The results of this were Sheriff found that over numerous estimates of the movement of light, the group converged to a common estimate. The participant’s estimates of movement were greatly different to the other two in the group compared to the view of the other two. Sherif said that this showed that people would always tend to conform. Rather than make individual judgements they tend to come to a group agreement.
Sherif concluded that the results show that when in an ambiguous situation, a person will look to others who know more or better than them for guidance. They want to do the appropriate thing but may lack the appropriate information. Observing others can provide this information which therefore shows informational influence. The participants were therefore likely to internalise the views of the group.
Strength of Sherif’s study was it is a lab experiment. This means all variables can be controlled and any extraneous variables can be isolated from the study. In turn this creates a causal relationship where any effect on the DV is only due to the IV increasing the study’s internal Validity.
Sherif’s study may lack cross cultural validity as the research was carried out in an individualistic culture, the USA, meaning the findings of the study may not be generalisable to the wider population decreasing the studies external validity.
Another study done into conformity can be demonstrated by Asch’s Line Judgment Experiment. Asch used a lab experiment to study conformity. He used a technique called the line judgement task. Asch placed a pp in a room with 7 confederates. Each of these confederates was actors and agreed before the experiment to agree on the same incorrect response to the questions, the real participant did not o this was occurring. Each person in the room had to state aloud which comparison line A, B or C was most like the target line. The answer to all the questions was always really obvious and the pp sat at the end of the row of confederates and gave his or her answer last. In some trials the seven confederates gave the wrong answer. There were 18 trails in total and the confederates gave the wrong answer on 12 of the 18 trails. The idea behind this was Asch was interested to see if the pp would conform to the majority view. Overall 50 pp’s were tested.
The results shown that the number of times each pp conformed to the majority view on average was around 32%, one third of pps. 74% conformed at least once and 26% of pps never conformed once. 4 people conformed 10 times or more. This shows that when placed under a majority influence people conform to get the approval of the overruling majority.
Asch’s study was a lab experiment so therefore it was high in control and any extraneous variables could be isolated from the study. In turn this mean that a causal relationship was created meaning any effect on the DV was only due to a change in the IV, increasing the studies internal validity.
Also Asch’s work maybe unethical because he placed his participants in a situation where they would have felt very uncomfortable as they could think they have something wrong with them. This is because he created a situation where pps felt pressure to go against their own judgments and answer incorrectly to an obvious question all in a public setting. This therefore means that Asch failed to protect his participants.
Asch’s study may lack cross cultural validity as the research was carried out in an individualistic culture, the USA, meaning the findings of the study may not be generalisable to the wider population decreasing the studies external validity.
