Conformity

Question 1

What are the types of conformity?

Answer 1

Internalisation, Identification and Compliance

Question 2

What is Internalisation?

Answer 2

Private and public change of beliefs.
Attitudes/behaviours are internalised and persist without group presence.

Question 3

What is Identification?

Answer 3

Public change of beliefs, but no private agreement.
Done because we value the group.

Question 4

What is Compliance?

Answer 4

Conforming to group norms only when others are present.
Behaviour stops when group pressure stops.

Question 5

What is ISI?

Answer 5

Informational Social Influence
(explanation for conformity)

Desire to be right; cognitive process.
Leads to internalisation.
Looks to the majority when unsure of the correct answer.

Question 6

What is NSI?

Answer 6

Normative Social Influence
(explanation for conformity)

Desire to be liked; need for acceptance.
Leads to compliance to avoid rejection.

Asch (1956)
Conformity occurs when fear of rejection is high.
More likely in stressful situations needing social support.

Question 7

Aim and procedure for group norm conformity study:

Answer 7

Sherif (1936)

Aim:
Investigate how group norms develop in small groups.

Procedure:
Used the autokinetic effect (stationary light in a dark room appeared to move).

1.) Participants first estimated how much the light moved individually.
2.) Then placed in groups, with 3 group sessions.
3.) Estimates began to converge into a group norm.

Question 8

Difference between identification and compliance?

Answer 8

Compliance - superficial, internal attitudes don’t change

Identification - adopting some beliefs but not fully internalising

Question 9

Asch study (1951) aim:

Answer 9

Aim:
Investigate how individuals conform to an incorrect group consensus.

+ effects of social pressure on personal judgment.

Question 10

Asch study (1951) procedure:

Answer 10

Procedure:
123 male American college students.
Placed in groups with confederates in a line-judging task.

Shown two cards: one with a single line and the other with three lines of varying lengths.
Asked to identify which of the three lines matched the first card.

Confederates gave incorrect answers on specific trials to create majority influence.
Participants responded last or second-to-last, after confederates.

Question 11

Asch study (1951) findings:

Answer 11

Findings:
32% of participants conformed to the incorrect majority on critical trials.
75% conformed at least once.
25% never conformed.

Question 12

Asch study (1951) conclusions:

Answer 12

Conclusions:
People are highly susceptible to social pressure, even when the evidence is clear.

Asch concluded that conformity occurs due to NSI and ISI

Question 13

Asch study (1951) criticisms:

Answer 13

• Artificial Task
• Generalisability
• Cultural Bias
  Conformity levels may vary between individualist and collectivist cultures.
• Situational Differences
  Results may differ in other situations or with different tasks.
• Relation Between Participants
  Williams & Sogon (1984) found higher conformity when the group consisted of friends.
• Ethical Issues
  Participants were deceived about the study’s nature and did not provide full informed consent.

Question 14

Variables affecting conformity?

Answer 14

Group Size:
Larger groups increase conformity likelihood.
Conformity levels off after 3+ people.
* Asch:
3+ people = 32% conformity.
2 people = 13% conformity.

Task Difficulty:
Harder tasks increase conformity.
Easier tasks lead to less conformity due to greater confidence in individual abilities.
* Asch:
When lines were more similar, task difficulty increased, and so did conformity.

Unanimity (Social Support):
Conformity is more likely when the majority is unanimous.
A dissenting individual reduces conformity.
* Asch:
When one other person gave the correct answer, conformity dropped to 5%.

Question 15

Conformity explanations research ISI :

Answer 15

Informational Social Influence (ISI)

Lucas et al. (2006)
Findings: Higher conformity on difficult math problems, especially among those with low self-confidence.

Baron et al. (1996)
Findings: Increased conformity on difficult tasks due to perceived expertise; NSI less clear.

Crutchfield (1955)
Findings: Conformity influenced by group responses even without face-to-face interaction; NSI had minimal impact.

Question 16

Zimbardo prison experiment (1973) aim:

Answer 16

Aim:
To explore if prison brutality is due to dispositional factors (individual personalities) or situational factors (prison environment).

Question 17

Zimbardo prison experiment (1973) procedure:

Answer 17

Procedure:
Stanford University, mock prison in a basement.
24 male college students, selected for psychological stability.
Randomly assigned as guards or prisoners.
Guards: Given uniforms, sunglasses, and batons.
Prisoners: Arrested at home, stripped of identity, given numbered uniforms.
Findings

Question 18

Zimbardo prison experiment (1973) findings:

Answer 18

Findings:
Guards became abusive, hostile, and authoritarian.
Prisoners exhibited obedience, emotional distress, and rebellion.
Experiment ended after 6 days due to severe psychological effects.

Question 19

Zimbardo prison experiment (1973) criticisms:

Answer 19

Criticisms:
Ecological Validity: Artificial setting, limited generalizability to real prisons.

Demand Characteristics: Participants may have acted based on perceived expectations.

Dispositional Factors: Individual personality traits not fully controlled.

Ethical Issues: Participants experienced significant distress; SAVIN (1973) questioned if the knowledge gained justified the harm. Zimbardo noted consent forms and debriefing.

Temporal Validity: Conducted in the 1970s; social roles and attitudes may have evolved.

Haslam & Reicher (2002): Awareness of being filmed could have influenced behavior.

Question 20

Zimbardo prison experiment (1973) conclusion:

Answer 20

Demonstrated the strong influence of situational factors on behavior, supporting the situational hypothesis.
Showed power of authority in shaping behaviour.

Question 21

ISI study

Answer 21

Jenness (1932) - ‘Beans’ Study
Group estimated beans in a jar.
Estimates became similar.

Question 22

Findings for group norm conformity study:

Answer 22

Findings:
In ambiguous situations, participants looked to others for guidance.
Group estimates became similar over time.
Confederates successfully influenced the group’s norm, and this influence persisted.

Confederates were later introduced to inflate the group norm.
Influence persisted over a year later.

Question 23

Conclusion for group norm conformity study:

Answer 23

Conclusion:
When faced with uncertainty, people rely on others to form opinions.
Group norms develop in ambiguous situations, and social influence can have a long-lasting effect.

Answer 24

Asch (1951)
Findings: Conformity to avoid rejection, even with clear answers; ISI less relevant.

Williams, Cheung and Choi (2000)
Findings: Participant ignored by others on video game task, when belonging is threatened, higher motivation to belong to a group

McGee & Teevan (1967)
Findings: Higher conformity in individuals with a need for affiliation; lower self-confidence increased susceptibility to both ISI and NSI.