University at Buffalo
But a new study from the University at Buffalo that assessed
bodily responses suggests that standing up for your beliefs, expressing your
opinions and demonstrating your core values can be a positive psychological
experience.
There can be a clear divergence between what people do and say and
how they feel, according to Mark Seery, an associate professor in UB's
Department of Psychology.
"People can show conformity, but going along with the group
doesn't mean they're going along happily," he says. "The external
behavior isn't necessarily a good indication of their internal
experience."
The findings, published in the journal Psychophysiology, provide new insights into what it's like being alone against the group, investigating the experience as it happens.
Methodologically this is a hard thing to capture, according to
Seery. He says there is a long tradition in social psychology investigating how
people are affected by pressure to conform to a group.
The vast majority of the
work has focused on behavior and self-reported attitudes, with the assumption
that it's uncomfortable being the lone dissenter, and that people are motivated
to conform because it relieves their discomfort.
Questioning study subjects during the experience can be
disruptive, while waiting to interview them later demands that they recall
feelings that aren't always accurately reported.
"But we can tap into the experience using
psychophysiological measures, which is what we did in this case by assessing
cardiovascular responses," says Seery. "That's where this study
started. To try to understand what that momentary experience of conformity
pressure is like."
By measuring cardiovascular responses, Seery and the other
researchers -- UB colleague Shira Gabriel, Daemen College's Shannon Lupien and
Southern Illinois University's Mitsuru Shimizu -- get a sense for how people
are evaluating personal resources versus the demands of the situation while in
the act of potentially conforming.
When trying to reach a goal, evaluating high resources and low
demands leads to a mostly positive, invigorating experience called challenge,
which corresponds with feeling confident.
Low resources and high demands lead
to a much less confident state called threat, which may produce feelings of
anxiety.
The researchers assigned participants into one of four experimental
conditions, each with a goal to either fit in with a group's political opinion
or assert their individuality, and with a group that either agreed or disagreed
with participants' opinion on the issue.
"When participants' goal was to fit in with a group of
people who disagreed with them, their cardiovascular responses were consistent
with a psychological threat state," says Seery. "In contrast, when
the goal was to be an individual among a group of people who disagreed with
them, their cardiovascular responses were consistent with challenge.
"You may have to work to reach a goal, but when you
experience challenge, it is more like feeling invigorated than overwhelmed. It
is consistent with seeing something to gain rather than focusing on what can be
lost," he says.
The results have interesting implications, especially in
an election year, when someone can be surrounded by family members, coworkers
or even neighborhood lawn signs that run contrary to personal opinions.
"It could easily be overwhelming to face a group on the
other side of an issue or candidate, but this study suggests that reminding
yourself of wanting to be an individual can make it a better experience,
challenging instead of threatening, invigorating instead of overwhelming,"
says Seery.
