Social Influence Flashcards
(42 cards)
1
Q
Jonestown
A
- Established the Peoples Temple, which was founded on principles of Christianity, communism, and equality
- Closed off community, family members of Jonestown members’ were concerned leading to US congressman coming to town to check up on them
- Only a couple individuals wanted to come back but as they were boarding the plan, some town members shot them and killed them all
- Rev. Jones said it was time for a revolutionary suicide and all the towns members drank cyanide laced punch, making sure the children did so first, with little resistance
- WHY
2
Q
Social Influence
A
Effects of other people on an individual’s beliefs, attitudes, values, or behaviour; history replete with ppl doing unexpected things because of social influence
3
Q
Types of Social Influence
A
- Social learning
- Conformity
- Compliance
- Obedience
4
Q
Social Learning
A
The capacity to learn from observing others; we can either be encouraged or discouraged from engaging in both new or known behaviours
5
Q
Albert Bandura’s Observational Learning
A
- Behaviourism had issues with explaining people learning things that seemingly increased or decreased behaviours but did not engage in them
- Psychodynamics at the time had brought up catharsis (the release of pressure built up from impulses)
- Social modeling was considered, where a social display may lead to people doing the same without question
- Bandura wanted to know whether that was the case for good and bad behaviour and whether social display was rooted in social acceptance
6
Q
Bandura’s Bobo Doll
A
- With this experiment, children who saw nurses being aggressive towards the doll mimicked their behaviour and even found new ways to be aggressive, as opposed to children who were not exposed to such actions and did not do anything similar
- This demonstrated learning without first engaging in the behaviour (operant conditioning) and opposed catharsis, as rather than letting off steam by watching someone be aggressive, it actually lead to increased aggression, as ppl learned to model aggression
- There were clear implications for media and learning (movies, video games, sports, etc.)
7
Q
Conformity
A
- Seen with the elevator video
- Altering behaviours or beliefs to bring them in accordance with others; quite powerful
- Questions on whether it is a good or bad thing, due to having negative connotations but potentially having a function
8
Q
Why do people conform?
A
- Informational Influence, where conformity is produced when a person believes others are correct in their judgement, as they themselves lack knowledge on the specific context
- Normative Influence, where conformity is produced when a person wants to fit in or fears the negative consequences of appearing deviant, rather than being unsure on what to do
9
Q
Two Types of Conformity Produced by Sources of Influence
A
- Private Conformity: Change in beliefs when a person truly accepts the position taken by others (moreso informational)
- Public Conformity: Superficial change in behaviour produced by real or imagined group pressure w/o changing in opinion internally (moreso normative)
10
Q
Autokinetic Study
A
- Sherif had participants in a dark room and asked them how much a dot flashing on and off was moving (autokinetic illusion, as it was not actually moving although it seemed so)
- Sherif conducted studies examining how groups influence behaviour by shaping how reality is perceived
- Participants first had to do the task individually and then sit with others and make the same estimates
- Individual judgements soon became group norm and normed influenced perception
- A year later, similar estimates were revealed when tested individually
11
Q
When do we conform to informational social influence?
