Conformity: The Effects of Misinformation Without Direct Social Pressure

Most of the current psychological knowledge about conformity rela,tes to direct social pressure. However, little is known about how people conform to perceived social pressure. This study examined whether individuals conform to perceived, not direct, social pressure in a naturalistic setting. We hypothesized that individuals would conform to perceived social pressure and that females would conform more than males. Participants were invited to guess the number of M&M's in a jar. An experimental group was subjected to fabricated guesses without direct social pressure to conform. Results indicate a main effect for conformity (p<0. 001) and for gender (p<0.05). Individuals, especially females, were found to conform to perceived social pressure. "\VJ'hen individuals act according to social norms, W consciously or subconsciously, they are said to conform. Evidence of conformity can be found even in basic, everyday decisions. Fujihara (1976) has suggested that such choices are often strongly influenced by the perception of what other people do. Although deciding to align choices with others' often can be a subconscious process, it may yield less than desirable results. Indeed, social psychological research has demonstrated that people will sometimes conform to others beliefs and actions even if doing so inflicts severe harm on another individual (Cokley et al., 2001; Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo., 1973; and Milgram, 1963). Conformity can be influenced by many factors, but one of the most important is social pressure perceived and real. We defined social pressure as the influence of others intended to alter an individual's attitudes or behaviors. This pressure can lead people to conform negatively, such as accepting misinformation. Our study analyzed the effects of perceived (subtle) social pressure independent of direct (overt) social pressure on the acceptance of misinformation. Perceived social pressure does not ;inmrrrmm1rm1mrmnm11mm1Tm1m1r•n1mmr1wITTlTTITTTITTTT involve social interaction but may be due to information purported to be from other social members. Direct social pressure is based on social interaction. For the purpose of our study, conformity was measured as compliance to what was represented as the majority opinion. Individuals who altered their actions from the norm based on the perceived opinion of others were said to conform. Research has identified the combined effects of direct social pressure and misinformation on conformity. Asch (1948) showed that social pressure leads most people to conform even when they are aware of misinformation. This study also brought an important question to light: Is direct social pressure, as opposed to perceived social pressure, a necessary condition for conformity? Much of the subsequent research on conformity has focused on direct social pressureand shown that the physical presence of others increases conformity (Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo, 1973; Hoffman, Granhag, See, & Loftus, 2001; Jetten, Postmes, & McAuliffe, 2002; and Tesser, Campbell, & Mickler, 1983). In addition, other studies have found that direct social pressure can lead to the acceptance of blatant misinformation (Mudd and Govern, 2004; Wright, Mathews, & Skagerberg, 2005; and Wright, Self, & Justice, 2000). However, little research has been published on conformity in settings with only perceived social pressure. Garry, French, Kinzett, & Mori (2008) showed that individuals not only comply but also accept misinformation in a setting lacking direct social pressure, although there was social interaction in the setting. Irwin and Van Holsteyn (2002) found that people's expectations about voting outcomes conformed to opinion polls. It is unclear whether the conforming behavior they observed resulted from perceived social pressure. Our study sought to build on past research by observing conformity in a situation lacking not only direct social pressure but also social interaction. We assessed whether or not the mere 34 1 et al.: Conformity Published by BYU ScholarsArchive, 2009 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111:lllllll'llllllllllllllllllllllllllll lllllllillllll ll'llllll! llll: ll.l ,llll llilll:ll! illi I: 111! l lll l,li liil . 11 ~1 Ii I I Ii [, . 1 II: II 1111 : I' 1111 II 1 . i i 1111111111 I I II 11 1