Why is it difficult to distinguish between compliance and internalisation?
- difficulty to distinguish between compliance and internalisation
- complicated because of difficulties in knowing when each is actually taking place
- for example, it is assumed that a person who publicly agrees with a majority yet disagrees with them in private must be demonstrating compliance rather than internalisation. However, it is also possible that acceptable of the group’s views has occurred in public yet dissipates later when in private
- this could be because they have forgotten information given by the group or because they have received new information that changes their mind. This demonstrates the difficulty in determining what is, and what is not, simple compliance rather than internalisation
What research support is there for normative influence?
- research support for normative influence
- US research has supported the important role played by peoples normative beliefs in shaping behaviours such as smoking and energy conservation
- Linkenbach and Perkins (2003) found that adolescents exposed to the simple message that the majority of their age peers did not smoke were subsequently less likely to take up smoking
What research is there for informational influence?
- research support for informational influence
- studies have demonstrated how exposure to other peoples beliefs and opinions can shape many aspects of social behaviour and beliefs
- Wittenbrink and Henley (1996) found that participants exposed to negative information about negative attitudes toward black individuals
Why might normative influence not be detected?
- normative influence may not be detected
- although normative influence undoubtedly has a powerful effect on the behaviour of the individual, it is possible that they do not actually recognise the behaviour of others as a casual factor in their own behaviour
- Nolan et al. (2008) investigates whether people detected the influence of social norms on their energy conservation behaviour. When asked about what factors had influenced their own energy conservation, people believed that the behaviour of neighbours had the least impact on their own energy conservation, yet results showed that it had the strongest impact
What is the limitation with informational influence being moderated by type of task
- informational influence is moderated by type of task
- a problem for the informational explanation of conformity is the features of the task moderate the impact of majority influence. For some judgements there are clear physical criteria for validation, but for other judgements, there may be no physical way of validating them
- for example, deciding whether Bristol is the most highly populated city in the South West of England can be determined through objective (i.e. physical) means such as consulting statistics, census records and so on. However, other judgements cannot be made using objective criteria because such criteria do not exist. Consequently, these kinds of judgements must be made on the basis of social consensus
What are nAffiliators?
- NSI does not predict conformity in every case
- nAffiliators - they have a strong need for ‘affiliation’ (i.e. they want to relate to other people)
- Paul McGhee and Richard Teevan (1967) found that students who were nAffilators were more likely to conform
What was Jenness (1932) experiment?
- Jenness carried out a study into conformity – in his experiment participants were asked to estimate how many beans they thought were in a jar. Each participant had to make an individual estimate, and then do the same as a group.
- He found that when the task was carried out in a social group, the participants would report estimates of roughly the same value (even though they had previously reported quite different estimates as individuals).
- The study was successful in showing majority influence, thus proving that individuals” behaviour and beliefs can be influenced by a group.
Additionally, this is likely to be an example of informational social influence as participants would be uncertain about the actual number of beans in the jar.
What is a confederate?
confederate - An actor who participates in a psychological experiment pretending to be a subject but in actuality working for the researcher.
What is the definition of conformity?
conformity is defined as changing behaviour to yield to group/majority pressure (it is sometimes also called ‘majority influence’ as a result)
What three types of conformity did Kelman (1958) suggest?
Compliance
Identification
Internalisation
What is compliance?
- Compliance
- This refers to ‘going along’ with others in public but not privately changing opinions
- We do it so as not to stand out from the group, but the behaviour will stop as soon as the group pressure stops
- It is the shallowest form of conformity
what is identification?
- Identification
- We may wish to belong to a particular group and so we wish to identify with them in order to belong
- we comply in order to fit in
- Public views will change but we may not accept their beliefs in private
What is internalisation?
- Internalisation
- This occurs when a person accepts the group’s views and adopts them as their own so behaviour and views change publicly and privately
- This will result in a permanent change. It is the deepest form of conformity
What did Deutsch and Gerald (1955) come up with?
- Deutsch and Gerald (1955) - came up with a two process theory: Normative vs informational influence:
- Normative Social Influence (NSI) - based on the desire to be liked and accepted by members of a group
- Informational Social Influence (ISI) - comes from the desire to be right
What is Normative social influence (NSI)?
- Normative Social Influence (NSI) - based on the desire to be liked and accepted by members of a group
- Going against the majority isn’t easy - we often feel uncomfortable deviating form the majority
- Humans are social species and have fundamental need for social companionship
- emotional process
What is informative social influence (ISI)?
- Informational Social Influence (ISI) - comes from the desire to be right
- people look to others for the right answer
- It is more likely when:
- The situation is ambiguous
- The situation is a crisis
- We believe others to be experts
- cognitive process
What are the criticisms of Asch’s research regarding conformity to majority influence?
- Asch’s study may be a ‘Child of its Time’, low in temporal validity
- Critics of Asch argue that his findings are unique to the culture and the time in which the research took place
- During the 1950s (McCarthyism)
- All participants were American men
- Critics of Asch argue that his findings are unique to the culture and the time in which the research took place
- Contrasting research: Perrin and Spencer (1980)
- A repeat of the Asch study in England using engineering students showed conformity in 1/396 trials!
