Social influence is a powerful force that shapes how we behave and make decisions. This article explores the groundbreaking experiments by psychologists Stanley Milgram and Solomon Asch, which reveal important insights into obedience, conformity, and group behavior.
In the early 1960s, psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted experiments to see how far people would go in obeying authority figures, even if it meant doing something against their morals. He was inspired by the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, who claimed he was just following orders. Milgram wanted to understand how ordinary people might react in similar situations.
Milgram recruited forty male volunteers through newspaper ads, telling them they were part of a study on learning and memory. Each volunteer was assigned the role of “teacher,” while an actor played the “learner.” The teacher was instructed to give electric shocks to the learner for every wrong answer, using a fake shock generator that ranged from 30 to 450 volts.
Surprisingly, about two-thirds of the participants delivered the maximum shock of 450 volts, even though they heard the learner’s fake cries of pain. Milgram found that obedience was highest when the authority figure was present and seemed legitimate, especially if they were from a prestigious institution. Participants were more likely to obey if the learner was depersonalized or distant, and if they didn’t see anyone else disobeying.
Milgram’s findings show how ordinary people can commit harmful acts under authority’s influence, raising important questions about moral responsibility and obedience.
In the early 1950s, Solomon Asch conducted experiments to explore how people conform to group opinions, even when the group is clearly wrong.
Participants were placed in a group with five actors who were told to give wrong answers to a simple visual task. The real participant didn’t know the others were actors. When asked to identify which of three lines matched a standard line, the group would intentionally choose the wrong line.
Asch found that while most participants initially gave the correct answer, more than a third conformed to the group’s wrong choice at least once. Factors influencing conformity included feelings of insecurity, group size, and admiration for the group. Participants were more likely to conform when they felt unsure or were in a group of three or more people agreeing on an answer.
Both Milgram’s and Asch’s experiments reveal the strong impact of social influence on individual behavior. Here are some key concepts related to group dynamics:
This concept refers to the tendency to conform to be liked or accepted by a group. People may follow group norms to avoid rejection or gain approval.
Social facilitation describes how people perform better on tasks when others are watching, while social loafing is the tendency to put in less effort when working in a group compared to working alone. Research shows that people may pull less hard in a tug-of-war if they think they are part of a team rather than competing individually.
Deindividuation happens when people lose self-awareness and restraint in group settings, often leading to impulsive or aggressive behavior. Group polarization is when group discussions amplify members’ preexisting attitudes, leading to more extreme positions.
Coined by psychologist Irving Janis, groupthink describes when a group makes poor decisions due to a lack of critical evaluation and dissenting opinions. This can lead to significant historical failures, like the Watergate scandal and the Bay of Pigs invasion.
Understanding social influence, conformity, and obedience is crucial for recognizing how group behavior can shape individual actions. While Milgram’s experiment showed the potential for people to follow harmful orders, it also reminds us of the importance of personal choice and moral responsibility. By examining these psychological principles, we can better navigate our interactions within groups and make informed decisions that align with our values.
Imagine you are a participant in Milgram’s experiment. Create a short skit with your classmates where you act out the roles of the “teacher,” “learner,” and “authority figure.” Discuss how it felt to be in each role and what factors influenced your decisions. Reflect on how authority can impact moral choices.
Recreate Asch’s line experiment in class. Have a group of students intentionally choose the wrong answer to a simple question while one student, unaware of the setup, gives their answer last. Discuss the feelings and thoughts of the participant who was unaware and explore why they did or did not conform to the group’s choice.
Divide into two groups and debate the statement: “Obedience to authority is more important than personal responsibility.” Use evidence from Milgram’s experiment and other historical examples to support your arguments. After the debate, reflect on how this applies to real-world situations.
Identify a situation in your daily life where you felt pressured to conform or obey an authority figure. Write a short essay describing the situation, how you responded, and what you learned about social influence. Share your insights with the class and discuss strategies for maintaining personal integrity.
Conduct a group activity where you work together to solve a problem or complete a task. Observe instances of social facilitation, social loafing, deindividuation, and group polarization. After the activity, discuss how these dynamics affected the group’s performance and decision-making process.
Social Influence – The effect that the words, actions, or presence of other people have on our thoughts, feelings, attitudes, or behavior. – Example sentence: Social influence can lead individuals to change their opinions to align with those of a group.
Obedience – The act of following orders or instructions from someone in a position of authority. – Example sentence: The classic Milgram experiment demonstrated the extent to which people are willing to show obedience to authority figures, even when it involves harming others.
Conformity – The tendency to adjust one’s behavior or thinking to match those of others, often in response to real or imagined group pressure. – Example sentence: Conformity can lead to a loss of individuality when people prioritize group harmony over personal beliefs.
Group Behavior – The behaviors and interactions that occur when individuals are in a group setting, often influenced by group dynamics and social norms. – Example sentence: Group behavior can be unpredictable, as individuals may act differently in a group than they would alone.
Authority – The power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience. – Example sentence: In a psychological context, authority figures can greatly influence the behavior of individuals, as seen in various social experiments.
Norms – Shared expectations or rules within a group or society about how people should behave. – Example sentence: Social norms often dictate acceptable behavior in different cultural contexts, influencing how individuals interact with each other.
Deindividuation – A psychological state characterized by a loss of self-awareness and a diminished sense of personal responsibility, often occurring in group settings. – Example sentence: Deindividuation can lead to impulsive and sometimes destructive behavior, as individuals feel less accountable for their actions in a crowd.
Groupthink – A phenomenon where the desire for harmony or conformity in a group results in irrational or dysfunctional decision-making. – Example sentence: Groupthink can prevent critical thinking and lead to poor decisions, as dissenting opinions are often suppressed to maintain group cohesion.
Social Facilitation – The tendency for people to perform better on simple tasks when in the presence of others. – Example sentence: Social facilitation can enhance performance in competitive sports, where athletes are motivated by the presence of an audience.
Moral Responsibility – The duty to act ethically and be accountable for one’s actions, especially in social contexts. – Example sentence: Individuals with a strong sense of moral responsibility are more likely to stand up against unethical practices, even when it is challenging.
