Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Belongingness wikipedia , lookup
Stanford prison experiment wikipedia , lookup
Impression formation wikipedia , lookup
Group dynamics wikipedia , lookup
Social perception wikipedia , lookup
Séralini affair wikipedia , lookup
Introspection illusion wikipedia , lookup
False consensus effect wikipedia , lookup
Social tuning wikipedia , lookup
Communication in small groups wikipedia , lookup
Memory conformity wikipedia , lookup
Core studies summary Asch (1955) opinions and social pressure Aims and context (Put aims of study & background history) The aim of the study was to see if p’s would yield (conform) to majority social influence & give incorrect answers in a situation where the correct answers were always obvious. Asch was investigating what would happen if p’s were exposed to normative social influence (we conform as we want to be liked and fit in) in a group situation when the answers were obvious. The researchers wanted to find out how and how much do social forces constrain people’s opinions and attitudes. Asch aimed to investigate the effects of group pressure on individuals in unambiguous situation as previous research had focused on ambiguous situations; he wanted to find out if when confronted with an obviously incorrect answer, whether individuals would give an answer which perpetuated this error (conformed) or whether they would give an independent response. Context: Asch comments on how Charcot stated that only hysterical people could be hypnotised, these were people who demonstrated strange symptoms with no bodily cause, e.g. deafness or paralysis. But however, Bernheim & Liebault demonstrated that they could put normal people in a hypnotic trance. Bernheim said hypnosis was an extreme form of a normal psychological process known as SUGGESTIBILITY. It was already known that repeating instructions to people who were awake could make them respond involuntarily e.g. their bodies would sway, or they would feel warm. At the start of the 1900’s social psychology was born, the first experiments followed like this: college students were asked to give their opinions concerning certain matters, some time later they were asked again to give their opinions BUT they were told of what the opinions of most people were first. These studies produced the same result, given opinions against their own, these students shifted their opinions to agree with the majority. The sheer weight of numbers or authority was enough to change people’s opinions even when no good arguments were given for these opinions!! Asch was interested in how people submit to manipulation by suggestion or due to the power of authority and that any idea can be sold or unsold, without needing to talk about its merits. He wondered if it was possible to change a person’s judgment of a situation or object without first changing his knowledge or assumptions about it. 1 SHERIF (1935): Sherif did research on the autokinetic effect this is when a still point of light in the dark appears to move, the p’s had to estimate how far it moved on their own at first and then in groups. When alone, p’s developed their own individual norms BUT in the group judgements became closer and closer to one another until a group norm was established - an estimate they all agreed on. When re-tested alone p’s answered using the group norm; they appeared to have internalised the group norm. To conclude p’s were influenced by the estimates of others. Estimates became the same i.e. converged as they used information from other p’s to help them. Jenness (1932) asked p’s to estimate the number of beans in a bottle, first on their own, then in a group. When asked alone again after being in a group, individuals shifted their opinion towards the group estimate rather than their own. Procedures (What did the Psychologists do to the participants?) A group of 7-9 young men, all college students were placed in a classroom for a supposed psychological experiment on visual judgement. The experimenter told them that they would be comparing lengths of lines. They are shown 2 large white cards. On one is a vertical black line the standard line, on another card are 3 vertical lines of various lengths. P’s had to choose the line that is the same length as the line on the standard card. One of the 3 lines is of the same length, the others are very different, the difference ranges from 3 quarters of an inch to an inch and 3 quarters. P’s have to announce their answers out loud to the group in the order they have been seated in. Unknown to the true naïve participant the other students are stooges/confederates of the experimenter. They have been 2 instructed on 12 out of 18 trials called the critical trials to give the wrong answer. In total Asch tested 123 male college students (participants). The participant is placed in position in which while he is giving the correct answers he is in an uncomfortable minority of 1 opposed by a unanimous (together) opinion of a group of his peers. Perspective : Social Method: Laboratory study & Interview at end to find out why they conformed/resisted 3 advantages of the methodology: Sample (e.g. representative) Internal & external validity/internal & external reliability/ethics & any other issues: 1. High internal validity because it was conducted in a controlled environment & Asch was able to manipulate & control conditions so that he could measure the effects directly e.g. number of incorrect answers (i.e. conforming) / average conformity level of p’s over critical trials measured by percentage e.g. 36.8% / percentage of p’s that conformed / percentage of p’s that never conformed. 2. External reliability - Asch in variations of his experiment still showed that p’s conform under group pressure, e.g. if a task was made harder then conformity levels went up. Crutchfield (1955) showed p’s still conformed even when not face to face. 3. Sample were of a similar age as all college students, so this acted as a control, and it showed most p’s conformed. 4. Experiment - standardised procedures followed, means the study can be replicated so the results can be tested e.g. number of trials/place of testing/behaviour of confederates etc. 3 disadvantages of this methodology: Sample bias/validity – internal & external/reliability internal & external/ethics/gender bias/cultural bias & any other issues: 1. Sample - all male college students so low population validity in terms of you can’t generalise results to other types of people e.g. older 3 male adults. Also gender bias as no females were used. (Androcentric/Ethnocentric) 2. Internal validity could be lowered by demand characteristics where p’s look at the situation and guess how they should react so behaviour is not telling truth i.e. it is not valid. Experimenter may also expect p’s to behave in a certain way and this is transmitted to them called expectancy effects. 