2786435

7/30/2019 2786435

1/13

Conformity, Persuasibility and Counternormative PersuasionAuthor(s): Lucille Nahemow and Ruth BennettSource: Sociometry, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Mar., 1967), pp. 14-25Published by: American Sociological AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2786435 .

Accessed: 27/04/2013 10:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Sociometry.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.25.33.171 on Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:39:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/30/2019 2786435

2/13

Conformity,ersuasibilityndCounternormativeersuasion*LUCILLE NAHEMOW AND RUTH BENNETTNew YorkState Department fMentalHygiene

The relationship etween onformityosocial norms, ersuasibilitynd coun-ternormativeersuasionwas studied mong esidents f a homefor ged. Ingeneralthe residentswere highly ersuasible nd some were clearlymorepersuasible han others.However,no relationship as found between hetendency o agree withthe nterviewersnd conformityo the norms f thehome. Furthermore, ighlyconformingesidentswere found to be mostresistant o counternormativeersuasiveappeals. Conformingndividualsevaluatedthehome highly nd tendedto regard t as a positivereferencegroupwhile imultaneouslyndicating lack of nterestn peopleand eventsoutside hehome. t was concludedhatconformityas less dependent pona general ompliance endencyhanuponcommitmento normativetandardsofthe home.This studywas designed o determine hetherndividualswho conformedtothenorms fan ongoing roup lso acquiescedunder onditions f experi-mentalpersuasion. arson's definitionf conformity,behavior nacted naccordancewiththenormative tandardswhichhave cometo be set up asthecommon ulture," was used. Elderlypeople who had residedn a homefor gedfor yearormorewere tudied.Theirconformityo the normativestandards fthehomewas assessedand related o twootherforms f com-

pliant behavior,persuasibilitynd counternormativeersuasion,both ofwhich oncern hetendencyfthe ndividual obe persuaded r,at least,toexpress greementwith an opinionpresented y an outsideexperimenter.The measures fexperimentalersuasion aried from hoseof little oncern*Thispaper sbasedona portionf a doctoral issertationubmittedothefacultyfpolitical ciencef ColumbiaUniversity.he authors re ndebted o themembersf thedissertationommittee,ichard hristieChairman), oseph ubin ndHerbert ymanfor heirssistancend advice uring llstages fthis esearch. e wish o thank rederic

Zeman and otherpersonnel f theJewishHome and Hospitalfor the Aged for thecooperationnd interestfferedo generouslyy them.We are verymuch ndebted oHenryJ. Walton f theUniversityf Edinburgh,ho conductedhepsychiatricxamina-tions nder U. S. PublicHealth ervice esearch ellowship.hisresearch as supportedby NIMH predoctoralellowship 14,144 1 andNIMH grantsMH02775 nd CD00029.'Talcott Parsons, he SocialSystem, lencoe,llinois:The FreePress,1951.14

This content downloaded from 188.25.33.171 on Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:39:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/30/2019 2786435

3/13

CONFORMITY AND PERSUASION 15to any of the residentsf thehomefor ged,to thosewhichweresalient othemby virtueof their tatus as residents. onformity,ersuasibilityndcounternormativeersuasionwere related o reference roup elections,sy-chiatric iagnosis, nd selectedbackground actors.The question fwhetherndividualswhoare compliant r conformingnone situation endto be compliant n other, uite different,ituationss anopen one. Research n whichdifferentspectsof compliant ehaviorhavebeen related n ad hoc groupshas yielded nconsistentesults.2 ack andDavis investigatedhe relations etween onformityo socialnorms mongnursing tudents t Duke University,ndyielding o the ncorrecterceptualjudgments f othersn a laboratory xperiment.hey found moderate or-relation f +.25 between he two conformityituations. hey notedthatprevious xperimentersave generally ound tronger elationshipsetweenmeasures f conformitynd attributedhis to the fact thatprior studiestypicallyhad moresituational imilarityn the measures mployed.Thestudy f Back andDavis is unique n thattheydealt with onformityo thesocial norm f a naturallyxisting roup, nd withthe problem f general-izing from aboratorytudies f conformityo natural ife situations.3Personal nvolvementith n issue relatingo a particular roup s directlydependent pon one's evaluationof thatgroup. A greatmany aboratorystudies fconformityave demonstratedpositive elationshipetween owattractive he ndividual inds hegroup nd his tendencyo conform,r toendorse he udgmentsf theother roupmembers.4The issue becomesmorecomplexwhen heconcept freferenceroup s introduced,incethequestion"conformityo what?"becomes ermane. ewcomb ound hatthose tudents

