I read an interesting research article called "Measuring Peer Pressure, Popularity, and Conformity in Adolescent Boys and Girls: Predicting School Performance, Sexual Attitudes, and Substance Abuse" by Darcy Santor, Deanna Messervey, and Vivek Kusumakar. Although peer pressure, popularity, and conformity all seem to overlap each other, Santor et al. make a good assessment of each one and specify the differences between them. They write that "peer pressure implies one is being urged to do something" and is "motivated to act and think in certain ways because (he or she) have been urged, encouraged, or pressured by a peer to do so" (2000). Along with that, they mention that "peer pressure was defined explicitly as 'when people your own age encourage you to do something or to keep from doing something else, no matter if you personally want to or not'" (2000). The difference between peer pressure and popularity is that "peer pressure refers to more specific situations in which individuals feel they are being pressured, whereas the need to be popular refers to a broader class of situation which individuals may or may not be directly pressured to act or think in a certain way" (Santor et al. 2000). In other words, popularity does not involve "feeling pressured by a peer", rather it involves a desire to be "recognized or liked by a group of individuals" (Santor et al. 2000). The conformity aspect of this study related to peer conformity, which, according to Santor et al., "assesses whether or not individuals adopt a certain course of action sanctioned by their peer group" (2000).
For this study, questionnaires, which "included measures of well-being, school performance, sexual attitudes and behavior, as well as measures of substance use and the measures of peer pressure", were given to students (Santor et al. 2000). As someone who always wanted to be popular growing up I figured that popularity would weigh heaviest upon the results in this study, because it weighed heaviest in my own life. I was wrong however. It turns out that peer pressure and peer conformity are what influence kids to make the decisions that they do in their adolescent lives. Based on the study results, Santor et al. concluded "that peer pressure and peer conformity can be reliably and effeciently assessed in young adolescents, that doing things in order to be popular with others is strongly related to feeling pressured by others to engage in certain activities, and that peep pressure is a far stronger predictor of risk behaviors and potential psychosocial difficulties than popularity" (2000).
I always thought that wanting to be popular and being populuar was how I was conforming to what everyone else was doing. In fact, being well liked is not a problem and wanting to be liked by others is not wrong either. Changing who I was to fit in, hiding truths about me in order to ramain off the radar for any ridicule, or pretending to like things that I did not like at all was me giving in to peer conformity and I lost sense of who I was and my individuality.
___________________________________________________________
Santor, Darcy; Messervey, Deanna; Kusumakar, Vivek. Measuring Peer Pressure, Popularity, and Conformity in Adolescent Boys and Girls: Predicting School Performance, Sexual Attitudes, and Substance Abuse. Journal of Youth and Adolescence (2000) Vol. 29:2.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Asch Conformity Experiment
It is interesting watching someone fold under the pressures around them by answering incorrectly when they've known all along what the right answer is.
JUNO
In this film, Juno is an average high school girl, but what makes us love her is that she is honest about who she is. She is not part of the popular crowd, nor does she want to be. Yet when her dad says to her that he thought she was the kind of girl who knew when to say when, she was open and admitted that she does not know what kind of girl she is. She is on a journey to learn who she is but she does not lose sight of what she is, an individual. She likes the kind of music that she likes not because other people like it too, but because she knows that she likes it. I think that there were pressures in her life, like her sexually active best friend, that might have influenced her decision to sleep with Bleeker. Also, by listening to her best friend, she went to an abortion clinic. As she was getting closer to the building, a schoolmate of hers was holding a sign in protest against abortions. As Juno walked by, the schoolmate yelled to her that the baby has fingernails. Juno thought about that statement, she reasoned with it, and ran out of that clinic. She thought for herself and let go of what she was told to do. The courage and bravery it would take for a young high school girl to walk through the hallways of her high school with a full pregnant belly, to tell her parents the truth about what she had gotten herself into, and to go searching for adoptive parents whom she thought would be the perfect match for her little baby, is outstanding. I think that is why we love Juno so much. She admits to who she is and even that she does not always know who she is. I think it was really great for her dad to tell her that she has to meet someone who is going to love her just the way that she is now. It is a good encouragement to us to be who we are, the unique individuals that we are, and not change ourselves to make people like us better. Even though Juno was not sure of who she was all the time, she was confident in knowing that she was herself and nobody else.
