×
Login Register an account
Top Submissions Explore Upgoat Search Random Subverse Random Post Colorize! Site Rules
1

The Asch conformity experiments

submitted by McNasty to whatever 6 monthsMar 19, 2024 17:20:48 ago (+4/-3)     (whatever)

In psychology, the Asch conformity experiments or the Asch paradigm were a series of studies directed by Solomon Asch studying if and how individuals yielded to or defied a majority group and the effect of such influences on beliefs and opinions.

Developed in the 1950s, prior to the existence of NASA, the methodology remains in use by many researchers. Uses include the study of conformity effects of task importance, age, sex, and culture.

Many early studies in social psychology were adaptations of earlier work on "suggestibility" whereby researchers such as Edward L. Thorndyke were able to shift the preferences of adult subjects towards majority or expert opinion.

Solomon Asch's experiments on group conformity mark a departure from these earlier studies by removing investigator influence from experimental conditions.

In Asch's method, groups of eight male college students participated in a simple "perceptual" task. In reality, all but one of the participants were actors, and the true focus of the study was about how the remaining participant would react to the actors' behavior.

The actors knew the true aim of the experiment, but were introduced to the subject as other participants. Each student viewed a card with a line on it, followed by another with three lines labeled A, B, and C (see accompanying figure).

https://files.catbox.moe/yoo586.png

One of these lines was identical in length to that on the first card, and the other two lines were clearly longer or shorter (i.e., a near-100% rate of correct responding was expected). Each participant was then asked to say aloud which line matched the length of that on the first card. Before the experiment, all actors were given detailed instructions on how they should respond to each trial (card presentation). They would always unanimously nominate one comparator, but on certain trials they would give the correct response and on others, an incorrect response. The group was seated such that the real participant always responded last.

Subjects completed 18 trials. On the first two trials, both the subject and the actors gave the obvious, correct answer. On the third trial, the actors would all give the same wrong answer. This wrong-responding recurred on 11 of the remaining 15 trials. It was subjects' behavior on these 12 "critical trials" (the 3rd trial + the 11 trials where the actors gave the same wrong answer) that formed the aim of the study: to test how many subjects would change their answer to conform to those of the 7 actors, despite it being wrong. Subjects were interviewed after the study including being debriefed about the true purpose of the study. These post-test interviews shed valuable light on the study—both because they revealed subjects often were "just going along", and because they revealed considerable individual differences to Asch. Additional trials with slightly altered conditions were also run,[1] including having a single actor also give the correct answer.

Asch's experiment also had a condition in which participants were tested alone with only the experimenter in the room. In total, there were 50 subjects in the experimental condition and 37 in the control condition.

The results:

In the control group, with no pressure to conform to actors, the error rate on the critical stimuli was less than 0.7%.

In the actor condition also, the majority of participants' responses remained correct (64.3%), but a sizable minority of responses conformed to the actors' (incorrect) answer (35.7%). The responses revealed strong individual differences: 12% of participants followed the group in nearly all of the tests. 26% of the sample consistently defied majority opinion, with the rest conforming on some trials. An examination of all critical trials in the experimental group revealed that one-third of all responses were incorrect. These incorrect responses often matched the incorrect response of the majority group (i.e., actors). Overall, 74% of participants gave at least one incorrect answer out of the 12 critical trials.[1] Regarding the study results, Asch stated: "That intelligent, well-meaning young people are willing to call white black is a matter of concern."

The experiments revealed the degree to which a person's own opinions are influenced by those of a group. Asch found that people were willing to ignore reality and give an incorrect answer in order to conform to the rest of the group.

This is why so many people defend the jew Einstein. They believe he is correct simply because everybody believes he is correct. Even though a smarter white man, Nikola Tesla, tells you that Einstein is a retard.

Einstein's relativity work is a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king... its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists. ~ Nikola Tesla

This would explain why so many people, even on this site believe that the pressurized atmosphere can exist next to the vacuum of space. It's clearly impossible, yet it is reality because most people believe it to be reality.

Thanks jews




4 comments block


[ - ] TheYiddler 2 points 6 monthsMar 19, 2024 18:34:53 ago (+2/-0)

There is no distinct barrier of space and atmosphere. It gets thinner and thinner as you go higher up. At some point, molecules of air no longer have higher ones to bounce off of to send them back down and instead return because of gravity. Except lighter gas like helium is too light for earth's gravity and escapes. Which is why there is practically none in the atmosphere.

[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 6 monthsMar 19, 2024 18:57:51 ago (+0/-1)*

There is no distinct barrier

Yes there is. It is repelling water.

It's an objective fact that there is a voltage gradient increasing 1,200 volts per meter. Voltage is the measurement of potential discharge between two points. The earth has a slight negative charge. This means that the gradient of voltage is telling us that the further away from the earth we are, the less electrons there are, thus having a higher discharge potential from the Earth. This would suggest that at some point, there are no electrons.

You can do a simple experiment with a balloon to show you what effect this would have on water. Take a balloon, rub it on your chest. You have just rubbed electrons off of your chest onto the balloon. Now turn on your faucet and hold the balloon next to the water. Notice how the water is attracted to the balloon. This is because the water has a positive charge and you just gave the balloon a negative charge. So what would happen if the balloon were to have a positive charge? Will the water be attracted or would it would repel?

So if the edge of our magnetic field is void of electrons, this would create the barrier that water cannot penetrate.

Except lighter gas like helium is too light for earth's gravity and escapes.

No. Electrostatics is gravity. Helium is considered light because it's atomic structure does not allow it to carry so many electrons. Electrons make things go down because the earth is like a charging battery. When we charge batteries, how do we get all the electrons on one side?

Obviously according to the periodic table, The denser an object is, the more electrons it can have. If there is a gradient of voltage that increases going up, then there's most likely an increase in voltage going down also. If this is the case, it would explain why radioactive elements are radioactive. They belong at a lower depth, The fact that they exist on the surface of the earth means that they do not have enough electrons to sustain their atomic structure. Therefore, they will decay. We call that radioactivity.

[ - ] Dingo 0 points 6 monthsMar 19, 2024 17:28:06 ago (+1/-1)

These people are always so interested in digging findings like this up because they are sorcerers. This is like how a chemist mixes things around to see the effects or a mechanic tinkerer in the workshop. But, a sorcerers craft is alchemy, i.e. "magic" (more reasonably, to instill the belief in magic so they can gain advantage).

I've been digging into prospect theory for a while and like this particular finding, there are probably hundreds more to find among the psychology literature and in some published books. Another good one is the Milgrim experiment.

If you learn to see some of these the best analogy I can use is that it's like that scene in "They Live" when he puts on the glasses. You see all the automated sorcery to coax all the herd along. It's fucking unreal actually.

At least I can usually get my way with tellers and stewards by being aware of what spells people are under. I don't even want to admit how gullible I used to be. It's so strange looking back at it all after being aware of many findings.

[ - ] McNasty [op] 1 point 6 monthsMar 19, 2024 17:41:05 ago (+3/-2)

how gullible I used to be.

We were all there. Defenseless children attending indoctrination school. Learning all about what the "entire world believes."

Personally, I think if a person learned the truth about the Holocaust, I would expect them to be more of a critical thinker about EVERYTHING from that point on. Yet, here I am on voat constantly being told that the white man Nikola Tesla was insane and the lazy bum Albert Einstein was a genius.