The Effect of Group Pressure on an Individual To Conform

Jordan Childs, Sarah Medved, Zach Brill, Dana Robertson

Portland State University, Ways of Knowing
November 12, 2014
Abstract
Our team is motivated to see how much peer pressure affects a person to conform to the
majority of the group. This project will give us results to see if people are confident enough to
stand against the social norm or if they will conform under social pressure to fit in. This
experiment is based off the Asch Conformity Experiment. To conduct this experiment we asked
random individuals from campus to participate in a vision test and take them to a group with our
controlled actors. We presented the group with a series of obvious questions to answer aloud in
specific order, one at a time. The test consisted of three lines. In a set of lines we asked the
individuals to determine which line matched, was the shortest and the longest. In the first three
questions the actors answered correctly, then from the fourth question onward answered
incorrectly to see if the test subject would give an obviously incorrect answer because of
perceived pressure to conform with the group. Group pressure did have some effect on subjects
answers and their tendency to conform. We are 95% confident that 14-36% of subjects will
conform to the group. However with a 0.24 p-value we cannot say that our p-value supports our
hypothesis. If we were to conduct this test again we would most likely approach a younger
audience, have a larger sample size and be very precise with the directions for the test.

Introduction

Conformity is when an individual is affected by social influence, causing them to change

a certain belief, or a behavior so they can fit in with the group. It is likely that everyone can
recall a time that they were fully aware of themselves conforming under the pressure of their
peers. Research has isolated four different types of conformity; Normative, Informational,
Compliance, and Ingratiational. Normative conformity is where an individual changes their
answer because they want to fit-in, and that they are scared of rejection. Informational
conformity is when one lacks knowledge, so they just go with what the group says, accepting the
groups view, and begins to believe what they say. Compliance conformity is when someone
changes their overall behavior to fit in with a group, even though they secretly disagree.
Ingratiational conformity is when someone changes their behavior or beliefs only to impress or
gain the favor of the group. In 1935 Muzafer Sherif conducted an Informational conformity
experiment. He called it the Autokinetic Effect, where he put subjects in a dark room, with a
light portrayed on a screen. The light seemed to move, and he would ask the subjects
individually how far the light moved (normally 4-6 inches). Then he would put three subjects in
a room, grouping two out of the three who has the closest answer, making them say their answer
aloud first, attempting to get the third subject to change their original answer. As a result, the
majority of the subjects ended up changing their answer due to their uncertainty or what the real
answer should be (Saul McLead, Jan 1, 2008).
There have been many experiments to test conformity on subjects in order to see how it
affects the decisions they make. In 1932, the psychologist Jennesse tested conformity by putting
a glass bottle filled with beans in the middle of the table and asked subjects, individually to
estimate how many beans were in the bottle. After they all had made their guesses, he put all of
the subjects in a room, together to talk it out. After discussion, they were asked to re-estimate the

amount of beans in the glass. When they were interviewed, the majority of them has changed
their original answers.
There have also been conformity studies with animals. The research was done on Ververt
Monkeys by Dr. Erica van de Waal, Professor Andrew Whiten and Christele Borgeaud. It
entailed studying Ververt Monkeys in South Africa, to see if group peer pressure would affect
how an individual monkey would act if his group dynamic changed over migration. The study
entailed that the scientists were studying 109 Ververt Monkeys that were divided into two
groups. Then the two groups were both provided with two boxes of maize corn. One box was
dyed pink, while the other box was dyed blue. The blue group was given good tasting blue
corn and bad tasting pink corn. The pink group was given good tasting pink corn and bad
tasting blue corn.
The original design of this study was to observe in infant monkeys would follow in their
mothers footsteps and eat the same food that they did. The infant monkeys in both groups were
given the two boxes of the corn and neither of them had a foul taste. The infant monkeys
followed the example given by their mother. If their mother ate the pink corn, then the infant
would also and vice versa. However this experiment gets even more interesting when ten males
in this study decide to migrate around during the mating season. If one male was used to eating
the pink corn, but he migrated to another group that ate blue corn he would succumb to peer
pressure and eat the blue corn. Out of the ten male monkeys, nine of them fell victim to peer
pressure. The only monkey that refused to do so was the Alpha male who felt that he did not
need to impress the other group of monkeys. This validates if a monkey is exposed to a change in
its group dynamics it will cave to peer pressure so it will be accepted. The strive for conformity

