Conformity and Obedience

Question 1

Summarise Mori and Arai - Aim

Answer 1

To replicate an Asch-like experiment with lines but without the need for confederates.

To also include both males and females which contributed to our understanding of individual differences in conformity.

Question 2

Summarise Mori and Arai - Results

Answer 2

Women conformed in 4.41 out of 12 trials (this is compared to 3.84 in Asch’s study) while men did not conform to the view of the majority.

Unlike Asch’s study, this study found that it made very little difference whether the majority was unanimous or not.

Question 3

Summarise Mori and Arai - Method

Answer 3

Lab experiment replicated Asch-type situation with lines but used filter glasses as opposed to confederates.

These filter glasses were designed so that people could look at the same image and see different things.

Participants split in groups of 4 with one participant in each group being given different glasses to the rest so they saw the lines differently.

104 participants (40 male, 64 female).

Participants said their answers aloud with the minority participant going third.

Question 4

Analyse Mori and Arai - Link

Answer 4

This study links to normative social influence because it supports the idea that people will conform to the ideas of others, even when the correct answer is clear, in order to feel part of a group and to be liked.

This study links to compliance because
participants who conformed publicly agreed with the group but privately maintained their own belief about the length of lines.

Question 5

Analyse Mori and Arai - Comparison

Answer 5

Asch used actors whereas Mori and Arai did not which makes it more natural and ethical.

Similar experimental method (Lab) and the same task (length of lines).

Mori and Arai used females whereas Asch only used Males which makes the results of Mori and Arai more generalisable.

In Asch’s study males did conform whereas in Mori and Arai males did not conform.

Asch took place in America whereas Mori and Arai took place in Japan. There is a cultural difference between collectivist and individualist cultures.

Question 6

Analyse Mori and Arai - Implication

Answer 6

Females in Japan are more likely to conform than males, which can be explained as being because of the different expectations and social roles of males and females.

The findings demonstrate how people conform to
people they know just like in the real world as. We are much more likely to conform to our peers and this study supports
this.

Question 7

Summarise Mori and Arai - Evaluation (Strengths)

Answer 7

Unlike Asch, Mori and Arai used both males and females so the results can be more generalised to the general population.

Participants knew each other unlike in Asch’s study which makes the results more relevant to real life conformity where we conform to our peers and not strangers.

Lab experiment so a high level of control over EV’s. This makes the results more valid because conformity rates were due to social influence not something else.

Question 8

Summarise Mori and Arai - Evaluation (Weakness)

Answer 8

Lab experiment takes place in a highly artificial environment which decreases ecological validity.

This study was conducted in Japan, where the norms of behaviour are quite different from these other cultures. This means that findings relate only to Japan and cannot be generalised more widely to other cultures.

Deception was still present as participants were told the filter glasses were for glare which makes the study more unethical as the participants did not know the true meaning of the study

Question 9

Types of conformity: Identification

Answer 9

Identification is change in beliefs and behaviour but this is only temporary depending on situation or group membership. i.e. being a vegan when you live with a vegan but once you move out you go back to not being vegan.

Question 10

Types of conformity: Compliance

Answer 10

A change in behaviour but not opinion. A person will pretend to conform with the group in public, but still maintain their own beliefs in private.

Question 11

Types of conformity: Internalisation

Answer 11

A permanent change in behaviour and beliefs. i.e. becoming. a vegan because you live with a vegan but once you move out you stay a vegan.

Question 12

Motivations for conforming - Normative social influence

Answer 12

When a person is not in doubt but is influenced by social norms. This is when we conform to the views of others in order to be liked by others.

Question 13

Motivations for conforming - Informational social influence

Answer 13

When someone conforms because they don’t know what to do and they want to be correct. Occurs in situations where there is high uncertainty and ambiguity as we are likely to shape our behaviour to match that of others. A person will conform because they genuinely believe the majority to be right.

