← GCSE Psychology · Edexcel · GCSE Psychology revision
⭐ 0
Edexcel GCSE Psychology (1PS0) · Topic 5 Social Influence
Mini-Lesson

Social Influence

5 missions. Guess, learn, then check. Your place is saved.

  1. Mission 1Seven people give the same wrong answer. Do you go along with them?
  2. Mission 2A stranger in uniform gives you an order. Why is it so hard to say no?
  3. Mission 3A man collapses on a train. Does a cane or a bottle change who helps?
  4. Mission 4In a crowd, polite people do things they'd never do alone. Why?
  5. Mission 5Most people go along. A few refuse. What helps someone resist?
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

Asch's line card and the groupThe cardStandard lineABCThe group answers out loudAAAAAA??A
  • 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 study Social influence · conformity

Asch (1951)

Errors alone and with a wrong majorityAlone or with a group010203040under 1% errorsAlone (control)32% of critical trialsWith a wrong majoritywrong answers (%)
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

Group size and conforming answersGroup size and conforming010203040almost none1about 13%2about 32%3conforming answers (%)x: people giving the wrong answerMore than 3: little change
  • These are situational 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.
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?
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

Conformity and obedienceConformityObediencegroup pressuredirect order
  • 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 study Social influence · obedience

Milgram (1963)

Milgram set-upExperimenterTeacher(real participant)Shock generator15 V450 VLearner(actor)next room,behind a wallNo real shocks: the learner was an actor.
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

Autonomous to agentic stateAutonomousstate: I amresponsibleAgentic state: theyare responsibleresponsibilitymeets alegitimateauthorityagenticshift
  • 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

Milgram variationsObedience in three set-ups020406065%Original40%Learner in sameroom20.5%Orders byphonewent to 450 V (%)
  • 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.
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?
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

Diffusion of responsibilityOne bystanderIt's up to meSix bystandersEach thinks: Someone else will helpdiffusion of responsibility
  • 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 situational factor.
Social influence · bystander behaviour

Weighing up the cost

Costs of helping and not helpingdangerefforttimeembarrassmentCosts of helpingguiltblameCosts of not helping
  • 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 situational factor.
  • Piliavin et al.'s arousal: cost–reward model: seeing an emergency is upsetting, and people choose whatever reduces that feeling at the lowest cost.
Social influence · bystander behaviour

Who is more likely to help

  • Personal 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.
  • Other personal factors include the bystander's mood and gender.
Key study Social influence · bystander behaviour

Piliavin et al. (1969)

Piliavin et al. (1969)Piliavin et al. (1969)critical areavictim collapsesSeen from above: dots are passengers, blue squaresare observer seats.025507510095%Cane (ill)50%Drunktrials where help was given (%)
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?
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 chainIn a crowdAnonymity + shared responsibilityLower self-awarenessFollow the crowd's normsAnti-social normsharmPro-social normshelp
  • 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

Personality and morality

Locus of control continuumExternal locus ofcontrolInternal locus of control
  • 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.
Key study Social influence · crowds and collective behaviour

Haney, Banks and Zimbardo (1973)

Haney, Banks and Zimbardo (1973)Haney, Banks and Zimbardo (1973)CellCellCellGuards' roomYardGuards: 11Prisoners: 1021 students, randomly assigned. Guards: plain uniform,dark glasses. Prisoners: smock with a number.Planned: two weeksStopped after six daysFive prisoners released early
Aim
To see whether prison brutality comes from the personalities of guards and prisoners or from the situation.
Method
Mock prison in a Stanford University basement. 21 healthy male students (from 75 who answered an advert; paid $15 a day) were randomly assigned as 10 prisoners or 11 guards. Guards wore uniforms and dark glasses; prisoners wore smocks and numbers.
Results
Guards became hostile and abusive; prisoners became passive and distressed. Five prisoners were released early. Planned for two weeks, it was stopped after six days.
Conclusion
The situation, not personality, caused the behaviour; uniforms and anonymity deindividuated both groups.
Strength
Random allocation and screening make personality an unlikely cause.
Weakness
Serious distress to participants; small all-male student sample; guards may have been acting.
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?
Mission 5

Most people go along. A few refuse. What helps someone resist?

Make a guess: Most people go along. A few refuse. What helps someone resist?

