Are we conformists? group conformism and pressure

One of the costs of homogeneity is that it favors pressures in favor of compliance that groups usually exert on their members

It may seem the same as capitalism, but it is a different problem. Conformism causes a change in the behavior or opinions of a person as a result of the real or imagined pressure of people or groups of people. The individual changes his mind not because he thinks now differently, but because it is easier to change his mind than to face the group.

Conformism is a difficult behavior to analyze and even less assume: because We are aware that others are made up, but we undervalue our own degree of conformity Regarding the group. Therefore, and despite the half century, the experiment with which Solomon Asch continues that it was very widespread behavior continues to surprise.

Solomon Asch's conformism study

The psychologist used two cards: in one there were three lines of well different lengths; In the other, a line identical to one of the previous three. It was that the participants would tell which of the three lines the same was the one presented in the second card. It was incredibly simple; In fact, asked individually, there was practically no error. However, Asch introduced each participant in a group with four other people who acted on behalf of the experimenter, and who were responsible for defending a clearly incorrect response. The result: when they were confronted with the four companions who gave the same erroneous answer, within a series of twelve judgments, three quarters of the subjects were folded to the incorrect general criteria at least once once. And when the set of opinions issued was verified, it was discovered that 35% of all the answers assumed the manifestly wrong judgments of Asch's accomplices.

It should be noted that the experiment, which has been confirmed once after another, it was carried out in conditions in which there was no other pressure other than the majority opinion. In other conditions, the percentage of conformist responses would have been even higher. As he holds Elliot Aronnson, "A group will be more effective to induce conformism:

1) if it is constituted by experts;

2) If the members (both individually and collectively) are important for the individual;

3) If the members (both individually and collectively) are, somehow, comparable to the individual".

The committees directed by the parties are constituted by experts; Companions are vital for the political aspirations of any of its members; And all group members are absolutely comparable. So these groups are clearly immersed in the situation it raises James Surowieki: "The greater the influence that the members of a group exercise the ones over the others, and the greater the personal contact that they have with each other, the less likely they reach intelligent decisions as a group. The greater the mutual influence, more probability that everyone creates the same things and making the same mistakes". There is nothing more to add the strong cohesion of these groups around their leader or leaders, and the permanent urgency of achieving consensus on decisions to be made, so that it can be said that the groups that run political parties behave like an authentic Machine of producing conformism, which obviously shows its little ability to make the best decisions.

But in addition to what said, Asch's work revealed that It was enough with the presence of a single discrepancy in the group, of someone who chose the correct line, so that the percentage of conformist responses would decrease radically. A single discrepant can make the group smarter.

Conclusions

We return, then, to The importance of diversity, Not only because it contributes perspectives other than the group, but also because it makes it easier for people to express what they really think. The existence of independent and discrepant opinions is revealed again as a crucial ingredient for the collective speech of intelligent decisions. So dissidents should go from being a species pursued in political parties to protected species.

Juan Carlos Heredia
Social psychologist