Essay Plans
Social Influence
Paper 1 - Section A
,Types of conformity
Outline types of conformity (6)
Compliance (AO1)
● Change behaviour to fit in with the group - most favourable outcome
● Public acceptance not private - most superficial / not permanent
● Likely to be linked to NSI
● E.g laughing at a joke you don’t find funny
Internalisation (AO1)
● Behaviour / belief of the majority is accepted by the individual
● Public / private acceptance - most permanent / lasts if majority isn’t present
● Linked to ISI
● E.g a person becomes vegan after living with vegans
Identification (AO1)
● Conform to behaviour / belief of the group as you value them / want to fit in
● Public acceptance - maybe not a private change (temporary)
● Involves role models
● Looks to group for guidance
● E.g trying a spicy dish your friends made, but you don’t like spice
,Explanations of conformity
Steph: ‘I have become quite passionate about it’
Jeff’s: ‘Everyone else was striking and I didn’t want to be the only one who wasn’t’
Polly asks her friends what they’re wearing - she doesn’t like to be the odd one out
Jed watches his colleagues when he starts a new job so he can work out where to
put his things / how long to take for lunch
Discuss explanations for conformity, refer to the conversations (8) / (16)
Para 1 → Outline: normative social influence (AO1)
● Social rules that govern behaviour - need to be seen as a member / fit in
● Desire for social approval / acceptance / avoidance of rejection
● Conformity is public / not private agreement (compliance)
● Change in attitude / behaviour is temporary
Para 2 → Outline: informative social influence (AO1)
● Conformity driven by the need to be right / have accurate perception of reality
● Conformity due to uncertainty about correct responses / behaviour
● Believe the group has more knowledge / expertise
● Public behaviour / private opinion match (internalisation)
● Change in attitude/behaviour is likely to be more permanent
Application: (AO2)
● Steph - conformed for informational reasons
● She has become ‘passionate’ suggesting permanent change / internalisation
● Jeff - conformed for normative reasons
● Didn’t want to be the ‘odd one out’ suggesting temporary behaviour / compliance
● Polly’s - NSI as she is wanting to be the same as everyone else / be part of the norm
● Jed - ISI - using colleagues as a source of information
Para 3 → Strengths: evidence for NSI - Asche (AO3)
● Unambiguous (obvious) task ↓
● P’s said they knew the correct answer / but conformed to fit in
Para 4 → Strengths: evidence for ISI - Jennes (AO3)
● Ambiguous task (not obvious) - beans in a jar
● P’s changed their answer after talking to a group
● They believed the group was more likely to be right
Para 5 → Weakness: individual differences (AO3)
● Factors that distinguish people - intelligence, traits, culture…
● nAffiliators have a bigger need to be liked
● They are more likely to conform as they need to be liked
Para 6 → Weakness: dual-process model (AO3)
● Although it’s suggested there are two distinct types of social influence
● The 2 could work together to influence conformity
● In Asche’s study people influenced by NSI (thought they'd misunderstood) / ISI
● You can’t always determine between ISI and NSI
, Variables affecting conformity
Outline Asch’s findings in relation to two variables affecting conformity (16)
Outline and evaluate Asch’s conformity research (8) / (16)
Para 1 → Outline: Asch’s studies (AO1)
● Conformity is the tendency to adopt the behaviour, attitudes, values of a group
● P’s (123 male USA) said aloud which of 3 lines matched standard (unambiguous)
● Groups of 7-9 - all confederates and 1 naive participant
● 12 trials - confederate gave wrong answer / 6 trials - confederate gave right answer
● 37% in the 12 trials incorrect / 75% conformed at least once / 25% never conformed
● Reasons: wanted to please experimenter / misunderstood/ didn’t want to embarrass
themselves / genuinely believed their answer / thought their eyesight was bad
● Conclusion: p’s often go along with something they know to be wrong - compliance
Para 2 → Outline: variations (AO1)
● Asch made variations to investigate the variables that affect conformity
● P’s write down answer = less conformity (less judgement)
● 3 confederates = same / 2 confederates = conformity dropped (no majority)
● Smaller difference (harder) = increased conformity
● Found 3 variables affect conformity group size / unanimity / task difficulty
Para 3 → Weakness: ‘child of it’s time’ (AO3)
● Asch’s findings may not be so relevant today
● Outcome may have been influenced by social attitudes of the 1950s
● At the time in the US conformity was important
● Post-war attitudes people should work together / consent NOT dissent
● Later on, Perin repeated the study in the UK - found 1 conforming result out of 396
● However when they used youths on probation as p’s and probation officers as confederates,
they found similar conformity to Asche
● Confirmed conformity is likely if the perceived costs of not conforming are high
Para 4 → Weakness: artificial (AO3)
● Lab study / standardised procedures = good internal validity
● Artificial task - p’s not invested / don’t care if wrong
● DC’s - p’s may have guess the aim of the study
● P’s may have wanted to impress other so conformity increased
● All these factors would have affected the answers of the p’s = bad validity
Para 5 → Weakness: unrepresentative (AO3)
● Gender bias as only use males - do findings apply to women
● Volunteers - do their personalities apply to the general population
● Culture bias as only used white Americans - can’t apply findings to other cultures
● Smith analysed results from Asche-type studies in different cultures
● Conformity in individualist cultures (Europe / UK) was 25% whereas in collectivist cultures
(Africa / Asia) was 37%
● Asch's study therefore lacks ecological validity as the findings can’t be generalised
Para 6 → Weakness: ethical issue (AO3)
● Deception - p’s didn't know true aim / thought it was a study into perception
● Informed consent - couldn’t give informed consent as they didn’t know aim
● Protection from harm - p’s were put in a stressful and embarrassing situation
● But no more than normal life
