Sample of research Paper on Conformity to Rape Culture in Fraternity Settings



Sociology 380-002

Save your time - order a paper!

Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlines

Order Paper Now
  1. Introduction to Research Topic


Discussions of sexual assault and rape culture becoming more prevalent on college and university campuses, especially at the University of New Mexico with the recent Department of Justice investigation which found that the university fails to comply with federal law in regards to sexual assault allegations and responses. It is clearer than ever that there needs to be immediate action taken to deter these that perpetuate rape culture, a term that is become more popular in the discussion of sexual assault. Rape culture, broadly, is a set of beliefs which by normalizing sexual violence, systematically blames victims of sexual assault for their aggressor’s actions. While the problem of sexual assault and rape culture is quite expansive in nature, as shown by the conceptual definition, there are many factors of the problem as whole that need to be analyzed on a much more detailed and independent level, one of those being the relationship between fraternities, rape culture and sexual assault.

A significant portion of on campus rape occurs in fraternity settings, whether that is in fraternity houses or in fraternity social settings. Fisher, Cullen and Turner offer in a report for the National Institute of Justice 10.3 percent of rape on college campuses occurs in a fraternity setting. This was based on national data collected from a sample of 4,446 college women in the 1996-97 academic years (18). The study reports that in a population of 1,000 college women, 123 were victims of rape (Fisher et al., 11). Of these 123 victims, 74 experienced completed rape and 49 experienced attempted rape (Fisher et al.,11).  This totals in a victimization rate of 35.3 rapes per 1,000 students per academic year on a given college campus (Fisher et al., 11). As the population increases, so does the number of rapes. A campus population of 10,000 can expect to see 350 rapes in one academic year alone (Fisher et al., 11). These staggering statistics show, in a quantitative way, that sexual assault on college campuses is an undeniable problem.

According to Sinozich and Langton in a special report conducted from 1995-2013, for the Bureau of Justice Statistics, student victims were more likely not to report their sexual assault to police than non-student victims (1). 26 percent of students and 23 percent of non-students did not report due to fear of retaliation, 12 percent of students and 5 percent of non-students did not feel the incident of their sexual assault was important enough to report, and finally, Sinozich and Langton found that for the period of 1995-2013 the “rate of rape and sexual assault was 1.2 times higher for non-students (7.6 per 1,000) than students (6.1 per 1000)” (1).

The issue of rape and sexual assault on-campus rape has recently come to the forefront of the social conversation (Wallace). Fraternities especially have been targeted and singled out as loci of a higher instance of campus rape incidents (Wallace). This allegation is supported by the data cited above. The nature of fraternities is one that prioritizes membership and brotherhood, which could become problematic in the context of rape and sexual assault. This study aims to further examine the potential effects of organizational characteristic of fraternities, such as conformity,  on individual members’ motivation to participate in rape culture. To what extent does social pressure and a want for conformity from fraternity brothers impact an individual’s inclination to participate in/perpetuate rape culture within the context of UNM’s campus?


Save your time – Order a paper now!

Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlines

Order Paper here

  1. Literature Review


When considering the topic of conformity more specifically, there is an abundance of literature regarding peer groups, social pressure, and moral basis in regards to morally charged situations. This following review of literature should serve as a basis for the understanding of the topic of conformity and how conformity interacts with other variables important to the proposed research. With that said this is obviously not a complete look on all works done about conformity, but rather a purposeful sampling of literature that shows a warrant and need for the proposed research.

Lee, McCauley and Jussim, in their research on the accuracy and validity of stereotypes, found that “on average, stereotypes have only a very small influence on person perception” (477). This would suggest that in environments where the individual is confronted with potential stereotype, they may evaluate this situation based on “individuating information” and not make a judgement based solely on the schema of the stereotype ( Lee et al., 478).

Further, the research of Lee et al. revealed that “once people categorize [others] they mostly jettison their stereotypes when relevant individuating information is available” (478). This finding indicates that while the majority of people are expected to utilize information that departs from a stereotype (when it is available) when evaluating others, when it is not available they do rely on stereotypes to make a judgement. Lee et al. supports this further in saying stereotypes “increase the accuracy of one’s perception” and that “stereotyped judgements are substantially better than chance” (479-485).

