IB Psychology

Paper 1
Socio-cultural level of analysis
2016-01-07

Conformity
(11,12)
Learning outcomes:
11. Evaluate research on
conformity to group norms
12. Discuss factors influencing conformity
(for example, culture, groupthink, risky shift, minority influence)
Course Companion: 119-123
Past exam questions (only ERQs so far):
12. Discuss factors influencing conformity May 11
11. Evaluate research /theories and/or studies on conformity. May 12 TZ2
12. Discuss factors influencing conformity. May 14 TZ2
12. Discuss factors influencing conformity. May 14 TZ2
11. Evaluate research (theories and/or studies) on conformity to group norms. Nov 14
Videos:
Youtube: Asch conformity experiment (https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=NyDDyT1lDhA)
Youtube: Prudential: Everybody is doing it (https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=NyDDyT1lDhA) Conformity in an elevator. Candid camera. Replication
WYFFT? - Will People Follow The Crowd In An Elevator Experiment??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GSzCBv1-qA
Youtube: Conformity (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrNIuFrso8I) from 3
minutes. MRI study.
DEFINITION OF CONFORMITY:
Conformity is yielding to group pressure.
- It is a type of social influence involving a change in belief or behavior in order to fit in with a group.

- This change occurs in response to real (involving the physical presence of others) or imagined (involving
the pressure of social norms/expectations, even though no-one is present) group pressure.

SUMMARY: RESEARCH ON CONFORMITY (11)

Conformity is yielding to group pressure.

- It is a type of social influence involving a change in belief or behavior in order to fit in with a group.
- This change occurs in response to real (involving the physical presence of others) or imagined (involving
the pressure of social norms/expectations, even though no-one is present) group pressure.

Studies:
Asch, 1955
Crutchfield, 1954
Bond and Smith, 1996
Theories:
Deutch and Gerards (1955) theory of normative and informational influence
Crutchfields conforming personality theory

GENERAL STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF

CONFORMITY RESEARCH STUDIES
METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS (Sharif, Asch, Crutchfield)
(+) (-) Lack of ecological validity judging lines in a lab. No real life situation. Difficult to generalize to
real life. (+) but the results have been replicated many times (see Smith and Bonds cross-cultural meta analysis) so the
results are reliable. And the participants in the studies conformed to people they did not know. In real life groups exert even
stronger forces and issues are more ambiguous. Research shows that we conform even more to groups we value and want to
belong to and when the issue is more ambiguous.

(+) Cause and effect can be determined Conformity experiments are often well controlled lab
experiments where one IV is manipulated, which means that one can draw the conclusion that the IV caused the DV to
change. (-) Some of the research is correlational and does not show causation (This does not
refer to the experiments by Asch, but, for example, to the part of Crutchfields research where he looked at differences
between the genders, cultures and personalities and correlated those measures/variables to levels of conformity to see the
link between personality and conformity or gender and conformity)

(-) Demand characteristics - a bias where the participants agree with everyone else because they have
figured out the aim and they are aware of being in an experiment and do not want to ruin it for the researchers. Some
participants gave this reason when interviewed after taking part in Aschs experiment.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
(-) Deception about the true purpose of the experiment. Participants were told that Aschs experiment was about
perception. (+) However, this is used to avoid demand characteristics and could be justified because important and
groundbreaking knowledge was gained. No-one at the time believed that such a large number would conform, that the
situation is more important than disposition/personality.

(-) Participants were not protected from psychological distress made to believe they had a conforming
personality when the researchers told them the aim, which is embarrassing. Distress during the experiment. It is debatable
whether these experiments can be justified in terms of ethics. Guidelines have changed since then.

GENDER CONSIDERATIONS
(-) Gender biased samples in early studies. Young male students were used.

It is difficult to generalize the

results to everyone. However, many other studies have investigated the influence of gender (see studies)

(-) Gender biased tasks - testing conditions were more familiar to men (results caused by gender biases in the
method used). Remember that this was a long time ago, when men and women did not have the same educ., etc.

(+) Later studies included women (Crutchfields replications) and showed that women conform more
willingly than men. More recent research has failed to show gender differences. On one of Crutchfields studies, women in
their forties lower levels of conformity.

