Hey guys! Let's dive deep into the fascinating world of social influence for your AQA Psychology studies. Ever wondered why people conform, obey authority, or resist social pressure? That's all part of social influence, and understanding it is super key for your exams. We'll be breaking down the core concepts, key studies, and explanations that AQA loves to test. So, buckle up, get your notes ready, and let's get this psychological party started!

Conformity: Why We Go With The Flow

Alright, first up on our social influence agenda is conformity. This is basically when we change our behaviour or our beliefs because of real or imagined pressure from others. It's something we all do, sometimes without even realizing it! Think about it: have you ever laughed at a joke you didn't really get, just because everyone else was laughing? Or maybe you've started wearing a certain style of clothing because it's popular among your friends? That's conformity in action, my friends. AQA really wants you to grasp the different reasons why we conform. We're talking about informational social influence and normative social influence. Informational influence happens when we're unsure about something, so we look to others for guidance, assuming they know better. It's like when you're in a new city and follow the crowd to find the best restaurant – you assume they know what they're doing! On the flip side, normative social influence is all about the desire to be liked and accepted by a group. We conform to avoid rejection or to fit in. Remember those awkward school days? Yeah, normative influence was probably a big player there!

Classic Studies in Conformity

Now, to really nail this topic, you absolutely have to know the classic studies. First and foremost, there's Solomon Asch's conformity experiments. These are iconic, guys! Asch set up these super clever studies where participants had to judge the length of lines. The twist? The other 'participants' were actually confederates (actors working with the experimenter) who deliberately gave the wrong answers. Asch found that a significant number of people conformed to the obviously wrong majority answer, even when it was clearly incorrect. This demonstrated the power of normative social influence – people didn't want to stick out like a sore thumb! He explored factors affecting conformity too, like group size (a larger majority generally leads to more conformity, up to a point) and unanimity (if just one other person disagrees with the majority, conformity drops dramatically). It really shows how powerful the pressure to be like everyone else can be.

Another super important study is Muzafer Sherif's autokinetic effect experiment. This one is a bit different; it explores informational social influence. Sherif used a visual illusion called the autokinetic effect – a stationary light in a dark room appears to move. Participants were asked to estimate how much the light moved, first alone and then in groups. Individually, their estimates varied wildly. But when they were in groups, their estimates quickly converged to a common norm. This suggests that when faced with ambiguity, we rely on others to form a more stable and accurate judgment. It highlights how our perceptions can be shaped by the social environment, especially when we're not sure what's going on.

We also need to talk about Kelley's 1952 study, which distinguished between informational and normative influence more clearly. Participants had to evaluate essays. When they were told they'd have to justify their opinions later (increasing accountability), they tended to conform more to the group's opinion. This suggests they were influenced by a desire to be correct (informational) but also perhaps by a desire to be accepted by the group. Understanding these studies and their findings is crucial for explaining why people conform in different situations. Remember to link the study's findings back to the specific type of social influence it demonstrates. It's all about making those connections!

Explanations for Conformity: Why We Do It

So, we've seen that people conform and some classic studies showing it, but why does it happen? AQA wants you to explain the two-process theory of conformity. This theory, largely developed by Morton Deutsch and Harold Gerard, suggests that conformity is caused by normative social influence (the desire to be liked and accepted) and informational social influence (the desire to be right). These two processes often work together. For instance, in Asch's study, participants might have conformed to avoid looking foolish in front of the group (normative) and also because they started to doubt their own judgment, thinking the majority might actually be right (informational). The theory proposes that if one of these influences is removed, conformity might decrease. For example, if participants were anonymous (reducing normative pressure) or if the task was incredibly easy and unambiguous (reducing informational pressure), they might be less likely to conform.

It's important to note that this theory isn't without its critics. Some psychologists argue that it's difficult to disentangle the two processes completely. Sometimes, conformity might be driven by a deeper desire to maintain a positive self-image or to avoid social exclusion, which blends aspects of both informational and normative influence. However, the two-process theory remains a foundational explanation for conformity in psychology, and it's definitely one you need to have in your exam answers. When you're explaining conformity, always refer back to these two core motivations: wanting to fit in and wanting to be correct. It’s a really solid framework to build your understanding upon, guys. Keep those explanations clear and concise, linking them directly to the studies we’ve discussed.

