Developmental Comparisons of Conformity Across Two Cultures

Sistrunk, Frank; Clement, David E.; Guenther, Zenita C.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1971.tb02012.x

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Neither study tested for potential curvilinear associations of withdrawal over time. Curvilinear associations are likely because several phenomena related to social evaluation and social withdrawal have been found to follow a curvilinear association with increases during early adolescence and decreases during late adolescence and adulthood, such as self-consciousness (Rankin et al 2004 ), social conformity (Sistrunk et al 1971 ), perceived importance of popularity (LaFontana and Cillessen 2010 ), and social anxiety (Nelemans et al 2014 ).…”

Section: Normative Patterns and At-risk Trajectories Of Social Withdrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Withdrawal in Adolescence and Early Adulthood: Measurement Issues, Normative Development, and Distinct Trajectories

Barzeva

Meeus

Oldehinkel

2018

J Abnorm Child Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social withdrawal during adolescence and early adulthood is particularly problematic due to the increasing importance of social interactions during these ages. Yet little is known about the changes, trajectories, or correlates of being withdrawn during this transition to adulthood. The purpose of this study was to examine the normative change and distinct trajectories of withdrawal in order to identify adolescents and early adults at greatest risk for maladjustment. Participants were from a Dutch population-based cohort study (Tracking Adolescents’ Individual Lives Survey), including 1917 adolescents who were assessed at four waves from the age of 16 to 25 years. Five items from the Youth Self Report and Adult Self Report were found to be measurement invariant and used to assess longitudinal changes in social withdrawal. Overall, participants followed a U-shaped trajectory of social withdrawal, where withdrawal decreased from ages 16 to 19 years, remained stable from 19 to 22 years, and increased from 22 to 25 years. Furthermore, three distinct trajectory classes of withdrawal emerged: a low-stable group (71.8%), a high-decreasing group (12.0%), and a low-curvilinear group (16.2%). The three classes differed on: shyness, social affiliation, reduced social contact, anxiety, and antisocial behaviors. The high-decreasing group endorsed the highest social maladjustment, followed by the low-curvilinear group, and the low-stable group was highly adjusted. We discuss the potential contribution of the changing social network in influencing withdrawal levels, the distinct characteristics of each trajectory group, and future directions in the study of social withdrawal in adolescence and early adulthood. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10802-018-0497-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Normative Patterns and At-risk Trajectories Of Social Withdrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Withdrawal in Adolescence and Early Adulthood: Measurement Issues, Normative Development, and Distinct Trajectories

Barzeva

Meeus

Oldehinkel

2018

J Abnorm Child Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Normative influences appear when relevant others recommend consumers to visit a movie, and as these consumers conform to the opinions and evaluations of others by going to see that movie. These normative influences are ''universal'' and are observed in all cultures, but the extent and manner with which consumers practice them may vary from country to country and from culture to culture (Bagozzi and Lee, 2002;Chu, 1979;Dawar and Parker, 1994;Dawar et al, 1996;D'Rozario, 2001;Hofstede, 2001;Sistrunk, Clement, and Guenther, 1971;Soares, Farhangmehr, and Shoham, 2007;Triandis, 1989).…”

Section: Social Influence and Cross-cultural Differencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These normative influences are “universal” and are observed in all cultures, but the extent and manner with which consumers practice them may vary from country to country and from culture to culture (Bagozzi and Lee, 2002; Chu, 1979; Dawar and Parker, 1994; Dawar et al, 1996; D'Rozario, 2001; Hofstede, 2001; Sistrunk, Clement, and Guenther, 1971; Soares, Farhangmehr, and Shoham, 2007; Triandis, 1989).…”

Section: Cross‐national Field Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulating the Cinema Market: How Cross‐Cultural Differences in Social Influence Explain Box Office Distributions

Broekhuizen

Delre

Torres

2011

J of Product Innov Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper uses a mixed method approach to show how cross-cultural differences in social influences can explain differences in distributions of market shares in different markets. First, we develop a realistic agent-based model that mimics the behavior of movie visitors and incorporates the social influences visitors exert on each other before and after visiting movies. The simulation results indicate that market inequalities are determined by social influences. In particular, we find that the social influence derived from the intended behaviors of others (coordinated consumption effect) has a stronger effect on market inequalities than the social influence derived from the past behavior of others (imitation effect). Second, we empirically validate the simulation results by conducting a crossnational survey that makes use of the cross-cultural differences in Hofstede's collectivism-individualism index as a proxy for the level of social influence present in a market. The results of this field study, performed in China, the Netherlands, Italy, and Spain, empirically show that social influences differ across countries, and that these differences can explain the apparent differences in the dispersion of movies' market shares. The empirical survey further contributes to understanding the role of social influence by revealing a U-shaped relationship between Hofstede's collectivism-individualism index score and the degree of social influence.

show abstract

Peer influence on event reports among adolescents and young adults

McGuire

London

Wright

2011

Memory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When two or more people witness an event together, the event report from one person can influence others' reports. In the current study we examined the role of age and motivational factors on peer influence regarding event reports in adolescents and young adults. Participants (N=249) watched a short video of a robbery then answered questions with no co-witness information or with information believed to be from a co-witness. Public and private response conditions were included to explore motivations for peer influence. Co-witness information influenced participants' responses, although the effect was equally strong in the private and the public co-witness conditions. Peer influence on event reports was steady across a large age range (11- to 25-year-olds).

show abstract

Developmental Comparisons of Conformity Across Two Cultures

Cited by 3 publications

References 12 publications

Social Withdrawal in Adolescence and Early Adulthood: Measurement Issues, Normative Development, and Distinct Trajectories

Social Withdrawal in Adolescence and Early Adulthood: Measurement Issues, Normative Development, and Distinct Trajectories

Simulating the Cinema Market: How Cross‐Cultural Differences in Social Influence Explain Box Office Distributions

Peer influence on event reports among adolescents and young adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About