The Pressure To Conformity Trial

In 1932, Jenness conducted the first study of conformity. The experiment was ambiguous as there was no right or wrong answer. The study focused on the participants' estimates on the number of beans in a bottle. Firstly, Jenness asked his participants to individually estimate the number of beans. He then gathered the group and got them to examine the contents. Finally, the researcher once again asked individuals for an estimate and observed that nearly all the individuals changed their original estimates to be closer to the group estimate, therefore showing a level of conformity.

In 1963 a psychologist named Stanley Milgram conducted one of the greatest controversial experiments of all time. Milgram tested students from Yale to discover the obedience of people to an authoritative figure. The subjects, whom did not know the shocks would not hurt, had to shock a “learner” when the “learner” answered questions incorrectly. Milgram came under fire for this experiment, which many proclaimed was unethical. This experiment of Milgram’s stimulated the creation of several responsive articles. Two articles that respond to this experiment are authored by Diane Baumrind and Ian Parker. These two authors attempt to review the methods, results, and ethical issues of Milgram’s experiment.

Solomon Asch 's (1951) conformity experiment is the study of people adapting their behaviours in order to follow the social normalities. This experiment entails a group of people who are actors and know about the experiment, and one person who is unknowing of the experiment, which are all in the same room. The group is shown a pair of cards; card A has a line on the card, and card B has three lines varying in length on the card, the similarities of the lines are obvious. The group individually, saying out loud picks one of the three lines on card B that matches the length of the line on card A. Everybody picks the correct line, this happens for a few rounds, then when shown another pair of cards the first actor chooses the wrong line on card B. The rest of the actors choose the same line the first actor chose, this tests to see if the unknowing participant will choose the same answer as the group (McLeod, 2008). The person who is unknowing of the

In 1951, Solomon Asch carried out several experiments on conformity. The aim of these studies was to investigate conformity in a group environment situation. The purpose of these experiments was to see if an individual would be swayed by public pressure to go along with the incorrect answer. Asch believed that conformity reflects on relatively rational process in which people are pressured to change their behaviour. Asch designed experiments to measure the pressure of a group situation upon an individual judgment. Asch wanted to prove that conformity can really play a big role in disbelieving our own senses.

Asch’s experiment was performed in 1951 and is now a classic experiment in psychology. Asch asked individuals a simple question and a high percentage answered correctly. Then Asch placed a participant in a room with seven actors who had predetermined incorrect answers. When asked in front of the group, 75% of people would give incorrect answers clearly because of they conformed to the actors around them. Asch then concluded that it is natural for one to conform to society in order to fit

In Solomon E. Asch’s social pressure experiment, subjects were shown a line on a piece of paper and instructed to choose a line of the same length on a different piece of paper with two other lines of varying lengths. All but one of the subjects in each experiment group were instructed to choose the wrong answer on purpose, unbeknownst to the last member. The last member of the group, who did not know

The confederates were told ahead of time what their responses would be. The line judgment test had a standard line and three other lines. Out of the three lines, one line was the same length as the standard line, one was shorter and one was longer. The object was to see if the subject would agree with the other individuals. The wrong answer was given by the confederates to see if the subject would conform or stand alone. Out of eighteen trials, twelve of which being “critical trials”, approximately 75% of the subjects conformed at least once and 25% of the subjects never conformed. He found that subjects conformed with the wrong answers of the majority but did not actually agree with their answers. Therefore, individuals conform as a result of reasons such as wanting to fit in with the majority or because they of the assumption that the group has better information as compared to them.

The next experiment focuses on obedience and why the tests subjects reacted the way they did. Stanley Milgram reflects on the study conducted and the outcomes of the electric shock study in an article titled “The Perils of Obedience”. The experiment calls for a teacher participant to do word association with a learner. When an incorrect answer is given by the learner, the teacher is under the instruction to administer electric shock on an upwards scale as the experiment continues. There comes a point in the experiment when the teachers feel uncomfortable continuing to shock the learner. Many times though the teacher continues at the urging of an individual overseeing the experiment. The first experiment that Milgram conducted was using Yale undergraduates, the results reflected “about 60 percent of them being fully obedient (696).” Another experiment was then conducted using “ordinary people” as the people of New Haven were labeled (Milgram 696). Milgram made the following statement about the results: “The experiment’s total outcome was the same as we had observed among the students (696).” The study did reflect that even though a person did not agree with the commands especially when putting another individual through he or she did as told more than half of the time. More studies were conducted around the world by other professors; many of the experiments had the same or similar results. There is one study that was conducted that has

