Transcript Resisting Social Pressure 1 - Intrapersonal processes

Resisting Social Pressure - 1
 Taking responsibility for one’s own actions
‘social responsibility’ (Bierhoff, 2002)
 Related to deindividuation (loss of personal
identity-relate to physical appearance)
 Kipper and Har-Evan (1984): task-focused
(instructed to act like teachers) and spontaneous
groups allowed to decide levels of shocks- the
former led to high levels as attributed responsibility
for shocks to nature of task
Resisting Social Pressure 2
 Moral reasoning and awareness of own
values
 Kohlberg’s theory of moral reasoning (1969)
 3 levels represent a fundamental shift in the moral
perspective of the individual
 Pre-conventional

Judge morality of actions by direct consequences e.g.
‘will I be punished for doing this?’
 Conventional
 Understanding that certain norms and conventions are
necessary
Resisting Social Pressure 2 (continued)
 Post-conventional
 Individuals reason that some aspects of morality,
such as regard for life and human welfare, should
be upheld irrespective of convention or normative
obligation.
Resisting Social Pressure - 3
 Humanisation and dehumanisation
 Individuals alter events to ensure they maintain
positive self-regard e.g. through ‘diffusion of
responsibility’ and ‘displacement of responsibility’- or
‘no-one else did anything’ and ‘it was his fault’
 Victims become dehumanised through their treatment
and portrayal (e.g. in media)- necessary to avoid
moral distress in extreme stages (Levi, 1989).
 Accepting a common humanity between individuals
brings the best out in people (Bandura, 2002).
Resisting Social Pressure - 4
 The role of disobedient models
 Milgram’s study- obedience levels dropped when
another ‘teacher’ refused to give out shocks.
 Disobedience or dissent? While many participants
in the Milgram study dissented, only a minority
actually disobeyed.
 Real life - Reserve Police Battalion 101 80%
obeyed orders to kill despite offer of other duties.
Resisting Social Pressure - 5
 Questioning motives
 Advertisers- media literacy training for children
(Austin and Johnson, 1997)
 Gamson(1982) – star study – demonstrated that
groups given the opportunity to question the
motives of others are very likely to disobey. He also
showed that all groups dissented.