The Doctrine of Suggestion, Prestige and Imitation in Social Psychology - Essay Example

? Compliance, Obedience and Conformity: Perspectives from Psychology Table of Contents Table of Contents Introduction 2 Compliance: Psychological Research 2 Obedience: Psychological Research 7 Conformity: Psychological Research 9 Conclusion 10 Sources Cited 11 Introduction Psychology relates to a rational inquiry into the human mind through collective analysis and includes the research into the behavioral patterns that join humans together in society. The method of investigation in psychology is dependent on the school of philosophy or theory that the researchers adhere to in conducting experiments. Experimental methodologies may also be dependent on the way psychologists frame the primary questions of inquiry. Therefore, in seeking to investigate the similarities and differences found in psychological research regarding compliance, obedience and conformity in human behavior, consciousness, and understanding, a balanced approach looking at the findings across numerous fields of psychology historically is required. This survey of research should include behaviorist, humanist, Freudian, and other fundamental schools, as well as branches such as social psychology, abnormal psychology, and neuroscience. In this manner, the findings in each school of psychology can be determined to be based in experimental observations, theoretical hypothesis or speculation, material biology, brain structure, conditioning, bio-chemistry, learning, genetics, or other factors determined by the research to be significant in causing or influencing the behavior in groups and individuals. In cross-referencing the proposed causes of compliance, obedience and conformity in human behavior and their influence on social organizations historically through psychological research, a more balanced, nuanced, and critical understanding of the concepts can result that illustrates the interrelation of compounded effects in these behavior patterns. Compliance: Psychological Research According to David Myers (2005) and the textbook ‘Social Psychology,’ compliance relates to “conformity that involves publicly acting in accord with an implied or explicit request while privately disagreeing”. (Myers, 2005, p. 209) From this definition, certain a priori acknowledgements must be made or assumed by the researcher. The first is that the human individual and society has evolved to a degree where group organization has reached a level of complexity and identities are separated based upon character, personality, likes, dislikes, attractions, aversions, etc. This means that individual identity must be established or evolved in the human being subjectively, and that the means of distinguishing individual identity from the group must be developed conceptually. In a similar manner, the establishment of the narrative of compliance assumes personal or social identities that join the individual and group both consciously and unconsciously, though these are inevitably contingent on the ideological biases of the researcher or observer. The question of compliance also assumes a morally aware and engaged individual who struggles with the pressure of social demands against competing personal desires. In this manner, two forms of compliance can be distinguished, the conscious compliance which is directly decided upon by the individual as a matter of positive choice or through the negative possibility of punishment, and the unconscious compliance that is part of programming, identity, or group awareness that is unquestioned by the individual. Recognizing these two forms of compliance is important, as they also show how cultural conditioning can bias the investigation through the manner in which the primary questions of inquiry are phrased. Freudian theory associates compliance as learned behavior which is acquired by the process of acculturation proceeding from infancy. Freud identified five stages, the oral, anal, phallic, latency, and genital which described the individual urges which existed in each stage of human development from infancy to adolescence. (Priestly, 2001) While these stages can be seen as arbitrary and inexact by modern standards, Freud established the psychological framework through which the difference between the individual’s natural desires are met with resistance, first in the family and then in society, leading to repression and the psychic effects of repression in potential neurosis. From this interpretation, human morality can be seen as an evolutionary process relating to the conflict of individual desires, governed by self-interest, pleasure, curiosity, etc., with social and familial dictates of conformity or compliance with normative behavior. (Freud, 1961) Thus, the early psychological study of compliance from the era of Freud onwards can be seen as relating to the question of how individual desires are moderated, mediated, or conditioned by the family and social group in the identity formation processes of human development. Erickson’s theory of personality development can be seen as an extension of this framework of Freud’s as it relates to larger circles of acculturation and social norm acquisition in larger, interconnected and ideologically distinct groups of behavior. (Davis & Clifton, 1995) The theory and research related to Freud, Erickson, and other schools of humanistic psychology