Psychology (9685) | Social psychology

Social Psychology: Understanding the Power of the Group (9685)

Welcome to Social Psychology! This is one of the most relatable and fascinating topics in the syllabus because it explores how the presence of others affects our thoughts, feelings, and actions. Essentially, we are looking at how people influence each other.
Don't worry if you sometimes find yourself doing things just because everyone else is—this chapter explains the psychological reasons why! We will cover why we conform, why we obey, and how some people manage to resist social pressure.

3.1.2 Conformity: Fitting In or Changing Your Mind?

Conformity is a type of social influence where an individual changes their behaviour or beliefs due to real or imagined group pressure. It's about adjusting to a social norm.

Types of Conformity

It's important to distinguish between *why* someone conforms and *how deeply* that conformity affects their private beliefs. The syllabus focuses on two main types:

1. Compliance:
   • This is the weakest form of conformity.
   • You adjust your public behaviour and opinions to fit in with the group, but you do not change your private beliefs.
   • It is usually temporary and stops when the group pressure is removed.
   • Analogy: Wearing a specific uniform or style of clothing only when you are at school or work, but changing immediately when you get home. You comply with the rule publicly, but you don't privately believe that uniform is the best outfit for you.
2. Internalisation:
   • This is the deepest form of conformity.
   • You change both your public behaviour and your private beliefs.
   • The belief or behaviour becomes truly adopted and is usually permanent, even when the group is absent.
   • Analogy: You join a new religious group (or political party) and genuinely adopt their core values and beliefs, even when you are alone. You have internalised their worldview.

Quick Review Tip: Think of Compliance as "Coping" (doing it publicly) and Internalisation as "Inhaling" (taking the belief into yourself).

Explanations for Conformity

Psychologists propose two main reasons (influences) why people conform:

1. Normative Social Influence (NSI)

NSI is conforming to be liked, accepted, and to fit in. It relates to our fundamental human need for social companionship.

• Normative means relating to 'norms'—the standard rules of behaviour in a group.
• We conform publicly (often leading to compliance) to avoid rejection, embarrassment, or ridicule.
• Example: Laughing at a joke you didn't really understand because everyone else is laughing.

2. Informational Social Influence (ISI)

ISI is conforming to be right. This happens when we are unsure about the correct way to behave or the correct answer, so we look to others whom we believe have better information.

• This often occurs in ambiguous (unclear) situations or when the task is difficult.
• It often leads to internalisation because you genuinely believe the information provided by the group is correct.
• Example: When travelling to a new city, you see a massive queue outside a restaurant, so you assume it must be good and decide to join the queue. You are using the group's behaviour as information.

Key Takeaway: Conformity is driven by two key needs: the need to fit in (Normative) and the need to be correct (Informational).

Asch's Variables Affecting Conformity (1951)

The psychologist Solomon Asch conducted a classic line-judgement study to investigate the extent to which people would conform to the opinions of others, even when the answer was obviously wrong. Critically, he manipulated different variables to see how they changed the rates of conformity.

Key Variables Investigated by Asch:

1. Group Size

The Finding: Conformity increases with group size, but only up to a point.

• With 1 or 2 confederates (people secretly working for the experimenter), conformity was low.
• When the group size reached 3 confederates, conformity jumped significantly (about 32%).
• Adding more confederates beyond 3 made very little difference.

Interpretation: A small majority is sufficient to exert maximum pressure. You don't need a huge crowd, just a small, cohesive group, especially when Normative Social Influence is at play (the fear of being the only odd one out).

2. Unanimity (Agreement)

The Finding: The presence of just one dissenter (someone who breaks the group consensus) significantly reduces conformity.

• If one confederate was instructed to give the correct answer, conformity dropped from 32% to about 5.5%.
• The dissenter provides social support, making the participant feel less isolated. This breaks the unanimous front.

Interpretation: The most critical factor in conformity pressure is the group being completely unified. Even if the dissenter gives a *different* wrong answer, it still reduces conformity because the participant is no longer alone.

3. Task Difficulty

The Finding: As the line judgment task was made more difficult (the lines were made more similar in length), conformity increased.

• When the answer is unclear, people rely more on the group for guidance.

Interpretation: Increased task difficulty leads to higher rates of conformity because the participant experiences Informational Social Influence. They genuinely doubt their own judgment and assume the group must be right.

3.1.2 Obedience: Following Orders

Obedience is a form of social influence where an individual follows a direct order, usually from a person perceived to be in a position of authority. Obedience is different from conformity because it involves a hierarchy of power.

