Misplaced Pages

#489510

151-483: The Asch conformity experiment demonstrates how much influence conformity has on people. In a laboratory experiment, Asch asked 50 male students from Swarthmore College in the US to participate in a 'vision test'. Asch put a naive participant in a room with seven confederates/stooges in a line judgment task. When confronted with the line task, each confederate had already decided what response they would give. The real members of

302-427: A Hawthorne effect in which participants simply gave researchers the answers they wanted to hear. Solomon Asch 's experiments on group conformity mark a departure from these earlier studies by removing investigator influence from experimental conditions. In 1951, Asch conducted his first conformity laboratory experiments at Swarthmore College , laying the foundation for his remaining conformity studies. The experiment

453-410: A "Stop" sign or paying for groceries) are also regarded as prosocial behaviors. These actions may be motivated by culturally influenced value systems ; empathy and concern about the welfare and rights of others; egoistic or practical concerns, such as one's social status or reputation, hope for direct or indirect reciprocity, or adherence to one's perceived system of fairness; or altruism , though

604-863: A benefactor even when such efforts are costly (i.e., hedonically negative), and that this increase is qualitatively different from efforts given from just general positive affective state. They also show that gratitude can increase assistance provided to strangers, not just close social ties. Awe is another positive emotional state that has been closely linked to inspiring generosity and prosocial behavior. Piff et al. studied this phenomenon through experiments using economic and ethical-decision making games and explain, "When people experience awe they really want to share that experience with other people, suggesting that it has this particularly viral component to it... awe binds people together—by causing people to want to share their positive experiences collectively with one another." In 1941, Hervey Cleckley described psychopathy as

755-410: A card with a line on it, followed by another with three lines labeled A , B , and C (see accompanying figure). One of these lines was identical in length to that on the first card, and the other two lines were clearly longer or shorter (i.e., a near-100% rate of correct responding was expected). Each participant was then asked to say aloud which line matched the length of that on the first card. Before

906-426: A complex mixture of individual differences in subjects' reaction to the experimental situation, with distinct reactions linked to factors such as confidence, self-doubt, the desire to be normative, and resolving perceived confusion over the nature of the task. Asch's report included interviews of a subject that remained "independent" and another that "yielded". Each provided a descriptive account following disclosure of

1057-493: A continuum from conversion to anticonformity. For example, a popular experiment in conformity research, known as the Asch situation or Asch conformity experiments , primarily includes compliance and independence . Also, other responses to conformity can be identified in groups such as juries, sports teams and work teams. Muzafer Sherif was interested in knowing how many people would change their opinions to bring them in line with

1208-523: A criterion for the disorder although the role of criminality in the disorder is strongly debated. Additionally, psychopathy is being researched as a dimensional construct that is one extreme of normal range personality traits instead of a categorical disorder. In regards to the lack of prosocial behavior in psychopathy, there are several theories that have been proposed in the literature. One theory suggests that psychopaths engage in less prosocial behavior (and conversely more antisocial behavior) because of

1359-549: A deficit in their ability to recognize fear in others, particularly fearful facial expressions. Because they are unable to recognize that their actions are causing another distress, they continue that behavior in order to obtain some goal that benefits them. A second theory proposes that psychopaths have a sense of "altruistic punishment" where they are willing to punish other individuals even if it means they will be harmed in some way. There has also been an evolutionary theory proposed stating that psychopaths lack of prosocial behavior

1510-407: A direct impact on the world that they live in. This would be considered a mutually constituting relationship, or a relationship in which both individuals and culture develop interdependently. In other words, what students are learning in a classroom could be intimately connected with a purpose towards a greater cause, deepening the learning itself. Studies by Yeager et al. test the effects of having

1661-401: A disorder in which individuals often initially appear intelligent, charming , and even kind but are in fact egocentric , grandiose and impulsive. He described individuals who would, on a whim, leave their families to cross the country gambling, drinking and fighting, only to return and act as if nothing was out of the ordinary. Today, psychopathy is described as a personality disorder that

SECTION 10

#1732794430490

1812-619: A four-week Kind Acts intervention, where individuals were instructed to engage in three kind acts each day twice a week over the four-week period, showed both higher self-reported positive mood and increased satisfaction with relationships at the end of the intervention. This intervention demonstrates ways in which prosocial behavior may be beneficial in improving mood and mental health. A meta-analysis from 2020 by Hui et al., which looked at 126 prior studies involving almost 200,000 participants, found that spontaneous instances of prosocial behavior, such as helping an older neighbor carry groceries, had

1963-425: A good mood increases helping behaviors. Being in a good mood helps us to see the "good" in other people, and prolongs our own good mood. For example, mood and work behaviors have frequently been examined in research; studies show that positive mood at work is associated with more positive work-related behaviors (e.g., helping co-workers). Similarly, prosocial behaviors increase positive mood. Several studies have shown

2114-399: A habitual motivation to help others is therefore socialized, and reinforced as children understand why helping skills should be used to help others around them. Social and individual standards and ideals also motivate individuals to engage in prosocial behavior. Social responsibility norms, and social reciprocity norms reinforce those who act prosocially. As an example, consider the child who

2265-784: A member of one's "in-group" leads to greater feelings of closeness, emotional arousal, and a heightened sense of personal responsibility for the other's welfare, all of which increase the motivation to act prosocially. Researchers have also found that social exclusion decreases the likelihood of prosocial behavior occurring. In a series of seven experiments conducted by professor Jean M Twenge and colleagues (2007) researchers manipulated social inclusion or exclusion by telling research participants that other participants had purposefully excluded them, or that they would probably end up alone later in life. They found that this preliminary social exclusion caused prosocial behavior to drop significantly, noting that "Socially excluded people donated less money to

2416-463: A misleading summary of the results as reflecting complete power of the situation to produce conformity of behavior and belief. A 2015 survey found no change, with just 1 of 20 major texts reporting that most participant-responses defied majority opinion. No text mentioned that 95% of subjects defied the majority at least once. Nineteen of the 20 books made no mention of Asch's interview data in which many participants said they were certain all along that

2567-556: A negative emotional climate that interferes with healthy group functioning. They can be avoided by careful selection procedures and managed by reassigning them to positions that require less social interaction. Stanley Milgram found that individuals in Norway (from a collectivistic culture) exhibited a higher degree of conformity than individuals in France (from an individualistic culture). Similarly, Berry studied two different populations:

2718-405: A number of trials that they must be wrongly interpreting the stimuli and that the majority must be right, leading them to answer with the majority. These individuals were characterized by low levels of confidence. The final group of participants who yielded on at least some trials exhibited a "distortion of action". These subjects reported that they knew what the correct answer was, but conformed with

