Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Human behavior in social environment theories
Influence of social environment to human behaviors
How does social structure shape our lives
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Human behavior in social environment theories
Normative influence refers to individuals conforming to a certain behaviour lead through examples set by others. It generally involves humans behaving in specific ways to gain approval from a specific person or group, necessarily the individual usually does not even realise they are doing it. Normative social influence is an important area for research in social psychology and for the purposes of this essay I will discuss the power that it has on behaviour, providing research from two areas of social psychology.
Within the social hierarchy and the daunting-ness of social pressure, the concern about the impressions we make have a big impact on our behaviour. This often influences the choices we decide upon and the things we do and say whilst
…show more content…
We tend to conform to these examples due to information and pragmatics. If you see others deciding on a certain answer in a test, you are more likely to also go for that option if the information you already acquire is limited. If other people tell you rhubarb leaves are poisonous, then to be safe, in the absence of better information we should not eat them (7th edition. Gray, Bjorklund). Within each stem of social life lies the great power of sharing information. Humans use this advantage to avoid having to make additional mistakes in life. This type of normative social influence is referred to as informational influence. Another reason we may conform to these behaviours, is to feel socially accepted by a group and to encourage the togetherness of a group. There is a fundamental human need in society to feel worthy of belonging somewhere, usually within a group setting. Within these social groups, the pressure to conform is often very high and usually stems from a social interaction or from the social norms that the group or an individual from the group believes. Therefore, an individual will adjust their own beliefs and behaviours in order to align themselves with the thinking of a particular group. This is often to feel accepted or to feel that sense of closeness within the group. Asche (1951) was the first social psychologist to demonstrate conformity and …show more content…
The aim of this study was to find out how far an individual would go when under strict orders and how the experience would affect them. The experiment was made up of 40 male participants who were then allocated into groups. The allocating process made sure the confederates of the researcher were given the roles of the teachers and the actual participant was the “learner”. The learners were strapped into a chair and electrodes were taped to their wrist. The teacher was under order to read off the questions on a verbal memory test and to shock the learners for every question they answer wrong. As the experiment progresses onwards the shocks for the learners get stronger as the number of questions answered wrong increases. However, what the subject did not know was that the learners were also confederates of the experimenter and that in actual fact no harm was caused to those in the electric chairs. The teachers were showing signs of struggle as each shock was administered and pleaded with the man in charge to end the experiment but were then verbally forced to continue. The findings of this study demonstrated that two thirds of the teachers used the maximum volt shock and the all of the volunteers took part right up until a significant point. The results display that when under order from another individual in an unethical situation that conformity will become more
The teachers would initiate a “shock” to the student every time they got an answer wrong, but the teachers were unaware that the shock was fake. As the experiment continued, the shocks became more severe, and the students would plead for the teacher to stop since they were in pain. Despite the fact, that the participants continuously asked the authoritative experimenter if they could stop, “...relatively few people [had] the resources needed to resist authority” (Cherry 5). The participants feared questioning the effectiveness of the experiment, or restraining from continuing in fear of losing their job, going to jail, or getting reprimanded by Yale. A majority of the participants were intimidated by the experimenter, hence why they continued to shock the students, even though they knew morally, it was incorrect what they were doing. This experiment concluded, “...situational variables have a stronger sway than personality factors in determining obedience...” (5). One's decisions are based on the situation they are facing. If someone is under pressure, they will resort to illogical decision making. There thoughts could potentially be altered due to fear, or hostility. In conclusion, the rash, incohesive state of mind, provoked by fear will eventually lead to the rise of
Claim: When making a decision, people are often influenced by the pressure society places on them in order to follow the social norm, or what is socially accepted.
In this article “The Pearls of Obedience”, Stanley Milgram asserts that obedience to authority is a common response for many people in today’s society, often diminishing an individuals beliefs or ideals. Stanley Milgram designs an experiment to understand how strong a person’s tendency to obey authority is, even though it is amoral or destructive. Stanley Milgram bases his experiment on three people: a learner, teacher, and experimenter. The experimenter is simply an overseer of the experiment, and is concerned with the outcome of punishing the learner. The teacher, who is the subject of the experiment, is made to believe the electrical shocks are real; he is responsible for obeying the experimenter and punishing the learner for incorrect answers by electrocuting him from an electric shock panel that increases from 15 to 450 volts.
