Social Influence

This occurs when people adopt the behavior, attitudes or beliefs of the majority (dominant or largest group) after being exposed to their values or behavior.

Increasing §  Unanimous majority§  Difficult Task §  Being deserted by a

partner who had previously given correct answers

Decreasing §  Non-unanimous majority§  Majority of only two

people§  Writing responses rather

than calling them aloud (i.e. private rather than public responding)

§  Going along with the group changing public behavior but not private opinion

§  The change in behavior lasts as long as the pressure of the group is exerted

§  An example of this is someone smoking with their friends but not alone

§  Going along with the group changing public behavior and private opinion

§  The most permanent form of conformity; even when group pressure ceases conformity continues

§  An example is religious beliefs due to your family or becoming a vegetarian

§  We see others in the group and we want to be like them

§  The more attractive the influence, the longer it is likely to last

§  Occurs because we want to be like the primary influence

§  An example is dressing like a particular group

Aim: To discover whether the power of the group was enough for a person to give an obviously incorrect answer to an easy task

§  They used American male undergraduate students§  Asch showed a pair of cards to groups of people sat around a

table§  One card was a test line and the other had three lines of

differing lengths§  Participants had to state aloud which one was the same as the

target line (it was always obvious)§  The naïve participant was placed in a group with six others who

were confederates§  The confederates gave the same unanimous wrong answer on

12 of the 18 trials (so it wasn’t too obvious)§  The participant was sat at the table last but one

§  On 32% of the critical trials participants conformed

§  74% conformed at least once

§  26% never conformed or 13 out of the 50

§  Often they experienced tension or doubt

Asch demonstrated that the power of group pressure was so strong that it could make people give an obviously wrong answer to an easy task.

Participants appeared to demonstrate compliance as although they gave the wrong answer they knew it was wrong.

§  The study was very influential in showing the power of group pressure

§  Crutchfield (1955) – He thought that the face to face issue was responsible for conformity•  He arranged his participants in booths out of sight but all able to see

the cards. They sat individually with rows of switches and lights.•  They had to press the switch that corresponded with their answer.•  They were told the lights showed the other participant's answers.•  In fact the experimenter controlled these and he found a 30%

conformity rating using Asch’s task thus supporting Asch.•  The group didn’t even exist showing how strong the power was.

§  The task was trivial and judging line length is not important in the participant’s belief systems therefore lacking ecological validity

§  Lacks temporal validity as the era it was carried out in was very conservative and against left wing views (McCarthyism)•  This suggests Asch’s study is irrelevant today and Perrin and Spencer’s

study (repeating Asch’s with British Students later) found only 1 conformity in 396 trials.

•  However they did use maths, chemistry and engineering students and it is possible their intellectual abilities explain the difference, not the time.

§  It was an all male (androcentric) sample and therefore may not be generalised to women•  Some research shows women to be slightly more conformist than men•  Later research found that women conformed more than males only

when the researcher was male or when the group task was male oriented.

§  The sample was all American (ethnocentric) and as America is an individualistic society the findings may not generalise to a collectivist society

§  The study has also been criticised for it’s ethical problems

§  This is the need to be right§  When there is no correct or obvious answer we turn to

others for information as we don’t know what else to do§  An example is a fire alarm going off and you following

everyone else§  Supported by variations of Asch’s study where when the

task was made more difficult, conforming responses increased

§  This is the need to be liked§  When you want to be liked and so conform to the group

even if your not going to see them again §  An example is Asch’s study where the participants

conformed with the confederates§  Supported by Asch’s study where it seemed they were

conforming to be accepted by the group§  Also in a variation where participants were given the

option to give answers privately and they still conform

Aim: To study the identification of social roles by using a mock prison situation.

§  25 physically and mentally fit participants agreed to take part in a mock prison set up

§  They were assigned randomly the position of prisoner or guard§  Local police were recruited to help and the nine prisoners were

arrested at their homes without any warning§  They were taken blindfolded to the prison where they were

stripped, deloused, given smocks to wear and given numbers§  They were supervised when going to the toilet and given work

shifts§  The three guards wore dark glasses and they had to make up

the rules, but they could not physically harm the prisoners§  The study was discontinued in 6 days out of the 14.

