Situational Factors In Conformity

Allen, Vernon L.

doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60105-7

Cited by 305 publications

(219 citation statements)

References 103 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

205

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This effect of social conformity is stronger in cases where the "majority" consists of members of your "in group" (e.g., Allen, 1965), which is always the case in the situations in question. Furthermore, social conformity is higher when individuals that are in disagreement with you are in a position of authority (e.g., Milgram, 1974), which is relevant in cases where, for example, the talk is given by someone who is well respected in the field.…”

Section: An Invalid Argument: Presenting Research At Public Forums Ismentioning

confidence: 96%

The need for quantitative methods in syntax and semantics research

Gibson

Fedorenko

2013

Language and Cognitive Processes

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prevalent method in syntax and semantics research involves obtaining a judgment of the acceptability of a sentence / meaning pair, typically by just the author of the paper, sometimes with feedback from colleagues. This methodology does not allow proper testing of scientific hypotheses because of (a) the small number of experimental participants (typically one); (b) the small number of experimental stimuli (typically one); (c) cognitive biases on the part of the researcher and participants; and (d) the effect of the preceding context (e.g., other constructions the researcher may have been recently considering). In the current paper we respond to some arguments that have been given in support of continuing to use the traditional non-quantitative method in syntax / semantics research. One recent defense of the traditional method comes from Phillips (2008), who argues that no harm has come from the non-quantitative approach in syntax research thus far. Phillips argues that there are no cases in the literature where an incorrect intuitive judgment has become the basis for a widely accepted generalization or an important theoretical claim. He therefore concludes that there is no reason to adopt more rigorous data collection standards. We challenge Philips' conclusion by presenting three cases from the literature where a faulty intuition has led to incorrect generalizations and mistaken theorizing, plausibly due to cognitive biases on the part of the researchers.Furthermore, we present additional arguments for rigorous data collection standards. For example, allowing lax data collection standards has the undesirable effect that the results and claims will often be ignored by researchers with stronger methodological standards.Finally, we observe that behavioral experiments are easier to conduct in English than ever before, with the advent of Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk, a marketplace interface that Quantitative syntax 3 can be used for collecting behavioral data over the internet.Quantitative syntax 4

show abstract

Section: An Invalid Argument: Presenting Research At Public Forums Ismentioning

confidence: 96%

The need for quantitative methods in syntax and semantics research

Gibson

Fedorenko

2013

Language and Cognitive Processes

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Asch, 1956), which as such was adopted by contemporary scientists (e.g. Allen, 1965;Cohen, Bornstein, & Sherman, 1973) and has remained a commonly used concept (e.g. see Bond, 2005).…”

Section: Human Conformity Revisitedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conformity without majority? The case for demarcating social from majority influences

Leeuwen

Haun

2014

Animal Behaviour

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Keywords: conformity decision making frequency-dependent learning majority influence nonhuman animals social learningIn this review, we explore the extent to which the recent evidence for conformity in nonhuman animals may alternatively be explained by the animals' preference for social information regardless of the number of individuals demonstrating the respective behaviour. Conformity as a research topic originated in human psychology and has been described as the phenomenon in which individuals change their behaviour to match the behaviour displayed by the majority of group members. Recent studies have aimed to investigate the same process in nonhuman animals; however, most of the adopted designs have not been able to control for social influences independent of any majority influence and some studies have not even incorporated a majority in their designs. This begs the question to what extent the 'conformity interpretation' is preliminary and should be revisited in light of animals' general susceptibility to social influences. Similarly, demarcating social from majority influences sheds new light on the original findings in human psychology and motivates reinterpretation of the reported behavioural patterns in terms of social instead of majority influences. Conformity can have profound ramifications for individual fitness and group dynamics; identifying the exact source responsible for animals' behavioural adjustments is essential for understanding animals' learning biases and interpreting cross-species data in terms of evolutionary processes.

show abstract

“…It is reasonable to conclude that influence is associated with low confidence and that independence is associated with high confidence. This conclusion is based on extensive evidence and is summarized in reviews by Allen (1965Allen ( , 1975, Allen and Wilder (1977), Jones and Gerard (1967) and Kiesler and Kiesler (1969).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…There are three classes of indirect evidence which can be interpreted as showing the role of uncertainty in the influence process (the area has been reviewed by Allen (1965) and Jones and Gerard (1967) but research showing resistance to influence, e.g. Allen (1975) is just as relevant).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%