Transcript Slide 1
Social Psychology is the study of the impact of our surroundings, and in particular of other people on our behaviour. Social Influence Conformity vs Independent behaviour The Final Solution e.g. Adolf Eichmann 6 million people Abu Ghraib Iraqi prison abuses Conformity What is conformity? It is a form of social influence where people adopt the behaviour, attitudes and values of other members in a majority position Kelman (1958) proposed 3 types of conformity: Compliance Internalisation Identification Compliance Individuals engage in social comparison, adjusting their own actions to fit with the group Identification with the majority is desirable Individual may comply with little or no private attitude change Internalisation Individuals may engage in a validation process. Beliefs and attitudes are examined Individual may decide that the majority is correct. This leads to an acceptance of the group’s point of view both publicly and privately Identification Incorporates both compliance and internalisation Individual may wish to adapt the group’s attitudes and beliefs to establish a relationship etc. Individual accepts what they are adopting (internalisation) Attitudes are adopted to be an accepted member of the group (compliance) Asch 1956 - procedure 123 male American undergraduates recruited for a ‘vision test’ In each experiment all but one were confederates In turn, participants and confederates were asked to state which of three lines was the same length as a stimulus line. The real participant always answered last or second to last Confederates would give the same incorrect answer for 12 out of 18 trials Findings For 12 critical trials 36.8% of responses given by participants were incorrect ¼ of participants never conformed In a control trial, only 1% of responses given by participants were incorrect Why? When asked why they conformed, participants often gave one of three answers: Distortion of perception Participants actually started to perceive the line differently Distortion of judgement Feelings of doubt about their judgement Distortion of action Majority continued to trust their own perception and judgement but changed their behaviour to avoid disapproval Variations - Difficulty Q A B C Differences between the lines were made smaller Conformity increased Lucas et al. (2006) Conformity is moderated by self-efficacy of the individual E.g. When exposed to maths problems, individuals confident in their abilities remained more independent Demonstrates both situational (task difficulty) and individual differences (self-efficacy) determine conformity Variations – Size of the Majority Conformity low when majority consisted of one or two With majority of three, conformity rose to 30% Further increases did not substantially increase conformity Variations – Unanimity of the Majority When participant was joined by another real participant or disaffected confederate, conformity fell from 32% to 5.5% If the dissenter gave a different wrong answer conformity fell to 9% Asch concluded: breaking the group’s consensus important to reduce conformity Abu Ghraib – Private Joe Darby Real-World Applications Conformity in juries Many jurors would not want to appear to have a different attitude to their fellow jurors Tanford and Penrod, 1986 1st vote of the jury determines the outcome 95% of the time Suggests conformity pressure is a real issue in juries How could this be reduced? Individual Differences Eagly and Carli (1981) Meta-analysis of 145 studies Women were more compliant than men Women are possibly more interpersonally-oriented Male researchers were more likely to find gender differences, suggesting they choose experimental material more accessible to males (self-efficacy) Vs. Quick quiz: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. What are the three different types of conformity? How many participants were there in Asch’s study? What gender? What percentage of the responses were incorrect? What percentage of the population never conformed? Conformity increased when the line lengths were closer or farther apart? The size of the majority must be more than what for individuals to conform? Do men or women conform more? Evaluation – Validity of Asch’s study Lack of ecological validity Judging lengths of lines is an insignificant task How would conformity change for important tasks? Answering out loud puts special pressure on the participant not to sound stupid Asch’s study may only show us about conformity in certain circumstances Williams and Sogon (1984) tested people from same sports club Suggested conformity higher with people you know Evaluation – Validity of Asch’s study Lack of historical and population validity? All were male Americans in the 1950’s during the era of McCarthyism Perrin and Spencer (1980) England 1970’s on science and engineering students – only one conformity in 396 trials In a 2nd study youths on probation (probation officers as confederates), conformity was similar to Asch’s studies Suggests conformity is higher when perceived costs of non-conformity are high Evaluation - Ethics of Asch’s study Deception Pps didn’t know the real purpose of the study Can be overcome with proper debriefing Offering right to withhold their data Informed consent not given at the start but could be given at the end Independence??? With 2/3 of trials participants not conforming, Asch’s study also highlights a human tendency to show independent behaviour Lalancette and Standing (1990) found no conformity in trials – concluded Asch effect is unstable phenomenon. Activity Complete Study Evaluation for Smith and Bond, 1998 Plan essay question: Has research supported the view that majority exerts a significant degree of influence over the individual? Compliance Internalisation Ethical issue with Asch’s study Inter-personal orientation A real-world application of research into majority influence Deception Majority of participants changed their behaviour to avoid disapproval, is explained as a... Conformity in juries Participants who felt doubt about their judgement is explained as a... Distortion of action Confidence in performing in a certain manner to attain certain goals. Distortion of judgement Participants who started to perceive the line differently is explained as a... Self-efficacy Researcher who studied majority influence Distortion of perception Individuals conform by both adjusting their actions (compliance) and changing their attitudes to fit with the majority (internalisation) Asch Individuals engage in a validation process, possibly changing their attitudes Identification Individuals engage in social comparison, adjusting their own actions to fit with the group A suggestion as to why women are more compliant in Asch’s study Situational difference Setting different task difficulties in Asch’s study is an example of a...