Personality and Conformity
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ABSTRACT PERSONALITY AND CONFORMITY The present study examined the moderating role of personality in a social situation modeled after Solomon Asch’s classic line judgment paradigm. Participants indicated their willingness to engage in hypothetical risky behaviors, either while alone or while surrounded by confederates who verbally expressed high willingness for risk. Personality was measured according to the Five Factor Model, using the NEO-PI-R. In the presence of risk-advocating confederates, participants’ risk-willingness ratings elevated greatly, indicating a strong conformity effect. However, the effect of confederate influence to elicit conformity did not vary as a function of personality. Accordingly, results did not evince personality moderation of conforming risk-willingness ratings, and instead supported a situationist perspective according to which situational forces influenced behavior regardless of individual differences. The impactful nature of expressing behavioral intentions for risk may have constrained the influence of personality in the present paradigm. Spencer V. Irish August 2016 PERSONALITY AND CONFORMITY by Spencer V. Irish A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Psychology in the College of Science and Mathematics California State University, Fresno August 2016 APPROVED For the Department of Psychology: We, the undersigned, certify that the thesis of the following student meets the required standards of scholarship, format, and style of the university and the student's graduate degree program for the awarding of the master's degree. Spencer V. Irish Thesis Author Spee Kosloff (Chair) Psychology Paul Price Psychology Robert Levine Psychology For the University Graduate Committee: Dean, Division of Graduate Studies AUTHORIZATION FOR REPRODUCTION OF MASTER’S THESIS X I grant permission for the reproduction of this thesis in part or in its entirety without further authorization from me, on the condition that the person or agency requesting reproduction absorbs the cost and provides proper acknowledgment of authorship. Permission to reproduce this thesis in part or in its entirety must be obtained from me. Signature of thesis author: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Spee Kosloff, for elevating my abilities as a researcher. Thank you for your guidance and support. I would also like to thank my committee members Dr. Paul Price and Dr. Robert Levine for their assistance and insight during the past three years. Next I would like to thank my esteemed research team, without whom this research could not have been possible. Thank you for dedicating so many long hours to running participants and upholding such strenuous research practices. While over forty students were involved in the data collection process, I would like to thank Kyla Rankin, Leticia Rodriguez, and Makenzie Engle above all. Finally, I would like to thank my mother and father for their love and support during this process. I am also deeply grateful to my grandmother for supporting me in the pursuit of this goal. I could not have made it this far without each of you. And of course all of my friends, for commiserating and celebrating with me through every peak and valley. I would not have had the strength to persevere without each of you behind me. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................. vi LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ vii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................ 1 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................. 3 History of Situationism and Interactionism in Social Psychology ................... 3 Personality Moderation of Classic Social Psychological Research ................ 10 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .......................................................................... 23 Pilot Test ......................................................................................................... 23 Main Study ...................................................................................................... 25 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ....................................................................................... 32 Results ............................................................................................................. 32 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION ................................................................................. 38 Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 44 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 45 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................ 54 APPENDIX A: VIGNETTES ................................................................................ 55 APPENDIX B: PANAS ......................................................................................... 63 APPENDIX C: MORNINGNESS AND EVENINGNESS SCALE...................... 65 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1 Pilot Study: Mean Vignette Risk-Willingness Ratings and Correlations with Big 5 Domain Scores. ................................................. 26 Table 2 Scripted Confederate Risk-Willingness Ratings ....................................... 28 Table 3 Pairwise Comparisons (LSD) of Big 5 Domains across Levels of the Social Pressure Variable ......................................................................... 33 Table 4 Correlations between Risk-Willingness and Big 5 Domain Scores as a Function of Social Pressure and Public/Private Response Assessment. .............................................................................................. 35 Table 5 Correlations (r) between Select Big 5 Facets and Public Risk- Willingness Ratings as a Function of Social Pressure ............................ 37 LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. Lewin’s depiction of the forces acting upon a marriage (Lewin, 1951, p. 99). .............................................................................................. 4 Figure 2. Statistical practices in personality and social psychological research (Tracy et al., 2009, p. 1214). ..................................................................... 9 Figure 3. Diagram of seating arrangement for researcher (R), participant (P), and three confederates. ............................................................................ 29 Figure 4. Fisher’s (1959) “twisted pear” model of a heteroscedastic relationship, adapted by Berge and Raad (2001, p. 273) to characterize differential variability in trait-based behavioral expression (Y-axis) as a function of the restrictive (R) versus eliciting (E) nature of a situation (X-axis). ............................................. 40 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Social psychology has historically focused on the power of situational forces to elicit changes in the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of individuals. Emphases on main effects of situational factors have often overshadowed moderating influences of important individual difference variables, such as gender, culture, and personality, stressing the malleability of persons over their more consistent traits and tendencies (Orom & Cervone, 2009). This focus on transient environmental factors to which an individual is subjected (e.g., physical location, presence or absence of others, stimulus priming) attained its firmest articulation with the genesis of the “situationist” movement (Mischel, 1968). Situationism implies that changing contextual factors profoundly determine individual behavior, and thus by its very nature discounts influences from stable dispositional factors. From this perspective, the majority of individuals placed in a highly impactful social situation should generally exhibit a common response tendency (i.e., varying around a common average). It is assumed that such relatively uniform responses result not from trait-based commonalities between individuals tested, but rather due to external factors that impinge with common force and result upon all individuals tested. However, in the past several decades, orthodox situationism has become less prevalent and its limitations increasingly recognized (Krueger, 2009). Notable among relevant critiques is concern that seemingly poor predictive power of early personality assessments may have stemmed not from the relatively strong influence of situational factors, but rather from weaknesses in the reliability and validity of early personality assessment tools. Yet, many foundational findings in social psychology have not been extensively revisited to reconsider the potential 2 2 moderating role of personality (Gazzaniga & Heatherton, 2006). The present work seeks to do so in the context of a variant on one classic body of work on social influence: namely, Solomon Asch’s famous work on conformity (Asch, 1951, 1955, 1956). Asch’s research placed a naïve participant in a group of confederates. On each of 18 trials, the participant was asked to judge which among three lines matched to the length of a single target line. As the study progressed, the confederates began giving obviously incorrect answers, enabling Asch to measure the frequency with which participants caved to social pressure by conforming their