PSYCHOLOGY REVISION.
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Conformity,
AO1 - when someone adjusts their behaviour/opinion to match closely to others
types:
o compliance – when someone conforms to the majority publicly, but privately
disagrees, it is temporary (to be liked)
e.g., you disliked a movie, but your friends loved it, so you conform by acting
as if you liked the movie
o identification – when someone conforms both publicly and privately, due to
group membership, this is temporary as long as you are in the group
e.g., conforming to a friendship group on liking a certain type of music
o internalisation – when someone conforms both publicly and privately, due to a
change of beliefs, this is permanent
e.g., your roommates were vegan, then you became vegan
Deutsch & Gerard proposed the two-process theory, stating that there are 2 reasons
behind conformity – informational social influence (the need to be right,
unambiguous) and normative social influence (the need to be liked, ambiguous)
1. informational social influence – when someone is unsure, they look at others
to gain information, this is internalisation as you are changing your
behaviour/opinions due to the idea of being right
e.g., it is your second day at a new school and you are unsure on where to
go, you see a group of friends from your class heading somewhere so you
decide to follow them
2. normative social influence – when someone is behaving the same as others
to be liked and accepted by the group, this is compliance as you are publicly
conforming to the majority to be liked by a group
e.g., your friend group is smoking, and they ask you to smoke, you hate the
idea of smoking and condemn it, but you smoke in order to be seen as
cool/approved by the group and not seen as foolish
informational social influence experiment:
AO1 – Jennes carried out a bean study where he asked participants to estimate the
amount of bean in a jar, he then asked participants to make a group estimate, which
then they were instructed to write down their answers individually, after he
interviewed them asking what answer they would like to stick to and found that
,almost all participants changed from their original answer to and answer closer to the
group estimates
AO3 – strength is that there is evidence of informational social influence from
Jennes’ experiment, where he carried out a bean study that asked participants to
estimate the amount of bean in a jar, after that he asked them to make a group
estimate and then finally write down their answers individually, after he asked them
what answer they would like to stick with and almost all had changed their original
answer to the answer closer to the group estimates, meaning that the participants
had second guessed their answers in order to be right, therefore this demonstrates
that people do conform due to the need to be right or when they gain information
weakness is that Jennes’ experiment was unusual, and the tasks given were not like
tasks performed in day-to-day life, therefore this experiment lack mudane realism
meaning that it can even be argued that conformity acts differently in real world
situations
normative social influence experiment:
AO1 – Asch carried out a line test experiment where he asked participants to match
a standard line on a paper with three lines on another paper, the naïve participants
were placed in a group of 6-8 confederates and either answered last or second-to-
last, the confederates had started to answer correctly at first then begun saying
incorrect answers which was in 12/18 trials, Asch found that 36.8% participants
conformed every time and 75% at least once
AO3 - strength is that there is evidence of normative social influence from Asch’s
experiment, where he carried out a line test that asked participants to match a
standard line with 3 lines on another paper, he set the participants up in a group of 6-
8 confederates that begun to answer incorrectly in 12/18 trials, where Asch found
that 36.8% conformed every time and 75% conformed at least once, this reveals that
people do show compliant behaviour in order to fit in and be approved by a group ,
as they tried to avoid rejection
weakness is that as Asch’s experiment was also unusual, the tasks does not
represent real life conformity meaning that it lacks mudane realism therefore it
unknown whether conformity would act differently to real life
Asch’s experiment of conformity,
AO1 - it was a lab experiment, had an independent groups design, the IV was the
test groups and the DV was the amount of wrong answers given, it had an
opportunity sampling where there was 123 American males
Asch wanted to investigate whether people would conform to the obvious wrong
answer of a majority in a group
the experiment was to show a paper with a standard line and then a paper with 3
lines, and told participants to match them
, he placed naïve participants in a group of 6-8 confederates, where they answered
last or second-to-last
the confederates firstly answered with the correct answers, but then begun saying
the incorrect answer which was in 12/18 trials
Asch found that 36.8% conformed every time, and 75% conformed at least once
this was compared to a control group where the confederates answered with the
correct answer every time, in which only 1% of participants said the wrong answer
Asch concluded that when unsure in a group, you would conform to the majority
AO3 – weakness is that the experiment has a biased sample, as the participants
were all male who were from America, meaning that it has low population validity
due to the sample, therefore the findings cannot be generalisable to females or other
countries/cultures
weakness is that the experiment used artificial tasks to measure conformity, in
which the tasks used will never be as plain in sight as it had been in the experiment
in real life, this means that there is low mundane realism and therefore the findings
may not be applicable to real life conformity
HOWEVER, Asch has stated that he wanted to investigate situations of
conformity where the participants had no doubt of the obvious answer, therefore he
was able to measure the true lengths of conformity
strength is that as the experiment was a lab experiment, it means that it has high
levels of control such as participants variables like order effects as Asch made sure
for the naïve participant to go last or second-to-last to measure their conformity,
meaning that it is easily replicable, therefore the findings are reliable
weakness is that it has a lack of generalisability, for example when Perrin and
Spencer repeated the experiment in Britain, they found only 1/396 students had
conformed to the majority, this may be because the original experiment was carried
out at a time of McCarthyism, which was anti-communism, and they may have been
afraid to be different, meaning the findings cannot be generalised to different time or
cultures, therefore no assumption of conformity can be made
the variables of Asch’s study
group size – when it was two people, conformity was less likely but when the number
of people increased from 3 or more, conformity also increased
unanimity – when another confederate was introduced that disagreed with the
majority, conformity decreased as it encouraged participants to become more
independent
task difficulty – Asch made the lines more similar which made the task more difficult,
this resulted in conformity increasing as the experiment became more ambiguous,
and it is normal to look at others to gain information when you assume you are
wrong in the situation
