SA 21 A- Gonzales, San Diego, Yulo

1.  What norm did you violate?
• Usually when people go out they would be accompanied by another person or they would be by themselves. We decided to break the norm of who can accompany you in public places by carrying around a pillow with a cutout of a celebrity’s face attached to it. 
• Link to videos:  https://drive.google.com/openid=0B0737MLxT6WXRnU4Q2JmQ1AzMTQ
2.  Describe the Breaching Experiment. What was the activity? Where did you do it? 
• We began the experiment in Jollibee Katipunan. Reiko, the actor, would walk in and order and have a “meal” with the pillow or “Justin Bieber”. Afterwards, the group decided to walk around UP Town Center. Reiko was walking around hugging “Justin Bieber” and even entered a store. After walking around, Reiko asked the guard for directions on how to get to a certain place. The rest of the group also asked a stranger if he could take their picture with Reiko and “Justin Bieber” 
3. What were the different reactions of people? List all possible reactions you observed. Why do you think they reacted that way? What caused these reactions? Did the deviant act reaffirm/reinforce the existing norms based on these reactions? 

   Some people would stare or have a double take, but generally there were no extreme reactions such as obvious laughter and pointing. The most extreme reaction we had gotten was when a woman was face to face with “Justin Bieber” and it shocked her causing her to take a step back and say “Hala Siya!” Below are the responses we obtained throughout the experimentation

   
   
