Studied by 0 people
3 types of conformity
internalisation - informational social influence
identification
compliance - normative social influence
internalisation + evidence
where the behaviour or belief system of the majority is accepted by the individual and becomes part of his or her own belief system. It is the most permanent form of conformity
Jenness’ bean jar experiment
Jenness’ bean jar experiment - proof for internalisation
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)
identification + evidence
where we sometimes conform to the opinions behaviours of an individual or a group because there is something we admire and want to be like. We identify with the group, so we want to be part of it
Zimbardo’s prison experiment
Zimbardo’s prison experiment - proof for identification
Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment involved college students randomly assigned to act as either guards or prisoners in a simulated prison environment. Participants quickly internalized the roles of guards and prisoners, adopting behaviors that aligned with these identities
compliance + evidence
where the individual changes their own behaviour and go along with the majority to fit in with the group. They may not necessarily agree with the behaviour/belief but they go along with it anyway.
Asch’s Line Study
Asch’s line study - proof of compliance
Participants were placed in a group with confederates (who answered incorrectly) and asked to compare the length of a line to three others, selecting the matching one in a simple, obvious task. Many participants admitted afterward that they didn’t believe the group’s answers, indicating their conformity was superficial and motivated by external pressure, not internal belief.
2 strengths of the two process explanation for conformity
There is research support for normative social influence: Schlutz et al (2008) found that hotel guests exposed to the normative message that ‘75% of guests re-used their towels each day’ reduced their own towel use by 25%
There is research support for informational social influence: Lucas et al (2006) asked students to give answers to mathematical questions that were easy or difficult. There was greater conformity to incorrect answers when they were difficult compared to when they were easy
procedure for asch’s experiment
123 american men were in groups with 5-7 confederates. They were tested on the comparison of lines and were made to say their answer of the matching line aloud. The confederates gave the wrong answer on some trials.
findings of Asch’s baseline experiment
naive participants conformed about 37% of the time
25% of the participants never conformed
3 variables investigated by Asch
group size, unanimity, task difficulty
findings for Asch’s experiment: group size
He varied the number of confederates from 1-15
He found a curvilinear relationship between group size and conformity rate
Conformity increased with group size but only up to a point
With 3 confederates, conformity to the wrong answer rose to 32%
The presence of more confederates made little difference
This suggests that mos
Note 
Flashcard (77)