Individuation, gender role, and dissent: Personality mediators of situational forces.

Abstract

An experimental analysis of dissenting and conforming behavior in small groups revealed a significant interaction between personality and situational variables. Individual differences in gender role and in willingness to be "individuated" were predictive of subjects' choices to disagree or agree with the opinions of other group members. However, this link between personality and social behavior showed within-subjects variation as a function of two situational factors: group norm and opinion topic. Contrary to traditional expectations, personality was a better predictor of behavior on those trials when peer pressure was strong than when it was weak. Personality variables also differentially predicted responses to masculine opinion topics versus feminine ones. These results contribute to a new understanding of the interaction of pereon and situation, as well as to the psychological meaning of conformity and dissent. They also bear on the long-standing debate about sex differences in influenceability.Current theorizing about personality and situations has emphasized the importance of studying interactions between these two factors, rather than limiting analyses to main effects. This position accords well with Allport's assertion 50 years ago that "traits are often aroused in one type of situation and not in another; not all stimuli are equivalent in effectiveness" (Allport, 1937, pp. 331-332). Thus, researchers have argued that personality will be more predictive of behavior when situational pressures are weak and less predictive when situational pressures are strong (Mischel, 1977;Monson, Hesley, &Chernick, 1982).More recently, it has been proposed that personality traits will also predict behavior in strong situations that are precipitating (i.e., that maximize behavioral manifestations of relevant dispositional differences; Snyder & Ickes, 1985). In these and other approaches, there has been an attempt to specify the types of situations in which personality either will or will not have an impact on behavior.The concept of situation has not always been clearly denned, but it usually refers to the immediate setting in which the individual is located. As such, it includes the physical environment, other people, social norms or constraints, and other types of physical or social stimuli. Given the complexity of what constitutes a situation, it is not always easy to specify which situations are most relevant to personality traits and their behavioral expression. Theorizing has often been at a more molar or typological level, in which contrasting situations (e.g., structured vs. unstructured) involve very different types of task settings (e.g.,

Influence of primed social roles on gender differences in conformity

“…These results highlight the importance of examining gender roles in future conformity research. Overall, the results support recent research that indicates a subtle change in women's gender roles (Diekman & Eagly, 2000;Diekman & Goodfriend, 2006 A review of the literature on gender differences in conformity reveals a series of inconsistent results across studies (e.g., Collin, Di Sano, & Malik, 1994;Eagly, Wood, & Fishbaugh, 1981;Endler, 1966;Follingstad, 1979;Maslach, Santee, & Wade, 1987;Maupin & Fisher, 1989;Reysen & Reysen, 2004;Santee & Jackson, 1982;Sistrunk & McDavid, 1971) and meta-analyses (Cooper, 1979;Eagly, 1978;Eagly & Carli, 1981). While most researchers argue that there is little evidence to suggest that women always conform more than men, most researchers find at least some evidence to support the idea that women conform more than men sometimes or in some situations.…”

“…Specifically, this research found that masculine participants were more likely to dissent and feminine participants were more likely to conform, regardless of gender (Maslach, Santee, & Wade, 1987). Additionally, men and women high in femininity have both been found to conform more to masculine items, while men and women high in masculinity have been found to conform more to feminine items (Goldberg, 1975).…”

“…Beyond gender differences, some researchers have considered the effects of gender roles on conformity (Goldberg, 1975;Maslach, Santee, & Wade, 1987;Maupin & Fisher, 1989). Gender roles are defined in terms of masculinity and femininity (Bem, 1974).…”

“…Specifically, men have a tendency to conform less or dissent when they are under surveillance (Eagly, Wood, & Fishbaugh, 1981), when they can choose an equally positive, but different alternative (Maslach, Santee, & Wade, 1987), or when they have been primed with a mating motive (i.e., asked to think about meeting a desirable mate on vacation) and can be viewed in a positive light (i.e., a desirable, independent mate) by dissenting from the group (Griskevicius et al, 2006). This suggests that closer attention should be paid to the exact pattern of means in relation to an appropriate comparison group in order to discern whether differences are being driven by a higher likelihood of women going along with the influence agent or higher likelihood of men going against the influence agent.…”

Positive and Negative Opinion Modeling: The Influence of Another's Similarity and Dissimilarity.

“…However, gender differences in modeling and social comparison have not been consistent and appear to be highly personality and domain specific (Carli, 2001;Deaux & Major, 1987). For instance, opinions or behaviors believed to be particularly masculine or feminine may result in different male and female responses, and these differences may depend on personality characteristics, such as gender role and desire to individuate (Maslach, Santee, & Wade, 1987). Also, depending on the domain, the gender of a model may connote status or competence, thus causing differences in how observers respond (Eagly, 1983;Schunk, 1987).…”