2 Some tudies avefound ignificantelationshipsetween ifferentinds f compliantbehavior. ee, forexample:Hilda Beloff,Two Formsof Social Conformity:cquies-cence nd Conventionality."ournal fAbnormalndSocialPsychology,6 (February,1958),pp. 99-103;RobertR. Blake,HarryHelson nd Jane . Mouton, TheGeneralityof Conformityehavior s a Function f FactualAnchorage,ifficultyf Task,andAmount f Social Pressure," ournal f Personality,5 (June,1956), pp. 294-305.Onthe ther and, ther tudies avenotfound uch relationship.ee,for xample: arrietLinton, Dependence n External nfluences, orrelatesn Perception, ttitudesndJudgement,"ournalf Abnormalnd SocialPsychology,1 (November,955),pp.502-507; and Richard . McGee, TheRelationshipetween esponse tyle nd PersonalityVariables:HI. The Predictionf Independentonformityehavior,"Journal f Ab-normal ndSocialPsychology,5 (November,962) pp. 347-350.

3KurtW. Back andKeithE. Davis,"SomePersonal nd SituationalactorsRelevantto theConsistencyndPredictionf Conformingehavior,"ociometry,8 (September,1965)pp. 227-240.4 See,for xample: harles eisler,Attractiono the Group ndConformityo GroupNorms", ournal fPersonality,1 (December,963), pp. 559-569; nd EdwinP. Hol-lander, amesW. Julian ndGordonA. Holland, Conformityrocess nd PriorGroupSupport," ournal fPersonalityndSocialPsychology, (December,965) pp. 852-858.

This content downloaded from 188.25.33.171 on Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:39:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/30/2019 2786435

4/13

16 SOCIOMETRYwhoconsidered ennington highly ttractiveollege nd usedit as a posi-tive reference roupwere likelyto conform y acceptingthe prevailing"liberal" campusattitudes.However, e found hatthestudentswhocouldbe called "independents" ith referenceo theBenningtonormswere, nfact,usuallyconformingo a differentet of norms,.e. thoseof their wnreference roup.He concludedthat reference roupstypically erve asanchorsfor an individual's ttitudes.5In thepresenttudy, onductedwith gedpeopleresidingn a home, on-formityo the normsof an ongoing roupwas measured.This was madepossible ythefact hat naturallyestrictednvironmentas used nwhichthe socialnormswere partlyknown s a resultof previous esearch.6 hehome for the aged was a self-containedommunityn which residentsplannedto spendthe remaining ears of their ives.Room,board,medicaland nursing are,religiouservicesnda wide variety factivitiesndvolun-tary obs were providedon the premises.Residentswerenot required oleavethehomefor ny reason nd few verdid.Sincethe home ncompassesso much f the ivesofthosewhoreside here,tmay be classifieds a "totalinstitution."A normwas defined s an expectationorbehavior boutwhich herewasconsensusmongresidents.Methodsused to studynormswereobservation,content nalysisof articles ppearing n thehome'snewspaper,nd inter-viewswith taffmembers, ld-time esidentsnd newly dmitted esidents.Onlythosenorms n which onsensusncreased fterresidentswere n thehomefrom ne to twomonthswereconsidered orms pecific o thehome.Thesenormswereused in determiningonformityo the "common ulture"of thehome.In contrast,ersuasibilityas definedndependentlyf thenorms f thehome.The concept fpersuasibility as developedby Hovland, Janisandothers,8nd refers o consistentndividualdifferencesn susceptibilityopersuasion. heynoted that almost rrespectivef the issueinvolved, hereseemedto be some individualswho were moresusceptible han otherstopersuasive ppeals.To eliminatehe effect f a pre-existingttitude owarda particularssue,Lesser and Abelsonconstructed topicfreemeasureofpersuasibility,onsistingfpairsofpictures,where he content f thecom-

5TheodoreM. Newcomb,Attitude evelopments a Function f Reference roups:The Benningtontudy,"Chapter in EleanorE. Maccoby, t al., Readingsn SocialPsychology,ew York: Holt,Rinehartnd Winston,nc., 1958.

