SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 11
Extensions to Asch’s research




                  Since the original study
                  Asch has run a number of
                  variations of his study to
                  find out the circumstances
                  under which people will
                  conform or will not
                  conform to a majority.
Factors that INCREASE
conformity
1.   The nature of the task – when the
     task was made more difficult the
     conformity levels increased (as in
     Crutchfield’s study)
2.   Majority of 3 people – when the
     majority consisted of 3 people he
     found optimum conformity effects
     (32%). Increasing the size beyond 3
     did not increase the level of
     conformity found.
Factors that DECREASED
conformity levels
1.   Majority of only two people -
     conformity responses in the p’s
     dropped to 12.8% of their total
     judgements when the majority
     consisted of only 2 people.
2.   A non-unanimous majority (not
     everyone agreed with the majority) –
     conformity levels dropped to 5%
     when one participant dissented from
     the majority and supported the naïve
     participant
Key Study 2
Crutchfield (1955)
Aim
   Crutchfield wanted to establish
    whether other people need to be
    physically present for conformity to
    occur, or if the belief that others are
    carrying out the same task is all that is
    necessary.
Procedure
   More than 600 participants were tested
    P’s included American college students and military personnel
   They were tested for conformity on a range of tasks, including clearly
    incorrect factual statements and personal opinions
     ◦ Task 1 – Asch style task
     ◦ Task 2 – Do you agree that a star has a larger surface area than a circle?
       (it was in fact a third smaller) HARDER TASK
     ◦ Task 3 – Do you agree with the statement – ‘I doubt I would make an
       effective leader’ TASK THAT INVOLVED OPINION
   participants worked in booths on their own, so were not directly exposed to
    other participants.
   They were asked to indicate agreement or disagreement by means of
    switches which would turn on lights.
   They were told that the lights on the display panel showed the responses by
    the other participants. In fact the experimenter controlled these lights and
    each participants saw an identical display.
Findings
 The level of conformity varied with the
  nature of the task.
 There was 46% conformity to Task 2 -
  agreement that a star had a larger
  surface area than a circle
 30% conformity to Task 1- Asch-type
  task [supporting evidence for Asch’s
  study]
 37% agreed with Task 3 ‘I doubt that I
  would make an effective leader’’….none
  of whom did so when asked on their
  own.
Conclusions
 He extended Asch's work by
  demonstrating conformity not only in
  factual judgments, but also opinions.
 When the task was made more
  difficult conformity levels increased.
Evaluation


 Ethics – what ethical guidelines were
  broken and how were they broken?
 This study can be criticised for
  lacking ecological validity. This was
  because ………
 The study showed that Asch’s
  findings were reliable because …….
Other factors affecting
conformity
1. The importance of time
 Perin and Spencer (1981) argued that
  Asch’s classic conformity study reflected
  the social and historical aspects of 1950s
  America where pressure to conform was
  strong
 Perin and Spencer replicated Asch’s task
  25 years later in 1981
 33 male students were used – they
  found only one conforming response in
  396 trials. This shows that conformity
  was much lower in the 1980s than Asch
  had originally found in the 1950s
2. The importance of culture
 Smith and Bond (1998) reviewed 31
  studies of conformity conducted in
  different cultures using Asch’s
  procedure.
 They concluded that people living in
  non-western cultures (family and
  community are seen as being really
  important) show higher levels of
  conformity than those who live in
  Western cultures (where individuality
  is preferred).

More Related Content

What's hot

Social Identity Theory Intro
Social Identity Theory IntroSocial Identity Theory Intro
Social Identity Theory IntroThomas Galvez
 
Social Psychology: Deindividuation
Social Psychology: DeindividuationSocial Psychology: Deindividuation
Social Psychology: Deindividuationcncomeau
 
Social identity theory
Social identity theorySocial identity theory
Social identity theorySynflame
 
Explanations of obedience
Explanations of obedienceExplanations of obedience
Explanations of obediencesssfcpsychology
 
Determinants of Aggression.pptx
Determinants of Aggression.pptxDeterminants of Aggression.pptx
Determinants of Aggression.pptxDrMsJayanthiRani
 
Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders (DSM-V)
Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders (DSM-V)Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders (DSM-V)
Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders (DSM-V)Adesh Agrawal
 
Social Psychology - Social Influence
Social Psychology - Social InfluenceSocial Psychology - Social Influence
Social Psychology - Social InfluenceSavipra Gorospe
 
What is impression formation? How does it contribute to sociability or social...
What is impression formation? How does it contribute to sociability or social...What is impression formation? How does it contribute to sociability or social...
What is impression formation? How does it contribute to sociability or social...Eric Wagobera Jnr
 
Learning theory explanation of attachment
Learning theory explanation of attachmentLearning theory explanation of attachment
Learning theory explanation of attachmentmpape
 

What's hot (20)

Social Influence
Social InfluenceSocial Influence
Social Influence
 
Social Identity Theory Intro
Social Identity Theory IntroSocial Identity Theory Intro
Social Identity Theory Intro
 
Prosocial behavior
Prosocial behaviorProsocial behavior
Prosocial behavior
 
Social Identity Theory
Social Identity TheorySocial Identity Theory
Social Identity Theory
 
Social Psychology: Deindividuation
Social Psychology: DeindividuationSocial Psychology: Deindividuation
Social Psychology: Deindividuation
 
Social identity theory
Social identity theorySocial identity theory
Social identity theory
 
Explanations of obedience
Explanations of obedienceExplanations of obedience
Explanations of obedience
 
Determinants of Aggression.pptx
Determinants of Aggression.pptxDeterminants of Aggression.pptx
Determinants of Aggression.pptx
 
Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders (DSM-V)
Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders (DSM-V)Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders (DSM-V)
Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders (DSM-V)
 
Social Psychology - Social Influence
Social Psychology - Social InfluenceSocial Psychology - Social Influence
Social Psychology - Social Influence
 
Prosocial behavior
Prosocial behaviorProsocial behavior
Prosocial behavior
 
Prosocial Behavior
Prosocial BehaviorProsocial Behavior
Prosocial Behavior
 
Obedience and authority
Obedience and authorityObedience and authority
Obedience and authority
 
Deindividuation
DeindividuationDeindividuation
Deindividuation
 
Unit 14
Unit 14Unit 14
Unit 14
 
What is impression formation? How does it contribute to sociability or social...
What is impression formation? How does it contribute to sociability or social...What is impression formation? How does it contribute to sociability or social...
What is impression formation? How does it contribute to sociability or social...
 
Theories of personality
Theories of personalityTheories of personality
Theories of personality
 
Conformity
ConformityConformity
Conformity
 
Learning theory explanation of attachment
Learning theory explanation of attachmentLearning theory explanation of attachment
Learning theory explanation of attachment
 
Obedience
ObedienceObedience
Obedience
 

Viewers also liked

Asch Conformity Social Psychology AS
Asch Conformity Social Psychology ASAsch Conformity Social Psychology AS
Asch Conformity Social Psychology ASJill Jan
 
Conformity types explanations exam question practice
Conformity types explanations exam question practiceConformity types explanations exam question practice
Conformity types explanations exam question practicempape
 
Mod 3 milgram (1963)
Mod 3 milgram (1963)Mod 3 milgram (1963)
Mod 3 milgram (1963)mpape
 
Stanford Prison Study
Stanford Prison StudyStanford Prison Study
Stanford Prison Studympape
 
Mod 3 minority influence
Mod 3 minority influenceMod 3 minority influence
Mod 3 minority influencempape
 
Social influence intro asch & sherif
Social influence intro   asch & sherifSocial influence intro   asch & sherif
Social influence intro asch & sherifsssfcpsychology
 

Viewers also liked (6)

Asch Conformity Social Psychology AS
Asch Conformity Social Psychology ASAsch Conformity Social Psychology AS
Asch Conformity Social Psychology AS
 
Conformity types explanations exam question practice
Conformity types explanations exam question practiceConformity types explanations exam question practice
Conformity types explanations exam question practice
 
