Social Influence - Conformity

Question 1

What is conformity?

Answer 1

Conformity is a type of social influence defined as a change in belief or behaviour in response to real or imagined social pressure. It is also known as majority influence.

Question 2

What are the three types of conformity?

Answer 2

• Compliance
• Identification
• Internalisation

Question 3

What is compliance?

Answer 3

Yielding to social pressure in terms of behaviour but not necessarily in terms of attitude. So a person may agree in public with a group of people, but the person actually privately disagrees with the group’s viewpoint or behaviour. The individual changes their views enough for their behaviour to change, but it is a temporary and superficial change.

Question 4

What is an example of compliance?

Answer 4

E.g. a person may laugh at a racist or sexist joke because their group of friends find it funny, but deep down the person does not find the joke funny and when they think of it later they feel ashamed that they laughed.

Question 5

For a study on compliance, who would you refer to?

Answer 5

Asch

Question 6

What is identification?

Answer 6

Identification is the middle level of conformity. Here a person changes their public behaviour (the way they act) and opinions, but only while they are in the presence of the group they are identifying with. This happens when the individual values something about the group. They identify with the group so want to be part of it. This is usually a short-term change and is often the result of normative social influence. Privately the individual still disagrees with at least some aspects of the groups behaviour/values.

Question 7

What is Internalisation?

Answer 7

A person publicly changes their behaviour to fit in with the group whilst also agreeing with them privately. An internal (private) and external (public) change of behaviour. This is the deepest level of conformity where the beliefs of the group become part of the individual’s own belief system.

Question 8

What is an example of internalisation?

Answer 8

E.g. If someone lived with a vegetarian at university and then decides to also become one, too, because they agree with their friends’ viewpoint.

Question 9

APFCC is used to examine psychological studies. What does it stand for?

Answer 9

Aims
Procedures
Findings
Conclusions
Criticisms

Question 10

What was the aim of Asch’s (1955) Line Study?

Answer 10

Asch’s aim was to investigate whether people would conform to the majority in situations where an answer was obvious.

Question 11

What was the procedure of Asch’s (1955) Line Study? (3)

Answer 11

• In Asch’s study there were between 5-7 participants per group.
• Each group was presented with a standard line (X) and three comparison lines (A,B,C).
• Participants were asked to say aloud which comparison line matched the standard line in length.

Question 12

What were the findings & conclusions of Asch’s (1955) Line Study? (3)

Answer 12

• True participants conformed on 37% of the critical trials where confederates gave the wrong answers.
• 75% of the sample conformed to the majority on at least one trial.
• 25% of the participants never gave a wrong answer (i.e. never conformed).

Question 13

What is/are the evaluation or criticism/s of Asch’s (1955) Line Study? (6)

Answer 13

:( This study is low in mundane realism (the task set was meaningless in the context of real life) and lacks ecological validity (how well you have measured something in the real world) as it was based on peoples’ perception of lines; this does not reflect the complexity of real-life conformity. Asch’s study has high internal validity (Internal validity is the degree of confidence that the causal relationship you are testing is not influenced by other factors or variables) and low ecological validity.
:( Ppts knew they were in a study - may simply have gone along with what they thought was expected of them (ie say the wrong answer, too) - this is called showing demand characteristics.
:( Although the ppts were in a “group” it was not a real social group but was gathered just for this study. Fiske (2014) said “Asch’s groups were not very groupy”!! Means that the ppts’ behaviour in a real group may have been very different.
:( There are also sampling issues regarding this study as the study was only carried out on men thus the sample was gender biased and therefore the results cannot be applied to females. Other research suggests that women may be more conformist, possibly because they are concerned about social relationships and being accepted (Neto 1955). Also, the US is an individualistic culture. The sample therefore lacks population validity, ie we cannot say that those in Asch’s study represent all members of the population from which they were drawn.
:( There are ethical issues regarding Asch’s study; it’s worth mentioning the deception used, as participants were told the study was about perception of lines. Also, they thought the other people in the group were participants like themselves when they were really confederates. As a result they could not give fully informed consent.
:( It is possible that the participants may have felt embarrassed when the true nature of the study was revealed and they realised what there behaviour said about them as an individual. Thus it could potentially out them through some form of psychological harm.