2869-411: A person is, the more valuable they are as a resource. Thus, people often turn to experts for help. But once again people must be careful, as experts can make mistakes too. Informational social influence often results in internalization or private acceptance , where a person genuinely believes that the information is right. Normative social influence occurs when one conforms to be liked or accepted by

3020-519: A position where they publicly agree with the group's decision yet privately disagrees with the group's consensus, they are experiencing compliance or acquiescence . This is also referenced as apparent conformity. This type of conformity recognizes that behavior is not always consistent with our beliefs and attitudes, which mimics Leon Festinger's cognitive dissonance theory. In turn, conversion , otherwise known as private acceptance or "true conformity", involves both publicly and privately agreeing with

3171-487: A positive relationship between prosocial behavior and religion as well as social status. In addition, there may be sex differences in prosocial behavior, particularly as youths move into adolescence. Research suggests that while women and men both engage in prosocial behaviors, women tend to engage in more communal and relational prosocial behaviors whereas men tend to engage in more agentic prosocial behaviors. A recent study examining workplace charitable giving looked at

SECTION 20

#1732794430490

3322-481: A possible explanation for this disparity. A more recent study that focused on the effects of pubertal timing found that early maturation in adolescents has a positive impact on prosocial behaviors. While their findings apply to both genders, this study found a much more pronounced effect in males. This suggests that earlier onset of puberty has a positive correlation with the development of prosocial behaviors. In many Indigenous American communities , prosocial behavior

3473-491: A preregistered study of 80,337 people from 76 countries, representing 90% of global population. Objective wealth correlated positively with positive reciprocity, donating, volunteering, and helping strangers but negatively with trust. The results were highly consistent across the world, without any systematic variation. In addition to situational and individualistic factors, there are some categorical characteristics that can impact prosocial behavior. Several studies have indicated

3624-565: A pretend prison setting on the Stanford University Campus. The study was set to be over the course of two weeks but it was abruptly cut short because of the behaviors the subjects were exuding. It was terminated due to the "guards" taking on tyrannical and discriminatory characteristics while "prisoners" showed blatant signs of depression and distress. In essence, this study showed us a lot about conformity and power imbalance. For one, it demonstrates how situations determines

3775-416: A self-transcendent purpose for learning, with the results showing that such a purpose for learning led to fewer future college dropouts, increased high school math and science GPAs, and persistence on boring tasks. This self transcendent purpose may not only encourage persistence on boring tasks, but may help to make boring tasks more meaningful and engaging. A person's ideas and opinions are largely shaped by

3926-498: A self-transcendent purpose in their learning, others enable them to enjoy their learning and make connections to community contributions. Studies have shown that different types of media programming may evoke prosocial behaviors in children. The channels aimed at younger viewers like Nickelodeon and Disney Channel had significantly more acts of altruism than the general-audience demographic channels like A&E and or TNT , according to one large-scale study. This study examined

4077-620: A similar trend – older participants displayed less conformity when compared to younger participants. In the same way that gender has been viewed as corresponding to status, age has also been argued to have status implications. Berger, Rosenholtz and Zelditch suggest that age as a status role can be observed among college students. Younger students, such as those in their first year in college, are treated as lower-status individuals and older college students are treated as higher-status individuals. Therefore, given these status roles, it would be expected that younger individuals (low status) conform to

4228-415: A single actor also give the correct answer. Asch's experiment also had a condition in which participants were tested alone with only the experimenter in the room. In total, there were 50 subjects in the experimental condition and 37 in the control condition. In the control group, with no pressure to conform to actors, the error rate on the critical stimuli was less than 0.7%. In the actor condition also,

4379-402: A situation depends upon their analysis of the situation. An individual will consider whether or not the situation requires their assistance, if the assistance is the responsibility of the individual, and how to help. This model, proposed by professors Bibb Latané and John M. Darley, describes five things that must occur in order for a person to intervene: The number of individuals present in

4530-400: A situation – that is, that people are rationally self-motivated. Prosocial behavior is more likely to occur if the cost of helping is low (i.e. minimal time, or minimal effort), if helping would actually benefit the individual providing the help in some way, and if the rewards of providing the help are large. If it is in an individual's interest to help, they will most likely do so, especially if

4681-484: A social relationship and involves a question of right and wrong. So, as children move through childhood, their reasoning changes from being hedonistic and needs-oriented to becoming more concerned with approval and more involved in complex cognitive forms of perspective taking and reciprocity reasoning. Additionally, children's prosocial behavior is typically more centered around interest in friends and concern for approval, whereas adolescents begin to develop reasoning that

Conformity - Misplaced Pages Continue

4832-451: A standard line. All participants except one were accomplices and gave the wrong answer in 12 of the 18 trials. The results showed a surprisingly high degree of conformity: 74% of the participants conformed on at least one trial. On average people conformed one third of the time. A question is how the group would affect individuals in a situation where the correct answer is less obvious. After his first test, Asch wanted to investigate whether

4983-649: A strong motivator in education, for it provides students with a purpose beyond themselves and the classroom. This purpose beyond the self, or self-transcendence, is an innate human need to be a part of something bigger than themselves. When learning in isolation, the way Western academics are traditionally designed, students struggle to make connections to the material and its greater overarching purpose. This disconnection harms student learning, motivation, and attitudes about education. If teachers make space for prosocial behavior in education and social learning , then they can illustrate that what students are learning will have

5134-439: A stronger positive effect on well-being than did more formal instances of prosocial behavior, such as volunteering for a charity at a pre-scheduled time. Other research suggests that cultivating positive emotions, such as gratitude , may also facilitate prosocial behavior. A study by Bartlett & DeSteno examined the ability of gratitude to shape costly prosocial behavior, demonstrating that gratitude increases efforts to assist

5285-691: A student fund, were unwilling to volunteer for further lab experiments, were less helpful after a mishap, and cooperated less in a mixed-motive game with another student." This effect is thought to be due to the fact that prosocial behavior, again, is motivated by a sense of responsibility in caring for and sharing resources with members of one's own group. Individuals can be compelled to act prosocially based on learning and socialization during childhood. Operant conditioning and social learning positively reinforces discrete instances of prosocial behaviors. Cognitive capacities like intelligence for example, are almost always related to prosocial likings. Helping skills and

5436-470: A subsequent research article, Eagly suggests that women are more likely to conform than men because of lower status roles of women in society. She suggests that more submissive roles (i.e., conforming) are expected of individuals that hold low status roles. Still, Eagly and Chrvala's results do conflict with previous research which have found higher conformity levels among younger rather than older individuals. Although conformity pressures generally increase as

5587-407: A suspect individually and then in a lineup of other suspects. They were given one second to identify him, making it a difficult task. One group was told that their input was very important and would be used by the legal community. To the other it was simply an experiment. Being more motivated to get the right answer increased the tendency to conform. Those who wanted to be more accurate conformed 51% of

