Chapter 6
Obedience and Conformity
Presented By :
Bernas
Lesiguez
Montante
Topic Overview
• What is conformity?
• What are the classic conformity and obedience
studies?
• What predicts conformity?
• Why conform?
• Who conforms?
• Do we ever want to be different?
• Postscript: On being an individual within a
community
Topic Overview
[Link] Is Conformity? 142
• Unanimity 160
2. What Are the Classic Conformity
• Cohesion 161
and Obedience Studies? 143
• Status 162
• Sherif’s Studies of Norm Formation
• Public Response 162
143
• Prior Commitment 162
• Research Close-Up: Contagious
Yawning 145 5. Why Conform? 164
• Asch’s Studies of Group Pressure 6. Who Conforms? 166
147 • Personality 166
• Milgram’s Obedience Studies 149 • Culture 167
• The Inside Story: Stanley Milgram • Social Roles 168
on Obedience 150 7. Do We Ever Want to Be Different?
• The Ethics of Milgram’s Studies 169
152 • Reactance 169
3. What Breeds Obedience? 152 • Asserting Uniqueness 170
• Focus On: Personalizing The 8. Postscript: On Being an Individual
What is Conformity?
Is conformity good or bad?
Conformity
Definition Example
• Buying certain types of
Changing one’s clothes to fit in your
behavior or belief as a social group.
result of group • Saying that you agree
pressure—comes in with other people even if
two forms, you don't.
• Clapping when you
ACCEPTANCE AND
notice that other people
COMPLIANCE (Nail are clapping.
[Link]., 2000).
Conformity
Acceptance Compliance
Acceptance is believing in Compliance is outwardly
as well as acting in accord going along with the group
with social pressure. This while inwardly disagreeing; a
occurs when you believe in subset of compliance is
what a group has obedience, compliance with a
direct command. This
persuaded you to do—you
conforms to an expectation
inwardly and sincerely
or a request without really
believe that the group’s
believing in what you are
actions are right.
Obedience
Obedience, or complying
with a direct command, is a
variation on compliance.
Obedience means doing
something you wouldn’t do
otherwise because someone
else says you need to.
What are the Classic
Conformity and
Obedience Studies?
Sherif’s Studies of Norm Formation
• Suggestibility is a cognitive bias that refers to how
susceptible we are to altering our behavior based on the
suggestions of others.
Autokinetic Phenomenon
• optical illusion that is known as the apparent
movement of a stationary point of light in the dark
• this was used on the Sherif’s experiment as a
technique to answer questions about people’s
suggestibility.
Social Contagion
Mass Hysteria Chameleon Effect Mimicry
• also known as suggestibility—
• Another form of social contagion occur on a large scale, known as
• the suggestibility to problems
• Mimicking someone’s behavior mass hysteria.
that spreads throughout a large • Our natural mimicry of others’
group of people. postures and language generally • Behavior influences our attitudes
elicits liking—except when echoing and emotions, our natural mimicry
• Ex. Car accident, and sickness others’ negative expressions, such inclines us to feel what the other
in class as anger. feels.
• Ex. Copying someone who rubs their • Ex. Suicide, Gun violence and
face Mass Shooting.
Mood Linkage
A phenomenon of just being around happy people can help us feel happier.
Ex. Laughing
Asch’s Experiment
Solomon Asch’s conformity experiments explored how
group pressure affects individual judgment. Asch found that
while a significant portion of participants conformed to the
incorrect answers given by confederates, a majority still
maintained their independent judgments at least some of
the time.
Other experiments that
explore conformity:
This highlights an important aspect of human behavior: the
• Dental Flossing
tension between social conformity and personal integrity.
• Cancer Screening
• Soccer
• Eating
Asch’s Studies of Group Pressure
• Asch's work on conformity and the social dynamics of the 1950s
highlights his concerns about individuals compromising their beliefs
for group acceptance raise essential questions about educational
practices and societal values.
• While the controlled settings of Sherif and Asch experiments might
lack mundane realism, they effectively demonstrate the
psychological pressure of conformity without overt coercion.
• The subtle yet powerful influence of social norms is indeed startling,
as even the mere awareness of standing out can affect judgment
significantly.
Milgram’s Obedience Studies
• Milgram’s studies tests what happens when the demands of authority
clash with the demands of conscience.
• The participants did not automatically obey the experimenter—nearly all
stopped and expressed concern for the learner, at which point the
experimenter prompted them to continue by using the four verbal prods
• Burger noted that the result from Milgram’s study were not surprising.
• All of the documented psychological effects in Milgram’s studies and in
other research, has proven to increase compliance and obedience.
Stephen Milgram
While working for Solomon E. Asch, Milgram wondered whether his conformity experiments
could be made more humanly significant.
“First, I imagined an experiment similar to Asch’s, except that the group induced the
person to deliver shocks to a protesting victim. But a control was needed to see how much
shock a person would give in the absence of group pressure. Someone, presumably the
experimenter, would have to instruct the subject to give the shocks.”
