Social influence
,Social influence
Describe and evaluate ISI and NSI
AO1
internalisation: when a person accepts the group norms, private aswell as public
change of behaviour, permanent change as its been internalised
Identification: conforming because you value the group, this is because you want to
be apart of the group even if you don't agree with them
Compliance: going along with others in public, privately not changing behaviour, its a
superficial change, stops as soon as pressure stops
ISI: you are uncertain about what behaviours and beliefs are right and wrong so you
conform, based on desire to be right, cognitive process, most likely in ambiguous
situations
NSI: wanting to be normal or have a typical behaviour, wanting to go along with the
norms, people do not want to appear foolish, concerned with social approval, an
emotional process.
AO3
research support for ISI, Lucas asked students to give answers to mathematical
problems that were easy or more difficult. There was greater conformity to incorrect
answers when they were difficult rather than when there were easier ones, true for
most students who have poor abilities in maths, shows that people conform in
situations where they don't know the answer which is predicted by ISI, we look to
other people and assume they know better than us. However, there are individual
differences as the increased conformity was more seen with those who were bad at
maths suggesting that conformity may depend on confidence rather than uncertainty.
NSI doesn't affect everyone's behaviour in the same way. For example, those who are
less concerned with being liked are less affected by NSI than those who do, those
who have a need to be associated with others are nAffiliators, these people have a
need for affiliation. McGhee found that students high in need of Affiliation were more
likely to conform, therefore there are individual differences in the way people
respond. However, the need for affiliation experiment is usually measured with self
report questionnaires which are vulnerable to social desirability bias.
The idea of Deutsch and Gerrads two process approach is that behaviour is either due
to NSI or ISI, but the truth is that more often, both processes are involved, for
example, conformity is reduced when there is one other dissenting participant as they
may reduce NSI by providing social support or reducing ISI by giving more
information but its hard to separate the two from each other. This shows it's harder to
be sure whether NSI or ISi is at work, this casts doubt over the view of NSI and NSI as
two processes operating independently in conforming behaviour. However, there is
evidence that the processes can be separated using controlled conditions, like Asch's
studies which demonstrate that when responses are made privately conformity drops,
suggesting NSi is reduced while ISI may still operate
,Discuss Asch’s research into conformity
AO1
Solomon tested conformity
on one card was a standard line and on the other there were 3 comparison lines, ppts
were asked to match the 3 lines to the standard line
123 american male undergraduates
each ppt was tested in a group between 6 and 8 confederates
first few triaals all the confederates gave the right answers but then they started to
make errors, all the confederates were instructed to give the wrong answer
Each ppt took place in 18 trials and 12 critical trials where the confederate gave the
wrong answer.
naive ppt gave a wrong answer 36.8% of the time
25% of ppts didnt conform
75% conformed atleast once
when interviewed they said they conformed cause they were afraid of rejection (NSI)
variations: group size, Asch found that with 3 confederates in each group conformity
to the wrong answer rose to 31.8% but tis was reduced as they added more
confederates, this suggests that a snall majority isnt a sufficient influence
uanimity:a presence of a non conforming person, the presence of a dissenter meant
that conformity was reduced
task difficulty: asch made the linejudging task more difficult by making the stimulus
line and the comparison lines more similar, this made conformity increase suggesting
ISI played a role.
AO3
Perrin and spencer repeated Asch’s line study with engineering students, found that
only one student conformed in a total of 396 trials, It may be that the engineering
students felt more confident about measuring lines that the original sample and
therefore was less conformist, but it's possible that in the 1950s, when asch carried
out his research, was a conformist time and therefore it made sense to conform to
established social norms. But society has changed since then and people are
possibly less conformist today. This is a limitation of Asch's study as it means that
his study is not consistent across situations and may not be consistent across time.
However, the underlying process of nsi still appears consistent, research across
different cultures and contexts shows that people conform there is social pressure,
ambiguity, or desire for acceptance, so Asch’s core conclusion remains valid.
Participants knew they were in a research study and may simply have one along with
the demands of the situation, demand characteristics. The task of identifying lines
was relatively trivial and therefore there was really no reason not to conform, also
although the naive participants were members of a group it didn't really resemble
groups that we are apart of in everyday life, Fiske said that asch’s groups were not
very groupy, this is a limitation as you can't generalise to everyday situations.
However, this can be seen as a strength not a weakness as if people conform even
when the answer is obvious and unimportant it suggests that conformity is a powerful
and robust process.
