Social influence as a function of stimulus ambiguity at three age levels.

Abstract

Children in Grades 2, 5, and 8 were required to determine which of two sides of a projected slide had the greater number of dots. Slides on which similar-age children had made correct judgments approximately 50%, 80%, and 98% of the time under noninfluence conditions were employed. The magnitude of peer influence was assessed both with and without a correction for error rate. The results revealed that peer influence varied with the ambiguity of the task and the age of the subjects. Conformity on unambiguous slides was negatively related to age, whereas conformity to completely ambiguous slides was positively related to age. The task that was of intermediate ambiguity revealed conformity to be a nonmonotonic function of age.Several recent articles have reported a nonmonotonic relationship between conformity and age. Costanzo and Shaw (1966) found that conformity increased from ages 7-9 to ages 11-13 and then decreased. Iscoe, Williams, and Harvey (1963) also reported increasing conformity from ages 7 through 12 in both boys and girls. Girls then decreased in conformity by age 15, but conformity in boys increased at least through age 15.These findings are in marked contrast to those reported by Berenda (1950), who found significantly less conformity in a group of 10-to 13-year-old children than in a group of 7-to 10-year-old children. Moving (1964) also found more conformity in second-grade (age 7) than fourth-grade (age 9) children. Moving, Hamm, andRoehl (1967) have suggested that differences in task ambiguity may be responsible for these conflicting results. The tasks used in these studies differed in terms of the clarity with J P.

Comprehension of the Objectivity-Subjectivity Distinction in Childhood and Early Adolescence

“…The present findings are consistent with those reported by Hoving, Hamm, and Galvin (1969) in research on peer conformity. Employing a task conceptually similar to the present judgment-of-age task (judging which of two slides has a greater number of dots), Hoving et al found that imitation increased with age (from 9 to 13 years) when the stimuli were highly ambiguous and decreased with age when the stimuli were unambiguous.…”

“…Hoving et al (1969) used live peer models rather than symbolic adult models, and they assumed that the desire for peer approval increases with age. While there is no assumption in the present study that the desire for approval from the adult models increases with age, this assumption does not affect the predictions regarding the difference in imitation on objective and subjective matters.This content downloaded from 138.38.44.95 on Tue, 21 Jun 2016 02:49:31 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms…”

Conformity as a Function of Age in Preadolescents

“…Moving, Hamm, & Galvin (1969) have suggested that the relationship between conformity and age varies as a function of the ambiguity of the task. Using an ambiguous task, they found conformity to increase with age.…”

Populism, school prayer, and the courts: Confessions of an expert witness

“…In general, age is curvilinearly related to the significance of social comparisons and conformity to peers. Especially for important matters, social comparisons and peer conformity become important at about age eight and increase in significance until about age thirteen, when they begin to become less important (see Allen and Newtson, 1972;Berndt, 1983;Costanzo and Shaw, 1966;Hartup, 1970;Hoving, Hamm, and Galvin, 1969;Ruble, Boggiano, Feldman, and Loebl, 1980). Thus, for children in the intermediate and junior high grades, exercise of the right not to participate in the moment of silence (and demarcation of oneself and one's beliefs as different) may indeed require "courage and determination.…”

“…These dilemmas are especially profound when the majority is itself oppressed and therefore prone to respond rigidly and defensively to minority views (Katz and Glass, 1979). Few lessons are harder to learn than the principle that neither cultural values nor personal autonomy will solidify by turning "question marks" into "periods," as if one had a monopoly on the truth.…”