AQA - Topic 1: Social Influence
Learning Outcomes:
1.) Types of conformity: internalisation, and compliance. Explanations for
conformity: informational social influence and normative social influence,
and variables affecting conformity including group size, unanimity and
task difficulty as investigated by Asch.
2.) Explanations for obedience: agentic state and legitimacy of authority,
and situational variables affecting obedience including proximity and
location, as investigated by Milgram, and uniform. Dispositional
explanation for obedience: the Authoritarian Personality.
3.) Explanations of resistance to social influence, including social support
and locus of control.
4.) Minority influence including reference to consistency, commitment and
flexibility.
1. Types of Conformity
Definition
Conformity: A form of social influence that results from exposure to the
majority position & leads to compliance with that position. It is the tendency for
people to adopt the behavior, attitudes & values of other members of a
reference group.
Myers (1999): Changes in behaviour/belief as a result of real/imagined group
pressure
Kelman's TwoTypes of Conformity
a.) Compliance
Publicly conforming but privately maintaining own views
AQA - Topic 1: Social Influence 1
, Not adopting the content but conforming because of the rewards or approval
associated with its adoption
An individual's change of view is temporary and is likely to occur as a result of
normative social influence
E.g., when friends pressure you into drinking alcohol when you don't truly want to,
and will not drink outside of such social situations.
b.) Internalisation
The strongest type of conformity, and often occurs as a result of informational
social influence
Publicly conforming and privately adopting group views
The content of the attitude is consistent with their own value system
E.g., being brought up in a religious household, and becoming religious yourself.
Explanations for Conformity
a.) Normative Social Influence
Conforming to be liked
Feel that others will accept and approve them if they conform
Example of compliance
E.g., a person starting to smoke because they are surrounded by other people
who smoke
b.) Informational Social Influence
Conforming to be right
People look to those that they believe are correct as a way of obtaining
information about how to behave, especially in unfamiliar situations
An example of internalisation
E.g., Fein et al. asked participants to vote for a US presidential candidate after they
saw others voting for somebody else. Most of the participants changed their mind
AQA - Topic 1: Social Influence 2
, because they wanted to be 'correct', thus demonstrating the impact of
informational social influence as a mechanism for conformity.
Evaluation
Strengths Weaknesses
1. Difficulties in distinguishing between
compliance and internalization
- The relationship between compliance and
internalisation is complicated by how we
1. Research support for normative define and measure public compliance and
influence private acceptance.
E.g., Garandeau and Cillissen E.g., It is assumed that a person who agrees
- Found that a boy can be manipulated by a with the group in public and in private must
bully into victimising another child have internalized the view of group
because the bully provides a common goal - But, it is also possible that the individual
for the boy's group of friends may actually have been merely complying in
- The goal is to victimise the other child, so public, but as a result of self-perception ('I
the boy would most likely also victimise the agreed with the rest of the group, therefore
child to avoid disapproval from his friends. that must be what I really believe') they
come to subsequently accept that position
2. Research support for informational as their own.
influence
E.g., Sherif (1935) 2. Normative influence may not be detected
- In an ambiguous situation, participants - Nolan et al. found that people
experienced informational influence underestimate the impact of normative
- Where they followed the group norm and influence on their behavior
the effects continued even when they were
alone afterwards. 3. Informational influence is moderated by
type of task
- E.g., the number of people, the task type,
what responses are given and whether
partners were lost or gained
Key Study: ASCH (1956)
AQA - Topic 1: Social Influence 3
, Aim
To know whether people could be influenced by other people's opinions
to give an answer they knew to be wrong
To see if people were conforming
Procedure
Male students were asked to take part in a study of visual discrimination, they
were tested in groups of 7-9 participants, but only one was genuine/naive, all
other participants were stooges
Seated in a semi-circle, they had to decide which of 3 lines was the same
length as the standard line, they each say their judgment aloud, in the order
that they were seated, with the naïve participant second to last
6 neutral trials in which the stooges gave the correct answer, 12 where the
stooges gave the wrong answer, and a control where 37 participants made
their judgments in private
Results
In the control condition, 0.7% errors were made, in the experimental condition,
around 37% errors were made
There were large individual differences, 25% made no mistakes, 28% gave 8
or more out of 12 answers incorrectly
74% of the participants gave at least one wrong answer
Without confederates, participants made mistakes 1% of the time
Conclusion
Those who gave incorrect answers told Asch they knew their answers were
wrong but did not want to go against the rest of the group
→ This clearly shows normative social influence.