5738-468: A threat against social rejection. See: Normative influence vs. referent informational influence In a reinterpretation of the original data from these experiments Hodges and Geyer (2006) found that Asch's subjects were not so conformist after all: The experiments provide powerful evidence for people's tendency to tell the truth even when others do not. They also provide compelling evidence of people's concern for others and their views. By closely examining

5889-439: A world-wide movement, using evolutionary science to create real-world pro-social changes from working groups to whole cultures. According to the psychology researcher Daniel Batson , the term "was created by social scientists as an antonym for antisocial ." The purest forms of prosocial behavior are motivated by altruism , an unselfish interest in helping another person. According to psychology professor John W. Santrock,

6040-445: Is a social behavior that "benefit[s] other people or society as a whole", "such as helping, sharing, donating, co-operating, and volunteering". The person may or may not intend to benefit others; the behaviour's prosocial benefits are often only calculable after the fact. (Consider: Someone may intend to 'do good' but the effects may be catastrophic.) Obeying the rules and conforming to socially accepted behaviors (such as stopping at

6191-421: Is a deeper type of conformism than compliance); 3) internalization (which is to conform both publicly and privately). Major factors that influence the degree of conformity include culture, gender, age, size of the group, situational factors, and different stimuli. In some cases, minority influence , a special case of informational influence, can resist the pressure to conform and influence the majority to accept

Conformity - Misplaced Pages Continue

6342-653: Is a valued means of learning and child rearing. Such behaviors are seen as contributing in an eagerly collaborative and flexible environment, aimed at teaching consideration, responsibility, and skills with the guidance and support of adults. Culturally valued developmental goals are integrally tied to children's participation in these contexts. It is also helpful for children to learn cultural mores in addition to individual personality development. Children learn functional life skills through real-time observation of adults and interactive participation of these learned skills within their community. Prosocial behavior can act as

6493-422: Is an adaptive mating strategy in that it allows them to spread more of their genes while taking less responsibility for their offspring. Finally, there is some evidence that in some situations psychopaths behavior may not be antisocial but instead it may be more utilitarian than other individuals. In a recent study, Bartels & Pizarro (2011) found that when making decisions about traditional moral dilemmas such as

6644-448: Is an additional important motivator for prosocial behavior in general. Batson's (1987) empathy-altruism model examines the emotional and motivational component of prosocial behavior. Feeling empathy towards the individual needing aid increases the likelihood that the aid will be given. This empathy is called "empathetic concern" for the other individual, and is characterized by feelings of tenderness, compassion, and sympathy. Agreeableness

6795-451: Is better informed, or in response to normative influence when they are afraid of rejection. When the advocated norm could be correct, the informational influence is more important than the normative influence, while otherwise the normative influence dominates. People often conform from a desire for security within a group, also known as normative influence —typically a group of a similar age, culture , religion or educational status. This

6946-536: Is characterized by decreased anxiety , fear, and social closeness as well as increased impulsivity , manipulativeness , interpersonal dominance and aggression . These traits lead to numerous types of antisocial behavior including high rates of substance abuse, serial short term relationships, and various forms of criminal behavior. One common misconception about psychopathy though is that all psychopaths are serial killers or other vicious criminals. In reality, many researchers do not consider criminal behavior to be

7097-405: Is conformity, can be conscious or not. People have an intrinsic tendency to unconsciously imitate other's behaviors such as gesture, language, talking speed, and other actions of the people they interact with. There are two other main reasons for conformity: informational influence and normative influence . People display conformity in response to informational influence when they believe the group

7248-424: Is driven by a genetic tendency". Thus some professionals argue that altruism may not exist, and is completely motivated by reciprocity. Either reciprocity or altruism may motivate many important prosocial behaviors, including sharing. Prosocial behavior is mediated by both situational and individual factors. One of the most common situation factors is the occurrence of the bystander effect . The bystander effect

7399-478: Is evaluation apprehension, which simply refers to the fear of being judged by other bystanders. Finally, pluralistic ignorance may also lead to someone not intervening. This refers to relying on the reaction of others, before reacting yourself. Additionally, psychology professors John F. Dovidio , Jane Allyn Piliavin, and colleagues (1981) noted that individuals are likely to maximize their rewards and minimize their costs when determining whether or not to give aid in

7550-439: Is growing, especially among adolescent social media users. The negative effects of social media has been a large focus of scientific research; however, social media can also be a catalyst for prosocial behavior both online and offline. Social media is one of the most newly profound ways to spread awareness. Erreygers and colleagues define online prosocial behavior as "as voluntary behavior carried out in an electronic context with

7701-486: Is in a competitive atmosphere or not. People tend to be influenced by those who are their own age especially. Co-actors that are similar to us tend to push us more than those who are not. According to Donelson Forsyth , after submitting to group pressures, individuals may find themselves facing one of several responses to conformity. These types of responses to conformity vary in their degree of public agreement versus private agreement. When an individual finds themselves in

SECTION 50

#1732794430490

7852-405: Is ineffective or not available, people will then turn to comparable others for validation. In other words, social comparison theory predicts that social reality testing will arise when physical reality testing yields uncertainty. The Asch conformity experiments demonstrate that uncertainty can arise as an outcome of social reality testing. More broadly, this inconsistency has been used to support

8003-419: Is more concerned with abstract principles such as guilt and positive affect. Parents can set examples that children carry into their interactions and communication with peers, but parents are not present during all of their children's peer exchanges. The day-to-day constructions of fairness standards is done by children in collaboration and negotiation with each other. Recent research demonstrates that invoking

8154-526: Is often referred to as groupthink : a pattern of thought characterized by self-deception, forced manufacture of consent, and conformity to group values and ethics , which ignores realistic appraisal of other courses of action. Unwillingness to conform carries the risk of social rejection . Conformity is often associated in media with adolescence and youth culture , but strongly affects humans of all ages. Although peer pressure may manifest negatively, conformity can be regarded as either good or bad. Driving on

8305-429: Is one example of normative influence. Even though John Turner et al. argued that the post experimental interviews showed that the respondents were uncertain about the correct answers in some cases. The answers might have been evident to the experimenters, but the participants did not have the same experience. Subsequent studies pointed out the fact that the participants were not known to each other and therefore did not pose

8456-409: Is positively reinforced for "sharing" during their early childhood years. When acting prosocially, individuals reinforce and maintain their positive self-images or personal ideals, as well as help to fulfill their own personal needs. The correlation between a helper's state and helping tendencies are greatly restricted to the relationship between whoever takes part in the situation. Emotional arousal

8607-523: Is strongest for individuals who reported strong identification with their friends or groups, making them more likely to adopt beliefs and behaviors accepted in such circles. There is also the factor that the mere presence of a person can influence whether one is conforming or not. Norman Triplett (1898) was the researcher that initially discovered the impact that mere presence has, especially among peers. In other words, all people can affect society. We are influenced by people doing things beside us, whether this

