Definition
“Conformity is a type of social influence in which individuals change their attitudes, beliefs or behaviours to
adhere to existing social norms” Baron et al, 2006
Explanation of social norms (you must learn this for small mark answer)
 Social norms are one of the key causes of why people conform to the majority view.
 Social norms (group norms) are the standard rules of behaviour for individuals in any given
society/culture.
 Unspoken rules develop spontaneously, unconsciously usually through force of habit and if you do not
conform to these rules you will be excluded…
 For example, behaviour at a bus stop, the type of clothes that are popular, the type of drinks to be
drinking, the type of music to listen to, the places to travel in the world
Jenness (1932)
The first informal experimental study of conformity where participants were asked to estimate how many
beans the bottle contained. When asked for a group estimate they almost all changed their individual
guesses closer to the group estimate. This persisted when asked again individually. They conformed.
NB: Remember for every study in this topic and obedience try to give a
methodological and ethical issue (or advantage) for each study
Methodological issues
Ethical issues
Problems with sample – size/gender/age etc
For each ethical issue explain why it was an issue in
the study and how the experimenter could overcome
The study conducted was a lab experiment, thus all it next time.
variables were controlled and so it is an excellent
way to establish a cause and effect relationship
(state the cause and effect in the particular study)
Protection from participants
However a problem with all lab experiments is that Confidentiality
they lack ecological validity – i.e. the behaviour
displayed by participants in the controlled situation Withdrawal from investigation
is not typical of how they would behave in situations
in real life
Informed consent
Demand characteristics may have changed their Deception
behaviour to suit what they think the experimenter
wants or to little cues that are suggestive in the Debrief
environment.
The study may not have controlled for extraneous
variables (certain variables may have been ignored
about the participants used which affected the
overall outcome of the study) such as individual
differences. Some may have had a higher IQ or had
higher self esteem which influenced whether they
conformed or not.
Study to support conformity in ambiguous situations
SHERIF (1935)
Aim
Sherif wanted to investigate if people conform to group norms when they are in an ambiguous
situation.
Method
In this experiment a single point of light in a dark room seems to move as there is no point of
reference (the autokinetic effect) but actually the light is perfectly still.
Sherif put participants into the darkened room. He told them that a light would appear in
front of them for almost an instant and then be extinguished. Then another light would
appear and then be extinguished. He asked them to tell him how far the light had moved.
However, the light had not moved at all, but because the participants had been asked the
specific question “how far…” they assumed it had and gave a distance. It was found that
individuals on their own in the room gave estimates about how much the light moved from
about 20-30cms or 60-80cms. The influence of group norms was investigated by Sherif
putting three people in a room together. Sherif manipulated the composition of the group by
putting together two people whose estimate of the light movement when they were alone was
very similar and then one person whose estimate was very different. Each person in the room
had to say aloud their estimate with the participant who had previously given the most
different estimate last to speak aloud their answer..
Results
Sherif found that over numerous estimates of the movement of the light, the group would
almost certainly converge. The person whose estimate was very different from the other two
would conform to the other two in the group.
Conclusion
The results showed that the ‘deviant’ in the group conformed to the majority view. This took
place over a small number of trials in the autokinetic effect.
Evaluations
The significant difference between Jenness and Sherif’s study is that Jenness requested a
‘group answer’ whereas Sherif did not.
The group size only included three people – some would argue this really isn’t a group.
Ambiguous situation – there was no right or wrong answer – makes it difficult to draw
conclusions about conformity, i.e. what would they do in an unambiguous situation?
Also the fact Sherif said he would move the light was a leading question so they thought the
light moved which is why they gave that answer.
Any other methodological problems of laboratory experiments.
Ethical considerations of deception, protection from harm, consent are especially easy to use
here.
There are two types of conformity
Internalisation
► This is where the individual accepts the majority group view and believes that the view is correct.
We can call this ‘private acceptance’ where a person conforms to another persons view because they
believe them to be right.
► The Sherif experiment is a good example of internalisation or private acceptance. In ambiguous
situations people rely on each other to decide what is right and then stay with that view.
► Can you think of any real life scenarios where you look around you have accepted the majority view.
Compliance
► Is where a person conforms to other peoples behaviours or attitudes but does not believe them to be
correct. This is when you go along with other people’s views or what they do to ‘keep the peace’ or
not cause disagreement/conflict. It is also known as ‘public compliance’ because you are agreeing
with others publicly even if you think they are wrong.