build a systematic framework for understanding compliance in human behavior through the acculturation process in the family and social groups. The largest and most personal influence will be the conditioning provided by the immediate family in the early days of infancy. As the child explores the environment, natural learning occurs. The infant’s range of mobility expands through crawling, walking, and other forms of transportation leading to innumerable encounters with objects, situations, and personalities in both human society and nature. The child must learn practically where his or her conceptual models fail or lead to harm. Similarly, the child must learn human behavior, which includes the acquisition of norms. The tendency to chew on foreign objects in the oral stage, for example, is abandoned or the behavior related to toilet training is acquired. Gradually, the human individual discovers a pluralistic society and natural abundance with a variety of competing interests that challenge his or her own desires, goals, and instincts. In the management of this conflict in perception of interests and feedback of behavior in groups, compliance becomes a method of evolutionary adaptation that leads the individual to survive in an environment, or operate according to the shared governing principle of a group society. (Myers, 2005) Freud identified that conflicts, oppositions, or irrationalities occurring at vital stages of conditioning relating to the acculturation of social norms could lead to abnormal psychological states and maladaptive patterns through neurosis. (Yiannis, 1983) This led consequently to a large corpus of research in psychoanalytic theory relating to the understanding of the consequences of the family imprinting of values into individual consciousness and the manner in which this could cause existential problems through repression or alienation. While Freud established a link between compliance and abnormal psychology that could be explored and treated through psychoanalysis, other researchers in psychology chose to look more experimentally at the means through which social norms were created, learned, and shared as repeated behavior in groups. For example, psychologists treating patients often realized the same factors operating in the family, society, or group dynamics were also operating in the clinic with regard to patients’ compliance with health care treatment programs. (Butcher et al., 2004, p. 322) researchers also began to study the effects of social programming on large groups, as in the instances where Freud investigated cases of mass hysteria. (Freud, 1953) Mass hysteria suggested a suspension of commonly accepted social norms for a type of panic or irrational response. Freud observed similar suspensions of the normal compliance response of patients with regard to hypnosis, suggesting that a subliminal or subconscious influence on compliance could exist. (Freud, 1953) This encouraged psychologists like Herbert Marcuse, Wilhelm Reich, and others to begin deconstructing the qualities of mass propaganda and the relationship to fascism in the Second World War. (Marcuse, 1955) While many psychologists such as Piaget and Chomsky focused on the importance of neural linguistic programming on identity and belief systems through language, the relationship of language to the self was best expressed as genetic epistemology and the potential material basis of grammar in the neuro-architecture of the brain. Piaget’s work highlighted the importance of language in human identity systems that operate in a complex environmental system such as the modern plurality of values found in a modern city or town, while Chomsky’s work in deep grammar would presage many of the late 20th Century’s developments in neuropsychology that would change the way the question was framed or understood. (Piaget, 1968; Searle, 1972) In 20th Century experimental psychology, two researchers stand out as groundbreaking in the investigation into the social dynamics of compliance in human individuals. The first is Solomon Asch, who conducted a simple experiment with groups reporting findings from observation of cards to conclude that social compliance forces could lead to false impressions and groups adhering to incorrect valuations of reality. (Asch, 1956) The other most frequently cited studies in this field relates to the research of Bibb Latane who published “The psychology of social impact” (1981) and “Pressures to uniformity and the evolution of cultural norms: Modeling dynamic social impact” (2000). In these works, the author reviews “evidence from research on conformity and imitation, stage fright and embarrassment, news interest, bystander intervention, tipping, inquiring for Christ, productivity in groups, and crowding in rats” in order to draw conclusions about the ability of humans to stray from rationally accepted social norms under stress or unique situations. (Latane, 1981) Research such as this shows means to model fear as imagined from threats, social consequences, or subtle persuasion in groups to condition what would be considered an altruistic moral response or rationally agreed social norm violation by sub-groups and individuals. These type of experimental findings in psychology point to important lessons of human nature, but neuro-scientists also have begun searching for the roots of compliance in the deep structures of the brain’s architecture