Social Influence

In Asch's (1951) line-judgement studies, conformity to the obviously incorrect majority is best explained as which type of conformity?

• ACompliance, driven by normative social influence to avoid rejection✓
• BInternalisation, because participants genuinely changed their private beliefs
• CIdentification, because participants admired the confederates
• DInformational social influence, because the task was highly ambiguous

Answer: The line task was unambiguous, so participants knew the majority was wrong but went along publicly to fit in and avoid disapproval. This is compliance driven by normative social influence; their private view was unchanged, ruling out internalisation.

Asch found that conformity DROPPED markedly under which of the following variations?

• AIncreasing group size from one confederate to three
• BMaking the comparison lines more similar in length (greater task difficulty)
• CIntroducing a single dissenting confederate who broke the unanimity✓
• DAsking participants to answer out loud rather than in writing

Answer: When one confederate dissented, unanimity was broken and conformity fell from about 33% to around 5.5% (about 9% if the dissenter gave a different wrong answer). Greater task difficulty raises conformity, and beyond about three confederates adding more people makes little further difference.

Which finding from Zimbardo's (1973) Stanford Prison Experiment best supports conformity to social roles?

• AParticipants refused to adopt their assigned roles, so Zimbardo had to reassign the guards and prisoners several times
• BGuards became increasingly cruel and prisoners became passive, despite random allocation to roles✓
• CPrisoners and guards behaved identically because personality, not the situation, drove behaviour
• DThe study ran its full 14 days (as planned) with no adverse effects

Answer: Roles were assigned at random, yet participants rapidly conformed to them: guards grew abusive and prisoners became submissive and distressed, leading Zimbardo to end the study after six days. This illustrates the power of social roles and situational forces.

In Milgram's (1963) baseline obedience study, what percentage of participants administered the maximum 450-volt shock?

• A35%
• B50%
• C100%
• D65%✓

Answer: In the original study, 65% (26 of 40 male participants) continued to the maximum 450 volts. 100% continued to at least 300 volts, but the headline full-obedience figure is 65%.

Across Milgram's situational variations, obedience was LOWEST in which condition?

• AWhen the experiment was moved to a run-down office block in Bridgeport
• BWhen the teacher had to force the learner's hand onto a shock plate (touch proximity)
• CWhen the experimenter gave instructions by telephone from another room✓
• DWhen the teacher only had to instruct an assistant who delivered the shock

Answer: When the experimenter left the room and gave orders by phone, obedience dropped to around 20.5% as the authority figure's proximity fell. Touch proximity reduced it to about 30%, and the run-down location to roughly 47.5%; the reduced proximity of a remote authority produced the lowest figure of these.

According to agentic state theory, a person obeys a destructive order because they:

• ASee themselves as an agent carrying out another's wishes, shifting responsibility to the authority✓
• BHave a strongly internal locus of control, and therefore feel personally responsible for the harm they cause
• CHave internalised the moral values of the authority figure, so the order matches their own conscience
• DAre dispositionally submissive because of an authoritarian personality (Adorno)

Answer: In the agentic state, individuals no longer see themselves as responsible for their actions; they act as an agent for an authority figure, displacing moral responsibility upward. This contrasts with the autonomous state.

Adorno et al. (1950) linked obedience and prejudice to the authoritarian personality. Which scale and key characteristic are correctly paired?

• AThe F-scale, measuring a tendency towards rigid thinking and submission to authority✓
• BThe L-scale, measuring an external locus of control and a tendency to blame outside forces
• CThe MMPI (a personality inventory), measuring internalisation of minority views
• DThe F-scale, measuring high tolerance of ambiguity and flexible attitudes

Answer: Adorno developed the F-scale (potentiality for fascism). High scorers showed rigid, black-and-white thinking, submissiveness to those above them, hostility to those below, and intolerance of ambiguity. Pairing the F-scale with high tolerance of ambiguity and flexible attitudes inverts these traits.

Research suggests that people with an internal locus of control are more likely to resist obedience. This is because they:

• ABelieve outcomes are determined by luck and external forces beyond their control
• BTake personal responsibility for their actions and rely less on others' approval✓
• CAre more susceptible to normative social influence
• DAlways have an authoritarian personality

Answer: Internals attribute outcomes to their own behaviour, take responsibility for their actions, and are less reliant on others' approval, making them more able to resist pressure to obey or conform. Externals attribute outcomes to luck or fate.

