Why Do People Change Their Minds To Go With The Group?

Post Reply New Topic

I hope I´m posting this under the right category...this is something that happened to me at work recently; however, this type of situation is not only limited to work. I guess this is basically going to be a vent...sorry, everybody!...but I´m curious if anyone can relate, or even understands why this happens.

I teach in a dance school, and recently took part in a meeting where a particular subject was broached by another teacher; (what to do about students who are hanging back in class, not keeping up, or are generally untalented). I was so happy she brought it up, because she mirrored my concerns. We all then had a very productive discussion and decided on a few things. We all seemed to be in agreement, and I was relieved that this problem was talked about. However, the very next day, there was another meeting with some of the same teachers, but many different teachers- (and the teacher who originally brought this topic up was not there). We talked about it again, but suddenly something had "changed". In this meeting, the opinion was different, they didn´t want to do anything about this problem...and, even the teachers who were there the day before suddenly took the other side, so it ended up being a "me versus them" conversation. I didn´t understand what had happened! In the discussion, I kept reminding the teachers who were in both meetings about "what we discussed yesterday", because I couldn´t comprehend how their opinions had changed so quickly! (?) It was like, everybody agreed with whatever the "strong" person in the group said. One of those strange "social things", I guess. Unfortunately, I kept arguing about it, but made no headway. I found it incredibly frustrating!

Does anyone know what´s going on here? Or has experienced something similar?

ah, yes, the old switcheroo.

I remember so many times I was with people that were interested in reaching out to inclued everyone, and we even get a little group together that feel that way, and then, poof, it all goes up in smoke because "others" come in and just dismiss it out of hand.

after a while I saw that the people that agreed with the smaller group in the first place were the same people that agreed with the bigger group in the second place were NOT FOR OR AGAINST either group, they were going along in BOTH INSTANCES.

so the only thing that happened was the 'go alongers' just continued to 'go along'.

Merle

This is all too familiar. People want to fit in. They want the person in charge to like them. Everything else becomes less important. It's all about status.

I read in a book once that there is a tendency among groups to reach a concensus. People go with the majority opinion. I don't think you did anything all that wrong. But it does happen sometimes...

the solution is simple: be in charge, be the confident leader that the sheep want to follow

any idiot can do it - just pick a direction (even at random) and tell the others that they're coming with you (as if you were the leader already)

if the outcome is favorable for those who follow you, soon they will stand up for you even if others disagree (because they know you're always right)

forget democracy - even democracy isn't really democratic, it just allows more easily for new leaders to come in without (much) bloodshed

hmm, that might sound cynical, but it's not meant to be - I came to the realization some time ago that not everyone wants the responsibility and stress of leadership, and that I personally would rather lead foolishly than follow foolishly :p

Last edited by ghostpawn on 22 Dec 2008, 9:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I wonder if it's a financial issue, untalented pupils still pay fees, and besides they make the talented ones look better.

What was the solution you proposed with your colleagues (before things changed)?

When they form groups, the minds of NTs can sometimes look a lot like hive or fish-schooling behavior!

The funny thing is that this behavior, too, is contagious. Once a few people in the environment become "schooling fish thinkers" then more of them do! It's like people start noticing that others around them are schooling to the majority, and then it spreads b/c no one wants to stick out. It's instinctive social behavior of NTs.




Milgram's experimentation had some interesting schooling behavior insights. They discovered that if one other person went against the tide, it wasn't enough to stop most subjects from refusing to do something bad if they thought the group gave them permission and expected them to do it. But if two other people were against the bad thing they were told to do, then more people are likely to not go along with the experiment.

"...Professor Milgram himself saw implications for peer pressure in the results. In his book Obedience to Authority, he elaborated two theories to explain his results:

The first is the theory of conformism, based on Solomon Asch's work, describing the fundamental relationship between the group of reference and the individual person: "A subject who has neither ability nor expertise to make decisions, especially in a crisis, will leave decision making to the group and its hierarchy. The group is the person's behavioral model."

The second is the agentic state theory, where, according to Milgram, "the essence of obedience consists in the fact that a person comes to view himself as the instrument for carrying out another person's wishes, and he therefore no longer sees himself as responsible for his actions. Once this critical shift of viewpoint has occurred in the person, all of the essential features of obedience follow."