- BUT… when carrying out the study using youths on probation as P’s and probation officers as confederates, conformity was similar to Asch’s results
- Nicholson et al. (1985)
- He did find conformity levels similar to Asch in a replication using British students
- When comparing levels similar to Asch in a replication using British students
- The Asch effect is an unpredictable phenomenon, relying on a number of historical and cultural factors
- Asch’s conclusions may be culturally biased
- Cross-cultural studies into conformity have shown much higher levels in countries such as Japan and China
- Such countries are typically called collectivist cultures
- Emphasis is placed on behaviour that will benefit the larger group, rather than the individual
- ‘Selfish’ behaviour is significantly frowned upon in such cultures
- Oh (2013) found that collectivist cultures showed higher levels of compliance. However there was less cross-cultural variation in internalisation
- It could be argued that Asch’s results actually show independence rather than conformity
- If only one third if trials in Asch’s research conformed, this means that nearly 70% did not!
- Asch believed that his research, instead of showing that people are conformist, showed that people have a tendency to stick to what they believe
What was Asch’s aim, procedure and what did he change in his later studies?
Asch (1951) – The influence of a majority view in an unambiguous situation
AIM: To see if participants would yield (conform) to majority social influence and give incorrect answers even in a situation where the correct answers were always obvious
Procedure:
- Original study:
- 123 male college students were used as participants in Asch’s first study.
- 7 male students (6 confederates – accomplices of the experimenter - and 1 genuine participant) looked at 2 cards. The test card showed one vertical line; the other card showed 3 vertical lines of different length
- The Pps task was to call out, in turn, which of the 3 lines was the same length as the ‘test’ line. The correct answer was always obvious.
- The genuine Pp called out his answer last but one.
- Confederates gave unanimous wrong answers on 12 of the 18 trials
- Later Studies:
- The participant was provided with social support (i.e. non-unanimous majorities were used)
- The size of the majority changed
- Part way through the procedure, the participant was provided with a ‘partner’, whose judgements disagreed with those of the other accomplices
- The type of task changed
- The mode of responding changed
What were the results of Asch’s original and later studies?
- Results:
- Original Study:
- Pps (i.e. genuine Pps) conformed on 32% of the critical trials
- 74% of Pps conformed at least once (so 26% of Pps never conformed)
- In post-experimental interviews Pps generally said they conformed to fit in with the group
- In the control group, with no pressure to conform to confederates, less than 1% of participants gave the wrong answer.
- Later Studies. Factors affecting conformity:
- Social support. Conformity dropped to 5% when just one other participant dissented (went against the group and gave the correct answer)
- When a participant was only given a ‘partner’ half way through, conformity dropped to 8.7%. When the participant started with a ‘partner’ who later ‘deserted’ him, conformity levels reached 28.5% after the desertion
- Size of majority. A majority of only 2 caused a drop in conformity to 12.8%; increasing the size of the majority beyond 3 did not increase the level of conformity
- Task difficulty. When the judgement was made more difficult, conformity levels increased
- Anonymity. When Pps wrote their answers, conformity levels dropped sharply.
- Conclusions:
- Even in unambiguous situations, there may be strong group pressure to conform, especially if the group is a unanimous majority.
What is the evaluation for Asch’s studies?
- EVALUATION:
- Original sample was androcentric. Therefore may not be able to generalise findings to all people (e.g. women) (BUT… research soon after with other samples replicated Asch’s findings)
- Asch’s work generated lots of further research into this topic.
- Temporal validity. The time and the place (USA) when research was carried out may have affected the findings (see later studies e.g. by Perrin & Spencer, on subsequent pages).
- Ecological validity. Artificiality of laboratory setting and the task. Might therefore not be able to be generalised to conformity behaviour in everyday life
- Ethical issues about informed consent and protection from psychological harm (humiliation) of Pps.
What was the full name of the SPE Zimbardo study and date?
What was Zimbardo’s aim?
Haney, Banks and Zimbardo 1973:
Zimbardo’s aim: following several prison riots in America, he wanted to find out whether prison guards were brutal and sadistic due to uneducated and insensitive ‘evil’ personalities (disposition) or whether their behaviour was a product of their environment (situation)
What was the SPE’s procedure?
Procedure: 24 male volunteers judged to be physically and mentally healthy. Randomly assigned to be a prisoner or a guard. The ‘prisoners’ were arrested by the police and then handed over to the ‘guards’. Social roles emphasised by uniforms, and prisoners were ‘deindividualized’ using numbers
What was the SPE’s findings?
Findings: At first the prisoners resisted the orders of the guards. The guards continually harassed and humiliated the prisoners. Some behaved in a brutal and sadistic manner. The prisoners became increasingly passive and docile. The experiment had to be stopped 8 days early.
Who was the SPE sponsored by?
The study was sponsored by the US Navy
