Psych - social influence

• What is Conformity

  A change in a person's behaviour or opinions as a result of real or imagined pressure from a person or group of people
• Types of conformity

  • Compliance
  • Identification
  • Internalization
• Compliance

  • Shallow
  • Agreeing with the group in public, however keeping private views and beliefs
  • Results in a temporary change
• Identification

  • Value being a member of a group, so we conform to their behaviours to be a part of the group
  • Results in a temporary change
• Internalisation

  • Deepest level of conformity
  • Personal opinions genuinely change to match the group
  • Results in a Permanent Change
• Explanations for conformity

  • Informational Social influence
  • Normative social influence
• ISI

  • Following the behaviour of the group, as we feel that they are right.
  • Results in internalisation
• NSI

  • Follow the group as we feel the need to be accepted and liked by the group.
  • Often Results in compliance
• Asch Study - Aim

  To assess to what extent people would conform to the opinion of others, even in a situation where the answer is unambiguous.
• Asch - Sample

  123 American Male Participants.
• Asch Procedure

  • PPTs were told they were taking part in a visual perception test.
  • Tested with 7-9 Confederates.
  • Two white cards were displayed, The first showed the standard line, and The second had 3 comparison lines with one being the same length as the standard line.
  • The group was asked one by one on 18 trials which one of the comparison lines was the same as the standard line.
  • On 12 'critical' trials the confederates gave the wrong answers
• Asch - Results

  • Conformity was 32% compared to 0.004% with a control group with no confederates.
  • 75% of people conformed at least once.
  • 5% conforming on all trials
• Asch - Variation 1

  • Group size
  • 3% conformity with one confederate
  • 13% with 2
  • 33% with 3
  • Barely/not increasing after 3 confeds
• Asch - Variation 2

  • Unanimity
  • if a Confed just before the ppt disagrees with the majority and gives the correct answer, conformity drops to 5.5%
  • May give ppt emotional support to dissent.
• Asch - Variation 3

  • Task difficulty
  • Asch made the difference between the lines much smaller and found conformity increased when the task was more difficult.
  • This is a ISI effect.
• AO3 Asch

  • Artificial situtation
  • Limited Application
  • Research Support
  • Ethical issues
• Asch - artificial situation

  • PPTs knew they were part of a study and may have shown demand characteristics.
• Asch - Limited Application

  • All American men
  • Other research shows that women may be more conformists
  • Similar conformity studies have found that collectivist cultures are more likely to conform.
• Asch - Research support

  • Todd Lucas et al asked PPTs to solve easy and hard math problems, they were given fake results from three other students, the PPTS were more likely to conform to "harder" questions.
• NSI research support

  • Asch interviewed his PPTs and found that some said they conformed because they felt self-conscious giving the correct answer and they were afraid of disapproval.
  • When PPTs wrote their answers down, conformity fell to 12.5% as their answers were private.
• ISI Research support

  • Lucas et al found that PPTs conformed more often to incorrect answers for harder questions as when the questions were easy they 'knew their own minds' but when the questions were unambiguous they didn't want to be wrong and therefore relied on the answers given.
• AO1: Main Aim

  - A study on internalisation is Zimbardo's (1973) prison experiment.

  - Zimbardo aimed to investigate whether the reason for high levels of aggression observed in American prisons was due to the guards sadistic personalities or was it the social role (as a prison guard) that created such behaviour.
• AO1: Procedure

  - Created a fake prison in the basement of Stanford university.

  - 21 male students rated as physically and mentally stable were selected from 75 volunteers who responded to a newspaper advert.

  - They were randomly allocated as either a guard or prisoner.

  - The prisoners were given a realistic arrest at their homes by local police - so were fingerprinted, stripped and deloused.

  - Prisoners were given a loose smock and a cap to cover their hair plus an identification number in an attempt to dehumanise them. These created a loss of identity (de-individualisation)

  - Guards had uniforms, clubs and handcuffs as well as mirrored sunglasses to prevent eye contact between prisoners and guards.
• AO1: Findings

  - Prisoners and guards quickly conformed to their social roles.

  - By two days the prisoners revolted against their poor treatment from the guards.

  - Prisoners became subdued, depressed and anxious.

  - One prisoner was released because he showed symptoms of psychological disturbance.

  - One prisoner went on a hunger strike.

  - The guards identified with their roles and their behaviour became increasingly brutal and aggressive.