Both of the theories that Milgram proposed have implications for training our children (or ourselves) to resist destructive peer pressure."

http://www.new-life.net/milgram.htm

NTs have the ability to swap their internal behavior models with the behavior models of a group they are in. Like swapping out hard drives with new information on how to behave. They can do this at a moment's notice. This is part of their social talents, and why they do things that are bad if the whole group is doing them -- without any sense that the thing is bad.

This is a groupthink phenomenon. People with weak opinions or moderate positions will polarize towards people with strong opinions or extreme positions. As a few people begin to shift, this "magnetic effect" gets stronger and pulls more people in, because people tend to give more credit to beliefs when they think that several other people hold those beliefs. A single dissenter is not very convincing. But find a couple of allies and watch everyone else start to agree...

Yes, untalented students do pay money, but I think it´s wrong to take people´s money and basically not ever tell them the truth about the situation; that´s just wasting their time (and money), and when they leave the school and go to auditions, they´ll find out, but too late. This is a recurring problem in Europe, and I just feel wrong about it. What´s also bad is that it does have a negative effect on the good students too, by lowering the level, wasting some time in the classes, etc. For me, it´s very difficult to teach when the levels are too mixed! I am told to focus my class on the highest level; however, when I do this, the people on the lower level are so far off that they get nothing out of the class. They are missing the basics, and going on is not going to help them, otherwise they´re skipping some of the necessary parts. All I can do really is ignore them...but then why are they there??? Aaarrrgghhh, I hate it when things are not logical!

The solution we proposed was that when people don´t keep up, we would either hold them back 1 year- (this is something the school NEVER does, no matter how bad the people are, they are too nice); or, if it´s clear that the people have no future on stage (this is already very clear with some of them), we let them go. I think it´s great that we give so many people chances in the 1st year- I´m all for that!- but if they don´t "pan out", then something has to be done. The school is at the point where they could really go somewhere, the level could get better, and there are many talented people. I guess part of my problem is that I just have my own ideas about how it should be done, and it´s hard for me to let go...

In the 2nd meeting, the argument was that "the school is not up at the level where we can do things like that"....however, how do they ever expect the standard to progress? I have enough experience to know that you have to SET a standard first. If you don´t, then you will attract the wrong people, and the standard will remain low. I think they are too afraid to change....

Well, sorry, I just really vented. But it felt good....

Our brain is derived from social environments.

Mostly its the frontal lobe thats causing people to gel robotically. Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, or DLPFC, and inferior parietal cortex, constantly keep people interested in groups.

It's unusual for people to go against a group with hierarchy. Even when they are told to commit sadistic acts they will comply. Its not a good idea to have hopes that people in a group will accept good or better moral information from anybody without group status. I don't think sensitive people with aspergers should take part in any group scenario.

They should follow me instead and i will guide them to moral salvation

Google Stanley Milgram for background, and joshua greene for the neuroscience or The Lucifer Effect by Philip Zimbardo as a general overview.

I think there is some research showing that groups turn on those who go against the group, so it's probably fear that is driving people to conform. It appears that NT behaviour is highly robotic. The milgram experiments were replicated this year and exactly the same thing happened. This time they seperated race and gender, and found that women conformed more, confirming that anxiety might play a role, and orientals also conformed more. Orientals are more left brain dominant so this could also be a factor, as left brain dominants appear to prefer authority. Aspies are mostly right brain dominant. I noticed in the video of the milgram repition by abc news that the woman who argued most against the experiment was african, and the woman who administered shocks unemotionally was oriental. Africans are more right brain dominant.

.

Wow, this Milgram stuff is pretty interesting. I have actually heard of that experiment, but never did much reading on the subject. This reminds me of a movie I saw recently, called "An American Crime", which is a true story. It´s about a teenage girl who was left in the care of a woman and her family when her own mother and father went out of town. The woman who was taking care of her at some point got it in her head that the girl was "evil", so she locked her in the basement. The woman´s own children were allowed to torture the girl, because she told them the girl was an "animal" and wouldn´t feel it. Even the neighborhood kids came to the house and tortured the girl because they were told she needed punishment and could barely feel it, but it was clear the girl was suffering. Even the sister of the locked up girl- who was considered "okay" and therefore allowed to be upstairs with the family- acted totally powerless and didn´t help her sister, though she didn´t torture her either. It was an incredibly disturbing movie, and I keep thinking about it and wonder how that could happen- especially because it is a true story! I guess the experiments of Milgram and this whole "groupthink" idea is an explanation.

But, man. Pretty scary!