Baumrind fairly claims the “laboratory is not the place” to conduct studies of obedience as the laboratory tends to increase the number of variables above what is desired (Baumrind 90). Science Magazine defends Baumrind’s claim by conducting an experiment directed toward answering the question of the reproducibility of previously conducted psychological experiments. The data collected shows a significant decrease in the strength of the data collected and the number of experiments deemed reproducible was much smaller than those which were reproducible (“Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science”). If the experiment’s results are correct, then Baumrind has fairly contested the integrity of the results of the experiment conducted by Milgram since his results have a stronger chance of not being reproduced in a laboratory than of being reproduced in a laboratory. Milgram adds credibility to his article by mentioning the population from which the subjects were drawn. Initially, Milgram enlists Yale undergraduates to volunteer for his study which led to results consistent with his study, but severely taints the credibility of his experiment. He then modifies his experiment and enlarges to volunteer population to include that of anyone living in the city (Milgram 80-81). His

Solomon Asch set up a laboratory experiment using deception and confederates to determine what factors were involved in conformity and individual decisions in group decisions. Asch instructed subjects to choose which of three lines was the same length as the original line shown. Each subject was on a panel with seven other subjects, however in reality were confederates. The experimenter demonstrated the two cards and asked the individuals to choose the line on the comparison card that is the same length as the standard line. In the second trial the process was repeated again. However, on the third trial, when the card is revealed everyone gave wrong answers. The results indicate that approximately 75% of the subjects went with the group’s

An experimenter held up one of the cards and the subjects had to match on of the lines with the single line. For the first two cards, the seven matched the two pairs on lines correctly. The eighth subject answered correctly as well. On the third pair of cards, the seven subjects answered wrong to see if the eighth subject would conform or answer correctly. Asch found out that 75% of the subjects conformed at least once in the trials, but not one person conformed every time. The other 25% did not conform with any of the groups decisions. Some of the experiments had the subjects write down their answer so the line lengths could be accurately judged. In these experiments, 98% of the real subjects answered correctly. Asch found out many things from the experiment. Some of the findings are social support, attraction and commitment to the group, size of the group, and sex. Asch did the same experiment with a slight variation. He changed the answers of the seven subjects so that one of them always gave the right answer. This comforted the real subject and only 5% of the subjects agreed with the group answer. This social support experiment showed that if one person gives the same answer then a person feels more comfortable. Also, other experiments showed that the more attracted and committed

On average, about thirty-two percent of the participants conformed to pick the blatantly wrong answer and over the twelve trials seventy-five percent of the students conformed at least once, and twenty-five didn’t conform at all. Many of the participants afterward admitted they conformed to give the wrong answer because they wanted to avoid being ridiculed and some thought the group really was correct. Is was the results of this experiment that led Asch to conclude that whenever people conform it’s to either fit in or because they believe that since they’re in the minority their conclusion is incorrect. Another influential experiment concerning conformity is the Stanford Prison Experiment. Conducted in 1973, Phillip Zimbardo wanted to determine if brutality in prison systems was due to the

With this addiction would allow Asch to determine how the answers of the subject would change with the addition of peer pressure onto the real subject. The results of the experiment were interesting, which showed that peer pressure was a big influence on the answers given by the subjects. The results about the people giving an incorrect answer, one third of the real subjects also voiced an incorrect answer. The means that 75% of the subjects gave the wrong answer to at least one question, so there was no doubt that peer pressure can cause conformity. There was debate whether peer pressure can cause conformity because people did not believe the results and believe that the subjects were just being obedient. There were many other Asch Experiments that showed disobedient voices that difference to the results, so did the forcefulness of the actors. For example, one incorrect answer made by an actor made little difference to the answers, but the influence increased if two or more people disagreed. The results did not change much after this point because more actors made little difference. Also, the number of people in the group also made a

Solomon Asch was a psychologist that conduced numerous expirments designed to illustrate the increasing conformity within social groups. The experiments also invesigated the effect the number of people present within the group had one the conformity rate. Asch hypothesized, “ that the majority of the people would not conform to something obviosly wrong; however, when surrounded by (other) individuals all voicing an incorrect answer, 75% of them(the participant) will conform to the groups answer” (Watzlawick 1976)

So Dr. Asch asked, did the people who gave in to the group do so knowing that their answers was wrong? Or did the social pressure actually change their perceptions?. To answer the question I believe it was social pressure that changed their perceptions, I believe that these participants were influenced by their fellow peers, which encouraged them to follow their peers and changed their thoughts and reality of the real answer. The articles goes on speaking about conformity and a new study that was being researched on perception. “The new study tried to find an answer by using functional M.R.I scanners that can peer into the working brain, a technology not available to Dr. Asch.” As stated in the article, the researcher found that social conformity showed up in the brain as activity in regions that are entirely devoted to perception. And our independent judgment was found in our emotional activity in the brain, this is significant because it makes sense that the conformity would associate itself with the area of the brain that deal with perception. Because as I said before conformity is rules and standards made by society, people can change and shape our perception in a very significant way. But it takes our emotions to stand up against that group and have our own independent judgment. Now In this new research, they used 32 volunteers and informed them that they’ll be in the M.R.I scanner. They were asking to rotate images of three-dimensional objects to