6 RuthBennett,TheMeaning f nstitutionalife,"TheGerontologist,(September,1963),pp.117-125.7 ErvingGoffman,sylums,hicago:Aldine,962.8 Carl . Hovland,rving . Janis ndHaroldH. Kelley, ommunicationndPersua-sion,NewHaven: YaleUniversityress, 953.

This content downloaded from 188.25.33.171 on Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:39:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/30/2019 2786435

5/13

CONFORMITYAND PERSUASION 17munication as novel nd uninvolving.9modificationf this nstrumentasused in thepresent esearch.The notionof topic freepersuasibilityas provenuseful n stimulatingresearch utis limited o theextent hattheres a differencen kindas wellas indegree etween ersuasiono novel, mbiguousmaterial nd persuasionto meaningfulmaterial.That an individual'spersonal nvolvementn anissue s criticaln any considerationf attitude hangehas been emphasizedin the theoryf Sherif ndHovland.'0 Because the norms f the homewereat least partlyknown, t was possible to developcounternormativeppealsabout issues concerninghe home's way of life with whichresidents eltpersonallynvolved. n all, threemeasures f persuasibilityereused whichvariedfrom opicfree o highly alient o the residents.

METHODSUBJECTS. Ninety-six esidentsf a homeforthe aged served s subjects.The sample ncluded very esident ho was admitted etween ne and threeyearsprior o the studyexceptthosewhowere n the infirmary,nable tospeak English rtotally eaf.Twenty evenmen nd sixtyninewomenwereinterviewed;heir ges rangedfrom 4 to 92 years,themedianage being

82 years.AllwereJewishnd ofthe white ace.Sixtyfour ercent came tothis country romEurope and the rest werenative born.Their educationvariedfromixresidents hohad no formalchoolingo fivewhohad gradu-ated from ollege; the average personhad an elementarychooleducation.Althoughevenresidentsxpired rwerehospitalized uringhecourse ftheexperiment,o onewas lostbecauseof refusal o be interviewed.The home n which his researchwas conducteds a voluntary, on-pro-prietarynstitutionocated in the New York metropolitanrea, which slargely upported y a Jewish hilanthropicrganization.t offersn un-usuallywidevariety f services o theresidents,nd in addition,erves s acenterfor trainingworkersn the care of the aged. The residents n thesamplewerehoused n thecentral ranch f the nstitution here fulltimestaffof physicians,nurses,paramedicaland housekeeping ersonnel reemployed.PROCEDURE.veryresidentn the amplewas nterviewedwice;an averageofsixmonths lapsedbetween he first nd the second nterview. he inter-viewswere onducted ytwowomen xperimentersn their ate 20's,eachof

9Robert . Abelsonnd Gerald . Lesser, The Measurementf Persuasibilityn Chil-dren," hapter in Carl . Hovland nd Irving . Janis, ersonalityndPersuasibility,NewHaven:Yale Universityress, 959.I0 Muzafer herifndCarl . Hovland, ocialJudgement,ewHaven:Yale UniversityPress, 961.

This content downloaded from 188.25.33.171 on Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:39:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/30/2019 2786435

6/13

18 SOCIOMETRYwhom onducted alfofthe first ndhalfof the second nterviews. pproxi-matelyhalfof the nterviews eretaperecordedn order o assess the con-spective eliabilityfpersuasibilityeasures."

