social influence

Question 1

social influence

Answer 1

other people make deliberate attempts to persuade us

BUT

we are still susceptible to social influences even when others are not necessarily trying to influence us

Question 2

majority influence

Answer 2

(conformity)

Social influence resulting from exposure to the opinions of a majority
or the majority of one’s group

(Hewstone 2015)

Question 3

minority influence

Answer 3

(innovation)

Situation in which either an individual or a group in a numerical
minority can influence the majority

(Hewstone 2015)

Question 4

social norms definition

Answer 4

belief systems about how (not) to behave, that
guide behaviour, but without the force of laws, and reflect group
members’ shared expectations about typical or desirable activities

Question 5

social norms key features

Answer 5

not enforced by law

shared expectations by group members

vital for social life

important mechanism for explaining why people act similarly

Question 6

Muzafer Sherif study procedure

Answer 6

used autokinetic effect (ambiguous stimuli)

asked groups of male participants to determine how much the ligh had moved

the light had never moved (it just looks a bit like it did when you close your eyes)

Ps are very unsure what to answer

Question 7

Muzafer Sherif study condition A

Answer 7

CONDITION A

4 sessions to judge how much the light moved

session 1: Alone
session 2-4: in a group

estimates slowly converge towards a common estimate - shows how social norms emerge in the face of uncertain, ambiguous situations

Question 8

Muzafer Sherif study condition B

Answer 8

CONDITION B

Sessions 1-3 = Group

Session 4 = Alone

Estimates alone are very similar to converged estimates from when in groups

They have internalised the group norm

Question 9

Muzafer Sherif study conclusion

Answer 9

When confronted with ambiguous physical reality >

we look to others to decide how to perceive our reality rather than simply just rely on our own perception

Others serve as a guide on how we should perceive the world

Question 10

Asch vs Sherif

Answer 10

Sherif = influence of others on our behaviour when faced with and AMBIGUOUS stimuli

Asch = influence of others on our behaviour when faced with an UNAMBIGUOUS stimuli

Question 11

Asch general procedure - the lines

Answer 11

white american males

reference line and then a card of three different lengthed lines on the right

reference line ALWAYS matches ONE of those of the right

correct response very clear

many trials = almost 0 errors

Question 12

Asch paradigm - basic experiment

Answer 12

18 trials
no. of confederates differ but often 9

p’s take turns calling out the marching line

one naive participant = last but one to call out

confederates say errors on 12/18 or 2/3rds of trials - unanimously

Question 13

Asch paradigm - basic experiment RESULTS

Answer 13

37% of response = incorrect

75% of participants made at least one error compared to 0% when alone

5% of participants conformed every time

Evidence of how conformist people can be –>
Most succumb to majority pressure at least once

Question 14

Asch paradigm - basic experiment RESULTS: alternative story

Answer 14

Keep in mind full picture

Almost all p’s resisted majority pressure at least once

Almost ⅔ of participants gave correct answers most or all of the time

Not the case every time but most of the time

Asch even said that he found more conformity than expected but the results still supported his aim to demonstrate independence

Question 15

Situational factors and group characteristics influence conformity

Answer 15

group size
unanimity
culture

Question 16

Asch: group size

Answer 16

Increased group size increases conformity up to a point and then it levels off

35% = highest the conformity rate gets

Question 17

Asch: unanimity

Answer 17

add correct dissenters

2 naive p’s OR
1 naive plus 1 confederate that gives correct answer

Dramatic drop in conformity rates - unanimity is very important

Unanimity variation:
add dissenter that gives different from the majority but still incorrect answers → this still makes majority drop

Question 18

group size reality

Answer 18

Bond 2005 - metanalysis > depends on several factors and results are inconclusive

Are they willing to go against what everyone else believes

How likely are we to be leaders and speak up?

In reality, we do not often have to be the leader but decide whether to follow the minority or the majority

• someone else makes the change first
  Who do we decide to follow?

Question 19

unanimity why?

Answer 19

When considering real life when you decide to dissent - it makes it so much easier for others to dissent too → this leads to opposition

1 disagreement = more disagreements - encourages expression of alternative perspectives

Question 20

asch: culture

Answer 20

Many replications cross-culturally → meta-analysed = effect is replicated across various cultures

Degree of conformity differs depending on some cultural characteristics:

Collectivist cultures show greater conformity compared to individualistic

Western - Northern American, UK, West Europe: lower degree of conformity

Non-western - higher degree

140 studies - vast majority (100) came from US → need more cross-cultural research

Question 21

culture why?

