Fichas
Social Influence
Fichas del conjunto (14)
- 1Describe and give two evaluations of the Asch line study.Effect of other opinions on conforming to wrong answer.
4 lines, asked to pick same length - confederates gave wrong answers.
[32%] GAVE WRONG ANSWER.
Those giving wrong ans. clearly conforming.
(-) Laboratory study
(-) Deception was unethical - 2Name 4 factors affecting Conformity.Group size: Larger group -> Higher
Need to be right: We assume others are correct.
Need to be liked: Strong desire to be accepted.
Anonymity: If others can't know our answers, conformity drops. - 3Describe and evaluate one study into Obedience, giving its definition.Milgram - A: See how far people obey orders of authority.
M: Teacher shocks a confederate learner. Verbal 'continue' prompts used.
R: 100% shocked fatal 300v, and [65%] shocked to 450v. 3 seizures.
C: Normal people are obedient.
Obedience is following authority's orders. - 4Evaluate the study described.(-) Deception used
(-) No protection from psych. harm - stress
(-) Right to withdraw revoked
(-) Only male American participants - 5Describe 3 factors affecting obedience.Authority: When no white coat worn, obedi -> lowered
Personal Responsibility: When not pressing the button, obedi. -> Raised
Proximity: If learner could be seen, obedi. -> lowered - 6Define social loafing, and describe a study into it.Putting less effort in when in a group.
Latane - A: Investigate effect of groups on effort.
M: Participants clapped, alone or in group of 6 wearing headphones.
R: Larger the group size, less noise made.
C: People put less effort into a task when others do the same task. - 7Evaluate the study described.(-) Only one culture studied: Different concerns for group well-being.
(-) Lacks ecological validity (making noise is odd) - 8Name two factors affecting social loafing.Size of group: Larger the loafier.
Culture: Some care more than others. - 9Define De-individuation and two factors affecting it.Losing our sense of individuality and responsibility.
Wearing a uniform causes us to act the roles it represents.
Defined groups lead to deindiv. as people act as their group is expected to. - 10Describe and evaluate a study into deindividuation.Zimbardo - A: To see anti-social in a city vs. a small town
M: Parked a car with bonnet up in each place. Observed people's actions.
R: In city, parts stolen immediately. In town, untouched save bonnet put down.
C: Large cities lead to deindividuation.
(+) High ecological validity, done real setting.
(-) No informed consent. - 11Describe one study into bystander intervention. (Darley and Latane)A: Investigate emergency reactions when others present.
M: Participants filled questionnaire in room, alone or in threes. Smoke filled room.
R: [75%] reported smoke on their own, while only [38%] in threes.
C: Other people decrease bystander intervention. - 12Evaluate a study into bystander intervention.(-) Could have picked up demand characteristics.
(-) Unlike everyday situation, lacks eco. validity.
(+) Demonstrates diffusion of responsibility. - 13State 3 factors affecting bystander intervention.More people around -> Lower B.I.
Similarity to the victim -> Higher B.I (eg. female shock study)
Appearance of victim. Vulnerable -> Higher B.I. - 14State a practical implication for: Conformity, Obedience, Social loafing, Deindividuation, Bystander Intervention.C: 12th jury member who agrees despite opinion.
O: Space shuttle Challenger explosion, minor engineers ignored fault when instructed.
S.L: Team games like rugby, football difficult to indentify.
D: School uniform on children makes them behave better.
B.I: 2-year old James Bulger murdered by two boys.
Información
- Descripción
- AS Level (Unit 2: Understanding Other People) Psychology Fichas sobre Social Influence, creado por Oliver Wood el 03/02/2014.
- Creado por
- Oliver Wood
- Visitas
- 61
- Etiquetas
- Valoración