Question 14

What are two positive aspects of Asch’s (1955) Line Study?

Answer 14

• Asch’s research increased our knowledge of why people conform, including the variables that affect the degree to which people are likely to conform (ie group size, unanimity, task difficulty). This knowledge could help avoid mindless destructive conformity by showing how people can be more independent in their behaviour. The knowledge gained could benefit a huge range and number of people or even society in general.
• One strength of Asch’s research is support from other studies for the effects of task difficulty. For example, Todd Lucas et al. (2006) asked their participants to solve ‘easy’ and ‘hard’ maths problems. Participants were given answers from three other students. The participants conformed more often when the problems were harder. This shows Asch was correct in claiming that task difficulty is one variable that affects conformity.

Question 15

What does it mean when participants are “deceived”?

Answer 15

When participants are deceived it means they do not understand what is really involved in the research, so they cannot make an informed decision to take part. This means they could be unwittingly exposed to negative psychological effects (e.g. stress, anxiety, humiliation).

Question 16

In Asch’s (1955) Line Study, how was psychological harm dealt with?

Answer 16

Through debriefing

Question 17

When did Perrin and Spencer revisit Solomon Asch’s conformity experiment?

Answer 17

1981

Question 18

What did Perrin and Spencer do in 1981?

Answer 18

In their study, Perrin and Spencer (1981) revisited Solomon Asch’s classic conformity experiment. They conducted an exact replication using engineering, mathematics and chemistry students as subjects.

Question 19

Describe the results of Perrin and Spencer’s 1981 experiment

Answer 19

The results were striking: out of 396 trials, only one observer joined the incorrect majority. Unlike the original Asch study, where 75% of participants conformed at least once, Perrin and Spencer found minimal conformity in their sample.

Question 20

State 2 possible reasons why Perrin and Spencer’s experiment’s results were different from Asch’s results

Answer 20

1) Different year (decades later) and so perhaps people were more comfortable with stating the obvious correct answer.
2) The students used in Perrin and Spencer’s experiment were all STEM students and had the same (usually) egotistical mindset where they believe they are correct.

Question 21

What is normative social influence?

Answer 21

The idea that conformity comes from the desire to be liked - when we conform to fit in with the group because we don’t want to appear different or be left out.

Question 22

What is informational social influence?

Answer 22

The idea that conformity comes from the desire to be right - we conform because we are unsure of the situation or lack knowledge of “the right thing to do” so we look to others who we believe may have more information than us. This explanation tends to lead to internalisation.

Question 23

For a study on normative influence, who should you refer to?

Answer 23

Asch

Question 24

For a study on informational influence, who should you refer to?

Answer 24

Jenness

Question 25

In normative social influence, people conform to the group _____ to fit in, to feel good, and to be _____________ by the group.

Answer 25

norm, accepted

Question 26

What are 2 examples of normative social influence?

Answer 26

• Dressing in a certain way to fit in with your peer group.
• Laughing at a joke you don’t find funny because everyone else is laughing.

Question 27

In informational social influence, people conform because they believe the group has the correct ________________, particularly when the situation is _____________.

Answer 27

information, ambiguous

Question 28

What is normative social influence driven by?

Answer 28

Normative social influence is driven by the human need for affiliation and acceptance in social groups.

Question 29

When does informational social influence usually happen?

Answer 29

This type of conformity happens especially in ambiguous or uncertain situations where individuals are unsure of the correct behaviour or response.

Question 30

What are 2 examples of informational social influence?

Answer 30

• Following evacuation instructions in an emergency.
• Adopting health practices based on advice from health officials.