Moscovici et al.'s (1969) blue-green slide study demonstrated minority influence. The key behavioural variable that made the minority more influential was:

• AThe flexibility of the minority in compromising its position
• BThe size of the minority (two confederates) relative to the majority
• CThe consistency with which the minority called the blue slides 'green'✓
• DThe minority's higher status and expertise in colour vision

Answer: A consistent minority (always saying 'green') produced significantly more agreement (8.42%) than an inconsistent minority (1.25%). Consistency is the central factor in Moscovici's study; flexibility and commitment are additional factors emphasised in later work.

In explanations of social change through minority influence, the process by which a minority view gradually becomes the majority view, often without people recalling its source, is termed:

• AThe snowball effect
• BThe augmentation principle
• CDeindividuation
• DSocial cryptomnesia✓

Answer: Social cryptomnesia describes when people accept a once-minority idea but have no memory of how the change happened. The snowball effect is the spread of the view, and augmentation refers to greater influence when a minority takes personal risk; deindividuation is unrelated.

What proportion of Milgram's (1963) participants continued to 450 volts?

• AAbout 35%, which was fourteen of the forty men
• BAbout 85%, which was thirty-four of the forty men
• CAbout 65%, which was twenty-six of the forty men✓
• DAbout 20%, which was eight of the forty men tested

Answer: Twenty-six of forty went to the maximum, and every participant continued to at least 300 volts. Psychiatrists had predicted around 1%, which is why the finding was so influential.

Which Milgram variation produced the LOWEST obedience rate?

• AThe study was relocated to a run-down office block
• BThe experimenter gave instructions by telephone✓
• CThe learner was placed in an adjacent separate room
• DThe teacher and learner were seated in the same room

Answer: Telephoned orders dropped obedience to about 20.5%, and some participants pretended to give shocks. Physical presence of the authority matters more than the prestige of the setting, which reduced it to 47.5%.

What is the agentic state?

• ASeeing yourself as an instrument carrying out another's wishes✓
• BSeeing yourself as being fully responsible for your own actions
• CFeeling far too anxious to carry out an order that has been given
• DMatching your behaviour to that of your immediate peers

Answer: In the agentic state responsibility is displaced onto the authority figure, so moral strain is reduced. The opposite is the autonomous state, where a person acts on their own principles and owns the consequences.

What distinguishes internalisation from compliance?

• ACompliance changes private belief, internalisation changes only behaviour
• BInternalisation happens quickly, compliance develops far more slowly
• CInternalisation changes private belief, compliance changes only behaviour✓
• DCompliance occurs only in groups, internalisation only when alone

Answer: Internalisation is a genuine and lasting conversion, usually driven by informational influence. Compliance is public agreement that disappears once the group is gone, and is driven by normative influence.

In Asch's studies, what happened when one confederate dissented?

• AConformity fell sharply because unanimity had been broken✓
• BConformity rose sharply because the group appeared divided
• CConformity was unchanged because the majority still agreed
• DConformity fell slightly but remained above fifty per cent

Answer: Conformity dropped from about 33% to roughly 5.5% once the participant had an ally. It fell even when the dissenter gave a different wrong answer, so it is the breaking of unanimity that matters rather than support for the correct view.

What is normative social influence?

• AConforming to gain acceptance and avoid being rejected✓
• BConforming because you believe the group is better informed
• CObeying a legitimate authority figure who issues an order
• DChanging behaviour after a consistent minority argues its case

Answer: Normative influence is emotional rather than cognitive: people go along publicly to fit in. It explains Asch's results, since the line task was unambiguous and participants knew the majority was wrong.

What makes a minority most likely to influence a majority?

• AConsistency, high status and considerable group size
• BConsistency, commitment and a degree of flexibility✓
• CFlexibility, high status and a very forceful manner
• DCommitment, group size and access to legitimate power

Answer: A consistent minority makes the majority think harder, commitment shows conviction through the augmentation principle, and flexibility avoids appearing rigid. That deeper processing is why minority influence tends to produce internalisation.

How does locus of control relate to resistance to social influence?

• AInternals resist more because they feel personally responsible✓
• BExternals resist more because they feel personally responsible
• CInternals conform more because they trust their own group
• DLocus of control has no measurable effect on resistance

Answer: People with an internal locus believe they control what happens to them, so they take responsibility and rely less on others. Externals attribute outcomes to luck or fate and are more easily influenced.

What is a methodological criticism of Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment?

• AParticipants were not deceived at any single point during the whole study
• BThe sample was far too large for any meaningful conclusions to be drawn
• CParticipants may have acted to demand characteristics rather than roles✓
• DThe study was replicated many times with identical findings

Answer: Some participants later said they were performing what they thought was expected, and Zimbardo's dual role as researcher and prison superintendent compromised objectivity. The BBC replication produced quite different dynamics.