CULTURAL CONSIDERATIONS
(-) Sampling bias The experiments conducted by Asch usedmale students

from the US, which affects

generalization, but (+) the studies have been replicated many times in many cultrues and (+) conformity can be said
universal to some degree (which means that it is fairly the same in all cultures (see Smith and Bond) but (-) There are

cultural differences in conformity levels, but these differences might be influenced by zeitgeist:
Conformity was the social norm in the 1950s in America. It was viewed as sensible if not desirable and there were stronger
pressures to conform than today.

(-) Conformity has a different meaning in some cultures, which influences

conformity rates. Collectivist cultures, (Japan, India) where the goals of the larger social group are valued over the
goals of the individual, has consistently found higher levels of conformity then in individualistic countries (USA, Sweden).
Conformity is a positive and desirable behavior.

SUMMARY: FACTORS INFLUENCING

CONFORMITY (12)
(Use the factors in a discuss research on conformity question. See last pages for
details.)
- Ambiguity/difficulty of the task ambiguous task=higher conformity (Asch:
non-ambiguous line judgment task; Asch replication: ambiguous line judgment task;
- Group size Asch replication: Larger group = more conformity, up to 6-7
people. Then it levels off (If the group is larger, the participants may know the true
nature of the experiment?)
- Social support - Asch replication: One ally = only 3 % conformity
- Culture - Zeitgeist: Conformity was the social norm in the 1950s in America. It
was viewed as sensible if not desirable and there were stronger pressures to
conform than today. Also, Bond and Smith (1996) performed a meta-analysis of
133 studies in 17 countries on the Asch paradigm. See below. collectivist cultures,
(Japan, India) where the goals of the larger social group are valued over the goals
of the individual, has consistently found higher levels of conformity then in
individualistic countries (USA, Sweden). Conformity is a positive and desirable
behavior.
- Gender see gender differences above (Crutchfield)
- Age - 12-16-year-olds are the most likely age group to conform
- Disposition/personality (Crutchfield) People who dont conform are more
intelligent, have ego-strength, have leadership ability, have mature social relations,
have an absence of inferiority feeling and authoritarian attitudes
- Greater attraction and commitment to the group = greater conformity

11. RESEARCH ON CONFORMITY

Remember that research means studies and theories
I would suggest that you use studies and not theories for this answer. They are
easier to evaluate in an ERQ.
Asch (1955) and his replications
Crutchfield (1954)
Bond and Smith (1996)

THEORIES OF CONFORMITY (explanations of why we conform)

1. Deutch and Gerard (1955) proposed a theory of conformity claiming
that conformity is a result of informational and normative social influence:

Normative conformity - A change in behavior without a change in private

opinion (just going along with the group). It is the result of the need to be liked and
accepted, to fit in, a need to belong (which is a principle of the SCLA).
Example of study: Aschs experiment (unambiguous task). When Asch interviewed
his participants, many of them said that they conformed to fit in with the group.This
is why Aschs research can be used to illustrate the principle Humans are
social animals with a need to belong.

Informational conformity - A change in both behavior and opinion (the groups

and your own opinions coincide when you lack knowledge and look to the group for
guidance or in unclear situations)
Example of study: Sharifs experiment (ambiguous task) since the task is so
ambiguous that they think the others are right. Some of Aschs participants also
said they conformed because they thought the others saw better. Especially when
the task was more ambiguous (when the lines were more alike).

2. Crutchfields conforming personality theory

This is a theory that proposes that personality influences conformity levels. He
tested participants for conformity (without the physical presence of others it was
just implied - by placing them in individual cubicles) and also gave them personality
and IQ tests. The conformity experiments were Asch-like experiments, with similar
types of tasks. The scores of the personality tests and IQ tests were then correlated
with the results from the conformity studies to see the link between conformity and
personality and IQ.
Participants who conformed
-had lower IQ
-Had less ego strength
-Had less leadership ability

-Were more narrow-minded/authoritarian

STUDIES ON CONFORMITY
Asch (1951)
He showed that people conform to others/to a majority to a great extent, even
when the task is obvious/non-ambiguous/not difficult.
He also conducted many replications investigating group size, unanimity and
ambiguity as factors (IVs). Remember to distinguish
between the original study and other studies investigating
these factors if you are asked about one study.

