Briefly outline and evaluate normative social influence as an explanation for conformity (4 marks)
AO1 - Normative social influence acts as one explanation for conformity based on the idea that a
person conforms to a groups’ beliefs or behaviour to be socially accepted and/or to be liked.
Normative links to social norms as it is the socially accepted, right thing to do.This type of conforming
can be socially rewarding to gain approval from peers with similar beliefs and attitudes and avoids
social rejection. This often leads to compliance which is where people will publicly agree with the
group but privately not change their opinion.
AO3 – Asch’s study provides evidence for this explanation of conformity. In Asch’s study there was a
single participant amongst a group of confederates whom were all asked about the lengths of a line.
74% of the participants conformed on at least one of the critical trials where the other confederates
stated an obviously wrong answer. When participants were interviewed after the experiment, most
said they conformed to fit into the group. This is important as his experiment displays the impact of
normative social influence in simple tasks and provides support for this explanation of conformity in
social situations, helping researchers to understand the influence of social situations on changing
behaviour.
Explain what is meant by internalisation (3 marks)
Internalisation is when a person accepts the groups beliefs as theirs. They change both their public
and private views and this is a permanent change as they continue to think this even when not in the
group. Internalisation is usually the result of Informative social influence which is where people will
change their belief and conform in ambiguous situations or in order to be accurate/correct.
Explain what is meant by compliance/identification (3 marks)
Compliance is where an individual changes his or her own behaviour to fit in with the group. They
may not necessarily agree with the behaviour but they go along with it publicly. This is not a
permanent form of social influence; it lasts only as long as the group is present. For example, in
Asch’s study, many of the naïve participants went along with the wrong answers so as not to look
stupid even if they didn’t believe it was correct.
Discuss NSI and ISI as explanations for conformity (16 marks)
AO1 - Normative social influence as an explanation for conformity suggests that a person conforms
to a groups’ beliefs or behaviour to be socially accepted and/or to be liked. This type of conforming
can be socially rewarding to gain approval from peers with similar beliefs and attitudes and avoids
social rejection. This often leads to compliance which is where people will publicly agree with the
group but privately not change their opinion. For example, in Asch’s study, many of the naïve
participants went along with the wrong answers so as not to look stupid even if they didn’t believe it
was correct.
Informative social influence as an explanation for conformity predicts that people conform when
they believe the group has more knowledge and expertise than they do. This suggests that
conformity within a group is due to uncertainty about correct responses or behaviour on the part of
the individual and is driven by the need to have a more accurate perception of reality. Typically, this
leads to internalisation in which a persons public behaviour and private opinion match and this
change in attitude is likely to be more permanent. This is illustrated in Jenness study, in which
participants changed their estimate of the number of sweets in a jar after talking to others, due to
the fact they wanted to be more accurate and assumed others might have a better guess.
, AO3 - Asch’s study provides evidence for normative social influence as explanation of conformity. In
Asch’s study there was a single participant amongst a group of confederates who were all asked
about the lengths of a line. 74% of the participants conformed on at least one of the critical trials
where the other confederates stated an obviously wrong answer. When participants were
interviewed after the experiment, most said they conformed to fit into the group. This is important
as his experiment displays the impact of normative social influence in simple tasks and provides
support for this explanation of conformity in social situations, helping researchers to understand the
influence of social situations on changing behaviour.
Additionally, Jenness’s study supports the role of informative social influence making people conform
in ambiguous situations. When asking participants to estimate the number of beans filled in a bottle,
75% of participants changed their estimate after a discussion with peers. This change in estimation is
down to the effect of informative social influence in which the participants wanted to provide the
most accurate answer when guessing the number of beans and complied due to the assumption that
other may have a more accurate perception, changing their initial belief/guess of the number.
(I wouldn’t have time to write both paragraphs would just pick the best opposing theory)
Researchers such as Turner (1991) have suggested an alternate explanation for conformity besides
NSI and ISI. Turner criticises the two-process theory stating it is too ‘simplistic’ and an ‘incomplete
explanation of conformity’. This is because it fails to take into account the crucial factor of social
identity. Our need to be liked and correct does not explain every instance of conformity behaviour.
