Section A – Social Influence
Students Natasha and Tanya are buying food in the supermarket on
their way home from school. As they are paying, they notice their
psychology teacher, Mr Boat, at the far end of the queue. They both
smile and wave.
Mr Boat shouts, "Hey, you two! I think you owe me homework. Wait
there so we can have a quick chat."
Natasha and Tanya finish paying, glance at each other giggling and
hurry out of the supermarket
02. Using your knowledge of obedience research, explain possible
reasons why the students failed to obey their teacher. [6 marks]
One reason why the peer failed to obey their teacher is due to social support.
This theory suggests that in the presence of a dissenting partner, the obligation
to obey is reduced. Milgram’s obedience study showed that in the obedient peer
condition, the obedience level dropped from 65% to 10%. This is because
individuals feel free to act based on their own conscience. In the text, Natasha
and Tanya had the support of each other so felt more confident to be disobedient
towards their teacher (the authority figure).
03. Discuss research into minority influence. [16 marks]
Minority influence refers to the influence one person or small group (the
minority) can have on the majority group. Minority influence can change the
beliefs of a larger group so that they believe them privately and publicly
(internalisation). There are 3 factors which contribute to minority influence. They
are consistency, flexibility and commitment.
Moscovici conducted research to find to what extent the consistency of a
minority group could influence the opinion of the majority. In each group of 6
there were 2 confederates who in the first condition consistently gave the wrong
answer and in the second condition were inconsistent. Moscovici found that
when confederates consistently claimed that slides were green, naïve
participants gave the same wrong answer 8.42% of the time. This reduced to
1.25% when confederates were inconsistent. Therefore, he showed that if a
minority group is consistent, they have the ability to sway the opinion of the
majority. Consistency has more impact than inconsistency.
One strength of Moscovici’s research into minority influence is research support.
Wood carried out a meta-analysis of 100 similar studies and found that they all
implied that a consistent minority group had more influence than an inconsistent
group. This supports Moscovici’s findings. So is high in external reliability. A
limitation of meta-analysis is that it is a type of secondary data. Information may
be outdated. Publication bias – researchers may not select or present studies.
, On the other hand, the study was artificial (tasks to measure minority influence).
Artificial tasks cannot show the true effect of minority influence in real-world
situations where the influence of a group on the majority holds some depth and
importance. Therefore, the study lacks external validity — in which research can
be applied to everyday situations. Furthermore, Moscovici's study does not show
how flexibility is an important factor in increasing minority influence (as in the
inconsistent condition the majority were influenced less meaning we cannot be
sure to what extent flexibility contributes to minority influence). Nemeth implied
how being consistent, repeating the same arguments, is rigid.
Another limitation of Moscovici’s study is that it raises ethical issues of
deception. As there were confederates present in the trial, participants couldn’t
have known the true aim of the task — meaning that researchers didn’t collect
informed consent of participants. Therefore, there is question as to whether
Moscovici’s research is credible and valuable as a contribution to minority
influence research.
Students Natasha and Tanya are buying food in the supermarket on
their way home from school. As they are paying, they notice their
psychology teacher, Mr Boat, at the far end of the queue. They both
smile and wave.
Mr Boat shouts, "Hey, you two! I think you owe me homework. Wait
there so we can have a quick chat."
Natasha and Tanya finish paying, glance at each other giggling and
hurry out of the supermarket
02. Using your knowledge of obedience research, explain possible
reasons why the students failed to obey their teacher. [6 marks]
One reason why the peer failed to obey their teacher is due to social support.
This theory suggests that in the presence of a dissenting partner, the obligation
to obey is reduced. Milgram’s obedience study showed that in the obedient peer
condition, the obedience level dropped from 65% to 10%. This is because
individuals feel free to act based on their own conscience. In the text, Natasha
and Tanya had the support of each other so felt more confident to be disobedient
towards their teacher (the authority figure).
03. Discuss research into minority influence. [16 marks]
Minority influence refers to the influence one person or small group (the
minority) can have on the majority group. Minority influence can change the
beliefs of a larger group so that they believe them privately and publicly
(internalisation). There are 3 factors which contribute to minority influence. They
are consistency, flexibility and commitment.
Moscovici conducted research to find to what extent the consistency of a
minority group could influence the opinion of the majority. In each group of 6
there were 2 confederates who in the first condition consistently gave the wrong
answer and in the second condition were inconsistent. Moscovici found that
when confederates consistently claimed that slides were green, naïve
participants gave the same wrong answer 8.42% of the time. This reduced to
1.25% when confederates were inconsistent. Therefore, he showed that if a
minority group is consistent, they have the ability to sway the opinion of the
majority. Consistency has more impact than inconsistency.
One strength of Moscovici’s research into minority influence is research support.
Wood carried out a meta-analysis of 100 similar studies and found that they all
implied that a consistent minority group had more influence than an inconsistent
group. This supports Moscovici’s findings. So is high in external reliability. A
limitation of meta-analysis is that it is a type of secondary data. Information may
be outdated. Publication bias – researchers may not select or present studies.
, On the other hand, the study was artificial (tasks to measure minority influence).
Artificial tasks cannot show the true effect of minority influence in real-world
situations where the influence of a group on the majority holds some depth and
importance. Therefore, the study lacks external validity — in which research can
be applied to everyday situations. Furthermore, Moscovici's study does not show
how flexibility is an important factor in increasing minority influence (as in the
inconsistent condition the majority were influenced less meaning we cannot be
sure to what extent flexibility contributes to minority influence). Nemeth implied
how being consistent, repeating the same arguments, is rigid.
Another limitation of Moscovici’s study is that it raises ethical issues of
deception. As there were confederates present in the trial, participants couldn’t
have known the true aim of the task — meaning that researchers didn’t collect
informed consent of participants. Therefore, there is question as to whether
Moscovici’s research is credible and valuable as a contribution to minority
influence research.
