conformity/ major influence Flashcards
What is Compliance?
a person may agree in public with a group of people, but the person privately disagrees with the group’s viewpoint or behaviour. The individual changes their view but it is temporary.
What is Internalisation?
publicly changing behaviour to fit in with the group whilst also agreeing with them privately. An internal and external change of behaviour.
What is Identification?
identification occurs when someone conforms to the demands of a given social role in society. This type of conformity extends over several aspects of external behaviour.
what is Normative influence?
Normative Social Influence is where a person conforms to fit in with the group because they don’t want to appear foolish or be left out. Normative social influence is usually associated with compliance, where a person changes their public behavior but not their private beliefs.
What is Informational Social Influence?
Informational social influence is where a person conforms because they have a desire to be right, and look to others who they believe may have more information. This type of conformity occurs when a person is unsure if a situation or lacks knowledge and is associated with internalisation.
What was the procedure carried out by Asch in the line study?
In Asch’s study there were 5-7 participants per group. Each group was presented with a standard line and three comparison lines. Participants had to say aloud which comparison line matched the standard line in length. In each group there was only one real participant the remaining 6 were confederates. The confederates were told to give the incorrect answer on 12 out of 18 trails.
What did Asch find in the line study?
Real participants conformed on 32% of the critical trials where confederates gave the wrong answers. Additionally, 75% of the sample conformed to the majority on at least one trial.
What are some criticisms of Asch’s line study?
- This study lacks ecological validity as it was based on peoples’ perception of lines, this does not reflect the complexity of real life conformity.
- There are also sampling issues regarding this study as the study was only carried out on men thus the sample was gender bias and therefore the results cannot be applied to females. The sample therefore lacks population validity.
- Moreover, there are ethical issues regarding Asch’s study – Mention deception as participants were told the study was about perception of lines. As a result, they could not give informed consent. Furthermore, it is possible that the participants may have felt embarrassed when the true nature of the study was revealed. Thus could potentially put them through some form of psychological harm. However, Asch did debrief at the end.
What are some factors that contribute to confomity?
- group size
- group unanimity
- difficulty of task
- answer in private
What was the procedure in Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Study?
To study the roles people play in prison situations, Zimbardo converted a basement of the Stanford University psychology building into a mock prison. He advertised for students to play the roles of prisoners and guards for a fortnight. Participants were randomly assigned to either the role of prisoner or guard in a simulated prison environment. Prisoners were issued a uniform, and referred to by their number only. Guards were issued a khaki uniform, together with whistles, handcuffs and dark glasses, to make eye contact with prisoners impossible. The guards worked shifts of eight hours each (the other guards remained on call). No physical violence was permitted.
Zimbardo observed the behavior of the prisoners and guards (as a researcher), and also acted as prison warden.
What did zimbardo find in his prison study?
- Within a very short time both guards and prisoners were settling into their new roles, with the guards adopting theirs quickly and easily. Within hours of beginning the experiment some guards began to harass prisoners. They behaved in a brutal and sadistic manner, apparently enjoying it. Other guards joined in, and other prisoners were also tormented.
- The prisoners soon adopted prisoner-like behavior too. They talked about prison issues a great deal of the time. They ‘told tales’ on each other to the guards. They started taking the prison rules very seriously, and some even began siding with the guards against prisoners who did not obey the rules.
What are some criticisms if zimbardo’s prison study?
- Demand characteristics could explain the findings of the study. Most of the guards later claimed they were simply acting. Because the guards and prisoners were playing a role their behavior may not be influenced by the same factors which affect behavior in real life. This means the study’s findings cannot be reasonably generalized to real life, such as prison settings (low ecological validity)
- The study may also lack population validity as the sample comprised US male students. The study’s findings cannot be applied to female prisons or those from other countries.
- The study has received many ethical criticisms, including lack of fully informed consent by participants as Zimbardo himself did not know what would happen in the experiment (it was unpredictable). Also, the prisoners did not consent to being ‘arrested’ at home.
- ## participants playing the role of prisoners were not protected from psychological harm, experiencing incidents of humiliation and distress.
What are some strengths of zimbardo’s prison study?
- A strength of the study is that it has altered the way US prisons are run. For example, juveniles accused of federal crimes are no longer housed before trial with adult prisoners (due to the risk of violence against them).
- Another strength of the study is that the harmful treatment of participant led to the formal recognition of ethical guidelines. Studies must now gain ethical approval before they are conducted. An ethics committee review whether the potential benefits of the research are justifiable in the light of possible risk of physical or psychological harm. They may request researchers make changes to the studies design or procedure, or in extreme cases deny approval of the study altogether.
