Matt Eichelberger Ann Westrick GSW 1120 September 11, 2016 Solomon Asch When reading Asch’s “Opinions and Social Pressure” one comes to the realization that it is extraordinary that scientists and scholars lacked the ability to determine social pressure existence prior to 1955. The farther one examines and dissects the article, the more the reader ascertains. A number of points can be acquired quickly and can be interpreted as good and bad. The details reveal the following; there is very little diversity present in the human variables, the language utilized is geared towards a direction, and the lack of variables of the lined cards. The Asch article and experiment are effective, as well as non-effective. Let us take a more in depth look …show more content…
The three lined cards were the same three utilized throughout all 18 trials. The cards remained a constant staple throughout. Using the same card with each test subject, instead of switching it for each individual, removes the possibility for the cards to change the results. The results rest solely on the test subject themselves. Human response to the cards are what creates the variable, not the cards themselves. This is noteworthy because it solidifies the belief that it is a person’s upbringing and perceptions that cause them to conform to society. While visual effects may not change an outcome a change in knowledge …show more content…
Human nature produces a need for group acceptance. A group of people raised in a similar manner and provided with the exact knowledge on the same subject as their peers will often come to the same conclusion. The same conclusion will be deduced because nobody wants to stand alone and be the outcast. Their thoughts may be different, their opinions may differ and yet they will not breech consensus or cause anarchy. The desire to be accepted outweighs the desire to be right or be heard as an individual with a personal opinion. A prop such as a card remains a constant and viable source that will not waiver with each participant. Human individuality is influenced by a need for common ground, a need for acceptance, and a need to be a part of something larger. Experiments confined to a sub category of people that does not represent the social, economic, educational, and racial class of the majority will produce an inaccurate
It often leads to people adjusting responses to stimuli just because they believe that if everyone else has the same response they must have it too. This is shown in "Asch Experiment" after McLeod explained how the dot of light never moved, he mentioned, "The participants are then asked to estimate how far the dot of light moves. These estimates are made out loud, and with repeated trials, each group of three converges on an estimate. The main finding of the study was that groups found their own "social norm" of perception." (McLeod 2) This shows that when placed in an environment where some people have a different opinion than others, the popular opinion takes over and everyone's opinion becomes uniform because people doubt themselves when they are alone on an opinion, leading to conformity. People in environments like this should try to keep their own opinions as to prevent the spread of conformity when uniqueness is
The world is divided up into numerous things: Countries, states, cities, communities, etc. However, when looking at the big scope of things, one can group the vast amount of people into a society. This society is where the majority lie in the scheme of things - in other words, the common people. Individuals do exist in this society, but they are scarce in a world of conformism. Society’s standards demands an individual to conform, and if the individual refuses they are pushed down by society.
Solomon Asch developed and ran an experiment regarding the power of conformity that affects most populations. Psychologists have been attempting to fully understand the mental workings behind why people are so easily pressured into following others for the longest time. The main focus of psychologists, is to figure and understand what the causes are behind social conformity. Numerous terms are brought up when studying conformity. The “unspoken rules or guidelines for behavior in a group” (Hock 293) are labeled as social norms. When individuals are placed in large groups, the tendency is to lean with whatever the majority of the group thinks. The regular behavior of the individual tends to readjust to appease the superior crowd.
Cialdini, Robert B, & Trost, Melanie R. (1998). Social Influence: Social Norms, Conformity, & Compliance. Interpersonal Phenomena. Retrieved from: angel.elmira.edu/section/default.asp?id=w114_PSY3010_01.
The astute reader may notice that this review does not include any papers that did not find a false consensus effect. The reason for this is not that this paper is not representative of the literature, but rather, that it is. The uniformity of the literature suggests that the phenomenon is fairly common. Some interesting arguments as to why this is are motivational or cognitive in nature. The motivational premise is based in the idea that people are motivated to believe that they have a place in their social environment. This argument is a based in self-justification, in that if many people share a given belief or behavior, it makes it easier to justify that this attitude or behavior is either right, or not as bad as it might seem.
