Surowiecki's Social Comparison Theory

Using individualism to think and live like others is not always bad. Being able to connect to a group of people brings happiness and a sense of belonging which is needed in people's lives. It is also good to want to be like others because in dire situations where mass populations are needed to comprehend directions, all these people are conscious and knowledgeable of the situation. However, the loss of individualism is a problem to society because there becomes a loss of diversion and spread of ideas which come from individuality. The belonging to a group is satisfying, but it leads to the overall loss of our individuality as people and a society, which is the barrier to against the individuality

Tajfel (1979) states that pride and self-esteem were things people gained from belonging to a group. The theory is based on how cognitive process influence people to group things together. In-groups are groups you identify yourself with, and out-groups are groups you do not identify with, and may discriminate against. The theory suggests that we increase our self-image by discriminating and holding prejudiced views against the out group, there are three stages involved, the first stage is categorization, this is the process of categorizing objects or interests in order to understand them and identify with them, the second stage is social identification, we adopt the identity of the group we have feel like we belong to and begin to fulfil a role within that group, the final stage is social comparison, this is the tendency to compare your group with other groups, to maintain your high self-esteem and minimum prejudice and discrimination, the comparisons need to favour your group. Group membership is a real part of a person and some need it more than others (McLeod, 2008).

This is modeled by the fact that people being in groups, causes them to act and think differently than they would have if they had been alone. In her essay, Tavris uses many examples of this: In the case of Kitty Genovese or the late Rodney King who was beat to death by police officers. People have a tendency to act differently in groups, others suffer due to people not wanting to “rock the boat” or they do not want to “embarrass themselves or others if they are wrong” (19). Tavris offers a solution to the way people act in groups, “By understanding the impulse to diffuse responsibility, perhaps as individuals we will be more likely to act. By understanding the social pressures that reward group-think, loyalty and obedience, we can foster those that reward whistle blowing and moral courage. And, as a society, we can reinforce the belief that they also sing who stand and watch” (19). If civilization can solve the dilemma of people acting differently when they are in groups with others, the world could be a much improved place.

Throughout Malcolm Gladwell essay he describes several examples of activism of different political movements. I agree with Gladwell’s argument about social media, like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc., is a form of weak-tie activism and strong-tie activism requires strong connections to other individuals who are willing to sacrifice for a cause. Throughout the essay, the author takes us through different scenarios in history to prove his point regarding the difference between traditional activism and non-traditional.

Gladwell’s piece explains why social media will not be an effective tool in organizing activism. He claims that social media is not a dangerous tool to truly change the existing state of affairs. Throughout his essay, Gladwell refers to many different protests throughout history and calls on the reader to discern that the events that did not use social media were better and more centrally organized and often more successful. The higher success rate in the protests without social media is cause of “strong tie“ phenomenon which is when people have an invested interest in the event due to emotional bonds and face to face social connections. An example that Gladwell uses of a successful protest was the Greensboro sit-ins. Due to face to face contact,

In order to have an even stronger system we need our supporters to understand and believe in the action that is being protested. Social media is capable with not only getting in contact with other people but it allows you to grab those people’s attentions in many different ways. These followers need to be convinced and taught about the different options that they can be given. Many people follow trends, and with social media being a big part of the trend it makes it easier to have an audience. It is easy for people to invite people to a group, or event on Facebook or even having a following of tweeters on Twitter because people are able to add descriptions. In this descriptions majority of people who are protesting are able to write who they are, what the problem is, give ideas of solutions to the problem and overall a way to convince their readers to press ‘Like’, ‘re-tweet’, ‘Follow’ or ‘Attend’. With their explanation they can create a bandwagon of supporters and build a strong willed support system. Gladwell used the example of the Bhatia needing a bone-marrow transplant. Even though people helped by signing up for a donor registry and sending in a

Groups can influence people’s perception and ideas even if they contradict their own. Groups can act as an entity of authority, and for some people it is difficult to stand out or think differently than their peers. “When we’re in a

Walter Payton famously said “We are stronger together than we are alone”. In Malcolm Gladwell’s article “Small Change- Why the Revolution Will Not be Tweeted”, Gladwell discusses the pros and cons of a situation in which social activism is amplified when combined with social media. Throughout his article he states various reasons why social media would not be an effective way to get people to be involved in a large-scale revolution. He also provides a lot of examples that show why social media is not a good platform to start a revolution. By using historical examples, the “strong tie” phenomenon, and through his constant skeptic tone desiring to uncover the truth, Gladwell effectively persuades his readers that social media has had more of a bad influence on social activism than beneficial one.

In Norman Gladwell’s “Small Change”, he seeks to answer the question: can activism through social media be as effective as it’s real world counterpart? In his opinion, no, though he notes that it can have it’s uses. Gladwell's primary argument is that social media sites lack the hierarchy and structure needed to execute and control the highly risky protests required to actually make a change, citing the almost militant precision exhibited by the civil rights movement. He theorizes that this is because social media is incapable of fostering the deep bonds between people necessary to trust and devote themselves wholly to their comrades and cause. He concludes that while social media activism can

Hence, conforming to people’s ideals can happen in various societies despite the level of

Even today, divisions in groups have been as a result of continued differences among the uniting groups. Humans have a tendency to incline towards the protection of their interest’s aid favors of their perceived groups. Such favourism makes them advocate fully for their interests posing a challenging opposing side to the interests of their unperceived groups. Many nations today are faced with such opposing groups having differing interests and ideals. People advocating for similar ideals tend to create strong ties of

The information on social referencing is found on page 334 of the textbook. When I was in elementary school, I would often compare myself to others. This is known as social comparison (Levine & Munsch). One way I would do this is if someone made an A on the test, and I made a B or a C, I wouldn’t feel good enough. It didn’t help that my dad would often make me strive for A’s and get onto me when I didn’t quite make a good grade. Information on social comparison can be found on page 377 of the textbook. During adolescence, I was not part of any popular crowd. I was sort of in a small clique, which is a small group of friends that spend time together and are close (Levine & Munsch). During middle school, I was frequently bullied, which is when

According to renowned psychologist René Girard, human nature revolves around mimicry of others. This imitation allows large groups of people to be united in pursuit of certain goals. Such unity is combatted when there are conflicting interests among groups. More often than not, the opinion of the largest party would overrule any minority, pressuring every individual to agree with the masses. However, strife and conflict remain within the collective hearts of groups.

Belonging to a group and being a fundamental part of that group is an objective for all citizens of the human race. But how a particular group is viewed and how important they are to society can differ, resulting in an unbalanced view of groups and a scar on peoples pride and image of themselves.The idea of importance differs and while 'medicine, law, business, engineering: are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. Art, music, poetry and literature are people live for'. One cannot be put on top of the other because everyone needs something else to live for, and while one strives for one thing the other looks onto another path. Being part

According to McCarthy and Zald, (1977), sociologists and political scientists propose that availability of resources and political opportunities are core to mobilization of protests. They argue that groups with many resources and more opportunities, their likelihood to mobilize is higher. The answer as to the reason why some people are more mobilized to protest while others are not is efficacy. Efficacy is an individual`s expectation that altering policies or situations through demonstrations is possible. For the view of possibility of change to exist, people should perceive group as being able to come together and fight for the particular concern. Additionally, people must be in a position to perceive the political framework as receptive for all the claims made by the group. Efficacy can be grouped into group efficacy and political efficacy whereby group efficacy is the belief that problems that are group associated can be addressed by collective efforts; whereas political efficacy is the belief that political acts can have an effect on political