Exam 3 (DR. LUNDY) Conformity, Group Influence, Prejudice

Conformity (Definition)

Adjusting your behavior to bring it align with a group

(e.g. wearing a mask)

Compliance (Definition)

Act, don’t believe (behavior =/ attitude)

(e.g. soemtimes going the speed limit or fake nazi’s)

Acceptance (Definition)

Act & Believe (behavior = attitude)

(e.g. standing for the national anthem or being polite in groups)

Obedience (Definition)

Complying with a direct demand

(e.g. Your boss telling you to complete a task or your parent telling you to do chores)

Sherif’s suggestibility (norm formation) study

Suggestibility: Subtle form of conformity (No public pressure)

Study: Sherif used an autokinetic effect (when a light flashes and appears to move) in a dark room, and asked participants to measure the distance it moved. Then gathered them to discuss what they answered. Procedure was repeated for four days straight and the group consensus on day 4, all replied with the same answer separately. A Year later the same group came back, repeated the study, and the answer was the same (as the 4th day).

Conclusion: There was no correct measurement of the light, but rather an arbitrary norm was developed in groups (especially when there was no correct measurement or ‘truth’). A natural outcome of human consumption is to come to the middle.

(E.g. True speed limit [despite the law] usually people say 5-10 over)

(E.g Fake yawning or hand gestures, usually in group settings will do so as well)

(e.g Does god exsist? Do races differ?) <Usually influenced by groups

Asch conformity study (1955)

Study: The cover story told to participants was they were conducting a study on visual perception because it’s essential the participants doesn’t know what the study is about. Asch put 1 participant into a room full of his research team/confederates (Participant thought confederates were other participants), asked them all a question, & called on them one at a time. As his research team called the wrong answer one after (Over a simple question like what the capital city of Pennsylvania) is the other the participant was the last to answer.

Study was conducted multiple time with multiple participants (1 at a time) and showed that 12 out of 18 trails all others gave the wrong answer. When a group is clearly incorrect most of individuals will still confirm. (Some individuals started sweating or shaking out of nervousness)

Conclusion: When there is no major consequence people still conform. 33% of people conform every time and 76% at least once gave the wrong answer.

It would be worse in real life:

1. There is often real consequences for not following the group

2. Correct answer usually isn’t as obvious

Milgram obedience study procedure, basic findings and implications

Study: Concluded one participant and one confederate. They gave them a “random” note that said teacher or student to make the participant believe that the confederate was also another participant. Experimenters then separated the participant and confederate. The confederate was (made to believe by) hooked up to a shock machine and the participant was sat in front of a shock machine (volts ranging from little shock 15 - Dangerous 450). The test was to recall what was the right answer by memory, with beforehand studying. The confederate answered questions both right and wrong to mostly wrong towards the end. Although they cannot see each other the confederate acted like he was getting shocked by yelling and screaming for help (all which the participant can hear) The participant was ordered no matter what to continue by experimenters even if he didn’t want to. Usually, participants would continue because the experiments said they would claim responsibility.

Conclusion: 63% went all the way to the max voltage (435-450) There were no long term psychological effects. People were more willing to do it because they weren’t soley responsible.

Milgram Study: Victim Distance (Emotionally)

Participants that went to full Voltage (435-450):

Participant can’t see Confederate: 63%

Participant in the same room as Confederate: 40%

Participant holding the Confederates hand down on the shock plate: 30%

• Obedience rates lower across three variations

Milgram Study: Authority Figure (Status & Distance)

Status:

Experimenter from prestigious university: 63% (435-450)

vs.

Experimenter from local business: 46% (435-450)

Distance:

Experimenter nearby: 63% (435-450)

vs

Command Given by Telephone: 21% (435-450)

• lower obedience

• Many people lied over the phone saying they went up in voltage

Milgram Study: Pairs of People

Alone (63%)

vs.

Two Participants (10%)

• Usually much lower obedience with two or more people

Explaining conformity: Normative vs. informational social influence

Resisting conformity: Psychological reactance and asserting uniqueness