Authenticity
In my sociology of culture class, for the past few class periods, we have been discussing a book called Blue Chicago: The Search for Authenticity in Urban Blues Clubs, by David Grazian. It has been an interesting read because Grazian interviews different musicians playing at the clubs, along with bar tenders, and customers. Everyone has a different idea of what they are hoping to get out of the night shows and everyone has a different idea of what authentic blues is. He mentiones that a lot of the performers just stick to the songs that people like to hear, in other words, they are crowd pleasers. They do not come up with their own stuff but are still very talented musicians playing the songs of other great artists. What caught my interest, as it relates to this topic of conformity and individuality, was one of the musicians whom Grazian talked to, named Louis. When talking about the music he plays and why he plays it he said this:
“Well, I’m not interested in playing traditional music—I’m more interested in creating my own style. Like what I do now, it’s not really blues, jazz, or R&B, but I call it “blusion,” and it’s my own thing, see? Music is all about metamorphosis and change. You know, it’s like if you listen to Charlie Parker or Miles… These guys created a new style, and some people said to them in the beginning, ‘Hey, what the hell are you doing?’ And I get that, I get bad feedback sometimes from owners because I don’t play in a traditional way… And you know, I don’t have a problem with that, because it’s business…but then I deal with the audience, and I try to win them over with it.”
I just thought this was great because here is a guy, a musician, who will not just play the songs that people love, but he plays what he has written, in his own style and in his own way. And with that new style, he uses it to win the crowd over and open them up to something new. He is not afraid of the bad feedback but he uses it to better himself and to work on winning the crowd over so that they will better appreciate what he has to offer. He does not conform to what the owners are looking for or to the expectations of the crowd. This reminded me of the essay Art Worlds by Howard Becker, which we read for class also. In this essay Becker writes about everything that art worlds consist of, such as the team of people who come together to produce the artwork. He writes about possible limitations due to the machinery used or techniques adopted in order to produce certain works. Sometimes this causes the artist not to have all the freedoms they would want or even consider. Sometimes artists produce what the viewers would want to see or the music the listeners would want to hear, or whatever was socially acceptable, in order to make money or get the artwork circulated around. Opposing this idea, Howard writes:
"The limitations of conventional practice are not total. You can always do things differently if you are prepared to pay the price in increased effort or decreased circulation of your work. The experience of composer Charles Ives exemplifies the latter possibility. He experimented with polytonality and polyrhythms early in the 1900s before they became part of the ordinary performer’s competence. The New York players who tried to play his chamber and orchestral music told him that it was unplayable, that their instruments could not make those sounds, that the scores could not be played in any practical way. Ives finally accepted their judgments, but continued to compose such music. What makes his case interesting is that, though he was also bitter about it, he experienced this as a great liberation. If no one could play his music, then he no longer h ad to write what musicians could play, no longer had to accept the constraints imposed by the conventions that regulated cooperation between contemporary composer and player. Since his music would not be played, he never needed to finish it; he was unwilling to confirm John Kirkpatrick’s pioneer reading of the Concord Sonata as a correct one because that would mean he could no longer change it. Nor did he have to accommodate his writing to the practical constraints of what could be financed by conventional means, and so wrote his Fourth Symphony for three orchestras.