   At Jollibee:
   40-60 YEARS OLD
   -       Old Ladies seated next to Reiko
   o   Was indifferent to the scene in front of them
   -       Old Man
   o   Stared at the pillow and Reiko and eventually just smiles and walks away
   WORKERS AT JOLLIBEE
   -       Manager of Jollibee
   o   Looks at Reiko and “Justin Bieber” numerous times and just smiles in confusion.
   -       Security Guard
   o   Taken aback by what he was seeing but smiles anyway and greets goodbye
   -       Cashier
   o   Was trying hard to hold in her laughter. She would take quick glances at Reiko whilst taking other people’s orders. Her smile seemed extra bright as she was accommodating the customers after Reiko
   STUDENTS
   -       Looks and laughs and decided to take out their phones to take pictures. A student who was alone was sitting right next to Reiko and he looked confused and uncomfortable at the situation happening next to him. Others would look and make expressions showing that they were judging what was happening.
   At UP Town Center
   -       LADY GUARD
   o   Upon entrance into the mall, the lady guard who was checking bags laughed and said “May pillow pa si Ma’am!”. She was clearly amused with what was happening in front of her.
   -       SALES LADIES AT BAZAAR SELLING CLOTHES ( Teenagers to early 20s)
   o   They laughed out loud as Reiko was passing by and even nudged their friends to see what was happening. Even as Reiko walked away, the continued to stare at her.
   -       SALES MEN AT BAZAAR SELLING PHONE CASES
   o   We’re unaware of what was happening as they were focused on using their cellphones so they did not take note of what was happening.
   -       OLDER PEOPLE
   o   They would usually stare blankly at Reiko and “Justin Bieber”. They were trying to understand why Reiko was walking around with a pillow. Would continue staring even is Reiko caught them staring.
   -       MIDDLE-AGED PEOPLE
   o   Asking the security Guard for Directions
   §  While interacting with Reiko, he remained neutral but friendly. However, as Reiko walked away he stared after and had a huge grin on his face
   o   Mallgoers
   §  They would stare at what was happening. Some would smile and laugh while others looked like they were just weirded out.
   o   Shopper in Uniqlo
   §  Reiko was walking around Uniqlo when she met a woman who was also shopping. The woman was surprised by what she saw that she took a step back and uttered the words “ Hala Siya!”. She then decides to call on her companion to also look at what was happening.
   o   Salesperson in Uniqlo
   §  Once they took notice of the pillow and the cutout, they would have a shocked expression and went on to tell their co-workers. They would avoid interacting with Reiko and stayed a little far away.
   -       RANDOM GUY WHO TOOK OUR PICTURE
   o   The guy seemed to be in his early 20s. As he was walking towards us, he was already staring at the pillow trying to hide a smile. We decided to ask him to take our picture and he did so willingly. Whilst, taking our picture it was obvious that he was trying to hold in his laughter
   -       CHILDREN
   o   At the initial encounter, the children would look scared and stare at what was happening, but they would eventually forget about it and act like nothing was there. 
4. Aside from the norms, what sociological themes are at play for people to react in a certain way? Is it a function of gender, social class, values/beliefs of institutions?
• The reactions of the people we have encountered just show that people find it weird if you carry around an inanimate object as if it were alive. Most of the reactions were tamed and controlled IF we were to analyze it base on the age group , we can see that the younger ones were more boisterous about it. . The older people seemed to stare more and did not mind if they were caught staring. The middle-aged people on the other hand, would silently laugh to themselves and would just smile and show an amused expression. The teenager and the early 20s group proved to be the one who would laugh out loud. They would cause a scene by taking pictures and point out what was happening to their friends. Children were afraid at first, but eventually became indifferent to what was happening. The social class also plays a role in how the results came about. The workers in both Jollibee-Katipunan as well as in UP Town Center tried to hold in their laughter as they were dealing with a customer as opposed to the others who would stare out right and others who would even laugh out loud. 
5. How did you feel when you did this experiment? How does it feel to deviate from the norms? Were you hesitant to do the activity?
• At first, Reiko was hesitant to do the experiment. She was thinking that if she saw someone else do what she was about to do, she would find it extremely weird. However, the experience proved to be a great one as we allowed ourselves to immerse in a different world. It was fun watching how people would try to hide their laughter and when they would take a second glance. All in all, it was a fun experience. It was a pretty tamed experiment, but it was an experience that allowed us to see the world more and to have a greater understanding of the people around us. 
• It felt weird carrying around a pillow in a mall and to be staring at Justin Bieber’s face while munching on some fries. It made us feel a little bad when the children were a little afraid. It also felt nerve-wracking to go against the usual. There was this fear that people would laugh out loud and point, but it wasn’t really like that in the end. It felt good to somehow bring a smile to people’s face even if we looked a little foolish. 
6. Other observations and analysis that you may have on the activity and on deviance in general.
• Another concept that can be applied to this experiment is Dramaturgy or the difference between your backstage self and front stage self. The workers of both the mall and the fast food chain tried to hold in their laughter and reaction to show respect to the customer. This was their front stage selves. They could not express their true emotions because of fear that they would be disrespectful to the customer.
• It would have been interesting if we tried this experiment using a local celebrity such as James Reid and see if the reaction would be different. To see a more diverse outcome, it would be nice to explore “higher-end” malls or other places that are more crowded just to see if social class has a grand effect on this. 
7.     PHOTOS 
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

SA21C: Agor, Baylon, Fallar, Reyes, Servigon

Breaching Experiment: Living BackwardsLink to experiment video: https://youtu.be/sbZNr3_ZGnk

1. What norm did you violate?

• The goal of the experiment is to deviate from the usual standards of how to dress (i.e. which side of the shirt goes in front, jackets are meant to be closed at the back and open at the front) and interacting backwards as people are usually self-conscious about their fashion choices especially on how people form their impressions and perceive them based on their appearance and clothing.

2. Describe the breaching experiment in detail. What was the activity? Where did you do it?

• In order to carry out the experiment, one of our groupmates (Rion Reyes) put on his shirt, jacket, cap, bag and id backwards. As seen in the video, the print of his shirt and the opening of his jacket can be seen at the back while his backpack was strapped in front of him. His ID and the front of his cap was oriented the same way. Throughout the experiment, he also walked backwards. The concept was to challenge the norm of facing forward in day-to-day events. The group created a concept of “living backwards” that challenged these traditions as we performed the study.

• The trials were done in the Regis Center in Katipunan and the nearby areas including the tricycle terminal and the alley beside Fully Booked. It was also done in 7-11 with our groupmate picking out and paying for things while facing backwards.

• From the group’s observation, the people’s reactions were generally classified into three: indifferent, confused and annoyed. 

