Conformity Flashcards
Define Conformity
The change in a persons behaviour/opinions due to real or imagined pressure from a person or group (Aronson 2011)
Outline the method of Asch’s study
Methods: 123 male American undergraduates.
An ‘experimenter’ presents one standard line and 3 comparisons (A, B or C) to the confederates and the naive PPT, who are asked to state which of the three lines are the same length as the stimulus line. The naive participant always answered last or second to last.
Confederates gave the incorrect answer for 12/18 trials and Asch observed how often the PPT would give the same incorrect answer as the confederates vs the correct answer.
Outline the aims and date of Asch’s study
1951, wanted to test whether participants would conform in the presence of a dissenting majority, even when the task was easy/unambiguous.
Outline the results of Asch’s study
36.8% conformed
25% never conformed
75% conformed at least once
In a control trial, only 1% of responses given by participants were incorrect (which eliminates eyesight/perception as an extraneous variable, thus increasing the validity of the conclusions drawn)
What variations did Asch test?
- Group size (of majority)
- Task difficulty
- Unanimity of the majority
State the types of conformity (Kelman, 1958)
- Compliance
- Identification
- Internalisation
Define Compliance
Going along with a groups behaviours/ideas to gain their approval or avoid disapproval - publicly agreeing but privately disagreeing with them.
The change being temporary and superficial and likely due to NSI.
The behaviour or opinion stops as as soon as group pressure stops.
Define Identification
A temporary change in behaviour and beliefs only in the presence of a group we value - we identify with that group and so wish to be part of it.
May publicly change opinions/behaviours, even if we MAY NOT privately agree with everything the group stands for.
Define Internalisation
When a person genuinely accepts group norms - resulting in public AND private change of opinions/behaviour.
Permanent change as the attitudes have been internalised - so the change persists even in the absence of the other group members.
Breifly evaluate Asch’s study of conformity (5 points)
- Artificial situation and task, trivial, lacks mundane realism, hard to generalise to real-world situations
- Artificial situation, participants may ave guessed the aims, displayed demand characteristics
- Limited application, androcentric, individualist culture, PPTs american men, doesn’t reflect conformity in women or in collectivist cultures
- Support from Lucas et al (2006) on task difficulty in maths problems increasing conformity
- BUT, Lucas found dispositional factors that interact with situational factors, conformity more complex - higher confidence also conform less.
Strength of NSI as an explanation for conformity
P - Evidence to support it as an explanation.
E - Asch, interviewed PPTs, conformed because self conscious + afraid of disapproval. When PPT wrote answers confomrity fell to 12.5%
E - so, when give answer privately, no NSI
L- So atleast some confomity = due to desire not to be rejected/disapproval
Strength of ISI as an explanation for conformity
P - Research evidence to support it as an explanation from Lucas et al (2006).
E - PPT conformed more when maths problems difficult because situation becomes ambiguous.
E - PPTs didn’t want to be wrong so relied on the answers they were given.
L - increases validity of ISI as an explanation as the results are what ISI would predict.
Counterpoint to Lucas et al (2006) on ISI
P - Often unclear whether it is NSI or ISI at work in both research/real life situtation.
E - Asch found that conformity reduced when there was a dissenter
E - But unclear if this due to NSI (as dissenter provides social support) or due to ISI (alternative source of social info).
L - As both interpretations are possible, hard to separate ISI and NSI as both probably operate together most of the time.
Limitation of NSI
P - NSI doesn’t predict conformity in every case
E - Some people more concerned with being liked than others, called nAffiliators because they have a stronger need for ‘affiliation’ - McGhee and Teevan (1967) found students who nAs are more likely to conform
E - NSI underlies conformity for some more than others
L - So, individual differences in conformity cannot be explained by one general theory based on situational pressures
How did Asch study group size?
Varied confederates from 1-15
Describe Asch group size variation findings
Curvilinear relationship between group size and conformity rate only up to 3 participants (rose by 31.8%) but increasing confederates beyond this made little difference.
What does Aschs group size variations findings suggest?
People are very sensitive to the views of others as just 2-3 confederates are enough to sway opinion.
Describe Asch unanimity variation findings
Introduced a dissenting confederate - in one gave the right answer and in another the wrong answer. Genuine PPT conformed less often in the presence of the dissenter as they were free to behave more independently even if the dissenter didn’t agree with the PPT.
What does Asch’s unanimity variations findings suggest?
Suggests that the influence of the majority us largely dependent on it being unanimous. Non-conformity is more likely when cracks are perceived in the majority’s unanimous view.
Describe Asch’s task difficulty variation findings.
How did Asch study task difficulty?
by making the stimulus line and comparison lines more similar in length
Strengths of Asch’s study
+ Lab setting, high levels of control of EV, increased internal validity
+
+