8758-461: Is the phenomenon that an individual's likelihood of helping decreases when passive bystanders are present in a critical situation. For example, when someone drops a stack of papers on a crowded sidewalk, most people are likely to continue passing him/her by. This example can be extended to even more urgent situations, such as a car crash or natural disaster. The decision model of bystander intervention noted that whether or not an individual gives aid in

8909-492: Is the willingness to conform publicly to attain social reward and avoid social punishment. From this perspective, the results are viewed as a striking example of people publicly endorsing the group response despite knowing full well that they were endorsing an incorrect response. Similarly, Jerry M. Burger admits the normative influence effect of the experiment in Chapter 21 of Noba online book. He mentioned that people follow

9060-500: Is thought to be the personality trait most associated with inherent prosocial motivation. Prosocial thoughts and feelings may be defined as a sense of responsibility for other individuals, and a higher likelihood of experiencing empathy ("other-oriented empathy") both affectively (emotionally) and cognitively. These prosocial thoughts and feelings correlate with dispositional empathy and dispositional agreeableness. Subjective wealth correlated positively with all aspects of prosociality in

9211-401: Is trying to be accepted by a group which has certain preferences, then individuals are more likely to conform to match the group. Similarly, the attractiveness of group members increases conformity. If an individual wishes to be liked by the group, they are increasingly likely to conform. Accuracy also effects conformity, as the more accurate and reasonable the majority is in their decision than

SECTION 60

#1732794430490

9362-561: Is used for a more selfish result while the other is not. Guilt has long been regarded as a motivator for prosocial behavior. Extensive data from a 2012 study conducted by de Hooge, demonstrates that when a secondary individual repairs a transgressors' damage caused to victims, the transgressors' guilt feelings, reparative intentions, and prosocial behavior drastically diminish. Thus, reduction of guilt may have more to do with reparative actions broadly, rather than necessarily prosocial behaviors taken on by oneself. Global use of social media

9513-563: The Children's Television Act was adopted in 1990. It states that channels must produce and air programming developed specifically for children as a condition to renew broadcast licenses. After discussions as to what the definition of "specifically designed for children" really means, in 1996 guidelines were passed to correct this ambiguity. Arts are increasingly recognized as influential for health behaviors in strengthening social bonds and cohesion and promoting prosocial behavior. Evidence of

9664-564: The University of Tokyo , along with Eiko Osaka reviewed four behavioral studies and found that the rate of conformity errors that the Japanese subjects manifested in the Asch paradigm was similar with that manifested by Americans. The study published in 1970 by Robert Frager from the University of California, Santa Cruz found that the percentage of conformity errors within the Asch paradigm

9815-593: The self-categorization theory account of social influence (otherwise known as the theory of referent informational influence ). Here, the observed conformity is an example of depersonalization processes, whereby people expect to hold the same opinions as others in their ingroup and will often adopt those opinions. The conformity demonstrated in Asch experiments may contradict aspects of social comparison theory. Social comparison theory suggests that, when seeking to validate opinions and abilities, people will first turn to direct observation. If direct observation

9966-511: The trolley problem , individuals high in psychopathic traits actually make more utilitarian (and therefore more moral in some views) choices. This finding is particularly interesting because it suggests that psychopaths, who are often considered immoral or even evil, may actually make better moral decisions than non-psychopaths. The authors of this study conclude that individuals high in psychopathic traits are less influenced by their emotions and therefore make more "mathematical" decisions and choose

10117-535: The "illusion" that they are being observed (e.g., by hanging up posters of "staring" human eyes) can generate significant changes in pro-social acts such as charitable giving and less littering. Pictures of human eyes trigger an involuntary neural gaze detection mechanism, which primes people to act pro-socially. There are two different forms of prosocial behaviors. Ordinary prosocial behavior requires "situational and sociocultural demands". Extraordinary prosocial behavior doesn't include as much. This indicates that one form

10268-681: The "yielding" subject was suspicious, he was not sufficiently confident to go against the majority. Subjects who did not conform to the majority reacted either with "confidence": they experienced conflict between their idea of the obvious answer and the group's incorrect answer, but stuck with their own answer, or were "withdrawn". These latter subjects stuck with their perception but did not experience conflict in doing so. Some participants also exhibited "doubt", responding in accordance with their perception, but questioning their own judgment while nonetheless sticking to their (correct) response, expressing this as needing to behave as they had been asked to do in

10419-446: The 7 actors, despite it being wrong. Subjects were interviewed after the study including being debriefed about the true purpose of the study. These post-test interviews shed valuable light on the study ‍ — ‍ both because they revealed subjects often were "just going along", and because they revealed considerable individual differences to Asch. Additional trials with slightly altered conditions were also run, including having

10570-509: The Temne (collectivists) and the Inuit (individualists) and found that the Temne conformed more than the Inuit when exposed to a conformity task. Bond and Smith compared 134 studies in a meta-analysis and found that there is a positive correlation between a country's level of collectivistic values and conformity rates in the Asch paradigm. Bond and Smith also reported that conformity has declined in

10721-652: The United States over time. Influenced by the writings of late-19th- and early-20th-century Western travelers, scholars or diplomats who visited Japan, such as Basil Hall Chamberlain , George Trumbull Ladd and Percival Lowell , as well as by Ruth Benedict 's influential book The Chrysanthemum and the Sword , many scholars of Japanese studies speculated that there would be a higher propensity to conform in Japanese culture than in American culture. However, this view

10872-600: The actors were wrong. This portrayal of the Asch studies was suggested to fit with social psychology narratives of situationism, obedience and conformity, to the neglect of recognition of disobedience of immoral commands (e.g., disobedience shown by participants in Milgram Studies ), desire for fair treatment (e.g., resistance to tyranny shown by many participants in the Stanford prison studies ) and self-determination . Prosocial behavior Prosocial behaviour

11023-447: The amount of conformity that occurs with some degree of accuracy. Baron and his colleagues conducted a second eyewitness study that focused on normative influence. In this version, the task was easier. Each participant had five seconds to look at a slide instead of just one second. Once again, there were both high and low motives to be accurate, but the results were the reverse of the first study. The low motivation group conformed 33% of

11174-421: The answers given by others. The majority of them, however, believe that groups are wiser or do not want to appear as mavericks and choose to repeat the same obvious misconception. It is clear from this that conformity has a powerful effect on human perception and behavior, even to the extent that it can be faked against a person's basic belief system. Changing one's behaviors to match the responses of others, which

11325-557: The argument that women conformed more because of a methodological bias. They argued that because stereotypes used in studies are generally male ones (sports, cars..) more than female ones (cooking, fashion..), women felt uncertain and conformed more, which was confirmed by their results. Research has noted age differences in conformity. For example, research with Australian children and adolescents ages 3 to 17 discovered that conformity decreases with age. Another study examined individuals that were ranged from ages 18 to 91. The results revealed

