Title: The Relationship Between Perceived Violation of Social Norms and Social Control: Situational Factors Influencing the Reaction to Deviance
Abstract: Journal of Applied Social PsychologyVolume 35, Issue 7 p. 1519-1539 The Relationship Between Perceived Violation of Social Norms and Social Control: Situational Factors Influencing the Reaction to Deviance Markus Brauer, Corresponding Author Markus Brauer Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique et Université de Clermont-Ferrand Clermont-Ferrand, France Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Markus Brauer, LAPSCO/ CNRS, 34, Av. Carnot, 63037 Clermont-Ferrand, France. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorPeggy Chekroun, Peggy Chekroun Université de Clermont-Ferrand Clermont-Ferrand, FranceSearch for more papers by this author Markus Brauer, Corresponding Author Markus Brauer Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique et Université de Clermont-Ferrand Clermont-Ferrand, France Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Markus Brauer, LAPSCO/ CNRS, 34, Av. Carnot, 63037 Clermont-Ferrand, France. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorPeggy Chekroun, Peggy Chekroun Université de Clermont-Ferrand Clermont-Ferrand, FranceSearch for more papers by this author First published: 31 July 2006 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02182.xCitations: 77AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Abstract Social control is the generic term for all reactions through which people express their disapproval to someone who engages in a counternormative behavior or who holds a counter-normative attitude. The literature on helping behavior suggests that perceived personal implication should play an important role in the decision of whether or not to exert social control. A field study involving 5 different experimental settings was conducted in order to test this hypothesis. Confederates engaged in a variety of behaviors that violated social norms. Perceived personal implication was consistently the best predictor of social control behavior, such that the more someone felt that a deviant behavior affected him or her personally, the more he or she was likely to communicate his or her disapproval to the deviant confederate. Perceived deviance of the behavior was a less powerful predictor of social control. These findings speak to the moderating factors of social control behavior and to the circumstances under which social norms protecting public property are likely to be perpetuated. References Abrams, D., Marques, J. M., Bown, N., & Henson, M. (2000). Pro-norm and anti-norm deviance within and between groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 906–912. 10.1037/0022-3514.78.5.906 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Anderson, L. S., Chiricos, T. G., & Wlado, G P. (1977). Formal and informal sanctions: A comparison of deterrent effects. Social Problems, 25, 1095–1111. Web of Science®Google Scholar Baumeister, R. R, Chesner, S. P., Senders, P. S, & Tice, D M (1988). Who's in charge here? Group leaders do lend help in emergencies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 17–22. 10.1177/0146167288141002 Web of Science®Google Scholar Black, D. (1984). Toward a general theory of social control. New York , NY : Academic Press. 10.1016/B978-0-12-102801-5.50007-8 Google Scholar Blake, J., Davis, K. (1964). Norms, values, and sanctions. In R. E. L. Faris (Ed.), Handbook of modern sociology (pp. 456–484). Chicago , IL : Rand-McNally. Google Scholar Brauer, M., Chekroun, P., & Judd, C. M. (2001). Power and social control: Reactions to deviance in high and low power groups. Unpublished raw data, University of Clermont-Ferrand. Google Scholar Chekroun, P., Brauer, M. (2002). The bystander effect and social control behavior: The effect of the presence of others on people's reactions to norm violations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 853–867. 10.1002/ejsp.126 Web of Science®Google Scholar Chekroun, P., Brauer, M. (2004). Contr61e social et effet spectateur: L'impact de ľimplication personnelle [Social control and the bystander effect: The impact of personal implication], ĽAnnée Psychologique, 104, 83–102. 10.3406/psy.2004.3928 Web of Science®Google Scholar Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. (1991). A focus theory of normative conduct: A theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 201–234. New York , NY : Academic Press. 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60330-5 Web of Science®Google Scholar Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1015–1026. 10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015 Web of Science®Google Scholar Collins, M. D., Frey, J. H. (1992). Drunken driving and informal social control: The case of peer intervention. Deviant Behavior, 13, 73–87. 10.1080/01639625.1992.9967899 Web of Science®Google Scholar Cramer, R. E., McMaster, M. R., Bartell, P. A., & Dragna, M. (1988). Subject competence and the minimization of the bystander effect. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 1133–1148. 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1988.tb01198.x Web of Science®Google Scholar Davis, K. (1948). Human society. New York , NY : Macmillan. Google Scholar Dedrick, D. K. (1978). Deviance and sanctioning with small groups. Social Psychology, 41, 94–104. 