CONFORMITY AND OBEDIENCE 1
You can add your own ideas to the paper
Conformity and Obedience
Your Name Here
Your School Here
CONFORMITY AND OBEDIENCE 1
Conformity and Obedience
Humans are social beings, who associate with different groups and invest efforts in improving their associations with others. As individuals interact with others, their associations with them flourish. However, the process of interacting with different groups involves being subjected to rules and norms that regulate such interactions and the consequent implications of being part of a social group. Rules are created for group members to abide by them and reflect compliance as group members. Compliance takes place due to various social factors like peer pressure which could lead to changes in an individual’s thoughts, principles and decision-making processes. This paper t discuses concerns related to conformity and obedience.
Compare and Contrast the Concepts of Conformity and Obedience
Both concepts conformity and obedience will be defined prior to comparing and contrasting them. By conformity it is understood the efforts made by a person to commit to a tasks or principle they do not normally do, to ensure that person is attuned with the group this person is exposed to by socialization. When acting in conformity an individual will observe norms like other members of the group. When it comes to conformity, multiple factors like gender, culture, and personality, to name a few, will affect how a person interacts with others in the group (Fiske, 2010). Conformity is said to have a great impact in groups, because it can be associated with individuals that share commonalities, as well as, people perceived of assistance to gain societal acceptance for the group. Some observational findings have related that individual members of a group have a tendency to behave like the group’s chief members (Martin & Bull, 2008). In addition, the responses and behaviors displayed by group members serve as emotional links that form from a partner’s absence and the support obtained from another group member (Blesk-Rechek, 2001).
Conversely, obedience coerces group members to be subject to the group commands and follows the group norms and regulations (Fiske, 2010). Obedience is influenced by the seniority or authority that an individual is given by the group to exercise authority over group members that are expected to do as they are told. Individuals are obligated to follow older members of the group or those assigned the leadership of the group (Martin et al., 2008).
One aspect in which both concepts compare is the conformity and obedience affect suffering and induces behavioral changes among group members (Fiske, 2010). Moreover, since individuals recognize and carry out the same traditions and engage in behaviors upheld by the group, it is expected that group members comply with groups normative and settle with group intercessions. Both concepts compare as the several aspects like personality, sex, and age affect group behaviors (Blesk-Rechek, 2001).
Analyze a Classical Study Concerning the Effect of Group Influence on the Self
By a group is understood a set of person congregated to form a group from two members and up. Some functions of a group are spend time together, involve in a community project, work for a common goal, and educate the community. There are three approaches used to elaborate the concept of a group, which are perceived control, tangible behaviors, and transparency within an entity. When groups experience success, group members will experience contentment, and additional members will be interested in joining the group. Conversely, when group interactions are poor and dissatisfaction is high, a group is likely to fail because is causing sadness among members, which can lead to their desertion from the group and eventual group closure (Fiske, 2010).
The members of a group are expected to work hard for group efforts, share with the group accomplishments, as well as, any confusion and threats perceived by them, in addition, group members are expected to deal with the same factors individually (Fiske, 2010). Theories like the self-classification theory and the theory of characteristics status and expectations of some nations are interesting topics of research in terms of societal influence (Fiske, 2010). When a person is accepted within a group due his or her social status or other commonalities within a group influence others to accept that individual within the group. For instance, a businesspersons social status causes great admiration and grants him great influence on others and the perception that other have on him. The influential weight he has on his social group reflects so much, which can lead to the assumption that members in a group compete for approval from other members, and those seeking approval tend to present themselves to the group using their real and favorable dispositions. (Fiske, 2010)
The later leads to a relevant concept when it comes to group behavior, as a member of a group you are expected to behave according to the groups accepted norms. By favoring group norms, an individual disregards his or her personal principles and behaviors.
Consequently, group membership lead to losing individualities leading individuals to involve in behaviors that are not regularly accepted by an individual or that are contrary to his or her principles (Oldmeadow et al., 2003). Studies have confirmed that practicing unbiased tolerance in a group can be advantageous for the members of the group. Nevertheless, group members can in some circumstances be pressed to conform to the group’s norms. Therefore, when some identity issues surge among group members, those problems can hinder the group, because the group’s needs and norms are to have a greater significance than personal values to ensure the group experience success in terms of the relationships between group members, personal associations, and group levels (Jetten et al., 2006, p. 841).
Contemporary Example of Group Influence on the Self
Each group member is expected to contribute to the group by showing and sharing their skills and knowledge; however, the latter is not certain when it comes to some members that instead of showing and sharing their own skills they rather merging with other members. The moment a group member merges their skills with other group members, this person stops acting as a unique individual. Group members are encouraged to show their individual characteristics to the group so the group forms the proper perception or tendencies about each individual, once this goal is achieve the group benefits because each member is mindful of each member’s characteristics. In addition, this assists group members to overcome future challenges and recruiting potential members. Having an understanding of the features of the group members helps the group to bind, behave, and maintain its integrity, despite the diversity of the members integrating the group (Jetten et al., 2006).
