| Abstrakt: |
The experiments described in this paper, like those reported previously, required subjects to make quantitative judgments with respect to problems of visual perception, general information, and opinion, while being supplied with knowledge of the judgments of others who generally appeared to agree with each other. In one treatment, the norm supplied was indeed the mode of a large standardization group; in the other, the systematic distortion of the norm was only moderate and subjects were generally unaware of any real discrepancy between themselves and "the others." In the "genuine norm" experiment, the principal effect was very significantly to reduce group variability as compared with controls who responded without knowledge of the norm. In the "moderate distortion" treatment, response variability was smaller than among controls on the relatively most ambiguous "opinion" subset, and only slightly larger on visual and information items. Nevertheless, the cumulative biasing of the norm was enough to shift mean judgments very significantly on all types of items and for both sexes as compared with controls. Results were contrasted with those described in previous papers when the pseudonorm had been subjected to gross distortion. It was concluded that when a norm lies within the range of judgments or opinions acceptable to the individual, its effect is to increase group homogeneity of response, a process here called "conformity." When a norm lies outside the range of acceptable judgments, subjects are faced with a conflict demanding resolution. Although nearly everyone is influenced, most people shift their responses only within the range potential with no norm present. Others, who are more influenced by the group judgment and less by their own opinions, will shift, sometimes to grotesque limits, depending on their susceptibility. This process, called "yielding" because one's own view must be given up if the group's apparent judgment is to be accepted, results not... [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
