Well, Michael, when you kept mentioning ethnic-religious affinities, I assumed that's what you meant. Social psychologists have often operationally defined similarity along ethnic and/or religious dimensions. So I guess at this point I'm not sure what you're talking about. ________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 12:41 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: Re: [tips] Milgram/Asch/Madoff
----- Original Message ----- From: Bourgeois, Dr. Martin<mailto:[email protected]> To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2009 11:13 AM Subject: RE: [tips] Milgram/Asch/Madoff Michael, there's a substantial body of literature going back over 40 years that supports the idea that what you call 'affinity' (we tend to call it similarity) increases conformity. Festinger's social comparison theory, published in 1954, considered similarity to be a key variable in predicting social behavior. ________________________________ I am not sure if the affinity I am talking about is equivalent to the social psychology similarity .From my understanding the latter had more to do with interpersonal attraction and group cohesive factors.I think the social psychology line also included "complementarity" (opposites attract) and "phyicality" as contributive to interpersonal attraction. The bottom line for Madoff's investors could have been pecuniary enhanced by the e-r demand characterics.Madoff,ironically, was a victim of this assumed motivation. Michael Sylvester,PhD Daytona Beach,Florida --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
