Participants in an experiment give wrong answers on an obvious line-judgment task when confederates unanimously answer incorrectly. When later allowed to respond privately (anonymously), conformity drops to near zero. This pattern is most consistent with:
AInformational influence — participants were uncertain about the correct answer
BNormative influence — conformity depended on social visibility rather than genuine uncertainty
CBoth mechanisms equally, since conformity occurred in the public condition
DNeither mechanism, since the task was objectively unambiguous
The diagnostic signature of normative influence is that it depends on public compliance: people go along to avoid social disapproval but privately maintain their own views. When the social audience is removed (private responses), conformity disappears — no genuine belief change occurred. This matches Asch's line experiments exactly. Informational influence would show the opposite: private beliefs would also change and persist after group exposure, as in Sherif's autokinetic studies. Option A is wrong because the task was unambiguous — there was no genuine uncertainty to drive informational influence.
Question 2 Multiple Choice
In Sherif's autokinetic effect studies, individuals in groups converged on shared estimates of light movement, and later maintained the group norm when tested alone. This demonstrates:
ANormative influence — participants remembered the group answer and repeated it to seem consistent
BInformational influence — participants genuinely used others' judgments as evidence about an ambiguous reality
CNormative influence — participants feared social rejection even when alone
DNeither type — convergence on an illusion task does not constitute social influence
The autokinetic effect produces no objectively correct answer — the light appears to move, but the amount is genuinely ambiguous. Under uncertainty, people rationally treat others' judgments as evidence about reality. When estimates persist in private testing, it shows participants actually updated their beliefs, not just their public reports — this is internalization driven by informational influence. Option A misidentifies the mechanism: normative influence produces compliance that disappears in private (as Asch's conditions showed), not private belief persistence.
Question 3 True / False
Informational influence is more likely to produce lasting private belief change than normative influence.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: True
Normative influence works through social cost: you comply publicly to avoid rejection, but your private belief is unchanged. Remove the social audience and compliance disappears. Informational influence works through epistemic updating: you treat others as evidence when uncertain, and once you've updated your belief, it persists whether or not anyone is watching. This difference has direct applied consequences — behavior change sustained only by normative pressure will evaporate when the social context changes, while internalized change driven by informational influence is durable.
Question 4 True / False
In Asch's line-judgment experiments, participants conformed because they were genuinely uncertain about which line matched the standard.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: False
Asch's stimuli were deliberately unambiguous — the correct answer was obvious to anyone looking. Participants conformed not because of uncertainty but to avoid standing out from a unanimous group (normative influence). Evidence: conformity dropped dramatically when participants answered privately, or when a single confederate gave the correct answer, breaking unanimity. Sherif's autokinetic studies — not Asch's — used genuinely ambiguous stimuli where informational influence drives convergence.
Question 5 Short Answer
What distinguishes normative from informational influence, and how can you tell which mechanism is driving conformity in a given situation?
Think about your answer, then reveal below.
Model answer: Normative influence is driven by the desire to be accepted and avoid social rejection — people conform publicly while privately disagreeing. Informational influence is driven by genuine uncertainty — people use others' judgments as evidence about reality and actually update their private beliefs. The key diagnostic is the public/private distinction: if conformity disappears when responses are anonymous, normative influence is operating (compliance without conversion). If private beliefs also change and persist after the group is gone, informational influence has produced internalization. Stimulus ambiguity and stakes for social acceptance predict which mechanism dominates in a given situation.
A secondary diagnostic: normative influence tends to operate when the right answer is knowable but costly to assert; informational influence operates when the right answer is genuinely unclear. In practice both can co-occur, but the public-vs-private test is the cleanest empirical separator.