and cellular arrangements. Dr. Vasily Klucharev of the F.C. Donders Center for Cognitive Neuroimaging in The Netherlands stated, "We often change our decisions and judgments to conform with normative group behavior. However, the neural mechanisms of social conformity remain unclear... Our results also show that social conformity is based on mechanisms that comply with reinforcement learning and is reinforced by the neural error-monitoring activity which signals what is probably the most fundamental social mistake—that of being too different from others." (Cell Press, 2011) From this interpretation based in neuroscience, the chemical basis of fear can be studied and analyzed as it relates to changes in the brain and body through increased rates of heartbeat, adrenalin response and decomposition cycles, and the mental states experiences as a result of these biological changes. While continuing in a similar manner as Freud’s investigations into hysteria, Erickson’s stages of social development, or in accordance with and Latane’s theories, the neuro-chemical approach to deconstructing the biological signals related to compliance and associated neuro-linguistic or emotional response programming in human compliance can also shed new light on the subject with possible methods of treatment in instances of abnormal psychology or neurosis. Obedience: Psychological Research In experimental psychology, the two paradigmatic publications on obedience are the Stanford Prison and Milgram Experiments, conducted in the 1960’s and 1970’s which suggested that humanities tendency to cruelty or to inflict pain and suffering on other individuals unjustly may be structurally conditioned or programmed. In the Stanford Prison experiment, a classic double-blind technique was used to convince the subjects they were taking part in a “role-playing” model of a prison, when in fact the psychologists were studying their behavior patterns with regard to obedience. (Zimbardo, 1999) What the researchers did not expect was the way the prison guards would identify with their social role extremely and inflict physical and psychological trauma or violence on the volunteer, role-playing “inmates”. The researchers stopped the experiment due to human rights conditions, but concluded that the institutional effect such as that experienced in a position of authority, power, or control could typically lead to abuse of power or inhumane treatment. The researchers concluded the institution provided the justification for the individuals to go beyond their own accepted limits of fairness and humanity, and to develop evil, vicious, violent, or malicious behavior. (Zimbardo, 1999) All the more surprising is the role of obedience to social roles, or ideas of behavior that are transmitted and programmed between individuals, in leading the prison guards out of their normal sense of reality. For this, the Stanford Prison Experiment can give researchers cause to question the corrupting influence of obedience, large groups, power structures, and institutions on morality. The reason for this seems to be that obedience to a higher power or authority seems to absolve the individuals from personal responsibility for their behaviors, making them more prone to abuse of power or even physical violence. In the Milgram experiment, the researchers found similarly that when empowered by authority to administer electrical shocks as part of a double-blind experiment, normal humans were surprisingly willing to go well beyond accepted social norms in administering pain to strangers. (Experiment-Resources, 2008) The participants may have felt that they were merely obeying the orders that they were given, but the researchers actually wanted to see when they would stop or refuse to comply. Instead, they found the people willing to administer very painful shocks to strangers who were obviously suffering, and continued to do so well beyond the limit of when they should have or could have refused to comply with administration. From the Milgram and Stanford Prison experiments, the conditioning influence of authority over basic morality was established, though the subtle reasons for the cause of the behavior was not fully established. Nevertheless, these conclusions can be seen as repeatable in the context of many historical abuses of power by government, armies, and corporations when individuals are absolved of a greater responsibility for their actions and required to obey orders or commands blindly without question. The moral effects can have very severe consequences in biochemistry, possibly leading to Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in individuals as a consequence. Conformity: Psychological Research According to Myers (2005), early psychological research on compliance was largely concerned with social norm formation, or how human attitudes, ideologies, and personalities form within a greater social dynamic. In relation to conformity, the work of Muzafer Sharif (1935, 1937) is regarded as one of the first instances of experimentally approaching the construction of social norms in a laboratory environment. (Myers, 2005, p.210) This has led in turn to innumerable studies showing false memory recollection or how memory and appearance itself can be determined, influences, or corrupted by aspects of social conformity. People will change their own expression of events to be more similar to the description