The study concluded that people can easily behave in uncharacteristic ways when placed in new situations and given new roles.

Some prisoners exhibited passive behaviour, depression, crying and anxiety and some thought they could not leave bringing many doubts into the ethical aspects.

§  Critics argue that the study lacks validity as they suggest that participants behaviour was the result of demand characteristics•  One particularly cruel guard said that he had just watched a film and

had based his character on the lead character•  However, many of the prisoners appeared to show genuine signs of

psychological disturbance so the evidence is not conclusive

§  Participants did not give fully informed consent

§  Participants were humiliated and dehumanised by the initiation procedure when they arrive at the prison therefore they were not protected from harm

§  The ends do not justify the means and the study became too real for participants; it should not have been carried out

Behaving as instructed, usually in response to an individual rather than group pressure. This usually takes place in a hierarchy where the person issuing the order is of a higher status than the person obeying the order. Obedience occurs because the individual feels they have little choice; they cannot resist to obey. It is unlikely to involve a change in private opinion.

Conformity §  Participants deny conformity

§  Can occur between people of

equal status as well as within a hierarchy

§  The emphasis is on acceptance§  The behaviour adopted is similar to

that of the group§  The requirement to yield to group

pressure is often, though not always implicit

Obedience§  Participants embrace obedience as

an explanation of their behaviour§  Occurs within a hierarchy

§  The emphasis is on power§  The behaviour adopted differs

from that of the authority figure§  The prescription for action is

explicit

Aim: To find out if ordinary Americans would obey an unjust order to inflict pain on another person.

§  Forty male volunteers were recruited after they responded to a newspaper article asking people to help in a memory experiment

§  The study took place at Yale university§  The experimenter told the participants that the study was on

the role of punishment in learning§  The P met Mr Wallace who was introduced as another P§  Mr W was in fact a confederate of the experimenter§  Lots were drawn for who should be the learner and who the

teacher, the P was always made to be the teacher §  The P watched MR W be strapped into the chair in the next

room, with his arms attached to the electrodes

§  The P read aloud a series of word pairs and then tested Mr W’s memory

§  Every time the learner made an error, the teacher was instructed to administer an electric shock

§  The P was sat in front of a shock generator which had 30 levers§  The shock levels went up in 15V intervals from 15V to 450V §  No shocks were actually administered but the learner was scripted to

pound loudly on the wall at 300V, and after 315V stop pounding and give no further answers

§  If the teacher refused to continue, four prods were issued•  “you have no other choice, you must go on”

§  The experiment continued until the teacher refused to continue or 450V had been administered 4 times

§  All Ps went to at least 300 volts on the shock generator

§  65% of Ps went to the full 450 volts

§  Most Ps dissented verbally but continued to obey the reseacher who prodded them to continue giving shocks

§  Many participants showed signs of extreme anxiety, biting their lips and trembling – two had full seizures

Showed the power of a situation over individuals and how under certain circumstances people would obey orders even if it meant going against conscience.

Milgram concluded that crimes against humanity were most likely the outcome of situational factors (factors present in the specific situation) rather than dispositional factors (factors within the participants themselves.)

§  Making the Learner’s Plight More Obvious•  62% - voice feedback – the learner making noises•  40% - teacher and learner in the same room •  30% - teacher has to force the learner’s hand on to a plate to receive the shock

§  Reducing the Authority of the Experimenter•  48% - change the venue to a seedy office•  21% - researcher’s prods continue to come via telephone from another room •  20% - experimenter was an ordinary member of the public rather than a white

coated scientist§  Other

•  93% - teacher has an assistant who throws the switches when asked to by the teacher

•  10% - teacher given support from two other teachers who refuse to continue

§  Participants did not really believe that the shocks they were giving were real •  Milgram’s participants were responding to demand characteristics•  There were many clues that the experiment was fake – the experimenter

remaining calm even when the learner appeared to have collapsed§  Therefore the study lacked internal validity§  Milgram defended saying