11476-528: The arts in sustaining prosocial behavior should however integrate an ethical approach to avoid the risk of mass manipulation and intergroup bias. People are generally much more likely to act pro-socially in a public setting rather than in a private setting. One explanation for this finding has to do with perceived status, being publicly recognized as a pro-social individual often enhance one's self-image and desirability to be considered for inclusion in social groups. Other research has shown that merely given people

11627-602: The benefits of volunteering and other prosocial behaviors on self-esteem, life satisfaction , and overall mental health. Additionally, negative mood can also impact prosocial behavior. Research has shown that guilt often leads to prosocial behaviors, whereas other negative mood states, such as fear, do not lead to the same prosocial behaviors. A recent pilot study examined whether an intervention increasing prosocial behavior (kind acts) in young adults with social anxiety would both increase positive affect and decrease social anxiety in participants. Participants randomly assigned to

11778-484: The causal nature of any one of these individual deficits as well as if there is any way to help these individuals develop more prosocial patterns of behavior. Psychologists have shown that helping others can produce "feel-good" neurotransmitters such as oxytocin and that, similar to any other pleasurable activity, the act of volunteering, giving and behaving pro-socially can become addictive ( warm-glow giving ). Some work has been done on utilizing this principle through

11929-477: The circumstances most likely to evoke altruism are empathy for an individual in need, or a close relationship between the benefactor and the recipient. However, many prosocial behaviors that appear altruistic are in fact motivated by the norm of reciprocity, which is the obligation to return a favor with a favor. People feel guilty when they do not reciprocate and they may feel angry when someone else does not reciprocate. Reciprocal altruism suggests that "such helping

12080-715: The classroom and larger community. In the workplace, prosocial behaviour can have a significant impact on team psychological safety , as well as positive indirect effects on employee's helping behaviors and task performance. Empathy is a strong motive in eliciting prosocial behavior, and has deep evolutionary roots. Prosocial behavior fosters positive traits that are beneficial for children and society. It helps many beneficial functions by bettering production of any league and its organizational scale. Evolutionary psychologists use theories such as kin-selection theory and inclusive fitness as an explanation for why prosocial behavioral tendencies are passed down generationally, according to

12231-418: The coast of Japan , when users turned to Facebook and Twitter to provide financial and emotional support via their social networks. Direct donations to Japanese relief were possible on The Red Cross fan page on Facebook, and via online discount sites like Groupon and LivingSocial . Mood and prosocial behavior are closely linked. People often experience the "feel good-do good" phenomena, where being in

12382-604: The concept of helper therapy , in which therapeutic benefits are gleaned from assisting others. Community health workers have been found to gain helper benefits that include positive feelings about self, a sense of belonging, valuable work experience, and access to health information and skills through their prosocial vocation, which may buffer against the various stressors inherent in this line of work. In addition, Helper therapy may also be highly beneficial for distressed adolescents experiencing suicidal thoughts. Studies indicate that when help-seeking youth use online community forums,

12533-425: The conventionally-approved side of the road may be seen as beneficial conformity. With the appropriate environmental influence, conforming, in early childhood years, allows one to learn and thus, adopt the appropriate behaviors necessary to interact and develop "correctly" within one's society. Conformity influences the formation and maintenance of social norms , and helps societies function smoothly and predictably via

12684-407: The cost of not providing the help is great. People are also more likely to help those in their social group, or their "in group". With a sense of shared identity with the individual requiring assistance, the altruist is more likely to provide help, on the basis that one allocates more time and energy towards helping behavior within individuals of their own group. The labeling of another individual as

12835-420: The crowd to avoid potential criticism. During Asch's experiment, participants choose the wrong answer to keep the association with the group. The demonstration in this experiment broadens people's understanding of the large application of normative influence. To stay consistent with other group members, people may follow a trend that is apparently wrong. Moreover, the behavior of normative conformity may reduce when

12986-496: The development of prosocial behaviors reaches a plateau. Theories for this change in development suggest that it is the result of more individualized and selective prosocial behaviors. During adolescence, youth begin to focus these behaviors toward their peer groups and/or affiliations. Consistent with previous analyses, this study also found a tendency toward higher prosocial behaviors in young adolescent girls compared to their male classmates. The earlier maturation in females may be

13137-421: The evolutionary fitness displayed by those who engaged in prosocial acts. Encouraging prosocial behavior may also require decreasing or eliminating undesirable social behaviors. Although the term "prosocial behavior" is often associated with developing desirable traits in children, the literature on the topic has grown since the late 1980s to include adult behaviors as well. The term "prosocial" has grown into

13288-411: The existence of pure altruism is somewhat disputed, and some have argued that this falls into the philosophical rather than psychological realm of debate. Evidence suggests that prosociality is central to the well-being of social groups across a range of scales, including schools. Prosocial behavior in the classroom can have a significant impact on a student's motivation for learning and contributions to

13439-410: The experiment, all actors were given detailed instructions on how they should respond to each trial (card presentation). They would always unanimously nominate one comparator, but on certain trials they would give the correct response and on others, an incorrect response. The group was seated such that the real participant always responded last. Subjects completed 18 trials. On the first two trials, both

13590-465: The experimental group revealed that one-third of all responses were incorrect. These incorrect responses often matched the incorrect response of the majority group (i.e., actors). Overall, 74% of participants gave at least one incorrect answer out of the 12 critical trials. Regarding the study results, Asch stated: "That intelligent, well-meaning young people are willing to call white black is a matter of concern." Participants' interview responses revealed

13741-546: The experimental group sat in the last position, while the others were pre-arranged experimenters who gave apparently incorrect answers in unison; Asch recorded the last person's answer to analyze the influence of conformity. Surprisingly, about one third (32%) of the participants who were placed in this situation sided with the clearly incorrect majority on the critical trials. Over the 12 critical trials, about 75% of participants conformed at least once. After being interviewed, subjects acknowledged that they did not actually agree with

13892-469: The experimental studies . For instance a study by Ferguson and Garza found that exposure to violent video games was associated with increased prosocial behavior, both on-line as well as volunteering in the real world. The authors speculated this may be due to the prosocial themes common in many violent games, as well as team oriented play in many games. In the United States, in an effort to get stations to air education and prosocial programming for children,

14043-409: The experiments. Although the correct answer appeared obvious to the researchers, this was not necessarily the experience of participants. Subsequent research has demonstrated similar patterns of conformity where participants were anonymous and thus not subject to social punishment or reward on the basis of their responses. From this perspective, the Asch conformity experiments are viewed as evidence for

14194-406: The group has a surprising effect. As the number increases, each person has less of an impact. A group's strength is how important the group is to a person. Groups we value generally have more social influence. Immediacy is how close the group is in time and space when the influence is taking place. Psychologists have constructed a mathematical model using these three factors and are able to predict