Aramovich, Lytle, and Skitka, in their research on moral conviction in opposing torture, investigate to what extent, if at all, the moral conviction of others in a small group of peers influences attitudes concerning torture. Aramovich et al. found that subjects with greater moral conviction in their opinion of torture were more likely to resist both public and private conformation to peers with opposing attitudes (31). Further, Aramovich et al. offers that other research supports their finding that “those with stronger moral convictions were less likely than those with weaker moral convictions to capitulate their attitudes despite strong pressures to do otherwise” (31). This study was conducted using students in an introductory psychology course, which inherently de-emphasizes the role of cohesiveness in the peer groups being evaluated. While the sample groups were composed of individuals recognized as peers, these groups do not have quite the same level of interdependence and cohesion that groups composed of peers from a fraternity would have. Additionally, part of the data obtained in this study was from a computer mediated experiment which reduces the amount of social peer pressure endured by subjects and may have an effect on their conformity to opposing attitudes (Aramovich et al.).

Hornsey, Smith and Begg examined the “Effects of Norms among Those with Moral Conviction”.  In this research, Hornsey et al. offers that examining attitudes about real world social issues “introduces unwanted variance associated with socio historical and political circumstances” (245). This is important to keep under consideration in the present research as it suggests that studying the effects of conformity in regards to highly politically charged issues such as rape culture, may alter the results because of the sensitive nature of the issue under scrutiny.

On this note, Sherif mentions that “the strongest evidence that has been uncovered for conformity—and normative influence in particular—has occurred when researchers examine attitudes that have little personal relevance” (as cited in Hornsey et al., 245). This is why many experiments of this nature often use perceptual tasks in examining attitudes of conformity. Hornsey et al. conclude that the “level of normative support for one’s opinion does have an effect on speaking out, but that its effects are moderated by the moral basis for attitude and perceptions for change” (263).

Further, this research indicates that normative support is also moderated by  “perceptions of whether the status quo is likely to change in line with your attitude” (Hornsey et al., 265).  Other findings of Hornsey et al. indicate that people with a strong moral basis for beliefs showed strong evidence for intention to counter-conform, but when they were put in a position to act on this, conformed instead. Hornsey et al. suggest that this indicates our desire to be seen as socially independent but largely lacking in the courage to be so (266).

This part of Hornsey et al.’s research  interplays with the research of Aramovich, Lytle, and Skitka because of the common thread of moral based decision making. While Aramovich, Lytle, and Skitka find that moral conviction is not changed in situations of peer pressure within their setting of analysis, Hornsey et al. finds that there is a want for social independence, but that even strong moral basis is malleable.

Deutsch and Gerard examined effects of “Normative and Informational Social Influences on Individual Judgement”. In this study Deutsch and Gerard exactly replicated Asch’s “face to face situation” as well as incorporated a new “anonymous situation” to determine if informational social influence would still have an effect on conformity when the subject had more privacy (631). Results of both these methods indicated that even when subjects are “not normatively influenced, may be influenced by the others in the sense that the judgments of others are taken to be a more or less trustworthy source of information about the objective reality with which he and the others are confronted” (Deutsch and Gerard, 635).

Further, Deutsch and Gerard state that their results illustrate that when subjects are in a group situation “ the normative social influences are grossly increased, producing considerable more errors in individual judgement” (635).  This seems to indicate that the influence of group norms on the subject in a social situation make it more difficult for them to use individuating information to pass individual judgement. Deutsch and Gerard conclude by offering that the implications of their research are “not particularly optimistic for those who place a high value on an individual to resist group pressures which run counter to his individual judgement” (635). This research is consistent with the work by Hornsey et al. that was cited earlier.

Reed, Langea, Ketchiea, and Clappa discuss the role social identity plays in determining normative behavior in regards to drinking in their research entitled “The relationship between social identity, normative information, and college student drinking”. This research shows that there is a positive correlation between identification with a university and alcohol consumption.

