Outline and evaluate types and explanations of conformity [16 MARKS]
One explanation of conformity is normative social influence. This is when someone conforms due to
the need to be liked and as a result explains compliance. The change in behaviour is done in public
but not privately and happens in unambiguous situations meaning the person knows the correct way
to behave.
Another explanation of conformity is informational social influence. This is when someone conforms
due to the need to be right and as a result explains internalisation. The change in behaviour is done
both in private and in public and happens in ambiguous situations. The person conforms because
they believe others have more knowledge than them and they do not know the correct way to
behave.
In 1951, Asch conducted a study to test conformity which ended up providing research support for
NSI. He had asked participants to take part in what they believed was a perception test. He had one
participant sit in a group with 3-6 confederates who the participant thought was other participants.
He had then shown the participant a standard line and then three comparison lines and asked them
to choose the line that was equal in length to the standard line. The participant and confederates
were asked to answer out loud in order, with the participant being last or second last, and the
confederates were told to give the incorrect answer. Asch found that 75% of participants conformed
at least once and there was a 33% rate of conformity over the 12 trials. He also had a control group
in which a participant took the test alone and less than 1% got the answer wrong which showed that
the situation was unambiguous. Furthermore, in the debrief participants revealed that they
conformed because they wanted approval from the confederates which highlights how they
conformed due to the need to be liked therefore due to NSI.
However, despite this, research has found that NSI does not influence everyone in the same way.
nAffliators are people who do not care about being liked and as a result it is suggested that
individual differences play a bigger role in whether one conforms or not. Furthermore, 25% did nt
conform in Asch’s study suggesting that NSI only influences some people.
In 1935, Sheriff conducted a study to test for ISI by doing an auto kinetic test. She had shown
participants a dot of light and asked them to estimate how far they thought the dot moved and in
which direction. Participants were alone and the answers were all different yet consistent. When
participants were put into groups and shown the same light and asked to state where they thought
the light moved and by how much, the answers became very similar to each other. The light moving
task was very ambiguous as it was difficult to come up with one answer which states that the reason
they conformed was due to ISI as the participants did not know the correct answer.
However, ISI does not impact everyone in the same way. In 1980, Perrin and Spencer repeated
Asch’s original study with science and engineering students and found that only one student
conformed in a total of 396 trials. This suggest that the others believed they had enough knowledge
and therefore did not conform as they were more confident. As a result, ISI does not impact
everyone in the same way and if one is confident in their answer then they are less likely to conform
due to ISI.
, Furthermore, Asch’s participants revealed that after a while, some of them genuinely started to
doubt themselves. This suggests that the situation became ambiguous and some participants did not
know the correct answer. However, they also revealed that they wanted to fit in meaning they
conformed due to ISI and NSI. Nonetheless, the explanations of conformity are supposed to be
distinct and you conform due to either one, not both. Due to this, the explanations of conformity are
a reductionist as they have ignored any other possible reason and are over simplistic.
One explanation of conformity is normative social influence. This is when someone conforms due to
the need to be liked and as a result explains compliance. The change in behaviour is done in public
but not privately and happens in unambiguous situations meaning the person knows the correct way
to behave.
Another explanation of conformity is informational social influence. This is when someone conforms
due to the need to be right and as a result explains internalisation. The change in behaviour is done
both in private and in public and happens in ambiguous situations. The person conforms because
they believe others have more knowledge than them and they do not know the correct way to
behave.
In 1951, Asch conducted a study to test conformity which ended up providing research support for
NSI. He had asked participants to take part in what they believed was a perception test. He had one
participant sit in a group with 3-6 confederates who the participant thought was other participants.
He had then shown the participant a standard line and then three comparison lines and asked them
to choose the line that was equal in length to the standard line. The participant and confederates
were asked to answer out loud in order, with the participant being last or second last, and the
confederates were told to give the incorrect answer. Asch found that 75% of participants conformed
at least once and there was a 33% rate of conformity over the 12 trials. He also had a control group
in which a participant took the test alone and less than 1% got the answer wrong which showed that
the situation was unambiguous. Furthermore, in the debrief participants revealed that they
conformed because they wanted approval from the confederates which highlights how they
conformed due to the need to be liked therefore due to NSI.
However, despite this, research has found that NSI does not influence everyone in the same way.
nAffliators are people who do not care about being liked and as a result it is suggested that
individual differences play a bigger role in whether one conforms or not. Furthermore, 25% did nt
conform in Asch’s study suggesting that NSI only influences some people.
In 1935, Sheriff conducted a study to test for ISI by doing an auto kinetic test. She had shown
participants a dot of light and asked them to estimate how far they thought the dot moved and in
which direction. Participants were alone and the answers were all different yet consistent. When
participants were put into groups and shown the same light and asked to state where they thought
the light moved and by how much, the answers became very similar to each other. The light moving
task was very ambiguous as it was difficult to come up with one answer which states that the reason
they conformed was due to ISI as the participants did not know the correct answer.
However, ISI does not impact everyone in the same way. In 1980, Perrin and Spencer repeated
Asch’s original study with science and engineering students and found that only one student
conformed in a total of 396 trials. This suggest that the others believed they had enough knowledge
and therefore did not conform as they were more confident. As a result, ISI does not impact
everyone in the same way and if one is confident in their answer then they are less likely to conform
due to ISI.
, Furthermore, Asch’s participants revealed that after a while, some of them genuinely started to
doubt themselves. This suggests that the situation became ambiguous and some participants did not
know the correct answer. However, they also revealed that they wanted to fit in meaning they
conformed due to ISI and NSI. Nonetheless, the explanations of conformity are supposed to be
distinct and you conform due to either one, not both. Due to this, the explanations of conformity are
a reductionist as they have ignored any other possible reason and are over simplistic.
