Discuss explanations of conformity (16)
AO1:
-informational social influence: someone conforms because they don’t know what to do but they want
to be correct so they follow the majority as they assume the majority knows more than them and
knows the right thing to do
ISI causes internalisation
ISI more likely with an ambiguity, when quick decision making is needed, when someone appears to
be the expert
-normative social influence: someone conforms to fit in/ for social approval from the majority
NSI causes compliance - publicly change behaviour but disagree in private
NSI more likely with strangers, need for social support or social approval
AO3:
-supporting evidence for ISI: Jenness - ppts guessed number of beans in a bottle then discussed with
others
in the second estimate (after discussing with others), individuals' answers were closer to the group
estimate
= demonstrates ISI as ppt's judgements changed based on majority opinions on an ambiguous task -
suggests they changed their answer because they assumed others knew more than them
-supporting evidence for NSI: Asch
when ppt was in a group of confederates (who gave wrong answers) to an unambigious task,
32% of the time, real ppts gave a wrong answer
Only 25% of participants didn't conform at all
= suggests people conform even when they know the right answer so they fit in with others
-real world application - manipulation
-companies use NSI in advertising for the manipulation of consumer behaviour by appealing to the
perceived feeling of social pressure and the idea that everyone else has a product, motivating
individuals to conform by buying a product to avoid feeling left out. = economic implications
-ISI can be used in health campaigns to positively impact people’s health, by providing information
which can reduce uncertainty and promote conformity based on the assumption that the people giving
the information know more than them
Describe and evaluate Asch’s research into conformity (16)
AO1:
-lab experiment using a volunteer sample of male american students
- groups of participants asked to identify the matching line from a group of lines
- only one participant was real
-confederates would sometimes say the same wrong answer to see if the real ppt would conform
-error rate of 0.4% = unambiguous task so wrong answers would be due to NSI
-32% of the time, people gave a wrong answer
-only 25% of participants didn't conform at all
= ppts conformed to fit in
AO3:
-although there was a low error rate which suggests that any conformity is NSI, and the high control
over variables which contributes to good internal validity,
-when interviewed some said they doubted their own eyesight, which would mean it would be ISI,
-but if they were lying it would be NSI
= questionable internal validity and the explanation for the conformity - whether it was actually NSI
-poor population validity:
only used male American students, therefore reduces the extent to which the findings can be
generalised to the wider population and people who aren't male american students
-gender bias and androcentrism/ beta bias - assumes that findings from male ppts can be generalised
to females
-poor ecological validity:
artificial task = lacks mundane realism
AO1:
-informational social influence: someone conforms because they don’t know what to do but they want
to be correct so they follow the majority as they assume the majority knows more than them and
knows the right thing to do
ISI causes internalisation
ISI more likely with an ambiguity, when quick decision making is needed, when someone appears to
be the expert
-normative social influence: someone conforms to fit in/ for social approval from the majority
NSI causes compliance - publicly change behaviour but disagree in private
NSI more likely with strangers, need for social support or social approval
AO3:
-supporting evidence for ISI: Jenness - ppts guessed number of beans in a bottle then discussed with
others
in the second estimate (after discussing with others), individuals' answers were closer to the group
estimate
= demonstrates ISI as ppt's judgements changed based on majority opinions on an ambiguous task -
suggests they changed their answer because they assumed others knew more than them
-supporting evidence for NSI: Asch
when ppt was in a group of confederates (who gave wrong answers) to an unambigious task,
32% of the time, real ppts gave a wrong answer
Only 25% of participants didn't conform at all
= suggests people conform even when they know the right answer so they fit in with others
-real world application - manipulation
-companies use NSI in advertising for the manipulation of consumer behaviour by appealing to the
perceived feeling of social pressure and the idea that everyone else has a product, motivating
individuals to conform by buying a product to avoid feeling left out. = economic implications
-ISI can be used in health campaigns to positively impact people’s health, by providing information
which can reduce uncertainty and promote conformity based on the assumption that the people giving
the information know more than them
Describe and evaluate Asch’s research into conformity (16)
AO1:
-lab experiment using a volunteer sample of male american students
- groups of participants asked to identify the matching line from a group of lines
- only one participant was real
-confederates would sometimes say the same wrong answer to see if the real ppt would conform
-error rate of 0.4% = unambiguous task so wrong answers would be due to NSI
-32% of the time, people gave a wrong answer
-only 25% of participants didn't conform at all
= ppts conformed to fit in
AO3:
-although there was a low error rate which suggests that any conformity is NSI, and the high control
over variables which contributes to good internal validity,
-when interviewed some said they doubted their own eyesight, which would mean it would be ISI,
-but if they were lying it would be NSI
= questionable internal validity and the explanation for the conformity - whether it was actually NSI
-poor population validity:
only used male American students, therefore reduces the extent to which the findings can be
generalised to the wider population and people who aren't male american students
-gender bias and androcentrism/ beta bias - assumes that findings from male ppts can be generalised
to females
-poor ecological validity:
artificial task = lacks mundane realism
