Section A – Social Influence
01 Outline two explanations of resistance to social influence. [4 marks]
One explanation of resistance to social influence is Social Support. This is when
another individual within the group dissents the majority opinion and breaks the
unanimity. For example, a confederate dissenter (someone who doesn't conform)
may encourage independence among others.
Another explanation of resistance to social influence is a high internal locus of
control. A person with a high internal locus of control can operate independently
and has high self-efficacy and confidence in themself. Therefore, they have the
confidence to reject the opinion of others and authority figures.
The survey shows that fewer young people are smoking today than in
1987.
04. Using your knowledge of social influence processes in social change,
explain possible reasons for this change in behaviour. (6 marks)
A reason for the decline in smoking could be normative social influence.
This is when individuals conform because they want to fit in. When information
about what other people are doing spreads around then others will start to do
the same thing, to be a part of the majority group.
The decline in smoking may be due to a minority influence. First, they would
draw attention to the idea of not smoking and making mention of the health
implications (e.g., causing lung damage). This group would need to be consistent
for deeper processing to occur. (When the majority truly questions and considers
the purpose of the minority's aims). For more attention to be paid the minority
influence would need to fulfil the augmentation principle.
This is when the minority show commitment to their cause, for example they
may steal cigarettes from shops and throw them away. Through this there would
be a snowball effect where gradually more people join and internalise the ideas
of the minority until they become the majority and social change has occurred.
05 Discuss ethical issues in social influence research. (8 marks)
One ethical issue in social influence research is deception. In Asch’s study,
participants were naive to the fact that the other individuals in the group were
confederates. They were also unaware that they were giving the same wrong
answer as a part of the research. Furthermore, participants were told that the
researchers were investigating visual perception and not conformity.
One strength of the use of deception in social influence research is that there are
no demand characteristics. Participants are less likely to catch onto the aims of
the study (to find the level of conformity in an unambiguous task) if they don’t
know what the aims are. Furthermore, participants will act more naturally which
, will increase the internal validity of the study and provide more insight into
conformity in natural social environments.
On the other hand, deception raises other ethical issues such as protection from
harm. Participants may have felt that they were manipulated and made to seem
dumb for following the conforming to the opinion of the majority even though
they were wrong.
In addition, there are issues of informed consent. As participants didn’t know the
aims of the study, there is no way that they could’ve given full consent to the
experiment. Therefore, deception raises other ethical issues and reduces the
credibility of the Asch experiment research.
01 Outline two explanations of resistance to social influence. [4 marks]
One explanation of resistance to social influence is Social Support. This is when
another individual within the group dissents the majority opinion and breaks the
unanimity. For example, a confederate dissenter (someone who doesn't conform)
may encourage independence among others.
Another explanation of resistance to social influence is a high internal locus of
control. A person with a high internal locus of control can operate independently
and has high self-efficacy and confidence in themself. Therefore, they have the
confidence to reject the opinion of others and authority figures.
The survey shows that fewer young people are smoking today than in
1987.
04. Using your knowledge of social influence processes in social change,
explain possible reasons for this change in behaviour. (6 marks)
A reason for the decline in smoking could be normative social influence.
This is when individuals conform because they want to fit in. When information
about what other people are doing spreads around then others will start to do
the same thing, to be a part of the majority group.
The decline in smoking may be due to a minority influence. First, they would
draw attention to the idea of not smoking and making mention of the health
implications (e.g., causing lung damage). This group would need to be consistent
for deeper processing to occur. (When the majority truly questions and considers
the purpose of the minority's aims). For more attention to be paid the minority
influence would need to fulfil the augmentation principle.
This is when the minority show commitment to their cause, for example they
may steal cigarettes from shops and throw them away. Through this there would
be a snowball effect where gradually more people join and internalise the ideas
of the minority until they become the majority and social change has occurred.
05 Discuss ethical issues in social influence research. (8 marks)
One ethical issue in social influence research is deception. In Asch’s study,
participants were naive to the fact that the other individuals in the group were
confederates. They were also unaware that they were giving the same wrong
answer as a part of the research. Furthermore, participants were told that the
researchers were investigating visual perception and not conformity.
One strength of the use of deception in social influence research is that there are
no demand characteristics. Participants are less likely to catch onto the aims of
the study (to find the level of conformity in an unambiguous task) if they don’t
know what the aims are. Furthermore, participants will act more naturally which
, will increase the internal validity of the study and provide more insight into
conformity in natural social environments.
On the other hand, deception raises other ethical issues such as protection from
harm. Participants may have felt that they were manipulated and made to seem
dumb for following the conforming to the opinion of the majority even though
they were wrong.
In addition, there are issues of informed consent. As participants didn’t know the
aims of the study, there is no way that they could’ve given full consent to the
experiment. Therefore, deception raises other ethical issues and reduces the
credibility of the Asch experiment research.