In general, breaking with existing conventions and their manifestations in social structure and material artifacts increases artists’ trouble and decreases the circulation of their work, but at the same time increases their freedom to choose unconventional alternatives and to depart substantially from customary practice. If that is true, we can understand any work as the product of a choice between conventional ease and success and unconventional trouble and lack of recognition.” (p.182-183)
I know that was quite a lengthy excerpt from Becker’s essay; however I hope the connection is quite obvious. Sacrifice has to be made to be an individual and to do things that one thinks is right or prefers. In Grazian’s book, Louis risked not being liked, not being able to play his music, and possibly not making money. In Becker’s essay, Charles Ives wrote music that people could not play and because of this it was not accepted. He was being experimental and making music his own, yet it was not what others were interested in. Although both situations could and I am sure do cause a lot of bitterness, Becker was right in saying how freeing it must have been also to stand against what others wanted or expected. We are limited in many ways and cannot help those limitations. But in so many other ways we are not limited thus we do not have to conform to unnecessary limitations. Martin Luther King Jr. did not conform to such limitations and neither did Pablo Picasso. Pablo Picasso is one of the greatest artists in history. Almost everyone has either heard of Picasso or seen his work in books, museums, or in classrooms and offices, in poster format of course. He was one of few artists who revolutionized art and opened the door to a whole new world and style of painting. We praise him now for his uniqueness and individuality, but he did not always get praise. His friends looked at his work at told him to not show it to anyone because of how hideous they thought it was. Picasso had had plenty of professional training in painting and drawing so he could produce work that the public would love and enjoy. He did not do that, however. He remained true to himself and his style. It might not have been great back then, but now he is one of the greatest artists that we study, look up to, and try to be like. And that is the sacrifice that individuals make. They have to let go of what other people think and just think for themselves. The individual knows he stands alone, that is why his is an individual. If people agree with him or join him then that is great and encouraging, but he knows that being an individual does not guarantee he will have support for his individuality.
So… maybe some of us are just scared of what other people will think of us. That is an unfortunate limitation that our society and culture has influenced upon us.
___________________________________________________________
Grazian, David. Blue Chicago: The Search for Authenticity in Urban Blues Clubs. The University of Chicago Press: 2003, p.159.
Spillman, Lyn. Cultural Sociology: Becker, Howard. Art Worlds. Blackwell Publishing:2002, p. 178-188.
“Well, I’m not interested in playing traditional music—I’m more interested in creating my own style. Like what I do now, it’s not really blues, jazz, or R&B, but I call it “blusion,” and it’s my own thing, see? Music is all about metamorphosis and change. You know, it’s like if you listen to Charlie Parker or Miles… These guys created a new style, and some people said to them in the beginning, ‘Hey, what the hell are you doing?’ And I get that, I get bad feedback sometimes from owners because I don’t play in a traditional way… And you know, I don’t have a problem with that, because it’s business…but then I deal with the audience, and I try to win them over with it.”
I just thought this was great because here is a guy, a musician, who will not just play the songs that people love, but he plays what he has written, in his own style and in his own way. And with that new style, he uses it to win the crowd over and open them up to something new. He is not afraid of the bad feedback but he uses it to better himself and to work on winning the crowd over so that they will better appreciate what he has to offer. He does not conform to what the owners are looking for or to the expectations of the crowd. This reminded me of the essay Art Worlds by Howard Becker, which we read for class also. In this essay Becker writes about everything that art worlds consist of, such as the team of people who come together to produce the artwork. He writes about possible limitations due to the machinery used or techniques adopted in order to produce certain works. Sometimes this causes the artist not to have all the freedoms they would want or even consider. Sometimes artists produce what the viewers would want to see or the music the listeners would want to hear, or whatever was socially acceptable, in order to make money or get the artwork circulated around. Opposing this idea, Howard writes:
"The limitations of conventional practice are not total. You can always do things differently if you are prepared to pay the price in increased effort or decreased circulation of your work. The experience of composer Charles Ives exemplifies the latter possibility. He experimented with polytonality and polyrhythms early in the 1900s before they became part of the ordinary performer’s competence. The New York players who tried to play his chamber and orchestral music told him that it was unplayable, that their instruments could not make those sounds, that the scores could not be played in any practical way. Ives finally accepted their judgments, but continued to compose such music. What makes his case interesting is that, though he was also bitter about it, he experienced this as a great liberation. If no one could play his music, then he no longer h ad to write what musicians could play, no longer had to accept the constraints imposed by the conventions that regulated cooperation between contemporary composer and player. Since his music would not be played, he never needed to finish it; he was unwilling to confirm John Kirkpatrick’s pioneer reading of the Concord Sonata as a correct one because that would mean he could no longer change it. Nor did he have to accommodate his writing to the practical constraints of what could be financed by conventional means, and so wrote his Fourth Symphony for three orchestras.
