low ecological validity - used a controlled laboratory setting not similar to an everyday situation
lack of informed consent
low population validity - only used 101 psychology students
Asch AO3:
demand characteristics - the task was trivial and artificial so there was no reason not to conform
low population validity - Neto has suggested women might be more conformist as the are more concerned about social relationships
deception - participants believed others in the study were genuine participants
Explanations for conformity AO3:
supporting research (Lucas) - participants with poor maths ability more likely to conform
Individual differences may affect conformity - nAffiliators (McGhee and Teevan) greater need for social relationships
overly simplistic - both processes could be involved
Zimbardo AO3:
control over extraneous variables - chose emotionally stable participants
demand characteristics - participants were play acting rather than conforming to roles
ethical issues - prison superindendent
Milgram AO3:
artificial relationship no different to wider settings - Hofling
low internal validity - guessed the shocks were fake
ethical issues - deception
Hofling AO3
high external validity - ordered in own working environment
high control over variables - standardised script
Locus of control AO3
evidence - Holland repeated Milgrams experiment and found 37% did not continue to highest shock
not all research supports - Twenge et al - people have become more independent and external
exaggerated - Rotter - only important in new situations
Moscovici AO3
mundane realism - highly artificial task
low population validity - only female participants
lack of informed consent - did not inform participants of fullnature
Social change AO3
role of NSI - Nolan et al
only indirectly effective - Nemeth - only influenced matters related to the issue
minority group is overlooked as a factor - Bashir et al - less likely to act in an environmental way as they dont want to be labelled as an environmentalist