A
- When the situation is ambiguous
- When there is a crisis
- When others. are experts
(like prof’s example on earthquakes)
12
Q
Normative Social Influence
A
- Conforming in order to be liked and accepted or to fulfill other’s expectations; this type of conformity results in public compliance (but not private acceptance) of the group’s beliefs and behaviours
- Conformity when we use others to know how to fit in, primarily when desire to fit in is high
13
Q
Social Pressure Study (Asch 1951)
A
- Room full of confederates with only one participant
- Always easy questions, starts with everyone saying the right answer
- Then confederates started all saying wrong answer and participant was confused and would say the same even though he knew it was not correct
- 75% of the participants conformed at least once giving an answer they knew to be wrong, not to learn anything rather due to social pressure
14
Q
Factors affecting conformity
A
- Group size
- Group unanimity
- Culture
- Gender
- Individual differences
- Age differences
15
Q
Group Size
A
- Not surprisingly, size of the group matters with larger groups exerting more influence; however, effects of group size level off quickly (after about 4-5)
- Important to see the group’s opinion as independent; in fact two groups of two are more effective than one group of four (all independently doing the same thing is more powerful)
16
Q
Group Unanimity
A
- Even having one other dissenter reduces conformity by almost 80%
- They do not have to share the same opinion or appear competent
- Appears that any dissent can reduce normative pressure
17
Q
Culture
A
- People in collectivistic societies tend to conform more than those in individualistic societies
- A review of 133 studies worldwide shows conformity rates vary considerably (from 18% to 60%) across culture, in terms of normative conformity, with more individualistic cultures being less likely to conform and more collectivistic cultures being the opposite
- Slight decline in conformity w/in the US over time
18
Q
Gender
A
- Weak gender differences in conformity, but even this tendency only in public conformity
- Effects are moderated by content of the judgement issue (blend of normative and informational influence), such that women tend to conform more in stereotypically male domains and men in more stereotypically female domains
19
Q
Individual differences
A
- People with a strong sense of self (high SE, high personal/achievement motivation, high leadership ability, and minimal concern about others’ judgements) conform less
- However only a weak effect
20
Q
Age differences
A
- Conformity especially high among teens (ages 14-15)
- Among adults 18-85 years of age, conformity tends to slightly decrease with age (the older you are, the less likely you are to conform)
21
Q
Compliance
A
- Changes in behaviour elicited by direct requests from others
- Different strategies for compliance that rely on various psychological processes
22
Q
Compliance Techniques
A
- Foot in the Door
- Free Gift
- Door in the Face
- Liking
- Scarcity
- That’s Not All
- Low Balling
23
Q
Foot in the Door
A
- Compliance technique in which one makes an initial small request followed by a larger request involving the behaviour of interest
- Exs: Asking to sign a petition and then requesting a donation; researchers found that only 17% of ppl agreed to display a ‘Drive Safely’ billboard on their lawn, but 55% complied when they first agreed to stick 3 inch sign on a window or sign petition; only 22% of women complied with request to take inventory of their homes, 53% complied when first agreed to answer questions about household items
24
Q
Why does Foot in the Door Cause Compliance
A
- When ppl comply with a small request, they may engage in self perception process of seeing themselves as helpful and become motivated to maintain self image when second request is made
- After agreeing to an initial request, ppl may feel that refusing a second one would be a public inconsistency, especially if high in preference of consistency
25
Free Gift
- Giving a small gift to someone or doing a small favour increases the likelihood to complying w a subsequent request (charities sending out solicited gifts to potential donors)
- Rooted in norm of reciprocity
26
Norm of Reciprocity
- Norm dictating that ppl should provide benefits to those who benefit them (same applies to negative stuff)
- Exs: over 20% of strangers returned X'mas card; participants bought twice as many raffle tickers from confederate when they were given a free drink by same person; ppl tip better when receiving a thank you message or candy with the bill
- However, desire to reciprocate wears off with time
27
Why does Free Gift Cause Compliance
- Situations in which receiving a gift from different person may lead to compliance because of positive mood (although almost 70% of participants complied with request to relay a message immediately after receiving a gift, only 45% did 10 minutes after receiving the gift and only about 10% more than 20 minutes after receiving gift)
- Feeling good (elicited by good music, food, feedback, etc.) generally leads to greater compliance (requests for blood, experimental participation, donating to charity, etc.)