, There are ethical issues as the naive participants were deceived as they thought the
other people involved in the procedure, the confederates, were also genuine
participants like themselves, however, it is worth bearing in mind that this ethical cost
should be weighed up against the benefits gained from the study.
Discuss research into conformity to social roles
AO1
Zimbardo wanted to find whether people conform to their social roles
Do prison guards behave brutally because they have sadistic personalities or is it the
situation that creates the behaviour?
procedure:
Zimbardo set up a mock prison in stanford university, students volunteered and was
randomly assigned guards or prisoners, beforehand they were assessed if they were
emotionally unstable, the prisoners were arrested outside their homes and then they
were blindfolded and stripsearched
findings:
guards took up their roles with enthusiasm, their behaviour became a threat to
prisoners physical and mental health, study was stopped after 6 days instead of 14
prisoners rebelled against the harsh treatment by the guards, ripped uniform and
swore at them, guards put the prisoners against each other, they would punish even
the smallest behaviours, abused their power brutally and aggressively
guards, prisoners both conformed to their roles within prison
AO3
Zimbardo had control over variables, this was shown through the selection of
participants, emotionally stable participants were chosen and randomly assigned to
the roles of guard and prisoner, this was a way to rule out individual personality
differences as an explanation of the findings. If guards and prisoners behaved
differently, but their roles were only by chance, then their behaviour must have been
due to the pressures of the situation. Having such control over variables is a strength
as it increases internal validity of the study. However, there is the argument that due
to demand characteristics the ppts acted based on perceived expectations, for
example, the guards may have behaved aggressively because they believed that was
how they were supposed to act in a mock prison.
A major ethical issue arose because of Zimbardo's roles in the study, for example, a
student spoke to him thinking he was the superintendent and the whole convo was on
the basis that the student was a prisoner in a prison asking to be released, Zimbardo
responded as a superintendent who was worried about the running of his prison
rather than as a researcher with responsibilities towards his participants. However,
despite going against ethical morals, Zimbardo created a setting where participants
believed in their roles, their behaviour was natural and authentic showing ecological
validity.
Haslam replicated the experiment on BBC and their findings were very different to
those of Zimbardo, it was the prisoners who took control of the mock prison and
subjected the guards to a campaign of harassment and disobedience, the researchers
used social identity theory to explain the outcome, they argued that the guards failed
to develop a shared sense of identity as a cohesive group, but the prisoners did, they
,Social influence
Describe and evaluate ISI and NSI
AO1
internalisation: when a person accepts the group norms, private aswell as public
change of behaviour, permanent change as its been internalised
Identification: conforming because you value the group, this is because you want to
be apart of the group even if you don't agree with them
Compliance: going along with others in public, privately not changing behaviour, its a
superficial change, stops as soon as pressure stops
ISI: you are uncertain about what behaviours and beliefs are right and wrong so you
conform, based on desire to be right, cognitive process, most likely in ambiguous
situations
NSI: wanting to be normal or have a typical behaviour, wanting to go along with the
norms, people do not want to appear foolish, concerned with social approval, an
emotional process.
AO3
research support for ISI, Lucas asked students to give answers to mathematical
problems that were easy or more difficult. There was greater conformity to incorrect
answers when they were difficult rather than when there were easier ones, true for
most students who have poor abilities in maths, shows that people conform in
situations where they don't know the answer which is predicted by ISI, we look to
other people and assume they know better than us. However, there are individual
differences as the increased conformity was more seen with those who were bad at
maths suggesting that conformity may depend on confidence rather than uncertainty.
NSI doesn't affect everyone's behaviour in the same way. For example, those who are
less concerned with being liked are less affected by NSI than those who do, those
who have a need to be associated with others are nAffiliators, these people have a
need for affiliation. McGhee found that students high in need of Affiliation were more
likely to conform, therefore there are individual differences in the way people
respond. However, the need for affiliation experiment is usually measured with self
report questionnaires which are vulnerable to social desirability bias.
The idea of Deutsch and Gerrads two process approach is that behaviour is either due
to NSI or ISI, but the truth is that more often, both processes are involved, for
example, conformity is reduced when there is one other dissenting participant as they
may reduce NSI by providing social support or reducing ISI by giving more
information but its hard to separate the two from each other. This shows it's harder to
be sure whether NSI or ISi is at work, this casts doubt over the view of NSI and NSI as
two processes operating independently in conforming behaviour. However, there is
evidence that the processes can be separated using controlled conditions, like Asch's
studies which demonstrate that when responses are made privately conformity drops,
suggesting NSi is reduced while ISI may still operate
,Discuss Asch’s research into conformity
AO1
Solomon tested conformity
on one card was a standard line and on the other there were 3 comparison lines, ppts
were asked to match the 3 lines to the standard line
123 american male undergraduates
each ppt was tested in a group between 6 and 8 confederates
first few triaals all the confederates gave the right answers but then they started to
make errors, all the confederates were instructed to give the wrong answer
Each ppt took place in 18 trials and 12 critical trials where the confederate gave the
wrong answer.