Question 14

Individual factors affecting conformity: Gender

Answer 14

Gender affects conformity because women are more likely to conform than men are. This was shown by Mori and Arai.

Eagly (1987) Suggested that this happens because women have been socialised to take on a more nurturing role of promoting harmony in the group while men are more comfortable maintaining their independence.

Question 15

Individual factors affecting conformity: Self esteem.

Answer 15

Self esteem affects conformity as research has shown that those with a low need for approval, i.e. those with high self esteem, are less likely to conform than those with lower self-esteem.

This is because those with higher self-esteem have more confidence in their own judgements, and less fear of potential rejection or ridicule from those who do not agree with their judgement.

Question 16

Individual factors affecting conformity: Age.

Answer 16

Age affects conformity because teenagers are the most likely age group to conform. One review of studies reported that conformity levels are highest then remain static between the ages 10-14, after which the ability to dissent rises until age 18.

Question 17

Situational factors affecting conformity: Group Size.

Answer 17

Asch re-ran his experiments with various numbers of confederates and found that conformity varied depending on the size of the group. Increased group size made a difference up to a certain point. When up to 7 confederates were added it made a slight increase to conformity compared to when there were only 3 confederates.

Question 18

Situational Factors affecting conformity: Group unanimity.

Answer 18

People are more likely to conform if the whole group is unanimous in their decision. For example, you are more likely to give your own answer in a class if someone else has said the same instead of going along with the wrong version. Asch (1956) variation showed when one confederate answered the correct answer before true participant conformity fell to 5%. In another variation conformity dropped by 9% when a confederate gave a different incorrect answer to the majority.

Question 19

Situational factors affecting conformity: Task difficulty

Answer 19

The more difficult the task, the greater the conformity. For example in a class you are more likely to conform to the answer the rest of the class is giving to a difficult maths question than you are to an easier one. Asch (1951) variation - found the rate of conformity increased when the task was more difficult but didn’t give a precise percentage.

Question 20

Cultural factors affecting conformity.

Answer 20

Collectivist cultures tend to show higher levels of conformity than individualist cultures. This is because collectivist cultures value family and society over the individual whereas individualist cultures are the opposite.

For example Central America and South East Asia tend to be more collectivist cultures that value family and society over the needs of the individual so conform more.

Smith and Bond (1993) found that Belgium, which is an individualist culture, showed the lowest level of conformity while Fiji, a collectivist culture, showed the highest.

Question 21

Milgram (1963) - Aim

Answer 21

He wanted to find out how easily ordinary people could be influenced to obey, even if it involved hurting other people.

He also wanted to investigate why so many “decent” German citizens went along with the brutality of the holocaust.

Question 22

Milgram (1963) - Method

Answer 22

Lab experiment consisting of 40 males ranged from ages 20-50 who signed up for a “learning and memory” study as opposed to an obedience study.

Real participants (who were the teachers) placed in a room with a confederate participant (the learner). The real participant took instructions from a researcher in a lab coat in the room.

The participant was told to give the learner an “electric shock” each time the learner got an answer incorrect. They were told that the shock would increase with each answer incorrect from 15 volts to 450 volts (fatal levels).

Participants were led to believe that the shock was real.

Question 22

Milgram (1963) - Results

Answer 22

It was found that all participants went to 300 volts, 65% of participants continued all the way to 450, 12.5% stopped at 300 and a further 22.5% stopped between 315-435 volts.

Question 23

Milgram (1963) - Evaluation (Strengths)

Answer 23

Influenced development of ethical guidelines.

Lab experiment so variables could be controlled and different factors that affected obedience could be tested in repetitions.

Question 24

Milgram (1963) - Evaluation (Weaknesses)

Answer 24

All participants were male so results are hard to generalise to women.

Conducted in a lab so it lacked ecological validity.

There are a number of ethical issues with the study such as deception, distress, informed consent.

