Skip to main content

Peer pressure

Mark Pilkington
Thursday May 27, 2004
The Guardian

What would it take for you to distrust the evidence of your own eyes? Only seven other people, according to a study conducted in the 1950s by the psychologist Solomon Asch. Interested in the extent to which the pressure to conform affects our judgment, Asch devised a simple but devastatingly effective experiment.
The test subject sits in a room with seven other people. The experimenter shows them all an image of a vertical line, X, followed by three more lines, A, B and C, one of which is the same length as X.

The people in the room are asked, one at a time, to state which of the lines A, B and C is the same length as line X. The process is repeated several times during the session.

Initially, everybody in the room selects the correct line, but over the course of several rounds, the others begin to choose lines that are quite clearly not the same length as line X.

In fact, the other seven people in the room are in cahoots with the experimenter. Six of them are always asked to make their choices first, giving the test subject plenty of time to consider his or her own decision.

Despite the simple nature of the question, more than 35% of the people tested provided an answer that they felt to be incorrect. This has nothing to do with visual impairment: in control experiments, people chose correctly almost 100% of the time, and during the actual experimental sessions, test subjects would remark on how clearly wrong the other people in the room were.

Asch concluded that either the subjects didn't trust their own judgment when confronted with a number of opposing opinions, or they were uncomfortable voicing a conflicting opinion against a majority decision.

He concluded that, for them, being accepted was more important than being correct.

Crucially, if even one other person agreed with the subject, then the subject was much more likely to make the right decision.

The experiment has been repeated since with similar results. In one version, 58% of pupils in a study agreed with the statement "the right of freedom of speech should be suspended when the government feels threatened". When questioned individually, all of them disagreed.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

St. Augustine on Curiosity ***

There is another form of temptation, even more fraught with danger. This is the disease of curiosity... It is this which drives us to try and discover the secrets of nature, those secrets which are beyond our understanding, which can avail us nothing and which man should not wish to learn.

- St. Augustine

***10/5/2013 - Note: this is probably a misquote, for the purpose of defaming St. Augustine.  I published it without any research as to its veracity, and I regret it.  He is a revered figure in Christianity and western culture, and whether we subscribe to his philosophy and views or not, everyone deserves at least to be described accurately. - James Carr.

Lieberman Agrees: Democrat Politicians are Paranoid Assholes

"But there is something profoundly wrong—something that should trouble all of us—when we have elected Democratic officials who seem more worried about how the Bush administration might respond to Iran’s murder of our troops, than about the fact that Iran is murdering our troops. "
- Senator Joe Lieberman, Nov 9, 2007



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 9, 2007
Contact: Marshall Wittmann


Lieberman Delivers Major Address on "The Politics of National Security"




WASHINGTON, D.C. – On Thursday, November 8, 2007, Senator Joe Lieberman (ID-CT) addressed a Center for Politics and Foreign Relations/Financial Times breakfast at The Johns Hopkins University Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies. The subject of Senator Lieberman’s talk was “The Politics of National Security,” in which he spoke about the future of the Democratic Party and its response to the threat of Iran.



In the address, Senator Lieberman stated, “Since retaking Congress in November 2006, the top foreig…