Answer 21

Induvidualsitic: more emphasis on being independent; separate from others

Collectivist: more emphasis on maintaining social harmony

People manage social relationships differently

Question 22

how do we conform? Asch post experiment interviews: independent p’s

Answer 22

• were confident the others were wrong
• tension and doubt were prevalent –> feeling discomfort and incorrect but felt obliged to answer truthfully

we often think people are brave and fearless but this is unreasonable

Question 23

how do we conform? Asch post experiment interviews: yielding p’s

Answer 23

reasons they conformed always involved some kind of distortion:

distortion of perception
distortion of judgement
distortion of action

often fell into more than one group

Question 24

distortion of perception

Answer 24

• rare
• yielding without awareness

Thought they answered truthfully based on their perception, no recognition of conformity

Question 25

distortion of judgement

Answer 25

- Aware their is a clash between their own perception and that of others - not confident about their own answers and think maybe the others have better judgments

Question 26

distortion of action

Answer 26

- Aware of the clash between their own perception and that of others - Do not think they're wrong - conform to fit in and not stand out

Question 27

theoretical explanations for conformity

Answer 27

informational social influence normative social influence referent informational influence

Question 28

informational social influence

Answer 28

Deutsch and Gerard 1955 - accept information as evidence of reality - goal is to make accurate and valid judgements - if valid explanation - should find conformity more likely when we are confronted with ambiguous stimulus situations --> because others help us understand reality better

Question 29

informational social influence: evidence support

Answer 29

Sherif (1936) Autokinetic study on norm function Meta-analysis of Asch-Like experiments where the lines were closer in length (more ambiguity) - conformity = higher

Question 30

Normative social influence

Answer 30

Deutsch and Gerard 1955 - 'to conform with the positive expectations of another' - need for social approval/harmony - compliance (public) without acceptance (private)

Question 31

Normative social influence: evidence

Answer 31

Asch variation of original experiment: - naive p’s write down their answers instead of say them outloud - hear everyone say their incorrect answers but does not have to show them they disagree → conformity drops to 12.5%

Question 32

Normative social influence: evidence Deutsch and Gerard 1955

Answer 32

had either ambiguous or unambiguous stimuli (high uncertainty vs low uncertainty) high = judge after lines are removed from view - rely on memory low = judge as they see it THEN ALSO HAD degree of group pressure: - private & anonymous - face to face - face to face AND told group accuracy is Important results: Face-to-face = ^ conformity than private - showcasing a fear of not fitting in (normative) F2F AND group accuracy = biggest increase in accuracy - pressure to reply more on group when accuracy is important

Question 33

referent informational influence

Answer 33

- who the group is MATTERS for us to decide if we want to follow them: people like us = we are more likely to follow different to us = we are less likely to follow We seek to maximise our similarity with our in-group We seek to maximize our differences with our out-group

Question 34

referent information influence

Answer 34

Ambrams 1990 either ingroup or outgroup and either private or public - do we want to gain approval Majority by an ingroup = increase conformity* when they have to give answers in public (want to gain approval) Majority by outgroup = decrease conformity* - when they have to give answers in public (want to maximise difference) *compared to when answering in private

Question 35

minority influence

Answer 35

Hewstone 2015 situation in which either an individual or a group in numerical minority can influence the majority IMPORTANT FOR ACHEIVING SOCIAL CHNAGE

Question 36

minority influence and majority influence

Answer 36

if majority was all powerful --> we would all think the same reality: societies are marked by innovation & change minorities too have influence but they lack power so how?

Question 37

4 behavioural styles important for minority/social influence

Answer 37

Moscovici 1. consistency - over time AND between members 2. investment - significant personal or material sacrifice 3. autonomy - no ulterior motives 4. rigidity - not dogmatic, yet consistent

Question 38

consistency

Answer 38

all say the same things as eachother AND over time → for the audience this consistency inspires certainty and confidence in the position, which elicits trust

Question 39

Investment

Answer 39

readiness to sacrifice themselves in order to uphold their beliefs - investment = attention and respect → personal investment in to the cause - why are these people going to such great lengths? Lets listen and reconsider

Question 40

Autonomy

Answer 40

less likely to open up to a minorities position if we think they are not acting autonomously , i.e., they are being paid or manipulated by authorities/outside agents Real life example: political authorities attempt to delegitimise movements by coming up with conspiracy theories about these people being paid by external agents

Question 41

Rigidity

Answer 41

not dogmatic, complete rigidity and no flexibility can backfire > need a happy medium

Question 42

Moscovici: conversion theory

Answer 42

When minorites present deviant views > they provoke us and create a psychological conflict within us As they insist on their views they can get on our nerves - we want to reject it but we definitely can no longer ignore it in some cases we then begin to lisiten and internalise the views > changing out beliefs

Question 43

minority influence is qualitatively different

Answer 43

majorities = introduce compliance through comparison processes - they do not need to win us over --> we agree with them through fear of ostracization, rather than bc we genuinely agree with their views minorities = we think about the reasons behind our views - they push us to re-examine them --> initiating change on a private level --> validation majority that show consensus = not much attention minority that disagree - think more deeply

