Formal Control Systems Influence Psychological Motivations

The instinct that once aided in the survival of people in the past serves a purpose in today’s modern society. Even today “herd behavior can aid in bonding, and it can clarify social expectations” (Moore 1). Humans are social creatures and strive to be part of a group whenever possible. By conforming to the norms of a group, a person is able to relate to the other members and therefore create a bond. In confusing situations, humans also look to people who posses more knowledge or appear to be stronger than themselves for guidance. Following others creates a set of guidelines which help to solidify social norms and expectations. By following others, people actually gain “relative morality” (Jasmine 1). Relative morality is the culturally influenced view of ethical and moral standards. Humans are not only affected in their understanding of societal standards, but also in terms of their ethical and moral values, which provide a basis for their actions. When a person’s ethical and moral standards change to match those of their peers, their actions inevitably change as well. Otherwise good people will suddenly start behaving in a way that is uncharacteristic to them because of relative

Cialdini and Trost (1998) mentions that there are many way in which social influences can be used to persuade others. In better understanding compliance with a request, six tendencies of human behavior play a major role in explain why other comply: reciprocity, returning a favor or service; consistency, keeping up with prior engagements or commitments; social validation, group acceptance, or normative influences; liking, what is desired or accepted; authority, conforming to rules established by individuals higher in a hierarchy; and scarcity, opportunities which are scarce or difficult to obtain. Social psychology views these six principles as the motivating factors that influence compliance (Cialdini, 2004).

Additionally, Spector (1983) utilised Rotter’s scale on 157 students to evaluate whether conformity is linked with locus of control. He discovered that participants with a higher internal locus of control weren’t as likely to conform only in circumstances of normative social influence, where people adapt in order to be accepted, whereas there was no significant difference between the two groups in situations of informational social influence, where people conform for their need to be right. (Deutsch & Gerard, 1955) This finding proposes that normative social influence

Conformity and obedience are some of the factors that usually influence the various processes that determine the manner in which an individual behaves in a social set up. They also have an impact on how people follow and adhere to social norms (both written and unwritten) as well as fashions and their immoral actions (Milgram, 2010). Several aspects come to play when one is asked by another individual to do a particular thing. First, they will need to consider whether whatever they are being asked to do is morally right or wrong. Second, based on the circumstances, they can either obey or comply and better still, they can decline to do it. The term obedience refers to the act of an individual doing something that they have been asked to do. On the other hand, conformity regards to how others influence people. They do things that they were not requested to do. The influence is usually through the behaviors and thoughts of others. This paper will compare and contrast the factors involved in conformity and obedience.

“Social norms are rules and standards that are understood by members of a group, and that guide and/or constrain human behavior without the force of laws” (Steg, 2013, p. 154). Social norms have two areas or types they fall into. Injunctive norms are considered behavior that is approved or disapproved and descriptive norms are described as behavior shown by the members of a group. Individuals follow social norms for the rewards involved and the individual wants to avoid rejection and ridicule from societal members. “Social norms can exert a powerful influence on pro-environmental behavior through normative and informational influence” (Steg, 2013, p. 162). Behavior is influenced through normative and informational influences, also moderator variables that may decrease or increase the strength of the influence. Moderator variables contain the size of the group in question, the salience of the norm, if the group is considered an in-group, and the individual personal norms. “A wide variety of research shows that the behavior of others in the social environment shape individuals’ interpretations of, and responses to, the situation, especially in novel, ambiguous, or uncertain

General Topic: The research and experiments done in this study were about the “role of individual differences in the general desire for control in conformity situations”. The results from all of the three experiments were interpreted as a model for the motivational part of the desire-for-control construct (Desire for control is a need to have dominance over social situations to minimize the extent of power others have.)

Imagine a thirteen year old middle school girl, wearing Guess boots and an Abercrombie hood in order to fit in. Visualize a thirty five year old man listening to the top forty radio stations and watching American Idol, so he can have something to add to the discussion with his co-workers over coffee break. The various types of behaviours stated before are pertained to as conformity. Conformity refers to the process by which an individual's attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours are influenced by other individuals. Except, how do these necessities manipulate a being? Social psychologists have conducted an assortment of experiments and concluded that, through a range of forms of social influence, groups can alter their members’ personality.

The acts of conforming and obeying shape us significantly, whether we are conscious of it or not. They do so in ways that psychologists Solomon Asch and Stanley Milgram attempt to explain through their research. Asch touches base on the topic of conformity and discusses the ways in which group behaviors and social norms can influence the decisions an individual makes. On the other hand, Milgram’s focus is on obedience, and he studied it by measuring average, everyday people and their willingness to obey authority figures, even if it involves actions that go against their personal beliefs and morals. They have provided evidence through experiments, and with this information, it becomes easier to understand the world of politics, and how these

In every society there are a set of norms everyone is expected to follow. These can be as simple as smiling when making eye contact or as complex as the norms involved with eating a formal dinner. No matter how seemingly insignificant norms help to run society; it is what is expected and helps people to find comfort in knowing what will happen. Yet, sometimes these norms are challenged. Not every person will always follow social norms.

As one of the countries in the world that prides itself in uniqueness, even Americans find themselves caught in webs of social influence. When this happens, we change our behavior and conform to the expectations of others (O’Gorman et al., 2008). Research on conformity was first

Social norms can dictate and justify how people behave. In order to justify their actions, some people

The researcher chose this project because the different reasons people conform to someone or something’s standards interests the researcher greatly. The person running this experiment would like to

There is a fundamental human need to belong to social groups especially if people were to live and work together, it is likely that they need to agree on common beliefs, values, attitudes and behaviours in order to get along and fit-in. Thus, we learnt to conform to rules of other people, the more people see others behaving in a particular way or making particular decisions, the more likely people will feel obliged to follow the suit. This is called conformity and can be defined in different ways, Aronson, Wilson & Akert (2014) stated it is the changing of one’s behavior due to the real or imagined influence of other people. According to Deutsch and Gerard (1955), social influence should be distinguished into two types, the informational social influence and normative social influence. The occurrence of social influence has implied to many real life events, which has drawn many researchers to attention. This has lead many researchers to design distinct experiments to try and understand the cause of the conformity, whether conformity is situation dependent, and whether we are able to resist social influences.

There are lots of articles discussing this topic and there are a few specific ones that stand out. In the article “You Are a Conformist (That Is, You Are Human)” by Noam Shpancer, it shows the pros of conformity of society by using facts and other conducted experiments.In his article Shpancer states that “ Recent research shows that social disapproval provokes the brain’s danger circuits. Conformity soothes”(Shpancer, par.

Based on all the previously referred material, conformity is totally driven by social norms, norms that are not written but sometimes are more powerful than law; the way that a person conforms to society affects the level and type of his compliance to society’s requests. For example, if a person has as personal characteristic not to like altering his self-image/ presentation based on society’s preferences due to his intense belief in independence, it is possible that this person will comply more difficult because of external motivation instead of internal. On the other hand, this means that if a person has an internal compliance only to smile to people who knows and not to