• Indifferent: Some who saw our groupmate standing in the convenience store while dressed backwards had no reaction, probably because they can only see the front which had the backpack strapped on him and his jacket looked like a normal sweatshirt if the opening at the back was not visible. Placing bags in front, especially backpacks, are quite normal especially in busy areas like train stations, sidewalks and malls in order to avoid theft. Meanwhile, sweatshirts are a normal fashion choice for everyone, hence the indifference in reaction. The observers might not have seen the print of the shirt, the opening of the jacket and the ID lace at the back, thus missing the point of the experiment. The deviant (our groupmate) was able to reinforce these clothing norms in such a way that the failure to elicit reactions actually meant that what the observers saw at face value were completely normal.

• Confused: When our groupmate started walking backwards along Regis, there were some people who looked at him funny and looked confused as to what he was doing. He received some questioning stares and some smiles of confusion from the tricycle drivers who saw that his clothes were faced backwards. While walking along the tricycle terminal, our groupmate hit some of the poles and lightly tripped on the sidewalk, eliciting weird looks from the drivers which meant as if that they were asking what in the world he was trying to do. The cashiers at 7-11 usually tell how much money is due and what amount they received, and the particular cashier in the experiment was hesitant to tell our groupmate how much he was to pay because he either looked like he was not paying attention or that he did not want to be bothered while facing backwards. These reactions only tell that the violation of existing clothing norms are integrated in society because the observers would not be bothered if they weren’t.

• Annoyed: While walking across Regis, a group of friends stared at our groupmate weirdly as if they were annoyed at what he was trying to do (i.e. they thought he was seeking for attention). He also lightly bumped across other people while walking backwards, and that may have caused the annoyance and not the experiment itself. Being annoyed at the consequence of violating these norms says something about how society strictly follows them: deviants have no place in a society where traditions, even as simple as clothing, are highly reinforced because of the perceived imbalance (i.e. space in walking) that may result from difference.

• Aside from violating the norm of clothing traditions, the breaching experiment also posed questions and insight regarding the institutions of education that are integrated within the concept of clothing. Our groupmate was wearing an Ateneo ID, and Ateneans are generally perceived to have received or receiving quality education which does not make them susceptible to dressing in an unconventional manner, that is, indecent in terms of presentability. Often, wrong orientation of clothing (i.e. t-shirt print backwards) is perceived as socially unacceptable because it gives off the wrong impression that if you are not properly educated in simple conventions like how to dress up, then how much more for the more complex functions of society (e.g. how to speak, interact)? Also, Ateneans are stereotyped to be picky in fashion choices because they have the resources to be so (i.e. brandname clothes, quality of fabric) but the breaching experiment encapsulated that social class is not always equal to possessing the behavior that come with the label (e.g. rich, middle-class, poor) that come with it. When a person starts to transcend these labels (i.e. “rich” people putting their shirt backwards) then it says something about how we usually value the importance of these labels in maintaining social order.

5. How did you feel when you did this experiment? How does it feel to deviate from the norms? Were you hesitant to do the activity?

• "I guess that we felt conscious about what we were doing and at times we felt like we were making fools of ourselves especially when some people don't know it's a social experiment. For me, it was amusing to deviate. The only hesitation was because we might get into trouble with the guards there." 

• "Rion (the deviant) when he was walking backwards since he might trip and injure himself."

• Over-all, the group consensus was that it was awkward to do it at first since there are a lot of people watching and that they don’t know it’s an experiment. Of course, it was troubling to think of what they were thinking about what we were doing. There were also risks in filming because the guards might send us out or stop us because they think that we’re doing something illegal. It was fun for the most part, though. Seeing others’ reactions was funny and that we were able to accomplish the task lightheartedly.

6. Other observations and analysis that you may have on the activity and deviance in general.

• Sometimes, the irony in deviance is that when you repeat it enough times, it becomes a norm. Walking backwards has been done in many breaching experiments and the observers might have participated in the same experiment themselves (since we shot near Ateneo) that they were able to easily figure out that it was an experiment, and it was normal to do it for the study. This is parallel to other social issues such as homosexuality, which was seen before as deviant and even “bad”, but society has come to accept that the difference in gender and who we choose to love does not account for the people that we choose to be.

