SECTION: Conformity to social roles
TOPIC: Social Influence
SUMMARY OF KEY IDEAS (K/U)
1. Social roles – the ‘part’ people play as members of social groups. There are expectations of behaviours and views in
each role.
2. Zimbardo 1970’s – wanted to know why in recent times prisoners were rioting and guard brutally responding.
In a mock prison he used 21 male student volunteers who all tested the most emotionally stable. 10 prisoners and 11
guards were randomly assigned to their roles and uniform was given to encourage conformity. Guards wore shades to
avoid eye contact and handcuffs, prisoners wore overalls and a cap to cover their hair. They were also given numbers
instead of names to encourage de-individualisation (loss of personal identity.)
Both groups took up their roles and by the second day prisoners began to rebel. Guards constantly reminded them of
the divide in power/hierarchy by giving more orders and requests the prisoners had to do. Eventually prisoners
became anxious and depressed. Behaviour become more brutal and psychologically damaging, the study stopped after
6 days.
3. In this study social roles had a strong influence on behaviour. Participants took on the expectations from the
membership in that social group. Even Zimbardo, who played the role as chief general, found himself losing sight of the
psychological study.
PEEL STRENGTH PEEL WEAKNESS
High control – the selection of participants involved Lack of realism – using a mock prison, in an artificial
random assignment and a test beforehand to test mental situation, participants are likely to just be play acting to
stability. This ruled out extreme personality affects stereotypes they have learned. Prisoners may have rioted
meaning internal validity is high. Conclusions can be more just be they thought that what prisoners do. One guard
accurately around social roles. said he was copying his favourite character in a violnet
They were also filmed and observed, conversations TV show.
were listened to.
But in the mock prison 90% of the conversations were
about prison life and one prisoner later said they believed
PEEL WEAKNESS
it was real, just run by psychologists. Suggesting the set
Exaggerated conclusions – Zimbardo emphasised the
up did replicate real life situation. Prisoners were also
idea that all participants conformed to social rules
arrested from their homes unknowingly.
(brutally.) Many were sympathetic and fairier to the
prisoners, resisting pressure of social roles. The power of PEEL STRENGTH
dispositional factors were ignored by Zimbardo. Temporal Validity – Many years after Zimbardo’s
experiment, the study was replicated on TV but many
refused to impose certain behaviours. Authority may be
Ethical Debate -
seen differently now with more people resisting
Prisoners = stress and anxiety conforming.
Arrested from homes without consent But the study was different, more public, and smaller
Many felt they had no right to withdraw sample used.
BUT Zimbardo debriefed and there was a right to
withdraw and many said afterwards they felt no harm.
TOPIC: Social Influence
SUMMARY OF KEY IDEAS (K/U)
1. Social roles – the ‘part’ people play as members of social groups. There are expectations of behaviours and views in
each role.
2. Zimbardo 1970’s – wanted to know why in recent times prisoners were rioting and guard brutally responding.
In a mock prison he used 21 male student volunteers who all tested the most emotionally stable. 10 prisoners and 11
guards were randomly assigned to their roles and uniform was given to encourage conformity. Guards wore shades to
avoid eye contact and handcuffs, prisoners wore overalls and a cap to cover their hair. They were also given numbers
instead of names to encourage de-individualisation (loss of personal identity.)
Both groups took up their roles and by the second day prisoners began to rebel. Guards constantly reminded them of
the divide in power/hierarchy by giving more orders and requests the prisoners had to do. Eventually prisoners
became anxious and depressed. Behaviour become more brutal and psychologically damaging, the study stopped after
6 days.
3. In this study social roles had a strong influence on behaviour. Participants took on the expectations from the
membership in that social group. Even Zimbardo, who played the role as chief general, found himself losing sight of the
psychological study.
PEEL STRENGTH PEEL WEAKNESS
High control – the selection of participants involved Lack of realism – using a mock prison, in an artificial
random assignment and a test beforehand to test mental situation, participants are likely to just be play acting to
stability. This ruled out extreme personality affects stereotypes they have learned. Prisoners may have rioted
meaning internal validity is high. Conclusions can be more just be they thought that what prisoners do. One guard
accurately around social roles. said he was copying his favourite character in a violnet
They were also filmed and observed, conversations TV show.
were listened to.
But in the mock prison 90% of the conversations were
about prison life and one prisoner later said they believed
PEEL WEAKNESS
it was real, just run by psychologists. Suggesting the set
Exaggerated conclusions – Zimbardo emphasised the
up did replicate real life situation. Prisoners were also
idea that all participants conformed to social rules
arrested from their homes unknowingly.
(brutally.) Many were sympathetic and fairier to the
prisoners, resisting pressure of social roles. The power of PEEL STRENGTH
dispositional factors were ignored by Zimbardo. Temporal Validity – Many years after Zimbardo’s
experiment, the study was replicated on TV but many
refused to impose certain behaviours. Authority may be
Ethical Debate -
seen differently now with more people resisting
Prisoners = stress and anxiety conforming.
Arrested from homes without consent But the study was different, more public, and smaller
Many felt they had no right to withdraw sample used.
BUT Zimbardo debriefed and there was a right to
withdraw and many said afterwards they felt no harm.
