Social Influence on Behaviour | Psychology | PDF

Social Influence on Behaviour Neuroscience and the Mind Introduction What is the definition of Social Influence? Discuss.  Social Influence In psychology, the term social influence refers to the ways in which others influence us. Social influence is the effects of the presen...

Social Influence on Behaviour Neuroscience and the Mind Introduction What is the definition of Social Influence? Discuss.  Social Influence In psychology, the term social influence refers to the ways in which others influence us. Social influence is the effects of the presence or actions of others, either real or imagined, on the way people think, feel and behave. What types of social influences exist at school?  01 Social Power Status and social power  Status and social power within groups Status refers to the importance of an individual’s position in the group, as perceived by members of the group. Their status can then determine the amount of power they have in the group which can influence the group’s behaviour. POWER Power refers to an individual’s (or group’s) ability to control or influence the thoughts, feelings or behaviour of another person (or group). Types of Social Power  Check for Understanding Scenario 1: A teacher announces that students who complete all their homework on time for a month will receive a special treat or extra recess time. Question: What type of power is the teacher using to motivate the students? Scenario 2: A school principal threatens to cancel the upcoming school dance if students continue to vandalise school property. Question: What type of power is the principal using to enforce good behaviour? Scenario 3: A newly appointed student council president is organising a meeting and expects all council members to attend and follow their instructions. Question: What type of power does the student council president have in this situation? Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment  A more recent (and ethical) study in 2017 What happened: Students wore either a police uniform or mechanics overalls and performed a task while encountering distractors during the main task. Distractors were pictures of people wearing clothing associated with low socioeconomic status (hoodie) or wearing clothing associated with high socioeconomic status (suit). Result: participants were biased toward low socioeconomic distractors only when they were wearing police-style uniforms. Implication: Power has an influence on our brain’s cognitive functions. Further Reading: Civile, C & Obhi, S.S. (2017). Students Wearing Police Uniforms Exhibit Biased Attention toward Individuals Wearing Hoodies. Frontiers in Psychology, 8:62.  Power and Brain Mirroring What happened: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was used to check brain activity of participants. People were “primed” by writing about a situation where they had power or when they were powerless.Then, participants in both groups (high and low power) watched videos of another person’s actions. Result: high power participants had decreased mirroring activity in the motor areas of the brain Implication: power might reduce your brain’s attention/sensitivity to others, causing it to take “neural shortcuts” like stereotypes. Further Reading: Hogeveen, J., Inzlicht, M. & Obhi, S.S. (2014). Power Changes How the Brain Responds to Others. Experimental Psychology: General, 43 (2), 755-762.  Check for Understanding What types of power do you see?  Key Science Skills Check Research Zimbardo’s Stanford Experiment and complete the following: ❏ AIM: ❏ HYPOTHESIS: ❏ PARTICIPANTS: ❏ METHOD: ❏ VARIABLES (IV. DV. CONT.): ❏ RESULTS: ❏ CONCLUSION: ❏ VALIDITY: ❏ LIMITATIONS: Influences on helping behaviour  02 Helping Behaviour Bystander Effect, Kitty Genovese How do you interpret this picture? How do you interpret this picture? How do you interpret this picture? How do you interpret this picture? Would you help these people?  Understanding Helping Behaviours Helping behaviors are actions or gestures aimed at providing assistance, support, or aid to others in need. In your own brain, helping others also releases oxytocin, which then boosts dopamine and serotonin. These hormones trigger feelings of happiness and pleasure. These chemicals also counteract cortisol, the stress hormone, and decrease blood pressure.  Types of Helping Behaviours Physical Help: Offering physical assistance such as helping carry groceries, opening doors, or helping with tasks. Emotional Support: Providing emotional support by listening, offering encouragement, and showing empathy towards others' feelings. Informational Help: Sharing knowledge, providing guidance, and offering information to help someone solve a problem or make informed decisions. Financial Assistance: Helping financially by offering resources, fundraising, or donating to support those in need. Volunteering: Engaging in volunteer work or community service to contribute positively to society.  Benefits of Practicing Helping Behaviours Personal Growth: Developing empathy, compassion, and a sense of fulfillment by making a positive impact on others' lives. Building Relationships: Strengthening relationships by showing care, support, and understanding towards others. Creating Positive Communities: Contributing to a culture of kindness, cooperation, and mutual respect within schools and communities. Improving Mental Health: Enhancing well-being by reducing stress, increasing self-esteem, and fostering a sense of purpose through helping others.  