of others as a basic phenomenon of communication, even if it means denying, downplaying, or silencing their own views of reality. In abnormal psychology, via Freud, the collusion of force on individuals can lead to neurosis or mental diseases if they are imprinted improperly due to repression. Therefore, humanistic psychology needs to understand the social forces of conformity in groups and individuals in order to help struggling or suffering people relate and work through their problems in therapy or counseling. It should be noted that psychological crises of meaning, as related to social adaption, conformity, and identity may be normal aspects of an existential psychology but that biological or neurological problems can make these normal problems with life goals into symptoms of greater disharmony or mental disease. Researchers such as Aronson & Mills (1959), Gerard & Mathewson (1966) and others have also studied how cults and ritual communities manipulate personal identities so as to create conformity with group policies and ideologies. (Myers, 2005, p.273) Conclusion Compliance, obedience, and conformity are related concepts psychologically, and the research on these topics shows the complexity of interactions that leads to their function in human behavior. Freud and Erickson are important in understanding the way education, learning, conditioning, and acculturation occur in the course of human development through the values of the family and society. The fear that leads to social compliance may lead to extreme behavior, as in the Stanford Prison and Milagram experiments, may lead additionally to new understanding of the processes through neuro-chemical analysis. Obedience, conformity, and compliance all relate to the construction of social norms, identities, ideologies, and personalities in a pluralistic environment of shared subjectivities. In this manner, the study of these aspects is an important part of social psychology as well as neuroscience, behaviorism, psychoanalysis, and humanistic schools of therapy and counseling. In understanding how these concepts operate psychologically, there is more opportunity to avoid abuse in institutions, society, and history. Sources Cited Asch, S. E. (1948). The doctrine of suggestion, prestige and imitation in social psychology. Psychological Review, Vol 55(5), Sep 1948. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/rev/55/5/250/ Asch, Solomon E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, Vol 70(9), 1956. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1957-05875-001 Asch, Solomon E.; Zukier, Henri (1984). Thinking about persons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 46(6), Jun 1984. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/46/6/1230/ Cell Press (2009). Brain Mechanisms of Social Conformity. ScienceDaily,January 16, 2009. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2009/01/090114124109.htm Davis, Doug and Clifton, Alan (1995). Psychosocial Theory: Erikson. Haverford, 1995. Retrieved from http://www.haverford.edu/psych/ddavis/p109g/erikson.stages.html Experiment-Resources.com (2008). Stanley Milgram Experiment. Experiment Resources, 2011. Retrieved from http://www.experiment-resources.com/stanley-milgram-experiment.html Freud, Sigmund (1961). Civilization and Its Discontents. Trans./Ed. James Strachey. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1961. Freud, Sigmund (1953). Civilization, War and Death. Ed. John Rickman. London: The Hogarth Press, 1953. Freud, Sigmund (1953). The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Ed. James Strachey. London: The Hogarth Press, 1953. Gabriel, Yiannis. Freud and Society. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1983. Genova, Cathleen (2009). Social Conformity Starts In The Brain. Medical News Today, Neurology / Neuroscience, 15 Jan 2009. Retrieved from http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/135600.php Latane, Bibb (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, Vol 36(4), Apr 1981. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/amp/36/4/343/ Marcuse, Herbert. Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud. Boston: The Beacon Press, 1955. Myers, David (2005). Social Psychology. New York: McGraw Hill Higher Education, 2005. Priestley, Brenton (2001). Freudian Psychoanalysis: Psychosexual Theory of Personality Development and Defence Mechanisms. 2001. Retrieved from http://www.brentonpriestley.com/writing/freud.htm Searle, John R. (1972). Chomsky's Revolution in Linguistics. The New York Review of Books, June 29, 1972. Retrieved from http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/19720629.htm Piaget, Jean (1968). Genetic Epistemology. Genetic Epistemology, a series of lectures delivered by Piaget at Columbia University, Published by Columbia University Press, translated by Eleanor Duckworth, 1968. Retrieved from http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/piaget.htm Shuttleworth, Martyn (2008). Asch Experiment. Experiment Resources, 2011. Retrieved from http://www.experiment-resources.com/asch-experiment.html Thompson, Michael (1995). The Truth About Freud's Technique: The Encounter With the Real. NYU Press, 1995. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.in/books?id=B7MPI_T38JIC Zimbardo, Philip G. (1999). Stanford Prison Experiment. PrisonExp, 2011. Retrieved from http://www.prisonexp.org/ Read More