Question 31

What does the key word ‘unanimity’ mean in relation to Asch’s study?

Answer 31

The extent to which all the members in a group agree. In Asch’s studies, the majority was unanimous when all the confederates selected the same comparison line. This produced the greatest degree of conformity in the naïve participants.

Question 32

How did Asch use group size to influence conformity?

Answer 32

To test this he varied the number of confederates from one to 15 (so the total group size was from two to 16).

Question 33

Describe the physical arrangement of the participants in Asch’s study

Answer 33

The participants were tested in groups of 6 to 8. Only one was a genuine (naïve) participant, always seated either either last or next to last in the group. The others were all confederates of Asch - that is, they all gave the same (incorrect) scripted answers each time. The genuine participants did not know the others were ‘fake’ participants.

Question 34

What are the three different variables that Asch wanted to investigate that might of lead to an increase or a decrease in conformity?

Answer 34

• Group size
• Unanimity
• Task difficulty

Question 35

What were Asch’s finding as he used group size to influence conformity?

Answer 35

Asch found a curvilinear relationship between group size and conformity rate. With one (i.e. confederates) in the group conformity was 3%, with two others it increased to 13% and with three or more it was 32%. However conformity did not increase much after the group size was about 4/5. Conformity increased with group size but only up to a point. With three confederates, conformity to the wrong answer rose to 31.8% but the presence of more confederates made little difference - the conformity rate soon levelled off.
- According to Hogg & Vaughan (1995), the most robust finding is that conformity reaches its full extent with 3-5 person majority, with additional members having little effect.

Question 36

What do Asch’s findings about the relationship between group size and conformity rate suggest? (3)

Answer 36

• His findings suggest that most people are very sensitive to the views of others because just one or two confederates were enough to sway opinion.
• Because conformity does not seem to increase in groups larger than four, this is considered the optimal group size.
• Brown and Byrne (1997) suggest that people might suspect collusion if the majority rises beyond three or four.

Question 37

Why did Asch want to test the relationship between unanimity and conformity rate?

Answer 37

Asch wondered if the presence of a non-conforming person would affect the naïve participant’s conformity.

Question 38

How did Asch test the relationship between unanimity and conformity?

Answer 38

He introduced a confederate who disagreed with the other confederates. In one variation of the study this person gave the correct answer and in another variation he gave a (different) wrong one.

Question 39

What were Asch’s findings when he tested the relationship between unanimity and conformity?

Answer 39

The participant conformed less often in the presence of a dissenter. The rate decreased to less than a quarter of the level it was when the majority was unanimous. The presence of a dissenter appeared to free the naïve participant to behave more independently. This was true even when the dissenter disagreed with the genuine participant.

Question 40

What did Asch’s findings suggest when he investigated the relationship between unanimity and conformity rate?

Answer 40

They suggest that the influence of the majority depends to a large extent on it being unanimous. Also that non-conformity is more likely when cracks are percieved in the majority’s unanimous view.

Question 41

How did Asch test the relationship between task difficulty and conformity rate?

Answer 41

He increased the difficulty of the line-judging task by making the stimulus line and the comparison lines more similar to each other in length. This meant it became harder for the genuine participants to see the differences between the lines.

Question 42

Name and describe two ways in which conformity decreased in Asch’s 1955 Line Study (2)

Answer 42

• When participants were allowed to answer in private (so the rest of the group does not know their response) conformity decreases. This is because there are fewer group pressures and normative influence is not as powerful, so there is no fear of rejection from the group.
• When there was a dissenter in the group that either said the correct answer or another incorrect answer. The genuine participant conformed less often in the presence of a dissenter. The rate decreased to less than a 1/4 of the level it was when the majority was unanimous. The presence of a dissenter appeared to free the naïve participant to behave more independently.

Question 43

Who suggested that there are three ways in which people conform to the majority?

Answer 43

Herbert Kelman (1958)

Question 44

Which two people developed a two-process theory, arguing that there are two reasons people conform?

