Conformity in psychology manifests through three distinct types: internalization, identification, and compliance. Each represents different levels of social influence and behavioral change.

When examining informational conformity, individuals change their behavior because they believe others have more accurate information than themselves. This often occurs in ambiguous situations where people seek guidance from others perceived as knowledgeable. For example, in Asch's famous line experiment, participants sometimes conformed because they doubted their own judgment when faced with unanimous group opposition.

Normative conformity occurs when individuals conform to be accepted and avoid rejection by the group. This type of conformity is driven by the basic human need for social approval and acceptance. The power of normative conformity was clearly demonstrated in Asch's study, where 36.8% of participants gave incorrect answers to match the group, despite knowing the right answer.

Definition: Conformity is the tendency to adjust one's attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors to align with those of a group.

Explanations for obedience center around both situational and dispositional factors. The agentic state theory suggests people enter a mental state where they view themselves as instruments of authority's wishes, surrendering personal responsibility.

Situational explanations for obedience focus on environmental factors like proximity to authority, location, and presence of uniforms. Milgram's groundbreaking research demonstrated how these variables significantly impact obedience levels. When authority figures were physically closer, participants showed higher obedience rates.

The dispositional explanation for obedience primarily revolves around the Authoritarian Personality theory. This suggests some individuals are more predisposed to obey authority due to rigid thinking patterns and strict adherence to conventional values.

Highlight: Both situational and personality factors play crucial roles in determining obedience levels.

Minority influence represents how a smaller group can influence the majority's beliefs and behaviors through consistent, committed action. This process, studied extensively by Moscovici, demonstrates that minorities can drive significant social change when they maintain unwavering positions.

Minority influence and social change are intrinsically linked through three key factors: consistency in message, commitment to position, and flexibility in approach. When minorities demonstrate these characteristics, they can successfully challenge majority views and catalyze social transformation.

The effectiveness of minority influence depends largely on the minority's ability to present their position as reasonable and well-thought-out. This often leads to private acceptance rather than mere public compliance, resulting in deeper, more lasting social change.

Example: The civil rights movement exemplifies successful minority influence, where a dedicated minority group achieved substantial social change through consistent, committed action.

Research on conformity has identified several crucial variables that affect social influence processes. Group size plays a significant role, with Asch's research showing that conformity levels plateau after reaching three to four confederates.

Task difficulty represents another key variable - as tasks become more complex or ambiguous, conformity rates typically increase. This relates to informational conformity, where individuals rely more on others' judgments when uncertain about correct responses.

Unanimity within the group significantly impacts conformity levels. When even one dissenter breaks group consensus, conformity rates can drop dramatically. This demonstrates the power of social support in resisting group pressure and maintaining independent judgment.

Vocabulary: Confederate - An actor or research assistant who poses as a participant but works with the experimenter to create specific social situations.

Compliance represents a form of social influence where individuals publicly accept group norms while privately maintaining different beliefs. In psychology, this manifests through three distinct mechanisms: identification, internalization, and basic compliance.

Definition: Compliance occurs when people conform to social pressure while privately disagreeing with the majority view.

When examining identification conformity, individuals temporarily adopt group behaviors both publicly and privately but may abandon these when separated from the group. For instance, a college student might embrace veganism while part of an environmental group but revert to their original diet after graduating. This demonstrates how social influence can create temporary behavioral changes without permanent belief modification.

Informational social influence and normative social influence represent two fundamental processes driving conformity. With informational influence, people conform because they believe others possess correct information, especially in ambiguous situations. This often leads to internalization - a permanent change in beliefs and behaviors.

Example: In a new college environment, students often observe and copy their peers' behaviors, assuming their classmates understand the correct social norms.

Normative social influence operates through people's desire for social acceptance and fear of rejection. This typically results in compliance, where individuals conform publicly while maintaining private disagreement. Research by Asch demonstrated this effect, showing how participants would give incorrect answers to avoid group disapproval.

The Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted by Philip Zimbardo, provides crucial insights into how social roles influence behavior and conformity. This landmark study demonstrated the powerful effect of assigned roles on human behavior and social dynamics.

