This essay analyses differences in these approaches regarding SDO as an influential factor when predicting behaviours which can establish an individual’s position in a social hierarchy being context dependent as SIT claims or determined by an individual as SDT states. SDT was instigated by Sidanius and Pratto (1999) and inspired from SIT (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1986). The theory attempts to comprehend the foundation of forming and upholding group based social hierarchies. They claim hierarchically based societies are more essential for a sustainable continuation compared to democratic societies which are not as stable, group based hierarchies are able to maintain their stability by reinforcing several mechanisms in the form of prejudice, stereotypes and discrimination termed ‘legitimizing myths’, mainly through social policies exerted by high status groups. Similar to SIT, SDT states that low status groups or individuals attempt to progress their status, although SDT stresses the struggle of inequality between groups and dominance of higher status groups.
Each of these factors plays a significant role in conformity and have their own process. Informational influence is when you conform due to the fact that you believe others are correct in their adjudications. For conformity is when you accept to put your personal feelings or opinions to the side in order for the group to be unified. When a person conforms they become one with a group for it shows the person’s dedication to the group’s standards. “Culture, gender, personality and other factors are believed to have great impact on how people conform themselves in a group settings” (Fiske, 2004).
Conformity, obedience and the social influences involved This essay examines the likely outcomes of human behaviour. By analysing Asch’s study into conformity and Hofling’s experiment about obedience, the extent to which individuals can avoid such social influences is investigated. There’s been great research into why people conform; following Asch’s study Deutsch and Gerald found that there are two types of social influence which makes people conform. Normative social influence; where individuals conform to be accepted and belong to the group. Benefits come from belonging in a group, individuals may conform on the surface but disagree with the group internally.
The world and culture is founded on the social construction of reality. How people perceive society to be has an influence on how society actually is. Our views affect how we treat other people and our actions toward them influence their actions and how they treat us as well. Different situations that take place in our lives and ones’ social interactions are the basis on which we choose what type of dispositions we take, who we take them with, and the setting in which these interactions occur. One’s life experiences can lead to a person's "construction of reality" by living the realities of everyday life.
Evaluate research studies on conformity Conformity is a type of social influence in which individuals change their attitudes or behaviour to adhere to existing social norms. Researchers identify to types of conformity – private or informative and public or normative. Private conformity refers to private acceptance of social norms, while public conformity is overt bahaviour consistent with social norms that are nor privately accepted. Why do people conform? On the one hand, people conform because they are members of social groups.
Evaluate Explanations of Conformity There are two explanations for conformity: Informational social influence and normative social influence. Informational Social Influence refers to instances where people conform because they are uncertain about what to do in a particular situation, so they look to others for guidance. Sherif: during an uncertain, we desire to be correct and look to our social group for answers. This then leads to internalisation. Which is when an individual is exposed to the views of a group, which causes them to validate or examine their own beliefs.
Individual decision making depends on one’s self-concept. Group decision making is based on how each member view themselves in relation to the other members of the group. This essay will discuss decision making within groups: The risky shift phenomenon. This essay will define the risky shift phenomenon and discuss how and why it takes place and also its strengths and weaknesses. The cultural value of the risky shift will be discussed as well as the informational influence of this phenomenon.
The term group dynamics implies that individual behaviours may differ depending on individuals' current or prospective connections to a sociological group. Group dynamics is the field of study within the social sciences that focuses on the nature of groups. Urges to belong or to identify may make for distinctly different attitudes (recognized or unrecognized), and the influence of a group may rapidly become strong, influencing or overwhelming individual proclivities and actions. The group dynamics may also include changes in behaviour of a person when he is represented before a group, the behavioural pattern of a person vis-a-vis group. Group dynamics form a basis for group therapy.
In this sense, who humans beings are, what they believe, and how they came to be, have all been influenced by society. Society has formed human nature to a point that is hard to argue against. ELABORATE/MORE EVIDENCE. To determine the social coordination/organization of society, Benedict stems many of her claims from observations of three groups: the Zuñi, Dobu, and Kwakiutl. In order to determine social coordination/organization, Benedict claims, “we need detailed information about contrasting limits of behaviors and the motivations that are dynamic in one society and not in another” (229).
Functionalism is a macro, structuralist theory. This means they see human behaviour being shaped as an influence of social forces. It is also seen as a consensus theory, as functionalists’ argue that, individuals are socialised into a shared value to ensure conformity and social order. However, this functionalists approach is criticised by action theorists, as they argue that individuals create society through their interactions. Unlike other functionalists, Parsons argues that individuals are integrated through socialisation and social order.