AQA A-Level Psychology: Paper 1
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
AO3 Evaluation points
Explanations for + -
Conformity
NSI Research support - ASCH Individual differences - MCGHEE + TEEVAN
Interviewed ppts, said they conformed because they were Some are nAfilliators - seek greater social approval, more likely to
self-conscious giving right answer, wanted to fit in conform and respond to NSI
Conformity decreased to 12.5% when ppts wrote down answer McGhee and Teevan found nAfilliator students are more likely to
conform
ISI Research support - LUCAS
Ppts conformed more to hard maths questions than easy
When easy ppts ‘knew their own minds’
When hard it was ambiguous so looked to others, wanted to be
correct
ISI/NSI Hard to know if NSI or ISI
ASCH - dissenter decreased conformity
NSI - gain social approval
ISI - alternative source of info
Is NSI/ISI distinction even helpful?
Group unanimity - strengthens ISI as one thinks they must all be
correct, also strengthens NSI as group is powerful source of
disapproval - fear rejection
= NSI and ISI probably operate together, distinction isn’t helpful
Asch + -
Research support for Task Difficulty - LUCAS CA: counter to research support - more individual differences
Ppts conformed more to hard maths questions LUCAS found conformity more complex - those with high maths
confidence conformed less
PERRIN + SPENCER, only 1 conforming trial out of 396 trials of
engineering students confident in their ability to measure lines
, Low ecological validity, doesn’t resemble real life
FISKE: ‘Asch’s groups weren’t very group’
Artificial task, had to say view out loud, in front of strangers
WILLIAMS + SOGON conformity is higher in front of friends
Demand characteristics - no reason not to conform
Good control + high replicability - SMITH Can’t generalise - NETO, BOND + SMITH
Lab experiment, controlled, provides objective, measurable and All American undergraduate students male
quantitative data, good internal validity Doesn’t tell us much about women - NETO said women may be
SMITH et al. replicated study and found similar findings more conformist - value social relationships and approval more
BOND + SMITH found conformity higher in collectivist cultures
Stanford Prison + -
Experiment
- CONFORMITY
Research support - Abu Ghraib Lack of research support - HASLAM + REICHER
Can explain events in Abu Ghraib, military prison in Iraq, where US Partially replicated SPE for BBC in 2006
soldiers tortured and abused Iraqi prisoners in 2003+4 Found prisoners took control not guards
Zimbardo believed the guards who committed the abuses were Social identity theory explained this as guards failed to develop
victims of situational factors such as lack of training, boredom and shared social identity but prisoners did, therefore they refused to
no accountability to higher authority. accept the limits of their assigned roles and rebelled
If we are aware of how these factors can lead to abuse, we can = brutality of guards in SPE may be due to shared social identity not
prevent it from happening again conformity to social roles
Good control Dispositional influences
Chose 24 emotionally stable students FROMM states Zimbardo overestimated impact of situational
Randomly assigned students to the roles, meaning researchers variables
could rule out individual personality difference as explanation for ⅓ guards were brutal
findings, behaviours were due to the pressure of the situation ⅓ fair
⅓ nice (cigarettes, privileges)
Most guards resisted pressures to conform to social role of brutal
guard
CA: there was realism - MCDERMOT Lack of ecological validity - BANUAZIZI + MOVAHEDI
McDermot suggests ppts did act as if it was real Tried to make it like prison - de-loused, number, uniform…
90% of prisoners convos were about prison life, complaining they But, ppts knew it was an experiment: BANUAZIZ + MOVAHEDI
can’t leave until their sentences finish suggest ppts were just play-acting, based their behaviour off
#416 believed it was a real prison just ran by psychologists not the stereotypes - Dave Eshelman based his behaviour off a brutal guard
gov in Cool Hand Luke
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
AO3 Evaluation points
Explanations for + -
Conformity
NSI Research support - ASCH Individual differences - MCGHEE + TEEVAN
Interviewed ppts, said they conformed because they were Some are nAfilliators - seek greater social approval, more likely to
self-conscious giving right answer, wanted to fit in conform and respond to NSI
Conformity decreased to 12.5% when ppts wrote down answer McGhee and Teevan found nAfilliator students are more likely to
conform
ISI Research support - LUCAS
Ppts conformed more to hard maths questions than easy
When easy ppts ‘knew their own minds’
When hard it was ambiguous so looked to others, wanted to be
correct
ISI/NSI Hard to know if NSI or ISI
ASCH - dissenter decreased conformity
NSI - gain social approval
ISI - alternative source of info
Is NSI/ISI distinction even helpful?
Group unanimity - strengthens ISI as one thinks they must all be
correct, also strengthens NSI as group is powerful source of
disapproval - fear rejection
= NSI and ISI probably operate together, distinction isn’t helpful
Asch + -
Research support for Task Difficulty - LUCAS CA: counter to research support - more individual differences
Ppts conformed more to hard maths questions LUCAS found conformity more complex - those with high maths
confidence conformed less
PERRIN + SPENCER, only 1 conforming trial out of 396 trials of
engineering students confident in their ability to measure lines
, Low ecological validity, doesn’t resemble real life
FISKE: ‘Asch’s groups weren’t very group’
Artificial task, had to say view out loud, in front of strangers
WILLIAMS + SOGON conformity is higher in front of friends
Demand characteristics - no reason not to conform
Good control + high replicability - SMITH Can’t generalise - NETO, BOND + SMITH
Lab experiment, controlled, provides objective, measurable and All American undergraduate students male
quantitative data, good internal validity Doesn’t tell us much about women - NETO said women may be
SMITH et al. replicated study and found similar findings more conformist - value social relationships and approval more
BOND + SMITH found conformity higher in collectivist cultures
Stanford Prison + -
Experiment
- CONFORMITY
Research support - Abu Ghraib Lack of research support - HASLAM + REICHER
Can explain events in Abu Ghraib, military prison in Iraq, where US Partially replicated SPE for BBC in 2006
soldiers tortured and abused Iraqi prisoners in 2003+4 Found prisoners took control not guards
Zimbardo believed the guards who committed the abuses were Social identity theory explained this as guards failed to develop
victims of situational factors such as lack of training, boredom and shared social identity but prisoners did, therefore they refused to
no accountability to higher authority. accept the limits of their assigned roles and rebelled
If we are aware of how these factors can lead to abuse, we can = brutality of guards in SPE may be due to shared social identity not
prevent it from happening again conformity to social roles
Good control Dispositional influences
Chose 24 emotionally stable students FROMM states Zimbardo overestimated impact of situational
Randomly assigned students to the roles, meaning researchers variables
could rule out individual personality difference as explanation for ⅓ guards were brutal
findings, behaviours were due to the pressure of the situation ⅓ fair
⅓ nice (cigarettes, privileges)
Most guards resisted pressures to conform to social role of brutal
guard
CA: there was realism - MCDERMOT Lack of ecological validity - BANUAZIZI + MOVAHEDI
McDermot suggests ppts did act as if it was real Tried to make it like prison - de-loused, number, uniform…
90% of prisoners convos were about prison life, complaining they But, ppts knew it was an experiment: BANUAZIZ + MOVAHEDI
can’t leave until their sentences finish suggest ppts were just play-acting, based their behaviour off
#416 believed it was a real prison just ran by psychologists not the stereotypes - Dave Eshelman based his behaviour off a brutal guard
gov in Cool Hand Luke