THE ORIGINAL EXPERIMENT:

Aim:
To test conformity under unambiguous conditions
(where the answer is obvious and the majority is incorrect).
To investigate the extent to which social pressure from a majority group could
affect a person to conform even when the majority is obviously incorrect..
Asch believed that people were only susceptible to social influence when the world was ambiguous
(as Sherif had demonstrated before him). Conformity in real life often involves general and
vague concepts such as attitudes, ethics, morals, and belief systems. Asch chose to focus
on a more obvious form (perceptual conformity) because he wanted to study the
phenomenon in a controlled lab environment.

Method: Lab experiment with an obvious answer to a line judgement (perception)

task. He used a control group that was asked individually to judge the lengths of the
lines, and they were correct in 98% of cases. This shows that the task was easy/
unambiguous. The answer was abvious. And it shows that the high conformity
levels (in 32% of the trails) were caused by being in the group.
IV: being tested alone or in a group
- experimental condition: when the participants were put with a group of 7-9 stooges
- control condition: when the participants were asked to judge the lines alone,
without others present. Asch checked whether the task was unambiguous. He
asked people individually to do the task, and everyone was able to solve it.
DV: conformity (operationalized as the number of times the participants
conformed/went along with the majority in the 12 trials when the majority actually
expressed the wrong answer)
Materials:
Pairs of cards (see below) with three different lengths of vertical lines (called
comparison lines) on one card and a single standard line the same length as
one of three comparison lines on the other.
Ethics: Deception (They were told it was a Visual perception study)

Participants: 123 male American college students were used in the original
experiment in 1955
Procedure:
Each participant in the control group was tested individually.
Each participant in the experimental group was tested in a group with stooges.
There were 7 confederates and 1 participant in each trial, which means that each
participant was put in a group of 8 and then exposed to 18 trials/18 different sets of
cards with lines and asked to make 18 judgements.
Using the line judgement task, he put a participant in a room with seven
confederates who had agreed in advance what their responses would be when
presented with the line task. Each person had to state aloud which comparison
line (A, B or C) was most like the standard line. The answer was always
obvious.
The participant sat at the end of the row and gave his or her answer last. There
were 18 trials per participant in total and the confederates unanimously gave
the wrong answer on 12 trials (DV=The researchers measured conformity in
12 trials, i.e. every time the confederates gave the wrong answer when the
stooges had given the WRONG answer). Asch wanted to know if the real
participant would conform to the majority view.
Results He found that the participants conformed (went along with the clearly
incorrect majority) on 32 % of the 12 trials (when the majority was unanimously
wrong). (Note: This number is an average of all trials for all participants. So it is not
like 32% of the participants conformed.)
75% of subjects conformed at least once (only 25 % never conformed which is
an important number since that means that some people never conform. The
reason would have to be their disposition and not the situation they were in=the
group)
Conclusion: Even in an unambiguous (obvious) situation there is a strong
group pressure to conform to a unanimous majority (=everyone else saying the
same thing). Even when we dont know the group.
Post-experiment interviews: Asch interviewed the participants after the experiment
to see why they conformed.) The reasons given by the participants for conforming
(The theories/explanations of conformity below are based on these explanations.)
They wanted to fit in with the group (normative influence)
They believed the group knew better (informational influence)

Evaluation of Aschs original study:

(+)The power of the social pressure to conform was demonstrated clearly and
scientifically for the first time. Asch and colleagues did not expect these results.
It was assumed that very few people would conform in an obvious, unambiguous