28
Door in the Face
- Making a very large request that one will certainly refuse and then following that with a more modest request
- Subsequent request tends to be seen as a concession (social negotiation) that the target feels obliged to honour (study found 17% of students were willing to chaperone a group of juvenile delinquents on a trip to the zoo, but 50% complied when it was first prefaced by request to counsel delinquents for 2 hours a week over the next two years
29
Why does Door in the Face Cause Compliance
- Technique may be effective because pressure to respond to change in position of the requester; the second request may be seen as a concession on their part requiring concession on ours (reciprocal concession)
- Also perceptual contrast between two requests may be at play
- Technique works best when request is large but not enough to be considered illegitimate, requests are made close to each other in time, and by the same person
30
Liking
- People are more likely to comply with requests from those who are likeable, similar or attractive
- Exs: only 28% of ppl agreed to request for making collections for an orphanage when simply asked, but 68% agreed after a brief friendly conversation; similarly, ppl more likely to comply w request for assistance or donation when sharing a date or birth or first name
31
Scarcity
- Strategy in which appeal of item increased by making it appear rare or temporary
- Exs: retail stores boost sales using limited time messages; cookie rated as more desirable when taken from a jar w 2 cookies than 10 cookies; ppl more likely to purchase an item when told in limited supply
32
That's Not All
- Strategy in which something is added as a bonus or reduced as a discount from the original offer
- Exs: salesperson offering a 'free' bonus or discount on product even before chance to respond; 44% of participants told that cupcakes cost 75 cents bought them compared to 73% of participants told that it was a dollar that was reduced to 75 cents; 40% bought cupcake and two cookies when sold all at once for 75 cents but over 70% did when sold cupcake w two bonus cookies
33
Lowballing Technique
- Strategy in which the person secures agreement w a request, but then increases the size of the request by revealing hidden costs
- Exs: car dealer getting agreement at lower rate then increasing price later on; asked to participate at 7 AM vs asked to participate then told its at 7 AM; similar effects found in many domains including fundraising and reducing harmful habits like smoking
34
Why does Lowballing Cause Compliance
- Once ppl make a commitment to smth, they focus on its positive aspects and see choice more favourably (cognitive dissonance process and spreading of alternatives)
- Once ppl make a public commitment to a course of action, they feel obligated to follow through
35
Obedience
- Behaviour change produced by the commands of authority
- In many ways, social order depends on respect to authority, but it also creates vulnerability to destructive social influence (WWII)
- Milgram studies classic in area, but later replicated by others
36
Milgram's (1963) Obedience Study
- Teachers believe they are delivering shocks to learner (appear to be RA to the roles)
- Every time the learner gets a wrong answer, he gets a shock that increases in intensity (0-450 volts)
- Strongly encouraged by the experimenter to continue, even when the learner protests
- First drop outs happen after moderate shocks and more happen but after intense shocks the curve flattens out, almost like a no point of return
37
Milgram's Obedience Study - Normative social influence
He says "it is absolutely necessary that you continue" so they think "I did commit to doing this study, what will he think of me if I mess up his study now"
38
Milgram's Obedience Study - Informational social influence
Because the situation is ambiguous/novel, we are unsure and so we look to the expert/experimenter (You think... "he must know what he is doing otherwise the study would not be running")
39
Milgram's Obedience Study - Different Studies
- Baseline (the OG): 63% obedience
- Admin: 93%
- Heart trouble: 65%
- Sketchy lab: 48%
- Visual proximity (w learner): 40%
- Touch proximity (w learner): 30%
- Phone (experimenter takes a call and leaves): 21%
- Clerk (present): 20%
- Two defiant confederates: 10%
40
Milgram's Obedience Study - Explanations other than info and norm social influences
- We are socialized to obey
- Increased in small increments and each increase in volts was a small step towards self-perception and self-justification for actions
- Hard to say no to authority figure; hard to face and challenge situational norms
- on automatic pilot to obey experimenter; we may adhere to norms in mindless ways and fast-paced environments like labs do not allow for much thought
- Not evil people, just people in bad situation
41
Cross-Cultural Differences in Obedience
- Replications conducted in 1980s and even 1990s in Spain, Austria, Germany, South Africa, Jordan, Scotland, Australia, India, Netherlands, Canada and Puerto Rico
- Evidence of even higher rates of obedience in most countries compared to the US
- No gender differences observed across studies
- Recent replications in the US have found high obedience rates similar to OG work
- However, slightly less obedience than OG work (70% went until 150V vs 82.5%)
42
Obedience to Authority
- Although tempting to dismiss findings as not applicable to ourselves, we mustn't ignore that participants did not wish to cause harm or mindlessly obey
- Evidence that participants avoided harm as best they thought possible (independently gave little shock, only 2.5% gave max shock on their own, did not shock when conflicting experimenter orders, etc.)
- Almost all called experimenter's attention to suffering or implicitly pleaded to stop
- Many got out of chair or asked to stop before continuing, showing internal conflicts
- Illustration of indecisive disobedience more than blind obedience (but indecision is what lead to obedience)