Reed et al. also note the importance of social pressures within Greek Organizations and that there was a positive correlation between drinking and being affiliated with a Greek Organization. This research is important to consider in the context of the aforementioned research about conformity and moral basis because it shows a specific and identifiable relationship between conformity, by means of drinking patterns, and Greek affiliation status. Because the previous authors, Hornsey et al. and Deutsch and Gerard, show that even with moral basis, peers are willing to conform to behavior of others, the groundwork for researching conformity in regards to rape culture in a fraternity setting is not only laid out, but warranted due to the relationships presented in the prior research analyzed.

While many criticized Asch’s research model as producing the results it did because of the historical and political culture at the time of the experiment, the research of Spencer and Perrin proves otherwise. Spencer and Perrin assert that the impacts of conformity in other situations, different from that of Asch’s original experiment, where there are high stake personal costs of not conforming to the majority still yield conformity within peer groups. This research focuses on the relationships between probation officers and youth on probation and white experimenters and black youth, but it still shows that Asch’s research and procedural model can demonstrate conformity within peer groups outside of the parameters of Asch’s experiment.

Kundu and Cummins investigate applying Asch’s conformity paradigm to moral decision making. This study followed the structure of the Asch experiments quite closely except for a few exceptions. Kundu and Cummins used female subjects where Asch only used male subjects, and used males for the informed majority (271-273). Additionally, instead of a perceptual line test, Kundu and Cummins evaluated subjects using moral vignette scenarios (272). Erb et al. identify three core motivations for conforming in the Asch experiment as “the desire for accuracy, desire for affiliation, and the maintenance of a positive self concept” (as cited in Kundu and Cummins, 269).

Much like Hornsey et al., Erb et al. states that these motivations vary according to the individual’s prior belief concerning the topic being considered (as cited in Kundu and Cummins (2012), p. 269). Kundu and Cummins (2012) evaluate this assertion in saying that when an individual strongly opposes the majority prior to experimentation, they will be motivated to conform by “the desire to fit in” (p. 269). Likewise, when an individual’s prior belief is not strongly opposed to the majority, they will be motivated to conform based off of the idea that the “majority view is more likely to constitute an objective consensus” (Kundu and Cummins (2012), p. 269).

From this, Kundu and Cummins (2012) assert that “resistance to conformity is both moral and rational” (p. 269). Results from Kundu and Cummins (2012) indicate that participants’ personal morals were highly affected by the social context (p. 276).  They explain this in saying that participants departed from their personal morals under the influence of social consensus “in a decision-making context [through] the creation of a social norm” (Kundu and Cummins (2012), p. 277). Finally, Kundu and Cummins (2012) offer that the cascade model set-up of the Asch experiments reinforces the individual’s perception of others having information that they (the individual) does not have–pushing them to conform (p. 277). They conclude by saying that “conformity can be viewed as a rational decision under conditions of uncertainty” even within a moral context, especially when “ modeled as an informational cascade”  (Kundu and Cummins (2012), p. 277).

Because there is strong evidence that conformity on morally charged topics is occurring and prevalent, it is clear that research regarding conformity within a peer group is warranted and has evidentiary support. Additionally, because there is a relationship between drinking patterns and Greek membership status, it is plausible to hypothesize that there may be a correlation between brotherhood and perpetuation of rape culture. With the literature regarding the topic provided, there is a clear and justifiable groundwork in place for this proposed research.


  1. Research Methods


This study will be modeled after Solomon Asch’s experiment entitled A Minority of One against a Unanimous Majority. Asch’s procedural methodology lends itself to the present investigation very well. Asch used an instructed majority that is trained prior to the experiment. The cohesive nature of the relationship between members of a fraternity fits the situational requirement of the informed majority within Asch’s experiment. During the training session, the informed majority, which consists of seven to nine people, will learn the general purpose of the experiment and their role within the experiment. The informed majority is also given more specific instructions about conduct during the experiment. The informed majority will be instructed to announce the judgements and statements they make within the experiment firmly and also to refrain from coming across as surprised or in any way directly interacting with the single subject. It is the role of the informed majority to come across as rather impersonal. The informed majority will rehearse their role in the experiment twice before the actual experiment is conducted in order to prevent error in that aspect of the experiment (Asch, 4).