3. Low mundane realism, this means is the task in the study like real life? Well, no so it has low mundane realism as when we conform we do it in different situations to this e.g. we conform due to group discussion. 4. Gender bias - no females used. 5. Ethics - participants were misled, told the study was about visual judgements and again this was rubbish, it was about conformity. However, it is doubtful that being misled like this would have led to worrying psychological effects. Findings and conclusions of the study: Individuals matching the lines without any group around them will make a mistake less than 1% of the time. Under group pressure the p’s agreed with the wrong majority view on 36.8% of the selections/critical trials. Some p’s went along with the majority nearly all the time. Other p’s stayed independent and true to their own judgements throughout the trials. At the end of the study p’s were interviewed. Some independent p’s were just really confident in their own judgements, others believed the majority were correct but they continued to dissent (disagree) as they felt that it was their obligation to do so. The conforming p’s quickly came to the agreement that they were wrong and everyone else was right. 4 Some of the conforming p’s thought that the majority was wrong due to some optical illusion but still conformed! All p’s underestimated how many times they conformed. Some p’s thought that they themselves were deficient in some way which they should hide so went along with the majority. Conclusion: Asch concluded that there was a strong tendency for conformity. He found tendency for conformity was so strong that well-meaning young people would conform this is a matter of concern. Alternative and complementary research findings: (See exemplar question for more information) Alternative: Crutchfield in conformity studies found participants with high intelligence scores and leadership abilities showed less conformity than others, so individual differences are important, which Asch didn’t emphasise. Furman & Duke (1988) found lack of confidence makes you more likely to conform. The publicly stated preferences of people who weren’t experts in music were affected by confederates who gave the opposite music preferences. Perrin & Spencer (1980) replicated (repeated) Asch’s study and found only 1 conforming response in 396 trials. They said cultural changes over the last 50 years had led to a reduction in conformity. Also the students were from precise disciplines like chemistry and maths. Smith & Bond (1998) in a review of 31 studies state that conformity is less likely in Britain & the USA so goes against Asch’s findings but more likely in collectivist cultures like Japan/China. Complementary: Crutchfeld (1955) arranged p’s in booths, they had to judge which shape was bigger, they could see lights on a display which they incorrectly thought was other p’s responses but the experimenter controlled these 5 displays, conformity levels were similar to Asch 30%. Also like in Asch’s study variations, when tasks were made harder p’s conformed more. Perrin & Spencer (1981) used youths on probation as p’s and their probation officers were confederates, the conformity levels were similar to those Asch found in 1952. Where the costs of not conforming were thought to be high, conformity effects happened. Nicholson et al (1985) showed conformity levels were linked to what was happening in society at the time, in 1982 there was the Falklands war when Britain went to war with Argentina over who had control of the Falkland islands, here p’s were more conforming than p’s who were tested in 1981. The war contributed to society’s cohesiveness at the time (we all stick together) which led to higher degrees of conformity. Zimbardo et al (1973) did a prison simulation study and found ordinary people conformed extremely to the roles given of guards or prisoner and guards became aggressive in their roles, punishing the prisoners by continually lining them up for counts and being verbally aggressive. They made prisoners clean out the toilet with their hands! Evaluation points of the study: Strengths: Valid - seems to show how strong social influence is to empower us to conform. Reliable research method - a lab experiment means the study can be replicated (repeated) and same results found. This gives confidence in results. Cause and effect can be established with this type of well controlled study. Quantitative data generated, which can be analysed and shows clear effects e.g. impressive to say that 74% of p’s conformed at least once. Control over variables – variables like age/setting/seating position all controlled, so variables which could affect results are controlled or eliminated again allowing us to be more confident in results. 6 Asch generated qualitative data through interviewing p’s to see why they conformed, this is useful data e.g. p’s conformed as they wanted to be liked (normative social influence) and also because they thought the others were right, called informational social influence. Weaknesses: Artificiality of study - conformity found under laboratory conditions with meaningless stimuli e.g. line judgement. High conformity rates may just reflect society at that time - in the 1950’s there was a fear of communist societies and a witch hunt went on in America, where communist sympathisers were trialled and jailed. But America is less conformist now. Replication of Asch’s study has found varying rates of conformity in recent times and when studies have been done cross culturally. Outdated study doesn’t tell us about society today? There will always be individual differences where not all people will conform so it doesn’t tell us that conformity is a universal human behaviour. Demand characteristics - the situation is formal (lab. experiment) and the participant may go along with everyone else thus lowering the internal validity i.e. that the IV led to a change in the DV. Androcentric or gender biased - focuses on males and ignores how females would react. Overemphasises nurture - that the environment through social pressure controls our behaviour, ignores nature side of the debate e.g. how our genes could influence us to conform. Cultural bias - done in America can’t apply findings to other cultures which may be more independent. Ethics – Deception / lack of informed consent / hard for them to withdraw would be embarrassing / protection of participants - p’s would have felt uncomfortable, unnerved and stressed should they 7 be put through this? Ethnocentric - an American cultural group is used to try to show how a universal human behaviour can be applied to other groups this isn’t necessarily correct. 8