AQA Psychology A-level - Social Influence

Types of Conformity and Explanations for Conformity

  • Conformity is defined as yielding to group pressures or a change in behavior/opinion due to real or imagined pressure from a group.

    • Real pressure involves consequences for conformity, while imagined pressure does not.

  • Kelman’s Three Types of Conformity:

    • Internalisation:
    • The strongest type, where an individual's beliefs and behaviors align permanently with the group.
    • Example: Adopting a religion from a religious household.
    • Identification:
    • Temporary change in behavior/beliefs in the presence of a group.
    • Example: Acting more professional at work.
    • Compliance:
    • Public agreement with the group while privately disagreeing; the weakest form of conformity.
    • Example: Drinking alcohol because friends pressure you.

  • Informational Social Influence (ISI):

    • Conforming due to a desire to be correct; looking to others for information when uncertain.
    • Example: Following a crowd in an emergency.
    • Evidence: Fein et al. study showed participants changing their vote upon observing others’ choices, demonstrating ISI.

  • Normative Social Influence (NSI):

    • Conforming to gain approval or avoid disapproval from a group.
    • Example: Starting to smoke to fit in with peers.
    • Evidence: Garandeau and Cillissen found that bullies manipulate peers to victimize others to maintain group goals.

  • Interrelation of NSI and ISI:

    • Both may operate together as shown in Deutsch and Gerrard’s ‘Two Process Model’.

Variables Affecting Conformity: Asch's Study

  • Participants: 123 male American undergraduates in groups of 6 (1 true participant, 5 confederates).
  • Aim: Investigate conformity and majority influence.
  • Procedure: Participants assessed which of 3 lines matched a standard line; confederates purposely gave incorrect answers.
  • Findings:
    • 36.8% conformity rate.
    • 75% conformed at least once, while 25% never conformed.
    • Control trial showed only 1% incorrect answers, confirming that perceptual error was not a factor.
Factors Affecting Conformity:

  • Group Size:

    • Larger groups increase conformity.
    • Majorities of 3+ increase pressure; but larger groups beyond 4 show diminishing returns.

  • Unanimity of Majority:

    • Conformity decreases significantly when even one other person gives the correct answer.
    • Example: Conformity dropped from 32% with unanimous agreement to 5.5% with one dissenting voice.

  • Task Difficulty:

    • Increased difficulty raises conformity due to uncertainty.
    • Example: Asch's alteration of line similarity increased conformity rates.

Evaluation of Asch's Study

Strengths:
  • High internal validity due to control over variables.
  • Reliable findings due to controlled lab conditions allowing replication.
Weaknesses:
  • Lacks ecological validity; tasks do not reflect real-world complexity.
  • Population validity is compromised as the sample was solely male undergraduates, introducing gender bias.

Conformity to Social Roles: Zimbardo's Study

  • Participants: 24 male American undergraduates.
  • Aim: Investigate conformity to social roles in a simulated environment.
  • Procedure: Created a mock prison environment with assigned roles of guards and prisoners.
    • Use of uniforms and props reinforced roles (e.g., sunglasses for guards).
  • Findings:
    • Rapid adoption of roles; guards abused power and prisoners internalized their roles.
Evaluation:

  • Strengths:

    • Real-world applications in prison management.
    • Comprehensive debriefing mitigated ethical issues post-experiment.

  • Weaknesses:

    • Ethical concerns raised due to psychological impact on participants and deception.

Explanations for Obedience

  • Agency Theory:
    • People obey authority figures when they believe that responsibility lies with the authority.
  • Legitimacy of Authority:
    • People are more likely to obey if the authority figure is perceived as credible and legitimate.
Factors Affecting Obedience:
  • Proximity: Higher obedience when the figure of authority is close.
  • Location: Prestige of the location (e.g., Yale university) enhances obedience.
  • Uniform: Authority figures in uniforms receive higher compliance.
Milgram Study Evaluation
Strengths:
  • High internal validity due to the nature of the experimental design (debunked trust factor).
  • Real-life applications highlight the danger of blind obedience to authority.
Weaknesses:
  • Ethical breaches, particularly regarding informed consent and psychological harm.

Authoritarian Personality (Adorno)

  • Defined by strict adherence to authority and submission to authorities while scape-goating perceived lower statuses.
  • Difficulty with F-scale suggests methodological concerns regarding acquiescence bias.
  • Lacks ecological validity as it oversimplifies obedience across political spectrums.

Resistance to Social Influence

  • Locus of Control:
    • Differentiation between Internal (taking responsibility) and External (fate-driven). Internal locus leads to lower conformity.
Social Support:
  • Presence from dissenting individuals significantly decreases conformity, thus fostering resistance through cooperative support.