chapter 8 groups and crowds & social influence

Question 1

what happens in crowds?

Answer 1

1. emergent behaviours (what we can’t predict)
   -local rule: do what other ppl are doing
   -crowds can be smart & dumb
2. social influence (we react diff when we are around others)
   -synchronisation & coordination
   -social facilitation
   -social loafing

Question 2

emergent behaviour

Answer 2

local rules:
we do what we see others doing
if a locust is craving salt/protein, eat another locust. if being eaten, run away
results in emergent behaviour

Question 3

human herding (emergent behaviour)

Answer 3

ppl like to follow each other, ppl may gather tgt even when there is another exit

Question 4

coordination of attention (emergent behaviour)

Answer 4

e.g. ppl trying to see the person talking even though they can’t see him

exp: experimenters stood on a sidewalk & looked up
IV: no. of ind on the sidewalk looking up
DV: % of passer-by that also looked up
results: as crowd size increase, % of ppl looking up increase (but not dramatic increase)

Question 5

emergent knowledge: wisdom of crowds

Answer 5

attendees of livestock exhibition attempt to guess ox’s weight for prize
-average guess was 542.95kg
-ox weighed 543.30kg
-with a bunch of bad guesses, end up w good guess
-the good guesses offset the bad guesses
-if crowd is large enough and not systematically biased, they will be accurate as a crowd, no matter how inaccurate the typical member is
-NOT what happens in a real, physical crowd

–>crowds are smart when there is diverse info, independent opinions, no systematic bias, and large no. of ppl

Question 6

what happens when there is bias in emergent behaviour

Answer 6

it gets amplified! (many times, we form opinions & judgements but not objectively)

“telephone game” experiment involved describing an illustration of an unfriendly encounter
results: 70% of the time, the last participant reported black person in the picture to be holding the razor blade (which was inaccurate)

Question 7

synchronisation & cooperation (social influence)

Answer 7

exp: trios of subjects sang “O Canada” and move cups around
some sang/moved in sync, some out of sync
played publics goods game
results: synchronised groups donated more & reported more team spirit, perceived similarity & trust

Question 8

social facilitation (social influence)

Answer 8

ppl tend to do better o simple tasks & worse on complex tasks when in presence of others & their ind performance can be evaluated!!! (if cnt be evaluated, ppl cnt tell whether u are doing well & social facilitation may not happen)

presence of others–>ind performance can be evaluated–>evaluation aprehension–>arousal–>dominant response:
1. performance improves on a simple task (correct response)
2. performance worsens on harder task (incorrect response)

Question 9

social loafing (social influence)

Answer 9

tendency for ppl to do worse on simple tasks but better on complex tasks when they are in the presence of others & their ind performance can not be evaluated e.g. clapping after a concert

no evaluation apprehension, no arousal

Question 10

why does the presence of others cause arousal?

Answer 10

1. presence of others make us more alert (alert to the possibility that he/she will do smith that requires us to respond
2. presence of others make us apprehensive abt how we are evaluated (we will be embarrassed if we do poorly, pleased if we do well; this concern abt being judged aka evaluation apprehension, can cause arousal)
3. other ppl can be distracting (put us in a state of conflict since it is hard to pay attention to 2 things at once–>divided attention–>arousal)

Question 11

automatic conformity (social influence)

Answer 11

1. social mimicry
2. ostracism-induced mimicry

Question 12

social mimicry

Answer 12

mimicry helps to facilitate smooth interactions & increases liking between inaction partners

mimicry helps promote prosocial behaviour

Question 13

ostracism-induced mimicry

Answer 13

ppl more likely to mimic when they are ostracised–>effect is amplified when its ppl in your group ostracising you

-mimic to ingratiate ourselves in our grp
-in-group ostracism increases anxiety

Question 14

Asch Line-Judgement Studies (conformity)

Answer 14

-participants asked to judge & announce out loud which line is closest in length to the line on a card (there is a very obvious answer)
-76% of participants conformed & gave an obviously incorrect response on at least one trial
-even though other participants were strangers, the fear of being the lone dissenter was so strong that most ppl conformed

Question 15

informational social influence (conformity)

Answer 15

refers to the process in which we conform because we believe that others’ interpretation of an ambiguous set of circumstances is more accurate than ours and will help us choose an appropriate course of action
-others provide us info on how to act
-situation is ambiguous
-our motive would be attempting to understand the ambiguous set of circumstances

exp:

Question 16

when do we engage in informational social influence?