Question 25

Analysis of Milgram (1963) - Link

Answer 25

Milgram suggested one reason that participants obeyed the authority figures is because they were in the “agentic state” so they didn’t feel personally responsible for their actions.

This links to Milgram’s study as it could be suggested that his participants believed the researcher would take responsibility for any harm that was caused to the learner.

Participants who did not obey took personal responsibility for their actions and so were in an autonomous state.

This study can also be linked to perceived legitimate authority and uniform. The researcher giving instructions was wearing a white lab coat, which means the participants may have felt that this was a legitimate authority figure and therefore be
more likely to obey.

Question 26

Analysis of Milgram (1963) - Implications

Answer 26

The results of this study suggest that people will obey under certain circumstances when given orders by a figure of authority, even
when it means harming another human being, since 65% of participants went to the maximum shock level.

The results of Milgram’s study can help us to understand German
soldiers’ behaviour in the Second World War as most of the soldiers said that they were just following orders given by a higher authority.

Question 27

Analysis of Milgram (1963) - Compare

Answer 27

Burger (2009) came up with a way to replicate the study without stressing out participants to the
same extent as Milgram did. He found 70% of participants were willing to continue past the 150-voltmark, similar to Milgram’s original work where 65% obeyed.

Both Milgram and Bickman used experimentation to study obedience, but Milgram’s study was
carried out in a laboratory, whereas Bickman’s study was carried out in the field, which means that
Milgram’s study has greater reliability/Bickman’s study has greater ecological validity.

Both studies found that uniform played a part in the levels of obedience.

Question 28

Factors affecting obedience: perceived legitimate authority

Answer 28

Milgram conducted his original research in a laboratory of Yale University. He conducted a variation of his study in a run-down building in Bridgeport, Connecticut. This caused obedience to decrease. The amount of people who administered the full 450 volts decreased from 65% to 47.5% which shows that locations of less credibility cause obedience to decrease.

Question 29

Factors affecting obedience: Socialisation

Answer 29

Socialisation is a process that takes place from birth when we learn the “rules of life” in a formal and informal manner.

From an early age we are taught to obey authority. We watch our parents obey the law and we are rewarded for obedience towards our parents. This leads to us automatically obeying authority when we grow up.

Question 30

Factors affecting obedience: authoritarian parenting

Answer 30

Authoritarian Parenting teaches children to adhere to authority rather than teaching them self control and to manage their own behaviours. Instead of rewarding positive behaviours, authoritarian parents only punish their child for wrongdoings but without giving a reason for doing so.

Question 31

Factors affecting obedience: autonomous and agentic levels of behaviour.

Answer 31

The autonomous state is seeing yourself as being in power; acting on your own wishes and morals.

The agentic state is when people see themselves acting as agents on behalf of someone else and therefore don’t believe themselves to be responsible for their actions. This may happen when individuals feel stressed or experience conflict about what to do so they look off a person in charge so they can relinquish their responsibility.

Question 32

Situational factors affecting obedience: Proximity

Answer 32

People are less likely to obey an authority figure if they are not in close proximity. Milgram did a variation of his study where the teacher was instructed over the phone in another room and obedience fell to 21% which shows that the proximity of the authority figure does have an effect

Question 33

Situational factors affecting obedience: Proximity 2

Answer 33

People are less likely to obey if they are in close proximity to the victim. Milgram repeated his study but removed the wall between the learner and teacher so the teacher saw the consequences of their actions. This caused obedience to fall to 40% of people administering the full 450 volts which shows the the proximity of the victim does make a difference

Question 34

Situational factors affecting obedience: uniform

Answer 34

People are more likely to obey an authority figure if they are wearing some form of uniform. For example you are more likely to obey a police officer in uniform than someone in civilian clothes. Bickman (1974) found higher levels of obedience when people were asked to pick up a bag by someone with a guard uniform on as opposed to a milk man or other dressed civilian