Explanations for conformity, Variables affecting Flashcards
Normative Social Influence: explanation
-public form of compliance
-desire to fit in, be accepted and not rejected, to fit in with ‘norm’
-when we want to be liked by the majority even though we may not agree with them
Asch 1955: experiment: aims (supporting NSI)
to investigate extent to which infividuals will conform in an unambiguous situation
Asch 1955: experiment: procedure (supporting NSI)
-123 male college participants each paired with group of 7-9 confederates (also male college students)
-perform line matching test and each participant always answered last or second to last
-within 18 trials, for the first few confederates gave correct answers there were 12 critical trials confederates gave incorrect answers
-control group of no confederated
Asch 1955: experiment: findings (supporting NSI)
the participants gave the wrong answer on 36.8% of the critical trials; 75% of participants conformed at least once. -> people will conform to the majority even when the situation is unambiguous.
However, 25% didn’t conform at all so conforming to the majority is not inevitable ,showed RESISTANCE
Asch 1955: experiment: evaluation: Strength 1 (supporting NSI)
REPLICABLE PROCEDURE so can be REPEATED to check for RELIABILITY
Asch 1955: experiment: evaluation: Strength 2 (supporting NSI)
APPLICATION e.g used for anti bullying strategies at schools understanding why non aggressive students become part of a bullys gang.
Asch 1955: experiment: evaluation: Limitation 1 (not supporting NSI)
LACK POPULATION VALIDITY as only male college students part of experiment so NO GENERALISATION due to limited sample
Asch 1955: experiment: evaluation: Limitation 2 (not supporting NSI)
LACK ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY as unnatural situation
Informational Social Influence: explanation
-private and internalisation
-looking for others for guidance to be CORRECT to shape own behaviours/opinions
-in ambiguous situations (unfamiliar)
Jenness (1932): overview (supporting ISI)
-investigating conformity in AMBIGUOUS situation
-all psychology students
-estimate number of beans in a jar: individual+group
-almost all participants changed of answer in group - within social group participants’ estimates converged to similar value despite initially varying significantly
-instance of ISI
STRENGTH: question was ambiguous so results valid
LIM: UNREALISTIC students already knew each other
ISI: supporting
REAL LIFE APPLICATION e.g formation of sports teams as coaches give potential members ambiguous tasks allowing ISI to take place as players learn from each others behaviour in order to be correct.
ISI + NSI: limiting
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES some people may be less concerned with fitting in or being correct than others, so not everyone will be affected by these explanations _> WEAKENS RANGE OF APPLICATION
SItuational variables affecting conformity: Asch’s variations: SIZE OF GROUP (Stu)
CONFORMITY rates INCREASE as SIZE of majority influence INCREASES, BUT there is a point where further INCREASES in SIZE DONT lead to further INCREASES in CONFORMITY
supported by.. Asch variation
1 real participant and 1 confederate -conformity low
1 real participant and 2 confederates
-13% conformity
1 real participant and 3 confederates
-32%
(extra confederates up to 15)
-no further effect on conformity
questioned by..Gerard et al
Conformity rates do rise as more confederates added, though rate of increase declines with each additional confederate (no point of increase stopping)
SItuational variables affecting conformity: Asch’s variations: TASK DIFFICULTY (sTu)
CONFORMITY INCREASE as TASK DIFFICULTY INCREASE, right answer becomes more ambiguous, ISI dominant force
supported by..Asch 1956
-made comparison lines similar to each other
-participants more likely to conform to wrong answers
SItuational variables affecting conformity: Asch’s variations: UNANIMITY (stU)
CONFORMITY DECREASE AS UNANIMITY DECRASE
supported by…Asch 1956
-1 confederate went against other confederates
-conformity drop of 26.5%
Use of conformity in real world?
‘the bandwagon effect’ using idea of individuals buying based on their peers recommendations - desire to fit in (NSI)
-Neilson Company Study surveyed 25,000 people from 50 countries and found 90% trusted their peers opinions of products