Every member is regarded for his or her unique features as a unique contributor to the group. Unlike a group’s composition that counts with the contributions of diverse professionals holding different skills, each member brings to the group his or her own attributes. This means that each individual that belongs to a group is building block of the group. Groups created based on interpersonal relationships, expect to have a greater influence in its group members, and this will influence how members perceive the group, as well (Postmes et al., 2005). Some experts have explained that peer pressure, and other factors influence the process of presenting and monitoring group membership.
In addition, individual’s behaviors change or alter as the interaction with the group progresses. Accordingly, the new environment generates new attitudes, those changes are known as attitudinal changes that occur after people is experiencing closed friendships, passionate indoctrination and extreme self-control (Postmes et al., 2005). Let us use an example to put this into prospective; cult indoctrination usually starts with a peer’s invitation to spend time together in a fun and spiritual activity. As the cult meeting attendance progresses, group members try to persuade the individual to join the group and his behaviors start changing to act more in compliance with the group, as well as, developing new attitudes, which concord with the mind-set of the group members. As the cult meeting attendance, progresses the individual behaviors start changing to act more in compliance with the group, as well as, developing new attitudes, which concord with the mind-set of the group members (Tsuji, 2002).
Individual and Societal Influences Leading To Deviance from Group Norms
Since groups are to operate under collective principles and approaches each member is expected to comply with all norms; members who do not comply with a group normative can be considered rebellious members, who are at high risk of deserting the group. Such situation can cause internal conflicts within the group rather than bitterness with other groups (Fiske, 2010). Nevertheless, when unpredicted behavior is rewarded by the group this creates the rise of irregularities within the group. Irregularities are regarded as exasperating acts, because they deviate of the group norms.
Deviant behavior is considered a form of resistance to group compliance (Akinlolu & Salawu, 2011, p. 237). Nonetheless, deviances can be regarded as profitable by some members of the groups, and doubtful and inauspicious changes by others. Deviances are also considered adverse influences for a group because deviant behaviors. When some members are not comfortable with the group standards, they can cause turmoil and others can join them to create a subgroup, develop their own identity and standards, and altogether abandon the original group (Akinlolu et al., 2011). Lastly, some individuals involve in deviant behaviors out of frustration, also a factor influencing the sponsoring of adverse attitudes that oppose customary rules within a group.
Many deviant behaviors are blamed on early life experiences, which make individuals uncontrollable in their youth and adulthood. Education and socialization can help individuals develop their communication skills and reduce deviant attitudes in adulthood(NovikPodgórecki, 2015). It is also possible, that cultural diversity favors deviant behaviors, because some freedoms particularly among adolescent could foster deviant behaviors among them. Complex patterns of communication can create additional difficulties, which can result in further adolescence ill-being. Proper communication can help groups reduce deviant behaviors among members (Novik et al., 2015). Maintaining group members engage in-group activities can also help group members comply with the group norms.
From a personal experience, deviant behaviors develop from social interactions(nurture), in addition to other factors that could be of nature order. However, learning, motivations and principles that shy the individual from deviant associations united with proper environments are fundamental for individuals to shy away from deviant interactions and improve group associations.
References
Akinlolu, A. A. and Salawu, R. O. (2011) Managing Deviant Behavior and Resistance to Change. International Journal of Business and Management, 6 (1), 235-242.
Bleske-Rechek, A. L. (2001). Obedience, conformity, and social roles: active learning in
a large introductory psychology class. Teaching of Psychology. 28(4), 260-262
Fiske, S. T. (2010). Social beings: Core Motives in Social Psychology(2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
Jetten, J., McAuliffe, B. J., Hornsey, M. J., and Gogg, M. A. (2006). Differentiation between and within groups: the influence of individualist and collectivist group norms. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 825-843
Martin, C. H. and Bull, P (2008). Obedience and conformity in clinical practice. British Journal of Midwifery, 16(8), 504-509.
Novik, K. and Podgórecki, J. (2015) A Model of Developing Communication Skills among
Adolescents with Behavioral Problems. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 10(4), 579-587.
Oldmeadow, J. A., Platow, M. J., Foddy, M., and Anderson, D. (2003). Self-
categorization, status, and social influence. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66 (2), 138-152.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., Lee, A. T., and Novak, R. J. (2005). Individuality and social influence in groups: Inductive and deductive routes to group identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 747–763.
Tsuji, R. (2002). Interpersonal influence and attitude change toward conformity in
small groups: a social psychological model. Journal of Mathematical Sociology.
26, 17-34.