  - The study was cancelled at six days (instead of the intended fourteen) due to fears for prisoners mental health.
• AO1: Conclusion

  - Participants in the experiment conformed to their social roles within the prison, showing the situational power of the prison environment to change behaviour.
• AO3: Reliability

  - Reichler and Hallam (2011) tried to recreate the Stanford Prison experiment in a programme for the BBC.

  - In this simulation however, the prisoners became dominant over the guards and the guards were unable to control their behaviour.

  - This suggests that the results of Zimbardo's study may be down to individual differences.

  - All or most of those randomly assigned to be guards were those with more dominant personalities, and all or most of the prisoners had more submissive/agreeable personalities.
• AO3: Ethics

  - The study was unethical as participants were exposed to psychological harm.

  - Although the harm could not have been predicted at the outset, the experiment should have been stopped as soon as it was clear that prisoners were distressed (e.g. on day 2) rather than being allowed to carry on.
• AO3 - Generalisability

  - Zimbardo used a biased sample of only male university students from America.

  - Therefore we cannot generalise the findings to other populations, for example, female students.

  - We are unable to conclude whether female students would have conformed in a similar way to the male students.

  - And so, Zimbardo's study has beta bias because it minimises the differences between men and women.

  - As a result Zimbardo's study lacks population validity and further research is required to determine whether men and women conform in the same way.
• Obedience AO1 - Milgram (1963) study aims


  - Stanley Milgram (1963) recruited 40 American male participants supposedly for a study of memory
• Obedience AO1 - Milgram (1963) study procedure


  - Each participant arrived at Milgram's lab and drew lots for their role

  - A confederate 'Mr Wallace', who was strapped into a chair in a separate room and wired with electrodes, was always the learner whilst the true participant was always the teacher

  - The teacher could hear but not see the learner

  - The learner's task was to remember word pairs

  - The teacher had to give the learner an increasingly severe electric shock (fake) each time he made a mistake on a task

  - The shock increased from 15v to 450v

  - If the teacher wished to stop, the experimenter gave verbal prods to continue
• Obedience AO1 - Milgram study findings


  - 12% of participants stopped at 300v

  - 65% of participants continued to 450v

  - Milgram concluded that we obey legitimate authority even if it means our behaviour causes harm to someone else
• Obedience AO3 - One strength is that replications have supported Milgram's research findings


  - In a French TV documentary/game show, contestants were paid to give (fake) electric shocks when ordered by the presenter to other participants (actors)

  - 80% gave maximum 460v to an apparently unconscious man. Their behaviour was like that of Milgram's participants

  - This supports Milgram's original findings about obedience to authority
• Obedience AO3 - One limitation is that Milgram's study lacked internal validity


  - Orne and Holland argued that participants guessed the electric shocks were fake, and thus were acting, This was supported by Perry's discovery that only half of the participants believed the electric shocks were real suggesting that participants may have been responding to demand characteristics

  - HOWEVER, Sheridan and King's participants gave real shocks to a puppy; 54% of males and 100% of females delivered what they thought was a fatal shock. This suggests that the obedience in Milgram's study may be genuine
• Obedience AO3 - Another limitation is that the findings are not due to blind obedience


  - Haslam (2014) found that every participant given the first three prods obeyed the examiner, but those given a fourth disobeyed

  - According to social identity theory, the first three prods required identification with the science of the research but the fourth prod required blind obedience

  - This shows that the findings are best explained in terms of identification with scientific aims and not as blind obedience to authority
• Situational Factors in obedience

  • There are external circumstances that influence the level of obedience
  • Milgram carried out variations of the initial study.
• Situational factors Obedience - Proximity


  both teacher and learner were sat in the same room.Obedience levels fell to 40% as the teacher was able to directly see the consequences of their actions.

  In another variation the experimenter gave instructions from a telephone in another room,the vast majority defied the experimenter with only 21% continuing to 450v and also faking the level of shocks given.In a touch proximity condition,obedience dropped to 30%.
• Situational factors Obedience - Location

  -The study was carried out at Yale university,this location gave participants confidence that the study was legit and they trusted the experimenters more.Another study was carried out at a less prestigious location in a run down office,obedience rates dropped slightly to 48% administering the 450v.
• Situational factors Obedience - Uniform


  Uniform can convey power and authority and this impacts obedience.In the original study the experimenter wore a lab coat.In one variation the experimenter was called away and the role was taken over by someone wearing ordinary clothes.Obedience dropped to 20%.