Transcript Obedience and Conformity

Compliance and Conformity
Summary of Milgram Studies
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
% Obeying
Teacher does not deliver shock, but helped out. 93%
Victim pounds on wall then becomes silent
65%
Victim heard protesting (movie version)
50%
Victim in same room
40%
Teacher has to put victim's hand on shock plate 30%
Victim says at outset that he will do study
only if he is let out when he wants to be
40%
Study done in Bridgeport, CT
48%
Experimenter in remote location
19%
Teacher told to select the level of shock
(experimenter legitimizes all levels)
3%
Additional Findings
• If the experimenter was not a scientist
• Two other confederates that refuse
• 2 experimenters that disagree
4 Prods
“Continue please.”
“The experiment requires that you continue”
“It is absolutely essential that you continue.”
“You have no other choice teacher.”
20%
10%
0%
Milgram’s 37
• Represents the ____number____of the
naïve subjects that helped out a
confederate who actually administered the
shocks.
• __37__out of _40_ people ( 93%)
continued to the end, the
__highest_____obedience rate in any of
Milgram’s studies.
• Experiment 18 “A peer administers
shocks” in Milgram’s book Obedience to
authority: An experimental view (pp. 121122).
Personalizing the victim
• Markedly reduces obedience
Gender
• Are men or women more obedient in
Milgram’s paradigm?
Other replications
Hofling et al. (1966)
• Unknown doctor called nurses and asked
them to administer 20 milligrams of the
drug "Astroten" to a patient on the ward.
Violated hospital policy.
• __21__/22 (_95_%) of the nurses
___administered_______the drug,
• ____Stopped__________and debriefed by
one of the researchers.
How well can people predict their
own obedience?
• The researchers told a group of nurses
and nursing students about the study and
asked them how they would react.
• Nearly all said they ___would not_____
administer the medication as ordered.
Another replication
Sheridan & King (1972)
• Replicated Milgram exactly, except that (a)
participants were male & female college
students, (b) victim was a "cute, fluffy, puppy,"
and (c) the shocks were real.
• Participants instructed to deliver a shock each
time the puppy failed to learn a discrimination
task, which was actually unsolvable
• Results: 50% of males subjects and 100%
of female subjects shocked the puppy
Would Milgram find less obedience if he
conducted his experiments today?
• Thomas Blass
– Examined Milgram studies and replications
during a 25-year period from 1961 to 1985.
Correlated year of publication and the amount
of obedience. No significant correlation.
Relevance of the FAE
• How is the fundamental attribution error
relevant to Milgram’s research?
Historical insights
• How might Milgram’s research offer
insights into historical events such as the
Holocaust and the My Lai massacre?
Conformity
• Conformity: A change in one’s
behavior due to the real or imagined
influence of other people.
• Unlike obedience, conformity does not
require commands or coercion by an
authority.
Normative Social Influence*
• Conformity and Social Approval:
The
Asch Line Judgment Studies
Asch (1951, 1956) tested whether people
would conform in situations in which the
group’s judgments were obviously incorrect.
Participants in the Asch line study showed a
high level of conformity, given how obvious it
was that the group was wrong in its
judgments.
Normative Social Influence*
• Conformity and Social Approval:
Asch Line Judgment Studies
The
Normative Social Influence*
•
•
Conformity and Social Approval: The Asch Line
Judgment Studies
76% conformed on at least one of the trials
Asch studies of conformity
• What was the role of…
– Public versus private conformity?
– Unanimity of the group?
– Normative influence? (don’t want to look silly)
Private vs. Public conformity
• Private conformity: change of beliefs
that occurs when a person privately
accepts the position taken by others.
• Public conformity: superficial change
in overt behavior, without a
corresponding change of opinion,
produced by real or imagined group
pressure.
• Asch studies demonstrate PUBLIC
conformity
Normative social influence*
• Normative influence: Conformity occurs
when a person fears the negative
consequences of appearing deviant.
• If they write answers privately, conformity
drops markedly.
Unanimous group*
• When the group’s position is unanimous,
conformity is greater.
• If one person dissents (an ally), conformity
drops.
Normative Social Influence
• When Will People Conform to
Normative Social Influence?*
Asch’s research show that conformity does
not increase much after group size reaches
4 or 5 other people.
Normative Social Influence
• Resisting Normative Social Influence
The first step in resisting normative social
influence is to become aware that we are
doing it. The second step is to find an ally
who thinks like we do.
Normative Social Influence
• Resisting Normative Social Influence
Additionally, if you conform to group norms
most of the time, you earn idiosyncracy
credits that give you the right to deviate
occasionally without serious
consequences.
Normative Social Influence
• Minority Influence: When the Few
Influence the Many
Moscovici (1985) argues that a minority can
affect change in the majority. The key to
this is consistency over time and consistent
unanimity among members of the minority.
Obedience and Conformity in
Everyday Life
• Candid Camera Video (For each episode, think
about why people might be conforming and what
kinds of social influence strategies might be
operating.)
• Face the Rear: Why are people conforming?
• Influence tactics for sharing ice cream: What
kinds of social influence strategies are being
used?
• Picketing against everything with nothing:
• Don’t walk on the black squares:
• Don’t Eat Light:
• Delaware closed today:
Who is most likely to conform?
• Adolescents
• Women are slightly more likely than men,
but the difference is very small and
depends on the specific type of situation.
• Cultures valuing interpersonal harmony
(e.g., some cultures in Asia, Africa, and
South America)
• People with low self-esteem are more
likely to conform than those with high selfesteem.
Compliance
• Mindlessness/Automatic Pilot
• Langer & colleagues (1978):
• IV: How phrased request:
– Excuse me. I have five pages. May I use the
xerox machine? (No reason) (60%)
– ....because I’m in a rush. (real reason) (94%)
– ...because I have to make some copies (illusion of
a reason) (93%)
• DV: Percent agreeing to request
Conformity
• Foot-in-the-door effect: Small request.
Large request
• Lowball procedure: commitment
• Door-in-the-face effect: Deny large to get
small.