situation. However, the experiment can explain how a majority may influence a
minority but not the other way around (how few people/one person can influence a
group)
(+)This experiment is one of the most influential experiments in social
psychology. It has generated a large amount of research. This early research
sparked a huge wave of additional studies that continue right up to the present.
(Aschs own replications, Crutchfields research and all the 177 studies analyzed by
Smith and Bond in 1996, etc.)
(+) Since the results have been replicated several times, they should be considered
reliable (use results of other studies to show support).
Evaluation of methodology (Can be used for question on methods in the
sociocultural level. Lab experiment is the typical method used in early studies in the
sociocultural level and here is the evaluation.)
(+) Since this is a lab experiment, one can draw conclusions about cause and
effect. The IV was being in a group or not and the DV was whether the participants
said the wrong answer/conformed to the group. Noone said the wrong answer when
alone, but many did/conformed to the group when put with the group. This means
that being in a group causes conformity to a great extent.
(-) The lab experiment can generally be criticized for lack of ecological validity,
which makes it difficult to generalize results to real life. The task of judging line
lengths is unlikely to happen in everyday life. Therefore it is not similar to a real life
situation demonstrating conformity. (+) On the other hand, the participants
conformed to people they did not know. In real life, groups influence even
more and issues discussed are more ambiguous. (+) Also, other types of tasks
have been used by other researchers, such as Crutchfield, and shown equally high
levels of conformity.
(-) Demand characteristics might have influenced some of the participants. This is
a bias where the participants agree with everyone else because they are aware of
being in an experiment and do not want to ruin it for the researchers. They
figure out the aim of the expeirment and act accordingly. Some participants gave
this reason when interviewed after taking part in Aschs study.
(+) Since this is a lab experiment, it is easier to control extraneous variables than
it would have been in a field expeirment or other types of research. In this case the
researchers used standardized instructions to participants, they used the same
stimulus lines in all conditions, the same stooges for all participants since all of
those factors could potentially influence the participants answers.

Ethical considerations (Can be used for the question on ethics in soc.)

(-) One ethical limitation of this experiment is that participants were deceived,
which means that there was no true informed consent, even though they signed
consent. They were told the experiment was about perception. This is a problem
because according to the ethical guidelines participants should not be deceived.

They should be told the true aim of the research. (+) However, this was necessary
to avoid demand characteristics and the participants were thoroughly debreifed at
the end of the study.
(-) One ethical limitation was that participants were not protected from
psychological distress. Most of them found out that they had a conforming
personality after the study, which is embarrassing. And the whole situation was
embarrassing. This is a problem because, according to the ethical guidelines,
researchers are not allowed to cause physical or psychological distress and the
participants should leave the study in the same condition as they entered. (+)
However, this type of research from the 50s has lead to changes in the ethical
guidelines. They have become stricter and most scientists today would agree that
the ends (gaining important knowledge about humans) justify the means
(psychological distress of the participants) in this case.
Culture considerations
Conformity may be universal to some degree (=It can be found in many cultures)
but conformity rates vary cross-culturally. The first studies (for example Aschs)
were performed on American male students in the 1950s in the US. But later
studies have shown that there are cultural differences in conformity levels:
- Conformity levels are dependent upon zeitgeist, which means the spirit of the
times or the spirit of the age. It is the general cultural, intellectual and political
climate within a nation or even specific groups. Conformity was the social norm in
the 1950s in America just like it is in collectivist cultures today. It was viewed as
sensible, if not desirable and there were stronger pressures to conform than
today. American and Western society in general has become more individualistic
since then (meaning that people focus more on themselves than the groups they
belong to. The goals of the individual tend to be valued more than the goals of the
group today.). That could explain why conformity levels were so high at that time.
- Research shows (meta-analysis of 117 studies, by Bond and Smith, 1996) that
collectivist cultures, (Japan, India), where the goals of the larger social group
are valued over the goals of the individual, show higher levels of conformity
then individualist cultures (USA, Sweden). Conformity is a positive and desirable
behavior in those cultures, which is important to remember since people in the
Western world often view conformity as a weakness. See Smith and Bonds meta
analysis below. Conformity levels ranged from 15 % in the individualistic culture
Belgium to 58 % among Indian teachers in Fiji. (THIS INFORMATION CAN BE
USED FOR THE CULTURAL DIMENSIONS QUESTION)
Gender considerations
(-) Participants were only young male students from the US in the original Asch
studies. The sample is gender, age and culture biased. It is difficult to generalize
the results outside the sample, but many other studies have confirmed the results,
using other types of participants (women, other cultures, participants of different
ages). For example, Crutchfield used other participants. See below.
Later studies showed that women conform more willingly than men, however
the testing conditions were more familiar to men (This means that the results

were caused by gender biases in the method used. Remember that most women
did not go to school at the time, which means that this type of task was less familiar
to them than to men.). More recent research has failed to show gender
differences and the reason might be that there is more gender equality in the
societies that have been tested.

