Welcome to Social Psychology: Understanding You and the Group!

Hello future psychologist! This chapter, Topic A: Social Psychology, is incredibly exciting because it focuses on something we all experience every single day: how the people around us, and society itself, influence our thoughts and actions.

Don't worry if some concepts seem a bit abstract at first. We’ll break down big ideas, like why people follow orders even if they disagree, and why prejudice exists. By the end, you'll see the world through a new, socially-aware lens!

1. What is Social Psychology?

Social Psychology is the scientific study of how people's thoughts, feelings, and behaviours are influenced by the actual, imagined, or implied presence of others.

Key Concepts in the Social Approach

  • Situational Factors: This is a core idea. Social psychologists emphasize that external circumstances (the situation, the environment, the presence of other people) often dictate our behaviour more strongly than our individual personalities (dispositional factors).
  • Group Influence: We are influenced by the groups we belong to and the roles we play within them (e.g., student, employee, son/daughter).
  • Social Norms: The unwritten rules about how to behave in certain situations (e.g., waiting in line, staying quiet in a library).

Analogy: Think of a river. Your personality (disposition) determines the type of boat you are, but the river (situation) determines where you go and how fast!

Quick Review: The Social Approach

The core idea is that the situation matters most. Behaviour is heavily determined by social context, not just individual traits.

2. Obedience to Authority: Stanley Milgram (1963)

Obedience is a form of social influence where an individual acts in response to a direct order from another person, who is usually a perceived figure of authority. This differs from conformity, which involves following peers without a direct command.

Milgram's Classic Study of Obedience (The 'Shock' Study)

Milgram wanted to understand why ordinary people could commit horrific acts under the command of authority (inspired by the Nazi atrocities of WWII).

A. Procedure and Setup (Step-by-Step)

Milgram recruited 40 male participants (Pps) through newspaper ads, telling them it was a study about memory and learning.

  1. The Pps met the Experimenter (a stern authority figure in a lab coat) and another participant (a Confederate – someone secretly working for Milgram) who acted as the 'Learner'.
  2. Roles were rigged: The true Pp was always the Teacher. The Confederate was always the Learner.
  3. The Learner was strapped into an electric chair in an adjoining room. The Teacher was told to administer an increasingly painful electric shock every time the Learner made a mistake on a word-pair task.
  4. The shock generator ranged from 15 volts (Slight Shock) up to 450 volts (Danger: Severe Shock/XXX). Crucially: the shocks were fake.
  5. If the Teacher hesitated, the Experimenter would use predetermined Prods (e.g., "Please continue," or "The experiment requires that you continue.").
B. Key Findings

Milgram asked experts beforehand what percentage of people would go to 450V. They predicted less than 3%. The results were shocking:

  • 100% of participants went up to 300 volts (the point where the Learner pounded on the wall).
  • 65% of participants continued right up to the maximum shock level of 450 volts.

Did you know? Despite following orders, the Pps showed signs of extreme distress (sweating, trembling, nervous laughter), confirming the conflict between their personal conscience and the demands of the authority figure.

C. Conclusion

Milgram concluded that ordinary people are surprisingly obedient to perceived legitimate authority figures, even when commanded to act in a way that goes against their moral conscience. This obedience is largely due to the power of the situation.

D. Ethical Issues (Very Important!)

Milgram's study, while influential, is highly controversial due to several ethical breaches:

  • Deception: Pps were lied to about the true purpose of the study (memory vs. obedience) and the nature of the shocks.
  • Lack of Informed Consent: Because of the deception, participants could not truly agree to take part knowing the real risks.
  • Protection from Harm (Psychological): Participants experienced extreme stress, anxiety, and internal conflict.
  • Right to Withdraw: The Prods made it difficult for Pps to feel they could leave, potentially violating their right to withdraw.

Common Mistake: Do not confuse Milgram's study with Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE). Milgram is about Obedience to Authority; Zimbardo is about Roles and Deindividuation.

3. Factors Affecting Obedience (Situational Variables)

Milgram carried out variations of his original experiment to see what increased or decreased obedience. These variations demonstrate the power of situational factors.

A. Proximity (How close the Authority/Victim are)

  • Teacher and Learner in the Same Room (Closer Proximity to Victim): Obedience dropped to 40%. It is harder to hurt someone if you can see their pain.
  • Experimenter Gives Orders by Phone (Lower Proximity to Authority): Obedience dropped significantly to 20.5%. The authority figure must be present to maintain control.

B. Location (The Setting)

The original study took place at Yale University, a prestigious setting that implies authority and legitimacy.

  • Variation in Run-down Office Block: When the experiment moved to a less legitimate, run-down office building in Bridgeport, obedience dropped to 47.5%. The perceived legitimacy of the institution affects obedience levels.

