You’re in a room with 10 other people who seem to agree on something, but you hold the opposite view. Do you say something? Or do you just go along with the others?
Decades of research show people tend to go along with the majority view, even if that view is objectively incorrect. Now, scientists are supporting those theories with brain images.
A new study in the journal Neuron shows when people hold an opinion differing from others in a group, their brains produce an error signal. A zone of the brain popularly called the “oops area” becomes extra active, while the “reward area” slows down, making us think we are too different.
Participants, all female, had to rate 222 faces based on physical beauty on a scale from 1 to 8. Afterwards, researchers told each participant either that the average score was higher or that it was lower than her rating. Some participants were told the average rating was equal to her rating. The researchers then chatted with the participant before suddenly asking the participant to do the rating again. Most subjects changed their opinion toward the average.
I Agree
Makes sense. If you don’t follow the crowd, you stand the risk of being ostracized, and people instinctively know that’s bad for survival, so they follow the majority. I never had that instinct as a kid (thanks, autism…), so I was ridiculed and ignored by my peers.
On the other hand, if everyone just went along with the crowd, there’d never be any progress, so I suppose society will always need a few ‘free thinkers’. So having a different brain isn’t necessarily a bad thing, either.
Very interesting but not surprising. But that makes me want to know what part of the brain controls this, and I’d like to learn a bit more about myself – ie how I would often go against the view of the rest of my class plus teachers at school and not change my view, even if they all made me cry. Does it mean my brain is wired differently from other people’s
but…why were they all FEMALE?
I had this experience back on my animation course about 12 years ago. Somehow “Rocky and Bullwinkle” came up in conversation about toons from yesteryear. Everyone correctly recalled that Bullwinkle was a moose, but for some reason everyone in the class of 5 people barring myself swore blind that Rocky was actually a beaver. Never mind the number of times he was referred to in the actual show as a flying squirrel (or the giveaway flying helmet he always wore). He had buck teeth and a big tail… ergo: beaver. At first I thought they were having a laugh, but they all appeared completely sincere in that belief, and sustained their unshakeable conviction for the best part of an hour.
I argued myself into a hole in the ground that day… perhaps I should’ve caved in just to keep the peace, but I just had to prove to myself I wasn’t going insane. Look, I know a squirrel when I see one!
It’s a geek thing… you wouldn’t understand
The experiment they mention is really too dumb for words … I can’t imagine that someone would change her opion just because of that, especially considering the topic. Most people don’t need to be like the majority in that area at all. Thank God.
It’s a bit too standard, what they state here. What type of group, what age, topic, how much you value the topic etc etc. I dont dislike stating the opposite view. Quite often it turns out that there are more who were not really seeing it like they at first though. Not all people take the things that serious all the time and talk nonsense at times.
stay true, make them come to you.
Yup – from an evolutionary standpoint, it certainly makes sense to conform and there’s a vast amount of literature to confirm this (check out social psychologist Stanley Milgram’s essays to see his take on anxiety re: social taboos; v. interesting).
It’s not easy to go against the grain but I’ve never had a problem with it; I had a nasty habit of making other children cry when I was little because I refused to believe in Father Christmas, fairies, tooth fairy… Anything, really. The dumbfounded little faces I saw when explaining exactly how inprobable these things were as a child match exactly the expressions I see now when talking about my Atheism. There really does seem to be a big no-no about contradicting others’ beliefs that it’s about time we got around to challenging in the name of rationalism.
However, I find the other side of the coin more intersting – what about those who suffer no inhibitions regarding publicly standing up to nonsense and loudly proclaiming the antonym of popular belief e.g. Ghandi, Dr King, Emmeline Pankhurst, Charles Darwin and dare I say… Richard Dawkins? With such a wealth of research proclaiming that the majority rules, what is it that drives these individuals to stand out from the crowd, with the possibility of great risk to themselves?
Discuss!!
I disagree – if I have a differing opinion to other people, then I will tell them, I like to be different!
I’m a geek, stand up and be proud. I especially like change. Seems to put me under pressure to adapt, does that make me different? People say I am strange, does that mean I am obsessive? My mind can be changed, however I will argue my point. Best avoid an argument with a woman, men usually give in for an easy life.
Most men avoid an argument with me, once they know what I am like.