Obedience: Following Orders

Next up in our social influence journey is obedience. This is different from conformity because it involves responding to a direct order from an authority figure. Think about soldiers following orders, or even you doing chores when your parents tell you to – that's obedience! It’s a fundamental part of how societies function, but it also has a darker side, as history has shown us. The big question AQA often poses is: why do ordinary people obey authority figures, even when the orders seem wrong or harmful? To answer this, we need to look at some incredibly influential, and frankly, quite disturbing, research.

Milgram's Shocking Experiments

The absolute cornerstone of obedience research is Stanley Milgram's obedience experiments from the 1960s. These studies are legendary, guys, and for good reason. Milgram wanted to understand how ordinary Americans would behave when instructed by an authority figure to inflict harm on another person. He recruited participants and told them they were part of a study on memory, with one person acting as the 'teacher' (the participant) and another as the 'learner' (a confederate). The teacher was instructed to administer electric shocks to the learner for every mistake made. The shocks increased in intensity with each wrong answer, ranging from mild to, allegedly, XXX volts – labelled 'Danger: Severe Shock'.

The results were absolutely staggering. A huge proportion of participants – a whopping 65% – obeyed the experimenter's orders all the way up to the maximum voltage, despite the learner's increasingly distressed protests (which were pre-recorded). This study powerfully demonstrated the extent to which people will obey an authority figure, even when it conflicts with their conscience. It raised profound ethical questions about the treatment of participants and the potential psychological harm caused by such experiments. Milgram's work highlights the situational factors that can influence obedience, suggesting that it's not necessarily the personality of the individual but the context of the situation that drives such behaviour.

Milgram also conducted variations of his experiment to explore factors that increase or decrease obedience. For example, proximity of the authority figure and the victim played a role; obedience decreased when the experimenter was further away or when the learner was in the same room. Location also mattered; obedience was higher in the prestigious Yale University setting than in a rundown office building. The presence of confederates who either defied or supported the authority figure had a huge impact. When confederates refused to continue, obedience plummeted. Conversely, if confederates obeyed, it bolstered the participant's willingness to obey. These variations are super important for AQA, as they show how obedience can be manipulated and understood by examining the situational context. You need to be able to explain these variations and their impact on obedience levels.

Situational vs. Dispositional Explanations

When we talk about obedience, AQA wants you to consider both situational explanations and dispositional explanations. Situational explanations, like Milgram's findings, focus on the external factors – the environment, the authority figure, the presence of others – that influence behaviour. Milgram argued that obedience is largely a product of the situation, not inherent evil in individuals. He proposed concepts like agentic state and autonomous state. In the autonomous state, individuals take responsibility for their own actions. In the agentic state, they see themselves as an agent of an authority figure and therefore shift responsibility to them. The agentic shift occurs when someone moves from the autonomous to the agentic state, often when confronted with an authority figure. This helps explain why people might do things they wouldn't normally do.

On the other hand, dispositional explanations focus on the internal characteristics of an individual – their personality, beliefs, and values. The most well-known dispositional explanation for obedience relates to the authoritarian personality. Theorised by Theodor Adorno and his colleagues, this personality type is characterised by a belief in absolute obedience to authority, a rigid adherence to conventional values, and a tendency to be prejudiced towards outgroups. People with authoritarian personalities tend to be submissive to those perceived as higher in status and aggressive towards those they perceive as inferior. While Milgram's research heavily emphasized situational factors, Adorno's theory suggests that some individuals are more likely than others to obey authority due to their personality structure, potentially shaped by their upbringing (e.g., strict, authoritarian parenting). It's crucial for your exams to understand both types of explanations. AQA often asks you to compare and contrast them or to evaluate the relative importance of each. Remember, Milgram's experiments showed powerful situational influences, but dispositional factors likely still play a role in who is most susceptible to obedience.