naive ppt gave a wrong answer 36.8% of the time
25% of ppts didnt conform
75% conformed atleast once
when interviewed they said they conformed cause they were afraid of rejection (NSI)
variations: group size, Asch found that with 3 confederates in each group conformity
to the wrong answer rose to 31.8% but tis was reduced as they added more
confederates, this suggests that a snall majority isnt a sufficient influence
uanimity:a presence of a non conforming person, the presence of a dissenter meant
that conformity was reduced
task difficulty: asch made the linejudging task more difficult by making the stimulus
line and the comparison lines more similar, this made conformity increase suggesting
ISI played a role.
AO3
Perrin and spencer repeated Asch’s line study with engineering students, found that
only one student conformed in a total of 396 trials, It may be that the engineering
students felt more confident about measuring lines that the original sample and
therefore was less conformist, but it's possible that in the 1950s, when asch carried
out his research, was a conformist time and therefore it made sense to conform to
established social norms. But society has changed since then and people are
possibly less conformist today. This is a limitation of Asch's study as it means that
his study is not consistent across situations and may not be consistent across time.
However, the underlying process of nsi still appears consistent, research across
different cultures and contexts shows that people conform there is social pressure,
ambiguity, or desire for acceptance, so Asch’s core conclusion remains valid.
Participants knew they were in a research study and may simply have one along with
the demands of the situation, demand characteristics. The task of identifying lines
was relatively trivial and therefore there was really no reason not to conform, also
although the naive participants were members of a group it didn't really resemble
groups that we are apart of in everyday life, Fiske said that asch’s groups were not
very groupy, this is a limitation as you can't generalise to everyday situations.
However, this can be seen as a strength not a weakness as if people conform even
when the answer is obvious and unimportant it suggests that conformity is a powerful
and robust process.
, There are ethical issues as the naive participants were deceived as they thought the
other people involved in the procedure, the confederates, were also genuine
participants like themselves, however, it is worth bearing in mind that this ethical cost
should be weighed up against the benefits gained from the study.
Discuss research into conformity to social roles
AO1
Zimbardo wanted to find whether people conform to their social roles
Do prison guards behave brutally because they have sadistic personalities or is it the
situation that creates the behaviour?
procedure:
Zimbardo set up a mock prison in stanford university, students volunteered and was
randomly assigned guards or prisoners, beforehand they were assessed if they were
emotionally unstable, the prisoners were arrested outside their homes and then they
were blindfolded and stripsearched
findings:
guards took up their roles with enthusiasm, their behaviour became a threat to
prisoners physical and mental health, study was stopped after 6 days instead of 14
prisoners rebelled against the harsh treatment by the guards, ripped uniform and
swore at them, guards put the prisoners against each other, they would punish even
the smallest behaviours, abused their power brutally and aggressively
guards, prisoners both conformed to their roles within prison
AO3
Zimbardo had control over variables, this was shown through the selection of
participants, emotionally stable participants were chosen and randomly assigned to
the roles of guard and prisoner, this was a way to rule out individual personality
differences as an explanation of the findings. If guards and prisoners behaved
differently, but their roles were only by chance, then their behaviour must have been
due to the pressures of the situation. Having such control over variables is a strength
as it increases internal validity of the study. However, there is the argument that due
to demand characteristics the ppts acted based on perceived expectations, for
example, the guards may have behaved aggressively because they believed that was
how they were supposed to act in a mock prison.
A major ethical issue arose because of Zimbardo's roles in the study, for example, a
student spoke to him thinking he was the superintendent and the whole convo was on
the basis that the student was a prisoner in a prison asking to be released, Zimbardo
responded as a superintendent who was worried about the running of his prison
rather than as a researcher with responsibilities towards his participants. However,
despite going against ethical morals, Zimbardo created a setting where participants
believed in their roles, their behaviour was natural and authentic showing ecological
validity.
Haslam replicated the experiment on BBC and their findings were very different to
those of Zimbardo, it was the prisoners who took control of the mock prison and
subjected the guards to a campaign of harassment and disobedience, the researchers
used social identity theory to explain the outcome, they argued that the guards failed
to develop a shared sense of identity as a cohesive group, but the prisoners did, they