Social influence · resisting and changing

Not alone

Social support: one allyEveryone agreesAAAAAAA?unanimous: hard to resistOne person disagreesAAAAAAB?one ally: much easierAsch ally: about 5% conformityTwo peers refuse: 10% obey (65% normally)
  • A unanimous majority or authority is hard to resist. One other person who refuses breaks the pressure: this is social support.
  • In Asch's line test, one ally giving the right answer cut conformity to about 5%.
  • In a Milgram variation, when two fellow "teachers" refused, only 10% went to 450 volts, compared with 65% normally.
  • A resister shows refusing is possible, so you don't stand out alone.
Social influence · resisting and changing

Preventing blind obedience

  • Blind obedience: obeying without asking whether the order is right.
  • Education: people who know about obedience research are more likely to question orders.
  • Disobedient role models: seeing others refuse makes refusing easier.
  • Personal responsibility: reminding people they are responsible for their actions keeps them in the autonomous state.
  • Question legitimacy: organisations can encourage staff to ask whether an order is right, and to speak up safely.
Social influence · resisting and changing

Social and cultural issues

  • Society: a community of people who share laws, institutions and customs.
  • A social issue is a problem that affects many people in a society, e.g. crime, riots or prejudice.
  • Culture: the shared beliefs, values, norms and customs of a group, passed between generations.
  • Social influence research helps explain social issues, e.g. deindividuation in riots, or the bystander effect when nobody helps.
  • Findings from one culture may not apply in another.
Quick check
?In a meeting, a manager tells staff to skip a safety check to finish faster. Which situation makes Sam most likely to refuse?
Quick check
?A hospital wants to stop nurses blindly following unsafe instructions. Which step keeps nurses most in the autonomous state?
Sort it
?Is each point a strength or a weakness of using social influence research to explain social issues?

Tap a statement, then tap the group it belongs in. Then press Check.

Mission check

?Most people go along. A few refuse. What helps someone resist?
Recap

Big ideas

  • Conformity is changing your behaviour or opinions to match a majority, even when the majority is clearly wrong.
  • Situational factors (group size, anonymity, task difficulty) and dispositional factors (personality, such as self-esteem and locus of control) affect how much people conform.
  • Key question, how do others affect you? A majority can change what you say, even about something obvious.
  • Obedience is following a direct order from an authority figure; symbols such as uniforms make an authority look legitimate.
  • Key question, how do others affect you? The situation (a legitimate authority, how close the authority and victim are) and personality (the authoritarian personality) both affect obedience.
  • The bystander effect: people help less when others are present, because of diffusion of responsibility; the cost of helping also matters.
  • Personal factors such as similarity to the victim and expertise make some people more likely to help.
  • Key question, how do others affect you? Piliavin et al. (1969) found more help for an ill victim than a drunk one, and no diffusion of responsibility, supporting the arousal: cost–reward model.
  • 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.
  • Key question, how do others affect you? Haney, Banks and Zimbardo (1973) showed uniforms and roles changed behaviour within days.
  • Social support: one other person who resists makes it much easier to resist a majority or an authority.
  • Ways to prevent blind obedience: education, disobedient role models, personal responsibility and questioning legitimacy.
  • Debate, social and cultural issues: social influence research explains social issues such as riots and bystander apathy, but findings from one culture may not apply in another.
🏆

Mini-lesson complete!

⭐⭐⭐

You've worked through Social Influence for Edexcel GCSE Psychology (1PS0). 🎉

  1. Mission 1Seven people give the same wrong answer. Do you go along with them?
  2. Mission 2A stranger in uniform gives you an order. Why is it so hard to say no?
  3. Mission 3A man collapses on a train. Does a cane or a bottle change who helps?
  4. Mission 4In a crowd, polite people do things they'd never do alone. Why?
  5. Mission 5Most people go along. A few refuse. What helps someone resist?

Your stars: 0 / 0

Next: test yourself in the Verify stage.

📣 Smashed it? Share your score

Challenge a mate to beat your stars, or show a parent how you got on.

→ Back to GCSE Psychology · Edexcel

Specification points and sources for this lesson are listed at the bottom of the page.

Sources (24)

The specification points and sources behind this lesson.

