7/16/2008
Social Psychology
Social Influence
Outline
Zimbardo
„ Asch
„ Milgram (video)
„ Social Influence
„
1
7/16/2008
Introduction to Study
In 1970s Phil Zimbardo was funded to
study antisocial behavior
„ 24 total students: 9 guards, 9 prisoners
„ Regular college guys
„ Intended to lock them in the basement at
Stanford for two weeks
„ Guards were trained in techniques
„ Prisoners were taken in by police,
fingerprinted, stripped, and deloused
„
Conformity
„
A change in a person
person’s
s behavior or
opinions as a result of real or imagined
pressure from a person or group of people
Compliance:
Conforming to an implied or
explicit request in public while privately
disagreeing
g
g
Obedience: Conforming to an explicit request
Acceptance: Conforming that also involves a
change in belief
2
7/16/2008
Norm Formation via
Informational Social Influence
„
Informational Social Influence:
The
influence of other people that leads us to
conform because we see them as a source of
information
We believe others’ interpretation of an
ambiguous situation is more correct than ours
Why conform?
„
Informational social influence: They
thought maybe they were wrong
3
7/16/2008
Why conform?
„
Normative social influence: The influence
of other people that leads us to conform in
order to be liked, accepted, or not rejected
What influences conforming to
group pressure?
Size of the group
„ Having an ally
„ When the group is cohesive or important
„
The
more cohesive (extent of “we-ness” of
group)
g
p) and the more important
p
the g
group
p the
more conformity
4
7/16/2008
Milgram’s classic obedience study
(1963)
The design
„
Participants
arrived at the lab, ostensibly, with
another participant (confederate; 47 yr. old, pleasantlooking, somewhat overweight fellow)
Milgram wearing white lab coat
Told study was on effect of punishment on learning
Participants always assigned to be the teacher
Confederate was the learner (word pair task)
Teacher had to give escalating shocks for incorrect
responses (start at 15 volts, increase by 15)
Increasing protests of learner
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
15-60: no protests
75-135: “Ugh!”
150: “That’s
That s all,
all get me out of here
here. I told you I have heart
trouble…”
210: “Ugh! Experimenter! Get me out of here…I won’t be in the
experiment any more.
285: Agonized scream
315: Intensely agonized scream. “I told you I refuse to answer, I
am no longer a part of this experiment.
After 330 volts, no responses at all
5
7/16/2008
Estimates of compliance
People (students,
(students Psychiatrists,
Psychiatrists working
people) estimated they would stop
complying by 135 volts (strong shock);
„ No one said more than 300
„ When
e as
asked
ed what
a o
other
e peop
people
e would
ou d do
estimated that 1 in 1,000 would “go all the
way” (to 450 or XXX)
„
Why Proximity Matters
Empathic understanding of pain
„ Prevented diverted attention
„ Viewed by person they were hurting
„ Saw impact directly
„ Formed g
group
p with experimenter
p
or
learner based on proximity
„ May not have learned not to aggress
against those who are remote from us.
„
6
7/16/2008
Growing tension
„
Tension signs
Physical
problems
Speech
Laughter
Smiling
Self
rated anxiety
Reflections on Milgram’s obedience
studies
„
Destructive obedience or indecisive
disobedience?
Most
participants questioned experimenter
Situation did not make sense or add up
Hard to translate intention to disobey into action
Subjects
j
became indecisive,, unwilling
g or unable to
challenge authority; dependent on the calm authority
figure
„
Ethics:
Who’s
responsible?
7
7/16/2008
What about not conforming?
„
How do we treat the nonconformist?
Johnny
Rocco study (Schachter, 1951)
Deviant in group received most comments
from others to convince him, until the end
Ignored at the end, rejected
Nominated him to be kicked off the island
Assigned him meaningless tasks
Law of Social Impact
„
Latane
I = SIN
Where:
I = social impact
S = strength of impact sources
I = immediacy in time or space
N = # of impact sources
8
7/16/2008
Diffusion
Anonymous
„ Confident
„ Positive Emotions
„
Individual Differences
IQ
„ Self esteem
„ Internal control
„ Need for social approval
„ Gender
„ Social desirability
„
9
7/16/2008
Social Example
„
Aronson & O’Leary
O Leary
Water
„
conservation
Cialdini
Littering
Minority Effects
(Moscovici)
Consistent
„ Coherent
„ Forceful
„
10
7/16/2008
Who do we agree with?
„
Thorndike
Those
„
we admire
Bennington girls
Liberal
at school
Conservative at home
Bases of Social Power
(Bertram, Raven)
Rewards
„ Coercion
„ Expertise
„ Information
„ Referent power
„ Legitimate authority
„
11
7/16/2008
Norms
Understanding of acceptable behavior
„ Implicit
„ Unwritten
„ Cultural
„ Group Specific
„
Group Decision Making
Hitler, Nixon White house
Hitler
house, Challenger
explosion, Enron
„ Cohesive
„ Isolated
„ Group think
„ Illusions of invulnerability
„
12
7/16/2008
Cults
Changed norms
„ Gradual
„ Powerful leader
„ Unquestioned authority
„
13