This video explains the Asch Conformity Experiment, which investigates how social pressure influences individual behavior. It details the experiment's setup, the participants' task, and the findings regarding conformity rates and the reasons behind them, distinguishing between informational and normative conformity.
Here's a response structured to address your class assignment, using the information from the video and focusing on the rubric points provided:
Written Response
Solomon Asch's conformity experiment, while groundbreaking, presents several limitations and considerations when evaluated with modern research standards.
Sampling & Generalizability: The use of predominantly male college students in the 1950s significantly restricts the generalizability of Asch's findings. This narrow sample may not accurately represent the conformity behaviors of women, individuals from different age groups, or those outside of a Western, academic context. Cultural norms, particularly collectivist versus individualist societies, can profoundly influence conformity, suggesting that findings from a 1950s American student sample may not apply universally or even in contemporary American society.
Experimental Design: Asch's use of a controlled laboratory setting with confederates had strengths in establishing high internal validity. This design allowed him to isolate the variable of group pressure and minimize confounding factors, making it more likely that the observed conformity was indeed due to the experimental manipulation. However, this artificial environment significantly compromises ecological validity. The situation was highly contrived, and participants were aware they were in an experiment, which likely influenced their behavior in ways that wouldn't occur in natural social settings. The pre-determined answers of confederates, while controlling the group's influence, also create an artificial dynamic that might not reflect real-world group interactions where opinions can evolve more organically.
Ethical Considerations: Deception was central to Asch's experiment, as participants were led to believe they were part of a perceptual study, not one on conformity. Asch might have justified this by arguing that revealing the true purpose beforehand would have invalidated the results, preventing genuine conformity from being observed (a necessity for studying the phenomenon itself). However, modern Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) would likely scrutinize this study rigorously. The potential for psychological distress caused by inducing conformity and the lack of full informed consent would be major concerns. While debriefing would be crucial, the initial deception and potential for participants to feel foolish or manipulated would still raise significant ethical flags, possibly requiring stricter controls or alternative designs.
Measurement & Data Collection: Measuring conformity solely by the number of times participants gave incorrect answers is a quantitative measure but might be an oversimplification. This operational definition captures compliance, but it doesn't fully encompass the subjective experience or the underlying reasons for conforming. As the video explains, participants conformed for different reasons – some genuinely changed their perception, while others conformed to avoid social friction. Simply counting incorrect answers doesn't differentiate between these motivations, potentially limiting the depth of understanding of the "concept of conformity."
Replication & Reliability: The replicability of Asch's findings today is questionable and likely lower than in his original context. Social norms have evolved, and there may be a greater awareness of conformity research, potentially leading participants to either resist or exaggerate conformity. Cultural shifts also play a role; in some societies, conformity might be more accepted or even valued, while in others, independence might be emphasized more strongly. This variability suggests that while the basic phenomenon of conformity may be reliable, its expression and magnitude are context-dependent, indicating that psychological experiments' reliability can be influenced by the time period, cultural milieu, and prevailing social norms.