SA 21 C Breaching Experiment (Añonuevo, Bagalay, Diaz, Mendoza, Ordoñez)

1. What norm did you violate?
• The stigma on periods can be characterized as something that always has been universal. It is always perceived as something “unpleasant”, “repulsive”, and something that should generally only be discussed in private. What some people fail to acknowledge, however, that this subject is also a matter of personal hygiene. For this reason, the group decided to have this breaching experiment in violating the norm on personal hygiene. The group wanted to witness first-hand the breach on this social norm.
2. Describe the breaching experiment in detail. What was the activity? Where did you do it?
• The breaching experiment was done in a crowded place where a lot of different age groups, but most especially, the young adults, spend time in. The target place was UP Town Center which is a large hub for students and young working people alike.
• The activity involved placing the act of deviance in a crowded section of the mall, like in the escalators, the pathways near the restaurants and the crowded clothing stores to get as many reactions as possible.
• One of the group members will be the target stimuli and will pose as a girl who stained her pants because of her period, this involved the use of food coloring. Another group mate walks behind the target to record the reactions and a another individual walks with the target to take note of the close contact reactions that might not have been caught by the camera.
3. What were the different reactions of the people? List all possible reactions you observed. Why do you think they reacted this way? What caused these reactions? Did the deviant act re-affirm/reinforce the existing norms based on these reactions?
• Most of the people ignored the stimuli, this might be because they were too involved with what’s going on with themselves that they didn’t have time to notice the deviance, especially in such a place as crowded as a mall.
• It is interesting to note however, that a large majority of those who did take notice were the young people. The people from the older age group barely looked at the stimuli.
• There were multiple occasions that people stared at the stain and laughed. This reaction involves the negative and informal sanctioning of the deviance. It might be important to note too that the more pronounced reactions came from ones in twos or in larger groups. This might be coming from the peer adherence/pressure principle to involve oneself with the sanctioning when in part of a group.
• The only one who approached the stimuli was a young woman. She expressed concern for the target. This reaction may be rooted in that there is a sense of “relation” with another girl because there is “sympathy”. Coming from the same age group and the same gender, there is a need and a driving principle of the norms that was imbedded in the girl so that she took it upon herself to respond to the deviance head-on.
4. Aside from the norms, what sociological themes are at play for people to react in a certain way? Is it a function of gender, social class, values/beliefs of institutions?
• The breaching experiment was actually heavily reliant on the gender principle. The sociological theme of gender played a heavy role in determining who will react to the norm more and who would take the initiative. The age group was also a big factor in determining who again will take action and react in a more pronounced manner. The theme of gender, as expected, created a space for the woman to act in accordance to the deviance that she saw. Concern that stems from the shared and common experience of periods might have pushed women to react more strongly to the point of intervention.
5. How did you feel when you did this experiment? How does it feel to deviate from the norms? Were you hesitant to do the activity?
• Target Stimuli: “It was really hard to do at first because for as long as I can remember periods have always held this stigma in our society. Being seen with a period stain is ‘unladylike’ or ‘kadiri’, so to walk around an extremely public and populated space with a bright red stain on my jeans made me really conscious. However, after a while admittedly it started to become fun, especially since not a lot of people paid attention to it.”
• Target Stimuli: “It honestly felt weird at first, since I’ve never really deviated from any kind of norm before. However, I realized that a lot of people are too absorbed with themselves and their own lives -- making sure they themselves were conforming and not deviating from the norms -- to worry about someone who was.”
• Target Stimuli: “Yes, I was hesitant in doing the activity. It took me about 10 minutes to get out of the restroom and actually start doing the project.”
6. Other observations and analysis that you may have on the activity or deviance in general.
• The breaching experiment was limited to shoppers in UP Town Center which limited the participants to the higher social classes. Because of this, the reaction of lower classes was not observed and therefore possibly making it different from what was observed from the video.
• People chose to simply stare at the stimulant rather than perform any actions to address the situation.
• Showing apathy towards an unusual situation has become the norm.