Instead, we sometimes conform to a group because of our desire to belong to it, Turner calls this
referent social influence (RSI). Suggesting we conform because we want to maintain the norms of the
group we see ourselves as belonging to and doing so reinforces our self-categorisation as a member
of that group. This can explain why majority opinion continues to influence individuals after the
group itself no longer exists. This is important as it suggests NSI and ISI along are incomplete
explanations of conformity and do not address every situation, this means we should not only
categorise compliant behaviour due NSI and ISI as there might be an alternative explanation.
Researchers have suggested evolutionary reasons as an alternate explanation for conformity besides
NSI and ISI. Pike and Laland (2010) found that stickleback fish conform to feeding behaviours by
copying a demonstrator fish to ensure they have sufficient meals and food to survive. This theory can
be applied to the behaviour of humans and suggests a reason for conforming to a group is due to the
evolutionary advantage of ensuring that an individual has a higher chance of surviving if they follow
the group’s behaviour. This explains that people continue to conform in this day due to our innate
nature of following a groups’ behaviour for safety and security as it would have been n advantage to
stick to a groups’ behaviour centuries ago and not be alone and vulnerable. This is important as it
suggests NSI and ISI along are incomplete explanations of conformity and do not address every
situation, this means we should not only categorise compliant behaviour due NSI and ISI as there
might be an alternative explanation that a person cannot control.
NSI as an explanation for conformity has many real-world application benefits. Schultz et al (2008)
looked at many hotels and conducted an experiment in which they placed door hangers in some
hotels on reusing towels, stating that 75% of people in that hotel reuse their towels. Those who were
in the experimental group and received this message reduced their need for fresh towels by 25%.
This is important as it displays the practicalities of using normative social influence to benefit society
in a positive way and improve our behaviour as a race. This can help us in the future to become more
eco-friendly and kind as a society by pushing individuals to comply in order to be socially accepted.
AO1 - Normative social influence acts as one explanation for conformity based on the idea that a
person conforms to a groups’ beliefs or behaviour to be socially accepted and/or to be liked.
Normative links to social norms as it is the socially accepted, right thing to do.This type of conforming
can be socially rewarding to gain approval from peers with similar beliefs and attitudes and avoids
social rejection. This often leads to compliance which is where people will publicly agree with the
group but privately not change their opinion.
AO3 – Asch’s study provides evidence for this explanation of conformity. In Asch’s study there was a
single participant amongst a group of confederates whom were all asked about the lengths of a line.
74% of the participants conformed on at least one of the critical trials where the other confederates
stated an obviously wrong answer. When participants were interviewed after the experiment, most
said they conformed to fit into the group. This is important as his experiment displays the impact of
normative social influence in simple tasks and provides support for this explanation of conformity in
social situations, helping researchers to understand the influence of social situations on changing
behaviour.
Explain what is meant by internalisation (3 marks)
Internalisation is when a person accepts the groups beliefs as theirs. They change both their public
and private views and this is a permanent change as they continue to think this even when not in the
group. Internalisation is usually the result of Informative social influence which is where people will
change their belief and conform in ambiguous situations or in order to be accurate/correct.
Explain what is meant by compliance/identification (3 marks)
Compliance is where an individual changes his or her own behaviour to fit in with the group. They
may not necessarily agree with the behaviour but they go along with it publicly. This is not a
permanent form of social influence; it lasts only as long as the group is present. For example, in
Asch’s study, many of the naïve participants went along with the wrong answers so as not to look
stupid even if they didn’t believe it was correct.
Discuss NSI and ISI as explanations for conformity (16 marks)
AO1 - Normative social influence as an explanation for conformity suggests that a person conforms
to a groups’ beliefs or behaviour to be socially accepted and/or to be liked. This type of conforming
can be socially rewarding to gain approval from peers with similar beliefs and attitudes and avoids
social rejection. This often leads to compliance which is where people will publicly agree with the
group but privately not change their opinion. For example, in Asch’s study, many of the naïve
participants went along with the wrong answers so as not to look stupid even if they didn’t believe it
was correct.
