Subject: Psychology | Level: GCSE | Exam Board: OCR
This study guide provides a comprehensive, exam-focused breakdown of Social Influence for OCR GCSE Psychology. It unpacks the critical differences between conformity and obedience, details the core studies of Asch, Milgram, and Piliavin, and provides examiner-level insights to help candidates secure top marks."
Revision Notes & Key Concepts
Worked Examples
Worked Example
Question: Explain two factors that affect conformity. (6 marks)
Solution: **Factor 1: Group Size** One factor that affects conformity is the size of the majority. Asch found that with just one confederate, conformity was very low. With two confederates, it rose to 13.6%, and with three confederates, it reached 31.8%. Adding more confederates beyond three had little further effect. This shows that a majority of three is sufficient to exert significant influence. **Factor 2: Unanimity** Another key factor is the unanimity of the majority. In one of Asch's variations, he introduced a dissenter – a confederate who gave the correct answer. In this condition, conformity dropped dramatically from 36.8% to just 5.5%. This demonstrates that breaking the group's unanimous position is a powerful way to reduce conformity, as it gives the naive participant social support for their own perception.
Worked Example
Question: Using your knowledge of psychology, explain why a person might obey an order to do something they believe is wrong. (13 marks)
Solution: **Introduction** One of the most compelling questions in psychology is why ordinary people obey orders that conflict with their conscience. Research by Stanley Milgram provides the most powerful explanation, focusing on situational factors such as the agentic state and legitimate authority. **AO1: The Agentic State** Milgram proposed that we operate in two states: the autonomous state, where we feel responsible for our actions, and the agentic state. When we perceive someone to be a legitimate authority figure, we undergo an 'agentic shift'. In this state, we see ourselves as an agent carrying out the authority figure's wishes and feel they are responsible for the consequences. In Milgram's (1963) study, the experimenter in the lab coat was the authority figure. When participants hesitated, the prod "The experiment requires that you continue" reinforced the idea that the experimenter was in charge, facilitating the shift. This explains why 65% of participants obeyed to the full 450V, as they had displaced responsibility onto the experimenter. **AO3: Evaluation of Agentic State** This theory has strong explanatory power. It helps to explain real-world atrocities, such as the actions of Nazi officer Adolf Eichmann, who claimed he was "only following orders". This gives the theory real-world application (A). However, the theory is deterministic as it suggests that the situation dictates behaviour, ignoring the role of free will. In Milgram's study, 35% of participants did *not* fully obey, showing that people can resist authority and remain in an autonomous state. Therefore, the agentic shift cannot be a complete explanation. **AO1: Legitimate Authority** Another key factor is the legitimacy of the authority figure and the setting. Society socialises us to obey people in certain positions (e.g., police, doctors). The prestige of the setting also contributes. Milgram's study was conducted at Yale University, a prestigious institution. This added to the experimenter's authority. **AO3: Supporting Evidence** This is supported by one of Milgram's variations. When the study was moved to a run-down office block, obedience rates dropped from 65% to 47.5%. This demonstrates that the perceived legitimacy of the setting is a crucial situational factor that influences obedience (V). This variation increases the reliability (R) of the main finding by showing a consistent cause-and-effect relationship between the setting and obedience levels. **Conclusion** In conclusion, people obey immoral orders primarily due to powerful situational factors. The agentic state allows individuals to displace responsibility, while the presence of a legitimate authority figure in a prestigious setting provides the pressure to continue. While dispositional factors play a role, Milgram's work shows that the situation is a far stronger predictor of behaviour.
Worked Example
Question: Describe and evaluate one study of crowd and collective behaviour. (8 marks)
Solution: **Description (AO1)** Piliavin et al. (1969) conducted a field experiment on the New York subway to investigate bystander helping. A confederate collapsed on a train. In one condition, he appeared ill and carried a cane; in another, he appeared drunk. Observers recorded helping behaviour. They found that the victim with the cane received help in 95% of trials, while the drunk victim received help in only 50% of trials. They concluded that helping is influenced by the perceived cause of the problem and proposed the Arousal: Cost-Reward model. **Evaluation (AO3)** One strength of the study is its high ecological validity. Because it was a field experiment in a real subway carriage, the behaviour of the passengers was natural and genuine, not subject to demand characteristics. This means the results are likely to be generalisable to real-life emergency situations. However, a weakness is the lack of control over extraneous variables. For example, the mood or personality of the individual passengers could have influenced their decision to help, which lowers the internal validity. Furthermore, the study raised ethical issues as participants were deceived and could not give informed consent, potentially causing them distress.
Practice Questions
Question: Describe Asch's (1955) study of conformity. (6 marks)
Answer:
Question: A new student, Ben, sees his classmates all putting their hands up to answer a question he doesn't know the answer to. He also puts his hand up. Using your knowledge of social influence, explain Ben's behaviour. (4 marks)
Answer:
Question: Evaluate Milgram's (1963) study of obedience. (8 marks)
Answer:
Question: Explain the difference between the agentic state and the autonomous state. (4 marks)
Answer:
Question: Describe one variation of Asch's study and explain what its findings show. (4 marks)
Answer:
