Social psychology Studies of Conformity SOCIAL AND APPLIED WEEK 2 LESSON 1 Objectives for today Time Activity 5 mins 5 mins - Recap of conformity -Video recreation of Asch’s study 15 mins Research the Asch study 30 mins 20 mins -Asch’s (1951) study Procedure Findings Critical evaluation Research Asch’s variations 5 mins Plenary and next steps Wk Lesson 1 1 Outcome – working towards … COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY CONTENT AND Introduction to the module and social OUTCOMES Content psychology 2 3 4 5 2 Social Influence & Conformity 3 Workshop – consolidate/stretch/prepare 1 Studies of Conformity 2 Studies of Conformity 3 Workshop – consolidate/ stretch/ prepare 1 Obedience – Milgram 2 Obedience – Milgram’s variations 3 Workshop – consolidate/ stretch/ prepare 1 Explanations for Obedience 2 Explanations for Obedience 3 Workshop – consolidate/ stretch/ prepare 1 Prejudice 2 Prejudice 3 Workshop – consolidate/ stretch/ prepare Social exam - you will answer one essay question and some short answer questions under examination conditions testing your knowledge of social psychology. One essay question testing your knowledge of conformity and obedience, and the short answer questions testing your knowledge of prejudice, aggression and media violence. It will assess your knowledge and understanding of the content studied, as well as, your ability to evaluate research evidence. CONFORMITY – TYPES AND EXPLANATIONS Conformity – ‘the tendency for people to adopt the behaviours, attitudes and values of other members of a reference group’ or ‘Yielding to group pressure’ TYPES OF CONFORMITY EXPLANATIONS FOR CONFORMITY ◼Compliance – superficial/public change in behaviour or beliefs but private beliefs don’t change ◼Identification – public and private adoption of belief BUT dependent on the presence of the reference group ◼Internalisation – permanent/ conversion/ public and private change – beliefs of the reference group become part of one’s own way of viewing the world ◼Normative Social Influence underlying need to be accepted and liked which encourages us to copy others in order to gain acceptance and avoid disapproval ◼Informational Social Influence underlying need to be right and to have an accurate perception of reality thus when in an ambiguous situation we look to others to inform us on how to behave or what to believe Asch (1951) Conformity experiment Video recreation RESEARCH TASK – STUDIES OF CONFORMITY – ASCH (1951) Asch (1951) – we can use this research as evidence for the NSI as an explanation for conformity (And ISI). ❑ TASK: Use the information on the resource card, a textbook (page 433 in GROSS Blue), watch a YouTube clip or the internet to summarise Asch’s study of conformity. ❑ A summary handout is available for you to complete based on your research – you do not have to use this although you should aim to include the following in your own summary: • The aim, method used, an outline of the procedure, details of the participants used, findings and conclusions • Critical Evaluation – comment on the strengths/weaknesses of the method/procedure used and the sample studied including reference to the socio-cultural context at the time, as well as any ethical issues Background to the study ◼ People want to conform to the majority social influence because they want to be accepted by the group ◼ Asch wanted to see if participants would yield (conform) to majority social influence and give incorrect answers in a situation where the correct answers were always obvious ◼ We can use this research as evidence for the NSI as an explanation for conformity (And ISI). Procedure ◼ Groups of 7-9 male, student participants looked at two cards: the test card showed one vertical line; the other card showed three vertical lines of different length. ◼ The participants’ task was to call out, in turn, which of the three lines was the same length as the test line. ◼ The correct answer was always obvious. ◼ All participants, except one, were accomplices of the experimenter. The genuine participant called out his answer last but one. ◼ Accomplices gave unanimous wrong answers on 12 of the 18 trials. ◼ These 12 trials were called the critical trials. ◼ Asch used 50 male college students as naïve, genuine participants in this first study. Findings ◼ Asch measured the number of times each participant conformed to the majority view. ◼ Participants conformed to the unanimous incorrect answer on 32% of the critical trials. ◼ 75% of participants conformed at least once. ◼ 25% of participants never conformed. ◼ Some of these “independent” participants were confident in their judgements. ◼ More often, however, they experienced tension and doubt but managed to resist the pressure exerted by the unanimous majority ◼ In the control group, with no pressure to conform to confederates, less than 1% of participants gave the wrong answer Post-experimental debriefing ◼ During post-experimental debriefing, some conforming participants claimed to have actually seen the line identified by the majority as the correct answer. ◼ Others yielded because they could not bear to be in a minority of one and risk being ridiculed or excluded by the group. - Evidence for NSI ◼ Most participants, who had conformed, however, experienced a distortion of judgement: they thought that their perception of the lines must be inaccurate and for that reason they yielded to the majority