Intro to Social Influnce Flashcards

Question

how does attitude strength come into play?

Answer 1

weak attitudes can be unstable overtime, vulnerable to persuasion, and are unlikely to influence behaviour ex: i might say i like the oilers but i don't really care so i could be persuaded and i don't like them enough to ever watch a full game strong attitudes are enduring and consequential, they come to memory easier and people tend to have strong attitudes for things personally relevant ex: im trans and obviously am against anti-trans legislation, i know a lot about the bs policies and it influences my behaviour like not endorsing JK rowlling bc shes a terf

Answer 2

Extremity-casual fan of scara vs me(extreme) strength/weakness-i cannot be dissuaded from scara nation, i know all his lore (strong) positivity/negativity-i love him, how could i ever hate him (pos)`

Answer 3

serve as a guide/expectation for behaviours/social interactions also applicable to attitudes, values, and cognitions they describe and prescribe behaviour, can be universal like the norm of reciprocity, or local, like being quiet in a library

Answer 4

perceptions of which behaviors are typically performed, inferred by observation, these normative beliefs can be inaccurate but still guide behaviour ex: seeing people lining up for coffee and joining the line if you also want coffee

Answer 5

perceptions of which behaviours are approved or disapproved of, what is acceptable violations may lead to disapproval or social sanctions ex: we SHOULD line up in order of who got there first but realistically you could cut the line-it's not illegal, but this may prompt someone to yell at you (that being the social sanction)

Answer 6

disagreement between a group over important social norms can induce uncertainty and lead to a schism, forming a new group ex: debates on what a family is, some ppl think the nuclear family is the only valid option

Answer 7

they can influence behaviour directly via things like conformity but they also help empower leaders that best embody group norms ex: you would probably want the leader of the art club be an artist that practices often and is good at what they do and passionate too

Answer 8

people conforming to the group ex: saving energy only bc you think your neighbours are

Answer 9

try not to draw attention to a descriptive norm you are trying to discourage (like littering) more likely to influence if the descriptive and injunctive norms are aligned

Answer 10

the one that is the most salient/people are aware of, seems international students don't know where to stand on the escalator but some evidence that injunctive norms may be more robust and long-lasting than descriptive norms since they are more setting based, ex: if recycling encouraged at home, more likely to recycle everywhere

Answer 11

internalized standards that we have adopted as a guide for our own behaviour ex: caleb thinks jorking it in the morning is wrong but i don't

Answer 12

descriptions of common behaviors but lacking moral weight or social sanction there is no consequence to buying an unpopular toothpaste

Answer 13

1. altering the social/physical environment so people directly observe the social norm ex: being in a dirty environment makes ppl more prone to littering, seeing certain candy wrappers in the trash make you more likely to eat that candy 2. communicate normative info via oral/written messages (often on mass media) ex: the majority of your neighbours conserve energy, can backfire if the person already does more than the norm

Answer 14

social proofs are especially powerful when people are uncertain, people tend to look to others for guidance people that are more uncertain identify with groups, esp more entitative/groupy groups uncertainty increases physiological arousal and stress responses, identifying with a group can reduce this

Answer 15

the more an issue or behavior is personally relevant, the less influential social norms are the more cognitive resources are available, the less influential social norms are (usually) social norms operate heuristically

Answer 16

widespread misperception of the attitudes and behaviours prevalent in one's group due to the public misinterpretation of private attitudes ex: people thinking that 90% of uni students binge drink when in reality only 10% do conservative lag-widespread change in attitude but not followed by behaviour change - american civil rights movement but ppl still racist liberal leap-widespread change in behaviour not followed by attitude change - the sexual revolution of the 60/70s, conform behavior to attitude

Answer 17

when in an emergency bystanders are less likely to help someone in need bc others are present

Answer 18

1. notice something is wrong 2. define situation as an emergency 3. decide whether you are personally responsible to act 4. choose how to help 5. help

Answer 19

the biggest issue is uncertainty, people look to others for cues when they don't know what to do and if the situation is ambiguous then it does not look like an emergency make the emergency known, ask specific people for help and tell them how they can help

Answer 20

informational influence and normative influence

Answer 21

desire to make a correct interpretation of reality and behave correctly, looking for social proof, accuracy goals people believe that the group is more correct than they are we want to be accurate and other people's behaviours and attitudes can be useful ex: most people know the earth is round, kids that don't fully understand go along with it bc they want to be right

Answer 22

desire to obtain social approval from others and be accepted, affiliation goals believing there are social rewards for conformity people pleasing behaviour, like me just going a long with being a girl sometimes

Answer 23

conformity can be an automatic thing in any social setting this effect is when we mimic the mannerisms, facial expressions, or vocal characteristics of the person we are interacting with happens outside of consciousness, we are all mimicking each other, helps with building rapport and as "social glue" in relationships it's a pro social behaviour and attempting to block it impedes emotional recognition, making a facial expression helps us better empathize, NORMATIVE influence