Mod 3 milgram (1963)
Mod 3 milgram (1963)Mod 3 milgram (1963)
Mod 3 milgram (1963)
 
Stanford Prison Study
Stanford Prison StudyStanford Prison Study
Stanford Prison Study
 
Mod 3 minority influence
Mod 3 minority influenceMod 3 minority influence
Mod 3 minority influence
 
Social influence intro asch & sherif
Social influence intro   asch & sherifSocial influence intro   asch & sherif
Social influence intro asch & sherif
 

Similar to Asch's conformity research extensions under 40 characters

Unit I Conformity.pptx
Unit I Conformity.pptxUnit I Conformity.pptx
Unit I Conformity.pptxDeepa Pandey
 
Top schools in gudgaon
Top schools in gudgaonTop schools in gudgaon
Top schools in gudgaonEdhole.com
 
Conformity Topic In Social Psychology.pptx
Conformity Topic In Social Psychology.pptxConformity Topic In Social Psychology.pptx
Conformity Topic In Social Psychology.pptxNurVural3
 
03 evaluating research examining conformity pp
03 evaluating research examining conformity pp03 evaluating research examining conformity pp
03 evaluating research examining conformity ppjosephsparks
 
Hypothesis On Conformity
Hypothesis On ConformityHypothesis On Conformity
Hypothesis On ConformityJessica Tanner
 
PSYA2 - Social
PSYA2 - Social PSYA2 - Social
PSYA2 - Social Nicky Burt
 
Social psych revision pack
Social psych revision packSocial psych revision pack
Social psych revision packMoses Lutta
 
Lesson 2 conformity
Lesson 2   conformityLesson 2   conformity
Lesson 2 conformitygbaptie
 
AQA AS Psychology Unit 1 SOCIAL INFLUENCE
AQA AS Psychology Unit 1 SOCIAL INFLUENCEAQA AS Psychology Unit 1 SOCIAL INFLUENCE
AQA AS Psychology Unit 1 SOCIAL INFLUENCEvpaiton
 
Social psychology
Social psychologySocial psychology
Social psychologybethieboo8
 
chapter 13-social-influences-psychology-4e-by-saul-kassin (1)
 chapter 13-social-influences-psychology-4e-by-saul-kassin (1) chapter 13-social-influences-psychology-4e-by-saul-kassin (1)
chapter 13-social-influences-psychology-4e-by-saul-kassin (1)Ariel. Christopher, BSW
 
Digital VisionThinkstockLearning Objectives By the en.docx
Digital VisionThinkstockLearning Objectives By the en.docxDigital VisionThinkstockLearning Objectives By the en.docx
Digital VisionThinkstockLearning Objectives By the en.docxjakeomoore75037
 

Similar to Asch's conformity research extensions under 40 characters (14)

Unit I Conformity.pptx
Unit I Conformity.pptxUnit I Conformity.pptx
Unit I Conformity.pptx
 
Top schools in gudgaon
Top schools in gudgaonTop schools in gudgaon
Top schools in gudgaon
 
Conformity Topic In Social Psychology.pptx
Conformity Topic In Social Psychology.pptxConformity Topic In Social Psychology.pptx
Conformity Topic In Social Psychology.pptx
 
03 evaluating research examining conformity pp
03 evaluating research examining conformity pp03 evaluating research examining conformity pp
03 evaluating research examining conformity pp
 
Hypothesis On Conformity
Hypothesis On ConformityHypothesis On Conformity
Hypothesis On Conformity
 
PSYA2 - Social
PSYA2 - Social PSYA2 - Social
PSYA2 - Social
 
Social psych revision pack
Social psych revision packSocial psych revision pack
Social psych revision pack
 
Lesson 2 conformity
Lesson 2   conformityLesson 2   conformity
Lesson 2 conformity
 
AQA AS Psychology Unit 1 SOCIAL INFLUENCE
AQA AS Psychology Unit 1 SOCIAL INFLUENCEAQA AS Psychology Unit 1 SOCIAL INFLUENCE
AQA AS Psychology Unit 1 SOCIAL INFLUENCE
 
