Social influence - variations affecting conformity (Asch)

Question 1

What year was Asch’s classic line study?

Answer 1

(1951)

Question 2

What was the aim?

Answer 2

To investigate the extent to which social pressure from a majority group could affect a person to conform

Question 3

Type of experiment?

Answer 3

Lab

Question 4

Sample?

Answer 4

50 male students, from the USA

Question 5

What aim were ppts. given, why?

Answer 5

False - told they were taking part in a vision test so they didn’t guess the true aim and display demand characteristics

Question 6

Procedure?

Answer 6

• Only one naïve ppt. in a group of 6-8 confederates
• Group shown 2 cards: 1 with standard line and another with 3 comparison lines
• Ppts. asked to state which comparison line matched the standard line
• Naïve ppt. always answered second to last as a control
• In first few trials, confederates always gave right answer, then started making errors
• Ppts. took part in 18 trials and 12 were ‘critical trials’ where confederates gave wrong answer - only this data included in analysis

Question 7

What does the average conformity rate mean?

Answer 7

How many times naïve ppts. answered incorrectly as a percentage

Question 8

What was the average conformity rate?

Answer 8

36.8%

Question 9

What percentage of ppts. conformed at least once?

Answer 9

75% - known as the Asch effect (how people conform even when the task is unambiguous)

Question 10

What percentage in the control group gave the wrong answer?

Answer 10

1% - One real ppt. completed the same experiment without any confederates

Question 11

What did ppts. say in post-experiment interviews?

Answer 11

They knew the correct answer but conformed to avoid social rejection

Question 12

This supports NSI or ISI?

Answer 12

NSI - people do conform, even in unambiguous situations, in order to fit in and not be rejected by the group

Question 13

How did Asch investigate the variable of ‘group size’?

Answer 13

He increased the number of confederates in the group to 15 to see how it affected conformity

Question 14

What where the (group size) results?

Answer 14

As group size increased, so did conformity
- With only 1 confederate, average conformity rate was 3%
- With 3 confederates, this rose to 32%
- After a group size of 3, conformity rate plateaued
1 = 3% 2 = 13% 3 = 32%

Question 15

What is the (group size) explanation?

Answer 15

Pressure of NSI increases as the group gets bigger

Question 16

How did Asch investigate the variable of ‘unanimity’?

Answer 16

He introduced a confederate that disagreed with the others (dissenter) and gave the correct answer to see if a non-conforming person could influence the naïve ppt.

Question 17

What were the (unanimity) results?

Answer 17

Conformity was reduced to 5%

Question 18

What is the (unanimity) explanation?

Answer 18

Dissenter broke unanimity of group and reduced the pressure of NSI

Question 19

How did Asch investigate the variable of ‘task difficulty’?

Answer 19

He made the standard and comparison lines more similar in length

Question 20

What were the (task difficulty) results?

Answer 20

As task increased in difficulty, so did conformity

Question 21

What is the (task difficulty) explanation?

Answer 21

The situation was more ambiguous, so naïve ppts. looked to others for guidance and pressure of ISI increased

Question 22

What is a limitation of his study? - Results lacked temporal validity

Answer 22

===> Results lack temporal validity as it was in 1950s America. Perrin and Spencer (1980) replicated Asch’s study with engineering students in the UK and only 1 student conformed in 396 trials, compared to 75% conforming once in Asch’s study in 1951. 1950s USA was an era of McCarthyism (paranoid hunt for communist infiltrators) so most people were social conformists out of fear. Asch effect might not be consistent over time

Question 23

What is it worth noting about Perrin and Spencer’s (1980) replication?

Answer 23

The students were engineering and science students so the level of expertise may have affected conformity rates, not just the time period

Question 24

What is a limitation of his study? - Individual differences

Answer 24

===> A limitation is that it doesn’t take into account individual differences. Neto (1995) suggests females are more concerned with social relationships so are more conformist and Bond and Smith (1996) analysed results of 133 line study replications to find relationships demonstrating conformity levels are greater in more collectivistic countries. Asch’s research presents androcentric and culture biases, suggesting in other populations and sexes, conformity levels could be higher, results not generalisable to everyone

Question 25

What is a limitation of his study? - Most common behaviour wasn’t to conform

Answer 25

===> Naïve ppts. only conformed 36.8% of the time, meaning 63.2% of it, ppts. showed independent behaviour to resist majority group pressure. Griggs (2015) assessed popular introductory psychology texts and found coverage of Asch’s seminal work has become more biased and misleading. Asch’s experiment is part of a wider bias in social conformity to neglect the discussion of dissent

Question 26

What is a limitation of his study? - Artificial task used in its methodology

Answer 26

===> This means it lacked mundane realism and isn’t reflective of everyday life. Consequently, results may lack ecological validity and must be generalised with caution to real-life situations, which are more complex and have serious implications.

Question 27

What should we consider about it being a lab experiment though?

Answer 27

Being carefully controlled means that extraneous variables were limited and any change in results between conditions is due to the change in the independent variable and its effect on the dependent. Direct cause-and-effect relationship increases reliability