Answer 24

larger group=more conformity, to an extent at some point the group becomes big enough and seen as a monolith rather than individuals, 5 being the min number of people for max results in the window study(idk generalizability)

Answer 25

people are more likely to conform with ingroup members even when the group is immoral or the ingroup is not meaningful (like randomly assigned groups) identifying strongly with an ingroup increases the likelihood of conforming to their norms, high identifiers feeling positive emotions

Answer 26

when the minority affects the majority ex: 2 friends that can't eat meat affect where the whole friend group is likely to meet for lunch most social changes start as a minority view like open practices in psychology

Answer 27

can have powerful conformity effects, asch line study deviance can lead to ridicule

Answer 28

1. it slows down group decisions/progress, making it harder to act and move forward 2. ingroup deviants threaten our own social identity, the groups we identify with help us understand our own identity (social identity theory) they interfere with intragroup unanimity and can pose a threat to the whole group, deviants threaten the validity of ingroup norms

Answer 29

tight cultures have strong social norms and a low tolerance of deviant behaviour, germany, pakistan, singapore they tend to be nations that have encountered more threats, such as natural disasters, war, etc... they also are more likely to have autocratic leadership that suppresses dissent, less open media, and less crime

Answer 30

weaker social norms and a greater tolerance of deviant behaviour, brazil, netherlands, new zealand generally more permissive and open, people here will be less likely to listen to the walk/stop signs

Answer 31

deviant/disloyal members of the ingroup are derogated more than outgroup members engaging in the same behaviour helps preserve ingroup members positive evaluations of the group, greater when there is uncertainty, ppl strongly identify with the group, injunctive norms are salient, deviant is a 'full' group member, the group is very entitative

Answer 32

information that is shared by group members is more favoured and disproportionately influential especially when the group is large and there is more info

Answer 33

a way to test if there is shared information bias in a group there is a right choice that can only be reached if all the people share what they know and not just what is known by all the members

Answer 34

the group spends more time talking about shared info, easier and invites less conflict if what is being discussed is common knowledge

Answer 35

assign "experts" on topics and allow their status as expert to be known by all members of the group prior to discussion give instructions that emphasize the importance of considering all available info encourage lower-status members to share time limits increase the urgency to discuss everything fewer decision alternatives lessen the effect too

Answer 36

ignoring and excluding someone from the group fear of this can increase conformity ostracism hurts, brain areas also associated with physical pain, threatens fundamental needs of belonging,etc, worsens mood we are highly sensitive to even subtle cues of ostracism

Answer 37

even things like people in digital images not looking at the camera or being excluded from the game of cyberball affect people's mood in the same way real ostracism can

Answer 38

the anticipation or possibility of it deters deviant behaviour from the group norms, normative influence after experiencing ostracism people are more sensitive to social influence, they contribute more to public goods games ir asch line shit, increased obedience to authority, more persuaded even by low quality messages, increased compliance to donation requests, increased behavioural mimicry

Answer 39

protecting the ingroup, it is directed at deviants that can harm the group, decreases things like social loafing behaviors self reported reasons: self-perceived social norm violations

Answer 40

aggression and other antisocial responses long term ostracism can lead to alienation, depression, and helplessness

Answer 41

when an ingroup member over achieves and endorses group norms beyond what is typical (pro-norm deviants) leaders are also more tolerated as deviants when there is a group norm of individualism within a loose culture

Answer 42

accentuate the differences between ingroup and outgroup norms they do more than they need to, over achieve, derogated less than anti-norm deviants think of that one church kid that is sucking up to that thang to get religious validation

Answer 43

ingroup member veers towards outgroup norm under achiever relative to others in the ingroup, derogated more than pro-norm deviants caleb trying to stretch christianity to fit in being pan and his dad getting pissed

Answer 44

they are granted 'innovation credit' they define the norms more tolerated from an incoming leader or leaders that have a history of ingroup favor

Answer 45

some groups encourage deviance/dissent/individualism it can result as conformity to an individualist group norm that is deviant to the wider society ex: drinking with ur friends at 15, MAC and Scona kids being tryhards compared to everyone else, the whole GC being some level of trans

Answer 46

group members react more positively to ingroup criticism voiced by ingroup members compared to outgroup members the opposite of the black sheep effect seen as more constructive and legitimate rather than hateful ex: only i can be mean to the homies

Answer 47

they influence others to deviate too, its presence encourages more deviance, infectious/contagious, also prompting systematic processing seen in the asch studies where there is a deviant confederate, increased deviance like-minded deviants are often rewarded for deviance, seen as more likable/smarter/etc... the only one who sees things similarly to the participant still applicable even if people are deviant in different directions, breaking overall unanimity of the group

Answer 48

general evaluation a person has regarding other people, places, objects, issues, etc (called the attitude object)... you can have an attitude of the self too