•  The participants clearly looked stressed on the video some had seizures! •  56% when asked said they believed it was real, only 2% believed it

absolutely wasn’t real, and some did stop before 450V! •  Similar experiment on puppies showed 75% obeyed to the end and this

looked more realistic

§  Milgram’s study was replicated in other countries with women too with similar results

§  However some argue that this experiment is not ecologically valid

§  Supported by Holfling’s study into obedience in nurses

§  Aim: To see if nurses would obey an order from a doctor that breached hospital regulations and was contrary to safe practice

§  Procedure: Took place in a real hospital setting, an unwitting nurse received a phone call from an unknown doctor asking her to administer a mystery drug to a patient. If they obliged it would be breaking many of the hospital’s rules.

§  21 out of 22 nurses obeyed until stopped by another nurse who was an accomplice to the researcher. When asked why they said they had done so before and doctors were angry if they didn’t cooperate.

§  This shows that pressures from authority can lead to breaking of rules even if it means putting someone’s life at risk

§  Milgram argues his work can justify the Nazi’s actions in the Holocaust

§  Some researchers argue that Milgram’s lack of ecological validity register this claim as wrong•  Milgram’s participants were told the shocks weren’t harmful, in the

Holocaust the effects clearly were•  Milgram’s participants experienced distress when harming the learner,

records show the Nazis enjoyed harming the Jews•  Obedience levels dropped in Milgram’s study when the authority

figure was not there, this was not the case in the holocaust

§  But the study lacked informed consent, and when other nurses were asked they said they thought anyone would refuse to obey with the order

§  The experiment was repeated with a known drug Valuim and the nurses were allowed to confide in other nurses, and only 2 out of the 18 obeyed.

§  This shows that Hofling’s Study also lacked ecological validity

§  We feel obligated to those in power because we respect their credentials and assume they know what they are doing.

§  Legitimate social power is held by those authority figures whose role is defined by society, which usually gives the person the right to exert control over the behaviour of others, and others usually accept it.

§  For: Milgram’s variations •  Location moved 48% •  Experimenter ordinary 20% •  Australia 40%, Germany 85% (Countries differ in authority tradition)

§  Against: Personality•  Individual differenced may affect this, as 35% disobeyed in the

original experiment, for example one said he couldn’t continue because he was Jewish.

§  This is the foot in the door effect§  People see a small step as harmless, and by the

experimenter gradually increasing the stages rather than just having one big stage, people see it as easier to obey

§  This sucks the participants in, and Milgram argued that after a point the participants felt contracted to the study

§  For: Milgram’s study – 15V intervals were used – if they agreed to the last one they could agree to the next one

§  For: In the real world, salesman use this technique and it works (i.e. can I come in)

§  Against: Personality•  Individual differenced may affect this, as 35% disobeyed in the

original experiment, for example one said he couldn’t continue because he was Jewish.

§  Milgram’s theory states that people operate on two levels:•  Being aware of the consequences of their actions•  Seeing themselves as agents of others and not responsible for their

own actions§  Milgram argued participants passed the blame onto the

authority figure, and would therefore accept any instruction the authority figure gave

§  It was argued that this feature is taught to children at an early age to train them to be obedient

Milgram and Zimbardo’s Studies

1.  Participants should not be deceived. They were deceived three times:•  First on the fact that the study was

on the effects of punishment on memory

•  Second they were giving someone real electric shocks

•  Third that the confederate was just another participant

2.  Participants should give informed consent.•  The participants hadn’t given their

consent to take part in a study on obedience.

1.  Without deception the study could not have taken place•  Participants were debriefed and

84% said that they were glad they had taken part in the study

•  74% said they had learnt something of personal importance and only 1.3% reported negative feelings

2.  It was essential to the study and they were debriefed afterwards

3.  Participants weren’t protected from psychological harm. It was very stressful for the participants and they may suffer long term psychological harm.

