Sherif (1935) Conformity and the autokinetic effect

Question 1

Method

Answer 1

• Was a laboratory experiment with a repeated measures design,
• Used a visual illusion called the autokinetic effect, where a stationary spot of light, viewed in a dark room, would appear to move,
• Participants were falsely told that the experimenter would move the light,
• They had to estimate how far it had moved,
• In the first phase, individual participants made repeated estimates,
• They were then put into groups of 3, where each made their estimates with others present,
• Finally they were retested individually.

Question 2

Results

Answer 2

• When they were alone participants developed their own stable estimates, varying widely between participants,
• Once the participants were in a group, the estimates tended to converge and become more alike,
• When the participants were then retested alone, their estimates were more like the group estimates than their orignal estimates.

Question 3

Conclusion

Answer 3

• Participants were influenced by the estimates of other people, and a group norm developed,
• Estimates converged because participants used information from others to help them; affected by informational social influence.

Question 4

Evaluation

Answer 4

• Was a laboratory experiment; strict control of variables, results are unlikely to have been affected by a third variable. It therefore should be possible to establish cause and effect,
• Method = replicable,
• Repeated measures design meant that participant variables that could have affected the results were kept constant,
• Method is flawed; participants were being asked to judge the movement of a light that wasn’t moving - rarely happens in real life,
• Created an artificial situation; lacks ecological validity,
• Sample = limited; all participants were male; results can be generalised,
• Ethical problem = deception; participants were told the light was moving when it wasn’t.