Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T06:55:05.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

We agree and we disagree, which is exactly what most people do most of the time

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2016

Bert H. Hodges  and
Dominic J. Packer
Bert H. Hodges
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-1020. [email protected]://socialpsych.uconn.edu/affiliated-faculty/bert-hodges/ Department of Psychology, Gordon College, Wenham, MA 01984.
Dominic J. Packer
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA 18015. [email protected]://psychology.cas2.lehigh.edu/content/djp208
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Humans are continually diverging and converging with respect to each other. Research across many domains suggests that differentiation and integration are aspects of a more complex set of dynamics, and are not step-wise but interdependent and continuous. Research on conformity in particular reveals that divergence and dissent are forms of cooperation, reflecting concerns for both individual and group integrity.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 39 , 2016 , e152
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Asch, S. E. (1956) Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs 70(9) (Whole No. 416).Google Scholar
Bond, R. & Smith, P. B. (1996) Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies using Asch's (1952b, 1956) line judgment task. Psychological Bulletin 119:111–37. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.111.Google Scholar
Boyd, R., Richerson, P. J. & Henrich, J. (2011) The cultural niche: Why social learning is essential for human adaptation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108:10918–25.Google Scholar
Corriveau, K. H. & Harris, P. L. (2010) Preschoolers (sometimes) defer to the majority in making simple perceptual judgments. Developmental Psychology 46:437–45.Google Scholar
Efferson, C., Lalive, R., Richerson, P. J., McElreath, R. & Lubell, M. (2008) Conformists and mavericks: The empirics of frequency-dependent cultural transmission. Evolution of Human Behavior 29:56–64.Google Scholar
Heyes, C. (2013) What can imitation do for cooperation? In: Cooperation and its evolution, ed. Sterelny, K., Joyce, R., Calcott, B. & Fraser, B., pp. 313–32. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hodges, B. H. (2009) Ecological pragmatics: Values, dialogical arrays, complexity, and caring. Pragmatics and Cognition 17:628–52.Google Scholar
Hodges, B. H. (2014) Rethinking conformity and imitation: Divergence, convergence, and social understanding. Frontiers in Psychology: Cognitive Science 5:726.Google Scholar
Hodges, B. H. (in press) Conformity and divergence in interactions, groups and culture. In: The Oxford handbook of social influence, ed. Harkins, S., Williams, K. & Burger, J.. Oxford University Press. Advance online publication: doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199859870.013.3.Google Scholar
Hodges, B. H. & Geyer, A. (2006) A nonconformist account of the Asch experiments: Values, pragmatics, and moral dilemmas. Personality and Social Psychology Review 10:2–19.Google Scholar
Hodges, B. H., Meagher, B. R., Norton, D. J., McBain, R. & Sroubek, A. (2014) Speaking from ignorance: Not agreeing with others we believe are correct. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 106:218–34.Google Scholar
Matsuda, N. (1985) Strong, quasi-, and weak conformity among Japanese in the modified Asch procedure. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 16:83–97.Google Scholar
McKelvey, W. & Kerr, N. H. (1988) Differences in conformity among friends and strangers. Psychological Reports 62:759–62.Google Scholar
Packer, D. J. (2008) On being both with us and against us: A normative conflict model of dissent in social groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review 12:50–72.Google Scholar
Packer, D. J. (2009) Avoiding groupthink: Whereas weakly identified members remain silent, strongly identified members dissent about collective problems. Psychological Science 20:546–48.Google Scholar
Packer, D. J. & Chasteen, A. L. (2010) Loyal deviance: Testing the normative conflict model of dissent in social groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 36:5–18.Google Scholar
Packer, D. J., Fujita, K. & Chasteen, A. L. (2014) The motivational dynamics of dissent decisions: A goal conflict approach. Social Psychological and Personality Science 5:27–34.Google Scholar
Packer, D. J. & Miners, C. T. H. (2014) Tough love: The normative conflict model of dissent. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 8:354–73.Google Scholar
Smith, P. B., Bond, M. H. & Kagitcibasi, C. (2006) Understanding social psychology across cultures. Sage.Google Scholar
Takano, Y. & Sogon, S. (2008) Are Japanese more collectivistic than Americans? Examining conformity in in-groups and the reference-group effect. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 39:237–50.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2009) Why we cooperate. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2014) The ultra-social animal. European Journal of Social Psychology 44:187–94.Google Scholar
Ungson, N. D. & Packer, D. J. (in progress) The complexity of loyalty conceptions, and their relation to whistleblowing.Google Scholar