The single subject in this case would be a peer of the informed majority. The nature of the experimental set up closely replicates the natural environment in which the single subject might conform to peer pressure in the company of his fraternity brothers. A member of the informed majority will discuss with the single subject that the experiment is on attitudes towards sexual assault and that another person is needed in order to conduct the experiment. The informed majority will leave a seat open and the single subject will sit before the last member of the majority. This will allow for the single subject to be seated so that he will be geographically last in the room and he will hear all of what the informed majority has to say before he is called on (Asch, 4).

Instead of a visual line test like that which Asch used to assess his participants, this study will utilize ethically controversial vignettes. The experiment will begin with the experimenters reading a set of instructions to the single subject and the informed majority that outlines what is to follow. By instructing the whole group, the experimenters convey to the single subject that all of the participants are equally in need of instruction. To convince the single subject even further, members of the informed majority will be instructed to ask prewritten questions regarding the procedures of the experiment. The participants, the single subject and informed majority, will be asked and instructed to decide how they would proceed in a situation of controversial sexual ethics. These vignettes are modeled after the vignettes used by Kundu and Cummins in their replication of Asch’s experiment. Like Kundu and Cummins, the vignettes will go in the following order: filler, weak consensus, strong yes consensus, and strong no consensus (273). The vignettes are modeled this way to avoid very morally questionable vignettes at the beginning of the experiment and allow for the subjects to be eased into the model of the experiment.

Once each vignette is read, the first member of the informed majority would be prompted to respond to follow up questions about the moral permissibility of various actions (which are outlined in the Instrument of Measurement section) in a predetermined way that indicated an aspect of rape culture and the rest of the informed majority would follow suit until it was time for the single subject to respond. It is important to note that the informed majority will not answer from a pro-rape culture position with each vignette (Asch, 453-4). The informed majority will be instructed to answer in an ethically sound fashion for some vignettes so as not to raise suspicion of the single subject. The experiment will not end after all the vignettes have been read and responded to.

In order to both further convince the single subject and to obtain more data, the experimenter will ask the participants questions about the disagreement of certain points. This discussion will be prompted by the experimenter mentioning that they noticed disagreement on several vignettes and would like to open up a conversation about why participants think this is so. As (it is predicted) the single subject will increasingly take over the conversation with the experimenter. The experimenter will intersperse the following questions into the discussion: “Who do you suppose was right?”, “Do you suppose the entire group was wrong and that you alone were right?”, “How confident in your judgements are you?” (Asch 455-6).  It is expected that the single subject will be the most vocal in this discussion and ultimately indicate whether they think their answers to the ethical vignettes or the majorities were correct (Asch, 455).

Once the discussion concludes the experimenter will dismiss the participants and request to see the single subject. The experimenter will briefly revisit the ethical vignettes from the experiment and the subject’s answers. This will allow for the experimenter to fully understand the subject’s reaction to the experimental situation. Then the experimenter will reveal the true object of the experiment, the subject’s role, and fully explain the nature of the procedure. The subject will be asked to keep this knowledge confidential. The subject will also be asked if they agree to let the data obtained from their participation be used in the experiment. Only with the subject’s permission will the data obtained from their participation be used in the sample (Asch, 456). Upon completion of the debriefing the experimenter will offer the single subject a leaflet of resources should they experience any emotional or psychological discomfort as a result of participating the experiment.

The duration of the experiment should be around twenty minutes and the experiment will be repeated multiple times until enough evidence is collected to have conclusive data (Asch, 4). All subjects will be asked to keep the experiment confidential in order to keep this research method effective until the study is complete (Asch, 5). Aside from the reading of the vignettes, the methodology and procedure follow that of Asch’s closely.

  1. Hypothesis Construction


Conformity is conceptually defined as “a type of social influence involving a change in belief or behavior in order to fit in with a group. This change is in response to real (involving the physical presence of others) or imagined (involving the pressure of social norms / expectations) group pressure”( Because conformity is the dependent variable for this research, it is operationally defined as the single subject replicating the informed majority’s verbal decisions which indicate theoretical participation in ethically questionable situations that demonstrate aspects of rape culture. This is quantifiable in the single subject’s response to the ethical vignettes posed by the research. Conformity will be evident in the single subject complying with the group consensus through answering in accordance with the group’s collective decision on how to handle the situation presented in the ethical vignette.