SA 21- B Africa, Chan, Garcia, Macatulad, Trinidad, Yu

1.      What norm did you violate?

-          Proper etiquette while eating in public (e.g., way of eating, way of sitting, behavior inside the restaurant)

2.      Describe the breaching experiment in detail? What was the activity? Where did you do it?

-          Where: Kenny Rogers (to focus on the reactions of people in the middle to upper classes), and Jollibee (to focus on the reactions of people in the lower to middle class)

-          Activity: Deviance to “proper” eating etiquette

-          Did not sit properly (1 chair - backwards, 1 chair - sideways)

-          Used our hands while eating

-          Did not use a spoon while eating ice cream and drank directly from the cup

-          Ordered food or asked for something in the counter while holding the whole plate and eating

-          Walked around the restaurant while holding the whole plate and eating

3.      What were the different reactions of the people? List all possible reactions you observed. Why do you think they reacted this way? What caused these reactions? Did the deviant act re-affirm/reinforce the existing norms based on these reactions?

-          Kenny Rogers

-          Reactions:

-          When I first turned my chair backwards, people beside me reacted differently. People stared at me, probably wondering why I did it.

-          While eating with my hands, the waitress in the cafe smiled and laughed at me.

-          When I walk around while eating, a waiter approached me. They thought that I was having problems with my dish.

-          Then, for the second time, another waiter approached me. He was collecting my plate.

-          Insights:

-          The staff and customers of Kenny Rogers probably reacted this way because they hold proper eating etiquette with high regard. This includes eating with utensils, sitting down properly, and etc.

-          They view this as a social norm, and people who sway from this are regarded as deviants and are judged appropriately.

-          Jollibee

-          Reactions:

-          Customers were indifferent when we ate using our hands and our chairs turned backwards.

-          The waiters even offered tissue.

-          Insights:

-          The staff and customers of Jollibee probably reacted this way because they were used to this kind of behavior.

-          Another reason could be that they honestly did not care.

-          They do not hold much importance to “proper” eating etiquette and do not regard them as a social norm.

-          The familial/kiddy vibe of Jollibee probably also contributed to the fact that our behavior came across as something they are used to (because kids are there all the time).

4.      Aside from the norms, what sociological themes are at play for people to react in a certain way? Is it a function of gender, social class, values/beliefs of institutions?

-          Other sociological themes at play were social class expectations.

-          We conducted the experiment in Kenny Rogers and Jollibee precisely to see the difference in social class expectations.

-          Kenny Rogers, being a more high-end restaurant than Jollibee, expects a sense of “class” from its customers.

-          Also, customers eating in Kenny Rogers expect to interact with people from the same social class with the same social graces and etiquette.

-          To do the simple act of turning one’s chair backwards in a more high-end restaurant definitely turns heads.

-          Furthermore, the staff in Kenny Rogers normally deal with middle to high class customers and have certain expectations on how they must act, hence the reaction of the waiters.

-          Jollibee, on the other hand, caters to low to middle class customers, which comprise the bulk of the population.

-          Customers expect few or no social eating etiquette, hence their indifference.

-          In turn, the Jollibee staff does not expect any form of eating etiquette from their customers.

-          In summary, the different social class expectations in the two restaurants drive people’s reactions towards social deviance.

5.      How did you feel when you did this experiment? How does it feel to deviate from the norms? Were you hesitant to do the activity?

-          It was embarrassing since people were looking at you

-          It was also embarrassing to deviate from the norms because you know that people will judge you

-          Hesitant at first because the activity we’re going to do is not normal like you know that some people will look at you and judge you because that’s not the proper way of behaving in a restaurant

-          Even though people do not notice that you’re eating differently, you can’t help but be conscious about yourself because you don’t normally act that way, and that might be why we are embarrassed or hesitant to do the experiment even in establishments like Jollibee.

6.      Other observations and analysis that you may have on the activity and on deviance in general.

-          People become deviants as others define them that way.

-          Eating with one’s hands and not exercising “proper” eating etiquette may be classified as deviant from the perspective of Kenny Roger’s staff and clientele, yet are openly welcomed or not noticed at all in Jollibee. 

PHOTOS