Answer 44

Morton Deutsch and Harold Gerard (1955)

Question 45

Research support for NSI

Answer 45

One strength of NSI is that evidence supports it as an explanation of conformity. For example, when Asch (1951) interviewed his participants, some said they conformed because they felt self-conscious giving the correct answer and they were afraid of disapproval. When participants wrote their answers down, conformity fell to 12.5%. This is because giving answers privately meant there was no normative group pressure. This shows that at least some conformity is due to a desire not to be rejected by the group for disagreeing with them.

Question 46

Research support for ISI

Answer 46

Lucas et al. found that participants conformed more often to incorrect answers they were given when the maths problems were difficult. This is because when the problems were easy the participants ‘knew their own minds’ but when the problems were hard the situation became ambiguous. The participants did not want to be wrong, so they relied on the answers they were given. This shows that ISI is a valid explanation of conformity because the results are what ISI would predict.

Question 47

What is the counterpoint to research support for NSI/ISI?

Answer 47

It is often unclear whether it is NSI or ISI at work in research studies. For example, Asch (1955) found that conformity is reduced when there is one other dissenting participant. The dissenter may reduce the power of NSI (because they provide social support) or they may reduce the power of ISI (because they provide an alternative source of social information). Both interpretations are possible.Therefore, it is hard to separate ISI and NSI and both processes probably operate in most real-world conformity situations.

Question 48

What are individual differences in normative social influence?

Answer 48

Some individuals, known as “nAffiliators” have a strong need for affiliation and want to relate to others. Paul McGhee and Richard Teevan (1967) found that students who were nAffiliators were more likely to conform. For other people, the need to be liked is less important, and so are less likely to conform due to NSI. This shows 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.

Question 49

What is the background info for The Stanford Prison Experiment?

Answer 49

In his famous Stanford Prison Experiment, Philip Zimbardo and his fellow psychological researchers at Stanford University, USA, wanted to investigate how readily people would conform to the social roles of guard and prisoner in a role-playing exercise that simulated prison life. There had been many prison riots in America and Zimbardo wanted to know why prison guards behave brutally - was it because they have sadistic personalities or was it their social role (as a prison guard) that created such behaviour?

Question 50

What was Zimbardo’s aim during his prison experiment?

Answer 50

To investigate the influence of situational factors on behaviour i.e. whether the role allocated to participants (prisoner or guard) would influence the way they behaved.

Question 51

What was the procedure of Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment? (3)

Answer 51

• Zimbardo et al (1973) set up a mock prison in the basement of the psychology department at Stanford University. They selected 21 men (student volunteers) who tested as ‘emotionally stable’. The students were randomly assigned to play the role of prison guard or prisoner. prisoners and guards were encouraged to conform to social roles both through the uniforms they wore and also instructions about behaviour.
• Uniforms: The prisoners were given a loose smock to wear and a cap to cover their hair, and they were identified by numbers (their names were never used). The guards had their own uniforms reflecting the status of their role, with wooden club, handcuffs and mirror shades. These uniforms created a loss of personal identity (called de-individuation), and meant they would be more likely to conform to the perceived social role.
• Instructions about behaviour: The prisoners were further encouraged to identify with their role by several procedures. For example rather than leaving the study early, prisoners could ‘apply for parole’. The guards were encouraged to play their role by being reminded that they had complete power over the prisoners.

Question 52

What were Zimbardo’s findings regarding his prison experiment?

