The effect of person-group relationships on conformity processes.

Abstract

\NY previous studies of conformity behavior-among them the wellknown experiments of Sherif and Asch (1, 2, 11)-have employed situations where the forces to conform were essentially cognitive in origin. A person in a situation of judgment or choice is confronted with contradictory information from two different sources. He has to weigh the evidence provided by his own perception of the stimulus against his knowledge of the actions or judgments of other persons. Festinger (5) has pointed out that a person will have a need for social reality, i.e., a need to depend upon information provided directly or indirectly by others, to the degree that his information from so-called physical sources is inadequate.Forces to conform which are created by a person's need for social reality have their source in his desire to make an appropriate rather than an inappropriate response, or to perceive the world accurately rather than inaccurately. This process of coming to cognitive terms with his environment can be distinguished from other processes of conformity that are influenced by the person's membership or nonrnembership in a group, the strength of his attraction to membership, or the relevance of the situation to the goals of the group.In experiments by Festinger, Thibaut, Schachter, and others (5, 6, 10), forces to conform were created which derived from pressures towards uniformity in a problemsolving group. These forces, generated by a process called group locomotion, are induced upon all persons who belong to the group and, especially, upon any deviant who may be blocking the group's progress toward its goal. The more attractive a group is for a member, the stronger are the forces from this source acting upon him to conform (3, 5).1 This study was conducted under Contract Nonr-1224(11) with the Office of Naval Research. A mimeographed report containing the detailed instruments and procedures is available elsewhere (9). This article is based in part on a report to the annual meetings of the American Psychological Association, September 1956.

Social Ostracism

“…Other evidence suggests that the desire for group membership does not decrease when the rejecting group is viewed as highly attractive (Jackson & Saltzstein, 1957). Snoek (1962) had groups reject individuals by not talking to them, either because ostensibly they were not worthy of group membership (personal) or because the group was too large (impersonal).…”

Psychologie des minorités actives

“…Il n'a pas essaye de démontrer, [41] qu'en cas d'incertitude, les gens deviennent influençables ou que, lorsqu'ils se conforment au groupe, ils doivent payer le prix de l'incertitude dans leurs propres croyances et jugements. Néanmoins, lorsque sa recherche a été intégrée dans le courant général (Deutsch et Gérard, 1955 ;Jackson et Saltzenstein, 1958) on n'a pas tenu compte de son caractère exceptionnel.…”

“…Kelley et Lamb (1957) ont eu l'occasion d'observer que les individus les plus extrêmes étaient aussi les moins influences. Jackson et Saltzenstein (1958) ont, à leur tour, découvert que les membres qui s'identifient le plus étroitement avec le groupe sont plus conformistes que les membres marginaux. Mais l'ouvrage précé-demment cité de Freedman et Doob (1968) nous fournit une moisson particuliè-rement abondante.…”

Going along versus getting it right: The role of self-integrity in political conformity

“…Group norms provide information about how to maintain acceptance in the group and, by extension, how to avoid becoming a "black sheep" (Marques, Yzerbyt, & Leyens 1988). People are especially likely to conform to groups they find attractive (Jackson & Saltzstein, 1958) and to groups that have a high level of cohesion or interdependence (Deutsch & Gerard, 1955). Notably, people are generally unaware of the powerful impact of normative information on their own attitudes and behavior (Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004;Cohen, 2003;Latanè & Darley, 1970;Nolan, Schultz, Cialdini, Goldstein, & Griskevicius, 2008).…”