The confederates gave unanimous wrong answers on 12 out of the 18 trials (the critical trials). The findings were that 74% of the participants conformed at least once, 26% never conformed and that participants conformed to the confederate’s unanimous incorrect answer on 32% of the critical trials. One of the problems with Asch’s conformity research is that it lacks ecological validity. This is because the tasked used is trivial. In other situations, the consequences for conformity may be higher, for example in smoking.
An example of a study that proves compliance occurs is Asch’s Line Study (1951). 123 American male student volunteers took part in what they believed to be a study of visual perception. Individual participants were placed in groups, who were actually pseudo-participants (confederates). The task was to say which comparison line, A, B or C was the same as a stimulus line. On 12 out of 18 ‘critical trials’ the pseudo-participants gave identical wrong answers, the real participant always answering last or last but one.
The group were asked to indicate and on a signal from the researcher, the confederates would give unanimous wrong answers on 12 of the 18 trials for each experiment. Answers were also always unambiguous so it was clear. Asch found that the overall conformity rate was 37%, and 5% of participants conformed on every trial and 25% never conformed. When asked why they conformed, participants gave a number of reasons: some felt their perceptions were wrong upon hearing different answers from the group, others stated that they believed the rest were wrong but they did not wish to stand out and it was reported that some participants grew increasingly nervous and self-conscious through trials. Asch concluded that a strong, large group can exert intense pressure to conform, even more so if they are unanimous in their opinions.
In addition to those studies Kelman (1958) also suggested that conformity can result in changing our private opinions as well as our public opinions, and has three explanations. 1, Compliance is a result of group pressure, when you don’t really agree with the answer, but go along with the group anyway but when the group pressure is removed conformity stops. 2, Identification: Group membership, this is when a person conforms to an actual role, without being overly enthuastic about what is expected from them. 3, Internalisation: when a person accepts the group norms and will not change their belief if group pressure is removed. Informational social influence occurs when there is no obvious answer to a question.
The difference is that compliance is when someone conforms out loud with the views or behaviour but secretly disagrees. In this situation their personal views on the subject do not change. An example of compliance is not stating your own opinion on a subject, because the majority has stated a different opinion leading you to agree with them. Whereas in internalisation, a person is so persuaded by the argument that their opinions begin to change both publically and privately. People internalise the views of others when they are persuaded/convinced the arguments make sense.
Rules such as: deception, protection of participants and the right to withdraw. Participants were deceived by description of task because he did not want to give away the true nature of the experiment. Participants believed they were investigating punishment and learning to which they gave full consent but the study was on obedience. However before undertaking the experiment Milgram spoke with psychiatrists to determine whether people would be obedient and follow the instructions, they predicted that most subjects would not go above 150 volts, while 4% could be expected to reach 300 volts. The results contradicted the prediction and 65% of normal working class men continued to the maximum voltage.
He found out during the 12 most important trials, 36.8% of the answers given by the ‘real’ participants were incorrect, effectively conforming to the wrong answers given by the common associates. Only 25% never gave a false answer, therefore showing that 75% conformed at least once. To make sure that the motivation lines were clear, Asch conducted a controlled experiment that had no partners giving false answers. The results showed that people do make mistakes 1% of the time. He concluded that the total results showed a shockingly strong trend to conform under group pressure, even in cases where the answer is clear.
Nikhita Sagar AS Psychology Miss Mahmoud “Describe and evaluate explanations of conformity” 12 marks Normative social influence is the need to be liked and accepted by others in the group. Other people are usually looked to in a group to identify behavior that leads to group acceptance – this may result in the person publicly changing their behavior/views but privately disagreeing/having their own opinions. This is because humans are social creatures and have a fundamental need for social companionship and a fear of rejection. The majority may also control other group members by making it difficult to deviate from majority point of view, therefore exerting pressure on them to conform. This type of social influence is also known as compliance and has been demonstrated in research by Asch, where participants clearly felt uncomfortable deviating from the majority position.
Looks can be deceiving when judging someone, not everyone appears or portrays themselves to be who they truly are. It’s okay to judge as long as you judge responsibly and your judgments are reasonable. Sometimes the idea of judging someone comes with a negative connotation, however responsible judgment is not always a bad thing. Being able to judge someone
These opinions forced upon generation after generation causes these misconceptions of how certain groups actually interact, thus beginning a cycle of conformity through people’s opinions. Although these views can appear to be slightly true at times, it can be an in just approach to characterize people based on what society believes is normal for that race, sex, or any other type of group. Stereotypes may change with time and society, but the conformist idea behind the ways people characterize others continue in a direction towards a misreading of social, gender, or any other types of