Author
Solomon E. Asch
Other affiliations: Princeton University, Brooklyn College, Rutgers University
Bio: Solomon E. Asch is an academic researcher from Swarthmore College. The author has contributed to research in topics: Social psychology (sociology) & Poison control. The author has an hindex of 18, co-authored 23 publications receiving 10330 citations. Previous affiliations of Solomon E. Asch include Princeton University & Brooklyn College.
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: In this article, the conditions of independence and lack of independence in the face of group pressure were investigated, and a disagreement between a group and one individual member about a clear and simple issue of fact.
Abstract: The investigations described in this series are concerned with the conditions of independence and lack of independence in the face of group pressure. The abstract temper of present-day theory and investigation in this region rests to a considerable degree on a neglect of the cognitive and emotional experiences that are part of the individual's psychological field. The understanding of social influences will require the study of a wide range of conditions and of the interrelated operations of different psychological functions. A group of seven to nine individuals was gathered in a classroom to take part in what appeared to be a simple experiment in visual discrimination. The subjects were all male, white college students, ranging in age from 17 to 25; the mean age was 20. For certain purposes a large number of critical subjects was required for the present experiment. The present report is based on a total of 123 subjects. The task consisted of the comparison of a standard line with three other lines, one of which was equal in length to the standard. We investigated some of the conditions responsible for independence and lack of independence in the face of arbitrary group pressure. To this end we produced a disagreement between a group and one individual member about a clear and simple issue of fact. The interview, which followed the experimental session, provided qualitative evidence concerning the effects produced by the majority, The particular properties of the experimental situation and their relation to more usual social contradictions were described. Fulltext Preview (Small, Large) PDF (4.7 MB) First Page Preview Studies of Independence and Conformity: I. A Minority of O... http://www.psycontent.com/content/h128830k244141t6/?print... 1 di 2 24/03/14 10:05
3,608 citations
••
TL;DR: Asch was a member of the Institute for Advanced Study, 1958-1960 and 1970; a Senior Fellow of the U.S. Public Health Service, 1959-1960; and a Fellow of Center for Advanced study in the Behavioral Sciences (1976-77).
Abstract: Solomon Asch was a member of the Institute for Advanced Study, 1958-1960 and 1970; a Senior Fellow of the U.S. Public Health Service, 1959-1960; and a Fellow of the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences (1976-77). He was awarded the Nicholas Murray Butler Medal from Columbia University in 1962 and the Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award from the American Psychological Association in 1967. He is best known for his book, Social Psychology, published in 1952 and reissued in 1987.
1,828 citations
••
TL;DR: It was concluded that the effect of the visual field upon the perceived upright tends to be stronger and more consistent, the more richly articulated the field.
Abstract: "The effects of visual frameworks of different tilt and of different bodily positions upon perception of the upright were investigated in 53 adult Ss. The visual field consisted of a simple luminous frame contained in a completely darkened room. Within the frame was a luminous rod which the S had to set to the vertical and horizontal. The frame was tilted 28° right, 28° left or was erect; and the body was either erect or tilted 28° left. Tilting of the frame caused a shift in the perceived upright in the direction of the frame. The influence of the frame was smaller with body upright than with body tilted." There were marked individual differences in performance with modes of perceiving the upright characteristic of the individual involved. "The 'weak' structure of the visual framework used resulted in smaller errors, as compared with previous studies, when the rod had to be set to the upright under the influence of the tilted frame. At the same time, the framework was relatively unstable, the top coming to be perceived as a side, and so on." It was concluded that "… the effect of the visual field upon the perceived upright tends to be stronger and more consistent, the more richly articulated the field." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
511 citations
••
TL;DR: It is indicated that postural factors provide an adequate and stable basis for judging the vertical and horizontal when the body is upright, but not when theBody is tilted.
Abstract: "With the position of his body varied systematically, the S, in a completely darkened room, was required to adjust a luminous rod to the true vertical and horizontal Judgments were found to be very accurate when the body was upright, but errors appeared as soon as the body, or even the head alone, was titled The largest errors occurred when the body was horizonal, which was the most extreme displacement of the body employed In addition, when the body was tilted, successive judgments proved to be quite variable It is thus indicated that postural factors provide an adequate and stable basis for judging the vertical and horizontal when the body is upright, but not when the body is tilted The errors made with head or body tilted were systematic in their direction With small tilts, the rod tended to be displaced opposite to the body, and with large tilts, toward the body These are the long-know E-phenomenon and Aubert-phenomenon, respectively These phenomena are eliminated at once upon the introduction of a visual field" (see 23: 48) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
261 citations
Cited by
More filters
•
01 Jan 1958TL;DR: The psychology of interpersonal relations as mentioned in this paper, The psychology in interpersonal relations, The Psychology of interpersonal relationships, کتابخانه دیجیتال و فن اطلاعات دانشگاه امام صادق(ع)
Abstract: The psychology of interpersonal relations , The psychology of interpersonal relations , کتابخانه دیجیتال و فن آوری اطلاعات دانشگاه امام صادق(ع)
15,254 citations
••
TL;DR: This chapter discusses a wide variety of variables that proved instrumental in affecting the elaboration likelihood, and thus the route to persuasion, and outlines the two basic routes to persuasion.