Question 44

dual process model of social change

Answer 44

Moscovici majority and minority influence operate differently majority: induces compliance (public conformity) through comparison processes (low attention) minority: private change through cognitive conflict and restructuring through validation processes (high attention)

Question 45

evidence for dual process of social influence: original Blue-green study

Answer 45

4 naive and 2 confederates(minority) all slides were blue but varied in intensity consistent condition: confederates called all slides green inconsistent condition: confederates called 2/3 slides green results consistent: 8% call green inconsistent: less than 2%

Question 46

follow up study: colour thresholds

Answer 46

would they show a genuine change in perception? (test to see if 8% were acting due to social desirability) Participants exposed to the minority have a lower threshold for green compared to the control participants Shows a lasting effect of exposure - true for both experimental groups Greater amongst p’s who did not change their opinion in public > Indirect delayed effects of minority influence, change in private, perceptual level Shows conversion process explained earlier

Question 47

Blue-green study comparing minority and majority influence directly

Answer 47

5 conditions 3x minority > Consistent 2/6 inconsistent 2/6 Consistent 1/6 2x majority > Unanimous 3/4 non-unanimous 4/6 (one dissenter) results: minority: - only changed opinions when confronted with a consistent minority majority: - much larger effect p especially when unanimous (40%) BUT only the consistent minority shifted p's colour thresholds CONCLUSIONS?

Question 48

Indirect/latent effects

Answer 48

Minority influence may not successfully change your opinion on the exact thing they are trying to influence BUT may change your opinion of something related to it

Question 49

abortion and indirect/latent effects

Answer 49

Perez Mugny 1987 exposed to a pro-abortion message portrayed as a majority OR minority position results: - no minority influence on attitudes towards abortion BUT - increase in support for birth control *an indirect change on a related issue

Question 50

gay and military and indirect/latent effects

Answer 50

Alvaro Crano 1997 exposed to a position advocating that gay people serve in the military portrayed as a majority OR minority position results: - no change on related issues - increased opposition to gun control

Question 51

Study: How profound and deep is the change that minority influence has? After-image effects

Answer 51

After image effects: stare at colour and then look at white screen --> should see the opposite of that colour so: blue - yellow green - magenta Results: - those exposed to perceptual minority = saw purple → sugests minority influence can change your very perception at a neural level (not just social) > however never been replicated since

Question 52

wood et al minorities and indirect measures

Answer 52

Directly: minorities < majorities Indirectly: minorities = majorities Indirect = like abortion increased birth control

Question 53

systematic processes

Answer 53

we decide whether we will be persuaded based on how strong we think the arguments are - requires deep, effortful form of cognitive processing

Question 54

heuristic processes

Answer 54

not content or strength but superficial features in the way the message is conveyed e.g. more persuaded if a celebrity says it fast low effort

Question 55

minority or majority better for processes

Answer 55

inconsistent findings we do not know

Question 56

source-context-elaboration model theory

Answer 56

Martin and Hewston 2008 persuasion depends on how much a message pushes us towards cognitive elaboration > to actually think about it

Question 57

source-context-elaboration model elements

Answer 57

elaboration = thinking about the message low elaboration > heuristic > favours the majority high elaboration > systematic > favours neither intermediate elaboration > conversion theory > systematic processing of minority view

Question 58

elaboration

Answer 58

thinking about the message > different situations allow/encourage more/less elaboration e.g., personal relevance

Question 59

processing for a highly personal, relevant issues

Answer 59

we are more likely to process it cognitively and think about whether we are persuaded or not > we can be persuaded by the minority or the majority depending on the argument

Question 60

processing for low personal relevance issues

Answer 60

we go on to heuristics - low elaboration modes to decide weather we are going to be convinced or not e.g. she's pretty i'll vote for her

Question 61

intermediate personal relevance

Answer 61

most common scenario - social influence experiments mimic this - argue this where conversion theory is relevant > more likely to process the minority influence

Question 62

If we disagree with the majority

Answer 62

> this is stressful and we will adopt convergent thinking - narrow thinking

Question 63

If we disagree with the minority

Answer 63

> not stressful and allows for considering other opinions - divergent thinking

Question 64

group membership and referent informational influence

Answer 64

minorities often belong to an outgroup we are more likely to be persuaded by our ingroups minorities are more likely to be influenced by in-group minorities than out-group minorities because we distance ourselves from out groups

Question 65

prototypical behaviour and social influence

Answer 65

we are effected by how prototypical we consider than minority to be - e.g. if they are popular, well respected or liked within the group

Question 66

Nemeth difference between majority and minority influence is the AMOUNT of thinking

Answer 66

majority > anxiety > narrow focus on the message minority > relaxed > broader, divergent thinking