Social Influence
Types of conformity = compliance, internalisation and identification
Compliance – changing your public views to fit in with the majority but
maintaining different private views
Identification – changing your public views depending on the group you’re with
but still maintaining your own private views
Internalisation – changing your public views and maintaining those views
privately because you believe they’re right
Explanations for conformity = normative and informational social influence
Normative Social Influence – conforming because you want to fit in, you don’t want
to stand out and you want to be liked, compliance and identification
Informational Social Influence – conforming because you believe that the views, they
are exemplifying are right, usually in the form of internalisation
Research into conformity = Asch and Jennes study
Asch – 1951, male students asked to identify line length see which one was the same
length as a test line (answer was obvious). They were told it was a vision test.
Confederates said wrong answer intentionally.
Results = on average about one third of the participants who were placed in the group
situation conformed and said the wrong answer even though the answer was obvious.
Over the 12 critical trials, 75% of the participants conformed at least once
Jennes – 1932, 101 psychology students. Individually estimated the number of
beans, then in groups of three were asked to provide a group estimate through
discussion, then were asked to individually estimate again.
Results = nearly all participants changed their original answer when they were provided
with another opportunity after discussing in a group demonstrating the power of
conformity in an ambiguous situation.
Variables affecting conformity = group size, unanimity and task difficulty
Group size - Asch did trials with groups 2,3 and more than 3. Levels peaked (32%)
people may suspect collusion
Unanimity – Asch One of the confederates said the right answer, levels dropped
(5.5%) breaking up the group unanimity gives participant confidence
Task Difficulty – Asch made the lines more closely together, so the answer wasn’t as
obvious as the original study. Levels rose significantly, people want to be right in
situations which are confusing, links to ISI.
Conforming to social roles = Zimbardo study of the prison (Stanford Prison)
, Stanford Prison Experiment- 24 participants split randomly guards and prisoners,
prisoners arrested, and strip searched, guards were given sticks etc. They were
randomly allocated, experiment was meant to last for two weeks
Results = ended 6 days due to abuse of power of the guards and mental breakdown of the
prisoners. Zimbardo’s study shows that our behaviour changes based on our environment
and our social role, even to the extremes of the prisoners and guards.
Examples of social roles – e.g., doctor, mum, teacher, politician
Shown through Identification
Explanations of obedience = Legitimate authority and Agentic State.
Legitimate Authority – orders given to you and following them by a person you
perceive to be in a position of authority. For example, if they have a badge, title,
uniform and lanyards. Example – Louise Osbourne, tricked into thinking he was the
police, with a badge. Bickem did experiment to see if someone would pick up litter
after being told by someone with uniform and without uniform.
Agentic State (shift) – Acting on behalf of someone else, you go from an autonomous
state to an agentic through the agentic shift. Being told what to do and doing it yet
not perceiving yourself to be in the wrong. Example – teacher asks you to take
display down, you do it and then a different teacher tells you off for it, you don’t feel
responsible for it as you were told too.
Study for investigate what level of obedience would be shown when participants were
told by an authority figure to administer electric shocks to another person – Milgram
40 participants were ‘asked to pick out of a hat’ for a role a teacher or learner. It
was already rigged that participants would be the teacher; confederates were
the learners. The participant was asked to shock the learner who was sat in a
supposed electric chair. Learner asked a question when got it wrong, the teacher
was asked to shock them, shock progressively going up in volts. Going up to 450
volts. Recordings of cries were heard when shocked
Results = 14 defied and 26 obeyed. 65% of participants went up to 450 volts. Signs of
tension from the participants, pointed out that they didn’t enjoy shocking the latter,
sweated, trembled, stuttered, bit their lips etc.
Situational Variables affecting Obedience = Proximity, Location and Uniform
Proximity – the closer we are to the consequences of the action the more likely
we are to feel the effect of them, therefore obedience levels will decrease, as
people don’t want to be identified
Location – if the location is not as professional then its less likely that we will
acknowledge it as a legitimate authority and we won’t feel as obliged to obey.
Uniform – the obedience levels will rise if someone is perceived to be in a
position of authority for example a badge. Being dressed in a uniform lead to the
perception of being in a position of legitimate authority.
