{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Social psyc textbook summary chap 7, conformity

Social psyc textbook summary chap 7, conformity - Chapter 7...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Chapter 7: Conformity Introduction o Various examples of flash mobs : group of people who receive instructions over the Internet, gather voluntarily at a set time and place, perform some silly but harmless action, and disperse. o A case of mass psychological illness : on a Vancouver bus, several people became ill and had to be hospitalized after the driver reported an “unusual odour.” All patients quickly recovered with no sign of actual medical illness. o Social influence : the way in which people are affected by the real and imagined pressures of others. Social influence as “automatic” o Humans are vulnerable to subtle, reflex-like influences (yawning or laughing when we see others doing so). o Milgram study, 1969 : confederates stopped on a busy New York street, looked up, and gawked at the sixth-floor window of a building. 80% of passers-by stopped and gazed up. o Within 72 hours of birth, babies mimic gestures of people around them. o Chartrand & Bargh study, 1999 : participants worked on a task with a partner, a confederate who exhibited a tick like rubbing his face or shaking his foot. Participants tended to mimic these behaviours. Dubbed the “chameleon effect.” They speculated that people do this because they interact more smoothly when their behaviours are in sync. Later, experimenters had confederates mimic the subjects; participants who had been mimicked reported liking the confederate more. o Dimberg study, 2000 : subjects saw rapid-fire subliminal picturs of happy or angry faces. Facial EMGs showed that subjects subtly evoked the face they were subliminally shown. o Mood contagion : “catching” the emotional state of someone you are interacting with. Conformity o Conformity : tendency for people to change their perceptions, opinions, behaviours in ways that are consistent with group norms. o In a 1978 Milgram study, research assistants were supposed to ask subway passengers to give up their seats – but many RAs could not do it, because they felt too anxious! o Buehler & Griffin study, 1994 : subjects read a story about a white cop who shot a black teenager. Those in one condition were told the cop was 75% responsible; other condition told that victim was 25% responsible. One week later, subjects asked to re-tell the story in their own words – they were more likely to recall details in a way that supported their group norm. The early classics
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
o Sherif, 1936 : male students sat alone in a dark room and watched a bright spot of light in front of them; asked to judge how far the spot of light moved in the 2 seconds it was on. The light never actually moved, but eventually each subject settled on his own stable perception of the movement. Subjects then returned and did the same thing in groups of 3: initial responses varied a lot, but subjects invariably settled on a similar answer.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}