Answer 49

it is targeted by persuasion in the active attempt to change someone's attitude but attitude can also be affects by conformity

Answer 50

most commonly via self-report rating scales of attitudes -issue with the social desirability bias/self presentation concerns -especially hard when trying to measure things like racism but it is a cheap and easy method physiological measures like EMG, ERP, fMRI Implicit measures like the IAT they help to get around social desirability concerns

Answer 51

attitude valence: positive vs negative attitude extremity: mild vs extreme attitude strength: strong vs weak

Answer 52

positive vs negative of the attitude object you can have both pos and neg things to say about the same object, ex: i like this class but not being tested a highly ambivalent attitude has a lot of both pos and neg evaluations, where a low one has a small amount of both ex: i am highly ambivalent of genshin but positive about neuvillette and scara

Answer 53

mild vs extreme the degree of deviation from neutral regardless of pos or neg ex: i really love neuvillette, extreme positive attitude

Answer 54

strong vs weak stability over time, vulnerability to persuasion, influence on behaviour and information processing how durable and impactful an attitude is, stronger ones translate into behaviour and can impact biases, more resistant to influence, are more easily accessible in memory ex: i have strong attitude on recycling, so i recycle often and am biased against people that don't so it, people can't persuade me out of this

Answer 55

when we use systematic processing to arrive at an attitude it tends to be stronger, elaboration (thinking deeply) increases strength systematic processing entails acquiring more knowledge and support for your attitude, it becomes more accessible to you, people become more confident in their attitude, more likely to translate into action

Answer 56

the feeling of confidence or conviction about an attitude, might be a component of attitude strength but this is debated when certainty is higher: it is more likely to guide behavior, more resistant to counter persuasion, more likely one will try to persuade others to adopt the same attitude

Answer 57

source uncertainty is when the sources expresses their when uncertainty, this can sometimes increase persuasion this violates expectations and stimulates deeper thinking cough elaboration, cough, systematic processing ex: seeing Katie as more credible as a prof because she admits when she doesn't know something, so when she does answer a question there is legitimacy behind it and not just BS

Answer 58

message contradictions inconsistency is not always harmful to persuasion (not always true, illusory truth effect) trusted sources can offer opposing opinions at different points, contradicting themselves, but still boosting persuasion violate expectations>more engagement with message> deeper thinking, attributional processing, why did the source do that?> greater persuasion

Answer 59

interruptions are not always harmful to persuasion ones that temporarily pause/delay the messages at the right times can increase processing and persuasiveness of the message because it impedes goal pursuit, the goal of hearing the message and makes the goal seem more attractive ex: the movie you are watching starts buffing right before the big villain reveal continuous interruptions like someone yelling in the background the whole time or take you away from the message completely are bad and will not increase persuasion

Answer 60

potential can be more persuasive than achievement framing the message in terms of high but uncertain achievement can increase message processing and persuasion by stimulating interest more exciting to ponder what this new kid with a lot of potential COULD do rather than the consistent dude that has done good but isn't as hyped up

Answer 61

how far should the message be from the target's existing attitude to be the most persuasive? moderate discrepancy is better than an extremely discrepant message that could be counter productive

Answer 62

any 2 attitudes/ an attitude and behavior can be: - irrelevant/unrelated - consonant, relates and consistent with each other - dissonant, related and inconsistent with each other ex: having a positive attitude of recycling but not recycling yourself inconsistent cognitions cause psychological tension that people want to reduce

Answer 63

this is done by bringing attitudes and behaviors more in line with each other, this can be done in multiple ways: -removing dissonant cognitions or adding new consonant ones -decrease the importance of the dissonance or increase importance of consonant ones -justifying/rationalizing behaviour -avoiding new information -selective memory trying to close this rift can lead to irrational behavior like trump supporters

Answer 64

when new information contradicts and existing belief ex: i thought wilbur soot was cool oh no

Answer 65

questioning whether you made the right choice uyghur moment with alshie and francesca can be reduced by downplaying the pros of the alternative or just trying not to think too much (bro cant do either)

Answer 66

when you put a lot of effort into a goal that doesn't turn out as expected you will try to find ways to justify the effort ex: you go to the gym for body improvement, bur progress not as linear as you had hoped> justify that you got other things from it like better mental health other ex: the sex psych class with the initiation, the ppl who underwent the severe one rated the class more highly

Answer 67

being compelled by outside forces to act against your beliefs there needs to be an aspect of free choice so there can be no large reward like lots of money, etc smaller incentive lead to greater attitude change $1 vs $20

Answer 68

condition where people freely perform an attitude-discrepant behavior without receiving a large reward ex: breaking the boycott

Answer 69

if the ingroup is clearly superior to the outgroup

Answer 70

to protect, to correct, to eject NOT DETECTION

Intro to Social Influnce Flashcards

(94 cards)