Informative social influence as an explanation for conformity predicts that people conform when
they believe the group has more knowledge and expertise than they do. This suggests that
conformity within a group is due to uncertainty about correct responses or behaviour on the part of
the individual and is driven by the need to have a more accurate perception of reality. Typically, this
leads to internalisation in which a persons public behaviour and private opinion match and this
change in attitude is likely to be more permanent. This is illustrated in Jenness study, in which
participants changed their estimate of the number of sweets in a jar after talking to others, due to
the fact they wanted to be more accurate and assumed others might have a better guess.
, AO3 - Asch’s study provides evidence for normative social influence as explanation of conformity. In
Asch’s study there was a single participant amongst a group of confederates who were all asked
about the lengths of a line. 74% of the participants conformed on at least one of the critical trials
where the other confederates stated an obviously wrong answer. When participants were
interviewed after the experiment, most said they conformed to fit into the group. This is important
as his experiment displays the impact of normative social influence in simple tasks and provides
support for this explanation of conformity in social situations, helping researchers to understand the
influence of social situations on changing behaviour.
Additionally, Jenness’s study supports the role of informative social influence making people conform
in ambiguous situations. When asking participants to estimate the number of beans filled in a bottle,
75% of participants changed their estimate after a discussion with peers. This change in estimation is
down to the effect of informative social influence in which the participants wanted to provide the
most accurate answer when guessing the number of beans and complied due to the assumption that
other may have a more accurate perception, changing their initial belief/guess of the number.
(I wouldn’t have time to write both paragraphs would just pick the best opposing theory)
Researchers such as Turner (1991) have suggested an alternate explanation for conformity besides
NSI and ISI. Turner criticises the two-process theory stating it is too ‘simplistic’ and an ‘incomplete
explanation of conformity’. This is because it fails to take into account the crucial factor of social
identity. Our need to be liked and correct does not explain every instance of conformity behaviour.
Instead, we sometimes conform to a group because of our desire to belong to it, Turner calls this
referent social influence (RSI). Suggesting we conform because we want to maintain the norms of the
group we see ourselves as belonging to and doing so reinforces our self-categorisation as a member
of that group. This can explain why majority opinion continues to influence individuals after the
group itself no longer exists. This is important as it suggests NSI and ISI along are incomplete
explanations of conformity and do not address every situation, this means we should not only
categorise compliant behaviour due NSI and ISI as there might be an alternative explanation.
Researchers have suggested evolutionary reasons as an alternate explanation for conformity besides
NSI and ISI. Pike and Laland (2010) found that stickleback fish conform to feeding behaviours by
copying a demonstrator fish to ensure they have sufficient meals and food to survive. This theory can
be applied to the behaviour of humans and suggests a reason for conforming to a group is due to the
evolutionary advantage of ensuring that an individual has a higher chance of surviving if they follow
the group’s behaviour. This explains that people continue to conform in this day due to our innate
nature of following a groups’ behaviour for safety and security as it would have been n advantage to
stick to a groups’ behaviour centuries ago and not be alone and vulnerable. This is important as it
suggests NSI and ISI along are incomplete explanations of conformity and do not address every
situation, this means we should not only categorise compliant behaviour due NSI and ISI as there
might be an alternative explanation that a person cannot control.
NSI as an explanation for conformity has many real-world application benefits. Schultz et al (2008)
looked at many hotels and conducted an experiment in which they placed door hangers in some
hotels on reusing towels, stating that 75% of people in that hotel reuse their towels. Those who were
in the experimental group and received this message reduced their need for fresh towels by 25%.
This is important as it displays the practicalities of using normative social influence to benefit society
in a positive way and improve our behaviour as a race. This can help us in the future to become more
eco-friendly and kind as a society by pushing individuals to comply in order to be socially accepted.