is not only something that humans search for, but it is also what other creatures are searching for.
To fit in, in order to survive is what the researchers documented in studying these primates.
Another more recent experiment by Toke Reinholt Fosgaard, Lars Gaarn Hansen, and
Marco Piovesan investigates the effect of peer pressure on cheating. The experimenters tested
whether students are more likely to cheat when they observe that their peers have cheated. In the
experiment, subjects tossed a coin in private and recorded the outcome (black or white). Only
white coin tosses were rewarded, the reward being an equivalent to $2 USD. By manipulating
the previous recordings on the sheet that the subjects recorded their results, the experimenters
suggested whether cheating was or was not an option and whether or not the subjects peers that
performed the test before them had cheated. This was achieved by either handwriting the
previous results on the report sheet used by the subjects, or printing them. When the results were
handwritten, it is likely that the subjects thought that the results were from classmates that went
immediately before them. Some of the results showed that the previous students recorded 10
white coin flips, while some showed a recording of five. When 10 white coin flips were shown
as a previous recording, the idea of cheating was presented as a viable option, since it can be
assumed that 10 of the same coin flips in a row is so statistically unlikely that cheating can be
assumed. It was found that increasing awareness of cheating as an option significantly increases
the chance that women cheat whereas men are not affected. When it is suggested that their peers
have cheated, men are significantly more likely to cheat, whereas women are not.
The most popular conformity test to date was conducted by Solomon Asch, in 1951 (Saul
McLead, 2008). He wanted to test social pressure, so he had 50 male students from Swarthmore
college and asked them to take part in a vision test (which it was not an actual vision test),
using different lengths of lines and made groups of eight. Seven of the eight were informed about

the experiment while one of the subjects were blindly tested. The blind subjects would sit on the
end of the table, having all seven subjects answer an obviously wrong answer - waiting to see if
the last subject would continue to answer correctly, or change their answer to fit in with the
group. On average 32% fully conformed, 75% at least once, 25% never conformed. When
subjects were tested with no peer pressure, less than 1% gave wrong answers (Saul McLead,
2007). When the subjects were interviewed, the majority of them gave the same response, that
they wanted to fit in, and believed that the group was more informed than them. In 1952 he
changed the experiment giving it a wider range of options. He made the groups bigger and
included woman (this increased the amount of conformity).
Through studies, it is shown that conformity happens most when working in large groups,
even small things such as take a vote for a certain answer. They tested this by asking an
individual what they thought, then put them all in a group to take a vote, and they changed their
answer to match the groups main vote. The group members spoke, saying they would rather not
have anybody in the group being conformed, yet the individual said they would rather just go
along with the groups vote anyways (James, K., & Zollman, S, Aug 2008). Conformity happens
daily, and it is important aspect of society. In our conformity experiment, Our hypothesis was
that subjects would answer significantly more survey questions incorrectly in conformance with
their peers.
Methods
To conduct this experiment we first asked random individuals from campus to participate in a
vision test and take them to a group with our controlled actors. We gave the group a series of
obvious questions to answer one at a time out loud. The test consisted of three lines. In a set of
lines we asked the individuals to determine which line matched, which was the shortest, and

which was the longest. We had ten slides containing questions, disguised as a vision test. There
were three actors who were informed of the experiment and were instructed to answer the first
three questions correct, and from the fourth question onward, give a unanimous and incorrect
answer to see if the test subject would begin to conform with the group and get them wrong as
well. Peer pressure would be the explanatory variable because it is independent explaining why
people will conform. The response variable would be conformity to the peer pressure and to
measure these we will see how many questions it will take for them to conform to the group. At
the end of the vision test we asked the individuals a series of questions to get feedback and
information on what we could do to improve the test. The survey was not used for any of our
actual data.
Results
Sample

Mean

Median

Mode

Control

15

N/A

Test Subjects

15

0.25

0.25

N/A

Table 1. The mean, median, and mode of the control and test subjects were calculated by how
many questions they conformed to out of 10. An example would be, if a test subject conformed
twice out of 10, their result would be 0.2.
Minimum

Maximum

Lower
Quartile

Median

Upper
Quartile

Control

0.10

Test
Subjects

0.40

0.10

0.20

Table 2. The 5 number summary of the control and test subjects.

