Social Influence - conformity

• Conformity


  How a person changes attitude/behaviour due to group pressure
• Levels of conformity


  • Compliance
  • Identification
  • Internalisation
• Compliance


  Shallowest level of conformity, change in public behaviour but not private beliefs. Normative social influences
• Identification


  Middle level of conformity, change public persona and their private beliefs. Normative social influence (Group presence)
• Internalisation


  Deepest level of conformity, change public behaviour and private beliefs. Informational social influence (long term)
• Normative social influence


  Conforming in order to be accepted
• Normative social influence


  Associated with compliance and identification
• Informational social influence


  Conforms to gain knowledge
• Informational social influence


  Associated with internalisation
• Outcomes of conformity


  • Change public behaviour
  • Change private belief
• Timeframe of conformity


  • Short term
  • Long term
• Compliance


  • Change public behaviour
  • No change private belief
• Identification


  • Change public behaviour
  • Change private belief
• Internalisation


  • Change public behaviour
  • Change private belief
• Evaluating explanations for conformity: Research support for normative and compliance, research support for identification and internalisation, individual differences mean not everyone is impacted the same way
• Jenness 1932


  Aim - Examine opinion changes in unclear situation. Method - 26 students estimated amount of beans in a bottle, then discussed in groups of 3 and re-estimated
• Results - Men's estimates changed by 296 beans, women's changed by 332 beans. The whole range decreased by 75% (1813 to 474)
• Conclusion - Change due to the thought of them being right
• Asch 1951


  Aim - Determine the extent to which social pressure to conform from an unanimous majority affects conformity in an ambiguous situation. Method - 123 male students from Swarthmore college, 1 real participant with 6-7 confederates who gave pre-agreed incorrect answers
• Results - 75% conformed, giving incorrect answers on 32% of critical trials. 25% never conformed
• Conclusion - Desire to fit in
• Evaluating Asch: Population validity limited, ecological validity low, lacks historical validity, broke ethical guidelines, potential demand characteristics
• Variations of Asch experiment

  • Group size
  • Unanimity
  • Task difficulty
• Group size - Conformity rates increased with 1-3 confederates, then dropped with more confederates as participants became suspicious
• Unanimity - Conformity decreased if one confederate gave a different incorrect answer, or if the unanimous position was distorted
• Task difficulty - Conformity increased with more difficult tasks, likely due to informational social influence