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Conformity,
AO1 - when someone adjusts their behaviour/opinion to match closely to others
types:
o compliance – when someone conforms to the majority publicly, but privately
disagrees, it is temporary (to be liked)
e.g., you disliked a movie, but your friends loved it, so you conform by acting
as if you liked the movie
o identification – when someone conforms both publicly and privately, due to
group membership, this is temporary as long as you are in the group
e.g., conforming to a friendship group on liking a certain type of music
o internalisation – when someone conforms both publicly and privately, due to a
change of beliefs, this is permanent
e.g., your roommates were vegan, then you became vegan
Deutsch & Gerard proposed the two-process theory, stating that there are 2 reasons
behind conformity – informational social influence (the need to be right,
unambiguous) and normative social influence (the need to be liked, ambiguous)
1. informational social influence – when someone is unsure, they look at others
to gain information, this is internalisation as you are changing your
behaviour/opinions due to the idea of being right
e.g., it is your second day at a new school and you are unsure on where to
go, you see a group of friends from your class heading somewhere so you
decide to follow them
2. normative social influence – when someone is behaving the same as others
to be liked and accepted by the group, this is compliance as you are publicly
conforming to the majority to be liked by a group
e.g., your friend group is smoking, and they ask you to smoke, you hate the
idea of smoking and condemn it, but you smoke in order to be seen as
cool/approved by the group and not seen as foolish
informational social influence experiment:
AO1 – Jennes carried out a bean study where he asked participants to estimate the
amount of bean in a jar, he then asked participants to make a group estimate, which
then they were instructed to write down their answers individually, after he
interviewed them asking what answer they would like to stick to and found that
,almost all participants changed from their original answer to and answer closer to the
group estimates
AO3 – strength is that there is evidence of informational social influence from
Jennes’ experiment, where he carried out a bean study that asked participants to
estimate the amount of bean in a jar, after that he asked them to make a group
estimate and then finally write down their answers individually, after he asked them
what answer they would like to stick with and almost all had changed their original
answer to the answer closer to the group estimates, meaning that the participants
had second guessed their answers in order to be right, therefore this demonstrates
that people do conform due to the need to be right or when they gain information
weakness is that Jennes’ experiment was unusual, and the tasks given were not like
tasks performed in day-to-day life, therefore this experiment lack mudane realism
meaning that it can even be argued that conformity acts differently in real world
situations
normative social influence experiment:
AO1 – Asch carried out a line test experiment where he asked participants to match
a standard line on a paper with three lines on another paper, the naïve participants
were placed in a group of 6-8 confederates and either answered last or second-to-
last, the confederates had started to answer correctly at first then begun saying
incorrect answers which was in 12/18 trials, Asch found that 36.8% participants
conformed every time and 75% at least once
AO3 - strength is that there is evidence of normative social influence from Asch’s
experiment, where he carried out a line test that asked participants to match a
standard line with 3 lines on another paper, he set the participants up in a group of 6-
8 confederates that begun to answer incorrectly in 12/18 trials, where Asch found
that 36.8% conformed every time and 75% conformed at least once, this reveals that
people do show compliant behaviour in order to fit in and be approved by a group ,
as they tried to avoid rejection
weakness is that as Asch’s experiment was also unusual, the tasks does not
represent real life conformity meaning that it lacks mudane realism therefore it
unknown whether conformity would act differently to real life
Asch’s experiment of conformity,
AO1 - it was a lab experiment, had an independent groups design, the IV was the
test groups and the DV was the amount of wrong answers given, it had an
opportunity sampling where there was 123 American males
Asch wanted to investigate whether people would conform to the obvious wrong
answer of a majority in a group
the experiment was to show a paper with a standard line and then a paper with 3
lines, and told participants to match them
, he placed naïve participants in a group of 6-8 confederates, where they answered
last or second-to-last
the confederates firstly answered with the correct answers, but then begun saying
the incorrect answer which was in 12/18 trials
Asch found that 36.8% conformed every time, and 75% conformed at least once
this was compared to a control group where the confederates answered with the
correct answer every time, in which only 1% of participants said the wrong answer
Asch concluded that when unsure in a group, you would conform to the majority
AO3 – weakness is that the experiment has a biased sample, as the participants
were all male who were from America, meaning that it has low population validity
due to the sample, therefore the findings cannot be generalisable to females or other
countries/cultures
weakness is that the experiment used artificial tasks to measure conformity, in
which the tasks used will never be as plain in sight as it had been in the experiment
in real life, this means that there is low mundane realism and therefore the findings
may not be applicable to real life conformity
HOWEVER, Asch has stated that he wanted to investigate situations of
conformity where the participants had no doubt of the obvious answer, therefore he
was able to measure the true lengths of conformity
strength is that as the experiment was a lab experiment, it means that it has high
levels of control such as participants variables like order effects as Asch made sure
for the naïve participant to go last or second-to-last to measure their conformity,
meaning that it is easily replicable, therefore the findings are reliable
weakness is that it has a lack of generalisability, for example when Perrin and
Spencer repeated the experiment in Britain, they found only 1/396 students had
conformed to the majority, this may be because the original experiment was carried
out at a time of McCarthyism, which was anti-communism, and they may have been
afraid to be different, meaning the findings cannot be generalised to different time or
cultures, therefore no assumption of conformity can be made
the variables of Asch’s study
group size – when it was two people, conformity was less likely but when the number
of people increased from 3 or more, conformity also increased
unanimity – when another confederate was introduced that disagreed with the
majority, conformity decreased as it encouraged participants to become more
independent
task difficulty – Asch made the lines more similar which made the task more difficult,
this resulted in conformity increasing as the experiment became more ambiguous,
and it is normal to look at others to gain information when you assume you are
wrong in the situation