“Just how far would a person go when ordered to administer such shocks? In my mind, the
issue had shifted to the willingness of people to comply with destructive orders. It was an
exciting moment for me. I realized that this simple question was both humanly important
and capable of being precisely answered.”
“The laboratory procedure gave scientific expression to a more general concern about
authority, a concern forced upon members of my generation, in particular upon Jews such as
myself, by the atrocities of World War II. The impact of the Holocaust on my own psyche
energized my interest in obedience and shaped the particular form in which it was
examined.”
The Ethics of Milgram’s Studies
Milgram's obedience studies sparked ethical concerns due to the significant
distress experienced by participants, who believed they were administering
shocks to others. Critics argued that the deception and stress could lead to lasting
psychological effects, with some participants likened to Nazi executioners.
Despite this, Milgram defended his work, noting that most participants felt positive
about their involvement and follow-up assessments showed no lasting harm.
What Breeds Obedience?
• Milgram’s research revealed • Compliance varied
more than just obedience to significantly, ranging from
authority; it also examined 0% to 93% fully obedient,
conditions that foster depending on social
obedience. conditions.
Four factors that determined obedience:
The Victim’s Institutional
Distance. Authority
Closeness and The Liberating Effects
Legitimacy of of Group Influence
Authority
The Victim’s Distance
Milgram's studies showed that participants were more obedient when the "learners"
were unseen, with nearly all complying when the victim was remote and silent, but
obedience dropped significantly when the learner was visible or personally connected. In
situations where the victim could be seen or was a friend or relative, compliance
plummeted, highlighting that known and visible victims are harder to harm. This pattern
reflects broader behaviors in society, where people may act cruelly online or in warfare
when the target is depersonalized or distant, such as using drones to attack from afar.
Closeness and Legitimacy of Authority
Milgram's studies show that people are more obedient when authority figures are physically
present, but compliance drops when the authority seems less legitimate. In one variation,
participants resisted following orders from an assistant instead of the experimenter, even
resorting to rebellion.
Similarly, in real-world settings like hospitals, people often comply with perceived legitimate
authority, even when orders are questionable, as seen in the "rectal ear ache" case where a
nurse misinterpreted a doctor's abbreviation.
Institutional Authority
Milgram moved his experiment to a less prestigious location and found that obedience
dropped from 65% at Yale to 48% in Bridgeport, showing that institutional authority plays a
role in compliance. Similarly, in real life, authorities backed by institutions hold significant
influence.
In one case, a police officer's commanding tone prompted a man threatening to jump off a
cliff to obey and move his car, defusing the situation without any negotiation.
The Liberating effects of Group
Influence
Conformity can be positive, as seen in the bravery of 9/11 firefighters who followed orders
and group loyalty. It can also have a liberating effect, such as when students speak up
against unfair treatment, encouraging others to do the same.
In Milgram's experiment, when two confederates defied the experimenter, 90% of
participants followed their example and refused to continue.
Reflections on the Classic Studies
Milgram's obedience studies are often compared to wartime atrocities, like Adolf
Eichmann's actions during the Holocaust and Lieutenant Calley's role in the My Lai
massacre. Soldiers, trained to obey, sometimes commit brutal acts under orders, but
the horrors of war and genocide often go beyond simple obedience. Scholars argue
that many Nazis acted not just out of obedience but because they had been deeply
indoctrinated into dehumanizing ideologies, showing that long-term socialization, not
just immediate orders, can lead to such extreme violence.
The Milgram obedience studies also differ from other conformity studies
in the strength of the social pressure: Obedience is explicitly
commanded. Yet the Asch and the Milgram studies share four similarities:
• They show how compliance can take precedence over moral sense.
• They succeed in pressuring people to go against their own consciences.
• They sensitize us to moral conflicts in our own lives.
• The link between behavior and attitudes and the power of the situation.
Behavior and Attitudes
• Asch's Conformity Experiments: Participants often gave correct answers when alone, but
conformed to incorrect group answers when faced with social pressure.
• Milgram's Obedience Experiments: Participants were more likely to administer extreme
shocks to a victim as they progressed through incremental steps, demonstrating a "slippery slope"
of obedience. Initial small commitments made it harder to refuse further commands.
• Blame-the-Victim: Compliance with harmful actions often leads individuals to devalue and
justify their behavior towards the victim, as seen in the training of torturers in Greece and Nazi
Germany.
• Capacity for Heroism: Contrasting with the examples of compliance, the French village of
Le Chambon showed that initial acts of defiance and support for a moral cause can build
commitment and lead to sustained resistance against oppressive regimes.
The Power of Social Norms
Social norms can be surprisingly powerful, as demonstrated in a Penn State study where
students found it hard to confront sexist comments, with only 5% predicting they would remain
silent, but 55% actually did. This highlights how, in real-life situations, people often act
differently than they would hypothetically claim. Additionally, the influence of situational factors
on human behavior can lead ordinary people to commit harmful acts, raising questions about
responsibility for evil actions; understanding these dynamics can help prevent future harm.
What Predicts Conformity?
Social psychologists explored whether Asch’s findings on
conformity could extend to other settings. They found that
conformity rates increase in more challenging situations or when
individuals feel less competent. The more uncertain people are
about their judgments, the more they are influenced by others.
