Social Influence
Outline and evaluate Asch’s study of conformity
Aimed to investigate the degree to which individuals would conform to a majority who gave obvious wrong
answers
Used 123 American male volunteers who believed it was a visual perception study, 1 participant was placed in
a room with 7-9 pseudo participants
Had to compare lines A, B and C with the stimulus line and say which two were the same
Did it 18 times and 12 of those times the confederates gave the wrong answer
Control group of 36 were tested to see how accurate individual judgments were – had an error rate of 0.04%,
showing how obvious the correct answers were
On the 12 critical trials there was a 32% conformity rate to wrong answers, 75% conformed at least once and
5% conformed to all wrong answers
AO3:
Strength – a lab experiment – supported by Bond and Smith who found 25-58% conformity in collectivist
cultures and 14-39% in individualist cultures– means it can be replicated to check reliability – although it
shows slight cultural differences, suggesting that Asch’s findings can’t be generalised to all cultures
Limitation – male sample – contradicted by Eagly et al who did an experiment with women and because they
focus more on relationships than being right, they conformed more – can’t be generalised to women, lacks
population validity – example of beta bias
Issue – participants were deceived – told it was about visual perception – however only a minor deception to
ensure participants didn’t show demand characteristics
Limitation – all American sample – contradicted by Perrin & Spenser who found only 0.25% of British students
conformed – similar cultures but yet found different results, may lack temporal validity as Asch was
experimenting when Americans were scared of communism – may have conformed due to the political climate
at the time
Outline and evaluate Zimbardo’s study of conformity
Aimed to investigate the extent to which people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner and to test
the dispositional vs situational hypothesis: is prisoner violence due to personalities of guards and prisoners or
brutal conditions of prison environment
75 male university students volunteered of which 21 were rated most physically and mentally stable and free
from criminal tendencies – 10 were guards and 11 were prisoners
Zimbardo played the role of prison superintendent and the basement at Stanford university was converted
into a mock prison
The ‘prisoners’ were arrested, finger printed, stripped and deloused; they were dehumanised by wearing
numbered smocks, nylon stocking caps and a chain round one ankle, while the guards wore khaki uniforms,
reflective sunglasses, handcuffs, keys and truncheons
Study planned to run for 2 weeks but stopped after 6 days after Zimbardo realised the extent of the harm
occurring
The guards and prisoners quickly conformed to their social roles and after a prisoner rebellion the guards
became taunting and gave the prisoners meaningless tasks to do, while the prisoners became submissive
AO3:
Strength – has ecological validity – looked like a prison, e.g. cell bars, clothing, etc. so maybe we can generalise
– however they’re not real prisoners or guards so can’t generalise
Limitation – may have changed behaviour as they knew they were being watched – Banuazizi and Movahedi
presented details of the study to students who had never heard of it and they guessed the purpose was to see
if normal people would conform to the roles of prisoner/guard – therefore if the participants knew the
purpose it lacks internal validity as it wasn’t measuring conformity and was influenced by demand
characteristics
Strength – wider implications – could be used to explain why the soldiers at Abu Ghraib abused the prisoners
e.g. there was a lack of training, boredom and no accountability to higher authority in both Zimbardo’s
experiment and Abu Ghraib – therefore the experiment could be used to help prison brutality
Outline and evaluate Asch’s study of conformity
Aimed to investigate the degree to which individuals would conform to a majority who gave obvious wrong
answers
Used 123 American male volunteers who believed it was a visual perception study, 1 participant was placed in
a room with 7-9 pseudo participants
Had to compare lines A, B and C with the stimulus line and say which two were the same
Did it 18 times and 12 of those times the confederates gave the wrong answer
Control group of 36 were tested to see how accurate individual judgments were – had an error rate of 0.04%,
showing how obvious the correct answers were
On the 12 critical trials there was a 32% conformity rate to wrong answers, 75% conformed at least once and
5% conformed to all wrong answers
AO3:
Strength – a lab experiment – supported by Bond and Smith who found 25-58% conformity in collectivist
cultures and 14-39% in individualist cultures– means it can be replicated to check reliability – although it
shows slight cultural differences, suggesting that Asch’s findings can’t be generalised to all cultures
Limitation – male sample – contradicted by Eagly et al who did an experiment with women and because they
focus more on relationships than being right, they conformed more – can’t be generalised to women, lacks
population validity – example of beta bias
Issue – participants were deceived – told it was about visual perception – however only a minor deception to
ensure participants didn’t show demand characteristics
Limitation – all American sample – contradicted by Perrin & Spenser who found only 0.25% of British students
conformed – similar cultures but yet found different results, may lack temporal validity as Asch was
experimenting when Americans were scared of communism – may have conformed due to the political climate
at the time
Outline and evaluate Zimbardo’s study of conformity
Aimed to investigate the extent to which people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner and to test
the dispositional vs situational hypothesis: is prisoner violence due to personalities of guards and prisoners or
brutal conditions of prison environment
75 male university students volunteered of which 21 were rated most physically and mentally stable and free
from criminal tendencies – 10 were guards and 11 were prisoners
Zimbardo played the role of prison superintendent and the basement at Stanford university was converted
into a mock prison
The ‘prisoners’ were arrested, finger printed, stripped and deloused; they were dehumanised by wearing
numbered smocks, nylon stocking caps and a chain round one ankle, while the guards wore khaki uniforms,
reflective sunglasses, handcuffs, keys and truncheons
Study planned to run for 2 weeks but stopped after 6 days after Zimbardo realised the extent of the harm
occurring
The guards and prisoners quickly conformed to their social roles and after a prisoner rebellion the guards
became taunting and gave the prisoners meaningless tasks to do, while the prisoners became submissive
AO3:
Strength – has ecological validity – looked like a prison, e.g. cell bars, clothing, etc. so maybe we can generalise
– however they’re not real prisoners or guards so can’t generalise
Limitation – may have changed behaviour as they knew they were being watched – Banuazizi and Movahedi
presented details of the study to students who had never heard of it and they guessed the purpose was to see
if normal people would conform to the roles of prisoner/guard – therefore if the participants knew the
purpose it lacks internal validity as it wasn’t measuring conformity and was influenced by demand
characteristics
Strength – wider implications – could be used to explain why the soldiers at Abu Ghraib abused the prisoners
e.g. there was a lack of training, boredom and no accountability to higher authority in both Zimbardo’s
experiment and Abu Ghraib – therefore the experiment could be used to help prison brutality
