Scientific Inquiry

1
Social Psychology
2
Types of Social Influence

• Compliance
• ? tendency to agree to do things requested by
  others
• Conformity
• Obedience

3
Conformity

• The altering of ones behavior to match those of
  others
• Normative social influence ? people conform to
  social norms (i.e., expected standards of
  conduct)
• Informational social influence ? look to others
  for information about how to respond in specific
  situations

4
Normative Social Influence
5
Informational Social Influence
6
In-group Inter-group Relations

• In-group
• The group to which we belong
• Share similar values, beliefs, and goals
• Through interaction, develop group norms that
  govern behavior
• Involves strong sense of commitment to and
  preference for the group and, by extension, its
  members
• Out-group
• Those groups to which we do not belong

7
In-group Inter-group Relations

• Inter-group relations
• Functional relationships between two or more
  groups and their respective members
• Inter-group behavior
• Actions of individuals belonging to one group
  when they interact, collectively or individually,
  with another group or its members in terms of
  their group membership

8
In-group Inter-group Relations

• Stereotypes
• Schemas that allow for easy and efficient
  organization of information about people based on
  their membership in certain groups
• Prejudice
• Affective response associated with stereotypes
  usually involves negative judgments about people
  based on their group membership
• Discrimination
• inappropriate or unjustified treatment of people
  based solely on their group membership

9
Sherif Sherif (1969)

• Study of
• In-group/ Out-group formation
• Inter-group relationships/ conflict
• Reduction of inter-group conflict

10
Sherif Sherif (1969)

• Participants
• Relatively homogenous sample of 11-12 year old
  boys at two isolated summer camps
• Summer camps completely at the disposal of the
  research team

11
In-group Formation

• Spontaneous Interpersonal Choices
• All boys arrived at the same time and were housed
  together in one large bunkhouse
• Sociometric choices asked to indicate who was
  their best friend
• Arbitrary division into two groups
• Split into two equal groups housed in separate
  cabins
• About 2/3rd of best friends were separated

12
Results
Before Arbitrary Split
After Arbitrary Split
13
In-group Formation

• Matched groups on specified criteria
• Boys divided into two, roughly equal, groups
  based on size and skills
• Exp. III ? two groups of boys arrived on separate
  buses and were unaware of one another until the
  next study stage

14
Conclusions

• Cooperative activities aimed toward desirable
  goals is sufficient for in-group formation
• Hierarchy is established
• Norms develop
• In-groups form even when there is no awareness of
  an out-group

15
Inter-Group Conflict

• Win-Lose competition
• Tournament involving a series of team
  competitions
• Winning team received a trophy and each
  individual member won highly desirable prizes
• Planned frustration of In-groups
• Frustrating situation for one group that was
  planned by staff so that it appeared to be caused
  by the other group

16
Results

• Sustained competition toward goals that each
  group desired, but only one could achieve
  resulted in
• An increase in in-group solidarity and pride
  (especially among the winning group)
• Hostility and aggression toward the out-group,
  which continued to escalate over time
• Social distance between groups that was justified
  by negative images (stereotypes) of and prejudice
  toward the out-groups

17
Inter-group Cooperation

• Phase I ? Series of situations involving contact
  between groups but no interdependence
• E.g., going to the movies eating in the same
  dining room
• Result ? served as opportunities to express
  hostility and aggression

18
Inter-group Cooperation

• Phase II? Have both groups work together toward
  superordinate goals
• Superordinate goals ? goals that have high appeal
  for both groups but that neither group can
  accomplish alone
• Result ? Cooperation on a series of superordinate
  goals resulted in a decrease in hostility and
  sociometric choices that transcended group status

19
Why do people conform to group norms?Why do
people violate larger societal norms and personal
standards?

• DISPOSITION OR SITUATION?