Abstract: Publisher Summary
This chapter outlines the two basic routes to persuasion. One route is based on the thoughtful consideration of arguments central to the issue, whereas the other is based on the affective associations or simple inferences tied to peripheral cues in the persuasion context. This chapter discusses a wide variety of variables that proved instrumental in affecting the elaboration likelihood, and thus the route to persuasion. One of the basic postulates of the Elaboration Likelihood Model—that variables may affect persuasion by increasing or decreasing scrutiny of message arguments—has been highly useful in accounting for the effects of a seemingly diverse list of variables. The reviewers of the attitude change literature have been disappointed with the many conflicting effects observed, even for ostensibly simple variables. The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) attempts to place these many conflicting results and theories under one conceptual umbrella by specifying the major processes underlying persuasion and indicating the way many of the traditionally studied variables and theories relate to these basic processes. The ELM may prove useful in providing a guiding set of postulates from which to interpret previous work and in suggesting new hypotheses to be explored in future research.
7,932 citations
•
08 Sep 2020TL;DR: A review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species – frequent outliers.
Abstract: Behavioral scientists routinely publish broad claims about human psychology and behavior in the world's top journals based on samples drawn entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. Researchers - often implicitly - assume that either there is little variation across human populations, or that these "standard subjects" are as representative of the species as any other population. Are these assumptions justified? Here, our review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species - frequent outliers. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, cooperation, spatial reasoning, categorization and inferential induction, moral reasoning, reasoning styles, self-concepts and related motivations, and the heritability of IQ. The findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies, including young children, are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Many of these findings involve domains that are associated with fundamental aspects of psychology, motivation, and behavior - hence, there are no obvious a priori grounds for claiming that a particular behavioral phenomenon is universal based on sampling from a single subpopulation. Overall, these empirical patterns suggests that we need to be less cavalier in addressing questions of human nature on the basis of data drawn from this particularly thin, and rather unusual, slice of humanity. We close by proposing ways to structurally re-organize the behavioral sciences to best tackle these challenges.
6,370 citations
••
TL;DR: The author gives 4 reasons for considering the hypothesis that moral reasoning does not cause moral judgment; rather, moral reasoning is usually a post hoc construction, generated after a judgment has been reached.
Abstract: Research on moral judgment has been dominated by rationalist models, in which moral judgment is thought to be caused by moral reasoning. The author gives 4 reasons for considering the hypothesis that moral reasoning does not cause moral judgment; rather, moral reasoning is usually a post hoc construction, generated after a judgment has been reached. The social intuitionist model is presented as an alternative to rationalist models. The model is a social model in that it deemphasizes the private reasoning done by individuals and emphasizes instead the importance of social and cultural influences. The model is an intuitionist model in that it states that moral judgment is generally the result of quick, automatic evaluations (intuitions). The model is more consistent than rationalist models with recent findings in social, cultural, evolutionary, and biological psychology, as well as in anthropology and primatology.
6,080 citations
••
TL;DR: Contrary to antipathy models, 2 dimensions mattered, and many stereotypes were mixed, either pitying (low competence, high warmth subordinates) or envying (high competence, low warmth competitors).
Abstract: Stereotype research emphasizes systematic processes over seemingly arbitrary contents, but content also may prove systematic. On the basis of stereotypes' intergroup functions, the stereotype content model hypothesizes that (a) 2 primary dimensions are competence and warmth, (b) frequent mixed clusters combine high warmth with low competence (paternalistic) or high competence with low warmth (envious), and (c) distinct emotions (pity, envy, admiration, contempt) differentiate the 4 competence-warmth combinations. Stereotypically, (d) status predicts high competence, and competition predicts low warmth. Nine varied samples rated gender, ethnicity, race, class, age, and disability out-groups. Contrary to antipathy models, 2 dimensions mattered, and many stereotypes were mixed, either pitying (low competence, high warmth subordinates) or envying (high competence, low warmth competitors). Stereotypically, status predicted competence, and competition predicted low warmth.
5,411 citations