Conformity is defined as a change in a persons behaviour or opinions as the result of
pressure from an external source. There are three key types of conformity- the first being
compliance. This is defined as superficial conformity, which results from group pressure. An
individual experiences a temporary change in their public beliefs or attitudes and complies
with group norms or ideals. The second type of conformity is identification, which is a
temporary change in public and private beliefs or behaviour as the result of group pressure.
The person identifies with the group mindset and therefore, whilst being in the presence of
the group, will change their beliefs and behaviours to match this mindset. This is only
temporary- once the pressure from the group is no longer applied, conformity too stops. The
final type of conformity is the “truest”, in the sense that it results in a permanent change in
public and private beliefs and attitudes- this is known as internalisation. A person genuinely
accepts the group norms and internalises them.
There are a multitude of explanations of conformity. Psychologists have proposed the two-
process theory as a predominant explanation of why conformity occurs, which is based on
two central human needs- the need to be right, and the need to be liked. The first explanation
of conformity is normative social influence, NSI, which occurs based on the desire to be liked
and fit in. A person conforms to group or social norms as an emotional process- they are
attempting to gain social approval in doing so, and agree with the opinion of the majority.
This is an emotional process rather than cognitive and typically occurs via compliance,
meaning that these beliefs and attitudes are not internalised.
Research support that illustrates normative social influence was committed within one of
Asch’s variations. It was found that when participants were interviewed and asked why they
provided the answers that they did, despite being clearly wrong, the participants answered
that they did not want to appear silly and felt self-conscious of disapproval. This
demonstrates the effect of normative social influence in adhering to the norm of social
groups, however temporary. Therefore this research support provides evidence to support
normative social influence.
The alternate explanation of conformity is informational social influence, ISI, which occurs
when an individual conforms to the majority due to the desire to be correct. This occurs in
situations which may be ambiguous or unclear, where they agree with the opinion of the
majority because they believe it to be correct. Informational social influence typically resides
in the individual internalising these beliefs.
Research support that provides evidence for informational social influence was committed
by Lucas et al, where it was found that participants were more likely to conform to the
majority when the situation was unclear. Participants were given hard and easy maths
questions, and were told the answers by two confederates- when the questions were “hard”,
conformity to the confederate answers increased due to the ambiguity of the situation. The
participants were not confident in their own abilities and thus conformed. This illustrates ISI
clearly and therefore provides research support that increases the internal validity of the
claims made by the explanation.
Despite this supporting research, the two process model may be flawed as an explanation of
conformity. It has been found that certain individuals that possess a dispositional tendancy
to desire to be liked, known as nAffiliators, are more susceptible to normative social
influence than those that do not desire the approval of others to the same extent. The lack of
consideration of the influence that disposition may have on the decision to conform
therefore limits the explanatory power of the explanation, making it only partial.
However, the real life application of this explanation of conformity may be limited. In real
life, it is often unclear whether normative or informational influence has a greater effect. For
instance, many situations can be interpreted as NSI or ISI, such as the introduction of a
pressure from an external source. There are three key types of conformity- the first being
compliance. This is defined as superficial conformity, which results from group pressure. An
individual experiences a temporary change in their public beliefs or attitudes and complies
with group norms or ideals. The second type of conformity is identification, which is a
temporary change in public and private beliefs or behaviour as the result of group pressure.
The person identifies with the group mindset and therefore, whilst being in the presence of
the group, will change their beliefs and behaviours to match this mindset. This is only
temporary- once the pressure from the group is no longer applied, conformity too stops. The
final type of conformity is the “truest”, in the sense that it results in a permanent change in
public and private beliefs and attitudes- this is known as internalisation. A person genuinely
accepts the group norms and internalises them.
There are a multitude of explanations of conformity. Psychologists have proposed the two-
process theory as a predominant explanation of why conformity occurs, which is based on
two central human needs- the need to be right, and the need to be liked. The first explanation
of conformity is normative social influence, NSI, which occurs based on the desire to be liked
and fit in. A person conforms to group or social norms as an emotional process- they are
attempting to gain social approval in doing so, and agree with the opinion of the majority.
This is an emotional process rather than cognitive and typically occurs via compliance,
meaning that these beliefs and attitudes are not internalised.
Research support that illustrates normative social influence was committed within one of
Asch’s variations. It was found that when participants were interviewed and asked why they
provided the answers that they did, despite being clearly wrong, the participants answered
that they did not want to appear silly and felt self-conscious of disapproval. This
demonstrates the effect of normative social influence in adhering to the norm of social
groups, however temporary. Therefore this research support provides evidence to support
normative social influence.
The alternate explanation of conformity is informational social influence, ISI, which occurs
when an individual conforms to the majority due to the desire to be correct. This occurs in
situations which may be ambiguous or unclear, where they agree with the opinion of the
majority because they believe it to be correct. Informational social influence typically resides
in the individual internalising these beliefs.
Research support that provides evidence for informational social influence was committed
by Lucas et al, where it was found that participants were more likely to conform to the
majority when the situation was unclear. Participants were given hard and easy maths
questions, and were told the answers by two confederates- when the questions were “hard”,
conformity to the confederate answers increased due to the ambiguity of the situation. The
participants were not confident in their own abilities and thus conformed. This illustrates ISI
clearly and therefore provides research support that increases the internal validity of the
claims made by the explanation.
Despite this supporting research, the two process model may be flawed as an explanation of
conformity. It has been found that certain individuals that possess a dispositional tendancy
to desire to be liked, known as nAffiliators, are more susceptible to normative social
influence than those that do not desire the approval of others to the same extent. The lack of
consideration of the influence that disposition may have on the decision to conform
therefore limits the explanatory power of the explanation, making it only partial.
However, the real life application of this explanation of conformity may be limited. In real
life, it is often unclear whether normative or informational influence has a greater effect. For
instance, many situations can be interpreted as NSI or ISI, such as the introduction of a
