Question 4 of Question 5 of Which of the following factors is likely to make resistance to social influence more likely. Question 6 of Question 7 of Which of these is an example of a voluntary social role? Question 8 of What type of questionnaire did Rotter use in to research aspects of personality? Question 9 of Which of these is an example of an involuntary social role?
Question 10 of Which of these is not an example of a situational factor? Question 11 of Which of these range of social roles could be held by one person? Question 12 of Which of these is not an example of a dispositional factor? Question 13 of What type of ward did Orlando set up in for research purposes? Question 14 of Question 15 of In which year did Orlando conduct research into social roles? Question 16 of Question 17 of Question 18 of Eagly and Carli did research into the effects of which of these dispositional factors?
Question 19 of Question 20 of What method did Eagly and Carli use for their research into Gender? Question 21 of In which year did Rotter conduct research into Independent Behaviour? Question 22 of Question 23 of Question 24 of Question 25 of Search for: Search.
Shop Terms and Conditions Privacy Policy. This website uses cookies to improve your experience. Another strength of the study is that the harmful treatment of participant led to the formal recognition of ethical guidelines. Studies must now gain ethical approval before they are conducted. An ethics committee review whether the potential benefits of the research are justifiable in the light of possible risk of physical or psychological harm.
They may request researchers make changes to the studies design or procedure, or in extreme cases deny approval of the study altogether. Obedience is a type of social influence where a person follows an order from another person who is usually an authority figure.
Milgram wanted to know why Germans were willing to kill Jews during the Holocaust. He thought that Americans were different and would not have followed such orders. Procedure : Milgram wanted to see whether people would obey a legitimate authority figure when given instructions to harm another human being.
He conducted a lab experiment in which two participants were assigned either the role of a teacher this was always given to the true participant or learner a confederate called Mr. The teacher and learner were put into separate rooms.
The teacher was then asked by the experimenter who wore a lab coat to administer electric shocks which were actually harmless to the learner each time he gave the wrong answer. These shocks increased every time the learner gave a wrong answer, from 15 - volts. There were 4 prods and if one was not obeyed then the experimenter read out the next prod, and so on.
Milgram did more than one experiment — he carried out 18 variations of his study. All he did was alter the situation IV to see how this affected obedience DV. For example, when the experimenter instructed and prompted the teacher by telephone from another room, obedience fell to Milgram also interviewed participants afterwards to find out the effect of the deception. Apparently Signs of tension included trembling, sweating, stuttering, laughing nervously, biting lips and digging fingernails into palms of hands.
Three participants had uncontrollable seizures, and many pleaded to be allowed to stop the experiment. Full blown seizures were observed for 3 participants; one so violent that the experiment was stopped. In his defence, Milgram argued that these effects were only short term. Once the participants were debriefed and could see the confederate was OK their stress levels decreased. Milgram also interviewed the participants one year after the event and concluded that most were happy that they had taken part.
Agency theory says that people will obey an authority when they believe that the authority will take responsibility for the consequences of their actions. For example, when participants were reminded that they had responsibility for their own actions, almost none of them were prepared to obey.
Another example of the agenetic state involved a variation of Milgram's study whereby participants could instruct an assistant confederate to press the switches. In this condition This shows when there is less personal responsibility obedience increases. Cannot explain Nazi behavior — Mandel described how the German Police Reserve shot civilians in a small Polish town even though they were not directly ordered to and were told they could be assigned to other duties — Challenges agentic state as they were not powerless to obey.
Most societies are hierarchal parents, teachers and police officers hold authority over us. The authority they use is legitimate as it is argued by society, helping it to run smoothly. One of the consequences is that some people are granted the power to punish others. This response to legitimate authority is learned in a variety of situations, for example in the family, school and workplace.
With regard to Milgram' study the experimenter is seen as having legitimate authority as he has scientific status. The Milgram experiment was carried out many times whereby Milgram varied the basic procedure changed the IV.
By doing this Milgram could identify which situational factors affected obedience the DV. Williams wore a laboratory coat a symbol of scientific expertise which gave him a high status. But when the experimenter dressed in everyday clothes obedience was very low.
The uniform of the authority figure can give them status. Milgram's obedience experiment was conducted at Yale, a prestigious university in America. The high status of the university gave the study credibility and respect in the eyes of the participants, thus making them more likely to obey. When Milgram moved his experiment to a set of run down offices rather than the impressive Yale University obedience dropped to This suggests that status of location effects obedience.
People are more likely be obey an authority figure who is in close proximity i. In Milgram's study the experimenter was in the same room as the participant i. If the authority figure is distant it is easier to resistant their orders. When the experimenter instructed and prompted the teacher by telephone from another room, obedience fell to Many participants cheated and missed out shocks or gave less voltage than ordered to by the experimenter.
Adorno felt that personality i. He proposed that there was such a thing as an authoritarian personality, i. One of the various characteristics of the authoritarian personality was that the individual is hostile to those who are of inferior status, but obedient of people with high status. He investigated middle class, white Americans and their unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups using the F-scale to measure Authoritarian personality. Independent behavior is a term that psychologists use to describe behavior that seems not be influenced by other people.
This happens when a person resists the pressures to conform or obey. This is thought to be because the presence of a dissident gave the true participant social support and made them feel more confident in their own decision and more confident in rejecting the majority position.
Social support also decreases obedience to authority. In a variation of Milgram' study two other participants confederates were also teachers but refused to obey. Confederate 1 stopped at volts and confederate 2 stopped at volts.