14345-476: The group in the past are also more likely to succeed. Another form of minority influence can sometimes override conformity effects and lead to unhealthy group dynamics. A 2007 review of two dozen studies by the University of Washington found that a single " bad apple " (an inconsiderate or negligent group member) can substantially increase conflicts and reduce performance in work groups. Bad apples often create

14496-420: The group making decisions. Asch conformity experiments In psychology , the Asch conformity experiments or the Asch paradigm were a series of studies directed by Solomon Asch studying if and how individuals yielded to or defied a majority group and the effect of such influences on beliefs and opinions. Developed in the 1950s, the methodology remains in use by many researchers. Uses include

14647-422: The group plays a role in conformity as well. In a study by Reitan and Shaw, it was found that men and women conformed more when there were participants of both sexes involved versus participants of the same sex. Subjects in the groups with both sexes were more apprehensive when there was a discrepancy amongst group members, and thus the subjects reported that they doubted their own judgments. Sistrunk and McDavid made

14798-448: The group size ranges from two to seven people. According to Latane's 1981 study, the number of the majority is one factor that influences the degree of conformity, and there are other factors like strength and immediacy. Moreover, a study suggests that the effects of group size depend on the type of social influence operating. This means that in situations where the group is clearly wrong, conformity will be motivated by normative influence;

14949-414: The group's decision. In the case of private acceptance, the person conforms to the group by changing their beliefs and attitudes. Thus, this represents a true change of opinion to match the majority. Another type of social response, which does not involve conformity with the majority of the group, is called convergence . In this type of social response, the group member agrees with the group's decision from

15100-425: The immoral orders or not. One of the most important factors of the experiment is the position of the authority figure relative to the subject (the shocker) along with the position of the learner (the one getting shocked). There is a reduction in conformity depending on if the authority figure or learner was in the same room as the subject. When the authority figure was in another room and only phoned to give their orders

15251-467: The impact of different arts is emerging and research is growing on literature, movies and theatre. A review of current literature argues that performative arts are more prone to elicit empathic concern which is linked with more durable prosocial behavior during stressful situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak: in particular theatre and virtual reality are seen as promising. An active role of

15402-423: The increasing majority was only influential up to a point: from three or more opponents, there is more than 30% of conformity. Besides that, this experiment proved that conformity is powerful, but also fragile. It is powerful because just by having actors giving the wrong answer made the participant to also give the wrong answer, even though they knew it was not correct. It is also fragile, however, because in one of

15553-425: The individual response is not accessible to other people. This phenomenon further stresses the social role in normative influence. In contrast, John Turner and colleagues argue that the interpretation of the Asch conformity experiments as normative influence is inconsistent with the data. They point out that post-experiment interviews revealed that participants experienced uncertainty about their judgement during

15704-422: The intention of benefitting particular others or promoting harmonious relations with others". Examples of online prosocial behavior include electronic donation of money to specific causes or the sharing of information and resources, such as in times of natural disaster. One example of online prosocial behavior during natural disasters is the relief efforts in the wake of the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami off

15855-533: The majority group simply because they didn't want to seem out of step by not going along with the rest. All conforming respondents underestimated the frequency with which they conformed to the majority. In subsequent research experiments, Asch explored several variations on the paradigm from his 1951 study. In 1955 he reported on work with 123 male students from three different universities. A second paper in 1956 also consisted of 123 male college students from three different universities. Asch did not state if this

16006-413: The majority of participants' responses remained correct (64.3%), but a sizable minority of responses conformed to the actors' (incorrect) answer (35.7%). The responses revealed strong individual differences: 12% of participants followed the group in nearly all of the tests. 26% of the sample consistently defied majority opinion, with the rest conforming on some trials. An examination of all critical trials in

16157-860: The majority whereas older individuals (high status) would be expected not to conform. Researchers have also reported an interaction of gender and age on conformity. Eagly and Chrvala examined the role of age (under 19 years vs. 19 years and older), gender and surveillance (anticipating responses to be shared with group members vs. not anticipating responses being shared) on conformity to group opinions. They discovered that among participants that were 19 years or older, females conformed to group opinions more so than males when under surveillance (i.e., anticipated that their responses would be shared with group members). However, there were no gender differences in conformity among participants who were under 19 years of age and in surveillance conditions. There were also no gender differences when participants were not under surveillance. In

16308-490: The members of one's group to obtain and accept accurate information about reality. A person is most likely to use informational social influence in certain situations: when a situation is ambiguous, people become uncertain about what to do and they are more likely to depend on others for the answer; and during a crisis when immediate action is necessary, in spite of panic. Looking to other people can help ease fears, but unfortunately, they are not always right. The more knowledgeable

16459-401: The members of the group. This need of social approval and acceptance is part of our state of humans. In addition to this, we know that when people do not conform with their group and therefore are deviants, they are less liked and even punished by the group. Normative influence usually results in public compliance , doing or saying something without believing in it. The experiment of Asch in 1951

16610-850: The message that these acts of prosocial behavior can come with positive consequences. Another study on the topic was conducted by University at Buffalo , Iowa State University and University of Minnesota professors. They studied children for two years for the purpose of investigating the role of media exposure on prosocial behavior for young boys and girls. The study concluded that media exposure could possibly predict outcomes related to prosocial behavior. Other experimental research has suggested that prosocial video games may increase prosocial behavior in players although some of this work has proven difficult to replicate. However other scholars have been critical of this work for tending to falsely dichotomize video games into prosocial/violent categories despite significant overlap as well as methodological flaws in

16761-495: The minority's belief or behaviors. Conformity is the tendency to change our perceptions, opinions, or behaviors in ways that are consistent with group norms . Norms are implicit, specific rules shared by a group of individuals on how they should behave. People may be susceptible to conform to group norms because they want to gain acceptance from their group. Some adolescents gain acceptance and recognition from their peers by conformity. This peer moderated conformity increases from

16912-477: The more likely the individual will be to conform. As mentioned earlier, size also effects individuals' likelihood to conform. The larger the majority the more likely an individual will conform to that majority. Similarly, the less ambiguous the task or decision is, the more likely someone will conform to the group. When tasks are ambiguous people are less pressured to conform. Task difficulty also increases conformity, but research has found that conformity increases when

17063-459: The need for participants to care for the integrity and well-being of other participants, the experimenter, themselves, and the worth of scientific research. Deutsch & Gérard (1955) designed different situations that variated from Asch' experiment and found that when participants were writing their answer privately, they gave the correct one. Normative influence, a function of social impact theory , has three components. The number of people in

