Social Norm Experiment: Scenario 6 -- Facing the Wrong Way in an Elevator Solomon Asch's Conformity Experiments during the 1950s demonstrated how much individual opinion and even perception of reality can be influenced by others (Gerrig & Zimbardo 2009, 577-579). In the original series of experiments, Asch tested subjects by presenting with a perceptual...
Social Norm Experiment: Scenario 6 -- Facing the Wrong Way in an Elevator Solomon Asch's Conformity Experiments during the 1950s demonstrated how much individual opinion and even perception of reality can be influenced by others (Gerrig & Zimbardo 2009, 577-579). In the original series of experiments, Asch tested subjects by presenting with a perceptual question that should have been very easy to identify the correct answer but within a group situation in which multiple confederates expressed confidence about the wrong answer. That experiment can be duplicated in many different settings and scenarios.
The reason I selected this particular scenario is that it involves one of the more subtle types of norm violations, as opposed to others that would seem to guarantee a reaction. To my mind, Asch's principle is best demonstrated by an experimental design that excludes other provocations for a response, such as invading someone else's space (e.g. standing too close or sitting at an occupied table) or acting in ways that are so unusual that they all but demand a response (e. g. loud singing in public).
Meanwhile, the elevator scenario is so passive that it virtually guarantees that any response will demonstrate the reaction to violation of the norm. Additionally, the elevator experiment is actually the only choice on the list that also provides the dimension of possibly influencing the behavior or others and mirrors Asch's experiments (Gerrig & Zimbardo 2009, 577-579) in that respect. While there is no chance of prompting other people to sing out loud, the elevator behavior could possibly influence others to ignore their perceptions (i.e.
where they see the elevator doors) and follow the experimenter's lead. I purposely selected a government office building because it has mirrored elevator walls and because it houses many agency offices with high numbers of visitors to the building who are unfamiliar with the setting and who are easily identifiable by their "Visitor" tags on their lapels. I purposely removed mine and I dressed professionally the way someone would who worked in the building daily.
I waited near an elevator bank on the 7th floor, until there was an opportunity to enter an elevator with several visitors and without too many other people without Visitor tags. I positioned myself so that I would be the first person to enter the elevator and I pressed a Lobby button next to the doors but then walked confidently to the back of the elevator and stood right in front of the back wall facing backwards.
Violating that norm was much easier for me than it would have been to sing in public or invade someone else's space. Almost every other person did the same thing, but they all did "double takes" at least once, looking back at the elevator doors. It was obvious that they realized there was something about what we were doing that was inconsistent with their perceptions (of where the doors actually were and of the apparent absence of any doors on the back wall.
Two people just ignored all of us and faced the right way but two others turned around our way after facing the doors initially. Another person started off facing the right way, looked around as though she was counting how many people were facing each way, and then she turned around backwards. When we got to the Lobby,.
The remaining sections cover Conclusions. Subscribe for $1 to unlock the full paper, plus 130,000+ paper examples and the PaperDue AI writing assistant — all included.
Always verify citation format against your institution's current style guide.