Conformity

1
Conformity

• Sherif experiment
• Asch experiment
• Milgram experiment

2
Conformity

• Changing ones behavior due to the real or
  imagined influence of others
• Informational social influence-believe others
  interpretation of an ambiguous situation is more
  accurate than ours

3
Informational Social Influence

• Informational conformity used to produce private
  acceptance
• Publicly announce the percentage of students
  drinking/smoking, etc.

4
Group Pressure to Conform

• Muzafer Sherifs Point of light study
• How far did the light move?
• Average guess was 8.
• Confederates said 1-2. By the 4th day,
  everyones estimates were the same.

5
Solomon Asch the lines

• He showed people lines of different lengths.
• Several people in the room, only 1 truly a
  subject.
• Asked which was longer.
• Alone, they were correct 99 of the time.

6
In groups

• 37 of them would go along with the others giving
  the wrong answer
• Asch that reasonably intelligent well-meaning
  young people were willing to call white black is
  a matter of concern.

7
Aschs experiment elsewhere

• Much the same in Britain Canada
• 31 in Lebanon
• 32 in Hong Kong
• In Germany, Italy, S. Africa, Australia, Spain
  Jordan higher rates.
• In one replication in Munich, 85

8
When do we conform?

• 1. group size. Works best with 4-5 people.
• Maximum benefit5 people.
• 2. Unanimity-all of them seem to be agreeing.
  Even 1 can ruin this.
• 3. Status-you want to be in this group.

9
Note also in Aschs exp

• No reward for conformity
• No punishment for failing to conform
• No friends in group
• Most conformity with a group of 5

10
Later Studies

• Manipulated how important it was to be accurate
  in eye witness identification
• Told it was almost ready to be used in legal
  system
• Or that it was to provide hints for the task
  later on

11
Contagion

• In a truly ambiguous situation, people will rely
  on others interpretations
• Mass psychogenic illness-a group reporting
  similar physical symptoms w/ no known cause

12
Review of Informational Social Influence

• 1. when the situation is ambiguous
• 2. when the situation is a crisis
• 3. when others are experts

13
Normative Social Influence

• The need to be accepted
• Sometimes we conform to be liked
• Public compliance w/ norms but often lacks
  private acceptance

14
Applied Normative S.Influence

• Body preferences are shaped by social influence
• Heavier women were in in the early 1900s
• Extremely thin bust to waist ratio currently
  popular

15
What about personality variables?

• Low-self esteem may make people more likely to
  conform
• In normative conformity, correlates
• Strong need for approval, correlates
• More studies-weak/non-existent relationship

16
Gender

• Women conform more, but it is a slight difference
• Often depends on the type of situation
• Group pressure-women conform more

17
Stanley Milgram

• Obedience to Authority

18
Study viewed as most important

• Because
• 1. contribution to social psychology
• 2. caused review of ethical treatment of human
  subjects

19
Milgram experiment

• Did NOT use college students
• Used community men and women aged 20 to 50
• Shock board ranges from 15 to 450 volts

20
Psychiatrists in advance

• Predicted that 1 person in 1000 would go to the
  end of the board
• Reality 63 did went all the way
• 80 went on even after the learner screamed

21
Did 6 variations of experiment

• 1. Remote condition Learner not seen, only
  heard pounding on the wall at 300 volts
• Compliance 65

22
2. Voice Feedback

• Asks to be let out, says he has a heart condition
• Compliance 63 went to the end of the board

23
3. Proximity-Learner in Room

• In the presence of the subject being shocked
• Compliance 40

24
4. Touch Proximity

• Subjects to force learners hand to hot plate
• Compliance 30

25
5. Subject participating but

• Other person delivered the shocks
• Compliance 93

26
6. Orders given by phone

• Compliance drops to 21
• And some lied, saying they did it but did not

27
What about women as subjects?

• In other research, women more compliant
• But women generally more empathic
• Less aggressive

28
Women were

• Virtually identical in performance
• But experienced more stress doing it
• Other research replicating Milgram agrees with
  this finding

29
The poor puppy

• 1972 study with a puppy who got actual shocks
• He yelped, howled, ran when shocked
• Who was more compliant in giving the shocks?

30
One more variation

• The learner asks to be shocked
• At 150 volts, L calls out experimenter calls a
  halt to the study
• L says he wants to go on because he agreed to,
  and he can take it
• What happens next?

31
The subjects obeyed

• The authority figure
• Not one single subject went on shocking

32
Milgram and Foot in the Door

• Note the shocks went up gradually
• Compliance with experiment gained a bit at a time
• So people didnt think what they were doing

33
Fundamental Attribution Error

• Subjects in experiment were not cold or
  aggressive
• Situation ruled the behavior
• Factors that did not matter sex, political party
  or religion

34
What if they did these now?

• Experiments were done August, 1961 to May 1962
• Replications done from 1961-1985
• No changes in obedience were observed

35
What breeds obedience?

• 1. Emotional distance of the victim.
• Less seen, less thought about.

36
2. Closeness Legitimacy of Authority

• Experimenters asking them to continue was enough.
• When experimenter was present, harder to resist.
  When absent, could disobey.

37
3. Institutional authority

• Prestige of Yale carried this one a ways.
• But when they did it as Research Associates of
  Bridgeport they still got 48 compliance.

38
What allows for disobedience?

• Opposite of the last 3
• And in Milgram, one variation had 2 confederates
• Both would defy the experimenter
• The true subject conformed to the defiant ones

39
Milgram speaks

• It may be that we are puppetspuppets controlled
  by the strings of society. But at least we are
  puppets of perception, with awareness. And
  perhaps awareness is the first step to our
  liberation.
• 1974

40
Milgram, 1974

• The social psychology of this century reveals a
  major lesson often it is not so much the kind of
  person a man is as the kind of situation in which
  he finds himself that determines how he will act.
  

41
Review of Conformity
42
When do People conform?

• 1. Group size. Optimal number 5.
• 2. Unanimity group consensus makes it easier to
  conform.
• 3. cohesion a person inside the group may move
  it, rarely outsiders.
• 4. Status. Higher status people have more
  impact.

43
Resisting Social Pressure

• Reactance
• Asserting uniqueness

44
Reactance

• People act to protect their freedom.
• If restricted too much, can boomerang.

45
Reactance Underage drinking

• Survey of 3,375 students
• Legal age 25 abstained from drinking
• Underage 19 abstained
• Heavy drinking? 15 of legals
• 24 underage

46
Asserting uniqueness

• People want to believe they are unique.
• May be uncomfortable if too much the same.
• May alter position to appear somewhat unique.