Asch did several replications using different factors as his

independent
variable (see

factors below):
Factor 1: Ambiguity/difficulty of the task

Asch changed the lengths of the lines and made them more alike, so the task would
be more difficult and ambiguous. In this type of study, the IV is the ambiguity of
the task meaning that in one condition they were similar like in the picture above,
and the other they were not. In one condition he would have lines that are almost
the same lengths, which means that the task is ambiguous. And in the other
condition he would use the task where the answer is very obvious. Conformity was
higher when the task was more ambiguous/more difficult, so ambiguity of task/
difficulty of task increases conformity levels.
This

research can be used as evidence for

informational conformity, which explains conformity with people looking to others
to see what the correct answer is. We dont know and therefore do as others do.
See theories of conformity above.

Factor 2: Group size

Asch changed the size of the group (the number of stooges). In this type of study,
the size of the group is the IV. Conformity increased when the group was
larger, up to 6-7 people. Then it levels off meaning that it does not increase after
6-7 people. It actually decreases. With two confederates the minority participants
errors rose to 13.6%. With three confederates the errors jumped to 31.8%. Further
increases in confederates did not increase errors so Asch concluded that the size of
opposition is important only up to a point. Asch suggested that with larger groups,
participants ay become resistant to conform if they suspect that members of the
majority are working together on purpose. The explanation might be that if the
group is larger, the participants may know the true nature of the experiment? They
become suspicious. See details below (Factors influencing conformity).

Factor 3: Social support /group unanimity

Asch made one or more of the stooges agree/state
the right line, which means that the naive participant
had social support, either another naive participant or
a confederate who had been instructed to go along
with the naive participant. This means that the
participant kind of has an ally (social support),
someone who agrees with him (Remember that he
actually knows which line is the right one since it is
obvious). The presence of a supporter reduced errors
from 35% to around 5.5%. This is particularly the case if the supporter responds
before the majority. This effect was seen even if the supporter was more incorrect
than the majority, so it seems that breaking group unanimity is the main factor in
reducing conformity.

Crutchfield (1954)
He replicated Aschs research using a more economical design and more
ecologically valid tasks. He also used correlations to show that certain
personality types conform more than others.
Aim: To investigate conformity without the physical presence of others
(remember that the definition of conformity states that others dont have to be
present) and to investigate whether personality is a factor that influences
conformity.

Participants: 90 air force officers, 50 in the experimental group and 40 in the

control group.
Procedure:
Differed from the Asch experiment in a number of ways.
- Five participants were tested simultaneously.
They were seated side by side; however, they could not see each other since their
desks had side wings. In front of each participant there were switches to be used
to indicate their responses and rows of signal lamps that indicated the responses
of the other four participants. Also in front of the participants there was a screen
where the different test items were displayed.
- Did not use any confederates (participants were presented with fake responses
assumed to be the responses of the other participants cost efficient)
- Test items included many different kinds of issues. Asch-like perceptual tasks,
factual, matters of opinions, logical tasks, and questions that had to do with
personal preferences.
- Finally, he also examined how personality traits were related to different degrees
of conformity by testing all participants for personality traits (This part of the
study is a CORRELATION since he measured whether there was a correlation
between results on experiments on conformity and the results on personality
tests). This is done by firs giving the participants personality tests and registering
their scores on different traits (ego strength, leadership ability, self control). They
also did intelligence tests, where an IQ score was determined. Then the participants
are exposed to conformity experiments and they are registered as high or low in
conformity. After that, statistical tests are used to see if there is a positive or
negative correlation.
Intelligence test item:
Results
30% conformed in the Asch-like perception task.
When participants were to
compare the area of a circle to
the area of a star (circle was one
third larger), 46% conformed and
agreed to a false alternative.
On a simple logical task of
completion of a number series,
30% conformed to an obviously illogical answer.
Among the control sample of men, not a single one expressed agreement with
the statement I doubt whether I would make a good leader, whereas 37% of
the men subjected to group pressure agreed to it. (This task does not lack

mundane reality. This means that the task resembled a real life task than the line
judgment task.)
Results on personality
Conformity varies between different individuals, which means that some individuals
conform more than others.
Since Crutchfield had measured personality traits in his participants, he could find
what traits correlated with willingness to conform.
People who dont conform:
-are more intelligent
-have more ego-strength
-have leadership ability
-have mature social relations
-absence of inferiority feelings
- rigid and excessive self-control,
- authoritarian attitudes