C. Uniform (Symbols of Authority)

The Experimenter’s lab coat symbolized scientific authority.

  • Variation: Experimenter is an Ordinary Member of the Public: When the Experimenter was replaced by an "ordinary man" in casual clothes, obedience plummeted to only 20%. Uniforms confer a sense of legitimate authority.
Memory Aid: Factors in Obedience

Remember the three main factors with the acronym L.P.U.:
Location (Legitimacy of setting)
Proximity (Closeness of Learner/Experimenter)
Uniform (Symbol of authority)

4. Understanding Prejudice and Discrimination

Obedience focuses on external pressure; prejudice focuses on how we perceive and treat different social groups.

Key Definitions (Crucial to keep separate!)

Understanding the difference between these terms is vital:

  • Stereotype: A generalized, often oversimplified belief about a particular category of people (e.g., "All people from X country are good at math."). This is a cognitive component (a thought).
  • Prejudice: An unjustifiable, usually negative attitude towards a group and its members. It involves feeling (affective component) based on stereotypes. (e.g., "I don't like people from X country.")
  • Discrimination: The actual unjustifiable negative behaviour or action directed towards a group or individual because of their group membership. (e.g., Refusing to hire someone from X country.)

Relationship: Stereotypes lead to Prejudice, which then manifests as Discrimination.

Explanations for Prejudice

A. Realistic Conflict Theory (RFT)

RFT suggests that prejudice arises when two or more groups are in competition for scarce resources (e.g., jobs, land, money, power).

  • Key Idea: Competition breeds hostility. The winning group views the losing group negatively (prejudice) to justify excluding them from the resource.
  • Example: Two neighbouring communities vying for the last available water source during a drought.
  • Supporting Study: Sherif’s Robbers Cave Experiment (demonstrated that intergroup conflict arose when competition was introduced, but could be reduced through shared goals).
B. Social Identity Theory (SIT)

Developed by Tajfel and Turner, SIT explains that prejudice comes from our desire to enhance our self-esteem by belonging to a successful group.

  1. Social Categorisation: We naturally categorize people into groups, including our own (the In-Group) and others (the Out-Group).
  2. Social Identification: We adopt the identity, norms, and behaviours of the In-Group.
  3. Social Comparison: We compare our In-Group favourably to the Out-Group to achieve Positive Distinctiveness (making our group look better). This leads to In-Group bias and Out-Group hostility/prejudice.

Analogy: If you wear your school sports team's colours and cheer against the rival team, you are experiencing Social Comparison to boost your Social Identity! You don't know the other team personally, but you favour your own.

Reducing Prejudice: The Contact Hypothesis

Proposed by Allport (1954), the Contact Hypothesis suggests that increased contact between antagonistic (opposing) groups can reduce prejudice. However, this only works under specific conditions:

  • Equal Status: Both groups must have the same status in the contact situation (e.g., neither group should feel superior or subordinate).
  • Shared Goals (Superordinate Goals): The groups must work together towards a common goal that requires mutual effort (like fixing a common problem).
  • Authority Support: Leaders, law, or custom must support and enforce the contact.
Key Takeaway: RFT vs. SIT

RFT (Realistic Conflict Theory) is about competition for resources.
SIT (Social Identity Theory) is about self-esteem and favouring your own group.

5. Research Methods in Social Psychology

The Social Approach relies heavily on studying behaviour in controlled situations (like Milgram's lab study) or natural environments (like Sherif’s field study).

A. Laboratory Experiments

Social psychologists often use lab experiments to establish cause-and-effect relationships (e.g., Milgram).

  • Advantage: High control over extraneous variables, increasing internal validity.
  • Disadvantage: Results may lack ecological validity (they might not reflect real-life behaviour) due to the artificial environment.

B. Field Experiments and Observations

These methods study behaviour in a natural setting (e.g., a school, a park, a workplace).

  • Advantage: High ecological validity; participants act more naturally.
  • Disadvantage: Harder to control extraneous variables; ethical issues if participants are unaware they are being studied.

Don't forget: Ethical considerations (as seen in Milgram) are paramount when studying social behaviour, especially concerning deception and participant safety.

Chapter Summary and Next Steps

You have successfully tackled the core concepts of Social Psychology! Remember that this approach teaches us that we are all deeply interconnected, and the power of the situation should never be underestimated.

  • Milgram showed how powerful authority figures are, even against our moral compass.
  • Obedience is affected by LPU (Location, Proximity, Uniform).
  • Prejudice is an attitude fueled by our need for resources (RFT) or our desire for self-esteem (SIT).

Keep practicing your definitions and use the examples of Milgram and the prejudice theories to structure your exam answers. Good luck!