AQA GCSE Psychology (8182) · 3.2.1 · Social context and behaviour Social Influence
Mini-Lesson
Social Influence
4 missions. Guess, learn, then check. Your place is saved.
Mission 1Seven people give the same wrong answer. Do you go along with them?
Mission 2A stranger in uniform gives you an order. Why is it so hard to say no?
Mission 3A man collapses on a train. Does a cane or a bottle change who helps?
Mission 4In a crowd, polite people do things they'd never do alone. Why?
The specification points and sources are listed under the lesson: see Sources.
Mission 1
Seven people give the same wrong answer. Do you go along with them?
Make a guess: Seven people give the same wrong answer. Do you go along with them?
Social influence · conformity
Going along with the majority
Conformity is changing your behaviour or opinions to match a group, because of real or imagined group pressure.
Majority influence: a larger group pressures one person, or a few, to adopt its view.
You may go along to fit in and avoid looking odd, or because you think the group must know better.
Conformity is not obedience: obedience means following a direct order from an authority figure.
Key studySocial influence · conformity
Asch (1951)
Aim
To see whether people would conform to a majority giving an obviously wrong answer.
Method
Lab experiment; 50 male American students, each with 7 confederates. Each person said aloud which of three lines matched a standard line; 18 trials, 12 critical (all confederates wrong).
Results
Participants conformed on 32% of critical trials; 75% conformed at least once; 25% never did. Alone, under 1% made errors.
Conclusion
Majority influence is powerful, even when the right answer is obvious.
Strength
Controlled and standardised: every participant saw the same lines and answers, so it can be replicated.
Weakness
Artificial task with little at stake; only American men in the 1950s; participants were deceived.
Social influence · conformity
The group and the task
These are social factors: features of the situation, not the person.
Group size: with one other person giving a wrong answer, almost nobody conformed; with two, about 13% of answers; with three, about 32%. More than three made little difference.
Anonymity: answering privately, e.g. in writing, reduces conformity.
Task difficulty: when the lines are closer in length, conformity rises. Unsure people look to others.
Social influence · conformity
What the person brings
Dispositional factors are features of the person, such as personality.
Self-esteem: people with low self-esteem conform more; confident people trust their own judgement.
Locus of control: people who feel outside forces control their lives (external locus) conform more.
Expertise: someone who knows the subject well, e.g. a maths teacher on a maths question, conforms less.
Quick check
?A class votes on the answer to a hard history question by raising hands. Which change would most likely reduce conformity?
Sort it
?Is each one a feature of the situation or of the person?
Tap a statement, then tap the group it belongs in. Then press Check.
Sort it
?Is each point a strength or a weakness of Asch's study?
Tap a statement, then tap the group it belongs in. Then press Check.
Mission check
?Seven people give the same wrong answer. Do you go along with them?
Quite possibly, at least once. In the classic line test about three in four people went along with a wrong majority at least once, although most answers stayed correct. How likely you are to conform depends on the situation (group size, anonymity, task difficulty) and on you, for example your self-esteem.
Mission 2
A stranger in uniform gives you an order. Why is it so hard to say no?
Make a guess: A stranger in uniform gives you an order. Why is it so hard to say no?
Social influence · obedience
Following orders
Obedience is following a direct order from an authority figure, someone with the power to give orders.
Conformity is pressure from a group of equals; obedience comes from someone of higher status.
People obey when they see the authority as legitimate: it has the right to give that order, like a police officer or a teacher.
Symbols such as a uniform or an official building make authority look legitimate.
Key studySocial influence · obedience
Milgram (1963)
Aim
To see whether ordinary people would obey an order to harm an innocent person.
Method
Controlled lab study at Yale; 40 male volunteers from a newspaper advert, paid $4.50. As "teacher", each gave what he believed were electric shocks (15 to 450 volts) to a "learner" (an actor) for wrong answers; an experimenter in a lab coat used set prods.
Results
All 40 went to at least 300 volts; 65% went to the full 450 volts. Many showed stress, such as sweating and trembling.
Conclusion
Ordinary people will obey a legitimate authority, even to harm someone.
Strength
Standardised prods and scripted protests, so it can be replicated; variations tested each factor.
Weakness
Deception, distress and pressure to continue raise ethical concerns, though participants were debriefed.
