Conformity

• What is conformity?

  A change in a person's behaviours or opinions as a result of real or imagined group pressure
• What's internalisation?

  Deepest level of conformity where individuals genuinely adopt group norms and beliefs as their own. Both public and private behaviour change and is usually a permanent behavioural change because beliefs have been internalised.
• Example of internalisation

  Making friends with vegans at university and you follow the vegan diet for the rest of your life, despite no longer being around the same friends
• What is identification?

  Moderate conformity level where individuals adjust behaviour to fit in with a group they identify with and want to be a part of. The individual publicly changes their behaviour, to be accepted by the group, even if they don't privately agree with everything the group stands for.
• Example of identification?

  Changing the way you dress to fit in with fashion trends whilst at university
• What's compliance?


  Weakest level of conformity. Where individuals go along with the groups norms publicly, but privately they maintain their own beliefs or behaviours.

  • often temporary, conform to behaviour when you're with that group
  • due to the desire to avoid discomfort and negative consequences e.g. rejection, criticism
  • as soon as group pressure stops so do the opinions/behaviours
• Example of compliance

  Laughing at a joke you don't find funny

  • laughing because others are laughing too
  • Don't want others to think about them in a negative way
• Explanations for conformity

  Deutsch and Gerard (1955) developed a two-process theory arguing two main reasons people conform based on 2 central human needs:

  • Normative social influence (NSI)
  • Informational social influence (ISI)
• What's Informational social influence (ISI)?

  Conforming to gain knowledge and be 'right'

  WHY?

  • to act appropriately
  • to avoid standing out

  An explanation of conformity that says we agree with the opinion of the majority because we believe it's correct. We accept it because we want to be correct as well. ISI is a cognitive process that leads to permanent change in behaviour/opinion (internalisation)

  • usually occurs in new or ambiguous situations
• What's Normative social influence? (NSI)

  Conforming to be accepted and belong to the group (need to be liked)

  WHY?

  • socially rewarding
  • avoid punishment

  An explanation of conformity that says we agree with the opinion of the majority because we want to gain social approval and be liked.

  NSI is an emotional process that leads to a temporary change in behaviour/opinion (compliance)

  • may occur in stressful situations where people have greater need for social support or with strangers where you feel concerned about rejection
• Strength of Informational social influence (ISI)- supporting evidence

  P: supporting evidence for it as explanation of

  E: Lucas et al. found that participants conformed more to incorrect answers when maths problems were difficult.

  Ex: When problems were easy, they trusted their own judgement; when hard, they relied on others for accuracy.

  L: Shows that at least some conformity is due to the desire to be right, supporting ISI.

  C: However Abrams et al found people conform more with those they share a social identity with suggesting ISI is influenced by social factors, making the two-process model too simplistic.
• Strength of Normative social influence (NSI)

  P: A strength of NSI is that it is supported by research evidence.

  E: Asch (1951) found participants conformed because they felt self-conscious and feared disapproval.

  Ex: When answers were written privately, conformity dropped to 12.5%, suggesting that without group pressure, the desire to avoid rejection (NSI) was reduced

  L: This suggests some conformity happens to avoid rejection, supporting NSI as an explanation.

  C: However, McGhee & Teevan (1967) found nAffiliators (people who care more about being liked) conformed more, suggesting NSI affects people differently - weakens NSI as universal exp
• Weakness of the two process model

  P: too simplistic, assumes ISI and NSI work separately

  E: Asch (1955) found conformity drops with a dissenter, but it’s unclear if this reduces NSI (social support) or ISI (alternative information).

  Ex: This suggests ISI and NSI often work together, making them hard to separate

  L: This reduces the model’s validity as real-world conformity is more complex

  C: However, the model is still useful, as seen in campaigns like "stop plastic usage," where both ISI (choosing the right action) and NSI (following social norms) influence behaviour
• Weakness of the two process model

  P: The two-process model ignores individual differences in conformity.

  E: Some people resist NSI and ISI due to personality traits like confidence or intelligence.

  Ex: Perrin & Spencer (1980) found engineering students conformed less in an Asch-style study.

  L: This suggests the model oversimplifies conformity by assuming everyone is equally affected.

  C: However, it still provides a useful framework for understanding group influence.
• What was Asch's (1955) aim?