Kitty Genovese Kitty was attacked on her way home from a bar at 3am. Her attacked stabbed her and ran away. Kitty was left screaming and asking yelling for help. She woke up 38 of her neighbours ! Out of the 38, how many of them do you think came to help Kitty? NONE. And only one called the police.  So what will encourage us to help? Research has shown that there are three factors that will encourage prosocial behaviour to occur. They are: - Noticing the situation - Interpreting the situation - Taking responsibility for helping  Noticing the Situation If you do not notice that there is a situation where help may be required you will not respond in an appropriate pro-social way. For example, when you are deep in conversation with someone else, would you notice if someone is slumped on the side of the road? But would you be more likely to notice the person slumped in front of the store if you were walking alone? Research findings indicate that, both in laboratory and real-world (field) experimental settings, when individuals are on their own they are quicker to notice something ‘different’ or ‘unusual’ than when they are in a group.  Interpreting the Situation Many situations in which help may be required are ambiguous or unclear. Therefore, people cannot always be sure that a helping response is appropriate or required. The less ambiguous the situation, the more likely it is that help will be offered. The interpretation can be influenced by other people, particularly the way in which others respond to the same situation. If an individual interprets a situation as one in which a helping response is needed, they must then decide whether they will take responsibility for helping.  Taking Responsibility Though you may notice and correctly interpret a situation as one in which help is required, you are unlikely to intervene and help unless you believe it is your responsibility to do so. Think back to Kitty’s situation where her neighbours did not help her. How might “taking responsibility” be one of the factors that prevented people from helping Kitty? The Bystander Effect  The Bystander Effect Latane and Dabbs (1975) “lift experiment” The bystander effect is the tendency for individuals to be less likely to help another person in need when other bystanders are present, or believed to be present, as compared to when they are alone. Furthermore, the greater the number of bystanders, the less likely any one of them is to help. The bystander effect indicates that when we are in a situation where help is needed and we know that others are around, we may place the responsibility to help on them.  The Neural Basis of the Bystander Effect Hortensius and de Gelder (2014) used an fMRI and found that there was decreased activity in pre- and postcentral gyri of the brain when the number of bystanders increased during an emergency situation. These areas of the brain are responsible for your motor movements and sensations. These results demonstrate that there is a neural basis to the bystander effect. SOCIAL FACTORS The influence us to help  Social Factors Often we help others because we believe that we ought to help; for example, we ought to return a lost wallet that we find and we ought to help a new student find their way to a classroom. In such cases, our desire to help is influenced by social norms. Social norms are standards that govern what people should or should not do in different social situations. Two social norms that can influence us to help are the reciprocity norm and the social responsibility norm. Reciprocity Norm The reciprocity norm is based on the reciprocity principle, an unwritten rule that we should give what we receive or expect to receive. The word ‘reciprocal’ means to give mutually and the saying ‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you’ reflects the reciprocity principle. Social Responsibility Norm The social responsibility norm prescribes that we should help those who need help because it is our responsibility or duty to do so. E.g. Fundraising for the Australian Bushfires PERSONAL FACTORS That influence us to help  Empathy We are more likely to help someone in need of help if we feel empathy for them. Empathy is the ability to identify with and understand another person’s feelings or difficulties. Empathic people tend to feel the distress of others, feel concern for them, and can imagine what it must be like to be in need of help. When we empathise with someone, we usually want their suffering to end and this can be a powerful motive for us to help in some way.  Mood Are we more likely to help someone if we are in a good mood or a bad mood? Many studies have found that people are more likely to help when they are feeling good.  Competence Clearly, we can’t help someone if we do not have the skills required or do not know how. Consequently, our actual or perceived ability to help can influence whether or not we help in a specific situation, as well as the type of help we may offer. RECALL Identify and explain the phenomenon occurring in the picture on the right. Describe some neural activity which could be occurring in the brain of the lady carrying the briefcase. (3 marks)  03 Obedience Milgram’s experiments  Obedience Parents, teachers, coaches, and employers can compel us to behave in specific ways. We learn from an early age to obey authority figures to avoid negative outcomes. The use of power/status in these situations, often produce obedient behaviour.  