AQA - Topic 1: Social Influence 4
Learning Outcomes:
1.) Types of conformity: internalisation, and compliance. Explanations for
conformity: informational social influence and normative social influence,
and variables affecting conformity including group size, unanimity and
task difficulty as investigated by Asch.
2.) Explanations for obedience: agentic state and legitimacy of authority,
and situational variables affecting obedience including proximity and
location, as investigated by Milgram, and uniform. Dispositional
explanation for obedience: the Authoritarian Personality.
3.) Explanations of resistance to social influence, including social support
and locus of control.
4.) Minority influence including reference to consistency, commitment and
flexibility.
1. Types of Conformity
Definition
Conformity: A form of social influence that results from exposure to the
majority position & leads to compliance with that position. It is the tendency for
people to adopt the behavior, attitudes & values of other members of a
reference group.
Myers (1999): Changes in behaviour/belief as a result of real/imagined group
pressure
Kelman's TwoTypes of Conformity
a.) Compliance
Publicly conforming but privately maintaining own views
AQA - Topic 1: Social Influence 1
, Not adopting the content but conforming because of the rewards or approval
associated with its adoption
An individual's change of view is temporary and is likely to occur as a result of
normative social influence
E.g., when friends pressure you into drinking alcohol when you don't truly want to,
and will not drink outside of such social situations.
b.) Internalisation
The strongest type of conformity, and often occurs as a result of informational
social influence
Publicly conforming and privately adopting group views
The content of the attitude is consistent with their own value system
E.g., being brought up in a religious household, and becoming religious yourself.
Explanations for Conformity
a.) Normative Social Influence
Conforming to be liked
Feel that others will accept and approve them if they conform
Example of compliance
E.g., a person starting to smoke because they are surrounded by other people
who smoke
b.) Informational Social Influence
Conforming to be right
People look to those that they believe are correct as a way of obtaining
information about how to behave, especially in unfamiliar situations
An example of internalisation
E.g., Fein et al. asked participants to vote for a US presidential candidate after they
saw others voting for somebody else. Most of the participants changed their mind
AQA - Topic 1: Social Influence 2
, because they wanted to be 'correct', thus demonstrating the impact of
informational social influence as a mechanism for conformity.
Evaluation
Strengths Weaknesses
1. Difficulties in distinguishing between
compliance and internalization
- The relationship between compliance and
internalisation is complicated by how we
1. Research support for normative define and measure public compliance and
influence private acceptance.
E.g., Garandeau and Cillissen E.g., It is assumed that a person who agrees
- Found that a boy can be manipulated by a with the group in public and in private must
bully into victimising another child have internalized the view of group
because the bully provides a common goal - But, it is also possible that the individual
for the boy's group of friends may actually have been merely complying in
- The goal is to victimise the other child, so public, but as a result of self-perception ('I
the boy would most likely also victimise the agreed with the rest of the group, therefore
child to avoid disapproval from his friends. that must be what I really believe') they
come to subsequently accept that position
2. Research support for informational as their own.
influence
E.g., Sherif (1935) 2. Normative influence may not be detected
- In an ambiguous situation, participants - Nolan et al. found that people
experienced informational influence underestimate the impact of normative
- Where they followed the group norm and influence on their behavior
the effects continued even when they were
alone afterwards. 3. Informational influence is moderated by
type of task
- E.g., the number of people, the task type,
what responses are given and whether
partners were lost or gained
Key Study: ASCH (1956)
AQA - Topic 1: Social Influence 3
, Aim
To know whether people could be influenced by other people's opinions
to give an answer they knew to be wrong
To see if people were conforming
Procedure
Male students were asked to take part in a study of visual discrimination, they
were tested in groups of 7-9 participants, but only one was genuine/naive, all
other participants were stooges
Seated in a semi-circle, they had to decide which of 3 lines was the same
length as the standard line, they each say their judgment aloud, in the order
that they were seated, with the naïve participant second to last
6 neutral trials in which the stooges gave the correct answer, 12 where the
stooges gave the wrong answer, and a control where 37 participants made
their judgments in private
Results
In the control condition, 0.7% errors were made, in the experimental condition,
around 37% errors were made
There were large individual differences, 25% made no mistakes, 28% gave 8
or more out of 12 answers incorrectly
74% of the participants gave at least one wrong answer
Without confederates, participants made mistakes 1% of the time
Conclusion
Those who gave incorrect answers told Asch they knew their answers were
wrong but did not want to go against the rest of the group
→ This clearly shows normative social influence.
AQA - Topic 1: Social Influence 4
