Transcript Slide 1
Social Psychology is the study of the impact of our
surroundings, and in particular of other people on
our behaviour.
Social Influence
Conformity
vs
Independent behaviour
The Final Solution
e.g. Adolf Eichmann
6 million people
Abu Ghraib
Iraqi prison abuses
Conformity
What is conformity?
It is a form of social influence where people adopt
the behaviour, attitudes and values of other
members in a majority position
Kelman (1958) proposed 3 types of conformity:
Compliance
Internalisation
Identification
Compliance
Individuals engage in social comparison, adjusting
their own actions to fit with the group
Identification
with the majority is desirable
Individual may comply with little or no private attitude
change
Internalisation
Individuals may engage in a validation process.
Beliefs
and attitudes are examined
Individual may decide that the majority is correct.
This leads to an acceptance of the group’s point of
view both publicly and privately
Identification
Incorporates both compliance and internalisation
Individual
may wish to adapt the group’s attitudes and
beliefs to establish a relationship etc.
Individual accepts what they are adopting
(internalisation)
Attitudes are adopted to be an accepted member of
the group (compliance)
Asch 1956 - procedure
123 male American undergraduates recruited for a
‘vision test’
In each experiment all but one were confederates
In turn, participants and confederates were asked to
state which of three lines was the same length as a
stimulus line.
The real participant always answered last or second to
last
Confederates would give the same incorrect answer for
12 out of 18 trials
Findings
For 12 critical trials 36.8% of responses given by
participants were incorrect
¼ of participants never conformed
In a control trial, only 1% of responses given by
participants were incorrect
Why?
When asked why they conformed, participants often
gave one of three answers:
Distortion of perception
Participants
actually started to perceive the line
differently
Distortion of judgement
Feelings
of doubt about their judgement
Distortion of action
Majority
continued to trust their own perception and
judgement but changed their behaviour to avoid
disapproval
Variations - Difficulty
Q
A
B
C
Differences between the lines were made smaller
Conformity increased
Lucas et al. (2006)
Conformity is moderated by self-efficacy of the individual
E.g. When exposed to maths problems, individuals confident
in their abilities remained more independent
Demonstrates both situational (task difficulty) and
individual differences (self-efficacy) determine conformity
Variations – Size of the Majority
Conformity low when majority consisted of one or
two
With majority of three, conformity rose to 30%
Further increases did not substantially increase
conformity
Variations – Unanimity of the Majority
When participant was joined by another real
participant or disaffected confederate, conformity
fell from 32% to 5.5%
If the dissenter gave a different wrong answer
conformity fell to 9%
Asch
concluded: breaking the group’s consensus
important to reduce conformity
Abu
Ghraib – Private Joe Darby
Real-World Applications
Conformity in juries
Many
jurors would not want to appear to have a
different attitude to their fellow jurors
Tanford and Penrod, 1986
1st
vote of the jury
determines the outcome
95% of the time
Suggests conformity
pressure is a real issue in
juries
How
could this be reduced?
Individual Differences
Eagly and Carli (1981)
Meta-analysis
of 145 studies
Women were more compliant than men
Women
are possibly more interpersonally-oriented
Male
researchers were more likely to find gender
differences, suggesting they choose experimental material
more accessible to males (self-efficacy)
Vs.
Quick quiz:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
What are the three different types of conformity?
How many participants were there in Asch’s study? What
gender?
What percentage of the responses were incorrect?
What percentage of the population never conformed?
Conformity increased when the line lengths were closer or
farther apart?
The size of the majority must be more than what for
individuals to conform?
Do men or women conform more?
Evaluation – Validity of Asch’s study
Lack of ecological validity
Judging
lengths of lines is an insignificant task
How would conformity change for important tasks?
Answering out loud puts special pressure on the
participant not to sound stupid
Asch’s study may only show us about conformity in
certain circumstances
Williams
and Sogon (1984) tested people from same
sports club
Suggested conformity higher with people you know
Evaluation – Validity of Asch’s
study
Lack of historical and population validity?
All
were male Americans in the 1950’s during the era of
McCarthyism
Perrin and Spencer (1980)
England
1970’s on science and engineering students –
only one conformity in 396 trials
In a 2nd study youths on probation (probation officers as
confederates), conformity was similar to Asch’s studies
Suggests conformity is higher when perceived costs of
non-conformity are high
Evaluation - Ethics of Asch’s study
Deception
Pps
didn’t know the real purpose of
the study
Can be overcome with
proper
debriefing
Offering right to withhold their data
Informed
consent not given at the
start but could be given at the end
Independence???
With 2/3 of trials participants not conforming,
Asch’s study also highlights a human tendency to
show independent behaviour
Lalancette and Standing (1990) found no conformity
in trials – concluded Asch effect is unstable
phenomenon.
Activity
Complete Study Evaluation for Smith and Bond,
1998
Plan essay question: Has research supported the
view that majority exerts a significant degree of
influence over the individual?
Compliance
Internalisation
Ethical issue with Asch’s study
Inter-personal orientation
A real-world application of research into majority influence
Deception
Majority of participants changed their behaviour to avoid disapproval, is explained as a...
Conformity in juries
Participants who felt doubt about their judgement is explained as a...
Distortion of action
Confidence in performing in a certain manner to attain certain goals.
Distortion of judgement
Participants who started to perceive the line differently is explained as a...
Self-efficacy
Researcher who studied majority influence
Distortion of perception
Individuals conform by both adjusting their actions (compliance) and changing their attitudes to fit with the majority
(internalisation)
Asch
Individuals engage in a validation process, possibly changing their attitudes
Identification
Individuals engage in social comparison, adjusting their own actions to fit with the group
A suggestion as to why women are more compliant in Asch’s study
Situational difference
Setting different task difficulties in Asch’s study is an example of a...