Standard Deviation

Z-Score

Percentile

Control

50%

Test Subjects

0.21

1.18

88%

Table 3. Shows the data of the standard deviation, z-score, and percentile of the control and test
subjects.
Standard Error
of mean

Margin of
Error
68%
Confidence

Margin of
Error
95%
Confidence

Margin of
Error
99%
Confidence

Control

Test Subjects

0.05

0.05

0.11

0.16

Table 4. The table shows the percent confidence of our control and test subjects group.
95% Confidence interval

P-value

14%-36%

0.24

Table 5. The table shows the final confidence interval and p-value.

Figure 1. The histogram groups subjects by frequency of conforming.

Discussion
According to our data, group pressure did have some effect on subjects answers and
their tendency to conform. We are 95% confident that 14-36% of subjects will conform to the
group. However, the results of our study are not statistically significant because we cannot reject
the null hypothesis. The probability that the evidence occurred by chance is 24%, too high to be
considered evidence conclusive.
Reasons for high p-value could be a small sample size and possible errors in our method.
A sample size of 30 allows for any anomalies in the data to have a drastic effect on the standard
error the of mean and therefore create a larger p-value. Many possible methodical errors could
have occurred during testing. At least one subject mentioned that they were suspicious when
presented with the apparent situation in which four subjects (actors) had already agreed to take
part in the test and were waiting for presumably a very long time for another subject to be found.

Any number of social miscues could have affected test results as well. Subtle body language cues
could have created a feeling of group separation between subject and actors. Another methodical
error happened when some of the test subjects did not follow directions given for the test. They
sometimes gave verbal answers out of the given order, and made it impossible for peer pressure
to have any effect because they did not even hear the answers of their peers before giving their
own. Even if the actors answers created doubts, the subjects never changed their answers after
the fact.
Conclusion
Our experiment shows that people do not fully conform under peer pressure, yet it does
have an effect. The subjects did display discomfort and unsureness, but still answered correctly
most of the time. There may have been some factors that affected the results, such as the age
group we chose. We tested with ages around 18-50; too large of a range, and too old of subjects.
Many of them had either heard of the test already, or could catch on quickly as to what was
going on. Along with that, our sample size was quite small, and that affected the results as well.
If we were to conduct this test again we would most likely approach a younger, more
homogenous audience, a larger sample size and be very precise with the directions for the test.
References
Cherry, K. (n.d.). The Asch Experiments: Why Do We Feel the Need to Conform?

James, K., & Zollman, S. (2008, August). Social structure and the effects of conformity.
McLead, S. (2008, January 1). Asch Experiment | Simply Psychology.
McLead, S. (2007, January 1). What is Conformity? | Simply Psychology.
Shuttleworth, M. (n.d.) Asch Experiment.

"University of St Andrews." 2013.

Appendix
Experiment Questions
1.

Which line is the longest?

A. ______________________
B. _______________________
C. ___________________

2.

Which line is the shortest?

A. ___________________
B. ___________________________
C. __________________

3.

Which line does not belong?

A. _______________________
B. _______________________
C. ______________________

4.

Find the line that matches

________________________
A. ____________________
B. ________________________
C. ____________________________

5.

Find the line that matches

_____________
A. _____________________
B. ______________

C. _________
6.

Find the line that does not belong

A. ____________________
B. ____________
C. ____________________

7.

Which line is the shortest?

A. _____________
B. _________________
C. _______________________

8.

Which line is the longest?

A. __________________________
B. ______________________
C. __________________

9.

Out of these lines which one matches the most?

____________________
A. ______________________
B. ____________________
C. __________________

10.

Which of these lines do not match

____________________
A. ____________________
B. ____________________
C. ______________