Asch (1955) Opinions and Social Pressure GMG PowerPoint

Asch (1955)Opinions and Social Pressure

Social Psychology

Asch (1955) Opinions and Social Pressure

0Context:

0 Jenness (1932) – beans in a jar…

0 Sherif (1935) – a spot of light…

0 But, Asch thought this research was flawed because it did not really measure conformity and the situations were ambiguous.


0Aims

0Asch aimed to investigate the effects of group pressure on individuals in unambiguous situations.


0Procedures

0 123 US student volunteers recruited for a ‘vision’ test.0 Each session had 1 naïve participant (P) + group of 6-8

confederates (C).0 Ps shown 2 large cards. 1 had a standard line the other had 3

vertical lines. Ps asked to select the line that matched the standard.

0 1 line matched, the other 2 were substantially different.0 Cs gave same incorrect answer on 12 of 18 trials (critical trials)0 Asch debriefed the naïve participants about their responses

and behaviour.


0Additional procedures

0 Size – varied from 1- 15 persons0 Truthful partner0 Dissenting, inaccurate partner – disagreed with both Cs and

P.0 Partner who changed his mind – correct answer for 1st 6

trials then joined majority for 2nd 6 trials.0 Partner who left – Partner gave correct answer for 1st 6

trials then had to leave for a ‘good reason’.


0Findings – baseline study

0 Control trial – No Cs gave the wrong answer, P made mistakes less than 1% of the time.

0 Critical trials – Ps gave wrong answers 36.8% of the time.


0Findings – baseline study

0 Individual differences:0 25% of Ps never gave the wrong answer.0 P behaviour tended to be compliant.0 The more conformist participants underestimated how

often they conformed gave more excuses.0 Those Ps who were more independent were more

confident about their judgement (but they regarded the majority as correct)


0Findings – additional procedures0 Size – varied from 1- 15 persons –

0 1 C had little effect. 0 2 Cs led Ps to give wrong answer 13.6% of time.0 3 Cs this rose to 31.6%

0 Truthful partner – 0 Reduced conformity to 25%

0 Dissenting, inaccurate partner – disagreed with both Cs and P –0 Reduced to conformity to 6%

0 Partner who changed his mind – correct answer for 1st 6 trials then joined majority for 2nd 6 trials.0 P behaved independently for 1st 6 trials then followed partner

0 Partner who left – Partner gave correct answer for 1st 6 trials then had to leave for a ‘good reason’.0 Partner reverted to being influenced by the majority.


0Conclusions:

0 There is evidence of conformity in unambiguous situations.

0 There are factors that affect the level of conformity: size of group, presence of dissenter.

0 The level of conformity depends on the extent to which the group is unanimous.

0 Most people can resist conformity, on nearly of trials Ps remained ⅔independent.


0Implications for us

0Who decides what our world should look like?

0Are we conforming to someone else's idea of a good society?

0How do we use conformity in education?


0Evaluating the methodology0 Method

0 Baseline study - NOT an experiment – no independent variable (IV).

0 Some of the variations were experimental – 1C vs 3C, (dependent variable = conformity)

(independent variable = No. of Cs)


0Validity – (Can these results be generalised to other situations?)

0 What is the task was more important?0 What if the Ps and Cs knew each other?0 What if the answers were given privately?


0Sampling

0The study contained only US male college students0 What could be the problems with that?

0Gender bias0Culture


0Ethics

0Active deception (telling lies)0Passive deception(omitting facts)0Psychological harm


0Alternative evidence

0 Context is King! Perrin and Spencer (1980) did the experiment again in England the 70s. Only 1 conformed in 396 trials. Were 1950s Americans more conformist?

0 Cultural differences. Smith and Bond (1988) – collectivist societies more conformist than individualistic ones.

0 Gender differences. Neto (1995) women are more conformist0 Unpredictable! Lalancette and Standing (1990) concluded

that it is unpredictable phenomenon.


0Compliance or internalisation? Berns et al. (2005) fMRI shows the areas of the brain active in this task are the perceptual ones rather than those concerned with making judgements. Are the Ps actually beginning to see the world differently? Perceive things differently? Do they begin to see the line as the same length?

Those going for A/A*…

Asch (1955) Opinions and Social Pressure GMG PowerPoint

Documents

Transcript of Asch (1955) Opinions and Social Pressure GMG PowerPoint