At the ame time, iftyesidentsnthesamplewere nterviewedgain by apsychiatristho was notaffiliated ith he home nd did not have access tothedata reported elow.Based upona standard sychiatricnterview,ifteensubjectswere givena diagnosis f senile dementia, ighteen diagnosis ffunctionalsychiatricisorder of these, ivehad a diagnosis fboth seniledementiand functionalisorder), nd twenty wowerefound obe normal.All but one case of seniledementiawereconsideredmild and all functionaldisorderswere eitherneuroses r character isorders. etails of the clinicalassessmentre given lsewhere.'2SCALES.Conformity.he conformitycale containedtwenty uestionsaboutbehavior elating o norms haredbyresidents f the homewhich reshownnTable 1. Items#1 to #10 were dministereduring hefirstnter-view; items#11 to #20 wereadministereduring he second nterview.Therewere an equal number f positivelynd negativelyworded uestionsand an equal number f questionswordedhypotheticallynd in terms factual behavior.This balance was maintained orthe halves of the scale,administereduring ach interview,s well as forthefullscale. Responseswere scored as conformingr nonconforming.he theoretical ange ofscoreswas from ero,for otal nonconformity,o 20 for otalconformity.Counternormativeppeals. The counternormativeppeals consistedofstandardized rgumentsgainstresident orms n whichtherewas a dis-crepancy etween heprevailing esident orm nd theadministrativeosi-tion.Two suchissues werefound:one concerned ipping hehelp; despitethe home'spolicy against tipping,nearly everyresident ippedand wasconvinced hat thiswas necessarynd proper.The other oncernedharingone's roomwith nother;due to a shortage f privaterooms,nearly veryresident ad at leastoneroommate. esidents isliked henecessityfsharinga roomand feltthat, deally, heyshouldhave roomsfor themselves. he

"1The opinion caleofpersuasibilityontainedpen-endedtems equiringhe nter-viewerointerprethetherhe ubject greed rdisagreed ith he tem.A clerk istenedto recordingsf fortyixfirst nd second nterviewsroughly alfof the tapes) andindependentlycored heresponsesagree"or "disagree". herewas 95 percent gree-mentbetween he nterviewernd theclerk, nd twoper centdisagreementin threeper centof the cases, heclerk ouldn't each decision). ersuasibilitycores btainedby the two interviewersere comparednd no differenceserefoundon either hepicturehoice rthe pinioncale.12Henry J. Walton,RuthBennett nd LucilleNahemow, PsychiatricllnessandAdjustmentn a Home forAged,"Annals f theNew York Academy f Science, 05(September,964)pp.897-918.

This content downloaded from 188.25.33.171 on Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:39:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/30/2019 2786435

7/13

CONFORMITY AND PERSUASION 19~~-~~~~- ~~~ ?-~~~~4 '0 0 Os.0 tooo to T- - X- el, te)M in

cn En .. 0 .4) 0 ~~~~~ g)~~~c 4- 0 4-0 0i *.4)

0 4 0 00 10 40 0 X-~4) 0

4.4U 4-'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- c , ccd 0 W CIL. ~~~~04)c ru4)~~~~~ ~40 4-'

0 '4 0- 0% 0 t- 0 0 Ot-.c 4 4- 0) cd >

4) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C'~~~~C4 .~~~c C' 0 ;-'", 4)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~40At W0 W4)- 0 cd 0 - 0 0.4) _~~~~~~~440 > 0 04-0 0 4)0w0cn* 4 '4)0 0 cd 0 En 00 4)w e4):

0 ~~~ 4-'~~~~O 4) 4)~~ C0 0 44 22~~~~~~00~~~~4) 0CLEn

4)4)d ~~~ 0 O~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~4.)0 00~4'~4 0 o4.4 ('4L cf) '0 - 00 0 6

This content downloaded from 188.25.33.171 on Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:39:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/30/2019 2786435