Explanations for Obedience

1. Agentic State

The term Agentic State (coined by Milgram) describes a mental state where an individual feels no personal responsibility for their actions. Instead, they believe they are acting as an agent for an authority figure.

• Agent means acting on behalf of someone else.
• In this state, moral strain is reduced because the person shifts the responsibility onto the authority figure ("I was just following orders").

The opposite of the agentic state is the Autonomous State, where a person feels free to act according to their own principles and feels responsible for their actions. The shift from autonomy to agency is called the Agentic Shift.

2. Legitimacy of Authority

For a person to enter the agentic state, they must perceive the person giving the orders as having Legitimate Authority.

• We live in hierarchical societies (schools, police, military). We are taught from a young age to accept that people in certain positions (like teachers or doctors) have the right to tell us what to do.
• This authority is legitimate because we trust it (or fear it) and we surrender some independence to the authority figure.
• Example: A traffic warden telling you to stop is legitimate authority, whereas a random person shouting at you to stop is not.

Milgram's Situational Variables Affecting Obedience (1963)

Stanley Milgram’s famous experiments investigated how far people would go in obeying an instruction, even if it involved harming another person. He found that changing the setting (situation) had a massive impact on obedience rates.

Key Situational Variables Investigated by Milgram:

1. Proximity

Proximity refers to the physical distance between the teacher (participant) and the learner (confederate), and between the teacher and the experimenter (authority figure).

• Teacher and Learner Proximity: When the teacher and learner were in the same room, obedience dropped from 65% (baseline) to 40%. When the teacher had to force the learner’s hand onto an ‘electrode plate’ (Touch Proximity variation), obedience dropped further to 30%.
• Teacher and Experimenter Proximity: When the experimenter gave instructions over the phone (Experimenter Absent variation), obedience dropped to 20.5%.

Interpretation: Decreased proximity to the authority figure reduces their Legitimacy of Authority, making it easier for the participant to resist orders and revert to the autonomous state. Increased proximity to the victim increases empathy, making the agentic shift harder.

2. Location

Location refers to the environment in which the study took place.

• The original study was conducted at the highly reputable Yale University (a prestigious, authoritative setting). Obedience was 65%.
• When Milgram moved the study to a run-down, ordinary office building in a different town (a lower-status setting), obedience dropped to 47.5%.

Interpretation: The institutional setting (Yale) conveyed high Legitimacy of Authority, increasing trust and obedience. The ordinary office block lowered the perceived power and legitimacy of the commands.

Key Takeaway: Obedience is maximized when authority is legitimate, proximity to the authority figure is high, and proximity to the victim is low.

3.1.2 Explanations of Resistance to Social Influence

While social influence is powerful, people are not passive puppets. Many individuals resist pressure to conform or obey. Psychologists explain this resistance through two main factors: Social Support and Locus of Control.

1. Social Support

Social support refers to the presence of others who resist the pressures to conform or obey.

Resistance to Conformity:

• As seen in Asch's study on unanimity, the presence of a dissenter (someone else giving the correct answer) significantly reduces conformity.
• This is effective because the dissenter provides a model of resistance and breaks the unanimous power of the majority, making the individual feel more confident in their own judgment.

Resistance to Obedience:

• In Milgram’s variations, when the participant was paired with two other confederates who refused to continue shocking the learner, obedience rates dropped dramatically (to just 10%).
• The presence of disobedient peers challenges the Legitimacy of Authority and makes it easier for the person to shift back to the Autonomous State.

2. Locus of Control (LOC)

Locus of Control is a concept developed by Julian Rotter. It describes the extent to which individuals believe they have control over the events in their lives.

Internal Locus of Control (Internals)

• Individuals with an Internal LOC believe they are primarily responsible for what happens to them (they control their destiny).
• Example: "I got a high mark because I studied hard."
• Resistance: Internals are more likely to resist social influence because they rely on their own judgments and beliefs, making them more confident, achievement-oriented, and less reliant on others' opinions.

External Locus of Control (Externals)

• Individuals with an External LOC believe that outside forces, luck, or fate determine what happens to them.
• Example: "I failed the exam because the teacher marked unfairly, or I had bad luck."
• Conformity: Externals are less likely to take responsibility and are more likely to be influenced by others, believing that they cannot change the outcome anyway.

Memory Trick: Think of an Internal LOC person as having the control switch inside them, while an External LOC person has the control switch outside, operated by external forces.

Key Takeaway: People resist social influence either by having Social Support (a model of resistance) or by having a strong Internal Locus of Control (a personality trait that makes them feel responsible for their own actions).