  1. 1 Pearson Edexcel GCSE Psychology 1PS0 spec Issue 1, 5.1.1, 5.1.3 (specs/pdftxt/edexcel-1ps0-spec.txt, line 620)
  2. 2 Pearson Edexcel GCSE Psychology 1PS0 spec Issue 1, 5.1.1, 5.1.4 (specs/pdftxt/edexcel-1ps0-spec.txt, line 620)
  3. 3 Pearson Edexcel GCSE Psychology 1PS0 spec Issue 1, 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1 (specs/pdftxt/edexcel-1ps0-spec.txt, line 620)
  4. 4 Pearson Edexcel GCSE Psychology 1PS0 spec Issue 1, 5.1.1, 5.1.5, 5.2.2 (specs/pdftxt/edexcel-1ps0-spec.txt, line 620)
  5. 5 Pearson Edexcel GCSE Psychology 1PS0 spec Issue 1, 5.1.6, 5.3.1 (specs/pdftxt/edexcel-1ps0-spec.txt, line 650)
  6. 6 Simply Psychology, "Asch Conformity Line Experiment", https://www.simplypsychology.org/asch-conformity.html
  7. 7 tutor2u, "Conformity: Asch (1951)", https://www.tutor2u.net/psychology/reference/conformity-asch-1951
  8. 8 Themantic Education, "Key Study: Conformity – Asch (1955)", https://www.themantic-education.com/ibpsych/2016/10/04/key-study-conformity-asch-1955/
  9. 9 TutorChase, "Variables affecting conformity in Asch's research", https://www.tutorchase.com/notes/aqa-a-level/psychology/1-1-3-variables-affecting-conformity-in-aschs-research
  10. 10 Pruessner et al. (2005) "Self-esteem, locus of control, hippocampal volume, and cortisol regulation in young and old adulthood", NeuroImage; abstract at https://vivo.weill.cornell.edu/display/pubid16023372
  11. 11 Simply Psychology, "Milgram Shock Experiment", https://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html
  12. 12 tutor2u, "Explanations for obedience: Milgram (1963)", https://www.tutor2u.net/psychology/reference/explanations-for-obedience-milgram-1963 and TutorChase, "Situational variables affecting obedience in Milgram's research", https://www.tutorchase.com/notes/aqa-a-level/psychology/1-2-2-situational-variables-affecting-obedience-in-milgrams-research
  13. 13 Vaia, "Bickman Obedience Study", https://www.hellovaia.com/explanations/psychology/social-context-of-behaviour/bickman-obedience-study/
  14. 14 Brainscape card set "Bickman (1974) study into the power of uniform on obedience levels", https://brainscape.com/flashcards/bickman-1974-study-into-the-power-of-uni-13504656/packs/20905362; FIU summary of the paper, https://discovery.fiu.edu/display/pub116134
  15. 15 Simply Psychology, "Piliavin (1969) Subway Samaritan Study", https://www.simplypsychology.org/piliavin.html
  16. 16 StudyMind, "Piliavin (Brain)", https://studymind.co.uk/notes/piliavin-brain/
  17. 17 StudyMind, "Haney, Banks and Zimbardo (Social)", https://studymind.co.uk/notes/haney-banks-and-zimbardo-social/
  18. 18 Cognito, "Haney et al. (1973): Prisoners & Guards", https://cognito.org/courses/alevel/psychology/ocr/notes/aWV6aWRtdXI/14.12-haney-et-al.-1973-prisoners-guards and Simply Psychology, https://www.simplypsychology.org/zimbardo.html
  19. 19 Morrell et al. (2011) NatCen, "The August riots in England: understanding the involvement of young people", https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/60531/The_20August_20Riots_20in_20England_20_pdf__201mb_.pdf; GOV.UK summary https://www.gov.uk/government/news/independent-riot-motivation-findings-published
  20. 20 Koenigs et al. (2007) "Damage to the prefrontal cortex increases utilitarian moral judgements", Nature, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17377536/
  21. 21 tutor2u, "Aggression: evaluating deindividuation", https://www.tutor2u.net/psychology/reference/aggression-evaluating-deindividuation
  22. 22 Simply Psychology, Asch (https://www.simplypsychology.org/asch-conformity.html) and Milgram (https://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html)
  23. 23 tutor2u, "Resistance to social influence: social support", https://www.tutor2u.net/psychology/reference/resistance-to-social-influence-social-support
  24. 24 "Investigating changes in mental illness stigma and discrimination after the Time to Change programme in England", BJPsych Open, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11698152