PSYC 1101 Learning Unit 4F

1
PSYC 1101 Learning Unit 4F

• The Social Subsystem
• Social Influence

2
Social Influence

• The greatest contribution of social psychology is
  its study of attitudes, beliefs, decisions, and
  actions and the way they are molded by social
  influence.

3
Conformity Obedience

• Behavior is contagious, modeled by one followed
  by another. We unconsciously mimic others
  expressions, postures, voice tones. This is
  known as the chameleon effect.
• We follow the behavior of others to conform.
• Other behaviors may be the expression of
  compliance (obedience) toward authority.

Conformity
Obedience
4
Group Pressure ConformitySolomon Asch
Suggestibility is a subtle type of conformity
adjusting our behavior or thinking toward some
group standard.
5
Group Pressure Conformity

• Influence resulting from ones willingness to
  accept others opinions about reality.

6
Conditions that Strengthen Conformity

• One is made to feel incompetent or insecure.
• The group has at least three people.
• The group is unanimous.
• One admires the groups status and
  attractiveness.
• On has no prior commitment to response.
• The group observes ones behavior.
• Ones culture strongly encourages respect for
  social standard.

7
Reasons for Conformity

• Normative Social Influence influence resulting
  from a persons desire to gain approval or avoid
  rejection. Respecting normative behavior, because
  price may be severe if not followed.

Informative Social Influence The group may
provide valuable information. When we lack
information we are more easily influenced by
those whom we perceive as having it.
8
Informative Social Influence

• Baron and colleagues (1996) made students do an
  eyewitness identification task. If the task was
  easy (lineup exposure 5 sec.) conformity was low
  compared to difficult (1/2 sec. exposure) task.

9
Informative Social Influence
Baron et al., (1996)
10
Obedience
People comply to social pressures. But how would
they respond to outright command? Stanley
Milgram designed a study that investigated the
effects of authority on obedience.
Stanley Milgram (1933-1984)
11
Milgrams Study
12
Obedience Studies

• 1961-63
• Studies were presented as research into the
  effects of punishment on learning but were really
  studies of obedience to authority
• Participants represented a diverse group of
  individuals with respect to occupation and
  socio-economic status.

13
Obedience Studies

• Procedure
• Initial studies were conducted at Yale University
• Two apparent research participants arrived at the
  location at approximately the same time.
• Only one was actually a research participant
  the other was a confederate of the researcher
  playing a role.

14
Obedience Studies

• Procedure
• Participants were briefed on the procedures
• One would serve as the teacher and the other as
  the learner
• Apparent random selection was rigged so that
  actual participant was always chosen as the
  teacher

15
Obedience Studies

• Learner was taken to an adjacent room and, with
  teacher observing, his arms were strapped to a
  chair and an electrode was placed on his skin
  through which electric shocks were to be
  delivered when he provided wrong answers to
  questions posed by the teacher. Learner remarked
  that he had a heart condition.

16
Obedience Studies

• Back in the adjoining room, teacher was
  instructed how to deliver questions and operate
  the shock generator

17
Obedience Studies

• Switches on the generator ranged from 15 volts to
  450 volts.
• Teacher was given a sample shock of 45 volts to
  reinforce the deception.
• Study proceeded with teacher reading list of word
  pairs to learner and then testing learner to see
  how many word pairs were correctly remembered.
• For each wrong answer a shock was administered
  with level increasing 15 volts on each occasion.

18
Obedience Studies

• At 75 volts the learner was heard to groan, at
  120 volts he exclaimed that the shocks really
  hurt, at 150 volts he shouted that his heart was
  bothering him and he wanted to stop, at
  succeeding levels his protests grew more
  insistent, he demanded to be let out and he
  screamed in pain. Eventually he shouted that he
  would refuse to answer any more questions.
• Whenever the teacher indicated that he wanted to
  stop, the experimenter calmly but insistently
  directed him to continue.

19
Obedience Studies

• Prior to the study, Milgram surveyed a group of
  psychiatrists and asked them to predict what
  percentage of participants would administer the
  highest shock level. They predicted that one
  subject in a thousand would proceed to the
  highest level.

20
Obedience Studies

• In the situation as described, 65 of
  participants continued to the end of the line
  they delivered what they believed to be 450 volts
  of electricity to a stranger that many of them
  believed could be severely injured perhaps to the
  point at which his life was in jeopardy.

21
Obedience Studies

• The teachers who continued to deliver shocks to
  the end often were in obvious distress and were
  terribly conflicted about continuing. These were
  not, as some have suggested, sadistic individuals
  who took delight in being given sanction by an
  authority figure to hurt another person.

22
Obedience Studies

• Several variations on the original design were
  conducted.
• Factors that were associated with significantly
  reduced levels of obedience included
• Closer proximity of the learner
• Further distance from the experimenter
• Other teachers who resisted

23
Milgrams Study Results
24
Individual Resistance

• A third of individuals in Milgrams study
  resisted social coercion.

An unarmed individual single-handedly Challenged
a line of tanks at Tiananmen Square.
25
Lessons from the Conformity and Obedience Studies
In both Ash's and Milgram's studies participants
were pressurized between following their personal
standards and being responsive to others.
In Milgrams study participants were torn between
hearing victims pleas and experimenters orders
but more often followed orders.
26
Group Influence

• How do groups affect our behavior? Social
  psychologists study all kinds of groups

• One person affecting another
• Families
• Teams
• Committees

27
Individual Behavior in the Presence of Others

• Social facilitation Refers to improved
  performance on a task in the presence of others.
  Triplett (1898) noticed cyclists race time were
  faster when they competed against others than
  against a clock.

28
Social Loafing

• Tendency of an individual in a group to exert
  less effort toward attaining a common goal than
  when tested individually (Latané, 1981).
• Individual accountability works against social
  loafing.

29
Deindividuation

• Loss of self-awareness and self-restraint in
  group situations that foster arousal and
  anonymity.

Mob behavior
30
Effects of Group Interaction

• Group Polarization enhances groups prevailing
  attitudes through discussion. If a group is
  like-minded, discussion strengthens its
  prevailing opinions and attitudes.

31
Groupthink

• Mode of thinking that occurs when the desire for
  harmony in a decision-making group overrides
  realistic appraisal of alternatives.

Kennedy and Bay of Pigs Crisis Decision to Launch
Challenger Watergate Cover-up Chernobyl Reactor
Accident Decision to Invade Iraq?
32
Power of Individuals

• The power of social influence is enormous but so
  is the power of the individual.
• Non-violent fasts and appeals by Gandhi led to
  the independence of India from the British.
• Individuals influence groups by standing firm.

Gandhi