Highlight: The experiment revealed how quickly ordinary people can conform to extreme social roles, with guards becoming increasingly authoritarian and prisoners showing signs of learned helplessness.

The study's methodology involved creating a mock prison in Stanford University's basement, where 21 psychologically stable male students were randomly assigned roles as either guards or prisoners. Guards received uniforms and symbols of authority, while prisoners were deindividuated through numbered smocks and caps. The dramatic behavioral changes observed led to the study's early termination after just six days.

While the experiment offers valuable insights into social role conformity, it faces criticism regarding ecological validity and ethical considerations. Critics argue that participants may have been acting based on stereotypes rather than genuine role internalization. However, evidence suggests participants did genuinely embrace their roles, with prisoners discussing prison conditions in 90% of their private conversations.

The Milgram obedience experiment represents a pivotal study in understanding explanations for obedience in psychology. This research revealed how ordinary individuals might comply with authority figures even when asked to perform potentially harmful acts.

Vocabulary: Legitimacy of authority refers to the perceived right of an authority figure to make demands and expect compliance.

The experiment's design involved participants acting as "teachers" administering electric shocks to "learners" (actually confederates) under the direction of an authority figure. The study found that 65% of participants were willing to administer maximum voltage shocks despite visible distress.

This research provides crucial insights into situational explanations for obedience, demonstrating how environmental factors and authority presence can override personal moral judgments. However, the study's findings must be considered alongside ethical concerns and questions about ecological validity.

Minority influence represents a fascinating aspect of social psychology where smaller groups can effectively influence majority opinions and behaviors. Moscovici's work on minority influence and social change demonstrates how consistent minorities can create lasting social transformations.

Definition: Minority influence occurs when a smaller group successfully influences the beliefs or behaviors of the larger majority.

Understanding minority influence flexibility is crucial for explaining how social movements succeed. When minorities maintain consistent positions while showing flexibility in their approach, they're more likely to achieve social change. This explains how initially unpopular ideas, like environmental protection or civil rights, eventually gain widespread acceptance.

The relationship between minority influence and social change involves several key factors: consistency in message, commitment to position, and the ability to create cognitive conflict in the majority. Successful minority influence often leads to private acceptance first, followed by public behavior change, contrasting with majority influence patterns.

Situational explanations for obedience play a crucial role in understanding why people follow authority figures. These environmental factors significantly influence human behavior and decision-making in various social contexts.

Proximity stands as a key situational variable affecting obedience. When authority figures maintain close physical presence, individuals are more likely to comply with commands. Research demonstrates that physical distance between the authority figure and the subject dramatically impacts obedience rates. For instance, Milgram's variations showed that when teachers and learners were placed in separate rooms, obedience rates dropped significantly from 65% to 21%.

Definition: Situational variables are environmental factors that influence individual behavior, including proximity, location, and uniformity of authority figures.

Location and institutional context also shape obedience patterns. The prestige associated with a particular setting can enhance or diminish authority's influence. When Milgram's famous experiment was conducted in a run-down office instead of Yale University, obedience rates decreased from 65% to 47.5%, demonstrating how environmental legitimacy affects compliance.

The presence of uniforms and official attire represents another crucial situational factor. Authority figures in professional or official uniforms typically command greater obedience than those in civilian clothes. This phenomenon relates to legitimacy of authority as an explanation for obedience, where visual symbols of authority enhance compliance.

The experimental method in obedience studies provides researchers with valuable control over variables, allowing them to establish clear cause-and-effect relationships. This methodological approach helps isolate the impact of independent variables (IV) such as researcher presence and verbal prompts on dependent variables (DV) like participant compliance.

Highlight: While experimental methods offer strong internal validity, they may sacrifice external validity and generalizability to real-world situations.

However, these studies face important limitations regarding generalizability. Most notably, many classic obedience experiments focused on male participants, creating potential gender bias in our understanding of obedience patterns. This limitation raises questions about the universal applicability of findings across different demographic groups.

Despite concerns about artificial laboratory settings, evidence suggests participants often display genuine psychological and physiological responses during obedience experiments. Observable stress reactions like nervous laughter, sweating, and trembling indicate authentic emotional engagement, lending credibility to the ecological validity of these studies.