8/13

20 SOCIOMETRYcounternormativeppeals consisted f extensive rgumentsgainsttippingand forroom-sharing.he presentation as standardized,ncluding ausesduringwhich he residents ere llowedto interjectomments. owever, omatterwhatthey aid the nterviewerroceededwiththetext.For thetwocounternormativeppeals,the resident's pinionwas obtainedbothbeforeand after hepresentation.n order o determinehe ndividual's pinion nsharing roomwith thersn thehome, he question,Whena resident irstenters hehome,whatdo you thinkwouldbe the deal number fresidentssharing room?"was asked at the beginning f the first nterview. hecounternormativeppeal on room haringwas read at the end of thesameinterview,nd immediatelyfterwardhepersonwas againasked,"Whatdoyouthinkwouldbe the dealnumber fresidentsharing room?"For thecounternormativeppeal concerningippinghe help,thequestions,Do youthink hatresidentshould ipthehelp?Do youthink hat residentshouldgivepresentso thehelp?",were sked at thebeginningfthefirstnterview.The appealwas administereduring hesecond nterview y anothernter-viewer,mmediatelyfterwhich he questionswereaskedagain.'3Persuasibility.wo measures f persuasibility ere used. The topicfreepicture-choicecale consisted f 19pairsofpictures. or eachpair,residentswereasked to selecttheirfavorite. uringone interview,he interviewerpointed o a picture fthepairand said,"I like thisone best,which nedoyouprefer?" uring he econd nterview,heothernterviewerointed otheopposite icture s thepreferredne.The persuasible esidentwas onewhoagreedwiththe contradictoryhoices f both nterviewers.14The opinion cale concernedssuesofnational mportanceboutwhich heindividualwouldbe expected ohavesomepre-existingttitude.t contained17 pairsof contradictorypinion tatements hichwereadministered er-bally.For example, uring he firstnterview,ne intervieweraid, "I thinkthathospital mployeeshouldbe permittedo join unionsthe sameas anyotherworkersn order omaintainheir wn elf espect.Whatdoyouthink?"Duringthesecond nterview,he other ntervieweraid,"I don't think hathospital mployeeshouldbe permittedo oinunionsbecausetheir ompleteloyalty houldbe toward hehospital.Whatdo you think?"Residentswhoagreedwith both statementswere considered ersuasible. ssues such aswhether r not a communisthould be permittedo speak in public and

13 The scalesuffersrom pronouncedeiling ffectince hemainconcern aswithmovementn the directionf theappeal.Obviously,heresidents hodid nottakethenormativeosition eforeheargument as presentedouldnotobtain op scores.14This calewas originallyonstructedy Lesser nd Abelson orusewithchildren.In thepresenttudy hescale wasmodifiedorusewith dults.GeraldLesser uppliedthealternateicture airsthatmodificationecessitated.

This content downloaded from 188.25.33.171 on Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:39:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/30/2019 2786435

9/13

CONFORMITYAND PERSUASION 21whether r not privateclubs shouldbe permittedo rejectNegroeswereamong hosencluded.Use ofthehome s a referenceroup. n addition othemeasures f com-pliance,theresidentswereasked to evaluatevarious spectsof life n thehome,uch s thefood, hemedical are, he ctivitiesnd theother esidents.Twenty uch itemscomprised he evaluation cale. They were also askedwhetherheyfeltthat thehomehad becomean importantlace to them,whethertwas as importanto themnowas their ldhomeswith heir am-ilies used to be, and whetherheygenerallyikedtheirnewfriendss wellas those heyhad before. hesethree uestionswereusedtodeterminefthehomeservedas a reference roup.Questionspertainingo the use of theworldoutsideof the home as a positivereferenceroupweremorevaried.Residentswereaskedwhetherhey 1) left the home and how often, 2)maintainedny social contacts utsideof thehome, 3) wouldconsult heoutside ontact n instances f importantecisionmaking,4) continuedobelongto any outsideorganizations,nd finally5) continued o maintainan interestnpolitics nd madeuseofthemassmedia.

RESULTSTable 1 shows hepercentofresidents hosaid"yes"to each temon theconformitycale. Most residents erefound o be highly onformingo thenorms fthehome.For example, 3% said thattheyhad neverreportedresidentothestaffitem11), 72% said thattheywouldquietlydo withoutfood ftheydidn't ike whatwasbeing erved item15), and 60% said theywouldnever rguewith another esident venif he was wrong item 18).Although or ndividualtemsthedistributionf scoreswas J-shaped,otalscoreson theconformitycale approximated normaldistribution.cores

rangedfrom to 20 with meanof 14.4. An odd-evenplit-halfeliabilitycoefficientf+.72 wasobtained.Table 1 showsthattherewas no acquiescent esponsebias on the con-formitycale. For itemswith imilar ontent, esidentsaid "no" in answerto a negatively orded uestion s often s they aid "yes" to a positivelyworded ne.Whenthe temwas worded n sucha waythattheconformingresponse as"yes",residentsaid"yes" 71percentofthetime.When twasworded uchthattheconformingesponsewas "no", residentsaid "no" 73percentof thetime.Clearly herewas no tendencyo respond ffirmativelyirrespectivef tem ontent.In contrastoconformity,herewasa marked cquiescent esponse iasonbothmeasures fpersuasibility.esidents greedwith70% of the opinionstatements,ndorsing othcontradictorypinionsnearlyas often s theymaintainedn ideologicallyonsistentointof view.Onlyfourpeople dis-

