SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Types of conformity:
CONFORMITY – a change in a person’s behaviour
or opinions as a result of real or imagined
pressure from a person or group of people
INTERNALISATION – taking on a majority view
because you accept it as correct. Leads to
permanent change in behaviour, even when the
group is absent
IDENTIFICATION – acting in the same way as the group because you value it
and want to be part of it. You do not necessarily agree with everything the
majority believes
COMPLIANCE – outwardly going along with the majority view but privately
disagreeing with it. The change in behaviour only lasts as long as the group is
monitoring you
Explanations for conformity:
INFORMATIONAL SOCIAL INFLUENCE (ISI) – agreeing with the majority opinion
because you view it as correct/more likely to be correct. You accept it because
you want to be correct as well
NORMATIVE SOCIAL INFLUENCE (NSI) – agreeing with the majority opinion
because you want to be accepted, gain social approval and be liked
Resisting conformity:
INDIVDUAL DIFFERENCES – people with high self-esteem or with no need for
social approval are less likely to go along with the group
, CULTURAL FACTORS – individuals from societies that stress the important of
personal determinism (individualist cultures) are more likely to resist the
pressure to conform than those from collectivist societies
PRESENCE OF ALLIES – if there is another person who disagrees, it is easier for
the individual to resist the group pressure
COMPOSITION OF THE GROUP – if the people in the group are perceived to
have less knowledge than the individual (or low status) it is easier to resist the
pressure
Conformity – Asch’s research (1951):
PROCEDURE – showed 7 participants two cards (a test card
showing one vertical line, and another card showing three
vertical lines of different lengths). They had to call out, in
turn, which of the three lines was the same length as the test
line. This was obvious (unambiguous). All but one of the
participants were confederates. The genuine participant
called out his answer second to last. 18 trials took place with
each participant. 12 of these were known as critical trials, where confederates
gave the same wrong answer
FINDINGS – 75% conformed at least once on the critical trials. 5% conformed
on every critical trial. 25% never conformed.
CONCLUSION – even when the answer is unambiguous, people are seen to
change their view to conform to a unanimous majority. However, on most
critical trials, participants remained independent and resisted the pressure to
conform.
EVALUATION – high control, historical factors (in the 1950s the USA was very
conservative, so lacks temporal validity), lacked ecological validity (the task
was not important to the participants’ belief system so they were unlikely to
conform, and they were also among strangers, and it did not reflect a real life
situation), low generalisability (due to low temporal and ecological validity,
and gender and cultural differences not taken into account so may only apply
to American men), ethical issues (no informed consent, participants were
deceived)
2
Types of conformity:
CONFORMITY – a change in a person’s behaviour
or opinions as a result of real or imagined
pressure from a person or group of people
INTERNALISATION – taking on a majority view
because you accept it as correct. Leads to
permanent change in behaviour, even when the
group is absent
IDENTIFICATION – acting in the same way as the group because you value it
and want to be part of it. You do not necessarily agree with everything the
majority believes
COMPLIANCE – outwardly going along with the majority view but privately
disagreeing with it. The change in behaviour only lasts as long as the group is
monitoring you
Explanations for conformity:
INFORMATIONAL SOCIAL INFLUENCE (ISI) – agreeing with the majority opinion
because you view it as correct/more likely to be correct. You accept it because
you want to be correct as well
NORMATIVE SOCIAL INFLUENCE (NSI) – agreeing with the majority opinion
because you want to be accepted, gain social approval and be liked
Resisting conformity:
INDIVDUAL DIFFERENCES – people with high self-esteem or with no need for
social approval are less likely to go along with the group
, CULTURAL FACTORS – individuals from societies that stress the important of
personal determinism (individualist cultures) are more likely to resist the
pressure to conform than those from collectivist societies
PRESENCE OF ALLIES – if there is another person who disagrees, it is easier for
the individual to resist the group pressure
COMPOSITION OF THE GROUP – if the people in the group are perceived to
have less knowledge than the individual (or low status) it is easier to resist the
pressure
Conformity – Asch’s research (1951):
PROCEDURE – showed 7 participants two cards (a test card
showing one vertical line, and another card showing three
vertical lines of different lengths). They had to call out, in
turn, which of the three lines was the same length as the test
line. This was obvious (unambiguous). All but one of the
participants were confederates. The genuine participant
called out his answer second to last. 18 trials took place with
each participant. 12 of these were known as critical trials, where confederates
gave the same wrong answer
FINDINGS – 75% conformed at least once on the critical trials. 5% conformed
on every critical trial. 25% never conformed.
CONCLUSION – even when the answer is unambiguous, people are seen to
change their view to conform to a unanimous majority. However, on most
critical trials, participants remained independent and resisted the pressure to
conform.
EVALUATION – high control, historical factors (in the 1950s the USA was very
conservative, so lacks temporal validity), lacked ecological validity (the task
was not important to the participants’ belief system so they were unlikely to
conform, and they were also among strangers, and it did not reflect a real life
situation), low generalisability (due to low temporal and ecological validity,
and gender and cultural differences not taken into account so may only apply
to American men), ethical issues (no informed consent, participants were
deceived)
2