In general, breaking with existing conventions and their manifestations in social structure and material artifacts increases artists’ trouble and decreases the circulation of their work, but at the same time increases their freedom to choose unconventional alternatives and to depart substantially from customary practice. If that is true, we can understand any work as the product of a choice between conventional ease and success and unconventional trouble and lack of recognition.” (p.182-183)
I know that was quite a lengthy excerpt from Becker’s essay; however I hope the connection is quite obvious. Sacrifice has to be made to be an individual and to do things that one thinks is right or prefers. In Grazian’s book, Louis risked not being liked, not being able to play his music, and possibly not making money. In Becker’s essay, Charles Ives wrote music that people could not play and because of this it was not accepted. He was being experimental and making music his own, yet it was not what others were interested in. Although both situations could and I am sure do cause a lot of bitterness, Becker was right in saying how freeing it must have been also to stand against what others wanted or expected. We are limited in many ways and cannot help those limitations. But in so many other ways we are not limited thus we do not have to conform to unnecessary limitations. Martin Luther King Jr. did not conform to such limitations and neither did Pablo Picasso. Pablo Picasso is one of the greatest artists in history. Almost everyone has either heard of Picasso or seen his work in books, museums, or in classrooms and offices, in poster format of course. He was one of few artists who revolutionized art and opened the door to a whole new world and style of painting. We praise him now for his uniqueness and individuality, but he did not always get praise. His friends looked at his work at told him to not show it to anyone because of how hideous they thought it was. Picasso had had plenty of professional training in painting and drawing so he could produce work that the public would love and enjoy. He did not do that, however. He remained true to himself and his style. It might not have been great back then, but now he is one of the greatest artists that we study, look up to, and try to be like. And that is the sacrifice that individuals make. They have to let go of what other people think and just think for themselves. The individual knows he stands alone, that is why his is an individual. If people agree with him or join him then that is great and encouraging, but he knows that being an individual does not guarantee he will have support for his individuality.
So… maybe some of us are just scared of what other people will think of us. That is an unfortunate limitation that our society and culture has influenced upon us.
___________________________________________________________
Grazian, David. Blue Chicago: The Search for Authenticity in Urban Blues Clubs. The University of Chicago Press: 2003, p.159.
Spillman, Lyn. Cultural Sociology: Becker, Howard. Art Worlds. Blackwell Publishing:2002, p. 178-188.
Elizabeth Bennette: Pride & Prejudice
(The part of this clip I will be focusing on is in the time frame of 3:28-7:00)
Elizabeth Bennette is a very independent woman who does not feel the need to act how people think she should act. She knows herself well and knows what she wants and feels no need to act or pretend otherwise. The part of this clip that I am focusing on shows Elizabeth talking about her sister to a friend of hers. She cannot help but laugh at her friend when her friend talks about all the things Elizabeth's sister should do to secure her man. Elizabeth is the kind of woman who believes in love and in being yourself and if someone cannot or does not love you for who you are then they are not worth it. She is not like most of the women who would settle for any man who showed interest in them. Elizabeth does not believe in settling for anything less than love and a true companion. She does not fall for Mr. Darcy right away, nor does she accept his offer to dance. In the movie she is also willing to walk around outside and get a little muddy, which most of the women in that time period, would never do that. She turns down a marriage proposal when any other woman would have accepted it and she does not care about what others think of her as long as she knows what she likes and who she is. She is an individual, which makes her admirable and hopefully someone to strive to be like.
