Conformity - Types + explanations

Question 1

Types of conformity

Answer 1

1. internalisation
2. Identification
3. Compliance

Question 2

Internalisation

Answer 2

Deep type of conformity where we take on the majority view because we accept it as correct (genuinely). This results in a private and a public change of opinions/behavior. The change is usually permanent as these attitudes become internalised and is part of the way the person thinks. It persists even in the absence of other group members.

Question 3

Identification

Answer 3

Moderate type of conformity where we act in the same way as the group because we value and want to be part of it. Publicly change our opinions/behaviors to be accepted by the group EVEN if we don’t privately agree with everything the group stands for.

Question 4

Compliance

Answer 4

Supercial + temporary type of conformity - involves where we outwardly go along in with the majority view but privately disagree. We simply ‘go along with others’ but in private don’t change our opinions/behavior. This change in our behavior only lasts as long as the group is monitoring us (/in the presence of).

Question 5

Explanations for conformity

Answer 5

1. Normative social influence (NSI)
2. Informational social influence (ISI)
   * The 2 process theory based one two central human needs: the need to be right (ISI) + the need to be liked (NSI)

Question 6

NSI

Answer 6

An explanation of conformity that says we agree with the opinion of the majority because we want to gain social approval and be liked because we do not want to appear foolish and rejected.
* Often leads to compliance (temporary change)
* Emotional response rather than cognitive process
* Most likely to occur in situations with strangers - feelings of concern + rejection. AND possibly with people you know as you value their social approval .

Question 7

ISI

Answer 7

An explanation of conformity that says we agree with the opinion of the majority as we are often uncertain if our behaviors/beliefs are right or wrong - we believe the majority is correct. e.g. answering a question in class.
* We accept it because we want to be correct as well
* May lead to internalisation

Question 8

strength

EVAL: Research support for NSI

Answer 8

One strength is that there is evidence that supports it as an explanation of conformity. For example when Asch interviewed his pps some said they conformed because they felt self-conscious giving the correct answer + afraid of disapproval. When pps wrote their answers down, conformity dropped to 12.5% - because giving answers privately meant there was no normative group pressure. Showing us that at least some conformity is due to a desire not to be rejected by the group for disagreeing with them

Question 9

EVAL: Research support of ISI

Answer 9

Another strength is that there is research evidence to support ISI from the study by Todd Lucas et al (2006) - found that pps conformed more often to incorrect answers they were given when math problems were difficult. This is because when the problems were easier, pps ‘knew their own minds’ but when it increased in difficulty the situation became ambiguous. Pps didn’t want to be wrong and so they relied on ans given. Shows ISI is a valid explanation - results are what ISI would predict.

Question 10

EVAL: Counter to NSI + ISI

Answer 10

A limitation is that it is unclear whether NSI/ISI is at work in research studies or in real life. For example, Asch found conformity is reduced when there is a dissenter, they may reduce the power of ISI (they provide an alternative source of social information) + NSI (provide social support). Therefore it is hard to separate them - they probably operate together in most real-world conformity situations (complementary not mutually exclusive mechanisms)

Question 11

EVAL: Individual differences in NSI

Answer 11

A limitation is that NSI does not predict conformity in every case. Some are concerned with being liked by others - called nAffiliators in which they have a strong need for ‘affiliation (want to relate to other people). Paul McGhee + Richard Teevan (1967) found that students who were nAfilliators were more likely to conform. Shows us that NSI underlies conformity for some people more than it does for others. There are individual differences in conformity that cannot be fully explained by one general theory of situational pressures.