Social Influence:
Conformity: Types and Explanations:
Kelman’s Theory:
● Identified 3 levels of conformity
o Compliance; public agreement with the majority but privately disagrees. There
is only a superficial change and the behaviour/ opinion stops as soon as group
pressure stops
o Identification; conforms to group behaviour/ opinion because there is
something about the group that we value and that we identify with. Publicly
change our behaviour/ opinion even if were don’t privately agree with
everything
o Internalisation; Publicly and privately conform and genuinely accept the groups
norms. The behaviour has been internalised and become part of thoughts. These
changes are present even in the absence of other group members
Explanations for Conformity:
● Deutsch and Gerard developed a two-process theory, arguing the are 2 main reasons
for conformity based on the need to be right and the need to be liked
o Informational Social Influence (ISI); occurs when an individual lacks knowledge
or looks for guidance. It’s a cognitive process because it’s to do with our
thoughts and is most likely to happen in situations that are new or ambiguous.
Also, often typical in crisis situations where decision have to be made quickly
o Normative Social Influence (NSI); occurs when an individual conforms to gain
approval from the group and fears rejection. It’s an emotional rather than
cognitive process. NSI is most likely to occur in situations with strangers where
you feel concerned about rejection and can be more pronounced in stressful
situations where there is a greater need for social support
Evaluation:
✔ Research Support for ISI; Lucas et al. asked students to give answers to
mathematical problems that were easy or more difficult. He found there was greater
conformity to an incorrect answer for harder questions. This shows that people
conform in situations where they feel they don’t know the answer – ISI. We look to
others and assume they know more than us
✔ Research Support for NSI; Asch found that many of his participants went along with
an obviously wrong answer just because others did. When asked why, many said
they felt self-conscious and were afraid of disapproval from the group. When the
study was repeated with written answers instead, conformity rates dropped to
12.5%
� Individual Differences in NSI; People who are less concerned with being liked are
less affected by NSI than those who do. nAffiliators have a need to be in a
relationship with others and therefore are more likely to conform. The desire to be
liked underlies conformity for some people more than others which means that
there are individual differences in the way people respond
� ISI and NSI work together; Deutsch and Gerard’s theory is that behaviour is either
due to NSI or ISI when, more often than not, both processes are involved. Conformity
was reduced in Asch’s experiment when one other participant dissented which
, could reduce the power of NSI (they provide social support) or ISI (there is an
alternative source of information). This shows it isn’t always possible to be sure
whether NSI or ISI is at work which casts doubt over the view of ISI and NSI as two
processes operating independently
Conformity: Asch’s Research:
Procedure:
● Sample – 123 American, male undergraduate students
● Asch tested conformity by showing participants 2 cards with lines on; one had a
standard line and the other had 3 on
● He asked the participants to say which line matched the standard line
● Each participant was paired with 6-8 confederates who were instructed to give the
wrong answer on 12 of 18 trials.
o On the first few, the confederates would give the correct answer but then started
making errors and were instructed to all give the same incorrect answer
Findings:
● The naïve participant gave a wrong answer 36.8% of the time
● 25% of participants didn’t conform on any trials, meaning 75% conformed at least
once
● When they were interviewed afterwards, most said they gave the wrong answer to
avoid rejection (NSI)
Asch’s Variations:
● Asch was interested in conditions that could increase or decrease the rate of
conformity so carried out variations on his original experiment
● Group Size; He wanted to know if the size of the group was more important than the
agreement of the group. He found that with 3 confederates conformity rose to 31.8%
but the addition of more made little difference. This suggests that a small majority
isn’t enough for influence to be exerted but there is also no need for a majority of
more than 3
● Unanimity; Asch also wanted to know if the presence of another, non-conforming
person would affect the rate of conformity. The presence of a dissenting confederate
meant that conformity was reduced by a quarter. It allowed the participant to
behave more independently which suggests that the influence of the majority
depends, to some extent, on the unanimity of the group
● Task Difficulty; When the lines were more similar in length, conformity increased.
ISI became more apparent as the correct answer was more ambiguous as we look
the guidance from others
Evaluation:
� Outdated; Perrin and Spencer repeated Asch’s research in 1980 with UK engineering
students. Only one student conformed in 396 trials. This could be because the 1950s
were a conformist time in America and therefore it made sense to conform to
established social norms. Society has changed since then and people may be no
conformist. This is a limitation of Asch’s research because it means his findings are
consistent across time and so aren’t a fundamental feature of human behaviour.