If a person of authority ordered you inflict a 15 to 400 volt electrical shock on another innocent human being, would you follow your direct orders? That is the question that Stanley Milgram, a psychologist at Yale University tested in the 1960’s. Most people would answer “no,” to imposing pain on innocent human beings but Milgram wanted to go further with his study. Writing and Reading across the Curriculum holds a shortened edition of Stanley Milgram’s “The Perils of Obedience,” where he displays an eye-opening experiment that tests the true obedience of people under authority figures. He observes that most people go against their natural instinct to never harm innocent humans and obey the extreme and dangerous instructions of authority figures. Milgram is well aware of his audience and organization throughout his article, uses quotes directly from his experiment and connects his research with a real world example to make his article as effective as possible.
Obedience to authority and willingness to obey an authority against one’s morals has been a topic of debate for decades. Stanley Milgrim, a Yale psychologist, conducted a study in which his subjects were commanded by a person in authority to initiate lethal shocks to a learner; his experiment is discussed in detail in the article “The Perils of Obedience” (Milgrim 77). Milgrim’s studies are said to be the most “influential and controversial studies of modern psychology” (Levine).While the leaner did not actually receive fatal shocks, an actor pretended to be in extreme pain, and 60 percent of the subjects were fully obedient, despite evidence displaying they believed what they were doing was harming another human being (Milgrim 80). Likewise, in Dr. Zimbardo, a professor of psychology at Stanford University, conducted an experiment, explained in his article “The Stanford Prison Experiment,” in which ten guards were required to keep the prisoners from
The most basic concept in social psychology is conformity. Conformity is the idea that behaviour or a belief is changed in order to follow, or conform, to what is considered the “norm.” One of the oldest experiments to support this notion was conducted in 1935 by Muzafer Sherif (Song, Ma, Wu, Li, 2012 p. 1366). There are two different types of
In Stanley Milgram’s “The Perils of Obedience,” Milgram explains his own study on the effects authority has on levels of obedience. Milgram designed the experiment in order to recognize the subjects as “teachers,” and actors as “learners,” with another actor posing as an "experimenter.” (Milgram 78). Milgram required the teacher to read a list of word pairs to a learner and to test their remembrance afterward (78). As Milgram explains in his essay, each time the learner answers incorrectly, the teacher is required by the experimenter to flip a switch on an electric shock generator. The author illustrates that the experimenter implies that the teacher is electrically shocking the learner; however, no shocks are actually inflicted. Diana Baumrind
So far, conformity has been discussed in terms of group identification and social roles. However, individuals also tend to change prior beliefs to seek group acceptance. Asch (1951) investigated the effect of group pressure on conformity by asking participants to make a line judgment with seven confederates that gave the same obviously incorrect answer. Yet, 37% of participants conformed by giving the incorrect majority answer, whereas in the absence of group pressure, less than 1% of participants conformed (Asch, 1951). There are implications on normative influence as individuals, despite knowing the majority opinion was incorrect, may conform to avoid social punishment (Breckler et al., 2005). However, Turner and colleagues (1987) argued
It is 9:00 PM on a Sunday night. Televisions all across America tune into MTV. Millions of viewers will now spend the next thirty minutes watching a television program titled 'Jackass'. While watching this program, the viewers will observe everything from people eating hard boiled eggs in an attempt to purposely vomit, to a man testing out various self defense devices on himself. Next week viewers will tune into the same program to see the same kinds of stunts performed. The reason that America watches these kinds of programs, and the participants in them perform these stunts, are because 'norms' are being broken. A norm is something that is generally accepted by a society as the right thing to do, or the way things are supposed to be. For example, a norm would be to enter an elevator and stand facing the front for the duration of the trip. Breaking that norm would be to enter the elevator and face the back for the duration of the trip. It is not what is expected. Different norms exist in different societies, and when these norms are broken within these societies people pay attention, because it is not an occurrence observed on a regular basis.
