What are the 3 types of conformity
Automatic mimicry
Informational social influence
Normative social influence
Automatic mimicry explanation, experiment and why we mimic
- Spontaneously and automatically mimicking behaviours and beliefs of those around us
- Chartrand and bargh: participants had two 10 min sessions with confederate who either rubbed face or shook their foot. They were videotaped.
Participants mimicked their behaviour but did not consciously note it - Ideomotor action: thinking about an action makes one more likely to perform it
We prefer those who mimic our actions (even if we are unaware they are mimicking) Where they do not mimic, we use more self-regulatory resources as the interaction is less enjoyable.
Informational social influence meaning and experiment
- Looking to others for guidance and conforming to those we think have correct information.
- Autokinetic effect experiment: absence of other reference points make stationary light appear to move. When alone there was great variance in how much they thought the light moved. In group trials they conformed. Once the norm was established and did individual trials again, scores were similar to norm
- Descriptive norms: our perceptions of what we think people would do in a situation
Normative social influence
- Conforming to avoid social sanctions or disapproval.
- Asch exp: 1/4 never conformed 5% conformed on all.
self-doubt, thought maj were wrong but didn’t want to be ridiculed, maj must be right.
Some were emotionally effective but held individualistic beliefs. - Deutsch and gerard modified exp:
Either
1- independent and told what other participants said and answers submitted anonymously.
2- in a group with an objective of getting a high score.
As well as variance in whether the stimuli was there when they responded.
Decreasing group pressure reduced confromity.
Still 23% conformed
What are injunctive norms
Socially accepted beliefs on what we should do in particular contexts.
Factors affecting confromity
1- Group size: increases with conformity (not linear and only to an extent)
2- Group unanimity: (Asch) when only one confederate, conformity decreased to 5%
3- Expertise and status: affects ISI as they are thought to have correct information and NSI as we value their opinions and what they think
Moscovici et al 1969 on minority influence
- study on colour perception, asked to name different shades of blue
- minority group of confederates gave an unusual response (green) on all trials OR 2/3.
- In inconsistent there were few green responses
In consistent 18% of responses were green - When asked individually there were also green responses (internalisation)
- Can create private acceptance not just public compliance.
Nemeth and Brilmayer 1987 minority
- How much compensation would you pay for a ski lift injury.
- Groups of 4 with 1 confederate who either
1- remain consistent (50k)
2- compromise early (50-100)
3- compromise late (50-100) - Both compromises were more effective- people will listen as they feel more heard.
- In other case on individual views, early compromising indicates minority is not strong in their views and so majorities’ private views didn’t change
Individual differences that can impact conformity
Low self esteem
High need for social approval
Low IQ
Highly anxious
Feeling inferior or of low status
All more likely to conform
Cultural differences in conformity
- Kim and Markus (1999): choose between highly picked/ favoured pen or non-favoured
Americans picked unique ones in comparison to east Asians.
Also looked at magazine ADs where American ones had more emphasis on individuality.
Psychological reactance
Pennebaker and Sanders 1976
- One toilet stall said DO NOT write on walls other said please do not.
- First one is more threatening to free will.