As the study to be conducted is quasi-experimental,  there will be no control group. It is to be assumed that the real life behavior and responses of fraternity members is comparable to the behavior and responses that will be observed in the experiment setting. The strength of this comparability will be maintained by ensuring that both the members of the informed majority and the single subject come from the same chapter of their affiliated fraternity (Sigma Chi’s will be evaluated with an informed majority composed of fellow Sigma Chi’s, etc.).

As shown through literature review, there is warrant for research regarding the ways rape culture exists and is perpetuated on college campuses as well as the ways that conformity impacts decisions regarding perpetuation of rape culture. Modeling the experiment after the Asch experiment on conformity, this research will focus specifically on how rape culture is perpetuated within a fraternity setting, as that is pertinent to the discussion of rape culture on college campuses as a whole. With that said, the nature of fraternities creates an interesting way of contextualizing rape culture and how it is discussed within specific peer groups. Therefore, the hypothesis proposed is as follows:

The single subject will conform to the instructed majorities presented opinions and comments regarding rape culture and also respond in accordance with the group when presented with ethically questionable situations in the form of vignettes.

For both the dependent variable, conformity, and the independent variable, rape culture, the following hypotheses are proposed:

  1. Members of fraternities will conform to the opinions of one another when told to analyze ethical vignettes.
  2. Members of fraternities will indicate aspects of rape culture in their conformity to the demonstrated opinions of other fraternity members.
  3. Objectivity and Ethics

When considering the topic of sexual assault, it is important to acknowledge the fact that this topic could be triggering for victims, meaning discussing the topic of sexual assault could evoke emotional, physical, and/or mental responses from people that have been sexually assaulted. These responses are likely to be negative in nature because sexual assault is considered a traumatic event, therefore subjects that have experienced sexual assault and their reactions to being a part of this research will be closely monitored. A mechanism that is built into the research methods of this experiment in that allows for avoidance of this situation is the priming of the subject. Subjects will know the research is based around rape culture and sexual assault before they begin participating in the research. If additional support is needed for the participants of the study, counseling and mental health care resources will be provided.

When Asch conducted his experiment, which this research is modeled after, he ran into a few different ethical issues that also apply to this proposed research. First, participants are not necessarily protected from the psychological implications of disagreeing with the majority. Other researchers have found that situations like this one can be emotionally difficult to handle and that it puts participants in conflict like situation. This, of all of the ethical questions regarding this proposed research, is the most difficult to account for because researchers can in no way control the psychological response of the participants, thus counselling and mental health resources will be provided as mentioned before.

It is important to protect the identities of the participants as well as the organizations they are a part of. In this pursuit, after the sample has been assigned (after the subjects are gathered from each chapter of each fraternity that is included to study) a number will be attached to each individual and destroy records of their name and connection to their affiliated organization. Additionally, any results from participants who elect to remove themselves from the study after debriefing will not be published.

Randomness within this homogenous sampling method will be created in the following manner. Members of fraternities will be motivated to participate based on volunteer opportunities. Fraternities hold their members to a certain amount of community service and volunteer work. Negotiations with each chapter president (or the equivalent of that) will be organized to arrange for participation in the study to count towards volunteer hours. As part of these negotiation, the actual intent of the experiment will not be revealed to individuals, but  the entire purpose of experiment will be explained to the chapter presidents and their equivalents and to individuals during debriefing. Numbers will be previously assigned to each member of the chapter from a roster provided by the chapter head. From the pool of volunteers, random individuals will be chose until the desired sample number is reached.

Objectivity will be maintained through minimal interaction with the informed majority and single subject besides what is required to maintain the validity of the experiment. The researchers will obtain informed consent from participants, deliver the ethical vignettes, record responses, and debrief participants. Neither of the researchers are involved in fraternity life or culture, so there is little opportunity for bias or subjective influence. Additionally, the researchers will refrain for any body language that would indicate a response to what the participants are saying in the experiment. Through these means, the researchers intend on not contaminating the results of the experiment and research and creating an ethical and objective environment for research.



Recommendation : Get Your Paper Written From Scratch By Essaysprompt.Com Experts. Order Research Paper Here

  1. Sampling


This study will be conducted using a combination of purposive and availability sampling methods. Due to the sensitive nature of the study, it is likely that not all of the desired sample will be willing to participate. Thus, sampling will be taken from the population of fraternity members from which informed consent is obtained (this will not involve complete disclosure of the nature of the experiment as that would alter the responses of participants but it will inform participants of all vital information). The samples will be selected purposively from the selection of fraternities on campus at UNM due to high prevalence of sexual assault and rape associated with these organizations.

In this vein, approval will be obtained from the heads of the chapters of fraternities here on UNM’s campuses which are of interest to the study. After a roster of members is obtained, a number will be assigned to each member. Then volunteer participants will be taken after providing a description of the study which would not impact the responses of participants. An example of the study description: prospective participants will be told that they will be involved in an experiment on conformity within fraternities. It is important to mention that participants are not informed about the focus on conformity to rape culture as that would both repel prospective participants (due to the sensitive nature of the topic on campus at UNM) and potentially alter their behavior in the study should they chose to participate. From the pool of volunteers the desired sample number will be randomly selected.


  1. Instrument of Measurement


Rape culture, for the purpose of this research, is operationally defined as the following situations:

  1. Use of violent language regarding the victim of each vignette
  2. An increase in the volume of speech when talking about the victim of each vignette
  3. A shown preference for aggressive behavior towards the victims in each vignette
  4. Blaming of the victim in each vignette through words or possible social relations
  5. Wanting to perform sexual actions on each victim without consent from the victim
  6. Interpreting the words of a victim to mean something other than the explicit intent
  7. Sympathizing, by means of explicitly expressing support, with perpetrators in each vignette
  8. Replacement of the word rape with the word sex
  9. Indicating that the victim is a liar
  10. Questioning the account of the victim, if provided in the vignette

Because of the qualitative nature of this research, the ways in which rape culture will be measured are dependent on each individual vignette. The following are examples of vignettes that will be read during the experiment:

  1. A female college student went to a party with her friends on a Friday night. The female student consumed 5 shots of vodka. The female student found herself in need of a ride after being left by her friends at the party. A male student offers her a ride that was also in attendance at the party. The male student did not consume any alcohol at the party.
  2. A female college student is invited by a male college student to his house to watch a movie. The male student has expectations for sexual acts from the female student that he does not communicate to the female student. When the female student arrives at the male student’s house he greets her with a kiss.
  3. A female college student attends a party at a fraternity house. The female student consumes too much alcohol and becomes unconscious in the bathroom of the fraternity house. A male college student that is a member of the fraternity hosting the party finds the female student on the floor of the bathroom. The male student invites 5 other male students into the bathroom to look at the unconscious female student. All of the male students are sober.

The questions used to initiate response to each vignette will aim to operationalize rape culture in the context of each vignette. The questions will vary in severity, like the vignettes, in order to prevent to subjects from being rushed into serious topics. With the example vignette provided earlier, some of the follow up questions would be:

Vignette 1:

  1. Is it morally permissible for the male student to give the female student a ride home?
  2. Is it morally permissible for the male student to engage in sexual acts with the female student?
  3. Is it morally permissible for the female student to consent to sexual actions?
  4. Is it morally permissible to blame the female student for any possibly sexual acts that occur with the male student?

Vignette 2

  1. Is it morally permissible for the male student to expect further sexual acts from the female student without discussing it with the female student?
  2. Is it morally permissible for the female student to be angry about the kiss received from the male student?
  3. Is it morally permissible for the female student to reject further sexual acts from the male student?
  4. Is it morally permissible for the male student to be mad at the female student for rejecting further sexual acts?

Vignette 3:

  1. Is it morally permissible for the male student that found the female student to bring in other male students to see the female student?
  2. Is it morally permissible for the male students to engage in sexual acts with the female student?
  3. Is it morally permissible for the male students to record themselves engaging in sexual acts with the female subject?
  4. Is it morally permissible for the male students to share their recordings on the internet?

The follow up questions aim to put the single subject in a variety of different situations in which the single subject could respond through the operational definition of rape culture. Therefore, if the single subject demonstrates any of the tendencies outlined in the operational definition of rape culture when responding to the questions about the vignettes, his responses will be measured as conforming to rape culture. If the single subject fails to fall under any of these tendencies or actions, his responses will be measured as not conforming to rape culture.


  1. Conclusion


With an increasing number of people attending universities today, it is more important than ever to protect the safety of students against sexual assault on college campuses. As if the ever-increasing, word-of-mouth reports of individuals on campus being assaulted both in and outside of Greek sanctioned events aren’t an indication of an urgent problem, the investigation initiated by the Department of Justice definitely is. Universities everywhere need to do more to prevent sexual assault, the University of New Mexico, in particular, must hold itself of higher standard of student safety. The proposed research will investigate and help to explain how and why this crime occurs so frequently in and around fraternity settings. The study will hope to increase the knowledge base on behaviors of potential sexual offenders not only within fraternities, but within situations in which there is great pressure to conform to behaviors that perpetuate rape culture.


Work Cited:


Aramovich, Nicholas P., Brad A,. Lytle, and Linda J., Skitka. “ Opposing Torture: Moral Conviction and Resistance to Majority Influence.” Social Influence 7.1 (2012): 21-34. Web. 28  Apr. 2016.


Asch, Solomon E. “Studies of Independence and Conformity: I. A Minority of One Against a Unanimous Majority.” Psychological Monographs: General and Applied. Vol. 70. Washington: American Psychological Association, 1956. N. pag. Print.


Asch, Solomon E. Studies of Independence and Conformity. Washington: American Psychological Association, 1956. Print.


Deutsch, Morton, and Harold B. Gerard. “A Study of Normative and Informational Social Influences Upon Individual Judgment.” The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51.3 (1955): 629-636. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.


Hornsey J., Matthew, Joanne R., Smith, and Danielle Begg. “Effects of Norms Among Those with Moral Conviction: Counter‐conformity Emerges on Intentions but not Behaviors.” Social Influence 2.4 (2007): 244-268. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.


“Justice Department Releases Investigative Findings on University of New Mexico’s Response to Sexual Assault Allegations.” Justice News. Department of Justice, 22 Apr. 2016. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.<>.


Kundu, Payel, and Denise Dellarosa, Cummins. “Morality and Conformity: The Asch Paradigm Applied to Moral Decisions.” Social Influence 8.4 (2013): 268-279. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.


Lee, Yueh-Ting, Clark, McCauley, and Lee Jussim. “Stereotypes as Valid Categories of Knowledge and Human Perceptions of Group Differences.” Social and Personality Psychology Compass 7.7 (2013): 470-486. PsycINFO. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.


McLeod, Saul.“What is Conformity?” Simply Psychology, 2016. Web. 28 April, 2016


Perrin, Stephen, and Christopher Spencer. “Independence or Conformity in the Asch Experiment As a Reflection of Cultural and Situational Factors.” British Journal of Social Psychology 20.3 (1981): 205-209. Print.


Reed, Mark B., et al. “The Relationship between Social Identity, Normative Information, and College Student Drinking.” Social Influence 2.4 (2007): 269-294. Print.


United States of America. U.S. Department of Justice. Office of Justice Statistics. Rape and Sexual Assault Victimization Among College-Age Females, 1995–2013. By Sofi Sinozich and Lynn Langton. Washington D.C.: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2014. Print.


United States of America. National Institute of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. The Sexual Victimization of College Women. By Bonnie S. Fisher, Francis T. Cullen, and Michael G. Turner. Washington D.C.: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2000. Print.


Wallace, Kelly. “Study: Nearly 20% of College Freshmen Victims of Rape.”CNN. Cable News Network, 20 May 2015. Web. 10 Mar. 2016.


Get a similar assignment here