  He wanted to know why do we conform and why do we:

  1. 'go along' with people in our everyday social lives
  2. change our behaviours to 'fit in'

  • Asch set out to identify the extent to which social pressure from a majority group (confederates) could influence a person to conform.
• Explain the aim of Asch's Baseline conformity experiment

  To what extent will people conform to the opinions of others, even in an unambiguous task
• Methods of Asch's Baseline conformity experiment

  123 American males

  • 1 naive ppt seated last or second to last
  • 5-7 confederates

  18 trials (12 of which the confederates answer incorrectly)

  Participants had to say out loud which of the comparison lines was the same length as the standard X line.
• Results of Asch's Baseline conformity experiment

  • Naive ppts agreed with confederates' incorrect answers 36.8% of the time
  • 25% of ppts never gave a wrong answer
  • After the experiment in an interview many said they went along with the group in order to fit in, or because they would be ridiculed
• Conclusion of Asch's Baseline conformity experiment

  • ppts conformed around a third of the time
  • 1/4 of ppts never conformed highlighting individual differences
  • the interview confirms that they complied, due to normative social influence
• What were Asch's variations?

  Asch extended his baseline study to investigate the variables that might lead to an increase or decrease in conformity:

  • Group size: Asch increased the size of the group by adding more confederates, thus increasing the size of the majority. Will the size of the group be more important than the agreement of the group?
  • Unanimity: Asch introduced a confederate who disagreed with the other confederates
  • Task difficulty: Asch increased the difficulty of the line-judging task by making the stimulus line and the comparison lines more similar to each other in length
• Aim + Methods of Group size conformity experiment

  Aim: Is the group size more important than the agreement of the group?

  
  

  Methods:

  • 1 naive participant
  • 15 confederates
  • participants had to say out loud which of the comparison lines was the same length as the standard X line
• Results + Conclusion of Group size conformity experiment

  Results - a curvilinear relationship:

  • 1 confederate = 3% conformity
  • 2 confederates = 13% conformity
  • 3 confederates = 32% conformity

  More confederates made little difference

  Conclusion - Conformity increased with group size, but only up to a point

  • this suggests that most people are very sensitive to the views of others because just one or two confederates was enough to sway opinion
• Aim + Methods of Unanimity (social support) conformity experiment

  Aim: Does the presence of a non-conforming person affect the naive participant's conformity?

  
  

  Methods:

  • 1 naive participant
  • 5-7 confederates
  • 1 confederate (dissenter) who disagreed with other confederates
  • participants had to say out loud which of the comparison lines was the same length as the standard X line
• Results + Conclusion of Unanimity conformity experiment

  Results:

  • The naive ppt conformed less often in the presence of a dissenter
  • the rate decreased to less than a quarter of the level it was when the majority was unanimous

  Conclusion:

  • The presence of a dissenter seemed to free the naive ppts
  • this suggests that the influence of the majority depends to a large extent on it being unanimous
  • Non-conformity is more likely when cracks are shown in the majority's unanimous view
• Aim + Methods of Task difficulty conformity experiment

  Aim: Does making the task harder affect the degree of conformity?

  • Conformity increased because lines are harder to see e.g. ISI

  
  

  Methods:

  • 1 naive participant
  • 5-7 confederates
  • The difficulty of the line task was made harder. The stimulus line and the comparison lines were much more similar to each other in length
• Results + Conclusion of Task difficulty conformity experiment

  Results:

  • Conformity increased

  Conclusion:

  • The task is harder - more ambiguous and the ppts are unsure of the right answer so they look to the other ppts for the right answer.
  • This is called informational social influence
• Strength of Asch's research - research support for task difficulty

  P: supported from other studies for effects of task difficulty.

  E: Lucas et al. (2006) found participants conformed more on difficult maths problems.

  Ex: When the task was easy, they trusted their own judgment; when hard, they relied on others.

  L: This supports Asch’s claim that task difficulty affects conformity.

  C: Lucas also found confidence influences conformity, as ppts with high confidence in maths abilities conformed less on hard tasks, Asch didn’t research roles of individual factors, so conformity = more complex
• Weakness of Asch's research - ethical issues, deception

  P: Asch’s study has ethical concerns due to deception.

  E: Participants were misled into thinking confederates were real participants.

  Ex: They were also told the study was about vision, not conformity.