17214-494: The notion of "varieties" of conformity based upon "social influence" is ambiguous and indefinable in this context. According to Deutsch and Gérard (1955), conformity results from a motivational conflict (between the fear of being socially rejected and the wish to say what we think is correct) that leads to normative influence, and a cognitive conflict (others create doubts in what we think) which leads to informational influence. Informational social influence occurs when one turns to

17365-424: The obedience rate went down to 20.5%. When the learner was in the same room as the subject the obedience rate dropped to 40%. This experiment, led by psychology professor Philip G. Zimbardo, recruited Stanford students using a local newspaper ad, who he checked to be both physically and mentally healthy. Subjects were either assigned the role of a "prisoner" or "guard" at random over an extended period of time, within

17516-441: The opinion of a group. In his experiment, participants were placed in a dark room and asked to stare at a small dot of light 15 feet away. They were then asked to estimate the amount it moved. The trick was, there was no movement, it was caused by a visual illusion known as the autokinetic effect . The participants stated estimates ranging from 1–10 inches. On the first day, each person perceived different amounts of movement, but from

17667-413: The option that leads to the lowest number of deaths. The theories discussed above are not intended to be a comprehensive list but instead to provide a sense of how psychopaths differ in their approach to social interactions. As with most psychological/social phenomena, it is likely a combination of these factors that leads to psychopaths' lack of prosocial behavior. Further research is needed to determine

17818-437: The outset and thus does not need to shift their opinion on the matter at hand. In addition, Forsyth shows that nonconformity can also fall into one of two response categories. Firstly, an individual who does not conform to the majority can display independence . Independence , or dissent , can be defined as the unwillingness to bend to group pressures. Thus, this individual stays true to his or her personal standards instead of

17969-421: The participants shocked all the way to 450 volts, fully obeying the instruction, even if they did so reluctantly. Additionally, all participants shocked to at least 300 volts. In this experiment, the subjects did not have punishments or rewards if they chose to disobey or obey. All they might receive is disapproval or approval from the experimenter. Since this is the case they had no motives to sway them to perform

18120-428: The participants will conform in order to be accepted by the group. A participant may not feel much pressure to conform when the first person gives an incorrect response. However, conformity pressure will increase as each additional group member also gives the same incorrect response. Research has found different group and situation factors that affect conformity.  Accountability increases conformity, if an individual

18271-515: The people around them. This is known as minority influence , a special case of informational influence. Minority influence is most likely when people can make a clear and consistent case for their point of view. If the minority fluctuates and shows uncertainty, the chance of influence is small. However, a minority that makes a strong, convincing case increases the probability of changing the majority's beliefs and behaviors. Minority members who are perceived as experts, are high in status, or have benefited

18422-408: The position that the theoretical distinction between social reality testing and physical reality testing is untenable. Asch's 1956 report emphasized the predominance of independence over yielding saying "the facts that were being judged were, under the circumstances, the most decisive." However, a 1990 survey of US social psychology textbooks found that most ignored independence, instead reported

18573-890: The prisoners before the experiment) were subject to pathological reactions. These aspects are also traceable to situational forces. This experiment also demonstrated the notion of the banality of evil which explains that evil is not something special or rare, but it is something that exists in all ordinary people. Harvard psychologist Herbert Kelman identified three major types of conformity. Although Kelman's distinction has been influential, research in social psychology has focused primarily on two varieties of conformity. These are informational conformity, or informational social influence , and normative conformity, also called normative social influence . In Kelman's terminology, these correspond to internalization and compliance, respectively. There are naturally more than two or three variables in society influential on human psychology and conformity;

18724-407: The programming of 18 different channels, including more than 2,000 entertainment shows, during a randomly selected week on television. The study revealed that nearly three quarters (73 percent) of programs contained at least one act of altruism and on average viewers saw around three acts of altruism an hour. Around one-third of those behaviors were explicitly rewarded in the plot, potentially sending

18875-742: The role of both sex and ethnicity. Results showed that women gave significantly more than men, and Caucasians gave significantly more than minority groups. However, the percent of minority individuals in the workplace was positively associated with workplace charitable giving by minorities. Culture, sex, and religion are important factors to consider in understanding prosocial behavior on an individual and group level. Prosocial behavior in childhood often begins with questions of sharing and fairness. From age 12–18 months, children begin to display prosocial behavior in presenting and giving their toys to their parents, without promoting or being reinforced by praise. The development of prosocial behavior continues throughout

19026-573: The second to the fourth day, the same estimate was agreed on and others conformed to it. Over time, the personal estimates converged with the other group members' estimates once discussing their judgments aloud. Sherif suggested this was a simulation for how social norms develop in a society, providing a common frame of reference for people. His findings emphasize that people rely on others to interpret ambiguous stimuli and new situations. Subsequent experiments were based on more realistic situations. In an eyewitness identification task, participants were shown

19177-413: The second year of life, as children begin to gain a moral understanding of the world. As obedience to societal standards becomes important, children's ability to exhibit prosocial behavior strengthens, with occurrence and diversity of these behaviors increasing with age and cognitive maturity. What is important developmentally is that the child has developed a belief that sharing is an obligatory part of

19328-599: The self using subtle linguistic cues (e.g. identifying someone as a "helper" versus labeling the action, "helping") fosters the perception that a behavior reflects identity, and increases helping, or prosocial, behaviors in children significantly across tasks. Another study by psychology professor Amélie Nantel-Vivier and colleagues (2009) used a multi-informant model to investigate the development of prosocial behaviour in both Canadian and Italian adolescents aged 10–15. Their findings have indicated that, in early adolescence, although empathy and moral reasoning continue to advance,

19479-448: The self-elimination of behaviors seen as contrary to unwritten rules . Conformity was found to impair group performance in a variable environment, but was not found to have a significant effect on performance in a stable environment. According to Herbert Kelman, there are three types of conformity: 1) compliance (which is public conformity, and it is motivated by the need for approval or the fear of disapproval; 2) identification (which

19630-449: The situation in which Asch's subjects find themselves they find that the situation places multiple demands on participants: They include truth (i.e., expressing one's own view accurately), trust (i.e., taking seriously the value of others' claims), and social solidarity (i.e., a commitment to integrate the views of self and others without deprecating). In addition to these epistemic values, there are multiple moral claims as well: These include

19781-431: The situation requiring help is also a mediating factor in one's decision to give aid, where the more individuals are present, the less likely it is for one particular individual to give aid due to a reduction in perceived personal responsibility. This is known as diffusion of responsibility, where the responsibility one feels for the person(s) in need is divided by the number of bystanders. Another factor that comes into play

19932-403: The size of the majority increases, Asch's experiment in 1951 stated that increasing the size of the group will have no additional impact beyond a majority of size three. Brown and Byrne's 1997 study described a possible explanation that people may suspect collusion when the majority exceeds three or four. Gerard's 1968 study reported a linear relationship between the group size and conformity when