Social influence · obedience
Agents of authority
Milgram's Agency theory: in the autonomous state you act on your own conscience and feel responsible for what you do.
Faced with a legitimate authority, you shift into the agentic state: you act as the authority's agent and feel they are responsible.
This agentic shift explains why people obey orders they believe are wrong: "I was only following orders."
Social influence · obedience
Authority, distance and culture
Authority: obedience is higher when the authority looks legitimate (uniform, lab coat, official building).
Proximity: obedience falls when the victim is closer or the authority is further away.
In Milgram's variations, 65% obeyed fully; 40% with the learner in the same room; 20.5% with orders by phone.
Culture: obedience levels differed when Milgram's study was repeated in other countries; cultures that value respect for authority may obey more.
Social influence · obedience
The authoritarian personality
Adorno's theory: some people have an Authoritarian Personality, which makes them highly obedient.
Traits: strong respect for authority, rigid "black-and-white" thinking, and hostility towards people seen as lower status.
Cause: a strict upbringing with harsh discipline and love that depended on good behaviour.
It is measured with a questionnaire, the F-scale. People who scored high tended to be more obedient.
Quick check
?A hospital porter is told to move heavy equipment in a way that breaks safety rules. In which version is he most likely to refuse?
Sort it
?Is each point a strength or a weakness of these explanations of obedience?
Tap a statement, then tap the group it belongs in. Then press Check.
Calculate
?In Milgram's study, 26 of the 40 men went to the full 450 volts. What percentage is this?
Mission check
?A stranger in uniform gives you an order. Why is it so hard to say no?
The uniform makes the person look like a legitimate authority. Once you accept that, you tend to shift into the agentic state and feel that they, not you, are responsible. How close the authority is, and personality (such as the authoritarian personality), also affect whether you obey.
Mission 3
A man collapses on a train. Does a cane or a bottle change who helps?
Make a guess: A man collapses on a train. Does a cane or a bottle change who helps?
Social influence · bystander behaviour
When others are watching
A bystander sees an emergency but is not directly involved. Bystander intervention is when a bystander helps.
The bystander effect: people are less likely to help when others are present.
One reason is diffusion of responsibility: with others around, each person feels less responsible for helping.
The presence of others is a social factor.
Social influence · bystander behaviour
Weighing up the cost
Bystanders weigh the costs of helping (danger, effort, time, embarrassment, disgust) against the costs of not helping (guilt, blame).
The higher the cost of helping, the less likely people are to help.
The cost of helping is a social factor.
Social influence · bystander behaviour
Who is more likely to help
Dispositional factors are features of the bystander.
Similarity to victim: we are more likely to help people we see as like us, e.g. the same age, gender or group.
Expertise: people with relevant skills, such as first aid or medical training, are more likely to help, and to help well.
Key studySocial influence · bystander behaviour
Piliavin et al. (1969)
Aim
To see how victim type (ill or drunk), race and number of bystanders affect helping.
Method
Field experiment on New York subway trains with about 4,450 passengers. A male actor collapsed, carrying a cane (ill) or smelling of alcohol with a bottle (drunk). Observers recorded who helped and how fast.
Results
The cane victim was helped on 95% of trials (62 of 65); the drunk victim on 50% (19 of 38). 90% of first helpers were men. Larger groups did not help less.
Conclusion
Helping depends on its cost; diffusion of responsibility is weaker when the victim is in plain view.
Strength
Natural setting, passengers unaware, so behaviour was realistic.
Weakness
No consent, debrief or right to withdraw; some passengers may have been upset.
Calculate
?In Piliavin's study, the victim with a cane was helped on 62 of 65 trials. What percentage is this, to the nearest whole number?
Quick check
?A cyclist falls off her bike in a park. Which change would most likely make bystanders slower to help?
Sort it
?Is each one a feature of the situation or of the bystander?
Tap a statement, then tap the group it belongs in. Then press Check.
Sort it
?Is each point a strength or a weakness of Piliavin's study?
Tap a statement, then tap the group it belongs in. Then press Check.
Mission check
?A man collapses on a train. Does a cane or a bottle change who helps?