The astute reader may notice that this review does not include any papers that did not find a false consensus effect. The reason for this is not that this paper is not representative of the literature, but rather, that it is. The uniformity of the literature suggests that the phenomenon is fairly common. Some interesting arguments as to why this is are motivational or cognitive in nature. The motivational premise is based in the idea that people are motivated to believe that they have a place in their social environment. This argument is a based in self-justification, in that if many people share a given belief or behavior, it makes it easier to justify that this attitude or behavior is either right, or not as bad as it might seem.
The desire to be accepted and belong to a group is an undeniable human need. But how does this need affect an individual? Social psychologists have conducted numerous experiments and concluded that, through various forms of social influence, groups can change their members’ thoughts, feelings, and behavior.
Summary of the Experiment In Stanley Milgram’s ‘The Perils of Obedience’, Milgram conducted experiments with the objective of knowing “how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist" (Milgram 317). In the experiments, two participants would go into a warehouse where the experiments were being conducted and inside the warehouse, the subjects would be marked as either a teacher or a learner. A learner would be hooked up to a kind of electric chair and would be expected to do as he is being told by the teacher and do it right because whenever the learner said the wrong word, the intensity of the electric shocks increased. Similar procedure was undertaken on the teacher and the results of the experiments showed conclusively that a large number of people would go against their personal conscience in obedience to authority (Milgram 848).... ...
In 1961, Stanley Milgram, a Yale University Psychologist conducted a variety of social psychology experiments on obedience to authority figures. His experiments involved three individuals, one of them was a volunteer who played the role of the teacher, one was an actor who played the role of the student, and one was the experimenter who played the role of the authority. The teacher was instructed by the authority to administrate shocks to the student (who claimed to have a heart condition) whenever they answered a question incorrectly. The voltage of the shock would go up after every wrong answer. The experimenter would then instruct the teacher to administrate higher voltages even though pain was being imposed. The teacher would then have to make a choice between his morals and values or the choice of the authority figure. The point of the experiment was to try to comprehend just how far an individual would continue when being ordered by an individual in a trench coat to electrically shock another human being for getting questions incorrect. The experiment consisted of administrating pain to different people and proved that ordinary people will obey people with authority. Some of the various reasons are that the experimenter was wearing a trench coat, fear of the consequences for not cooperating, the experiments were conducted in Yale University a place of prestige, and the authority f...
Impression management is a social phenomenon that occurs in our daily life both consciously and unconsciously. “It is the act of presenting a favorable public image of oneself so that others will form positive judgments.” (Newman 184) Our first impressions of a person are always based on physical appearance and we compare them to the norms of our society. We can all admit to the initial meeting of a person and first noticing their age, gender, race, or other ascribed characteristics. Our cultural norms are ideas such that fat is “ugly” which are very different across societies and time. Also, impression management is an idea of how individuals interact in different social situations. “Sociologists refer to dramaturgy as the study of social interactions as theater, in which people (“actors”) project images (“play roles”) in front of others (“the audience”).” (Newman 169) This is our human need for acceptance and way of managing the impressions we give others and perform what we think people want to see. Our social life is governed by this concept but it only works with effective front-stage and back-stage separation. Our front-stage is the visible part of ourselves that we allow others to see unlike our hidden back-stage self.
Conformity, compliance and obedience are behavioural consequences of social influence (real or imagined social pressure) that occur in the presence of a group or other individuals (Elsenbroich & Xenitidou, 2012). Often these concepts are misinterpreted as being the same or even synonymous and while they do have similarities they are also very dissimilar. In social psychology conformity, compliance and obedience are distinct concepts that coincide due to their effect on behaviour in the presence of others. Pascual, Line Felonneau, Guéguen & Lafaille (2013) define conformity as an altering of behaviour and beliefs in an individual in order to reflect the behaviour and beliefs of the group that holds influence, though Myers (2014) emphasises that