PQ's for CH 8
Chapter 8: Conformity and Obedience
Pete Frates
Former college baseball player.
Inspired the Ice Bucket Challenge to raise awareness and funds for ALS.
Diagnosed with ALS, which heightened public discourse and attention towards the disease.
What is Conformity?
Definition: A change in one’s behavior due to the real or imagined influence of others.
Informational Social Influence
Concept: Relying on others as a source of information to guide behavior in ambiguous situations.
Leads to conformity as we accept others' interpretations as correct.
Private Acceptance: Conforming out of a genuine belief that the group is correct.
Public Compliance: Conforming publicly without necessarily believing in the others' actions.
Study Example: Jessica Nolan's Experiment
Focused on energy conservation.
Informing individuals that their neighbors conserved energy increased personal energy conservation efforts.
Demonstrates how conformity can lead to private acceptance.
Page 2: Autokinetic Effect and Sherif’s Experiment
Autokinetic Effect
Definition: A perceptual phenomenon where a stationary light in a dark environment appears to move.
Caused by small involuntary eye movements without a reference point.
Sherif’s Experiment (1935)
Purpose: Studied conformity and social influence using the autokinetic effect.
Phase 1 (Individual Judgment): Participants made individual judgments on light movement in isolation; responses varied.
Phase 2 (Group Influence): Participants discussed their estimates in groups; responses converged over time towards a group norm.
Phase 3 (Lasting Influence): Tested alone again, participants stuck to group estimates—indicating internalized social influence.
Conclusion: Individuals look to others for guidance in ambiguous situations, leading to informational social influence.
Page 3: Being Accurate
Increased Susceptibility
Susceptibility to informational social influence increases with the need for accuracy, especially in crises.
Example: During dangerous situations, individuals seek guidance from those they trust when unsure how to respond (e.g., COVID-19 rumors).
When People Conform to Informational Social Influence
Situations are ambiguous
Situations are crises
Others present are perceived as experts.
Page 4: Social Norms and Influence
Importance of Context
Ambiguous Situations: The more uncertain people are, the more they rely on others for information (e.g., new soldiers observing veterans).
Crisis Situations: Panic leads to immediate action by looking at others' responses.
Expertise: Knowledgeable individuals serve as better guides in ambiguity.
Normative Social Influence (NSI): Motivation to conform based on the need for acceptance.
Asch’s Line-Judgment Studies
Demonstrated the power of normative social influence.
Participants judged line lengths; confederates intentionally chose incorrect lines, leading to conformity among participants.
Page 5: Conformity Under Pressure
Risks of Conforming to Incorrect Norms
Conforming to a group can lead to enduring discomfort when the group is wrong.
Resistance to normative social influence may lead to rejection from the group.
Social Impact Theory
Developed by Bibb Latané.
Factors influencing conformity include:
Strength (Importance): More significant groups lead to higher conformity.
Immediacy: Closeness in time and space increases conformity.
Number: Larger groups increase pressure to conform, though individual impact diminishes after a certain point.
Page 6: Tolerance and Group Norms
Idiosyncrasy Credit
Tolerance earned over time by conforming to group norms.
Allows for occasional deviation without repercussions.
Collective Cultures vs. Individualistic Cultures
NSI is more potent when everyone in the group agrees.
Cultural Impact: Collective cultures prioritize group harmony (e.g., Japan) over personal expression (e.g., USA).
Minority Influence
Occurs when a minority impacts the majority's beliefs or behaviors.
Requires consistency and cohesion among minority members.
Often leads to private acceptance due to reliance on informational social influence.
Norms to Influence Behavior
Injunctive Norms: Perceptions on approved/disapproved behaviors; drive compliance through perceived rewards/punishments (e.g., littering is bad).
Descriptive Norms: Actual behaviors in situations regardless of approval (e.g., high littering at events despite knowing it’s wrong).
Page 7: Boomerang Effect
Occurs when attempts to change behavior backfire.
Individuals may adopt opposite behavior due to perceived threats to their freedom.
Example: In Schultz’s energy study, higher energy users reduced consumption after comparison, while lower users increased usage counter to expectations.
Page 8: Manipulative Techniques
Foot-in-the-Door Technique
Getting a person to agree to a small request may lead to higher likelihood of agreeing to a larger request later.
Rationale: Agreement creates self-perception as agreeable individuals.
Door-in-the-Face Technique
Asking for a large request, which is refused, increases the likelihood of agreeing to a smaller subsequent request.
Propaganda and Obedience
Propaganda: Deliberate manipulation of mass attitudes through emotionally charged or misleading information.
Obedience: Change in behavior influenced directly by authority figures.
Milgram Study
Highlighted both normative and informational social influence in obedience.
Participants looked to authority figures (experimenters) when uncertain how to act due to ambiguity of the situation.
Page 9: Reasons for Obedience
Adhering to Norms
Difficulty in switching norms when authority figures are present.
Self-Justification: People rationalize compliance to relieve dissonance (e.g., trivializing harmful actions).
Loss of Personal Responsibility
Individuals feel less accountable when following authoritative instructions, often rationalizing actions as part of a job.