Social Expulationment

Choice theory says that before a person commits a crime they weigh the consequences and benefits of their actions before committing the action, however, what the person does not get to consider is the unforeseeable consequences of their actions behinds those criminal acts, that is the invisible punishments. When defendants go before a judge and plead guilty, the judge engages them in a colloquy, this is a conversation between the judge and defendant making sure the defendant was not coerced into pleading guilty, that they were not under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and that they are pleading guilty because they are guilty. What is not openly discussed is all the other privileges they would be giving up by pleading guilty.

After collecting the data we can see that in all trials conformity increased when the all 18 participants were placed in a their small group environments of 6 . In trial 1 conformity increased by 33.33%, the range went from 3 to 2, in trial 2 conformity increased by 50% the range went from 2 to 1, trial 3 conformity increased by 75%, the range went from 4 to 1. From the results we can state that when individuals are placed with confederates they will most likely conform the most. Research has shown that when looking into normative social influence, people have a basic need to 'fit into the group' , the group doesn't have to be important, people just have a need to be accepted and this encourages people to conform to a certain behaviour to be accepted. Moreover.

Now, coupling the foreign setting, strange behaviors and the fact they have been paid with the principle of participant obedience, it can be assumed that all these attributes mixed together would result in an overly obedient test subject. To accurately study the baseline for the principle of obedience in

Conformity is the way that most people do in accordance to their behavior in their society (Conformity 1). Group Conformity is the way that human beings are affected by the behavior of others around them. The first experiment that studied group conformity was performed by Jenness in 1932 (Conformity 4). Following this experiment many more were performed such as The Stanford County Prison Experiment, Solomon Asch Experiment, Candid Camera Elevator Experiment, The Milgram Experiment, and the Bystander effect (Reyes). Just like there are many different types of experiments, there are also many different types of conformity compliance, internalisation, identification and ingratiational (Conformity). This paper will go over some of the many experiments

The students for the study were split into two groups for the two conditions. The two conditions were contiguous and noncontiguous with 25 students in each. The participants were given consent to sign, read the instructions and a cover story. It was understood by the students that the study was researching information about gun violence in the US. The film viewed was called “Bang You’re Dead” by Alfred Hitchcock and lasted 20 minutes.They were randomly given one the film conditions and were told to raise their index finger each time they heard the word “gun” in the film. The instructions were also not repeated to them throughout the study. The word “gun” was said 7 times in both

and changes in behavioral (Bernet, 2010). Moreover, it is important to note “that of all of

Persuasion, by definition, is the process by which a message induces change in beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors (Myers, 2010). There are two different paths that leads to influence. These two paths, or routes, are called the Central Route and the Peripheral Route. Although these two paths enable information to be processed differently, there are four elements that determine whether the information will be influential or not. These four elements include who is giving the information, what is being said, by what method is the information given, and to whom is it being told to.

Conformity, the most popular form of social influence, has been described as the ability of oneself to change their core behavior so as to have the same response as others and to fit in the norms set up by society (Deutsch & Gerard, 1955). With a view to understanding what conformity really is, Asch decided to carry out a relatively simple experiment where the participants had to undergo a visual perception test (Asch, 1951). The participants had two cards respectively on which there was a line of basic length and on the other cards were three other lines of three different lengths; the participants had to choose which of the three lines matched with that of basic lengths. What the participants were unaware of was that out of the groups of 7 or 9 that was predetermined, only the participant was the real subject of the study while the others were associates of the investigator who were asked to give wrong answers on purpose in more than 50% of the case. It was made sure that the real subject only announced his verdict prior to the last respondent (Asch,

Weaknesses of these articles are the date of which they were written. Both articles were written in the 1990s. Making some information not as current in the studies (Negin, 1991; Oakland et al., 1998). In Negin (1991) the student were given a test from 1987.

This study consisted of seventy-one male in introductory psychology class, experimenter, and a girl hired for the experiment (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959). Participant arrived in the secretary office, and was directed to the lab. The first task consisted of using one hand to put twelve spools on a tray, empty the tray and refill the tray for half hour. Later, the participant constantly quarter turns the peg using one hand for half hour. While the participant performed the tedious task, the experimenter noted observations. The experimenter was not recording; the participant performed tedious task to generate negative opinion. Once both of the tasks were completed the experimenter began describing the true nature of the study. There were two groups; one group got no introduction or information about the experiment, meanwhile, the other

A murder has killed a family only to be arrested the next day. The judge gives the murder the sentence of 2 lifetime in a medium to high security prison. For the murder this means 40 years in prison. That’s 40 years of food and clothing that could have gone to a prisoner that would be out of jail in a few years. Instead the murder eats and in a few years he finds a way to escape the prison only to kill another family. That’s a family that did nothing wrong and now they are in a grave, because a murder was put in a underfunded prison and managed to escape.

Sentences started being suspended just to give the defendant another chance. From these practices emerged the creation of probation. The trial courts have power to grant probation at any time prior to the execution of a sentence. The courts have sound discretion when deciding whether to grant probation. Probation was originally a way to keep first time and less serious offenders from undergoing the “corrupting effect of jail terms.” Further, supervision under probation can range anywhere from 6-months to 10-years.

In 1951 Solomn Asch, a Polish psychologist, administered an experiment to consider the effect to which social pressures from a majority group would have on an individual to conform. Solomn had a staged group of nine people and a single real participant take a visual line comparison test, in which participants would choose which line out of three matched the comparison line best. After running twelve trials, Solomn found that around seventy-five percent of real participants would knowingly conform at least once to the majority group that would always pick the wrong line. Solomn was able to conclude that people conform for two main reasons: either to fit in, known as normative influence, or because they believe they are less informed than the

Solomon Asch conducted one of the most famous studies of conformity in 1951. The problem, he believed, was there was no correct answer to Sherif’s experiment; so judging conformity was vague in terms of data (Asch 1951). In answer to this issue, he devised a study to distinctively judge the conformation of the participants. Using 50 male college students, Asch placed one participant with seven confederates, who had previously agreed on their answers, and asked each person to state which line out of three options was the closest to the sample line given.

The subject of conformity is considered a primary point of research in social psychology. Many social psychologists throughout history have experimented and evaluated the attributes of conformity, concluding key factors that contribute to conformity. With consideration, it is arguable that culture and group size are two of the most accountable factors in social conformity. Evidently, research in these areas are both highly notable and in abundance; with respect to studies such as the Asch Line Experiment (Asch, 1951) and the Stanford Prison Experiment (Zimbardo, 1971). Social psychological theories such as The Chameleon Effect (Chartrand & Bragh, 1999) also suggest evidence of conformism in society. Furthermore, the power and influence of minority groups (Minority Influence Theory; Charlan Jeanne Nemeth, 2009; Moscovivi and Lage, 1976) can importantly provide insight into not only how a minority can influence a majority in society but also show an alternative argument to the Asch paradigm. Fundamentally, all three factors that contribute to conformity are in attempt to describe human behaviour.