view. Evidence for ISI Conclusions ◼ Even in unambiguous situations, there may be strong group pressure to conform, especially if the group is a unanimous majority. ◼ However, after interviewing his participants, Asch concluded that people go along with the views of others for different reasons. ◼ Some people experience normative social influence and feel compelled to accept the mistaken majority’s norms or standards of behaviour to avoid being rejected. ◼ Others experience informational pressures and doubt their own judgements – “Surely they can’t all be wrong!” Critical Evaluation • Comment on the strengths/weaknesses of ▪ the method/procedure used ▪ the sample studied ▪ the socio-cultural context at the time ▪ any ethical issues How can we critique Asch? - Initial thoughts? Strengths ◼ The study was a lab experiment and is therefore easy to replicate – Asch’s experiment has been replicated many times to establish the reason why people conform. ◼ The high level of control also means that cause and effect can be inferred as extraneous variables which could spoil the results are controlled for more easily. ◼ He standardised the study so that every participant experienced the same procedure (the same behaviour by confederates, the same materials) Strengths Asch’s study provides evidence of NSI ◼ Many of the participants went along with a clearly wrong answer just because other people did - they said they felt self-conscious giving the correct answer and were afraid of disapproval ◼ Asch repeated his study, but asked the naive participants to write down their answers instead of saying them out loud - conformity rate fell to 12.5% ◼ This suggests we sometimes conform to avoid rejection by the majority when this pressure is removed because you don’t have to disagree publicly, then conformity is less likely Weaknesses - Validity ◼ Asch reported the results of his study as an astonishing rate of conformity with participants conforming to an obviously incorrect answer in 32% of critical trials. ◼ However, that failed to acknowledge that in 68% of critical trials there was no conformity ◼ So perhaps the study was more a measure of factors that lead to resisting a majority rather than those that make conformity more likely. Weakness - Low population validity ◼ The participants were all young male students from the same American university (androcentric and ethnocentric) ◼ This meant the results were not generalisable outside of the population sampled and did not apply to anyone other than male American college students, resulting in low population validity. ◼ This matters because other studies indicate that women may be more conformist because they are more concerned with maintaining social relationships ◼ The USA is an individualist culture - values individual needs above those of the wider social group ◼ Studies in collectivist societies (e.g. China) show that conformity is more common ◼ Asch’s findings may generally underestimate the true level of conformity Weakness - Low ecological validity ◼ The setting and the task participants engaged in were both artificial. ◼ Participants knew they were in research study and may simply have gone along with the demands of the situation (demand characteristics). ◼ The task of identifying lines was relatively trivial and therefore there was really no reason not to conform. ◼ Also, although the naïve participants were members of a ‘group’, it didn’t really resemble groups that we are part of in everyday life. ◼ According to Fiske (2014), ‘Asch’s groups were not very groupy’. ◼ This is a limitation as findings do not generalise to everyday situations. This is especially true where the consequences of conformity might be more important, and we interact with other people in groups in a much more direct way. Weakness - Ethical issues ◼ Participants were deceived into believing they were taking part in a ‘vision test’ and were not informed that it was a study of conformity. ◼ Not gaining informed consent is a breach of ethical guidelines ◼ However very different results would have been produced had participants known the true nature of the study and so it could be argued that deception was necessary. Weakness - Socio-political context ◼ In 1950s USA there was a culture of paranoia against communism and left wing views. ◼ The era was termed McCarthyism and left wing protagonists were ostracised by the ultra-conservative government. ◼ Such a culture is likely to breed a fear of nonconformity and make conformity more likely ◼ So the study may have been measuring political feeling and fears at the time rather than the human tendency to conform. Asch’s variations ◼ Asch did several variations on his basic study to investigate which factors would lead to changes in the level of conformity. ◼ Research Asch’s variations and complete the sheet. ◼ Bring this work to Friday’s workshop lesson. PLENARY YOU SHOULD HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF … ◼ Asch (1951) ◼Outline ◼Critical Evaluation ◼How the study can be used to provide evidence for NSI as an explanation for conformity? ◼How it can also be used to evidence ISI as an explanation for conformity? ◼Next Time … ◼Studies of Conformity ◼Sherif (1935) The Autokinetic Effect Independent study and next steps Other researchers have also replicated Asch’s study. Research Perrin and Spencer (1980; 1981) - why did they get different results to Asch?