Crutchfields two replications

1. With college undergraduates, both males and females. Found about the same
degree of conformity as when he used air-force officers. He also found that females
were more conformist than males.
This study shows that there might be a gender difference in conformity (even
though later studies have shown no difference.)
2. Participants were adult women in their forties. He found the average
conformity score to be significantly lower than in the other two experiments.
This study showed that middle-aged women conform less than students and air
force officers. It shows that age might be a factor influencing conformity.
What was different in Crutchfields research:
- The method he used was more economical since no stooges/confederates were
required (Cubicles were used and the participants were deceived about the
answers of others).
- More ecologically valid tasks were used. He used the Asch-like line task but also
other types of tasks. Se above.

12. Factors affecting the amount and

strength of conformity
PERSONALITY AS FACTOR

See Crutchfields research above. Here are the results on personality:

Conformity varies between different individuals, which means that some individuals
conform more than others.
Since Crutchfield had measured personality traits in his participants, he could find
what traits correlated with willingness to conform.
People who dont conform:
-are more intelligent
-have more ego-strength
-have leadership ability
-have mature social relations
-absence of inferiority feelings
- rigid and excessive self-control,
- authoritarian attitudes

CULTURE AS A FACTOR
1. Type of culture as a cultural factor (individualistic or
collectivistic, see handout 14)
Collectivist cultures (Japan, India) where the goals of the larger social group
are valued over the goals of the individual, show higher levels of conformity
then individualistic countries (USA, Sweden). Conformity is a positive and desirable
behavior

Bond and Smith (1996)

Method: meta-analysis of 133 studies in 17 countries on the Asch paradigm.
This means that they investigated and compared 133 studies on conformity. All of
these studies had used the same type of task as Asch did.
IV: alone or in a group
DV: conformity (operationalized as number of times agreeing with the majority when
they are wrong)
Results:
Higher conformity levels were found in collectivist cultures than individualistic
cultures.
The level of conformity ranged from 15 % in an experiment with Belgian students
(Doms, 1983) to 58 % among Indian teachers in Fiji (Chandra, 1973) . The Belgian
students were technology (=a need to be right?) students from an individualist
culture and teachers from Fiji are from a collectivist culture.
Evaluation:
(+,-) since Asch-like experiments were used, you can use the same strengths and
limitations

(+) A meta-analysis gives a more objective picture, since so many studies are
included. However (-), it is sometimes difficult to compare, since there are
methodological differences, such as what types of stooges are used, etc.

2. Zeitgeist as a cultural factor

Conformity levels are dependent upon zeitgeist, which means the spirit of the
times or the spirit of the age. It is the general cultural, intellectual and political
climate within a nation or even specific groups. Conformity was the social norm in
the 1950s in America. It was viewed as sensible, if not desirable and there were
stronger pressures to conform than today. That could explain why conformity
levels were so high at that time.

GROUPS SIZE AS A FACTOR The larger the group the higher

the conformity
Asch made variations of the original study by altering the number of confederates
(group size). When there was only one, the participants answered correctly. With
two confederates the minority participants errors rose to 13.6 %. With three
confederates the errors jumped to 31.8 % Further increases in confederates did not
increase error so Asch concluded that the size of opposition is important only up to
a point. Asch suggested that with larger groups, participants might become resistant
to conform if they suspect that members of the majority are working together on
purpose. This is the most important factor in conformity. Breaking up the majority
lowers conformity rates.

GROUP UNANIMITY AS A FACTOR Having an ally/When

the group is not unanimous, conformity is lower
Asch introduced social support to the participants, either another naive participant
or a confederate who had been instructed to go along with the naive participant.
The presence of a supporter reduced errors from 35 % to around 5.5 %. This is
particularly the case if the supporter responds before the majority. This effect was
seen even if the supporter was more incorrect than the majority, so it seems that
breaking group unanimity is the main factor in reducing conformity.

DIFFICULTY/AMBIGUITY OF THE TASK - The more

ambiguous the task, the higher is conformity
The more difficult the greater the conformity. Remember that Asch investigated the
influence of this factor in one of his replications, by changing the length of lines.
When it was more difficult to see which line was the correct one, conformity was
higher. It is as if we look to others for guidance on the correct answer.

