Types and Explanations for Conformity

Question 1

Conformity

Answer 1

A type of social influence that describes how a person changes their attitude or behaviour in response to real or imagined group pressure.

Question 2

Who proposed the different types of conformity?

Answer 2

Kelman (1958)

Question 3

What are the types of conformity?

Answer 3

Compliance, identification, and internalisation.

Question 4

Compliance

Answer 4

When an individual changes their public behaviour but not their private beliefs, resulting in a short-term change.

Question 5

Identification

Answer 5

When an individual changes their public behaviour and private beliefs, but only in the prescense of the group, resulting in a short-term change.

Question 6

Internalisation

Answer 6

When an individual changes their public behaviour and their private beliefs. They have accepted the group’s point of view as their own, resulting in a long-term change.

Question 7

What are the explanations of conformity?

Answer 7

Normative and informational.

Question 8

Normative Conformity

Answer 8

When we agree with the opinion of the majority because we want to be accepted, gain social approval, and be liked.

Question 8

Informational Conformity

Answer 8

When we agree with the opinion of the majority because we believe it to be correct.

Question 9

Jenness (1932) - Aim

Answer 9

To investigate conformity to majority influence in an unambiguous situation.

Question 10

Jenness (1932) - Procedure

Answer 10

101 psychology students were asked individually to estimate how many white beans were in a jar. Then, participants were divided into groups of three, asked to discuss, and provide a group estimate. Finally, they had another opportunity to estimate individually.

Question 11

Jenness (1932) - Findings

Answer 11

On average, male’s estimates changed by 256 beans, and female’s changed by 382.

Question 12

Jenness (1932) - Conclusion

Answer 12

Demonstrates how informational social influence can change people’s answers.

Question 13

Sherif (1935) - Aim

Answer 13

To demonstrate the idea that people conform to group norms when they are put in ambiguous situations.

Question 14

Sherif (1935) - Procedure

Answer 14

Used a lab experiment, using the autokinetic effect (when a still light appears to be moving). Participants were individually asked how far the light moved, then asked in groups of three.

Question 15

Sherif (1935) - Findings

Answer 15

Groups tended to converge to form a common estimate

Question 16

Who’s research supports normative conformity?

Answer 16

Asch (1951)

Question 17

Asch (1951) - Aim

Answer 17

To examine the extent to which social pressure from a majority, could affect a person to conform.

Question 18

Asch (1951) - Procedure

Answer 18

50 male students from America were told they were taking part in a vision test. They were placed in a room with seven confederates, seated penultemately in the line-up, and did the line judgement task. All had to state aloud which line was most like the target line, but the confederates had agreed upon an answer beforehand, 12 out of 18 trials being the incorrect answer.

Question 19

Asch (1951) - Findings

Answer 19

The real participants conformed to the incorrect answers on 32% of the trials. 74% conformed on at least one trial; 26% never conformed. When using a control group of no confederates, the participant answered incorrectly less than 1% of the time.

Question 20

Asch (1951) - Conclusion

Answer 20

The participants were interviewed after the experiment and most said that they did not believe the confederates’ answers, but they did not want to be ridiculed. A few said that they really believed the group’s answers were correct.

Question 21

Asch (1951) - Strengths

Answer 21

• The experiment used a very standardised lab condition, with control of extraneous variables, distractions, number of confederates, placement of the participant in the line up, and the task itself. This increases the reliability.
• Good internal validity due to high level of control over extraneous variables.

Question 22

Asch (1951) - Limitations

Answer 22

• Low ecological validity due to the artifical environment (lab) and task.
• Low population validity due to small sample, all male, all American, all attending the same college.
• Participants may have been affected by demand characteristics, lowering the internal validity.
• Ethical issues may include deception (participants told it was a vision test), right to withdraw (they were not briefed on any right to withdraw), informed consent (didn’t know what the study was investigating), and protection (may feel stressed or insecure).
• Low temporal validity as society is very different to 1951 - people’sn disposition/confidence has changed.

Question 23

Lucas (2006) - Summary

Answer 23

Asked students to answer math problems that were easy or difficult. Conformity was greater with the more difficult questions, especially for those who rated their maths ability as poor. This demonstrates informational social influence.

Question 24

Schultz (2008) - Summary

Answer 24

From 132 hotels and 794 rooms, Schultz assigned a control condition - with a hanger informing guests of the benfits of reusing towels - and an experimental condition where guests were told that 75% of guests reuse their towels each day. The experimental group reduced their need for towels by 25%, demonstrating normative influence.

Question 25

McGhee and Teevan (1967) - Summary

Answer 25

Found that students with a high need for affiliation were more likely to conform.

Question 26

How can individual differences affect normative social influence?

Answer 26

People who have less of a need to be liked will be less affected by group pressures - this is a limitation of normative social influence.