4.  Participants should have the right to withdraw from the study at any time. •  Participants who wanted to withdraw

were informed that they had no choice but to go on. The learner was also given this right, and he was refusing to continue yet the experiment continued.

3.  The participants were fully debriefed and offered counseling•  The pre-experimental surveys

showed very high levels of disobedience, so he didn’t expect the participants response.

4.  They were not physically detained, it just showed the power of the authoritative figure strengthening the experiment•  65% did withdraw before the end

showing that they clearly did have the right to withdraw as some did!

1.  Participants did not give fully informed consent:•  They did not know they would be

arrested at their homes2.  Participants were humiliated when

they arrived. They did not know that they would be deloused and stripped

3.  Participants did not have the right to withdraw. One asked to leave and Zimbardo offered for him to be a snitch. This made him feel like he couldn’t leave.

1.  After the experiment Zimbardo held several sessions with the participants to help them deal with their experiences.

2.  Zimbardo offered counseling and he did not know that the guards would do that.

3.  Participants were informed of their right to withdraw. He did not say that the participant could not leave, he just wanted him to think about it. Some participants did withdraw from the study.

Social influence in everyday life

§  Dissenter – another person resisting the majority – makes the participant feel more confident in their own decision, and more confident in rejecting the majority position.

§  Psychosocial identity – if we can relate to the minority group, it is much easier for us to agree with them.

§  Group unanimity – conformity reduces if the majority does not hold the same view. Asch found that if just one other group member agreed with the judgment of the true participant, conformity reduced from 32% to 5%.

§  Proximity of the victim – when the plight of the learner is made more obvious, obedience drops. When the teacher had to hold the participant’s hand on the plate, obedience dropped to 30%.

§  Proximity of the authority – when the experimenter was not in the same room, obedience dropped to 20%.

§  Feeling responsible – when they thought the learner was in distress, some participants refused to continue.

§  Disobedient allies – seeing others disobey, when the teacher had two accomplices obedience dropped to 10%.

§  Education – Gamson’s experiment found that some quoted Milgram’s experiment as reasons for disobedience.

§  Reactance – people resist because they don’t like being told what to do they don’t like their freedom being restricted.

§  A person’s perception on their personal control of their own behavior.

§  High internals perceive themselves as having a great deal of personal control over their behavior and are therefore more likely to take responsibility for it. They are less likely to conform or obey.

§  High externals perceive events that happen as being outside their control. They are more likely to conform and be obedient for this reason.

§  Burger and Cooper (1979) found that people with a high desire for personal control were less likely to conform in a situation.

§  This is a personality type that is linked to high levels of obedience and conformity

§  The characteristics of the authoritarian personality is:•  Very concerned about status and upholding convention •  Very conformist and submissive towards people they see as having a

higher status, and treat those ‘below’ with contempt and suspicion

§  Its believed that this personality type came about due to the person’s upbringing

Social change is where society as a whole adopts a new belief or way of behaving which then becomes widely accepted as the norm.

§  The minority group have to be consistent in their position.§  By maintaining their belief over time, it shows commitment

to their position, and sends a message that an alternative to the majority is available.

§  F4J have been consistent in their message for ten years.§  Across many different protests their have been the same

consistent message.

§  Confidence in the minority opinion sends a message to the majority that the position is a serious one.

§  This will lead to more attention being given to the minority view.

§  F4J perform stunts which demonstrate their confidence, and get them media attention which gets their voice heard.

§  They should try and win over people from the majority; this needs a clear argument given to convince the masses.

§  The minority influence is most effective if it isn’t personal and has a wider benefit to society. It also should be consistent and persistent to make it more persuasive and it will have the snowball effect.

§  F4J uses specific examples of cases ad they risk arrest showing their commitment which is very persuasive.

§  When the culture at the time is ready, then the change can occur.

§  It has been shown that non-violent behavior by a minority can bring about social change ‘pressure groups like the suffragette movement.

§  F4J: high divorce rates show that their point is relevant to today’s zeitgeist.