This content downloaded from 188.25.33.171 on Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:39:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/30/2019 2786435

10/13

22 SOCIOMETRYagreedmorefrequentlyhanthey greed.The samewas trueofthepicture-choice calewhere heresidentsgreedwith62% ofthechoices fthe nter-viewers. n bothscales, scoreofzerowouldbe obtainedfa residentwerelogically onsistentn his response o all items.Negativescoresreflectnegativisticesponseetandpositive cores eflect persuasible esponseet.The meanscoresfortheopinion nd picture-choicecaleswere6.4 and 5.6respectively,ndicatinghat ngeneral, heresidents erehighly ersuasible.Table 2 shows he ntercorrelationsetween onformity,ersuasibilitynd

TABLE 2CorrelationsbetweenConformity,Counternormativeersuasion and PersuasibilityCounternormative Opinion PictureChoicePersuasion Persuasibility Persuasibility

Conformity -.27* +.03 +.16Counternormativeersuasion +. 10 +. 11Opinionpersuasibility +.41*** p

7/30/2019 2786435

11/13

CONFORMITY AND PERSUASION 23expected o: a) behave n accordancewith hosenorms nd, b) notbe readilypersuaded y an outsider o accept a counternormativeosition.If theconformingndividuals not merely ielding o socialforces o whichhe feelsno personal ommitment,ut rathers seeking ersonal upport romothers, ewould xpecthimto regard hehome s a positive eferenceroup.Table 3 showstherelationship etween onformity,valuation nd the useof thehome or the outside s a positive eference roup.

TABLE 3Correlationsbetween Conformity,Evaluations and ReferenceGroup SelectionsEvaluation Home Selected as Outside SelectedasofHome ReferenceGroup ReferenceGroup

Conformity +.37** +.17 -. 24*Evaluation of Home + .54** -.04Home Selected sReferenceGroup +.16*p

7/30/2019 2786435

12/13

24 SOCIOMETRY(X2=4.16 p

7/30/2019 2786435

13/13

CONFORMITYAND PERSUASION 25experimenter.robably onformingndividualswerebetter ble to resist heexperimentersn thecounternormativeituation artly ecauseconformityothe prevailing orms f thegroupholdswith t the promise f rewards orcompliancend sanctions ordeviance. n the homefor ged, as in Benning-toncollege,usingthe membershiproup s a referenceroupserved s ananchorfor he ndividual's pinions.However, nlikeBennington,hehomefor ged is a total nstitution,nwhich, ecauseof naturalbarriers o inter-actionwith heoutside,t s particularlyifficultomaintain utside eferencegroups. hus,the ndividualwhodoesnotuse thehome s a positive eferencegroupwouldprobably e deprived f anyreferenceroup. f theconsequentlack of social support orthe individual's ttitudes nd opinionsmadehimparticularlyulnerableo persuasiveppealsby authoritativeutsiders,hismightexplain the unusuallylow relationship etweenconformityndpersuasibility.In conclusion,his tudy emonstratedhatwhen lderly esidentsf homewere nvolved n an on-going roup, heir onformityo groupnorms ouldnotbe predicted rom nowledgebout a general endencyo agree.More-over, heconformingesident idnotblindlycceptthe dictates fauthority.If hedid,heshouldhavebeeneasilypersuaded oendorse n appealmadebyexperimentersepresentingn authorityutside hehome o support policyadvocated ythe dministrativetafffthehome. n thecontext fthehome,the resident onformedo resident orms ecausethe normswerepartof asubgroupf whichhe was a member.When therewas a discrepancyetweenprevailing esident orms nd administrativeolicy,he did not disavowhiscommitmentn order o go alongwithauthority.t maybe said, therefore,that he independentlyonformedo and endorsed normative attern owhich efelt ommitted.