Meaning of life

Psychologists say that human motivation to undertake any action comes from knowing why this action should be taken. In other words, we first need to know why we should do something before we would want to do it. Following this train of thought, how can we live without knowing why are we living? Survival of the species aside, there should be another, deeper meaning to our existence. Could there be a simple answer to this question? Well, consider this: what if life didn’t have a real meaning, but instead the meaning of life was to be looking for its meaning? Paradox, you will say. Maybe. But who said life wasn’t paradoxical?

For some more existence-inspired photos from my mate Andy Shannon go here.

Conformity

In this post I want to share my experience in conducting an experiment for the Social Psychology of Organisations class that I took last semester. Together with four friends at Westminster Business School we attempted to measure conformity among fellow students.

We chose to research conformity because we thought of the huge role it plays in our daily lives. Just think about it, how many times have you dressed, ordered something to eat or drink, or said something only because you wanted to match the environment? We definitely saw it in our behaviour and wanted some answers.

What is conformity?

Kiesler & Kiesler (1970) define conformity as ‘change in behaviour or belief toward a group as a result of real or imagined group pressure.’ It is a type of social influence and is one of the underlying features of human psychology and a basic fact of social life.

As indicated in the definition above, the fundamental aspect of conformity is the notion of group pressure. Defined by Kiesler & Kiesler as the ‘psychological force upon a person to fulfil other’s expectations of him’ it is a process by which a group attempts to exert influence over an individual.

Where does the pressure come from? Broadly speaking, the pressure to conform stems from various social norms, the rules of how every individual ought to behave in the society. These do not necessary have to be explicit - consider such customs as leaving a tip in a restaurant or arriving just a little bit late to a party.

Not all conform: Three Musicians by Pablo Picasso

According to Baron et al., we conform to social pressures predominantly because of our desire to be liked and accepted by others and our need to be correct. Respectively, these are known as the normative and informational social influences.

Experiment

Our experiment was fairly simple. We were going to invite, one by one, ten unsuspecting students to take two tests, each consisting of eighteen questions. They would have to do it alongside four of the members of our group (pretending that they, too, were genuinely taking part in the study), all seated in one room, facing the moderator (fifth member of our group) who was going to ask them questions. These were to be answered out loud and in turns, by everyone.

Test 1 required open answers, whereas test 2 was “true or false”. While test 1 questions were varying in the level of difficulty a bit, e.g. “What is the biggest country on Earth in terms of population”? or “What is Chaplin’s first name”?, test 2 questions were plainly trivial, e.g. ‘Pyramids are located in Morroco, true or false’? We did this 10 times.

Now the trick was that in each of the ten sessions, the four of us who were pretending to be participants would provide unanimous answers to every question asked. More so, our answers would most of the time be incorrect – sometimes appearing to be simple mistakes but very often strikingly wrong! We hypothesised that the subjects would nevertheless go along with the group’s wrong answers. In other words, they would conform to the group!

Results

Honestly, we did not really expect amazing results, especially considering the informal nature of the study. It was hard for us to believe that people could say something they knew was incorrect. We were soon to prove wrong!

The first session kicked off, and a couple of questions passed without any signs of success. We felt kind of strange to say such nonsense like ‘It was Warner Brothers who invented Donald Duck’ or that ‘Australia is a former Canadian colony’. But what was our surprise when suddenly we had our participant agreeing to it! Overall results were pretty dramatic, as 9 out of 10 unsuspecting students yielded to group pressure and went along with our plainly wrong answers at least once.

Check out this short clip with some examples. Bare in mind that our subjects are always seated on the second seat from right.

After each session we interviewed our subjects and it was incredible to see how the theory matched practice. Students that conformed the most stated that it felt strange to say something different and that they did not want to step up to the front of the line.

Order! Order!

Conformity can be trouble. An interesting quote illustrates this:

“More crimes are done in the name of obedience than in the name of disobedience. It isn’t the rebel, the disobedient, the deviant or the maverick who is a threat to society - the real threat is the mindless masses who follow any authority without questioning” C.P. Snow, English physicist, 1905-1980.

Yes, indeed, conformity means that often individuals may find it difficult to raise their concerns or propose new and fresh ideas - and so, break the order. This can be particularly dangerous if the view held by the group is an erroneous one. On such occasion, with the threat of rejection at the doorstep, the one individual that can see the problem will more likely remain silent and the group will continue operating in a corrupt way.

