To be liked, compliance, shallow

To be right, superior knowledge, internalisation, deep

Type, to be accepted, public not private

Type, public and private

Group that you admire, public but maybe not private

NSI, 75% reused towels, towel use reduced by 25%

People don't recognise others' behaviour as a cause for their own, Nolan 

Political opinions changed when exposed to others' opinions

Difficult - physical reality. No correct answer - more impact.

Difficult to distinguish, forget info, self-perception

Asch

123 pps, 12 critical, avg. 33%, 25% never, 75% once, 7 confeds, male

Variable, 3

Ally same as pp 5.5%, ally diff. 9%

Harder task, higher conformity

McCarthyism, 1980 Perrin & Spencer (engineering), juvenile delinquents

Demand characteristics, Mori & Arai polarised glasses

Bond, no studies of majority greater than 9

2/3 didn't conform, 33% avg.

American students, Smith, Individualist (25%) vs collectivist (37%)

Deception, informed consent

Control, reliable, cause & effect, low external validity (no mundane realism)

Zimbardo

Zimbardo, 24 pps, uniforms, findings

BBC doc, 15 pps, 2 prisoners: 1 guard, no conformity to roles

Harm, informed consent, Zimbardo involved, withdraw, lessons learnt

Students guessed purpose of study w little knowledge, Banuazizi & Movhedi

Johnson and Downing, shocks, deindividuated

3 types: helpful, harsh but fair, sadistic, BBC not sadistic

Abu Ghraib, retrieve info

40 pps, 15V increments, up to 450V, scientific

65% - whole way, 100% up to 300V

Lab coat - 65%, normal clothes - 20%

Phone - 21%, learner in same room - 40%, hand on plate - 30%

Yale - 65%, downtown office - 48%

Bickman, security (89%), milkman (57%), civilian (33%), Bushman

Baumrind, deception, informed consent (psychiatrist), withdraw

Orne & Holland - not real, no harm, but stress genuine

Mandel, 1942 Nazi guards, obeyed despite factors that should ^ disobedience

Male, Milgram - 1 female, Blass  8/9 replication comparable

Milgram

Autonomous to agentic, less responsibility, guilt free

Someone else in charge, seem legitimate

Lifton-gradual commitment Nazis, Staub-repeated acts of increasing evil

Evil aggressive urges finding expression, SPE

Fennis and Aarts - bystander effect

Loss of own moral code - danger

Aviation crashes, Tarnow, 19/37, dependence on captain's authority

Strict adherence to conventional values, obedient to authority, strict parents

1950s, high score, authoritarian personality, obedient

RWA, conventialism, authoritarian aggression, authoritarian submission

Follow up, 20 obedient pps, 20 disobedient pps, obedient higher on F scale, fathers

Dambrun & Vatine, correlation between RWA scores & level of shock

Begue, world value q, LW, lower intensity shocks

 65-48% downtown office, if disposition, obedience wouldn't change in diff location

Middendorp & Meleon, less educated, more authoritarian, reduce b&w thinking

Elms & Milgram, 65% all way - can't all have punitive parents

Bad at measuring personality, understanding of q, put what they think they should

Internal/external, q,

Levine, order matters, seat 1 lower conformity than 4, pressure doesn't build

Allen & Levine, the more valid the ally, the greater the reduction in conformity

Real-life, increases population and ecological validity

Avtgis, secondary data, set-ups poss. different, can show reliability

Spector, external more likely to be influenced by NSI

Twenge, more external, 1960-2002, culture

Suggests certainty and confidence - makes people take it seriously

Wood meta-analysis suggested consistent minorities were more effective

Mugny - not too dogmatic but also not inconsistent

Nemeth & Brilmayer (87), flexibility, simulated jury

Xie (2011), computer models based on chat network, 10%

Mackie-don't listen, Nemeth-'opens the mind', Van Dyne & Saavedra better decisions w dissenting minority

Nemeth - only accept minority influence on surface, people get annoyed by a dissenting view that persists

e.g. suffragettes 

Causes people to think more

Moscovici

Being prepared to suffer causes people to take you seriously

Smoking ban, gradual progression to increasing it

Once you have a few individuals, you start to gather momentum &  the minority becomes the majority

Forget original message & messenger and think it was our idea - removes deviance

Research suggests minority influence is quick but history contradicts this, potential for change

Influence limited if seen as deviant as the majority doesn't want to associate w deviance

Act in interest of majority

Drink driving, Schultz, inform people what the majority do so they do the same

Norm intervention does not always work and it is costly

Schultz, norm intervention, 'missing out', opposite to desired effect