METHOD OF MAKING DECISIONS

Conformity decreases when writing the answer. If the decision is made

anonymously it drops to zero. This means that if you are in a group and you know
what the others have said, but you are allowed to write your answer that noone else
will see, there is no conformity.

GENDER (see Crutchfield)

In Crutchfields experiments (see above), women conformed more than men, but
middle-aged women conformed less than younger women and men.

ATTACHMENT AND COMMITMENT TO THE GROUP

Greater attraction and commitment to the group = greater conformity

WHY IS THIS HANDOUT IMPORTANT?

Learn three studies that can be used to answer all questions:
Aschs original study (and how he varied the IV by investigating different factors)
Crutchfields study
Smith and Bon
(1-2) Principles:
1. Humans are social animals with a need to belong: Asch showed that people
conform to a group. Many of the participants said they conformed not to stand out
from the group even if they knew the group was wrong (normative conformity).
2. Behavior is more influenced by the situation than personality:
All this research shows that the situation (such as the group we are in, number of
people around, the difficulty of a task) are more important than the individuals
personality since most people conform in these situations even though they know
the right answer. But Crutchfield also showed which personality types tend to
conform less.
3. Culture influences behavior:
The meta-analysis of Smith and Bond showed that there are cultural differences in
conformity (even though conformity can be found in most cultures). There is less
conformity in collectivistic societies. Zeitgeist also has to do with culture, so you can
use that.
(3) Methods:
One very important method used in the socio-cultural level of analysis (especially in
earlier research) is the lab experiment and almost all of the above are lab
experiments. Remember that Crutchfield used correlations to investigate the
correlation between levels of conformity and personality.

(4) Ethical considerations:

Ethical concerns can be raised in these types of lab experiments on conformity.
Participants are deceived, so there is no true informed consent and they are
exposed to embarrassing procedures. Finding out that you conform is
embarrassing, which means that the participants dont leave the experiment in the
same state as they entered. However, the experiments have lead to an increase of
knowledge about conformity. Many believe that this does not justify the means.
(11-12) Conformity research and factors influencing conformity.
See this handout
(14) Cultural

dimensions: Bond and Smith showed that collectivistic cultures tend

to conform to a greater extent, probably because of different cultural values.
Conformity is seen as a positive behavior/a desirable behavior in cultures where the
goals of the group are more important than the goals of the individual.
(15) Emics and etics: Conformity is an etic. All cultures seem to have a need to
belong and conform to others, but there are cultural differences in conformity and in
the view on whether this is a desirable behavior. Researchers have had an etic
perspective when investigating conformity.

Sample answers
ERQ: Evaluate research on conformity to group norms
Since the command term is evaluate, most paragraphs should start with One strength/limitation is... If it is
discuss, you could talk about strengths and limitations, about factors affecting conformity, etc.
Start by defining and explain conformity
Conformity is yielding to group pressure. It is a type of social influence in which individuals change their
attitudes or behavior to adhere to existing social norms. This change occurs in response to real
(involving the physical presence of others) or imagined (involving the pressure of social norms/expectations)
group pressure. This research can be illustrated through the original epxeriment conducted by Solomon
Asch in 1951 and some of his later replications.
Aschs original study
Asch conducted many lab experiments in the 1950 where he used a experimental technique (called the Asch
paradigm) where he asked participants to judge which one of three comparison lines was equal in length to a
standard line. This task was repeated 18 times. This task is so easy (unambiguous) that when participants
performed it alone in the control condition, they were nearly always right. In the experimental condition, the
participants (who were tested individually) stated their answers aloud after six confederates who had been
instructed to give the wrong answer on 12 out of 18 trials. Participants conformed, i.e. went along with the
wrong answer, given by the majority on nearly 37% of the critical trials. 76% of participants conformed on at
least one critical trial.
Strengths and limitations (Develop arguments)
One limitation of the research into conformity using the Asch paradigm, is that it tends to lack ecological
validity. In Aschs experiments participants judged the lengths of lines, which does not resemble a real life
situation in which people would conform. Because of this, the findings could be difficult to generalize. On the
other hand, in these experiments, participants conformed to people they did not know. In real life, groups
exert even stronger forces and issues are more ambiguous. In real life conformity often involves general and
vague concepts such as attitudes, ethics and belief systems, which is difficult to study in a controlled lab
environment, using standardized procedure. However, Crutchfield conducted research using the Asch
paradigm but using cubicles (which was more economical) and less artificial tasks, such as agreeing with a
statement such as I doubt whether I would make a good leader. The results showed the same levels of
conformity as the artificial line comparison task.

