Indndn and Dissnt Monographs - Assignment Example

Indереndеnсе and Dissеnt Student’s Name University of Affiliation Indереndеnсе and Dissеnt Independence behaviour is the ability to resist various pressures to conform to the majority, or resist pressure to comply with the orders given by an authority figure (Rotte, 1996, p.g 609). It should not be confused with ant-conformity as the anti-conformists conform themselves. An excellent example of independent behaviour would give more information about a person who behave in a way that they feel is always right and please them even when their demeanours may sometimes be the same as the majority’s. Another example of independent behaviour can be described by an individual who follows commands when they feel are justified but do not follow them when they feel that such commands are unjustified. On the other hand, dissent is an opinion or philosophy of opposition to the given prevailing order like the government policies or an entity like political party supporting such policies. Described in this report are the types of independent behaviours, the factors that affect different levels of dissent shown by individuals, and evaluation of the research on the aspects as mentioned above. Types of Independent Behaviour Resisting Pressure to Conform: From (Kassing, 2004, p.g 450), resisting pressure to conform is the independent behaviour where an individual fails to do like the compact majority. Resisting pressure to comply with other people is determined by the following factors. The size of the compact majority: When the size of the group is reduced, the probability of conformity tends to zero. A majority of two people results in a mild conformity degree as compared to a group of five individuals. It shows that the smaller the group, the easier it becomes to behave independently. Task’s nature: If the task is difficult, the rate of conformity increases. It means that when the task given is easy, and the correct answers are obvious, the group members are more likely to stick to them and behave independently. Resisting Pressure to Obey: From the lesson taught by Milgram about electric shocks experiment, he changed his initial experiment by bringing in buffers between the victims and the participants. After such introduction, the participants got it easy to resist to the pressure to obey and suggested the great amount of independence (Rotte, 1996, p.g 609). Such response shows that particular situations can make more likelihood of independence behaviour than others can. The following are factors that make obedience to a given authority less likely. Feeling accountable and sympathetic: From Milgram example, some group members were confused to continue giving electric shock because they thought that the victims were distressed or were feeling some pain. When they were able to see and touch the victims, the level of obedience dropped by a certain percentage. Questioning motives and the status of the authority: When the people are able to ask questions about the legitimacy of the authority, they may find it easy to remain independent (Kassing, 2004, p.g 451). Reactance: This is the psychological process of the individuals doing the exact opposite of what they have been requested to do. It usually happens when a person harshly attempts to limit another person’s freedom so that limited person reacts negatively. Factors that affect different levels of dissent Dissent is mainly influenced by two factors namely minority influence and moscovici. The term “minority influence” means any form of social influence that is articulated to vulnerability to a consistent minority position in a given group (Allen, 1969, p.g 148). It is mainly experienced for a given period, and it brings up some confidential recognition of the sentiments spoken by the minority group. A real life example of the minority influencing the majority was experienced in late years of 19th century when suffragette movement emerged. A minor group of this movement argued in the early unpopular opinion about the allowance of women to vote. Through working hard and joining up their justice, suffragette movement finally compelled the majority to accept their sentiments. Conversely, moscovici states that the majority influence tends to base its argument on the public compliance. It is most likely to the normative case that can be influenced by the social factors. In this case, the power of numbers is imperative where the majority have the authority to reward or punish with both approval and disapproval and because of this power, minorities are pressurized to conform (Allen, 1969, p.g 139). Given that the majority despises whatever the minorities say, the impact of the minorities is not based on the influence of social aspects. Instead, the minority influence on the informational social influence that provides news ideas to the majority. There are four factors that have been identified as crucial for the minority to dominate the majority. They include; the style of thinking, flexibility, behavioural style, and identification. Under flexibility and compromise, several researchers have tried to establish whether only consistency is adequate for a minority to impact a majority. Such scientists say that the primary feature in this context depends on the explanation given by the term “consistency.” If the consistent majority is found to be dogmatic, inflexible, and uncompromising, the minority are likely to be overpowered by the majority, but if they remain flexible and compromising, they are more likely to be construed as reasonable, moderate, and cooperative (Allen, 1969, p.g 139) Under identification, individuals are inclined to look for people with same characteristics. For example, women tend to identify with women, teenagers with teenagers, and so forth. Studies show that if the majorities identify with the minority, then they are likely to be serious with minority’s opinion and decline theirs. For instance, a study shows that a gay minority argued about the gay rights had a less influence on a straight majority than a straight minority arguing for the gay rights (Rotte, 1996, p.g 609). The majority of those who are non-gay identified with the minority of those who are non-gay. Research on colours Test on colours is another factor that can be used to show the impacts of the reliable minority over the majority. In an experiment to evaluate such effect, the Confederates were placed together where four people participated. In the evaluation, all these participants were tested on the different types of colours to ascertain that they understood various colours. In the group of four participants were shown 36 slides that had different shades of blue and then they were asked to say the colour in each case slide. In the first phase of the experiments, the two confederates said that they saw the green colour on each slide. Although they were wrong, they were consistent in their answers. The colours were used in this case to show whether the participants would stand firm to their answered or would change due to the influence of the other group. To confirm this, the same participants were asked the same colours for the second time. In This time round, they give different answers where they said they saw the green colour in twenty-four slides and blue in the rest of the slides and they were consistent with their answers. The question that needs to be answered in this case is whether the response of the minority (Confederates) had any influence on the participants’ answerers. From the above information, it can be seen that the minority had an impact on the majority (8.67%). About seventy percent of the individual participated in the experiment agreed that the slides were green more than once, meaning that their answering was influenced by the remaining thirty percent (minority). The graph below the evaluation of these effects on the green responses against the minorities. Source: http://cdn-1.simplypsychology.org/403x269xmoscovici.jpg.pagespeed.ic.03IP_PrrtS.webp Conclusion: Although the minority can influence the majority, this does not happen all the time. They impact the majority when they behave in some distinct ways. Criticism: In this case, the researcher used the laboratory outcomes experiment, that is, the outcomes may be true to real life (valid to ecology). Also, Moscovici applied female pupils as participants, so it may sound irrational to generalize the results to all people. In conclusion, independence behaviour is the ability to resist various pressures to conform to the majority, or resist pressure to comply with the orders given by an authority figure. A valid example of independent behaviour would give more information about a person who behave in a way that they feel is always right and please them even when their demeanours may sometimes be the same as the majority’s. There are two types independent behaviour that include; resisting pressure to obey and resisting pressure to confront. On the other hand, dissent is mainly affected by two factors namely minority influence and moscovici. Four factors have been identified as crucial for the minority to dominate the majority that include; the style of thinking, flexibility, behavioural style, and identification. References Allen, N.V., 1969. Social Support, Dissent and Confromity. American Sociological Association, 31(2),138-149. Kassing, W.J, 2004. Dissent in Organization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 40, 449-456. Rotter, J.B., 1996. Generalized Expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monorgraphs, 80 (1), 609. Read More