Conformity: Types and Explanations:
Kelman’s Theory:
● Identified 3 levels of conformity
o Compliance; public agreement with the majority but privately disagrees. There
is only a superficial change and the behaviour/ opinion stops as soon as group
pressure stops
o Identification; conforms to group behaviour/ opinion because there is
something about the group that we value and that we identify with. Publicly
change our behaviour/ opinion even if were don’t privately agree with
everything
o Internalisation; Publicly and privately conform and genuinely accept the groups
norms. The behaviour has been internalised and become part of thoughts. These
changes are present even in the absence of other group members
Explanations for Conformity:
● Deutsch and Gerard developed a two-process theory, arguing the are 2 main reasons
for conformity based on the need to be right and the need to be liked
o Informational Social Influence (ISI); occurs when an individual lacks knowledge
or looks for guidance. It’s a cognitive process because it’s to do with our
thoughts and is most likely to happen in situations that are new or ambiguous.
Also, often typical in crisis situations where decision have to be made quickly
o Normative Social Influence (NSI); occurs when an individual conforms to gain
approval from the group and fears rejection. It’s an emotional rather than
cognitive process. NSI is most likely to occur in situations with strangers where
you feel concerned about rejection and can be more pronounced in stressful
situations where there is a greater need for social support
Evaluation:
✔ Research Support for ISI; Lucas et al. asked students to give answers to
mathematical problems that were easy or more difficult. He found there was greater
conformity to an incorrect answer for harder questions. This shows that people
conform in situations where they feel they don’t know the answer – ISI. We look to
others and assume they know more than us
✔ Research Support for NSI; Asch found that many of his participants went along with
an obviously wrong answer just because others did. When asked why, many said
they felt self-conscious and were afraid of disapproval from the group. When the
study was repeated with written answers instead, conformity rates dropped to
12.5%
� Individual Differences in NSI; People who are less concerned with being liked are
less affected by NSI than those who do. nAffiliators have a need to be in a
relationship with others and therefore are more likely to conform. The desire to be
liked underlies conformity for some people more than others which means that
there are individual differences in the way people respond
� ISI and NSI work together; Deutsch and Gerard’s theory is that behaviour is either
due to NSI or ISI when, more often than not, both processes are involved. Conformity
was reduced in Asch’s experiment when one other participant dissented which
, could reduce the power of NSI (they provide social support) or ISI (there is an
alternative source of information). This shows it isn’t always possible to be sure
whether NSI or ISI is at work which casts doubt over the view of ISI and NSI as two
processes operating independently
Conformity: Asch’s Research:
Procedure:
● Sample – 123 American, male undergraduate students
● Asch tested conformity by showing participants 2 cards with lines on; one had a
standard line and the other had 3 on
● He asked the participants to say which line matched the standard line
● Each participant was paired with 6-8 confederates who were instructed to give the
wrong answer on 12 of 18 trials.
o On the first few, the confederates would give the correct answer but then started
making errors and were instructed to all give the same incorrect answer
Findings:
● The naïve participant gave a wrong answer 36.8% of the time
● 25% of participants didn’t conform on any trials, meaning 75% conformed at least
once
● When they were interviewed afterwards, most said they gave the wrong answer to
avoid rejection (NSI)
Asch’s Variations:
● Asch was interested in conditions that could increase or decrease the rate of
conformity so carried out variations on his original experiment
● Group Size; He wanted to know if the size of the group was more important than the
agreement of the group. He found that with 3 confederates conformity rose to 31.8%
but the addition of more made little difference. This suggests that a small majority
isn’t enough for influence to be exerted but there is also no need for a majority of
more than 3
● Unanimity; Asch also wanted to know if the presence of another, non-conforming
person would affect the rate of conformity. The presence of a dissenting confederate
meant that conformity was reduced by a quarter. It allowed the participant to
behave more independently which suggests that the influence of the majority
depends, to some extent, on the unanimity of the group
● Task Difficulty; When the lines were more similar in length, conformity increased.
ISI became more apparent as the correct answer was more ambiguous as we look
the guidance from others
Evaluation:
� Outdated; Perrin and Spencer repeated Asch’s research in 1980 with UK engineering
students. Only one student conformed in 396 trials. This could be because the 1950s
were a conformist time in America and therefore it made sense to conform to
established social norms. Society has changed since then and people may be no
conformist. This is a limitation of Asch’s research because it means his findings are
consistent across time and so aren’t a fundamental feature of human behaviour.
