Social Influence - Conformity

Question 1

Define Conformity

Answer 1

When the behaviour of an individual or a small group is influenced by a larger or dominant group.
- ‘Yielding to group pressures’

Question 2

Identify the three types of conformity and name who proposed them

Answer 2

Proposed by Kelman

• Internalisation
• Identification
• Compliance

Question 3

Define internalisation (strongest type of conformity)

Answer 3

• Public and private acceptance of majority influence, through adoption of a majorities believe system.
• Maintained outside of the group’s presence therefore stronger and more permanent type of conformity

Question 4

Define Compliance (weakest level of conformity)

Answer 4

• Public but not private acceptance of majority influence in order to gain approval/avoid ridicule

Question 5

Define Identification (middle type of conformity)

Answer 5

• Public and private acceptance of majority influence in order to gain group acceptance.
• Stronger form of conformity but still temporary, don’t always agree with the group
• Conforming to fulfil a social role

Question 6

What’s meant by ISI (Informational Social Influence) - Part of the Dual Process Dependency Model (Deutsch and Gerard 1955)

Answer 6

• To do with why we conform
• Is a cognitive process rather than an emotional one
• We agree with the majority because we believe it is correct
• We accept it because we want to be correct as well and change our public and private views to be consistent with the majority

Question 7

What is meant by NSI (Normative Social Influence) - Part of the Dual Process Dependency Model (Deutsch and Gerard 1955)

Answer 7

• To do with why we conform
• Is an emotional process rather than a cognitive one
• We agree with the majority because we want to be accepted
• People do not like to appear foolish, we want to gain social approval

Question 8

Evidence to support the role of ISI

Answer 8

• Fein et al. asked participants to vote for a US presidential candidate after seeing others vote for somebody else. Most participants changed their mind because they wanted to be correct, thus demonstrating the impact of ISI as mechanism for conformity

Question 9

Outline the method of Asch’s Experiment (1951)

Answer 9

• Asch carried out a laboratory experiment with an independent groups design
• Looking at effects of NSI with an unambiguous task
• Consisted of 50 male students
• In groups of 8, asked to judge the length of lines by saying out loud which comparison line (1,2 or 3) matched the standard line
• Each group contained one participant, the rest were confederates
• Real participant always went either last or last but one, to ensure they’d heard the others’ answer first
• Each participant did 18 trials, on 12 of these (the critical trials) the confederates all gave the same wrong answer
• Control group where participants judged lines in isolation

Question 10

Explain and Evaluate the findings from Asch’s Experiment (1951)

Answer 10

• 36.8% conformed
• 75% conformed at least once
• Showed that the task was easy to get right, however 37% wrong on critical trials, conformed due to NSI
• Laboratory experiment (reduce extraneous variables) ie. Only 1% of responses were incorrect (eliminating eyesight/perception as an extraneous variable, increasing the validity drawn from conclusions)
• Strict control of variables means easily repeatable
• Lacks ecological validity
• Deceived and may have been embarrassed after (ethical issue)
• Social context of the 1950’s. Perrin and Spencer criticised the study due to being at an anti-Communist time where people were afraid to be different i.e. McCarthyism, thus lacks temporal validity because findings cannot be generalised across all time periods

Question 11

Group size as a situational factor influencing Asch’s participants

Answer 11

1. Group size - Asch (1956) conducted conformity experiment with different numbers of confederates as the majority
   - 2 confederates, real participant conformed on only 14% of the critical trials
   - 3 confederates, rose to 32% conformity
   - Little change to conformity after that, meaning smaller majorities are easier to resist but influence doesn’t keep increasing with size of majority past a certain point

Question 12

Unanimity and task difficulty as situational factors affecting Asch’s participants

Answer 12

2. Unanimity/social support - Fellow dissenter (someone disagreeing with majority) breaks unanimity of group, far easier to resist conforming - conformity fell to 5.5%
3. Task difficulty - When it was more difficult to identify the similar line, conformity increased due to being less confident they were correct

Question 13

Confidence and expertise as dispositional factors affecting Asch’s participants

Answer 13

• During debrief found common factor of confidence from people who didn’t conform
  Wiesenthal et al (1976) those who felt competent in task were less likely to conform
  Perrin and Spencer (1980) replicated Asch’s study with engineering students. Conformity levels far lower due to confidence in making accurate observations

Question 14

Gender as a dispositional factor affecting Asch’s participants

Answer 14

• Eagly and Carli (1981) meta analysis found some sex differences in conformity. However, data was inconsistent.
• Eagly (1971) argued the differences in social roles between men and women explain the difference. Women want group harmony whereas men are associated with assertiveness and independence

Question 15

Outline the method of Sherif’s experiment (1935)

Answer 15

• Laboratory experiment with a repeated measures design
• Effects of ISI using an ambiguous task
• Visual illusion called the autokinetic effect
• Participants falsely told the light would move - had estimate by how much
• Individually made repeated estimates, then in groups of 3 made estimates and finally retested again individually

Question 16

Explain and evaluate the findings from Sherif’s experiment (1935)

Answer 16

• When alone, formed personal norms which varied widely
• In a group, generally converged to become more alike
• When retested more like group estimates
  Conclusion - A group norm was formed and estimates converged because participants used information from others to help them (affected by ISI)
  Evaluating Sherif:
• Laboratory experiment so strict control of variables - should be able to establish cause and effect - likely to be repeatable
• Artificial situational, sample so can’t be generalised, deception is an ethical issue