nature of the research project, and the fact that participants are being observed are concealed from those who are being studied.

300

State two conclusions of the study

• We are more likely to help an ill victim than a drunk victim
• Men are first helpers more than females
• People offer more help in bigger groups
• Diffusion of responsibility does not always occur

400

State 3 findings of the experiment: 

• 62 out of 65 times the victim had a cane – passengers helped before the model
• 19 out of 38 times the victim appeared drunk – passengers helped before the model
• 81 out of 103 trials, the victim was helped before the model planned to help (challenge: what is this as a percentage?)
• In 60% of the trials, more than one person helped
• 90% of first helpers were male
• 64% of first helpers were white
• 68% of helpers who aided the white victim were also white
• 50% of white passengers came to the aid of a black victim
• There was a tendency for same race helping if the victim appeared drunk
• Interestingly, no diffusion of responsibility was found. The speed in which people helped was greater when there was more people than when there was less

500

Evaluate Piliavin et. al using GRAVE

G: There was a large sample size of 4500 participants. They only used male model/victims 

R: Piliavin kept the procedure the same for each of the trials, but because it was in a natural environment it was hard to control extraneous variables

A: demonstrates that diffusion of responsibility does not always happen

V: In a natural environment so high in ecological validity. Participants did not know they were being observed, so they were more likely to act naturally and show fewer demand characteristics

E: no consent from the participants as it was a covert observation. Also, there was deception, as the victim wasn’t really ill/drunk or in need of genuine help.

Milgram

100

What type of experiment was Milgrams experiment?

Lab Experiment

200

How many participants were used in the experiment?

40 males 

300

What percentage of people went to 450V?

65%

400

What were the two types of personality factors that can influence obedience? 

1. Authoritarian personality – Adorno (1950) suggested that someone with an authoritarian personality type is more likely to obey because they dislike lower classes, like being bossed arround, have strong ideas of good and evil and son’t like any confusion about the rules.
2. Agentic State – Milgram came up with the agency theory. Individuals are either in an agentic state or an autonomous state. Someone in an agentic state believes they are acting on behalf of someone else and so are more likely to obey. Whereas, someone in an autonomous state believe that they have free will and are unlikely to obey.

500

What were the range of situational factors used to investigate the impact on obediance? 

1. Proximity – Milgram told the teacher to force the learner’s hand down onto a shock plate when they refused to participate after 150 volts. Milgram found that Obedience fell to 30%. The participant is no longer ‘protected’ from seeing the consequences of their actions.
2. Change of location – The experiment was moved to a set of run down offices rather than the impressive Yale University. Obedience dropped to 47.5%. This suggests that status of location effects obedience.
3. Uniform – The role of the experimenter was taken over by an ‘ordinary member of the public’ (a confederate) in everyday clothes rather than a lab coat. The obedience level dropped to 20%.