On her first day at a call centre, Priya is unsure how to log customer complaints on an unfamiliar system. She watches what experienced staff do and copies them, believing they must know the correct method.

Which explanation of conformity best accounts for Priya's behaviour?

• ANormative social influence, as she wants to be liked by the experienced staff
• BCompliance, as she publicly goes along while privately disagreeing with them
• CObedience, as she is following a direct order from someone with authority
• DInformational social influence, as she looks to others for the right answer✓

Answer: The situation is new and ambiguous, and Priya copies others because she believes they are right, which is informational social influence; it usually leads to internalisation. Nothing suggests she is trying to be liked (normative influence), she agrees with the method rather than privately disagreeing (compliance), and nobody has given her an order.

After deleting customer records on his manager's instruction, Kyle says, 'I didn't want to do it, but it was her decision, so it's on her, not me.'

Which concept best explains Kyle's account of his behaviour?

• AInternalisation, as he has come to accept the manager's view as his own
• BAn internal locus of control, as he takes responsibility for his actions
• CThe agentic state, as he sees himself as acting for another person✓
• DInformational influence, as he assumed the manager had better knowledge

Answer: Kyle shifts responsibility for his actions onto the authority figure, the defining feature of the agentic state (his reluctance also hints at moral strain). He has not accepted the manager's view, which rules out internalisation; an internal locus of control would mean owning the action, the opposite of what he says; and he gives no sign that he thought she knew better.

Gareth was raised by harsh, highly critical parents. As an adult he admires people with power, is contemptuous of those he sees as weak, and believes rules should be obeyed without question.

Which explanation of obedience fits Gareth's profile most closely?

• AThe authoritarian personality, which is a dispositional explanation✓
• BLegitimacy of authority, which is a dispositional explanation
• CThe agentic state, which is a dispositional explanation
• DSocial support, which is a situational explanation of obedience

Answer: Adorno et al. described the authoritarian personality as rooted in harsh, critical parenting and marked by admiration of power, contempt for the 'weak' and rigid respect for rules. Because it locates obedience in the person, it is dispositional. Legitimacy of authority and the agentic state are both SITUATIONAL explanations, and social support explains resistance to obedience, not obedience.

Dev, a quiet and easy-going student, takes a weekend job as a nightclub door supervisor. At work he becomes stern and controlling with customers, but at home and at college he is as relaxed as ever.

Which explanation best accounts for the change in Dev's behaviour at work?

• AConformity to a social role, as he acts out the expectations of the job✓
• BInternalisation, as his private attitudes have permanently changed
• CMinority influence, as a small group of colleagues converted his views
• DNormative influence, as he copies the customers so they will accept him

Answer: Dev's behaviour changes with the role and switches off when he leaves it, which is conformity to a social role, as described in Zimbardo's prison study. Internalisation would carry over into the rest of his life, nothing suggests a minority converted him, and he is behaving unlike the customers rather than copying them for acceptance.

On a club committee, votes are taken by a show of hands and most members vote the same way as the chair. When the club switches to secret ballots, the chair's proposals are defeated far more often.

What does this change most strongly suggest about the members' earlier voting?

• AIt was compliance driven by normative influence, as agreement fell once votes were private✓
• BIt was internalisation driven by informational influence, as members shared her views
• CIt was minority influence, as a consistent minority had gradually converted the members
• DIt was identification, as members privately accepted her views while in the committee

Answer: When votes became private the members' agreement disappeared, so their public agreement had not reflected private belief: compliance, driven by the wish to avoid disapproval (normative influence). This parallels Asch's finding that conformity fell when answers were written down privately. Internalisation and identification both involve private acceptance, which the secret ballots contradict, and the chair's view was the majority position, not a minority one.

Which of the following is the most valid criticism of Moscovici et al.'s (1969) blue-green slide study as evidence of minority influence?

• AThe minority were genuine participants rather than confederates, so the consistency of their answers could not be controlled
• BThe sample consisted of male students, so the findings may not generalise to the way that women respond to minority groups
• CThe majority agreed with the minority on most trials, so the size of the effect was unrealistically large
• DJudging slide colours is an artificial task, so it may say little about minorities changing important real-world views✓

Answer: Naming the colour of a slide carries none of the commitment or consequences of real minority campaigns, so the study lacks mundane realism. The minority were confederates, which is how their consistency was controlled; the participants were women; and the consistent minority produced 'green' answers on only around 8% of trials, a modest effect rather than an inflated one.