A person can either have an internal locus of control or an external locus of control. People with a high internal locus of control perceive see themselves as having a great deal of personal control over their behavior and are therefore more likely to take responsibility for the way they behave. For example, I did well on the exams because I revised extremely hard. In contrast a person with a high external locus of control perceive their behaviors as being a result of external influences or luck — e.
I did well on the test because it was easy. Research has shown that people with an internal locus of control tend to be less conforming and less obedient i. Rotter proposes that people with internal locus of control are better at resisting social pressure to conform or obey, perhaps because they feel responsible for their actions.
Minority influence occurs when a small group minority influences the opinion of a much larger group majority. This can happen when the minority behaves in the following ways. Moscovici stated that being consistent and unchanging in a view is more likely to influence the majority than if a minority is inconsistent and chops and changes their mind. Procedure : Moscovici conducted an experiment in which female participants were shown 36 blue slides of different intensity and asked to report the colours.
There were two confederates the minority and four participants the majority. In the first part of the experiment the two confederates answered green for each of the 36 slides.
They were totally consistent in their responses. In the second part of the experiment they answered green 24 times and blue 12 times. In this case they were inconsistent in their answers. A control group was also used consisting of participants only — no confederates. Confronted with a consistent opposition, members of the majority will sit up, take notice, and rethink their position i.
A consistent minority disrupts established norms and creates uncertainty, doubt and conflict. This can lead to the majority taking the minority view seriously.
The majority will therefore be more likely to question their own views. When the majority is confronted with someone with self-confidence and dedication to take a popular stand and refuses to back own, they may assume that he or she has a point. A number of researchers have questioned whether consistency alone is sufficient for a minority to influence a majority.
They argue that the key is how the majority interprets consistency. If the consistent minority are seen as inflexible, rigid, uncompromising and dogmatic, they will be unlikely to change the views of the majority. However, if they appear flexible and compromising, they are likely to be seen as less extreme, as more moderate, cooperative and reasonable.
As a result, they will have a better chance of changing majority views. Some researchers have gone further and suggested that it is not just the appearance of flexibility and compromise which is important but actual flexibility and compromise.
This possibility was investigated by Nemeth. Their experiment was based on a mock jury in which groups of three participants and one confederate had to decide on the amount of compensation to be given to the victim of a ski-lift accident.
When the consistent minority the confederate argued for a very low amount and refused to change his position, he had no effect on the majority. However, when he compromised and moved some way towards the majority position, the majority also compromised and changed their view.
This experiment questions the importance of consistency. The minority position changed, it was not consistent, and it was this change that apparently resulted in minority influence. He should show commitment to his idea by, for example, investing time in planning and organising his proposed trip. Lastly, he should some flexibility: for example, he could suggest the group go travelling but they will spend quite a bit of time at the beach whilst travelling.
Social influence processes involved in social change include minority influence consistency, commitment and flexibility , internal locus of control and disobedience to authority. Social change is usually a result of minority influence. This is when a small group of people the minority manage to persuade the majority to adopt their point of view. Usually the minority have an internal locus of control. Committed minorities, such as those who risk themselves for their cause has an effect on the majority through an augmentation principle, this means the majority value the importance of the cause - as the minority are risking their lives for it.
Through these processes more and more of the majority will gradually change towards the cause resulting in the snowball effect which will ultimately result in societal change, once this has happened social cryptomnesia occurs which is when people can remember a change but not how it came about. Moscovici found that consistency is the most important factor in deciding whether the minority are influential or not.
This means that the minority must be clear on what they are asking for and not change their minds, or disagree amongst themselves. This creates uncertainty amongst the majority. Moscovici investigated the importance of consistency.
The study had two conditions, confederates who consistently said green and an inconsistent group and a control group with no confederates. He found that the consistent minority group had a greater effect on the other participants than the inconsistent group. This confirms that consistency is a major factor in minority influence. It has been found that once the minority begin to persuade people round to their way of thinking, a snowball effect begins to happen.
This means that more and more people adopt the minority opinion, until gradually the minority becomes the majority. At this point, the people who have not changed their opinion are the minority, and they will often conform to the majority view as a result of group pressures. The majority opinion then becomes law, and people have to obey this law. Once this happens, the minority opinion has become the dominant position in society, and people do often not even remember where the opinion originated from.
This is a process known as crypto amnesia. Further social influence research from Asch and Milgram demonstrates that a minority can have an affect on the majority - both studies involved a dissenter or disobedient role model who influenced the behavior of the majority. However, there are methodological issues in these areas of research: these studies are both based on artificial tasks judging line lengths.
The application of minority influence is further limited due to the importance of identification which is overlooked in minority influence research. Minorities wanting social change should avoid behaviors that reinforce social change - essentially off-putting to the majority. This suggests that being able to identify with a minority group is just as important as agreeing with their views in order to change the behavior of the major.
Animal research also raises the issue of extrapolation. Toggle navigation. Explanations for conformity: informational social influence and normative social influence. Variables affecting conformity including group size, unanimity and task difficulty as investigated by Asch. Conformity to social roles as investigated by Zimbardo.
Explanations for obedience: agentic state and legitimacy of authority, and situational variables affecting obedience including proximity, location and uniform, as investigated by Milgram. Dispositional explanation for obedience: the Authoritarian Personality. Explanations of resistance to social influence, including social support and locus of control.
Minority influence including reference to consistency, commitment and flexibility. The role of social influence processes in social change.
0コメント