20083-436: The size or unanimity of the majority had greater influence on test subjects. "Which aspect of the influence of a majority is more important – the size of the majority or its unanimity? The experiment was modified to examine this question. In one series the size of the opposition was varied from one to 15 persons." The results clearly showed that as more people opposed the subject, the subject became more likely to conform. However,

20234-466: The study of conformity effects of task importance , age , sex , and culture . Many early studies in social psychology were adaptations of earlier work on "suggestibility" whereby researchers such as Edward L. Thorndyke were able to shift the preferences of adult subjects towards majority or expert opinion. Still the question remained as to whether subject opinions were actually able to be changed, or if such experiments were simply documenting

20385-435: The subject and the actors gave the obvious, correct answer. On the third trial, the actors would all give the same wrong answer. This wrong-responding recurred on 11 of the remaining 15 trials. It was subjects' behavior on these 12 "critical trials" (the 3rd trial + the 11 trials where the actors gave the same wrong answer) that formed the aim of the study: to test how many subjects would change their answer to conform to those of

20536-418: The swaying toward group standards. Secondly, a nonconformist could be displaying anticonformity or counterconformity which involves the taking of opinions that are opposite to what the group believes. This type of nonconformity can be motivated by a need to rebel against the status quo instead of the need to be accurate in one's opinion. To conclude, social responses to conformity can be seen to vary along

20687-480: The task is difficult but also important. Research has also found that as individuals become more aware that they disagree with the majority they feel more pressure, and hence are more likely to conform to the decisions of the group. Likewise, when responses must be made face-face, individuals increasingly conform, and therefore conformity increases as the anonymity of the response in a group decreases. Conformity also increases when individuals have committed themselves to

20838-511: The task. Participants who conformed to the majority on at least 50% of trials reported reacting with what Asch called a "distortion of perception". These participants, who made up a distinct minority (only 12 subjects), expressed the belief that the actors' answers were correct, and were apparently unaware that the majority were giving incorrect answers. Among the other participants who yielded on some trials, most expressed what Asch termed "distortion of judgment". These participants concluded after

20989-824: The time (similar to Asch's findings). The high motivation group conformed less at 16%. These results show that when accuracy is not very important, it is better to get the wrong answer than to risk social disapproval. An experiment using procedures similar to Asch's found that there was significantly less conformity in six-person groups of friends as compared to six-person groups of strangers. Because friends already know and accept each other, there may be less normative pressure to conform in some situations. Field studies on cigarette and alcohol abuse, however, generally demonstrate evidence of friends exerting normative social influence on each other. Although conformity generally leads individuals to think and act more like groups, individuals are occasionally able to reverse this tendency and change

21140-411: The time as opposed to 35% in the other group. Sherif's study provided a framework for subsequent studies of influence such as Solomon Asch's 1955 study. Solomon E. Asch conducted a modification of Sherif's study, assuming that when the situation was very clear, conformity would be drastically reduced. He exposed people in a group to a series of lines, and the participants were asked to match one line with

21291-532: The transition of childhood to adolescence. It follows a U-shaped age pattern wherein conformity increases through childhood, peaking at sixth and ninth grades and then declines. Adolescents often follow the logic that "if everyone else is doing it, then it must be good and right". However, it is found that they are more likely to conform if peer pressure involves neutral activities such as those in sports, entertainment, and prosocial behaviors rather than anti-social behaviors . Researchers have found that peer conformity

21442-446: The true nature of the experiment. The "independent" subject said that he felt happy and relieved and added, "I do not deny that at times I had the feeling: 'to go with it   [...] I'll go along with the rest. ' " At the other end of the spectrum, one "yielding" subject (who conformed in 11 of 12 critical trials) said, "I suspected about the middle ‍ — ‍ but tried to push it out of my mind." Asch points out that although

21593-409: The variants for the experiment, one of the actors was supposed to give the correct answer, being an "ally" to the participant. With an ally, the participant was more likely to give the correct answer than he was before the ally. In addition, if the participant was able to write down the answer, instead of saying out loud, he was also more likely to put the correct answer. The reason for that is because he

21744-487: The way men and women conform to social influence. For example, Alice Eagly and Linda Carli performed a meta-analysis of 148 studies of influenceability. They found that women are more persuadable and more conforming than men in group pressure situations that involve surveillance. Eagly has proposed that this sex difference may be due to different sex roles in society. Women are generally taught to be more agreeable whereas men are taught to be more independent. The composition of

21895-432: The way our behavior is shaped and predominates over our personality, attitudes, and individual morals. Those chosen to be "guards" were not mean-spirited. But, the situation they were put in made them act accordingly to their role. Furthermore, this study elucidates the idea that humans conform to expected roles. Good people (i.e. the guards before the experiment) were transformed into perpetrators of evil. Healthy people (i.e.

22046-531: The world that they grow up in, which in turn determines what sort of change they want to instill in the world. For example: a girl who grew up in poverty becoming a social worker. The environment she grew up in gave her an awareness of the workings of poverty, motivating her to instill change in either the institutions that cause it, or help those affected by poverty. There aren't many opportunities to make prosocial contributions in school; which makes school feel isolated and irrelevant. By encouraging students to find

22197-474: Was in fact the same sample as reported in his 1955 paper; the principal difference is that the 1956 paper includes an elaborate account of his interviews with participants. Across all these papers, Asch found the same results: participants conformed to the majority group in about one-third of all critical trials. The Asch conformity experiments are often interpreted as evidence for the power of conformity and normative social influence , where normative influence

22348-563: Was not afraid of being different from the rest of the group since the answers were hidden. This experiment was conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram in order to portray obedience to authority. They measured the willingness of participants (men aged 20 to 50 from a diverse range of occupations with different levels of education) to obey the instructions from an authority figure to supply fake electric shocks that would gradually increase to fatal levels. Regardless of these instructions going against their personal conscience, 65% of

22499-470: Was not formed on the basis of empirical evidence collected in a systematic way , but rather on the basis of anecdotes and casual observations, which are subject to a variety of cognitive biases . Modern scientific studies comparing conformity in Japan and the United States show that Americans conform in general as much as the Japanese and, in some situations, even more. Psychology professor Yohtaro Takano from

22650-411: Was published on two occasions. Groups of eight male college students participated in a simple "perceptual" task. In reality, all but one of the participants were actors, and the true focus of the study was about how the remaining participant would react to the actors' behavior. The actors knew the true aim of the experiment, but were introduced to the subject as other participants. Each student viewed

22801-477: Was significantly lower in Japan than in the United States, especially in the prize condition. Another study published in 2008, which compared the level of conformity among Japanese in-groups (peers from the same college clubs) with that found among Americans found no substantial difference in the level of conformity manifested by the two nations, even in the case of in-groups. Societal norms often establish gender differences and researchers have reported differences in

#489510