Recap on …
Social psychology
© Hodder Education 2011
Conformity
• A definition of conformity is yielding to group
pressure. Conformity occurs when an
individual’s behaviour and/or beliefs are
influenced by a larger group of people.
• Conformity is also referred to as ‘majority
influence’.
© Hodder Education 2011
Types of conformity
•
•
Compliance: When an individual alters
their behaviour and opinions to that of a
group to gain their acceptance or avoid
their disapproval.
Internalisation: Public and private
acceptance of majority influence where the
majority’s belief system is accepted.
© Hodder Education 2011
Research into conformity
Solomon Asch’s study (1955)
• Aims: To discover the extent of conformity to a
majority.
• Procedure: Participants stated which lines matched
in length, with confederates either stating the correct
or incorrect stimulus. Findings: 36.8 per cent
conformity rate to wrong answers. 75 per cent of
participants conformed to at least one wrong answer.
5 per cent of participants conformed to all 12 wrong
answers.
• Conclusions: Judgements of individuals are
affected by majority opinions, even when majority
are blatantly wrong.
• Other studies: Jenness’ Beans in the jar (1932) and
Smith and Bond (1996).
© Hodder Education 2011
Explanations of why people
conform 1
• Informational social influence: When we
feel the need to be part of a group. So we
may agree with the opinions of a group to be
considered a member of that group, or
maybe even to be popular.
• There is research evidence for informational
social influence in the Jenness study.
© Hodder Education 2011
Explanations of why people
conform 2
• Normative social influence: If we are
unsure of our knowledge on a topic or
situation, we may feel others are more
secure in their knowledge and so we conform
to their behaviour or opinion.
• Research evidence for this includes the Asch
study.
© Hodder Education 2011
Obedience: Stanley Milgram’s
research (1963)
• Aims: To test the ‘Germans are different’ hypothesis.
• Procedure: Participants asked to administer electric
shocks to a confederate when they performed a test
inaccurately.
• Findings: Obedience rate was 62.5 per cent (25 out of
40). In terms of qualitative data, many participants
showed extreme distress but some showed minimal or
no discomfort, and concentrated on the task.
• Conclusions: We will often obey orders that distress
us and go against our moral code. ‘Germans are
different’ hypothesis is incorrect.
© Hodder Education 2011
Explanations – why people obey
• Situational factors: Milgram argues that we
all obey and it is due to the situation.
• Perception of legitimate authority:
Authority figures persuade us to obey them
by their status.
• The agentic state: Individuals may feel like
they are acting on someone else’s behalf.
• Personal responsibility: People more likely
to obey if they feel it is not their responsibility.
• Gradual commitment (‘foot in the door’):
Once participants commit to a task, they feel
unable to withdraw.
© Hodder Education 2011
Resistance of pressures to
conform
• Unanimity: If there is dissent in a situation,
then individuals will be more likely to resist
conforming.
• Similarity: We are more likely to conform if
the majority are similar to us. Therefore,
resistance is greater if they are perceived as
different.
© Hodder Education 2011
Resistance to pressures to
obey
• Proximity: Obedience levels drop if the
person giving the orders is not easily seen or
not in close proximity.
• Personal responsibility: Anything that
diminishes the feeling of responsibility for the
act reduces obedience levels.
• Conformity: If an individual sees someone
else not obeying, they are likely to be
disobedient too.
© Hodder Education 2011
Influence of individual
differences
• Locus of control (LOC): Rotter (1966)
believed that having an internal LOC makes
individuals more resistant to social pressure.
Those who see themselves in control of a
situation are more likely to perceive
themselves as having a free choice to
conform or obey. The opposite is true for
those with an external LOC.
• Other influences: Attributional style.
© Hodder Education 2011
Research and understanding
social change
• Social change can be informed by research
into minority influence.
• This research explains how the gradual
process of changing a minority viewpoint to a
majority one occurs.
• The key factors are that the minority group is
consistent, flexible, committed and relevant.
© Hodder Education 2011
Minority influence research
Moscovici (1969)
• Aims: To investigate the role of a consistent minority
upon the opinions of a majority.
• Procedure: Four participants in a group with two
confederates were asked to make a judgement on
the colour of a slide. Sometimes the confederates
were consistent, sometimes not.
• Findings: There was 8.2 per cent agreement with
the minority in the consistent condition (with 32 per
cent agreeing at least once), but only a 1.25 per cent
agreement in the inconsistent condition.
• Conclusions: Minority influence is a relatively small
influence, but consistency is the important variable.
© Hodder Education 2011