Conformity: types and explanations

• Social influence leads to conformity. This is a change in behaviour or beliefs due to 'real' or 'imagined' pressure from a person or a group of people.
• Kelman suggested 3 types of conformity: compliance, identification and internalisation.
• Compliance is conforming to the group publicly, while privately disagreeing with the group's viewpoint or behaviour. It is a temporary change in expressed behaviour and views. It is driven by the desire to fit in and avoid social disapproval.
• Identification occurs when individuals conform to the opinions or behaviour of a social role or group they value. It involves publically changing one's opinions and behaviour in the presence of the group they identify with. It is usually a short-term change.
• Internalisation is when an individual genuinely adopts the beliefs and/or behaviours of a group, both publicly and privately, because they accept them as true. It leads to a permanent change in behaviour.
• The two main explanations for conformity include Normative social influence (NSI) and Informational social influence (ISI).
• Normative social influence (NSI) is conformity driven by the desire to be liked or accepted by a group. People conform to gain social approval or avoid rejection. It usually leads to compliance.
• Informational social influence (ISI) is when individuals conform because they believe the group is correct or has better information. It often leads to internalisation, especially in ambiguous situations.
• Informational social influence usually occurs during ambiguous situations, as individuals look to the group for guidance on what is correct, leading to internalisation.
• Normative social influence (NSI) is linked to the fear of rejection, as individuals conform to be accepted or liked by the group.
• A strength of Normative social influence (NSI) as an explanation of conformity is that it is supported by research. Asch's (1951) line judgment study demonstrated that participants conformed to avoid social rejection, even when the correct answer was obvious. This strengthens NSI as an explanation for conformity as Asch's study highlights its validity because the participants when interviewed admitted they followed the majority due to fear of social rejection.
• A weakness of Normative social influence (NSI) as an explanation for conformity is that it doesn't account for individual differences. Some individuals, known as nAffiliators, have a greater need for social approval than others, making them more susceptible to NSI. In contrast, others may not be as affected. This limits NSI as an explanation for conformity as it lacks comprehension because it fails to explain why some people are less susceptible to NSI.
• A strength of Informational social influence (ISI) as an explanation for conformity is that it has research evidence. In Sherif's (1935) autokinetic experiment, participants conformed to the group estimates in an ambiguous situation, showing that they relied on others for information because they wanted to seem right. This strengthens ISI as an explanation of conformity because it highlights its validity.
• A weakness of Informational social influence (ISI) as an explanation for conformity is that there is counter-evidence. Perrin and Spencer (1980) found that when engineering students were tested, they were less likely to conform, suggesting that personal expertise can reduce the need for ISI in ambiguous situations. This limits ISI as an explanation for conformity as it may not lead to internalisation in everyone due to individual differences.