2
Types of conformity = compliance, internalisation and identification
Compliance – changing your public views to fit in with the majority but
maintaining different private views
Identification – changing your public views depending on the group you’re with
but still maintaining your own private views
Internalisation – changing your public views and maintaining those views
privately because you believe they’re right
Explanations for conformity = normative and informational social influence
Normative Social Influence – conforming because you want to fit in, you don’t want
to stand out and you want to be liked, compliance and identification
Informational Social Influence – conforming because you believe that the views, they
are exemplifying are right, usually in the form of internalisation
Research into conformity = Asch and Jennes study
Asch – 1951, male students asked to identify line length see which one was the same
length as a test line (answer was obvious). They were told it was a vision test.
Confederates said wrong answer intentionally.
Results = on average about one third of the participants who were placed in the group
situation conformed and said the wrong answer even though the answer was obvious.
Over the 12 critical trials, 75% of the participants conformed at least once
Jennes – 1932, 101 psychology students. Individually estimated the number of
beans, then in groups of three were asked to provide a group estimate through
discussion, then were asked to individually estimate again.
Results = nearly all participants changed their original answer when they were provided
with another opportunity after discussing in a group demonstrating the power of
conformity in an ambiguous situation.
Variables affecting conformity = group size, unanimity and task difficulty
Group size - Asch did trials with groups 2,3 and more than 3. Levels peaked (32%)
people may suspect collusion
Unanimity – Asch One of the confederates said the right answer, levels dropped
(5.5%) breaking up the group unanimity gives participant confidence
Task Difficulty – Asch made the lines more closely together, so the answer wasn’t as
obvious as the original study. Levels rose significantly, people want to be right in
situations which are confusing, links to ISI.
Conforming to social roles = Zimbardo study of the prison (Stanford Prison)
, Stanford Prison Experiment- 24 participants split randomly guards and prisoners,
prisoners arrested, and strip searched, guards were given sticks etc. They were
randomly allocated, experiment was meant to last for two weeks
Results = ended 6 days due to abuse of power of the guards and mental breakdown of the
prisoners. Zimbardo’s study shows that our behaviour changes based on our environment
and our social role, even to the extremes of the prisoners and guards.
Examples of social roles – e.g., doctor, mum, teacher, politician
Shown through Identification
Explanations of obedience = Legitimate authority and Agentic State.
Legitimate Authority – orders given to you and following them by a person you
perceive to be in a position of authority. For example, if they have a badge, title,
uniform and lanyards. Example – Louise Osbourne, tricked into thinking he was the
police, with a badge. Bickem did experiment to see if someone would pick up litter
after being told by someone with uniform and without uniform.
Agentic State (shift) – Acting on behalf of someone else, you go from an autonomous
state to an agentic through the agentic shift. Being told what to do and doing it yet
not perceiving yourself to be in the wrong. Example – teacher asks you to take
display down, you do it and then a different teacher tells you off for it, you don’t feel
responsible for it as you were told too.
Study for investigate what level of obedience would be shown when participants were
told by an authority figure to administer electric shocks to another person – Milgram
40 participants were ‘asked to pick out of a hat’ for a role a teacher or learner. It
was already rigged that participants would be the teacher; confederates were
the learners. The participant was asked to shock the learner who was sat in a
supposed electric chair. Learner asked a question when got it wrong, the teacher
was asked to shock them, shock progressively going up in volts. Going up to 450
volts. Recordings of cries were heard when shocked
Results = 14 defied and 26 obeyed. 65% of participants went up to 450 volts. Signs of
tension from the participants, pointed out that they didn’t enjoy shocking the latter,
sweated, trembled, stuttered, bit their lips etc.
Situational Variables affecting Obedience = Proximity, Location and Uniform
Proximity – the closer we are to the consequences of the action the more likely
we are to feel the effect of them, therefore obedience levels will decrease, as
people don’t want to be identified
Location – if the location is not as professional then its less likely that we will
acknowledge it as a legitimate authority and we won’t feel as obliged to obey.
Uniform – the obedience levels will rise if someone is perceived to be in a
position of authority for example a badge. Being dressed in a uniform lead to the
perception of being in a position of legitimate authority.
2
