Conformity

• Conformity


  A change in a person's behaviour based on real or imagined pressure from a person or group
• Types of conformity


  • Internalisation
  • Identification
  • Compliance
• Internalisation


  Occurs when a person genuinely accepts the group norms. Results in a private as well as a public change of opinions/behaviours. This change is usually permanent because attitudes have been internalised. The change in behaviour persists even in the absence of other group members.
• Identification


  Conform to opinions/behaviour as a group because there is something about the group that we value. We identify with the group and want to be a part of it. This identification may mean we publicly change our behaviour to be accepted by the group, even if we don't privately agree with everything the group stands for.
• Compliance


  Going along with others' in public, but privately not changing personal opinions and behaviour. Superficial change. The particular behaviour stops as soon as the group pressure stops.
• Explanations for conformity


  • Informational social influence
  • Normative social influence
• Informational social influence


  About who has the better information, you or the rest of the group. Often we are uncertain about what behaviours or beliefs are right or wrong. It is a cognitive process because it is to do with what you think. It leads to permanent change in behaviour (internalisation).
• Normative social influence


  About norms, i.e. what is typical behaviour for a social group. Norms regulate the behaviour of groups and individuals so it's not surprising that we pay attention to them. It is an emotional rather than a cognitive process. It leads to a temporary change in behaviour (compliance). Likely to occur in situations with strangers where you may feel concerned about rejection.
• Asch's research found that conformity increased with group size, up to a maximum of about 3 members. Conformity was more difficult when the majority was not unanimous.
• Asch's research found that task difficulty affected conformity. Making the task harder increased conformity, as participants were more uncertain and more likely to assume the majority was correct.
• Asch's research found that the presence of a dissenting confederate reduced conformity, as participants were more willing to go against the majority. Unanimity
• One limitation of Asch's research is that the task and situation were artificial
• Participants knew they were in a research study and may simply have gone along with what was expected (demand characteristics)
• The task of identifying lines was relatively trivial and therefore there was really no reason not to conform
• According to Susan Fiske (2014), Asch's groups were not very "groupy", i.e. they did not really resemble groups that we experience in everyday life
• This means the findings do not generalise to real-world situations, especially those where the consequences of conformity might be important
• Another limitation is that Asch's participants were American men
• Other research suggests that women may be more conformist, presumably because they are concerned about social relationships and being accepted (Neto 1995)
• Furthermore, the US is an individualist culture (i.e. where people are more concerned about themselves rather than their social group)
• Conformity studies conducted in collectivist cultures such as China, where the social group is more important than the individual, have found that conformity rates are higher (Bond and Smith 1996)
• This means that Asch's findings tell us little about conformity in women and people from some cultures
• One strength of Asch's research is support from other studies for the effects of task difficulty
• For example, Todd Lucas (not book) asked their participants to solve easy and hard maths problems. Participants conformed more often by agreeing with the wrong answers when the problems were harder
• This shows Asch was correct in claiming that task difficulty is one variable that affects conformity
• However, Lucas et al.'s study found that conformity is more complex than Asch suggested. Participants with high confidence in their math abilities conformed less on hard tasks than those with low confidence
• This shows that an individual-level factor can influence conformity by interacting with situational variables (e.g. task difficulty)
• But Asch did not research the roles of individual factors
• Participants felt self-conscious and afraid of disapproval


  This led to conformity
• Research support for ISI


  • Participants conformed more to incorrect answers when the maths problems were difficult
  • When problems were easy, participants relied on their own minds
  • When problems were hard, the situation became ambiguous and participants did not want to be wrong, so they relied on the answers they were given
• This shows that ISI is a valid explanation of conformity because the results are what would be predicted
• Social roles


  The 'parts' people play as members of various social groups, e.g. parent, child, student, accompanied by expectations of appropriate behaviour
• Zimbardo's research (1973)


  1. Set up a mock prison in the basement of the psych department at Stanford University

  2. 21 men (student volunteers) who tested as 'emotionally stable' were randomly assigned to play the role of prison guard or prisoner

  3. Prisoners and guards were encouraged to conform to social roles through the uniform they wore and instructions about their behaviour
• Prisoner uniform

  • Loose smock, cap to cover hair, identified by number
• Guard uniform

  • Reflected the status of their role, with wooden club, handcuffs and mirror shades
• Uniforms created a loss of personal identity (de-individuation)


  Meant they would be more likely to conform to perceived social role
• Instructions about behaviour


  1. Prisoners were further encouraged to identify with their role

  2. Guards were encouraged to play their role by being reminded they had complete power over the prisoners
• Suggests that Zimbardo overstated his view that participants were conforming to social roles and minimised the influence of dispositional factors