Another limitation is demand characteristics - a bias where the participants agree with everyone else
because they are aware of being in an experiment and they have figured out the aim, but do not want
to ruin it for the researchers. Some participants gave this reason when interviewed after taking part in
Aschs research, which supports the claim. On the other hand, others stated that they conformed because
they wanted to be accepted by the group (This is called normative conformity in Deutch and Gerards theory)
or because they thought the others were right (informational conformity).
One strength is that most research on conformity is experimental, and the causes of conformity can be
established, usually with a very strong effect. Asch varied the independent variable in his replications and
showed that a larger group (up to six confererates) causes higher levels, that a more difficult task causes
higher levels of conformity and that having an ally causes lower levels. However, some of the research is
correlational and does not show causation. Those are the studies showing differences between genders,
cultures and personalities. For example, Crutchfield correlated IQ and personality characteristics such as
ego strength and leadership ability with conformity levels and showed that people with high IQ, more ego
strength and leadership ability tend to conform less. This does not mean that high IQ causes lower
conformity levels but it could possibly explain why 25% of the participants in the original experiment
conducted by Asch did not conform at all.
One ethical limitation in conformity research is deception. In Aschs research, participants were lead to
believe the experiment was about perception. However, they were later debriefed thoroughly. Also,
participants were not protected from psychological distress, which was the result for many of them when
they were made to believe they had a conforming personality. Many might have felt distressed by finding out
the true aim, since conformity is not a desirable characteristic in the West, where most of the studies have
been conducted.
The early studies can also be considered gender biased since only young male students were used. It is
difficult to generalize the results to other populations. Later studies included women (e.g. Crutchfields
replications) and showed that women conform more willingly than men. In one of Crutchfields studies,
women in their forties showed lower levels of conformity, which might show that age is also a factor affecting
conformity levels. These studies were also criticized for the gender-biased tasks, which means that testing
conditions (comparing lines, logical tasks such as completion of a number series) were more familiar to men
then women back in the 50s. More recent research has failed to show gender differences.
In conclusion, conformity research has many limitations, such as artificiality, demand characteristics, the
use of deception and causing psychological harm to participants but on the other hand one needs to
consider when most of the research was conducted: in the 50s when ethical guidelines were not as strict and
at a time when psychology was still mainly experimental. On the other hand, this type of research has been
very influential in psychology, especially in showing the influence of the situations in peoples behaviors and
showing that we are susceptible to social influence even then the world is unambiguous.
Word count: 947 words

SAQ: Describe one study on conformity to group norms

One study on conformity to group norms is the lab experiment conducted by Solomon
Asch in 1951.
Conformity is yielding to group pressure. It is a type of social influence in which
individuals change their attitudes or behavior to adhere to existing social norms. This
change occurs in response to real (involving the physical presence of others) or
imagined (involving the pressure of social norms/expectations) group pressure.
Asch conducted a lab experiment with the aim to investigate whether participants would
conform to a group. The independent variable was whether they were alone or in a group
and the dependent variable was conformity, operationalized as the number of trials in
which participants conformed to the majority.
The participants were American students and they were deceived into believing that the
experiment was about perception.

They were individually asked to judge which one of three comparison lines was equal in
length to a standard line. This task was repeated 18 times with each participants and it
was so easy that when participants performed it alone in the control condition, they were
nearly always right. In the experimental condition, the participants stated their answers
aloud after six confederates who had been instructed to give the wrong answer on 12 out
of 18 trials.
The results showed that participants conformed, i.e. went along with the wrong answer,
given by the majority, on nearly 37% of the critical trials. 76% of participants conformed on
at least one critical trial. This means that 24% never conformed.
After the experiment, Asch debriefed the participants. Some of them claimed that they
went along with the group in order to fit in (This is what Deutch and Gerard call normative
conformity) or because they thought that the majority was right (informational conformity).
From this one can conclude that people have a tendency to go conform to the behavior of
the majority. However, there are also people who never conform.
Word cound 319