Independent vs. Interdependent
I read a research article called Inidividuality or Conformity? The Effect of Independent and Interdependent Self-Concepts on Public Judgments by Carlos Torelli. In this article Torelli discusses the two perceptions that people have of their relationship to others (2006). The two concepts he mentions are the "independent self-concept" and the "interdependent self-concept" (Torelli 2006). He goes on to explain that an independent self-concept "includes mental representations of one’s own traits, attitudes, and preferences and is associated with the motivation to withstand undue social pressure and to be independent” (2006). Contrasting that is interdependent self-concept, which Torelli writes, “includes mental representations of social norms, group memberships, and others’ opinions and is linked to the motivation to adjust to the demands of others and to maintain harmony” (2006). One focuses on one’s individual thoughts and opinions, while the other focuses more on what other people think. A lot of times in our lives we do not want to stir up the dust too much, so often we will “tailor” our messages to correspond with the assumptions we make about the opinions of others (Torelli 2006). Sometimes we are too afraid to actually speak up about what we think and know. The Asch conformity experiment is a good example of this. Torelli goes on to write that, “when people expect to explain their judgments to others, they must often choose whether to tailor their messages to perceived attitudes of their audience. When people are motivated to seek approval from their audiences, they often try to conform to the judgments they anticipate others will make” (2006). This is the interdependent self concept. Continuing on, he writes,” In contrast, when people lack this motivation, or when they are motivated to disassociate themselves from others, they often base their judgments on their own previously formed beliefs or attitudes rather than on those of their audience” (Torelli 2006). Torelli is not saying that someone possesses one self-concept or the other rather he is saying that these self-concepts are situational. If we know that we will have to share with others our judgments on something, we will often time take on more of the interdependent self-concept in order to just blend in. When we know we will not have to openly share what our opinions or judgments are, it makes us less shy about what we think. The individual, however, takes on more of the independent self-concept and does not worry about what others think, but just thinks for himself.
I think this research article was a really interesting study to conduct because it helps reveal to us how we conform and why we conform in certain situations. It helps us understand ourselves better. How often are we in similar situations as the subject in the Asch conformity experiment and just conform to what other people are saying or doing in order not to stand out? I am thankful for the leaders of social movements who were not afraid to answer correctly and who did not let the opinions and judgments of others to slow them down. They thought critically and for themselves, not allowing other people to think for them, which produced a lot of character and gave hope for many others.
_______________________________________________________
Torelli, Carlos. Individuality or Conformity? The Effect of Independent and Interdependent Self-Concepts on Public Judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology (2006)16(3), 240-248.
I think this research article was a really interesting study to conduct because it helps reveal to us how we conform and why we conform in certain situations. It helps us understand ourselves better. How often are we in similar situations as the subject in the Asch conformity experiment and just conform to what other people are saying or doing in order not to stand out? I am thankful for the leaders of social movements who were not afraid to answer correctly and who did not let the opinions and judgments of others to slow them down. They thought critically and for themselves, not allowing other people to think for them, which produced a lot of character and gave hope for many others.
_______________________________________________________
Torelli, Carlos. Individuality or Conformity? The Effect of Independent and Interdependent Self-Concepts on Public Judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology (2006)16(3), 240-248.
Other Films
These films are fun, light hearted, chick-flick, comedies full of corny lines and silly moments, but definitely entertaining to watch. Not only that but these films are other examples of movies that portray the destruction of losing yourself to conform to be like others, or self discovery, as seen in whip it, of a girl who figures out where she belongs and who she is. Although films like these are not Academy Award Winners or Oscar Nominees, they do hold an important message and moral of the story, if one so chooses to look for it. I think these films share a lot about losing sense of your individuality by conforming to the crowd and the destruction, drama, and devastation that results from it; or remaining as an individual and finding, not a crowd to fit into, but a crowd that fits you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