It would be misleading to say that conformity is a bad thing. There are many advantages to it, most notably without conformity it would be very difficult to lead and manage others, and so to maintain order in organisations, as well as in the society as a whole. In this context, restrained individualism seems like a small price to pay.

With that said, ‘think different’ anyone? Come on, don’t be shy!

References

Baron, R. A., Byrne, D., & Watson, G. (2005). Exploring Social Psychology (4th ed.). Toronto, Ontario: Pearson Allyn and Bacon.

Kiesler, C. A., & Kiesler., S. B. (1970). Conformity. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Thoughts on Angriness

We all get angry and we all know how devastating effects such behaviour can have on the people around us. Why do we act in this way, so often without real reasons? Why do we loose control and act in the total opposite of the way we should and normally do? It is not an easy task to answer these questions! By no means I am trying to do so, but, as usual, provide a bit of an insight. To start with, take a look at the following account of a recent incident that involved my father and me.

The situation

It was a beautiful and sunny day and we planned with my dad to have a dinner on our rooftop terrace. My dad had an appointment at 7 PM and had to leave at 6:30 PM. So we decided to start preparing the meal at 5 PM. But 5 o’clock came and went and I only saw my father in the kitchen at about 5:45 PM. We both, not being used to early dining had forgotten to start cooking. As it usually happens, my dad went to cook and I was going to prepare the table. However, I did not look at the watch and had no idea how late it really was. More than half way through my task, I thought I needed a cold shower because I felt a bit sick from the hot temperature (it was actually VERY hot that day). So I went to have a shower thinking that it will be a while before my father could finish cooking and that I would still have time to finish preparing the table before he actually would do so. I told my father what I was going to do and jumped under the cold water. To my surprise, after taking the shower I saw my father already eating. As I was taking my seat, he made angry remarks about my failure to prepare the table, implying that I would be me fault if he was late for his appointment, and showing discontent with my performance. I argued that I had no idea how late it was and should not be treated in this way, especially because it was him who did not show up in the kitchen on time at first place. Because it was his appointment, it was also his responsibility for the dinner to be on time. We settled there.

Crime scene

This is the case. But what does it mean?

I should begin with yet another question. Namely, why is that a mature man, who knows how to use his brain (wrote several books, speaks six languages!) behaves in this irresponsible way? After all, this situation had no effect on the final outcome of the case – he wasn’t late in the end, and it was easy to see that he wouldn’t be. It only brought discomfort to the both of us (why ruin such a beautiful day anyway?). Even if I did not prepare the table on purpose, why respond with anger and aggression rather than trying to find out what really went wrong and attempting to fix it?

Fight or flee?

I am sure that there is more than one factor written into this. But one particularly seems on heavy duty here. Which one is it? We are all familiar with the “fight or flee” concept. This is where the answer lies.

Our brain is divided into several parts. Amygdala is one of the most primitive regions of the brain, the seat of fear and aggression. It is the impulse centre that controls our decisions when our thinking shuts down. In the words of the psychiatrist Edward Hallowell:

“When those deep brain areas are active, they shanghai your cortical neurons. Your IQ plummets. Your creativity, your sense of humour – all of that disappears. You’re stupid. ”

So, it appears that in stressful situations we can be prompted to enter the fight or flee mode, sometimes for no obvious reasons. In this mode we are not able to make rational choices. We loose control because our decisions are handled by amygdala not by the cortex, which does so under normal circumstances.

Taking control... of yourself!

Now, what is the point that I am trying to make here? Take another look at my father’s reaction in the case above. Now, consider the following alternative.

- My dad, thinking to himself: “Ok, the table is not ready, and I can be late. But there is nothing that will change the past. I must act to lessen the consequences. I can use this situation to demonstrate to my son why he shouldn’t leave a job undone. We can also learn about how important communication under pressure is.”

Can you see how different the picture of my father when comparing the above with the actual situation is!? It is very easy to see the contrast between them two. What is it? It’s control. My dad’s reaction was a sign of him not controlling himself, whereas in the alternative scenario he was totally in control.

So, the point that I am trying to make here is that stressful situations which we all go through on a regular basis whether at school, work or a crowded train home can easily be turned to our advantage if only we are able to handle our emotions. It is not the above average leadership skills, not the high IQ, not even mastering the art of the rhetoric, but simply being able to handle that “inner caveman” what really matters when trying to win others. Or in the words of Jeffrey Fox, author of How to Become CEO:

“Keep yourself in control so that you can keep control of the situation”.

Easier said than done? Maybe. But this is exactly why YOU can make a difference. Most of the others will have already given up!