Conformity Case

Conformity is a word that I feel often gets misunderstood. Society, and in particular, Western Society has created an idea that conformity is a, bad thing. Conformity is defined in the textbook as, " A change in behavior or belief as the result of real or imagined group pressure" (192). By definition there is nothing really, "bad" about conformity. Sure, there are many reasons why conformity could be harmful. In extreme cases, conformity can limit basic freedoms and the ability to express individuality. I feel these instances are few and far between and conformity should not be looked at to represent a negative social situation. Conversely, I think conformity should represent a social situation that is necessary for the cohesion and proper function of society. I experience this need for conformity during a semester out in the wilderness.

To give you some background. In my junior year of college I took a semester long course called N.O.L.S (National Outdoor Leadership School). It is a course given through the University Utah for a semester worth of college credit. NOLS offers courses of all over the world but they each have the same basic parameters. Firstly, they teach advanced practical techniques for various outdoor skills. Then these practical skills are woven into a classroom curriculum. Lastly, the course concentrates on teaching the group members to be leaders. A normal group consists of 10-15 people, both males and females, with ages ranging from 18-29.

The population of my specific group consisted of 8 boys and 4 girl ages 19-25. The location of the course was in the Rocky Mountains between the months of September and December. All the members were born in the United States and were of a European decent. The one thing that varied substantially was home geographic location. This did not have a noticeable effect on the group dynamic.

This core group of 13 people stayed together in close quarters for the entirety of the semester broken down into learning groups composed of 3-5 people that changed every 1-2weeks. The living conditions for those three months would be very intimate. The learning group ate together, slept together and did everything short of going to the bathroom together. We got to know each other's personalities and tendencies very well. It was a unique social environment for all of us.

Initially the group did not really get along. If the first two weeks were a predictor, this was going to be a long 3 and half months. The course was turning into Lord of the Flies crossed with the show Survivor. No one could get along, weird cliques and friendships started to entrench themselves. One disruption in the group affected everyone. Some people wanted to sleep in later and some wanted to get up earlier. Meal times were argued about and what to eat could turn into an hour-long conversation. In the framework of the course, people and groups seemed to want to do their own thing. There were many different agendas and none of them agreed.

I quickly understood that if I was going to be with these people for the next 3-4 months it would best if we were able to get along. I tried to put the group functioning ahead of my wants and needs and it actually seemed other people were doing the same. I didn't realize at the time, but we as individuals were slowly conforming to the norms and values of my NOLS semester. The reason for this higher level of functioning by the group was the social influence that the group had on each individual. A social psychologist studying the group would see a few specific reasons

...