Chapter Two from
Yüklə 100,43 Kb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
9 Festinger (1954) A Theory of Social Comparison Processes opinion in a group there is a tendency to reject those members of the group whose opinions are very divergent from one’s own. This rejection tends to be accompanied by a relative cessation of communica- tion to those who are rejected. This is undoubtedly another evidence of the cessation of comparison with those persons.
There are data relevant to this point’ in connection with abilities from the experiment by Hoffman, Festinger, and Lawrence (19). In this experiment, one out of a group of three persons were made to score very much higher than the other two on a test of intelligence. When the nature of the situation allowed, the two low scoring subjects ceased to compete against the high scorer and began to compete against each other. When they did this they also rated the intelligence of the high scorer as considerably higher than their own, thus acknowledging his superiority. In those conditions where they continued to compete against the high scorer they did not rate his intelligence as higher than’ their own. In other words, when the situation allowed it they stopped comparing their scores with the score of someone considerably higher than themselves. This cessation of comparison was accompanied by an acknowledgment of the others’ superiority. A number of sociometric questions showed no hostility toward or derogation of the high scorer.
Having discussed the manifestations of the “pressure toward uniformity” which arises from the drive to evaluate opinions and abilities, we will now raise the question as to the factors which determine the strength of these pressures. Derivation F (from I, II and III): Any factors which increase the strength of the drive to evaluate some particular ability or opinion will increase the “pressure toward uniformity” concerning that ability or opinion. Hypothesis VII: Any factors which increase the importance of some particular group as a comparison group for some particular opinion or ability will increase the pressure toward uniformity concerning that ability or opinion within that group.
involved. The corollaries stated below will specify some of these factors. We will then present the data relevant to these corollaries. Corollary to Derivation B: An increase in the importance of an ability or an opinion, or an increase in its relevance to immediate behavior, will increase the pressure toward reducing discrepancies concerning that opinion or ability.
If an opinion or ability is of no importance to a person there will be no drive to evaluate that ability or opinion. In general, the more important the opinion or ability is to the person, the more related to behavior, social behavior in particular, and the more immediate the behavior is, the greater will be the drive for evaluation. Thus, in an election year, influence processes concerning political opinions are much more current than in other years. Likewise, a person’s drive to evaluate his intellectual ability will be stronger when he must decide between going to graduate school or taking a job.
The previously mentioned experiment by Hoffman, Festinger, and Lawrence (19) corroborates the Corollary to Derivation B with respect to abilities. It will be recalled that this experiment involved groups of three persons who took an “intelligence test”. The situation was arranged so that one of the subjects (a paid participant) started out with a higher score than the other two. From then on the two subjects could completely control how many points the paid participant scored. The degree to which they prevented him from scoring points was taken as a measure of the extent to which they were competing against him and hence as an indication of the strength of the pressure toward uniformity acting on them. Half of the groups were told that this test which they were to take was an extremely valid test and hence a good measure of intelligence, an ability which these subjects considered important. The other half of the groups were told that it was a very poor test and the research was being done to demonstrate conclusively that the test was no good. For these subjects their performance was consequently not important. The results showed that the competition with the high scorer was significantly greater for the high importance than for the low importance condition.
Unfortunately there are no relevant data from experiments concerning opinions. The Corollary to A Theory of Social Comparison Processes 10
The data which we have presented refer to changing the position of members in the group. As the pressure toward uniformity increases there should also be observed an increase in the tendency to cease comparison with those who are too different from oneself. Specifically, this would mean that the range within which appreciable comparison with others is made should contract as the pressure toward uniformity increases. This leads to an interesting prediction concerning abilities which can be tested. The more important an ability is to a person and, hence, the stronger the pressures toward uniformity concerning this ability, the stronger will be the competition about it and also the greater the readiness with which the individuals involved will recognize and acknowledge that someone else is clearly superior to them. And just as in influence processes, where, once rejection has taken place there tends to be a cessation of communication and influence attempts ‘toward those who have been made incomparable (10, 22), so we may expect that once inferior or superior status has been conferred, there will be a cessation of competition with respect to those who have been thus rendered incomparable.
Thus, for example, let us imagine two individuals who are identical with respect to some particular ability but differ markedly in how important this ability is to them personally. The prediction from the above theory would say that the person for whom the ability is more important would be more competitive about it than the other; would be more ready to allocate “inferior status” to those considerably less good than he; and would be more ready to allocate “superior status” to those considerably better than he. In other words, he would be more competitive within a narrower range.
concerning abilities and opinions within that group.
The more attractive a group is to a member, the more important that group will be as a comparison group for him. Thus the pressure to reduce discrepancies which operate on him when differences of ability or opinion exist will be stronger. We would expect these stronger pressures toward uniformity to show themselves in all three ways, increased tendency to change own position, increased effort to change the position of others and greater restriction of the range within which appreciable comparison is made.
There are a number of studies which corroborate Corollary VII A. with regard to opinions. Back (3) showed that in groups to which the members were highly attracted there were more attempts to influence others than in groups to which the members were less attracted. This greater exertion of influence was, accompanied by more change of opinion in the highly attractive groups. Festinger, Gerard, et al. (10) showed a tendency for members of highly attractive groups to change their opinions more frequently than members of less attractive groups upon discovering that most others in the group disagreed with them. This change of opinion was before any influence had actually been exerted on them by other members of the groups. They also found that there was more communication attempting to influence others in the high than in the low attractive groups. Schachter (22) showed that this same factor, attraction to the group, also increased the tendency to cease comparison with those who differed too much. Members of his highly attractive groups rejected the deviate significantly more than did members of the less attractive groups. Festinger, Torrey, and Willerman (12) report an experiment specifically designed to test Corollary VII A with respect to abilities. If, given a range of performance reflecting some ability, the comparison, and hence the competition, in highly attractive groups would be str6nger than in less attractive groups, then this should be reflected in the feelings of having done ‘well or poorly after taking the tests. If Corollary
than in the low attractive groups. Similarly we would expect those scoring equal to or better than most others to feel more adequate in the high than in the low attractive groups. Groups of four persons were given a series of tests supposed to measure an ability that these persons considered important. One of the subjects was caused to score consistently slightly below the others. The other three were made to score equally well. Those members who were highly attracted to the group, and scored below the others, felt Yüklə 100,43 Kb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|