► The Asch study is a good example of this – as hardly any of them actually believed the majority view
Asch (1951)
Criticised Sherif for not demonstrating whether people would still conform in an unambiguous situation – i.e.
one where there is an obvious right or wrong answer. Asch conducted a pilot study by asking 36 people to
match the target line with one of the comparison lines. In all trials they got the answer correct – this was
definitely an unambiguous task
Aim
To investigate whether participants would yield (conform) to the incorrect majority even when
the correct answers were always obvious.
Method
The line judgement task seven male stooges and one naive participant were asked to say aloud
which three comparison lines were the same length as the target line. The correct answer was
always obvious. The genuine participant called out his answer second last.
Results
In some trials the accomplices gave all the same wrong answers.
Asch measured how many times the naïve participant gave a correct answer or conformed to
the incorrect majority. Just over 22% of participants gave the correct answer on all 12
occasions. This means that 78% of participants gave at least one incorrect response in line
with the majority. About 5% gave the same answer as all the incorrect majority on all
occasions.
CONCLUSION Even in unambiguous situations, there may be strong group pressure to conform, especially if
the group is a unanimous majority
EVALUATIONS
►
►
►
►
►
►
Male sample
The time and place when the research was carried out might have affected the findings. ‘A child of its time’ in the 50’s
people were more conforming than they are today
Lacks Ecological validity
Demand characteristics
Lack of Informed consent – did not exactly know what was happening
However Deception is necessary if we want their behaviour to be more realistic
Protection from harm was an issue as those with low self esteem may have been affected however this was overcome by
debriefing
Asch interviewed the participants afterwards and came up with a number of explanations as
to why the participants conformed.
During debriefing the participants who agreed with the incorrect majority gave a number of reasons:
► Did not want to spoil the results for experimenter
► Did not want to be different
► Actually they made the correct judgements
► Suffered from eyestrain
Other explanations for conformity in psychological terms:
People conform to social norms of society so that they know how to behave in certain situations. However
other explanations have also been provided to explain conformity. Deutsch & Gerard (1955) put forward a
distinction between normative and informational social influence.
1. Normative social influence
This is where people conform to maintain harmony, avoid rejection and to gain approval from the group. The
result – people publicly conform to the group however they privately disagree or hold different views with
the group. This is exactly what happened with Asch’s participants, they wanted to please the experimenter
or maintain group harmony.
Real life examples of normative social influence include wearing certain clothing fashions even though you
might not really be a fan of that particular clothing item, i.e. Goths wearing black or chavs wearing hoodies.
Study to support:
AIM
Anderson et al (1992) attempted to find whether a women’s ideal body size was
related to the reliability of food supply in a culture. It was hypothesised that in
cultures where women had a reliable food supply the ideal body size would be
‘slender’.
METHOD
Women from 54 different cultures were asked about their ideal body size in relation
to the categories of slender, moderate and heavy body size. Each culture was
categorised as having a reliable, moderately reliable and unreliable food supply.
RESULTS
It was found that women in countries where the food supply was unreliable regarded
a heavy body size as ideal whereas in cultures where food is reliable they preferred
to have a slender body size.
CONCLUSION: Cultural norms concerning women’s ideal body size are influenced by factors
such as reliability of the availability of food. Where food supplies are very
reliable there is evidence of normative social influence.
EVALUATIONS
Try to think of some yourself!
2. Informational social influence
This is conformity to the majority as a result of information (things you did not know, persuasive arguments
etc) presented to you by others in a group. This form of influence leads to private acceptance of the group
majority. The group is believed to be correct in what they say or do. Private acceptance or internalisation
of views results in persons repeating those behaviours. This doesn’t happen with normative influence.
Informational social influence is more likely to occur in ambiguous situations such as the autokinetic effect
where there is uncertainty – people have a need to be sure or to be right.
Study to support
AIM
Baron et al (1996) hypothesised that conformity would be greater where people
would have less confidence in their judgement.
METHOD
In a novel variation of Asch’s experiment participants were shown a drawing of a
person and then asked to match this drawing to a picture of three other drawings.
In one condition the drawing was shown for just half a second, in the other condition
the picture was shown for 5 seconds. Before being asked to match the drawing,
participants heard the wrong judgements of two assistants of the experimenters.
RESULTS
Conformity of the wrong matching of the drawing by the assistants was much higher
when the drawing was shown for only half a second rather than 5 seconds. The
information gained from seeing the drawing for just half a second is much less than
seeing the drawing for 5 seconds.
CONCLUSION
When there is not sufficient information to be sure of a judgement, informational
social influence will cause people to conform more.
EVALUATION
Factors that affect conformity
Highlight in yellow all the ways that tend to increase conformity. Highlight in green all the ways that tend to
decrease conformity.
