conformity

• 3 types of conformity: compliance, identification and internalisation
• compliance: superficial conformity, public conformity/priavte disagreement
• identification: deeper conformity, public + private change of view but temporary
• internalisation: deepest conformity, permanent change in public and private views
• NSI - normative social influence
• ISI -informational social influence
• NSI: explains compliance - adapting in a group to be accepted, it is rewarding to be accepted, happens in an unambiguous situation
• ISI: explains internalisation - adapting to a group for guidance, desire to be right, private acceptance, happens in ambiguous/new situation
• NSI AO3: research support (asch’s line test study). in the study people conformed to have the majority’s judgement, showing that NSI explains why people conform ; however its a lab experiment- low mundane reality, less generalisation ability
• NSI AO3: real life applications - conservation and ecology. in a study of 132 hotels when people were told that 75% of guests reused towels, conservation behaviour increased among guests - provides people w common goals to conform to (schulz et al)
• ISI AO3: research support (beans in a jar): people were asked to guess how many beans were in a jar, then had to discuss w people who thought the number was lower than their answer, and guess on average reduced - supports ISI as they believed guess in private. however , lab experiments->low mundane reality so less generalisation
• aim of asch's line study: to investigate the degree in which the individual would conform to a majority who gave obviously wrong answers
• asch line studyprocedure: 123 american student volunteers were placed in groups of 7 or 9 confederates. the line test itself was done 18 times, 12 of which were 'critical trials', where the confederates answered wrong, with the participant answering last
• findings of aschs line study: 32% conformity rate, 75% of people conformed at least once
• reasons for conformity in aschs line study: distortion of action - people conformed to avoid ridicule
• reasons for conformity in aschs study: distortion of perception - people may have genuinely belived they were wrong
• conclusions of aschs study: theres a strong tendency to conform to a group even if it is wronf, interviews confirm there are individual differences in reasons for conforming
• variations of Asch's line study - size of majority: 1 confederate / 3% conformity, 2 confederates / 13% conformity, 3 and 6 confederates / 32% conformity
• variations of aschs line study - unanimity: original study where all confederates gave same answers - 32% conformity. when there was rebel confederate - 5.5% conformity
• generalisability of aschs study: gender bias - women conform more; culture bias - collectivist/individualist cultures may act differently ; time relativity - culture may have changed so conformity may have changed
• reliability of aschs study: lab experiment makes it repeatable (standardisation, highly controlle), however, the study was repeated with different people and it found different results
• ethics of aschs study: confederates deceive participants, psychological harm of stress, embarrassment, self-doubt
• zimbardos aim: investigating the extent to which people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner, and to test the situational vs dispositional hypothesis
• zimbardo procedure: 21 students were divided between the roles of prisoner and guard. the prison guards converted the basement of the stanford uni psychology department basement into a prison. dehumanisation was achieved using uniforms for the prisoners (numbered smocks, nylon stocking caps) as well as being stripped down. prison guards had uniform, including blacked-out sunglasses and khaki uniform. the experiment planned to run for 2 weeks.
• zimbardo conclusion: all participants conformed to their social roles to a large extent
• zimbardo generalisability: unrepresentative sample - male students (females conform more), american (individualist and collectivist cultures may conform differently), students (different ages may conform more)
• zimbardo ethics: psychological harm - embarrassment, stress, anxiety, guilt. informed consent - ppts didn't fully consent to all that happened during the experiment. deception - they were not told that they were going to be arrested. right to withdraw - the nature of the experiment made it hard to leave, zimbardo himself obstructed someone from leaving
• zimbardo validity: demand characteristics, ecological validity - may not be an accurate representation of prison, could be realistic due to lack of extraneous variables
• aim of milligrams study: to see if individuals obeyed the orders of authority figures that caused negative consequences and went against their moral code
• procedure of milgram: 40 American males aged 20-50 were introduced to Mr Wallace, and at random assigned teacher or student, but it was rigged for the ppt to always be the teacher. ppts read paired-association word lists and recieved pre-recorded wrong answers, and upon those, they were instructed to give an electric shock.
• generalisability of milgram: gender bias (all men), culture bias (collectivist/individualist cultures may obey differently - in spain 90% obedience)
• reliability of milgram: lab experiment - standardised procedure. french tv show replicated experiment and got 80% obedience rate
• ethics of milgram: psychological harm (stress, guilt, long-term), informed consent (confederates block informed consent, ppts told they were in a memory study, they think they are electrocuting the person), right to withdraw (blocked by experimenter urging them to stay)
• findings of milgram: 65% continued to 450V, 100% continued to at least 300V
• proximity variation of milgram: experimenter gives order over the phone, 21% obedience
• location variation of milgram: order given in dilapidated office - 48% obedience
• uniform variation of milgram: experimenter in 'normal' clothes - 20% obedience
• autonomous state: where individuals are seen as personally responsible for their actions
• agentic state: where one hands over responsibility to the authority figure, and the individual sees themselves as agents for the authority figure
• research support for agentic state: milgram variation - experimenter gave order over the phone, obedience fell from 65% to 21%, meaning that the ppts were in the autonomous state. if the experimenter was closer, the ppts would be in the agentic state.