  L: This means Asch broke ethical guidelines on deception and protection from harm. Questions arose of whether findings outweigh potential psychological impact his study has on ppts

  C: However, the study’s findings helped explain conformity, which may prevent harmful social influence.
• Weakness of Asch's research - lacks temporal validity

  P: Asch’s findings may not apply today as they were a ‘child of its time.’

  E: Perrin & Spencer (1980) found much lower conformity rates than Asch with just one conforming response in 396 trials when replicating the study in 1970s and 1980s

  Ex: Asch’s study was conducted in 1950s America, a highly conformist era, society's post war attitudes to work together

  L: This suggests his findings lack temporal validity and may not replicate today.

  C: However, conformity studies still help explain social behavior in psychology and marketing.
• What was Zimbardo's research aim?

  Following reports of brutality by prison guards during a fling of American prison riots in the 1960s, Zimbardo wanted to know why prison guards behave brutally.

  • was it because of their social role (situational factors) or their sadistic personality (dispositional factors)
• What was the Stanford Prison experiment (1973)?

  A mock prison was set up in the basement of Stanford University

  • 24 male student volunteers who tested as 'emotionally stable' were randomly assigned prisoner or prison guard
  • an advert was put in the newspaper for 1-2 weeks looking for male college students for a psychological study of prison life, offering to pay $15 per day
  • there were 75 volunteers who took a psychological test
  • Zimbardo believed that it's the situation that makes people act in the way they do rather than their disposition
• What were all ppts encouraged to do?

  Adhere to social roles through uniforms and instructions, creating a loss of personal identity:

  • Researchers were able to observe the behaviour of the prisoners and guards using hidden cameras and microphones
• What was uniform like in Zimbardo's research?

  • The Prison guards were dressed in khaki uniform with handcuffs, sunglasses and held a baton
  • the prisoners wore a hair cap, white gown and were assigned a number rather than names

  this created de-individuation - a loss of personal identity
• What were the instructions in the SPE?

  • The guards were encouraged to play their role by being reminded that they had complete power over the prisoners
  • Prisoners were encouraged to 'apply for parole' rather than leaving
• Procedure/methods for SPE

  • prisoners were arrested by city police and blindfolded
  • prisoners went through a degrading ritual - lice removal, no underpants, referred to as numbers,
  • Each cell held 3 prisoners
  • one tiny space was designated as the solitary confinement room and a small prison yard
  • prisoners were to remain in the mock prison 24 hours a day during the study whereas guards were allowed to return to their homes until their next shift
  • researchers were able to observe the behaviour of the prisoners and guards using hidden cameras and microphones
• Findings of the SPE - prison guards

  • guards treated prisoners harshly - behaviour became increasingly brutal and aggressive with some appearing to enjoy the power that they had
  • guards retaliated to rebellion with fire extinguishers and humiliating tasks
  • guards played prisoners off against each other
  • harassed prisoners constantly - frequent headcounts
  • punished prisoners by putting them in a tiny dark closet 'the hole' - solitary confinement
• Findings of the SPE - prisoners

  • within two days the prisoners rebelled by ripping their uniform and shouting/swearing at guards
  • after the rebellion they became anxious, depressed, submissive
  • referred to themselves and other inmates as their numbers
  • Day 2: 1 prisoner released due to psychological disturbance
  • Day 5: 5 prisoners released
  • prisoner went on hunger strike
• When did Zimbardo end the SPE?

  He ended the study after 6 days instead of the intended 14
• Conclusions related to social roles - SPE

  Social roles have a strong influence on an individual's behaviour

  • Guards became brutal and prisoners became submissive
  • Roles were taken on by all ppts more quickly and extremely than expected - easily conformed to social roles
• Strength of Zimbardo's research - artificial setting = control

  P: It was conducted in an artificial setting meaning there was an element of control

  E: Some variables could be controlled for in the experiment as ppts completed a questionnaire prior to being allocated a role, in order to be deemed as 'emotionally stable' to take part. This was to ensure there were no individual differences that could affect the results

  Ex: Eliminating individual differences, we can be sure extraneous variables are minimised and they do not affect the dependent variable (social role assigned of prisoner or prison guard

  L: This increases the validity of the findings that social roles have a strong influence on individuals' behaviour

  C: Due to its artificial nature, the SPE may lack realism. Banuazizi & Mohavedi (1975) argued ppts were play-acting based on stereotypes — one guard even admitted copying a film character.