20
Why do People Conform?

• Self ? mental representation of ones personal
  experience conscious recognition that one is
  separate and unique from others
• Self-awareness? A state when the sense of self is
  the object of awareness
• Social comparison ? when the self is evaluated in
  contrast to others
• Impression management ? how we exhibit our
  personal characteristics before an audience

21
Why do People Violate Norms?

• Anonymity ? when ones identity will not be known
• i.e., individual cannot be held accountable for
  his/her actions
• Deindividuation ? when people are not self-aware
  and therefore do not attend to their own personal
  standards or those of the larger society

22
Bystander Apathy

• Bystander apathy ? failure to offer help by those
  who observe someone in need
• Diffusion of responsibility expectation that
  others will offer assistance
• E.g., Kitty Genovese

23
Stanford Prisoner and Guard Experiment

• Phillip Zimbardo

24
Prisoner Guard Experiment

• 22 male students from Stanford University
• Extensively screened selected those who were
  most mature and least involved in antisocial
  behavior
• Randomly assigned to be either a prisoner or a
  prison guard

25
Prisoner Guard Experiment

• Uniforms
• Guards? Plain khaki shirts and trousers, a
  whistle, police night stick, and reflecting
  sunglasses
• Prisoners ? loose fitting smock with ID number,
  no underwear, light chain and lock on one ankle,
  rubber sandals and a nylon stocking cap

26
Prisoner Guard Experiment

• Guards
• Became more deprecating as time progressed
• Did not inflict physical harm but did engage in
  verbal abuse
• Planned privileges were never allowed
• Often withheld bathroom visits and meals instead
  used these as rewards for good behavior
• Punishment became more extreme over time

27
Prisoner Guard Experiment

• Prisoners
• Increasingly expressed intentions to do harm to
  others or self
• 5 out of 9 were released because of extreme
  emotional reactions (Depression, crying, rage,
  and acute anxiety)
• Of the remaining prisoners, only two were
  unwilling to forfeit their compensation in order
  to be paroled

28
Key Points

• Prison Guards
• Deindividuated
• wearing uniform
• perception of being unobserved lead to worse
  treatment of prisoners
• Complete power over another individual
• Power is rewarding those with power had high
  status and respect
• All demands were followed unquestioningly or
  could be met with sanctions
• Sense of power intensified in situations of threat

29
Prisoner Guard Experiment

• Pathology of Power
• Being a guard carried with it social status and
  above all, the freedom to exercise an
  unprecedented degree of control over the lives of
  other human beings. (pp. 13-14)

30
Key Points

• Prisoners
• Deindividuated -- Loss of personal identity
• Loss of control leading to learned helplessness
• Learned helplessness when in a situation where
  punishment is uncontrollable, exhibit depression
  and passivity i.e., they learned to be helpless
• Dependent on guards for most basic needs
• Emasculation
• Dressed in smocks with no undergarments
• Independence or rebellion quickly severely
  punished

31
Prisoner Guard Experiment

• Pathological Prisoner Syndrome
• At first they exhibited disbelief at the total
  invasion of privacy Their next response was
  rebellion They then tried to work within the
  system by setting up an elected grievance
  committee When that failed, individual
  self-interests emerged leading to social
  disintegration which gave rise to feelings of
  isolation half the prisoners coped by becoming
  sick as a passive way of demanding attention
  and help. As the days wore on, the model prisoner
  reaction was one of passivity, dependence, and
  flattened affect.

32
Obedience

• The tendency to follow orders given by a
  legitimate authority
• E.g., Stanley Milgrams work

33
Obedience

• Showed obvious signs of tension (nervous
  laughter)
• Psychiatrists predicted that fewer than 1 would
  deliver all of the shocks
• However, 50 delivered all of the shocks

34

• Distance of victim another room or in the same
  room subject had to place hand on shock plate
  negative correlation between distance between
  subject and victim and of shocks give
• Distance of experimenter obedience dropped
  sharply as experimenter was distant than when
  close (psychological distance)
• Less obedience in bridgeport than at yale
• When with defectors 90 broke off.