Asch's Line Study and Variations

This page details Solomon Asch's famous conformity experiment and subsequent variations:

Asch investigated whether people would conform to an obviously incorrect majority. Using 123 American male undergraduates, confederates gave wrong answers on 12 of 18 trials. Key findings:

• One-third of participants conformed on critical trials
• 75% conformed at least once

Variations of the study explored different factors:

• Perrin and Spencer tested temporal validity, finding only 0.25% conformity
• Increasing confederates from 3 to 15 slightly increased conformity $29$
• Smith and Bond found higher conformity in Fiji compared to Belgium, demonstrating cultural differences
• Unanimity reduced conformity to 5% when a confederate "friend" was present
• Task difficulty increased conformity rates

Highlight: Asch's study is a cornerstone of social influence theory, demonstrating how people may conform even when the majority is clearly wrong.

Example: In Asch's experiment, participants had to match line lengths. Despite the correct answer being obvious, many still conformed to the group's incorrect responses.

Stanford Prison Experiment

This page summarizes Philip Zimbardo's controversial Stanford Prison Experiment:

Zimbardo aimed to investigate how readily people conform to social roles of prisoners and guards. Key aspects of the study include:

• 24 male volunteers randomly assigned as prisoners or guards
• Planned for 2 weeks but stopped after 6 days due to escalating abuse
• Prisoners given uniforms and numbers, guards given uniforms and accessories
• Both groups quickly settled into roles, with guards harassing prisoners and prisoners becoming submissive
• Some prisoners had to leave early due to distress

Evaluation points:

• Possible demand characteristics - participants may have been acting
• Lacks population validity
• Significant ethical issues
• Low face validity - could be investigating obedience rather than conformity
• Zimbardo's involvement may have influenced results
• Led to improved ethical guidelines for psychological research

Highlight: The Stanford Prison Experiment is a crucial study in social influence psychology, demonstrating the power of situational factors in shaping behavior.

Vocabulary: Demand characteristics refer to cues that may cause participants to behave in a way they think the researcher expects.

Milgram's Shock Study

This page details Stanley Milgram's famous obedience experiment:

Milgram investigated whether people would obey an authority figure's instructions to harm another person. Key aspects:

• Lab experiment with participants as "teachers" administering shocks to "learners"
• Shocks increased with wrong answers, with standardized prompts for hesitation
• All participants went to 300 volts, 65% to maximum 450 volts

Variations:

• Obedience dropped to 20% when experimenter not in uniform
• Moved to run-down offices, obedience fell to 47.5%
• Phone instructions lowered obedience to 20.5%, with participants often lying

Evaluation:

• Lacks ecological validity
• Androcentric sample
• Provides insight into historical events like Nazi obedience
• Standardized and replicable
• Ethical concerns due to deception, but participants were debriefed

Highlight: Milgram's study is crucial for understanding obedience in social influence psychology, showing how ordinary people may follow harmful orders from authority figures.

Example: The Milgram obedience study summary shows that a majority of participants were willing to administer potentially lethal shocks when instructed by an authority figure.

The Agentic State and Obedience Factors

This page introduces Milgram's concept of the agentic state and factors influencing obedience:

The agentic state, proposed by Milgram, explains participant behavior:

• Autonomous state: People direct their own actions and take responsibility
• Agentic state: People allow others to direct their actions and pass responsibility to the authority

Conditions for entering the agentic state:

• Authority must be seen as legitimate
• Belief that authority will take responsibility for actions

Supporting evidence:

• Milgram's two-teacher condition: 92.5% shocked to maximum when instructing someone else, showing increased obedience with less personal responsibility

Definition: The agentic state is a condition where individuals allow their actions to be directed by others and pass responsibility to the authority figure.

Highlight: Understanding the agentic state is crucial for explanations of conformity A Level Psychology, as it helps explain why people may obey harmful orders.

Authoritarian Personality

This page introduces the concept of authoritarian personality as an explanation for obedience:

Proposed by Adorno, the authoritarian personality theory suggests that dispositional factors, rather than situational ones, explain obedience. Key features include:

• Hostility towards those of inferior status
• Extreme respect for authority
• Belief in the need for a strong leader

Research method:

• Used the F-scale to assess 2000 middle-class white Americans
• Measured unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups
• Found a correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice

Vocabulary: The F-scale $Fascism scale$ is a personality test designed to measure authoritarian personality characteristics.

Highlight: The authoritarian personality theory provides an alternative explanation for obedience in social influence psychology, focusing on individual differences rather than situational factors.

Page 6: Resistance to Social Influence

This section examines factors that can reduce conformity and obedience, including locus of control.

Definition: Locus of control refers to how much control people believe they have over their behavior.

Example: Conformity dropped to 5% in Asch's study when unanimity was broken, demonstrating the power of social support in resistance.

Vocabulary:

• Internal LOC: Belief in personal control over behavior
• External LOC: Belief that external factors control behavior

Social Influence Types and Explanations

This page introduces key concepts related to social influence in psychology. Conformity is defined as changing one's attitude or behavior due to group pressure. Three types of conformity are outlined:

1. Compliance - agreeing publicly but disagreeing privately
2. Identification - agreeing publicly and privately only when with the group
3. Internalization - agreeing both publicly and privately

Two main explanations for conformity are provided:

• Normative social influence - conforming to fit in with a group
• Informational social influence - conforming due to a desire to be correct

Definition: Conformity is when someone changes their attitude or behavior due to group pressure.

Example: The Jenness study on estimating beans in a jar demonstrates informational social influence, as participants changed their estimates to align with the group.

Highlight: Understanding different types of conformity and the reasons behind it is crucial for social influence psychology A level studies.