Answer 52

• The guards took up their roles with enthusiasm, treating the prisoners harshly. Within two days, the prisoners rebelled. They ripped their uniforms and shouted and swore at the guards, who retaliated with fire extinguishers.
• The guards used ‘divide-and-rule’ tactics by playing the prisoners off against each other. They harassed the prisoners constantly, to remind them of the powerlessness of their role. For example they conducted frequent headcounts, sometimes at night, when the prisoners would stand in line and call out their numbers. The guards highlighted the differences in social roles by creating opportunities to enforce the rules and administer punishments.
• After their rebellion was put down, the prisoners became subdued, depressed and anxious. One was released because he showed symptoms of psychological disturbance. Two more were released on the fourth day. One prisoner went on a hunger strike. The guards tried to force -feed him and then punished him by putting him in the ‘hole’, a tiny dark closet.
• The guards identified more and more closely with their role. Their behaviour became increasingly brutal and aggressive, with some of them appearing to enjoy the power they had over the prisoners. Zimbardo ended the study after six days instead of the intended 14.

Question 53

What are the conclusions related to social roles after Zimbardo’s experiment?

Answer 53

• Social roles appear to have a strong influence on individual’s behaviour. The guards became brutal and the prisoners became submissive.
• Such roles were very easily taken on by all participants. Even volunteers who came in to perform specific functions (such as the ‘prison chaplain’) found themselves behaving as if they were in a prison rather than in a psychological study.

Question 54

What was Zimbardo’s experiment’s scenario based on?

Answer 54

A mock psychiatric ward - a study by Norma Jean Orlando (1973)

Question 55

Describe Norma Jean Orlando’s study, which Zimbardo’s experiment was based on

Answer 55

Norma Jean decided to investigate how conformity to social roles can influence people to behave in extreme ways. She selected staff at a psychiatric hospital to play the roles of patients on a ward for one week. After two days, several mock patients experienced symptoms of psychological disturbance, some cried uncontrollably, others became extremely withdrawn, and a few tried to escape. As time went on, most of the participants became more anxious and depressed, and felt very strongly that they were ‘trapped and isolated’. The study had to be ended early because some ‘patients’ were losing their sense of self-identity.

Question 56

Describe the Abu Ghraib prison incident

Answer 56

From 2003 to 2004, United States Army Military Police personnel committed serious human rights violations against Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad. The prisoners were tortured, physically and sexually abused, routinely humiliated and some were murdered.

Question 57

Apply Zimbardo’s study to the Abu Ghraib incident

Answer 57

Zimbardo noticed some remarkable similarities between the behaviour of the personnel at Abu Ghraib and the guards in the Stanford prison experiment. Abu Ghraib was a real-life prison in Iraq during the Iraq War, while the Stanford Prison Experiment was a simulated prison environment conducted with college students. Both situations demonstrated the potential for abuse when individuals are given power over others.

Question 58

What is one strength of the Stanford Prison Experiment?

Answer 58

• Control: one strength of the SPE is that Zimbardo and his colleagues had control over key variables.
• The most obvious example of this was the selection of participants. Emotionally-stable individuals were chosen and randomly assigned to the roles of guard and prisoner. This was one way in which the researchers ruled out individual personality differences as an explanation of the findings. If guards and prisoners behaved very differently, but were in those roles only by chance, then their behaviour must have been due to the role itself. This degree of control over variables increased the internal validity of the study, so we can be much more confident in drawing conclusions about the influence of roles on conformity.

Question 59

What are 5 criticisms of the Stanford Prison Experiment?

Answer 59

• Demand characteristics could explain the findings of the study. Most of the guards later claimed they were simply acting. Participants’ performances were based on their stereotypes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave. For example, one of the guards claimed he had based his role on a brutal character from the film Cool Hand Luke. This would explain why the prisoners rioted - they thought that was what real prisoners did.
• Because the guards and prisoners were playing a role, their behaviour may not be influenced by the same factors which affect behaviour in real life. This means the study’s findings cannot be reasonably generalised to real life, such as prison settings, i.e. the study has 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. For example, America is an individualist culture and the results may be different in collectivist cultures (such as Asian 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.
• Also, participants playing the role of prisoners were not protected from psychological harm, experiencing incidents of humiliation and distress. For example, one prisoner had to released after the first day because of uncontrollable bursts of screaming, crying and anger.