10.2307/3033569 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Festinger, L. (1950). Informal social communication. Psychological Review, 57, 271–282. 10.1037/h0056932 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Festinger, L., Thibaut, J. (1951). Interpersonal communication in small groups. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46, 92–99. 10.1037/h0054899 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading , MA : Addison-Wesley. Google Scholar Gibbs, J. P. (1981a). Norms, deviance, and social control: Conceptual matters. New York , NY : Elsiever. Google Scholar Gibbs, J. P. (1981b). The sociology of deviance and social control. In R. H. Turner (Eds.), Social psychology: Sociological perspectives (pp. 483–552). New York , NY : Basic Books. Google Scholar Holmes, J. G, Miller, D. T., & Lerner, M. J. (2002). Committing altruism under the cloak of self-interest: The exchange fiction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 144–151. 10.1006/jesp.2001.1494 Web of Science®Google Scholar Howard, W., Crano, W. D. (1974). Effects of sex, conversation, location, and size of observer group on bystander intervention in a high risk situation. Sociometry, 37, 491–507. 10.2307/2786423 Web of Science®Google Scholar Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink ( 2nd ed.). Boston , MA : Houghton-Mifflin. Google Scholar Janowitz, M. (1975). Sociological theory and social control. American Journal of Sociology, 81, 82–108. 10.1086/226035 Web of Science®Google Scholar Kiesler, C. A., Kiesler, S. B., & Pallak, M. S. (1967). The effect of commitment to future interaction on reactions to norm violations. Journal of Personality, 35, 585–599. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1967.tb01450.x CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Kiesler, C. A., Zanna, M., & DeSalvo, J. (1966). Deviation and conformity: Opinion change as a function of commitment, attraction, and presence of a deviate. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 458–467. 10.1037/h0023027 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Kitsuse, J. I. (1962). Societal reaction to deviant behavior: Problems of theory and method. Social Problems, 9, 247–256. 10.2307/799235 Web of Science®Google Scholar Latané, B., Darley, J. M. (1968). Group inhibition of bystander intervention in emergencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 215–221. 10.1037/h0026570 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Lemert, E. M. (1972). Human deviance, social problems, and social control ( 2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs , NJ : Prentice-Hall. Google Scholar Liska, A. E. (1997). Modeling the relationships between macro forms of social control. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 39–61. 10.1146/annurev.soc.23.1.39 Web of Science®Google Scholar McKirnan, D. J. (1980). The identification of deviance: A conceptualization and initial test of a model of social norms. European Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 75–95. 10.1002/ejsp.2420100106 Web of Science®Google Scholar Meier, R. F. (1982). Perspectives on the concept of social control. Annual Review of Sociology, 8, 35–55. 10.1146/annurev.so.08.080182.000343 Web of Science®Google Scholar Miller, D. T. (1999). The norm of self-interest. American Psychologist, 54, 1053–1060. 10.1037/0003-066X.54.12.1053 CASPubMedGoogle Scholar Moriarty, T. (1975). Crime, commitment, and the responsive bystander: Two field experiments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 370–376. 10.1037/h0076288 Web of Science®Google Scholar Moser, G. (1988). Urban stress and helping behavior: Effects of environmental overload and noise on behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 8, 287–298. 10.1016/S0272-4944(88)80035-5 Web of Science®Google Scholar Newcomb, T. M. (1961). The acquaintance process. New York , NY : Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. 10.1037/13156-000 Google Scholar Piliavin, I. M., Rodin, J., & Piliavin, J. A. (1969). Good Samaritanism: An underground phenomenon Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 289–299. 10.1037/h0028433 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Ratner, R. K., Miller, D. T. (2001). The norm of self-interest and its effects on social action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 5–16. 10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.5 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Schachter, S. (1951). Deviation, rejection, and communication. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46, 190–207. 10.1037/h0062326 CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221–279. New York , NY : Academic Press. 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60358-5 Google Scholar Sherif, M. (1936). The psychology of social norms. New York , NY : Harper. Google Scholar Staub, E. (1974). Helping a distressed person. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 293–341). New York , NY : Academic Press. Google Scholar Yamagishi, T. (1986). The provision of a sanctioning system as a public good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 110–116. 10.1037/0022-3514.51.1.110 Web of Science®Google Scholar Citing Literature Volume35, Issue7July 2005Pages 1519-1539 ReferencesRelatedInformation
Publication Year: 2005
Publication Date: 2005-07-01
Language: en
Type: article
Indexed In: ['crossref']
Access and Citation
Cited By Count: 132
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot