Asch in Elections

Have you ever been in a situation where you felt strongly about something but because everyone else in the room had stated the opposite opinion you went ahead with the crowd? Apparently this is fairly common reaction: you treasure your opinion but the social pressure is such that you voice something you don’t agree with just so you fit in. Every once in a while you get a situation where someone will actually question their own opinion in the face of such opposition, but for the most part people remain confident in their own opinions even they don’t voice them.

Apparently there was an actual study done for this back in the early 1950’s by Solomon Asch. Asch was a professor who would invite a group of students to participate in a “vision test.” As it turns out, only one student was the subject and the others were in on the true nature of the test. The professor would hold up a picture of a line and three lines next to it and ask which line of the three was closest in length to the solo line. He would go around the room and people would answer with the test subject usually being the last or second-to-last to answer. The students in on the test would give the correct answer for the first couple of questions, but eventually they would start giving the wrong answer. The test subject would usually hold out for a few questions, but eventually they would knowingly start giving the wrong answer. In after interviews, many of the subjects would state that they were confident of what the right answer was, but they were deliberately giving the wrong answer so they wouldn’t feel so isolated. Only in a few instances did the test subjects say that they began to doubt and assume that their senses were wrong. Asch reran the tests and whenever at least one other person stated the correct answer, the number of incidents where the test subject deliberately answered incorrectly dropped off drastically.

I mention this for two reasons. One, it’s really interesting from a social engineering standpoint. Second, it has bearing on something that’s been brought up in this election: the Bradley Effect.

The Bradley Effect is the factor that a certain percentage of white voters will say that they are going to vote for the African-American candidate, but vote for the white candidate instead. Now, this assumes that there is inherent racism on behalf of white America and that there is a segment of the population that physically cannot bring themselves to vote for the African-American for only that reason, whether they agree with him or not on other issues. In actuality, there is no way of really knowing as to why a group of people say they were going to vote one way but do not.

Dr. Asch’s tests might give us a reason. I believe that most Americans are not actually racist. However, many white Americans are terrified of being accused of being racist. So it is not surprising that a group of people would say that of course they are going to vote for the African-American candidate because it’s easier to not rock the boat that to say that they are not going to vote for him because they disagree with him on certain policy issues, out of fear of being accused of being racist. Incidentally, the Bradley Effect is a bit overstated to begin with because the poll that said that Mr. Bradley was going to become California’s next governor was conducted over a week out from the election. On Election Day, Mr. Bradley’s lead was down to two points, which was within the margin of error.

So, I am going to be very curious come Election Day. If Mr. Obama doesn’t win by the margin he is expected to, or he even loses, much of the talking heads will talk about the Bradley Effect. But I think it more likely that there are simply a bunch of people who don’t want to be the odd person out and either don’t say anything or say, yes I’m voting for X, but instead will vote for Y when they are secured in the quiet of the voting booth.