SIZE OF THE GROUP
Asch found as the group size increases, a larger incorrect
majority results in higher levels of conformity. With small
groups of two or three, where there are only one or two
confederates, giving the wrong answers, conformity
dropped to below 10% amongst the naïve participants.
LACK OF GROUP UNANIMITY (i.e. agreement)
When one person (confederate) in the group of 7
always gave the correct answer, Asch found that the
conformity of the naïve participants dropped to around
10%.
DIFFICULTY OF THE TASK
When the comparison lines (A, B, C) were made more similar
in length, it was harder to judge the correct answer and
conformity increased, reflecting Asch’s results.
ANONYMITY (i.e. secrecy)
When participants were allowed to answer in private
(so the rest of the group did not know their response)
conformity decreased.
When we are uncertain, it seems we look to others for
confirmation. The more difficult the task, the greater the
conformity. (Informational influence).
This suggests that individuals conform because they
are concerned about what other people think of them
(i.e. normative influence).
ATTRACTIVENESS
Stang (1973) found that the attractiveness of belonging to
a group for the individual affects conformity. Generally
the more attractive a group to the participant, the greater
the conformity to the majority view.
THE EXTREME DISSENTER
Asch fixed the experiment so that all six confederates
gave the same wrong answer, whilst the seventh
confederate gave a different wrong answer.
Conformity again dropped to around 10%
CULTURES
Smith and Harris Bond (1993) conducted a review of
conformity studies conducted in different cultures around
the world between 1957 and 1985. They made a distinction
between
individualistic
and
collectivistic
cultures.
Individualistic cultures are ones such as the USA and GB,
where personal choice and individual achievement are
valued. Collectivistic cultures are ones such as China and
Asia where the good of the group is valued over individual
achievement. Studies conducted in different cultures
showed that conformity is higher in a collectivist than
individualistic culture.
The main explanation is that
collectivist strive for group harmony more than
individualistic cultures do.
THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY
The authoritarian personality (Adorno et al 1950) is also
associated with high levels of conformity. According to
Adorno, the authoritarian personality is one which values
convention, rules and obeying rules to those in authority.
The authoritarian personality is also associated with
obedience to authority and prejudice.
COHESIVENESS
The cohesiveness of the group has also been found to
affect conformity. Cohesiveness concerns the extent
to which individuals in the group like each other and
prize being a member of that group.
Highly cohesive groups, where each member of the
group likes the other and so values being part of that
group show higher levels of conformity. Whilst low
cohesive groups show low levels of conformity (Latane
and L’Herrou, 1996)
PERSONALITY
Crutchfield (1955) suggested that personality
characteristics are associated with high levels of
conformity, including low levels of self esteem, low
intelligence, high levels of anxiety and a need for social
approval.
Other studies that have investigated conformity
(You can use these to make comparisons in your essay)
Many experiments have been carried out since Asch’s experiment; some have been shown to increase conformity whilst others have
been shown to decrease conformity.
Crutchfield (1955)
Aim
Crutchfield conducted a study to investigate conformity, but where participants sat alone in separate booths. The
aim of the study was to determine levels of conformity with other people not present.
Method
Participants sat in separate booths, side by side. In each booth was a set of switches and lights. Each participant
was told that they would be given a simple task (some of which were Asch’s line task) to make a decision about.
They were also told that 5 other people would be doing the same task and that the participant would see their
answers (shown as lights) before being asked their own view or decision. Participants had to indicate their view by
flipping one of the switches representing their choice.
Results
Conformity with incorrect majority views by participants dropped to below 50% (in the Asch study, 77% conformed
at least once to the majority view). With statement of opinion, conformity was below 35%.
Conclusion
When people are placed in situations where they are exposed to an incorrect majority view but not to other people,
conformity levels are low. Hence the actual presence of people increases the likelihood of a person conforming to a
majority view. This indicates that social pressure has a strong effect on behaviour.
Perrin and Spencer’s Conformity Experiment (1980)
In Asch’s (1951) classic conformity experiment an observer had to say which of the three lines was equal in length to the standard
line. The lines were easy to distinguish and if tested on their own observers made few if any errors.
When they were tested in a group who gave their judgements publicly and all the rest of the group gave the wrong answer, three
quarters of the naïve participants conformed at least once by responding incorrectly. Overall about a third of the overall responses
were conforming ones. As Eiser (1987) says ‘for Asch, the important finding was that there was any conformity at all’. This study
becomes a classic and is to be found in all texts on psychology. However, studies carried out from 1980 onwards have undermined
the classic status – or at least preferred alternative explanations for the amount of conformity found.
