Conformity Research

Asch's research - procedure

Pps showed two large white cards - one standard line, three comparison lines. One was same length as standard, other two clearly wrong. 123 american male undergrads. 6-8 confederates. On 12/18 trials, the confederates gave a wrong answer.

1 of 16

Asch's research - findings

Participant gave wrong answer 36.8% of the time. 25% did not conform at all. 75% conformed at least once.

2 of 16

Asch's research - Variations

1. Group size - conformity rose up to three confederates but any additional made little influence. 2. Unanimity - Presence of dissenting confederate meant conformity dropped by a quarter. 3. Task difficulty - Task more difficult = more conformity.

3 of 16

Asch evaluation - a child of its time

Perrin and Spencer (1980) repeated study with engineering students in UK. only 1/396 trials = conformity. 1950s may have been an especially conformist time in america. society changed since Asch carried out his research - not consistent across time

4 of 16

Asch evaluation - artificial situation and task

Pps knew they were in a study (demand characteristics may occur). Doesn't resemble groups we are in in everyday life - findings do not generalise to everyday situations.

5 of 16

Asch evaluation - limited application of findings

Only men tested, women may be more conformist. Conformity rates lower in individualist culture (US) than collectivist culture (China). Findings can only apply to american males - gender and cultural differences not taken into account

6 of 16

Asch evaluation - findings only apply to certain situations

Pps had to answer out loud in front of strangers they may want to impress = higher conformity.On the other hand, Williams and Sogon (1984) found conformity was higher in group of friends than in group of strangers.

7 of 16

Asch evaluation - ethical issues

Pps were deceived because they thought confederates were other pps. Ethical cost should be weighed up against benefits however.

8 of 16

Zimbardo's research - procedure

Mock prison set up in basement of Stanford Uni psych dept. Students volunteered. Randomly assigned roles of guard/prisoners. Fake arrested, blindfolded, ***** searched and issued uniform and number. Social roles strictly divided.16 rules.

9 of 16

Zimbardo's research - findings

Slow start. Guards took up roles with enthusiasm and behaviour became threat to prisoners' health. Stopped after 6 days rather than 14. Prisoners violent and rebellious then subdued and depressed.

10 of 16

Zimbardo's research - conclusion

Revealed power of the situation to influence people's behaviour. Guards, prisoners and researches all conformed to their roles and behaved as though they were in a prison rather than in a psychological study.

11 of 16

Zimbardo evaluation - control

Strength - had some control over variables. Emotionally stabled pps randomly assigned to rule out individual personality differences. Increased internal validity.

12 of 16

Zimbardo evaluation - Lack of realism

Banuazizi and Mohavedi (1975) argued that pps were just play-acting, behaviours based on stereotypes. but 90% of of the prisoners' conversation was about prison life. The situation seemed very real to pps - high internal validity.

13 of 16

Zimbardo evaluation - Role of dispositional influences

Fromm (1973) accused Zimbardo of exaggerating the power of the situation to influence behaviour.

14 of 16

Zimbardo evaluation - lack of research support

BBC prison study findings were very different to those of Zimbardo's - the prisoners eventually took control of the mock prison. Social; Identity theory was used to explain this.

15 of 16

Zimbardo evaluation - ethical issues

Zimbardo's dual roles in the study - he was researcher and prison superintendent and took his job as superintendent more seriously than his task of protecting pps.

16 of 16

Get Revising

Conformity Research

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Back

Card 3

Front

Back

Card 4

Front

Back

Card 5

Front

Back

Comments

Similar Psychology resources: