Public Compliance: A Neutralizing Attempt
To establish relevance between the scope of modern prejudice and its connection to public compliance, one needs to understand the impact of conformity. As both a direct and indirect implication of social identity, conformity facilitates the sense of belonging elaborated earlier. Respectively, the basic definition of conformity specifies changes in an individual’s behaviour resulting from the real or imagined influence of others (Aronson et al., 2013, p. 194). Consistent with belonging and the process by which an individual establishes such connection – social norms appoint the regulations about how one obtains and maintains that connection, thus, preserving belonging (Aronson et al., 2013, p. 202). Consequently, if falling short, one is subject to repercussions involving: ridicule, punishment, and rejection (Aronson et al., 2013, p. 202).
As can be expected, the abovementioned can become a liability between the individual and group members, and subsequently, between groups. …show more content…
205-210). According to Latane (1981) there are three parameters which predict this impact: strength, immediacy, and number (Aronson et al., 2013, p. 205). Strength measures the group’s importance dependent on social identification – we are more drawn to those we can identify with,thus, establishing their level of influence on us (Aronson et al., 2013, pp. 207-208). The parameters of immediacy involve influence based on proximity and time (Aronson et al., 2013, p. 205). Group size determines influential impact peaking at five members; and, whether informational or normative influence is operating (Aronson et al., 2013, p.
To establish relevance between the scope of modern prejudice and its connection to public compliance, one needs to understand the impact of conformity. As both a direct and indirect implication of social identity, conformity facilitates the sense of belonging elaborated earlier. Respectively, the basic definition of conformity specifies changes in an individual’s behaviour resulting from the real or imagined influence of others (Aronson et al., 2013, p. 194). Consistent with belonging and the process by which an individual establishes such connection – social norms appoint the regulations about how one obtains and maintains that connection, thus, preserving belonging (Aronson et al., 2013, p. 202). Consequently, if falling short, one is subject to repercussions involving: ridicule, punishment, and rejection (Aronson et al., 2013, p. 202).
As can be expected, the abovementioned can become a liability between the individual and group members, and subsequently, between groups. …show more content…
205-210). According to Latane (1981) there are three parameters which predict this impact: strength, immediacy, and number (Aronson et al., 2013, p. 205). Strength measures the group’s importance dependent on social identification – we are more drawn to those we can identify with,thus, establishing their level of influence on us (Aronson et al., 2013, pp. 207-208). The parameters of immediacy involve influence based on proximity and time (Aronson et al., 2013, p. 205). Group size determines influential impact peaking at five members; and, whether informational or normative influence is operating (Aronson et al., 2013, p.