Dari Eksperimen Milgram ke Budaya Digital: Tinjauan Literatur tentang Evolusi Konformitas dan Kepatuhan di Era Modern
Article Sidebar
Page Numbers:
335-345
Digital Object Identifier:
10.58578/tsaqofah.v6i1.8156
Viewed: 226 times
Downloaded: 166 times
LYAS Publisher cordially invites qualified professionals to serve as Editors or Reviewers. Your expertise will make an important contribution to maintaining and strengthening the academic quality of our publications. Interested applicants are kindly requested to complete the application form at the following link: Editors & Reviewers
Please feel free to contact us if you need any further information about the submission process or if you have any additional questions.
Authors:
Desri Ningsih1, Neviyarni Neviyarni2 
Copyright :
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication.
Main Article Content
Abstract
Conformity and obedience are two central concepts in social psychology, yet their transformation within digital culture has received relatively limited systematic attention. This study aims to examine the evolution of conformity and obedience from classical perspectives to the digital era and to identify new forms of social influence mediated by algorithms, online norms, and platform interaction mechanisms. Adopting a qualitative approach with a systematic literature review design, the study analyzes 52 scholarly publications selected through purposive sampling from various academic databases. Data were collected through structured searches and analyzed using thematic analysis to identify patterns, conceptual shifts, and new configurations of social influence. The findings reveal fundamental changes in the mechanisms of social influence in digital spaces, where digital signals such as likes, followers, algorithmic recommendations, and visibility indicators of popularity function as new forms of normative pressure and symbolic authority. These results contribute to the refinement of social influence theory by introducing the dimensions of digital conformity and digital obedience, and by expanding understanding of how human behavior is shaped by the architecture and structures of digital media. The study underscores the importance of digital literacy and critical awareness of algorithmic mechanisms to reduce vulnerability to online social influence and opens avenues for further research on variations in digital influence across different user groups and social media platforms.
Downloads
Article Details
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
References
Beer, D. (2017). The Social Power of Algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1216147
Bessi, A., & Ferrara, E. (2020). Social Media and Polarization. Chaos, 30(8), 083117. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0012735
Chung, A., & Rimal, R. N. (2021). Social Norms in the Digital World: Persistent and Emergent Norms on Social Media. Digital Health, 7, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076211024986
Cialdini, R. B. (2021). Influence: Science and Practice (7th Ed.). Pearson.
Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social Influence: Compliance and Conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015
De Arruda, G., Marinho, V., & Bastos, M. (2022). Digital Authority and the Influence of Social Platforms. Journal of Digital Society, 15(3), 211–229.
Fraser, N. (2021). The Digital Public Sphere Revisited. Social Research, 88(4), 1103–1128.
Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation, and the Hidden Decisions That Shape Social Media. Yale University Press.
Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. D. (2012). Contesting the “Nature” of Conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo’s Studies Really Show. PLOS Biology, 10(11), E1001426. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001426
Kwon, K. H., & Gruzd, A. (2017). Is Social Media Becoming More Political? Understanding the Use of Social Media in Political Activities and Discussions. Information Technology & People, 30(2), 388–408. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-06-2016-0137
Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral Study of Obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371–378. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040525
Munger, K. (2020). The Rise of Political Influencers. Public Opinion Quarterly, 84(S1), 236–256. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfaa019
Myers, D. G. (2018). Social Psychology (13th Ed.). Mcgraw-Hill Education.
Sunstein, C. R. (2018). #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. Princeton University Press.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (Pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.
Tufekci, Z. (2015). Algorithmic Harms Beyond Facebook and Google: Emergent Challenges of Computational Agency. Colorado Technology Law Journal, 13(1), 203–218.
Van Der Linden, S. (2022). The Psychology of Misinformation: Why We Are Vulnerable to Fake News and How to Resist It. Annual Review of Psychology, 73, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-103947
Wiederhold, B. K. (2016). Social Media, FOMO, and Mental Health. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(12), 653–654. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0535