asch

• aim

  investigate extent to which social pressure from majority could affect conformity
• method

  • participants = 123 male students from USA
  • group setting = participant in a group with 6-8 confederates
  • task = line judgement task
  • condition = in 12 trials, confederates gave the incorrect answer
• findings

  • conformity rate - 32% gave incorrect answer
  • no confederates - 99% gave correct answer
  • 75% conformed at least once
• conclusion

  people conform to majority view even when they know it's incorrect

  • normative social influence
• weakness of asch - culture

  • perrin & spencer
  • in britain, only 1 conformed out of 396 trials
  • lacks temporal validity
• what were the 3 variations to asch's study?

  1. group size
  2. unanimity
  3. task difficulty
• variation of group size

  • 3 confederates = conformity increased to 32%
  • adding more confederates didn't increase conformity

  group size of 3-4 confederates is optimal for influencing conformity
• variation of unanimity

  • 1 dissenter = conformity dropped to 5.5%

  when majority is not unanimous then conformity decreases
• variation of task difficulty

  • more difficult = conformity increased

  informational social influence increases when individuals are uncertain and task is ambiguous
• weakness of variation - group size

  • conformity rose to 32% with 3 confederates
  • ceiling effect as additional pressure didn't increase conformity
  • lacks generalisability
• weakness of asch - artificial task

  • line judgement task
  • lacks consequences of real-life situations
  • lacks mundane realism
• weakness of asch - ethical issues

  • deception
  • necessary to avoid demand characteristics
  • caused psychological distress
• strength of variation - unanimity

  • confederate gave correct answer then 5.5% compared to 9%
  • social support does reduce conformity
  • real-world application to work
• strength of variation - task difficulty

  • conformity increased showing informational social influence
  • aligns with real-world situations
  • lacks ecological validity