Social Infuence - psychology

what are the 4 different components of social influence content

• conformity

• obedience

• resistance to social influence

• minority influence

what are the types of conformity

• internalisation

• compliance

what is internalisation

• occurs when someone genuinely accepts the groups norms

• results in a public and private change in belief

• this change usually becomes permanent

• the change in belief/opinion persists even in the absence of other group members

what is compliance

• simply going along with others

• results in a public but NOT private change in belief

• the change is superficial

• the particular opinion/behaviour stops as soon as group pressure stops

who argued for the explanations of why people conform and when

morton deustch and harold gerald - 1955

what are the explanations for conformity

• normative social influence (NSI)

• informational social influence (ISI)

what is ISI

we conform because we believe that the opinion of the majority is correct - we accept it because we want to be correct aswell

what is NSI

we conform because we want to gain social approval and be liked - we fear rejection by disagreeing with the majority

does NSI usually lead to a permanent or temporary change in behaviour/belief

temporary

does ISI usually lead to a permanent or temporary change in behaviour/belief

permanent

evaluation for types of conformity and explanations of conformity

• research support for internalisation

• research support for ISI - counterpoint

• individual differences in NSI

• the NSI and ISI distinction isn’t helpful

evaluation for conformity - research support for internalisation

P = one strength of the concept of internalisation is that it has research support

E = e.g. scott bokemper et al (2021) investigated mask wearing during covid - one group of participants were told that other community members were wearing masks

Later , the informed participants were more likely to wear a mask correctly

C = this disapproval suggests that one element of conformity involves genuine acceptance of the norms of mask-wearing(i.e. internalisation) and not just compliance with the group norm

evaluation for conformity - research support for ISI

P = another strength is that there is research evidence to support ISI

E = todd lucas et al (2006) asked their participants to solve ‘easy’ and ‘hard’ maths problems

participants were given answers from three other students (not actually real) - participants conformed more often to incorrect answers from the fake students when the maths problems were difficult - this is because when the problems were easy the participants ‘knew their own minds’ but when the problems were hard the situation became ambiguous - the participants did not want to be wrong , so they relied on the answers they were given

C = this shows that ISI is a valid explanation of conformity because the results are what ISI would predict

evaluation for conformity - counterpoint to research support for ISI

P = however it is often unclear whether it is NSI or ISI at work in research studies

E = e.g. solomon asch (1955) found that conformity is reduced when there is one other dissenting participant - the dissenter may reduce the power of NSI (because they provide social support) or they may reduce the power of ISI (because they provide an alternative source of social information)

C = therefore it is hard to separate ISI and NSI and both processes probably operate together in most real world conformity situations

evaluation for conformity - individual differences in NSI

P = one limitation is that NSI does not predict conformity in every case

E = some people are greatly concerned with being liked by others - such people are called 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 nAffiliators were more likely to conform

C = this shows that NSI underlines conformity for some people more than it does for others , there are individual differences in conformity that cannot be fully explained by one general theory of situational pressures

what are the variables that affect conformity

• group size

• unanimity

• task difficulty

who did research into variables affecting conformity

solomon asch

what were the participants of asch’s baseline study

123 american men

procedure of asch’s baseline study

• participants were tested in groups of 6 - 8

• only one was a genuine (naive) participant, always seated either last or next to last in the group - the others were all confederates ( they all gave the same incorrect scripted answer each time

• the genuine participant did not know the others were ‘fake participants’

• in the group, each participant saw two large cards on each trial

• on one card there is a standard line - on the other card there are 3 comparison lines - one of the comparison lines is always clearly the same length as the standard line - the other two are substantially different

• on each trial the participants had to say out loud which of the comparison lines was the same length as the standard line

findings of aschs baseline study

• on average the genuine participant agreed with the confederates wrong answers 36.8% of the time

• there were individual differences 25% of the participants never gave a wrong answer

how did asch investigate if group size affected conformity

• asch wanted to know whether the size of the group would be more important than the agreement of the group

• he varied the number of confederates from 1 to 15( so the total group size was from 2 to 16)

• asch found a curvilinear relationship between group size and conformity rate - conformity increased with group size but only up to a point

• 3 confederates - conformity to the wrong answer rose to 31.8% - but the presence of more confederates made little difference - the conformity rate levelled off

• suggests that most people are very sensitive to the views of others because just one or two confederates was enough to sway opinions

how did asch investigate if unanimity affected conformity

• asch wondered if a lack on unanimity would affect the naive participants conformity

• he introduced a confederate who disagreed with the other confederates

• in one variation of the study this person gave the correct answer and in another variation he gave a different (incorrect) answer

• the genuine participant conformed less often in the presence of a dissenter

• the rate decreased to less than a quarter of the level it was when the majority was unanimous - the presence of a dissenter appeared to free the naive participant to behave more independently - this was true even when the dissenter disagreed with the genuine participant

• suggests that the influence of the majority depends to a large extent on it being unanimous and that non-conformity is more likely when cracks are perceived in the majority’s unanimous view

how did asch investigate if task difficulty affected conformity

• asch wanted to know whether making the task harder would affect the degree of conformity

• he increased the difficulty of the line-judging task by making the standard line and the comparison lines more similar to each other in length - this meant it became harder for the genuine participants to see the differences between the lines

• asch found that conformity increased - it may be that the situation is more ambiguous when the task becomes harder - it is unclear to the participants what the right answer is

• in these circumstances it is natural to look to other people for guidance and to assume that they are right and you are wrong (ISI)