Group Pressure & Obedience to Authority
Group Pressure & Obedience to AuthorityGroup Pressure & Obedience to Authority
Group Pressure & Obedience to Authority
 
Social psychology
Social psychologySocial psychology
Social psychology
 
Ashleigh Vogle REU
Ashleigh Vogle REUAshleigh Vogle REU
Ashleigh Vogle REU
 
chapter 13-social-influences-psychology-4e-by-saul-kassin (1)
 chapter 13-social-influences-psychology-4e-by-saul-kassin (1) chapter 13-social-influences-psychology-4e-by-saul-kassin (1)
chapter 13-social-influences-psychology-4e-by-saul-kassin (1)
 
Digital VisionThinkstockLearning Objectives By the en.docx
Digital VisionThinkstockLearning Objectives By the en.docxDigital VisionThinkstockLearning Objectives By the en.docx
Digital VisionThinkstockLearning Objectives By the en.docx
 

Asch's conformity research extensions under 40 characters

  • 1. Extensions to Asch’s research Since the original study Asch has run a number of variations of his study to find out the circumstances under which people will conform or will not conform to a majority.
  • 2. Factors that INCREASE conformity 1. The nature of the task – when the task was made more difficult the conformity levels increased (as in Crutchfield’s study) 2. Majority of 3 people – when the majority consisted of 3 people he found optimum conformity effects (32%). Increasing the size beyond 3 did not increase the level of conformity found.
  • 3. Factors that DECREASED conformity levels 1. Majority of only two people - conformity responses in the p’s dropped to 12.8% of their total judgements when the majority consisted of only 2 people. 2. A non-unanimous majority (not everyone agreed with the majority) – conformity levels dropped to 5% when one participant dissented from the majority and supported the naïve participant
  • 5. Aim  Crutchfield wanted to establish whether other people need to be physically present for conformity to occur, or if the belief that others are carrying out the same task is all that is necessary.
  • 6. Procedure  More than 600 participants were tested  P’s included American college students and military personnel  They were tested for conformity on a range of tasks, including clearly incorrect factual statements and personal opinions ◦ Task 1 – Asch style task ◦ Task 2 – Do you agree that a star has a larger surface area than a circle? (it was in fact a third smaller) HARDER TASK ◦ Task 3 – Do you agree with the statement – ‘I doubt I would make an effective leader’ TASK THAT INVOLVED OPINION  participants worked in booths on their own, so were not directly exposed to other participants.  They were asked to indicate agreement or disagreement by means of switches which would turn on lights.  They were told that the lights on the display panel showed the responses by the other participants. In fact the experimenter controlled these lights and each participants saw an identical display.
  • 7. Findings  The level of conformity varied with the nature of the task.  There was 46% conformity to Task 2 - agreement that a star had a larger surface area than a circle  30% conformity to Task 1- Asch-type task [supporting evidence for Asch’s study]  37% agreed with Task 3 ‘I doubt that I would make an effective leader’’….none of whom did so when asked on their own.
  • 8. Conclusions  He extended Asch's work by demonstrating conformity not only in factual judgments, but also opinions.  When the task was made more difficult conformity levels increased.
  • 9. Evaluation  Ethics – what ethical guidelines were broken and how were they broken?  This study can be criticised for lacking ecological validity. This was because ………  The study showed that Asch’s findings were reliable because …….
  • 10. Other factors affecting conformity 1. The importance of time  Perin and Spencer (1981) argued that Asch’s classic conformity study reflected the social and historical aspects of 1950s America where pressure to conform was strong  Perin and Spencer replicated Asch’s task 25 years later in 1981  33 male students were used – they found only one conforming response in 396 trials. This shows that conformity was much lower in the 1980s than Asch had originally found in the 1950s
  • 11. 2. The importance of culture  Smith and Bond (1998) reviewed 31 studies of conformity conducted in different cultures using Asch’s procedure.  They concluded that people living in non-western cultures (family and community are seen as being really important) show higher levels of conformity than those who live in Western cultures (where individuality is preferred).