Shannon Rufus

1. Compliance (Kelman, 1958)#

• Publicly conforming but privately disagreeing
• Shallow, temporary change
• Superficial compliance to avoid rejection/gain approval

1
Outside: "I agree with you!" (publicly)
2
Inside: "Actually, I think you're wrong" (private)

Example: Laughing at boss’s bad joke because you want to be liked

2. Identification (Kelman, 1958)#

• Publicly and privately changing to be like group
• Temporary - lasts while member of group
• Wanting to belong to group

Example: Supporting a football team because all your friends do

3. Internalisation (Kelman, 1958)#

• Deep, permanent change
• Public and private beliefs both change
• Accepts group’s views as own genuine belief

1
Outside: "I agree with you!" (publicly)
2
Inside: "You're right, I've changed my mind" (private - genuine)

Example: Converting to a religion after studying it deeply

TIP

Think of it as: Compliance (fake it), Identification (fit in), Internalisation (become it)

Normative Social Influence (NSI)#

Desire to be liked and accepted

• We conform to avoid social rejection
• Fear of disapproval
• Want to belong to group
• Explains compliance (superficial conformity)

1
          Everyone else does X
2
                    ↓
3
         "If I don't do X, they'll reject me!"
4
                    ↓
5
               I do X (but don't really believe it)

Evidence: Asch (1951, 1955) - participants conformed even though they knew the answer was wrong, showing NSI

Informational Social Influence (ISI)#

Desire to be right

• We look to others for guidance in ambiguous situations
• We assume others know more than us
• Internalisation occurs because we genuinely believe they’re right
• More likely when:
  • Situation is unclear/ambiguous
  • It’s a crisis (emergency)
  • We believe others are experts

1
      Ambiguous situation: "What should I do?"
2
                    ↓
3
          "Everyone else is doing X"
4
                    ↓
5
         "They must know something I don't!"
6
                    ↓
7
               I do X (and believe it's right)

Evidence: Sherif (1935) - Autokinetic effect (stationary light appears to move due to eye movements)

Sherif’s Study:

• Participants asked how far light moved (it wasn’t actually moving!)
• Alone: Estimates varied widely (2-8 inches)
• In groups: Converged on common estimate
• Internalisation - they genuinely believed the group estimate

Asch (1951, 1955) - Line Judgment Task#

Aim: To investigate the extent to which social pressure from a majority group could influence a person to conform

Procedure:

• 123 American male participants
• Shown two cards:
  • Card 1: One standard line
  • Card 2: Three comparison lines (A, B, C)
• Task: Match standard line to comparison line
• Easy task - obvious answer
• Naive participant sat with 6-8 confederates
• Confederates gave wrong answers on 12/18 trials

1
Card 1:         Card 2:
2
   ┃              A ┃
3
   ┃              ┃
4
   ┃            B ┃
5
   ┃              ┃
6
   ┃            C ┃
7
   ┃              ┃
8
 Standard    Which matches?

Findings:

• 36.8% conformity rate overall
• 25% never conformed
• 75% conformed at least once
• When one confederate gave correct answer → conformity dropped to 5%

1
Conformity rates:
2
╔════════════════════════════════════════╗
3
║ Condition                Conformity %  ║
4
╠════════════════════════════════════════╣
5
║ All confederates wrong    36.8%        ║
6
║ One confederate correct  5.3%         ║
7
║ One confederate dissenter 10.4%       ║
8
║ Participant writes answer 11.8%       ║
9
╚════════════════════════════════════════╝

Conclusions:

• People conform even in obvious situations
• Group size matters - but only up to a point (3-4 confederates)
• Unanimity is important - one dissenter reduces conformity
• Task difficulty affects conformity rates

Factors Affecting Conformity (Asch variations)#

1. Agentic State (Milgram)#

Agentic state = feeling of not being responsible for own actions

• Autonomous state: Normal state - responsible for own actions
• Agentic state: Sees self as agent executing authority’s wishes
• Moral strain - but obeys anyway
• Shifts responsibility from self to authority

1
                    Autonomous                    Agentic
2
                       State                       State
3
                     ┌────────┐                 ┌────────┐
4
                     │  Self  │                 │ Agent  │
5
    Responsibility   │   ↓    │    Authority    │   ↓    │
6
                     │    │   │      order      │    │   │
7
                     │  [●]   │    ────────→    │  [●]   │
8
                     └────────┘                 └────────┘

2. Legitimacy of Authority#

We obey authority because:

• Socialised from childhood to obey (parents, teachers)
• Authority has legitimate power (expertise, position)
• Authority appears trustworthy
• Institution gives authority (Yale University)

Legitimate authority figures:

• Police officers
• Doctors
• Teachers
• Judges

3. Gradual Commitment (Foot-in-the-door)#

• Start with small requests (15V shocks)
• Gradually escalate commitment
• Person feels obliged to continue
• Harder to refuse after agreeing

1
15V ✓ → 30V ✓ → 45V ✓ → ... → 450V ✓
2
"Sure"  "OK"   "Fine"            "I've come this far..."