Resistance to Social Influence: Standing Your Ground

Now, not everyone just goes along with the crowd or blindly obeys. Resistance to social influence is all about how people manage to not conform or obey, even when faced with strong social pressure. This is a really important area because it shows that we have agency and the capacity to act independently. Think about whistleblowers who expose wrongdoing, or people who stand up against injustice – they are resisting social influence!

Factors Enabling Resistance

So, what helps people resist? AQA highlights a few key factors. Firstly, social support is massive. If you have someone else who also refuses to conform or obey, it provides you with moral support and makes it much easier to stand your ground. In Asch's conformity studies, when there was a dissenter (someone who disagreed with the majority), the participant's conformity dropped significantly. Knowing you're not alone makes a huge difference! Similarly, in obedience studies, if a confederate refuses to obey, the real participant is far less likely to continue obeying.

Secondly, locus of control (LOC) plays a role. This concept, developed by Julian Rotter, refers to the extent to which people believe they have control over the events in their lives. People with a high internal locus of control believe they are responsible for their own actions and outcomes. They tend to be more independent and less susceptible to social influence because they rely on their own judgments and beliefs. On the other hand, individuals with a high external locus of control believe that external forces (like fate, luck, or authority figures) control their lives. They are often more likely to conform and obey because they feel less personal responsibility for their actions.

Finally, dissenter and commitment are crucial. If someone has already committed to a particular belief or course of action, they are less likely to change it when faced with social pressure. This commitment acts as a powerful anchor. Think about someone who has publicly declared their support for a cause; they'll be much more resistant to being persuaded to change their mind than someone who hasn't made such a commitment. These factors – social support, internal locus of control, and prior commitment – are the psychological tools that allow individuals to resist the powerful forces of social influence. Understanding these is key to understanding how social change can occur and how individual freedom is maintained.

Minority Influence: Small Groups, Big Impact

Finally, let's talk about minority influence. This is the flip side of conformity and obedience, focusing on how a minority group or individual can influence the majority. It might seem counterintuitive – how can a few people change the minds of many? Well, it happens, and it's often through a consistent and committed approach. Think about major social movements throughout history; they often started with a small group of determined individuals.

The Process of Minority Influence

For a minority to be influential, certain characteristics are essential. Consistency is paramount. If the minority group is consistent in their views and actions over time, it draws the attention of the majority and makes them reconsider their own position. Think about civil rights activists consistently protesting for their cause. Commitment is also vital. When the minority group shows dedication and makes sacrifices for their cause (e.g., participating in dangerous protests), it demonstrates the strength of their beliefs and persuades the majority that they are serious. Finally, flexibility is important. While consistency is key, an overly rigid or uncompromising minority might be perceived as extreme and be rejected. A minority that is willing to listen to the majority and make some concessions, while still holding firm on core beliefs, is more likely to be persuasive.

Moscovici's blue-green studies are the classic experiments here. In these studies, participants were shown a series of blue slides and asked to state their colour. A consistent minority of confederates called the slides green. Moscovici found that this consistent minority influence could sway a significant number of participants to also call the slides green, especially when the minority was consistent. When the minority was inconsistent, their influence was negligible. This research highlights that while the majority often conforms due to normative pressures, minority influence tends to operate through internalisation – members of the majority genuinely adopt the minority's viewpoint. This is a deeper level of change than just public compliance.

Minority influence is a powerful force for social change. It challenges existing norms and encourages people to think differently. It's often a slow process, but by being consistent, committed, and reasonably flexible, minorities can eventually shift the attitudes and behaviours of the majority. This is a crucial concept for understanding how societies evolve and how progress happens. So, remember: even a small, dedicated group can have a massive impact if they play their cards right!

And there you have it, guys! A comprehensive rundown of social influence for AQA Psychology. We've covered conformity, obedience, resistance, and minority influence, along with the key studies and explanations. Keep revising these topics, link them together, and you'll be well on your way to smashing those exams! Good luck!