aschs study Flashcards
participants
123 male american undergraduates in groups of 6:consisting of 1 true participant and 5 confederates
aim
to investigate conformity and majority influence
procedure
- pps and confederates were presented with 4 lines; 3 comparison lines and 1 standard line
-they are asked to state which of the three lines was the same length as a stimulus
-the real pps always answered last or second to last
-confederates would give the same incorrect answer for 12 out of 18 trials
-asch observed how often the pps would give the same incorrect answer as the confederates versus the correct answer
findings
36.8% conformed
25% never conformed
75% conformed at least once
factors affecting the level of conformity
-size of majority/group size
- unanimity of majority
-task difficulty
size of majority/group size
point- an individual is more likely to conform when in a larger group
evidence-there was low conformity with group size of confederates were less than 3- any more than 3 and the conformity rose by 30%
explain- a person is more likely to conform if all members of the group are in agreement and give the same answer, because it will increase their confidence in their own answer. conformity does not seem to increase in groups larger than four so this is considered the optimal group size
link- this shows that the majority must be at least 3 to exert an influence, but on overwhelming majority is not needed i all instances to bring about conformity
unanimity of majority
point- an individual is more likely to conform when the group is unanimous ie. all give the same answer as opposed to them all giving different answers
evidence- when joined by another participant or disaffected confederate who gave the correct answer, conformity fell from 32% to 5.5%. if different answers are given it falls from 32% to 9%
explain- the more unanimous the group is,the more confidence the pps will have that they are all correct, and therefore the participants answer is more likely to be correct
link-unanimity is vital in establishing a consistent majority view, which is particularly important by providing normative social influence through preventing any conflicting views arising.
task difficulty
Point: An individual is more likely to conform when the task is difficult. Evidence: For example, Asch altered the (comparison) lines (e.g. A, B, C) making them more similar in length. Since it was harder to judge the correct answer conformity increased.
Explain: When the task is difficult, we are more uncertain of our answer so we look to others for confirmation. The more difficult the task the
greater the conformity. Link: This suggests that informational social influence is a major
mechanism for conformity when the situation is ambiguous and the individual does not have enough of their own knowledge or information to make an informed decision independently, and so has to look towards
others.
strengths
High internal validity - There was strict control over extraneous variables,
such as timing of assessment and the type of task used. The participants
did the experiment before without confederates to see if they actually
knew the correct answer, thus removing the confounding variable of a
lack of knowledge. This suggests that valid and reliable ‘cause and effect’
relationships can be established, as well as valid conclusions.
Lab experiment - Extraneous and confounding variables are strictly
controlled, meaning that replication of the experiment is easy. Successful
replication increases the reliability of the findings because it reduces the
likelihood that the observed findings were a ‘one-off’.
Ethical issues - The researchers breached the BPS ethical guideline of
deception and consequently, the ability to give informed consent.
However, the participants were debriefed. Ethical issues do not threaten
the validity or reliability of findings, but rather suggest that a cost-benefit
analysis is required.
Supports normative social influence - participants reported that they
conformed to fit in with the group, so it supports the idea of normative
influence, which states that people conform to fit in when privately
disagreeing with the majority.
weaknesses
Lacks ecological validity - it was based on peoples’ perception of lines
and so the findings cannot be generalised to real life as it does not reflect
the complexity of real life conformity i.e. where there are many other
confounding variables and majorities exert influence irrespective of being
a large group.
Lacks population validity due to sampling issues - For example, the
participants were only American male undergraduates, and so the study
was subject to gender bias, where it is assumed that findings from male
participants can be generalised to females (i.e. beta bias).
Ethical issues:
- there was deception as participants were tricked into thinking the study
was about perception rather than compliance so they could not give
informed consent.
- There could have been psychological harm as the participants could
have been embarrassed after realising the true aims of the study.
- Such issues simply mean that a cost-benefit analysis is required to
evaluate whether the ethical costs are smaller than the benefits of
increased knowledge of the field. They do not affect the validity or
reliability of findings!
Lacked validity - The social context of the 1950s may have affected
results. For example, Perrin and Spencer criticised the study by stating
that the period that the experiment was conducted in influenced the
results because it was an anti-Communist period in America when people
were more scared to be different i.e. McCarthyism. Thus, the study can
be said to lack temporal validity because the findings cannot be
generalised across all time periods.