Answer 16

1. when situation is ambiguous
2. when situation is a crisis
3. when other ppl are experts

Question 17

normative social influence (controlled conformity)

Answer 17

occurs when the influence of other ppl leads us to conform in order to be liked & accepted
-dont want to risk social disapproval (even from complete strangers we will nv see again)
-others convey implicit/explicit social norms
-our motive wld be attempting to hv a sense of belonging to a certain group of ppl

Question 18

when do we engage in normative social influence?

Answer 18

1. when the group is important to us
   e.g. Conforming to a group over time earns us idiosyncrasy credits (individual’s capacity to acceptably deviate from group expectations)
2. when the group is close to us in space & time during the attempt to influence us (conformity is predicted to increase when group members are physically closer to us)
3. no. of ppl in group (size of group increase, so does normative pressure it exerts)

Question 19

private acceptance

Answer 19

refers to when we conform to others behaviour out of a genuine belief that what they are doing is right; often informational influence e.g. political conformity

Question 20

public compliance

Answer 20

refers to when we conform to others behaviour publicly, without necessarily believing in what we are doing; often normative influence

Question 21

what is compliance?

Answer 21

act of getting someone to do what u want them to do, often without changing their underlying beliefs/attitudes

5 elements to it:
1. conformity: descriptive norms (describe what others are up to)
2. consistency
3. reciprocity
4. commitment
5. authority

Question 22

role of injunctive vs descriptive norms

Answer 22

injunctive norms have to do with what we think other ppl approve/disapprove of or what ppl believe they shld do in a given situation
-motivate behaviour by promising rewards/punishments for normative/non-normative behaviour
e.g. littering is wrong/donating blood is good

descriptive norms concern our perceptions of the way ppl actually behave in a given situation
-describe the !behaviour! of others; not what is actually “right” or “wrong”
-motivate behaviour by informing ppl abt what is effective/adaptive behaviour
e.g. littering is wrong (injunctive norm) BUT ppl are likely to do it (descriptive norm)

-injunctive norms more powerful than descriptive norms in producing desirable behaviour
-anyth that highlights injunctive norms can be used to create positive behavioural change

Question 23

injunctive & descriptive norms case study

Answer 23

first IV: control group (confederate walks by), descriptive norm group (confederate litters bag, subtly communicating that this is what ppl do in this situation), injunctive norm group (confederate picks up bag, indicating that littering is wrong)
second IV: condition of environment (clean or littered)

results:
-control group: got the most ppl litter, regardless of whether the area was already littered or clean
-descriptive norm group: a lot of ppl litter in the littered lot, confederate’s behaviour reminded participants that ppl often litter here (served as just one salient example of the type of behaviour that led to such a mess in the first place) VS v little ppl litter in the clean lot (confederate’s littering behaviour stood out as unusual & reminded participants that most ppl don’t litter)
-injunctive norm group: lowest amt of littering (because seeing the confederate pick up someone else’s litter invokes the injunctive norm that littering is wrong in both clean & littered environment)

Question 24

consistency: foot-in-door technique

Answer 24

exploit ppl’s ow sense of consistency
ppl want to stay the same
-start of by asking a small req, then ask the bigger request that u wanted to do in the first place
-ppl always want to be the one that says yes
-as long as ppl say yes to the small request, they were more likely to say yes to the sign

Question 25

reciprocity: door-in-face technique

Answer 25

someone does nice things for u and u want to reciprocate

requests:
-large req: would u volunteer 2 hours a week for 2 years in a mental health agency?
-small req: will u serve as a chaperone next wk for some kids going to the zoo?

results:
29% say yes if is just small req
76% say yes if is large req THEN small req

Question 26

commitment: low ball

Answer 26

exp:
request: “would u participate in an experiment at 7am?” 24% compliance
vs
request: “would u participate in an experiment?” then “u will be scheduled for 7am. is that ok?” 56% compliance