Outline and evaluate one social psychological theory of aggression Deindividuation is one social psychological theory used to explain aggression. Deindividuation suggests that a person loses their inhibitions because they are no longer identifiable and so finds is easier to act in an aggressive way. One way that people can become deindividuated is by being a part of a big group or crowd. Deindividuation helps explain why people who are usually calm can turn aggressive when part of, for example, a riot. Le Bon said that individuals are more likely to behave in an aggressive manner when part of a large anonymous group.
Introducing an ally who resisted the majority caused conformity levels to drop sharply (5%). The presence of an ally makes an individual feel more confident and better able to stand up to the majority. Asch also discovered that people are better able to resist pressure to conform if the decision has a moral dimension. For Asch’s participants, the costs of conforming were not particularly great given the insignificance of the task. However if the behaviour is judged as immoral such as joining others in cheating there is less evidence of conformity as the costs are perceived as greater.
This action demonstrates a lack of interest to aid the less fortunate in the community, as well as failing to increase their customer base. The less fortunate members of society also have to shop for groceries, and they most certainly have a choice where to make their purchases. While Company Q management is making the decision to throw the food away, this results in revenue loss to the company. Shareholders are not likely to invest in a company which prefers to lose revenue rather than contributing to society,
He found that people were much more likely to relapse when they believed withdrawals were going to be negative. Those who were told to expect no negative withdrawals were less likely to relapse as they had a positive expectation. This provides evidence for the key role expectancy has in relapse. However Tate’s experiment can be criticised. The independent group design could have meant, by chance, the group who were told to expect no negative withdraws, were naturally more determined people, thus increasing their chance of giving up anyway.
Most owners of a chain stores are said to be only interested in a making a profit instead of supporting the local community. By closing this store, the social responsibility has not been met, because it would increase the unemployment rate in the community, leading to more crimes. A growing number of consumers are becoming more aware of the products they buy, but also how the goods and services they buy have been produced. Consumers are concerned about human rights, environmentally harmful production and animal welfare issues that revolve around products they purchase. Customers are prepared to buy products from companies that have retailers who act ethically and socially responsible when purchasing products to sell in their stores.
The fact the company is throwing food out instead of donating it makes the company appear heartless in the eyes of the public. Although company Q has logical financial reasons for disposing of the food, the public does not see this. The public’s perception is that company Q only cares about profit and not the people of the community. Company Q Needs to seek methods to remedy the public perception that it does not care about the community. One solution could be that company Q can set up a program to closely monitor the surplus of inventory in order to make donations to local food banks.
Company Q eventually listened and brought in a limited selection of products, but the customers found them to be to expensive to purchase. Knowing the economic status of the neighborhood their store was in, the customers did not feel that Company Q was being fair to them by supplying such high-margin items. Company Q’s was not socially responsible when they chose to allow their day-old food items to be thrown away instead of being donated to the local area food bank. They chose to show their distrust in their own employees, stating the possibility of the products to be stolen by their employees. Employees need to feel trusted and a valuable asset to the local grocery store chain.
Thankfully, Company Q doesn't need to expend much in the way of financial or employee effort to make a considerable difference in our store neighborhood community respect. One delivery van can be used to pick-up the product that would otherwise be thrown away at the end of the workday and transported by the store's supervisor to the local food bank. The food would be unloaded by food bank staff while the Company Q supervisor could discuss with the food bank managers the impact that those donations will have on the community. The marginal time spent loading and travelling to the local food bank is a minor inconvenience for the storeowner at worst and a major public relations benefit for not only the local store but also Company Q in general. We could also expect a reduction in our waste removal services since less product will be thrown
“In his article "The Two Step Flow of Communication" by Elihu Katz,[10] he found opinion leaders to have more influence on people's opinions, actions, and behaviors than the media. Opinion leaders are seen to have more influence than the media for a number of reasons. Opinion leaders are seen as trustworthy and non-purposive. People do not feel they are being tricked into thinking a certain way about something from someone they know. However, the media can be seen as forcing a concept on the public and therefore less influential.
People who remain optimistic may have an improved quality of life while coping with their sensory loss and maintaining their social contacts. Also that people are do not understand sensory loss will ignore them because they may think they are not educated because of the loss, or they don’t know how to communicate so just ignore them. 1.4 The steps that could be taken to overcome disabling attitudes and beliefs are encouraging individuals with sensory loss to have an active social life, education regarding sensory loss, provide training courses. Outcome 2 2.1 Sight loss: Making things are bigger, bolder, and brighter. Gain the persons attention, Tell them who you are, touch them while speaking to them.