Yes. In Piliavin's subway study the man with a cane was helped on 95% of trials and the man who seemed drunk on 50%. Bystanders weigh up the cost of helping, and helping someone drunk seems riskier and more unpleasant. Who helps also depends on the bystander, for example expertise and similarity to the victim.
Mission 4
In a crowd, polite people do things they'd never do alone. Why?
Make a guess: In a crowd, polite people do things they'd never do alone. Why?
Social influence · crowds and collective behaviour
Crowds can harm or help
Collective behaviour is how people act together as part of a group or crowd.
Anti-social crowd behaviour harms people or property, e.g. rioting, looting or fighting at a football match.
Pro-social crowd behaviour helps others, e.g. a crowd cheering on charity runners, or strangers working together to help in an emergency.
The same crowd processes can push behaviour either way.
Social influence · crowds and collective behaviour
Lost in the crowd
Deindividuation: losing your sense of personal identity in a crowd.
Anonymity (masks, uniforms, darkness, a big crowd) means you are unlikely to be identified, and responsibility feels shared.
With lower self-awareness, you follow the crowd's norms instead of your own standards.
The norms matter: in one study, anonymous people dressed in robes like the Ku Klux Klan gave stronger shocks than people dressed as nurses.
Social influence · crowds and collective behaviour
Social loafing
Social loafing: people put in less effort when working in a group than alone, because their own effort can't be identified.
E.g. people clapping or shouting in a group make less noise each than when they do it alone.
It is a social factor: crowds can make people less likely to help, as each person leaves it to others.
Social influence · crowds and collective behaviour
Culture
Culture is the shared values, norms and customs of a group.
Individualist cultures (e.g. the UK, the USA) value personal goals; collectivist cultures (e.g. China, Japan) value the group's goals.
Social loafing seems lower in collectivist cultures, where the group's success matters more.
Cultures differ in their norms for helping and aggression, so similar crowds can behave pro-socially in one culture and anti-socially in another.
Social influence · crowds and collective behaviour
Personality and morality
Locus of control: people with an internal locus (who feel in control of their actions) are less easily swept along by a crowd than those with an external locus.
Morality: people with a strong sense of right and wrong are less likely to join anti-social crowd behaviour and more likely to help.
Quick check
?At a night-time festival, Leo pulls on a face mask and joins others throwing bottles, something he would never do at school. Which explanation fits best?
Sort it
?Is each point a strength or a weakness of the explanation it mentions?
Tap a statement, then tap the group it belongs in. Then press Check.
Mission check
?In a crowd, polite people do things they'd never do alone. Why?
Being in a crowd can cause deindividuation. Feeling anonymous and sharing responsibility lowers self-awareness, so people follow the crowd's norms instead of their own. If those norms are anti-social, behaviour gets worse; if they are pro-social, it can get better. Personal factors, such as morality and locus of control, help some people resist.
Recap
Big ideas
Conformity is changing your behaviour or opinions to match a majority, even when the majority is clearly wrong.
Social factors (group size, anonymity, task difficulty) and dispositional factors (personality and expertise) affect how much people conform.
Obedience is following a direct order from an authority figure; symbols such as uniforms make an authority look legitimate.
Milgram's Agency theory: in the agentic state you feel the authority is responsible; authority, proximity and culture affect obedience. Adorno's Authoritarian Personality explains dispositional differences.
The bystander effect: people help less when others are present, because of diffusion of responsibility; the cost of helping also matters.
Dispositional factors such as similarity to the victim and expertise make some people more likely to help.
Piliavin's subway study: the ill (cane) victim was helped far more than the drunk victim, and crowded carriages did not reduce helping.
Crowds can produce pro-social or anti-social collective behaviour.
Deindividuation: anonymity and shared responsibility lower self-awareness, so people follow the crowd's norms.
Social factors: social loafing, deindividuation and culture. Dispositional factors: personality (locus of control) and morality.
🏆
Mini-lesson complete!
⭐⭐⭐
You've worked through Social Influence for AQA GCSE Psychology (8182). 🎉
Mission 1Seven people give the same wrong answer. Do you go along with them?
Mission 2A stranger in uniform gives you an order. Why is it so hard to say no?
Mission 3A man collapses on a train. Does a cane or a bottle change who helps?
Mission 4In a crowd, polite people do things they'd never do alone. Why?