Social Influence Revision Sheet
1. Key Concepts
Obedience: Following the orders of an authority figure.
Conformity: Adjusting behavior to align with group norms.
Compliance: Outwardly conforming, privately disagreeing.
Identification: Adopting behaviors to fit in with a group.
Internalization: Fully accepting group beliefs.
Deindividuation: Loss of self-awareness in groups leading to uninhibited
behavior.
Bystander Effect: Less likely to help in emergencies when others are
present.
2. Factors Affecting Obedience
Authority Figure Status: Higher status = more obedience.
Proximity of Authority: Closer = higher obedience.
Proximity to Victim: Closer = less obedience.
Legitimacy of Setting: More legitimate = more obedience.
Personal Responsibility: Shared responsibility = more obedience.
Support from Others: Dissenters reduce obedience.
3. Factors Affecting Bystander Intervention
Situational Factors:
1. Diffusion of Responsibility
Definition: When there are more bystanders, each person feels less
responsible for taking action, assuming that someone else will intervene.
2. Pluralistic Ignorance
Definition: In situations, bystanders look to others to gauge how to
respond. If no one else seems concerned or acts, people may conclude
that intervention isn’t needed.
3. Cost of Helping
Definition: The perceived risks or costs associated with helping, such as
physical danger, time, or effort.
4. Noticing the Event
Definition: If a bystander doesn’t notice the event or doesn’t perceive it
as an emergency, they are less likely to intervene.
, Personal Factors:
Competence: Skills increase helping.
Mood: Good mood increases helping.
Similarity: More likely to help similar individuals.
4. Social and Dispositional Factors
Social Factors:
Group Size: Larger groups increase conformity.
Anonymity: Increases deindividuation.
Task Difficulty: Increases conformity.
Dispositional Factors:
Personality: Authoritarian = more obedience.
Locus of Control:
Internal = less likely to conform/obey.
External = more likely to conform/obey.
5. Core Studies
Piliavin et al. (1969) - Subway Samaritan
Aim: Investigate helping behavior in real settings.
Procedure: Victim collapsed on train; IV = ill or drunk.
Results: Ill helped 95%, drunk helped 50%.
Conclusion: Appearance and similarity affect helping.
Haney, Banks & Zimbardo (1973) - Stanford Prison Experiment
Aim:
To investigate how individuals conform to roles of authority and
subordination in a simulated prison environment.
Procedure:
Participants: 24 male university students were selected, all deemed
mentally and physically healthy.
Roles: Participants were randomly assigned to either the role of prison
guard or prisoner.
Setting: A mock prison was created in the basement of Stanford
University’s psychology building.
Duration: The experiment was planned for 2 weeks but was terminated
after just 6 days due to extreme behavior.
Findings:
1. Key Concepts
Obedience: Following the orders of an authority figure.
Conformity: Adjusting behavior to align with group norms.
Compliance: Outwardly conforming, privately disagreeing.
Identification: Adopting behaviors to fit in with a group.
Internalization: Fully accepting group beliefs.
Deindividuation: Loss of self-awareness in groups leading to uninhibited
behavior.
Bystander Effect: Less likely to help in emergencies when others are
present.
2. Factors Affecting Obedience
Authority Figure Status: Higher status = more obedience.
Proximity of Authority: Closer = higher obedience.
Proximity to Victim: Closer = less obedience.
Legitimacy of Setting: More legitimate = more obedience.
Personal Responsibility: Shared responsibility = more obedience.
Support from Others: Dissenters reduce obedience.
3. Factors Affecting Bystander Intervention
Situational Factors:
1. Diffusion of Responsibility
Definition: When there are more bystanders, each person feels less
responsible for taking action, assuming that someone else will intervene.
2. Pluralistic Ignorance
Definition: In situations, bystanders look to others to gauge how to
respond. If no one else seems concerned or acts, people may conclude
that intervention isn’t needed.
3. Cost of Helping
Definition: The perceived risks or costs associated with helping, such as
physical danger, time, or effort.
4. Noticing the Event
Definition: If a bystander doesn’t notice the event or doesn’t perceive it
as an emergency, they are less likely to intervene.
, Personal Factors:
Competence: Skills increase helping.
Mood: Good mood increases helping.
Similarity: More likely to help similar individuals.
4. Social and Dispositional Factors
Social Factors:
Group Size: Larger groups increase conformity.
Anonymity: Increases deindividuation.
Task Difficulty: Increases conformity.
Dispositional Factors:
Personality: Authoritarian = more obedience.
Locus of Control:
Internal = less likely to conform/obey.
External = more likely to conform/obey.
5. Core Studies
Piliavin et al. (1969) - Subway Samaritan
Aim: Investigate helping behavior in real settings.
Procedure: Victim collapsed on train; IV = ill or drunk.
Results: Ill helped 95%, drunk helped 50%.
Conclusion: Appearance and similarity affect helping.
Haney, Banks & Zimbardo (1973) - Stanford Prison Experiment
Aim:
To investigate how individuals conform to roles of authority and
subordination in a simulated prison environment.
Procedure:
Participants: 24 male university students were selected, all deemed
mentally and physically healthy.
Roles: Participants were randomly assigned to either the role of prison
guard or prisoner.
Setting: A mock prison was created in the basement of Stanford
University’s psychology building.
Duration: The experiment was planned for 2 weeks but was terminated
after just 6 days due to extreme behavior.
Findings:
