Social influence Flashcards
Conformity: Types and explanations
Conformity = change in a person’s behaviour or opinions as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or group of people (Elliot Aronson 2011)
Types of conformity;
Internalisation = occurs when a person usually accepts the group norms > results in a private as well as a public change of opinions/behaviours. = change is likely to be permanent and persistent in the absence of group members as attitudes have been internalised
Identification = occurs sometimes when individuals conform to the opinions/behaviours of a group because we value it > want to be apart of the group - this may mean we publically change our opinions/behaviours even though we may not privately agree with everything the group stands for
Compliance = involves ‘going along with others’ in public but privately not changing personal opinions or behaviours > means that a particular behaviour or opinion stops as soon as group pressure stops
Deutsch & Harold (1955) developed a two-process theory arguing that there are two main reasons people conform.
Informational social influence (ISI) = a desire to be right - often we are uncertain about which behaviours are right or wrong therefore the reason individuals follow the behaviour of the group (the majority) is because people want to be right > it is a cognitive process because it is to do with what you think> most likely to happen in situations that are new to a person - also typical in situations where decisions have to be made quickly or when one group or person is regarded as being more expert - can lead to internalisation
Normative social influence (NSI) = is about norms - these regulate the behaviour of groups and individuals so it is not surprising we pay attention to them > people prefer to gain social approval rather than being rejected > most likely to occur when in situations with strangers where you may feel concerned about rejection or can occur with people we know as we are concerned about the social approval of our friends > may be pronounced in situations where people have a need for social support - can lead to compliance
Evaluation of types and explanantions of conformity
- research support for ISI by Lucus et al. (2006) = asked students to give answers to mathematical problems that were easy or more difficult > results showed there was greater conformity to incorrect answers when they were more difficult compared to when they were easy - true for students who rated their mathematical ability as poor. > Therefore, the study shows that people conform in situations where they feel they do not know the answer which is the outcome predicted by the ISI explanation - we look to other people and assume they know better than us and therefore must be right
+ research support for NSI as Asch (1951) found that many of the participants in his study went along with a clearly wrong answer and so asked his participants to explain why they did this > found that some of his participants felt self-conscious giving the correct answer and were afraid of disapproval > but, when Asch repeated his study and asked participants to write down their answers instead of saying them out loud, conformity fell to 12.5% > supports participants own reports that they were conforming because of NSI
- individual differences in NSI as it does not affect everyone’s behaviour> those who care most about being liked are affected by NSI are described as being nAffiliators - these are the people who have a greater need for ‘affiliation’ which is a need for being in a relationship with others > example, McGhee and Teevan (1967) found that students high in need of affiliation were more likely to conform > shows that the desire to be liked underlies conformity for some people more than others therefore there are individual differences in the way people respond
- ISI and NSI work together as the idea behind Deutsch and Gerrard’s ‘two-process’ approach is that behaviour is either due to NSI or ISI but more often both processes are involved > example, conformity is reduced when there is one other dissenting participant in the Asch experiment > This dissenter may reduce the power of NSI because the dissenter provides social support or may reduce the power of ISI because there is an alternative source of information > shows it is not always possible to be sure whether NSI or ISI is at work > this is the case in lab studies as well as real-life conformity situations outside the lab = this questions the view of ISI and NSI as operating independently in conforming behaviour.
- There is individual differences in ISI as it does not affect everyone’s behaviour in the same way > For example, Asch (1955) found that 28% of students were less conformist than other 37% of participants. As well as this Perrin and Spencer (1980) conducted a study involving science and engineering students and found very little conformity rates.
Conformity: Asch’s research (1955)
Procedure = Tested conformity by showing participants two large white cards at a time = on one card there was a ‘standard line’ and on the other card there were three ‘comparison lines’ - one of these three lines was the same length as the standard line and the other two were different > participants were asked which of the three lines matched the standard
Study involved 123 American males > each naive participant was tested individually with a group of between 6-8 confederates = participant were unaware the others were confederates
On the first few trials, all confederates gave the right answers but then started making errors = all confederates were instructed to give the same wrong answer > Each participant took part in 18 trials and on 12 ‘critical trials’ the confederates gave the wrong answer
Findings & conclusions; Naive participants gave a wrong answer 36.8% of the time showing they agreed with the confederates wrong answers
Overall, 25% of participants did not conform on any trails, which means 75% conformed at least once.
The term Asch effect has been used to describe this result - the extent to which participants conform even when the situation is unambiguous.
When participants were interviewed afterwards most said they conformed to avoid rejection (normative social influence)