Perrin and Spencer (1980) reproduced the Asch experiment with groups of 6 stooges and one genuine participant. But they found
that genuine participants only conformed out of 396 trials.
The Asch experiment is so well known today that it is difficult to find ‘naïve’ participants so they used engineering, maths and
chemistry students and after the experiment, discarded the results of anyone who heard of the original study Asch. This makes
comparison with the Asch study difficult and yields two possible explanations;
Interpretation 1
Science students may be particularly inclined to see accurate line measurement as important and be less willing to be swayed to the
group opinion. When Perrin and Spencer used young offenders on probation with people who were normally in authority over them
acting as experimenters the results were similar to Asch’s.
Interpretation 2
During the 1950’s conformity was viewed as sensible if not desirable and there were stronger pressures on students to conform
that there are now. The high level of conformity found by Asch might be a ‘child of its time’. So far no one else has been able to
separate these two variables and we do not know which interpretation is correct.
Conformity summary
In the Asch experiment, a distinction was made between those who changed their behaviour but not their
opinion (public conformity) and those who changed both their behaviour and opinion (private change).
Kelman (1958) picked up on this distinction referring to compliance (public conformity) and internalisation
(private change). These can be related to normative and informational influence respectively.
Fill in the blanks to summarise the conformity theory:
One form of conformity is ……………………….. where there is public acceptance of a group decision, but private
disagreement. It depends heavily on ………………… influence, and is motivated by ………………… It is more likely in
……..……… situations, such as in the study by …………………..
The other form of conformity is …………………….. where there is both public and private acceptance. It
depends more heavily on ……………….. influence, and is motivated by ……………………. It is more likely in …………………
situations, such as the study by …………………
Two other explanations as to why people conform include …………………… and ………………. The former is when we
conform to people we admire or like, because we want to be like tem. The latter refers to when we behave
in certain ways which we think appropriate to the situation.
internalisation
identification
Asch
the need to
right
informational
ambiguous
compliance
be unambiguous
normative
the
need
for
approval/acceptance
Sherif
social roles
Past paper exam questions
Identify three factors, which according to Asch, might influence whether or not a person conforms to a group norm. State whether
or not each factor tends to increase or decrease conformity.
(6 marks)
(AO1 = 3, AO2 = 3)
Outline what is meant by informational conformity.
(AO1=2, AO2=0)
(2 marks)
Outline what is meant by normative conformity.
(AO1=2, AO2=0)
(2 marks)
Using an example, outline what is meant by a group (social) norm.
(AO1=2, AO2=1)
(3 marks)
Distinguish between normative social influence and informational social influence.
(AO1=2, AO2=1)
(3 marks)
Outline what is meant by a social norm.
(AO1=2, AO2=0)
(2 marks)
Outline what social psychologists mean by internalisation.
(AO1=2, AO2=0)
(2 marks)
Max is a member of a jury in a complicated trial. He feels he has little in common with the other jurors. When the jury starts to
discuss a verdict, each member is asked in turn to state his or her opinion. All the other members say that the defendant is
guilty. Max is the last to give his opinion. From the description above, identify three factors likely to increase the probability
that Max will conform with a guilty verdict.
(3 marks)
A group of designers have to decide on a new company logo. The majority of the group prefers a modern logo but Jack
prefers a more traditional design. Identify two factors which, according to Asch, might affect whether or not Jack conforms to
the group norm. For each factor explain whether it would lead to an increase or a decrease in the likelihood of Jack
conforming.
(4 marks)
The twelve directors of a football club are meeting to decide how much money the club should spend on new players. It will
not be easy for them all to agree on a figure. Most of the directors are unwilling to spend more than £10 million. One of the
directors, Gary, wants the club to spend £15 million. Another director agrees with Gary. From the description above, identify
three psychological factors that might influence conformity. State the likely influence of each factor on whether or not Gary
will conform to the majority of the group.
(6 marks)
Discuss Asch’s research into conformity.
(10 MARKS)
Discuss two factors which might affect levels of conformity. Refer to evidence in your answer.
(10 MARKS)
Discuss at least two factors which might influence whether or not an individual will conform or not to the majority of the group.
(10 MARKS)
Discuss at least two psychological factors which might influence whether or not an individual will yield to group pressure.
Refer to empirical evidence in your answer.
(10 MARKS)
Psychologists have discovered a number of factors which influence conformity. Describe and discuss at least two
psychological factors which might influence whether or not someone might obey an order.
(10 MARKS)
Describe and discuss ethical and methodological issues which have arisen in studies of obedience conformity.
(10 MARKS)