Social Influence
Paper 1 - Section A
,Types of conformity
Outline types of conformity (6)
Compliance (AO1)
● Change behaviour to fit in with the group - most favourable outcome
● Public acceptance not private - most superficial / not permanent
● Likely to be linked to NSI
● E.g laughing at a joke you don’t find funny
Internalisation (AO1)
● Behaviour / belief of the majority is accepted by the individual
● Public / private acceptance - most permanent / lasts if majority isn’t present
● Linked to ISI
● E.g a person becomes vegan after living with vegans
Identification (AO1)
● Conform to behaviour / belief of the group as you value them / want to fit in
● Public acceptance - maybe not a private change (temporary)
● Involves role models
● Looks to group for guidance
● E.g trying a spicy dish your friends made, but you don’t like spice
,Explanations of conformity
Steph: ‘I have become quite passionate about it’
Jeff’s: ‘Everyone else was striking and I didn’t want to be the only one who wasn’t’
Polly asks her friends what they’re wearing - she doesn’t like to be the odd one out
Jed watches his colleagues when he starts a new job so he can work out where to
put his things / how long to take for lunch
Discuss explanations for conformity, refer to the conversations (8) / (16)
Para 1 → Outline: normative social influence (AO1)
● Social rules that govern behaviour - need to be seen as a member / fit in
● Desire for social approval / acceptance / avoidance of rejection
● Conformity is public / not private agreement (compliance)
● Change in attitude / behaviour is temporary
Para 2 → Outline: informative social influence (AO1)
● Conformity driven by the need to be right / have accurate perception of reality
● Conformity due to uncertainty about correct responses / behaviour
● Believe the group has more knowledge / expertise
● Public behaviour / private opinion match (internalisation)
● Change in attitude/behaviour is likely to be more permanent
Application: (AO2)
● Steph - conformed for informational reasons
● She has become ‘passionate’ suggesting permanent change / internalisation
● Jeff - conformed for normative reasons
● Didn’t want to be the ‘odd one out’ suggesting temporary behaviour / compliance
● Polly’s - NSI as she is wanting to be the same as everyone else / be part of the norm
● Jed - ISI - using colleagues as a source of information
Para 3 → Strengths: evidence for NSI - Asche (AO3)
● Unambiguous (obvious) task ↓
● P’s said they knew the correct answer / but conformed to fit in
Para 4 → Strengths: evidence for ISI - Jennes (AO3)
● Ambiguous task (not obvious) - beans in a jar
● P’s changed their answer after talking to a group
● They believed the group was more likely to be right
Para 5 → Weakness: individual differences (AO3)
● Factors that distinguish people - intelligence, traits, culture…
● nAffiliators have a bigger need to be liked
● They are more likely to conform as they need to be liked
Para 6 → Weakness: dual-process model (AO3)
● Although it’s suggested there are two distinct types of social influence
● The 2 could work together to influence conformity
● In Asche’s study people influenced by NSI (thought they'd misunderstood) / ISI
● You can’t always determine between ISI and NSI
, Variables affecting conformity
Outline Asch’s findings in relation to two variables affecting conformity (16)
Outline and evaluate Asch’s conformity research (8) / (16)
Para 1 → Outline: Asch’s studies (AO1)
● Conformity is the tendency to adopt the behaviour, attitudes, values of a group
● P’s (123 male USA) said aloud which of 3 lines matched standard (unambiguous)
● Groups of 7-9 - all confederates and 1 naive participant
● 12 trials - confederate gave wrong answer / 6 trials - confederate gave right answer
● 37% in the 12 trials incorrect / 75% conformed at least once / 25% never conformed
● Reasons: wanted to please experimenter / misunderstood/ didn’t want to embarrass
themselves / genuinely believed their answer / thought their eyesight was bad
● Conclusion: p’s often go along with something they know to be wrong - compliance
Para 2 → Outline: variations (AO1)
● Asch made variations to investigate the variables that affect conformity
● P’s write down answer = less conformity (less judgement)
● 3 confederates = same / 2 confederates = conformity dropped (no majority)
● Smaller difference (harder) = increased conformity
● Found 3 variables affect conformity group size / unanimity / task difficulty
Para 3 → Weakness: ‘child of it’s time’ (AO3)
● Asch’s findings may not be so relevant today
● Outcome may have been influenced by social attitudes of the 1950s
● At the time in the US conformity was important
● Post-war attitudes people should work together / consent NOT dissent
● Later on, Perin repeated the study in the UK - found 1 conforming result out of 396
● However when they used youths on probation as p’s and probation officers as confederates,
they found similar conformity to Asche
● Confirmed conformity is likely if the perceived costs of not conforming are high
Para 4 → Weakness: artificial (AO3)
● Lab study / standardised procedures = good internal validity
● Artificial task - p’s not invested / don’t care if wrong
● DC’s - p’s may have guess the aim of the study
● P’s may have wanted to impress other so conformity increased
● All these factors would have affected the answers of the p’s = bad validity
Para 5 → Weakness: unrepresentative (AO3)
● Gender bias as only use males - do findings apply to women
● Volunteers - do their personalities apply to the general population
● Culture bias as only used white Americans - can’t apply findings to other cultures
● Smith analysed results from Asche-type studies in different cultures
● Conformity in individualist cultures (Europe / UK) was 25% whereas in collectivist cultures
(Africa / Asia) was 37%
● Asch's study therefore lacks ecological validity as the findings can’t be generalised
Para 6 → Weakness: ethical issue (AO3)
● Deception - p’s didn't know true aim / thought it was a study into perception
● Informed consent - couldn’t give informed consent as they didn’t know aim
● Protection from harm - p’s were put in a stressful and embarrassing situation
● But no more than normal life