Conformity is also higher in groups with three or more members
that are unanimous, cohesive, and of high status. Additionally,
conformity tends to be greater when responses are made
publicly and without prior commitment.
Group Size
Asch and other researchers found Milgram and colleagues' field
that: experiment revealed that:
• Conformity significantly increases • More people looking up on a busy New
when the group size reaches 3 to 5 York City sidewalk led to a higher
people. percentage of passersby also looking
• Diminishing returns occur for larger up.
groups.
The "packaging" of the group affects
At the University of Michigan, it was conformity:
observed that: • Conformity was higher when
• A greater number of students confederates were presented as
looking up resulted in almost independent smaller groups.
everyone else doing the same. • Independent groups made a
position seem more credible
compared to a single larger group.
Unanimity
In conformity experiments, just one person dissenting from the majority can
encourage others to express their true opinions and feel closer to the dissenter.
Research shows that having even one ally increases individuals' confidence in
sticking to their views during discussions. Additionally, observing dissent—right or
wrong—boosts people's willingness to stand up for their beliefs, as seen in studies
where participants who witnessed a lone dissenter were more likely to correctly
label stimuli than those who did not.
Cohesion
Cohesion in groups strongly influences members' behaviors and
opinions, making them more likely to be swayed by those within their
group than outsiders. Research shows that individuals tend to like
things endorsed by similar others and are more likely to mimic
behaviors observed in their peers, especially in shared environments
like college.
Close friends or peers often adopt similar behaviors, such as binge
eating or drinking, to fit in, and they may feel pressured to conform to
Status
Higher-status individuals influence group behavior more than those of lower
status, with junior members conforming more strongly to group norms.
For example, women who moved to higher-status neighborhoods tended to adopt
local shoe preferences, while those moving to lower-status areas often ignored
these norms.
Similarly, in Milgram's obedience studies, lower-status participants were more
compliant with commands from higher-status experimenters, demonstrating that
prestige fosters conformity and influence.
Public Response
• Researchers found that people • Adolescents are particularly
conform more when responding susceptible to changing their answers
publicly compared to privately. when their responses are visible to
their peers.
• Individuals are less
influenced by group
pressure when they can
write their answers
anonymously.
Prior Commitment
Research shows that public commitments lead people to stick to their decisions,
as seen in various contexts like jury deliberations and pledges for health or
environmental behaviors, often resulting in more significant behavior changes.
In 1980, Genuine Risk became the second filly to win the Kentucky Derby but
lost the Preakness to Codex after he brushed against her, causing hesitation.
Despite public outrage and video evidence suggesting a foul, race officials
upheld their initial decision, highlighting how prior commitments can influence
judgment.
Why Conform?
a. A person may bow to the group to be accepted
and avoid rejection.
b. To obtain important information.
Two forms of Social Influence
Morton Deutsch and Harold Gerard (1955):
Normative Influence Informational Influence
• Desire to be right
• Desire to be liked • Conformity occurring when people accept
• Conformity based on a person’s desire to evidence about reality provided by other
fulfill others’ expectations, often to gain people.
acceptance.
• “going along with the crowd” to avoid e.g If many reviews praise a product or
rejection, to stay in people’s good graces, service, individuals may follow this consensus,
or to gain their approval. believing that the majority knows best.
Social rejection is painful and deviating from the
norm often results to us paying an emotional
price which compels people to support what they
do not believe in or at least to suppress their
disagreement.
Normative Influence
Leads to compliance and often sways us without our awareness.
e.g Teens are much more likely to smoke when their friends smoke and
thus they see smoking as the norm (Liu et al., 2017).
Asch-type Conformity Experiment
Conformity may genuinely shape perceptions.
Who Conforms?
Personality
• People higher in agreeableness and conscientiousness are more likely to conform (Begue et
al., 2015).
• Novelty seekers and people high in openness and experience are less likely to conform
Culture
• Conformity varies in different countries and cultures.
• Cultural differences also exist within social classes.
Social Roles
• Social life is like acting on a theatrical stage and those roles have much to do with
conformity.
Do we ever want to be different?
Knowing someone is trying to coerce us may prompt us
to react in the opposite direction.
Reactance
• Individuals value their sense of freedom and self-efficacy.
• The Theory of Psychological Reactance
• Anticonformity “boomerang effect”
e.g We’re more likely to eat healthy when others do (normative influence)—but not
when we’re lectured about how healthy it is (reactance)
People are more likely to follow actions they observe in others
rather than commands or advice(Normative Influence).
Do we ever want to be different?
Knowing someone is trying to coerce us may prompt us
to react in the opposite direction.
Asserting Uniqueness
• People often feel uneasy when they either stand out too much or
blend in too completely.
• Individuals who have the highest “need for uniqueness” tend to
conform the least (Imhoff & Erb, 2009).
POSTSCRIPT: On Being an Individual within a
Community
"A person is a person through other persons"
Ubuntu (South Africa)
We need to balance our “me” and our “we,” our needs for independence and
for attachment, our individuality and our social identity.
Thank You