Conformity

Question 1

What was the procedure and dependent variables in Solomon Asch (1951)?

Answer 1

• 123 American male participants judged line length, confederates gave wrong answers
• Group size (2-16), unanimity, task difficulty

Question 2

What were the findings of Solomon Asch (1951)?

Answer 2

• Group size: Conformity increased up to three confederates, then levelled off
• Unanimity: A dissenter confederate reduced conformity
• Task difficulty: Conformity increased with task difficulty
• Naive participants conformed (gave the wrong answer) on 37% of trials, 25% never conformed

Question 3

What are strengths of Solomon Asch (1951)?

Answer 3

• Research support: Lucas et al. (2006) found conformity increased with task difficulty
• Standardised procedure

Question 4

What are the weaknesses of Solomon Asch (1951)?

Answer 4

• Artificial situation/task, demand characteristics
• Limited application, only applicable to American men
• Lacks temporal validity, took place following WWII

Question 5

What are the types of conformity?

Answer 5

• Internalisation: public and private acceptance of group norms (ISI/NSI)
• Identification: change behaviour to match group we identify with (public, may also be private) (NSI)
• Compliance: go along with group publicly, no private change (NSI)

Question 6

What are the explanations of conformity?

Answer 6

• Informational social influence: conform to be right, assumes group has better information (linked to internalisation)
• Normative social influence: conform to be liked, accept group norms to avoid rejection (linked to compliance and identification)

Question 7

Evaluate normative and informational social influence

Answer 7

• Difficult to separate ISI from NSI in studies and real life
• Conformity affected by individual differences (LoC for example)
• Research support for both NSI and ISI

Question 8

What are social roles?

Answer 8

‘Parts’ people play in society with attached expectations of appropriate behaviour

Question 9

What was the procedure of Zimbardo et al. (1973)?

Answer 9

• Mock prison at Stanford University
• 21 male volunteers, all emotionally stable, randomly assigned as guards/prisoners
• Encouraged to conform to social roles through uniforms, instructions, etc

Question 10

What were the findings of Zimbardo et al. (1973)?

Answer 10

• Guards immediately aggressive
• Prisoners initially rebellious, after harsh treatment were subdued/anxious
• Guards increasingly violent, prisoners increasingly distressed, experiment stopped after 6 days instead of the intended 14

Question 11

What conclusions were drawn from Zimbardo et al. (1973)?

Answer 11

• Participants were strongly influenced by their social roles
• Deindividuation in both guards and prisoners

Question 12

What are the strengths of Zimbardo et al. (1973)?

Answer 12

• Control over variables (participants emotionally stable & randomly assigned), internal validity
• Participants immersed, they spoke as if they were in a real prison rather than a study (evidence they genuinely believed the prison was real)

Question 13

What are the weaknesses of Zimbardo et al. (1973)?

Answer 13

• Participants may have been play-acting their roles according to stereotypes (no immersion)
• Only a third of guards were aggressive so conclusion was exaggerated
• Can also be explained by social identity theory

Question 14

How can conformity cause social change?

Answer 14

• Solomon Asch, if a confederate breaks the majority others feel more free to not conform
• Campaigns use normative social influence to encourage certain behaviour (‘don’t litter, everyone else uses the bin’)

Question 15

Evaluate the role of conformity in social change

Answer 15

Foxcroft et al. (2015) compiled over 70 studies using normative influence to reduce alcohol consumption, no real difference found