13.) Evaluate research on conformity
Intro - start with the two main purposes of conformity:
This question says to evaluate research. This means the majority of this question will be looking at the strengths and limitations of the studies which support conformity, and then the general ones for conformity research overall. Here are a few studies to go in depth into.
Asch (1951) -
Aim: View the effect of majority mistakes on individual choice
Method: In a room of all confederates, a participant was unknowingly placed and a question was asked of the room. A few of the confederates gave the wrong answer to see if the participant would conform.
Results: 75% of the participants agreed with the confederates on wrong answers at least once
Significance: Participants said after the study that they felt it was more important to go along with the group than follow their own beliefs, so this study and such a reaction were nicknamed the "Asch paradigm".
Strengths: It has been replicated NUMEROUS times and has cross-cultural validity as of today
Weaknesses: The original study only focused on the individual, since all the other people present were confederates, plus it by itself did not contain any kind of cultural validity
Berns (2005) -
Aim: See whether conformity was entirely a choice or if perception of a person is changed
Method: Participants had to rotate a figure on a computer to fit a certain similar diagram and chose correct positions based on the answers of fellow participants and the computer itself.
Results: People rated the computer and the group to be about the same in accuracy, however, brain activity differed depending on which thing the person was conforming with.
Significance: In the end, Berns concluded that social conformity relates to perception, not just decision-making, since the amygdala and emotion were involved when dealing with conforming to others standards.
Bond and Smith (1996) - a meta-analysis (correlation study) of 133 studies from 17 countries
Aim: Observe conformity patterns in replication studies of Asch's original experiment
Results/Significance: Conformity was higher in participants when the majority was large or contained a larger proportion of females, and levels of conformity steadily declined since the 1950s ( both these conclusions were based on the U.S. portion of the studies). Also, conformity was higher in cultures with a tendency toward collectivism.
Strengths: Strict criteria so the studies could be comparable
Weaknesses: Their study can only observe relationships, not cause and effect; therefore, all conclusions are assumptions.
Bond and Smith (1996) - another study by this pair where they discovered that there is "perverse norms" with conformity in Spanish cultures that don't exist in Anglo culture, where people conform to a single individual authority such as a dictator. (Milgram's Shock experiment also betrays the presence of "perverse norms" in certain societies)
Significance: This suggests that specific aspects of culture affect conformity
Now for the broader stuff:
General Strengths of Conformity Research:
General Weaknesses of Conformity Research:
- Getting information from others
- Satisfying a need to belong
This question says to evaluate research. This means the majority of this question will be looking at the strengths and limitations of the studies which support conformity, and then the general ones for conformity research overall. Here are a few studies to go in depth into.
Asch (1951) -
Aim: View the effect of majority mistakes on individual choice
Method: In a room of all confederates, a participant was unknowingly placed and a question was asked of the room. A few of the confederates gave the wrong answer to see if the participant would conform.
Results: 75% of the participants agreed with the confederates on wrong answers at least once
Significance: Participants said after the study that they felt it was more important to go along with the group than follow their own beliefs, so this study and such a reaction were nicknamed the "Asch paradigm".
Strengths: It has been replicated NUMEROUS times and has cross-cultural validity as of today
Weaknesses: The original study only focused on the individual, since all the other people present were confederates, plus it by itself did not contain any kind of cultural validity
Berns (2005) -
Aim: See whether conformity was entirely a choice or if perception of a person is changed
Method: Participants had to rotate a figure on a computer to fit a certain similar diagram and chose correct positions based on the answers of fellow participants and the computer itself.
Results: People rated the computer and the group to be about the same in accuracy, however, brain activity differed depending on which thing the person was conforming with.
Significance: In the end, Berns concluded that social conformity relates to perception, not just decision-making, since the amygdala and emotion were involved when dealing with conforming to others standards.
Bond and Smith (1996) - a meta-analysis (correlation study) of 133 studies from 17 countries
Aim: Observe conformity patterns in replication studies of Asch's original experiment
Results/Significance: Conformity was higher in participants when the majority was large or contained a larger proportion of females, and levels of conformity steadily declined since the 1950s ( both these conclusions were based on the U.S. portion of the studies). Also, conformity was higher in cultures with a tendency toward collectivism.
Strengths: Strict criteria so the studies could be comparable
Weaknesses: Their study can only observe relationships, not cause and effect; therefore, all conclusions are assumptions.
Bond and Smith (1996) - another study by this pair where they discovered that there is "perverse norms" with conformity in Spanish cultures that don't exist in Anglo culture, where people conform to a single individual authority such as a dictator. (Milgram's Shock experiment also betrays the presence of "perverse norms" in certain societies)
Significance: This suggests that specific aspects of culture affect conformity
Now for the broader stuff:
General Strengths of Conformity Research:
- Conformity research has time, observer, and space triangulation (received similar conformity results overall when using Asch's experimental model)
- Meta-analyses can be used to form reasonable generalizations about conformity like those of Bond and Smith.
General Weaknesses of Conformity Research:
- The impact of gender on conformity is inconsistent in findings.
- Asch's conformity studies only looked at the individual, not group processes.
- Ethical considerations are a problem because participants are normally deceived in conformity studies, and the question of importance of data vs. individual rights is brought up.