In “Options and Social Pressure” Solomon E. Asch conducts an experiment to show the power of social influence, by using the lengths of sticks that the participants had to match up with the best fit, Asch then developed different scenarios to see how great the power of influence is, but what he discovered is that people always conformed to the majority regardless of how big or small the error was the individual always gave in to the power of the majority. In his conclusion, Solomon states “ …those who participated in this challenging experiment agreed nearly without exception that independence was preferable to conformity.”(Solomon 30) What Solomon and all the participants of the experiment agreed that it was better to have been independent knowing that they made their choice themselves than to have stood with the majority
In the experiment, the group of individuals that were heavily influenced that their judgement was poor had no choice but to join the group’s decision despite having opposing views. Similarly, Eric Forman had to stop attending his disco roller-skating events because his friend group was totally against it. Lastly, Varun ended up telling his girlfriend he cheated because his respect from the group was on the line. All in all, this theory that people have to listen to other individual’s opinions to grade their worth has become obvious through these
...g factors such as fear of consequences for not obeying, human nature’s willingness to conform, perceived stature of authority and geographical locations. I also believe that due to most individual’s upbringings they will trust and obey anyone in an authoritative position even at the expense of their own moral judgment. I strongly believe that Stanley Milgram’s experiments were a turning point for the field of social psychology and they remind us that “ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process”. Despite these findings it is important to point out it is human nature to be empathetic, kind and good to our fellow human beings. The shock experiments reveal not blind obedience but rather contradictory ethical inclinations that lie deep inside human beings.
Conformity, or going along with the crowd, is a unique phenomenon that manifests itself in our thoughts and behaviors. It’s quite simple to identify countless examples of the power of conformity in virtually all aspects of social life. Conformity influences our opinions and relationships with others, often to a higher extent than we realize. It is posited that people generally conform to the group in order to fit in and avoid rejection or because they truly believe the group is more knowledgeable than they are. After analyzing numerous studies and experiments on the nature of conformity, one will find that the motive of social acceptance is the greatest driver of conformity.
“Conformity is a form of social influence that involves a change in behavior or belief so that one can fit in with a certain group” (McLeod). Such a change is a response to imagined (which involves the pressure of expectations or social norms) or real (which involves the presence of others) group pressure. Another definition of conformity can be “yielding to group pressures”. Group pressure can take many forms, for example persuasion, teasing, bullying, criticism etc. Conformity is also referred to as group pressure or majority influence. The term conformity is mostly used to show an agreement to the position of the majority, and this is brought about by either by the desire to be liked or to fit in, or just to match a social role. The aim of this paper is to argue that conformity is among people because they always live in groups-work groups, family, political, religious and social groups. At the same instance, they are adjusted to obey authority. A conformist mentality makes it easy for people to be influenced by others.
As human beings, we have a strong desire to be accepted by others. We engage in behavior based on what we assume those around us are engaging. We misinterpret the firsthand information we gain from observing other people’s behavior. People’s behavior sometimes spring from a desire to create an impression that is not a true reflection one’s own beliefs, which may lead to errors in judgment. When a majority of group members privately reject a norm but assume that most others accept it, they are engaging in pluralistic ignorance. (Gilovich, Keltner, Chen & Nisbett, 2013, p. 112) Pluralistic ignorance occurs whenever people act in ways that conflict with their private beliefs because of a concern for the social consequences.
How do the actions and words of a society affect the way people act? In Never Let Me Go, author Kazuo Ishiguro depicts a society in which individuality is threatened by the pressure to conform through methods such as peer pressure and social expectations. Without a doubt, peer pressure is most commonly found in schools today just as social expectations are suffocating the middle class’ desire to become their own unique person.
By comparing ourselves with other people we categorize and label those who are similar to us as the in-group and people who differ from our-self are categorized as the out-group (Duff & Peace, 2012). We act in ways to favor our in-group rather than out group, this is called in-group favoritism. In-groups and out-groups are evident in many social environments, for example, children form groups with those who like playing similar games to them. In a study that explains in-group favoritism, an experiment was conducted by allocating individuals into groups based on the result of a coin flip (Billing & Tajfel, 1973). After having been told their group members, the participants then had to allocate points to members of their own group (‘in-group’) and to the members of the other group (‘out-group’). These members of the in-group ...
Mermillod et al (2015)conducted a study which attempted to resolve different interpretations of the Milgram experiment’s results. They considered the social identity perspective, which predicts that more obedience will occur under a low level of coercive pressure and the traditional approach, which predicts that participants will be more obedient under a high level of pressure. M. Mermillod et al tested between these by studying the role of coersive pressure vs. lack of pressure in the obedience process. Participants will know this is a role playing game - they will be the employer and the employee will be competing for a competitive job. Participants were put under two conditions: in “Compliance with pressure”, they were explicitly ordered to say negative remarks to the employee as he/she took the test - this was to make sure the employee could handle high stress situations. In the “Compliance without pressure” condition experimenters(playing a consultant character) positively
Several factors affect conformity. The larger the group, the more likely people are to conform, although this effect levels off at around seven group members. If there is even one dissenter in a group other than the participant, conformity drops dramatically. If the participant is in face-to-face contact with the group, he or she is more likely to conform. And finally, the more ambiguous the solution to the problem, the more likely the participant is to conform to others’ opinions (McLeod,