Asch & Variables Affecting Conformity (AQA A-Level Psychology): Revision Notes
Asch & Variables Affecting Conformity
Conformity refers to changing your behaviour or beliefs to match those of a group, even when you privately disagree. Solomon Asch conducted groundbreaking research in the 1950s to understand when and why people conform to group pressure.
Asch's research was revolutionary because it was one of the first controlled studies to measure conformity in laboratory conditions, providing quantitative data on how social pressure influences individual behaviour.
Asch's study
Participants: 123 male American undergraduates arranged in groups of six people. Each group contained only one genuine participant, whilst the other five were confederates (actors working with the researcher).
Aim: To investigate how individuals respond to majority influence and whether they would conform to an obviously incorrect group response.
Procedure:
- Participants viewed sets of four lines - three comparison lines and one standard line
- They had to identify which comparison line matched the length of the standard line
- The task was deliberately straightforward with an obvious correct answer
- The real participant always answered either last or second-to-last
- Confederates gave identical incorrect answers on 12 out of 18 trials
- Asch observed how frequently the genuine participant would give the same wrong answer as the majority
Findings:
- 36.8% of participants conformed to the incorrect majority response
- 25% never conformed at all
- 75% conformed at least once during the experiment
- In control conditions (without confederates), only 1% of responses were incorrect, demonstrating the task was genuinely easy
This study revealed that social pressure can influence people to give answers they know are wrong, highlighting the powerful effect of majority influence on individual judgement.
Variables affecting conformity
Asch conducted variations of his original study to identify which factors increase or decrease conformity rates.
Size of majority/Group size
Key finding: Conformity increases with group size, but only up to a certain point.
When confederates numbered fewer than three, conformity levels were relatively low. However, when the group size increased to three or more confederates, conformity rose by approximately 30%. Interestingly, groups larger than four people did not produce significantly higher conformity rates, suggesting an optimal group size exists.
Explanation: People are more likely to doubt their own judgement when faced with multiple people giving the same answer. However, once a certain threshold is reached, additional group members provide diminishing returns in terms of social pressure.
This demonstrates that whilst majority influence is powerful, an overwhelming majority is not always necessary to produce conformity. The relationship between group size and conformity follows a curve rather than a straight line.
Unanimity of majority
Key finding: Breaking the group's unanimity dramatically reduces conformity.
When Asch introduced a dissenting confederate who gave the correct answer, conformity dropped from 32% to 5.5%. Even when the dissenter gave a different incorrect answer, conformity still fell from 32% to 9%.
Explanation: Unanimity creates powerful social pressure because it suggests everyone else shares the same perception. When even one person breaks this consensus, it provides social support for the participant and reduces the normative pressure to conform. The dissenter doesn't need to be correct - simply breaking unanimity is enough to give people confidence to trust their own judgement.
This finding supports normative social influence - the desire to be accepted by the group and avoid standing out as different. Even one ally can provide enough support to resist group pressure.
Task difficulty
Key finding: Conformity increases when tasks become more difficult or ambiguous.
When Asch made the line-matching task more challenging by making the lines more similar in length, conformity rates increased substantially.
Explanation: When we're uncertain about the correct answer, we naturally look to others for guidance. This reflects informational social influence - conforming because we believe others possess superior knowledge or insight. In ambiguous situations, people assume the majority is more likely to be correct and adjust their responses accordingly.
This variable demonstrates that conformity serves different psychological functions depending on the situation - sometimes we conform to fit in (normative influence), and sometimes we conform because we genuinely believe others know better (informational influence).
Evaluation
Strengths
High internal validity: Asch maintained strict experimental control by standardising the procedure, controlling timing, and using the same type of task throughout. Participants completed the task alone first to establish they actually knew the correct answers, eliminating the possibility that conformity resulted from genuine confusion about the right response.
Laboratory control: The controlled environment allowed precise manipulation of variables and elimination of confounding factors. This makes the study replicable, and successful replications increase confidence in the reliability of the findings.
Ethical considerations addressed: Although participants were deceived about the study's true purpose, they were debriefed afterwards. The deception was necessary to obtain valid results, and a cost-benefit analysis suggests the psychological insights gained justify the temporary deception involved.
Supports normative social influence: Participants reported conforming to avoid standing out from the group, providing evidence for the theory that people conform to gain social acceptance even when privately disagreeing.
Weaknesses
Limited ecological validity: The line-judging task bears little resemblance to real-world conformity situations. In everyday life, conformity typically involves complex social situations with multiple variables at play, not simple perceptual judgements with clear right and wrong answers.
Population validity concerns: The sample consisted exclusively of American male undergraduates, limiting generalisability. The findings may not apply to women, different age groups, or people from other cultural backgrounds. This represents a significant sampling bias that affects the broader applicability of the results.
Temporal validity issues: The study was conducted during the 1950s in America, a period characterised by strong social pressures to conform (the McCarthyist era). This historical context may have inflated conformity rates, suggesting the findings might not apply to contemporary society where individualism is more valued.
Ethical concerns: Despite debriefing, participants experienced deception and potential embarrassment when they discovered the true nature of the study. Some may have felt foolish for conforming to obviously wrong answers, causing psychological discomfort that raises questions about the ethical cost-benefit ratio.
Key Points to Remember:
- Asch's study demonstrated that 36.8% of people will conform to an obviously incorrect majority, showing the significant impact of social pressure
- Group size affects conformity up to about 3-4 people, after which additional members provide little extra influence
- Breaking unanimity is crucial - even one dissenter can reduce conformity from 32% to 5.5%
- Task difficulty increases conformity as people rely more heavily on others when uncertain (informational social influence)
- Evaluation reveals high internal validity but questions about ecological validity and generalisability to modern, diverse populations