types and explanations of conformity AO3

Question 1

evaluation of explanations of conformity - research support for ISI (strength)

Answer 1

• one strength is that there is research evidence to support ISI
• lucas et al found that participants conformed more often to incorrect answers they were given when the maths problems were difficult. this is because when the problems were easy the participants ‘knew their own minds’ but when the problems were hard the situation became ambiguous (unclear).
• the participants did not want to be wrong so they relied on the answers they were given.
• this shows that ISI is a valid explanation of conformity because the results are what ISI would predict.

Question 2

evaluation of explanations of conformity - research support for ISI (counterpoint)

Answer 2

• however, it is often unclear whether it is NSI or ISI at work in research studies.
• for example, asch found that conformity is reduced when there is one other dissenting participant. the dissenter may reduce the power of NSI (provide social support) or they may reduce the power of ISI (they provide an alternative source of social information). both interpretations are possible.
• therefore, it is hard to separate ISI and NSI and both processes probably operate together in most real-world conformity situations.

Question 3

evaluation of explanations of conformity - individual differences in NSI (limitation)

Answer 3

• one limitation is that NSI does not predict conformity in every case.
• some people are greatly concerned with being liked by others. such people are called nAffiliators - they have a strong need for ‘affiliation’ (they want to relate to other people).
• mcGhee and teevan found that students who were nAffiliators were more likely to conform.
• this shows that NSI underlies conformity for some people more than it does for others. there are individual differences in conformity that cannot be fully explained by one general theory of situational pressures.