Constructive Obedience Constructive Obedience: Positive outcomes from obeying authority. Examples: Accident victims following emergency personnel instructions, citizens adhering to laws.  Destructive Obedience Negative outcomes from obeying authority. Examples: Soldiers harming civilians, public following masking regulations in Victoria harms people with long COVID  Milgram American psychologist Stanley Milgram (1963) investigated factors that can influence obedience to an authority figure. In all, there were 19 variations of the experimental procedures to identify specific influences.  Milgram’s Experiments AIM: To investigate the extent to which individuals would obey authority figures when instructed to perform acts conflicting with their personal conscience. METHOD: Participants were assigned the role of "teacher." An actor, posing as a "learner," was strapped to a chair in another room. The "teacher" was instructed to administer electric shocks to the "learner" for every incorrect answer. Shocks increased in 15-volt increments, from 15 to 450 volts. The "learner" (actor) would respond with increasingly desperate pleas and eventually silence as the shocks intensified. The experimenter, an authority figure, would prod the "teacher" to continue administering shocks, despite the "learner's" distress.  Findings & Conclusions Findings: A majority of participants continued to administer shocks up to the highest voltage level (450 volts), despite believing they were causing severe harm. Many participants showed signs of extreme stress and discomfort but still obeyed the experimenter's instructions. Conclusion: People are surprisingly obedient to authority figures, even to the point of performing actions that conflict with their personal morals. Implications: The study highlighted the power of authority in shaping behavior and has been influential in understanding behaviors in contexts like military, workplaces, and other hierarchical structures.  Gender & Obedience Milgram’s original experiment used an entirely male sample. Discuss the implications of his original data.  Gender & Obedience In later experiments, Milgram (1974) found adult females showed the same level of obedience as the males — 65% delivered an electric shock to the maximum intensity of 450 volts. Similar results have also been obtained from people in different countries, different socioeconomic, and cultural backgrounds, including children and elderly people in the role of the teacher. Universally, participants expressed considerable distress over what they were asked to do, yet most also continued to obey.  Social proximity Social proximity refers to the closeness (physical or emotional) between two or more people. In Milgram’s experiment, the closer the learner (‘victim’) was to the teacher (person administering the shock), the more likely that person was to refuse to administer the shock.  For example, as shown in Figure 7.20, when the teacher was in the same room with the learner and standing only 45–50 cm away, the number of fully obedient teachers dropped from 65% to 40%. And when the teacher was required to force the learner’s hand down into contact with a simulated ‘shock plate’, the number of fully obedient teachers dropped to 30%. 65% 40% 30%  Legitimacy of authority figures An individual is also more likely to be obedient when the authority figure is perceived as being legitimate and having power. When an ‘ordinary person’ (someone with no particular authority) instead of the experimenter gave the orders, full obedience dropped from 65% to 20%. 20%  Group pressure An individual is also more likely to be obedient where there is little or no group support for resisting the authority figure. When the ‘teachers’ were exposed to the actions of disobedient people who refused to obey the authority figure’s commands, full obedience dropped from 65% to about 10%. 10% Milgram Shock Study  Is there a neural basis to obedience? fMRI scans have shown participants who disobey orders have increased engagement of “social brain regions” which are involved in empathy/guilt (e.g., insula, inferior frontal gyrus, inferior parietal lobule) Inferior parietal lobule insula  Ethical issues A common criticism of obedience studies, such as those conducted by Milgram, is that they are unethical. Using your understanding of ethics, discuss how Milgram’s experiment breached ethical guidelines (5 marks).  Example Response Milgram’s experiment breached several ethical guidelines. First, informed consent was not properly obtained, as participants were misled about the true nature of the study. Deception was a major issue, as they were told they were administering real shocks to a learner, causing unnecessary distress. Voluntary participation was compromised because participants were pressured to continue despite their discomfort and were recruited using offers of money (15/day). Withdrawal rights were unclear, as the experimenter used verbal prods to discourage participants from leaving. While confidentiality was maintained, debriefing was inadequate, as some participants were not immediately informed of the deception, leaving them distressed even months after the study.  Contrast status and power (2 marks) Power refers to an individual’s ability to influence or control others' thoughts, feelings, or behaviors, whereas status is the level of respect or prestige a person holds within a group (1). A person can have high status without necessarily having power, but power often comes with higher status (1).