Conformity & Influence (Ch.8) Flashcards
Conformity
change in behavior due to real or imagined influence of others
Causes of Conformity
informational and normative social influences
Informational Social Influence
looking to behavior of others around us when unsure of the best choice
Private Acceptance
genuine belief that the informational influences used are correct
Information Conformity Fails
when those around us are wrong
Normative Social Influence
change in behavior to conform to social norms, rules, etc.
Public Compliance
result of normative social influence, although not private acceptance
Resisting Normative Influence
can lead to criticism, rejection, etc.
Injunctive Norms
communicating expectations about approved behavior, powerful way to create change
Descriptive Norms
communicating expectation of how people truly act, less effective than injunctive
Boomerang Effect
when descriptive norms make bad behavior more likely than before
Tactics of Social Influence
foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face techniques
Foot-in-the-door Technique
requestor presents a small request first, then follows with a larger ask
Door-in-the-face Technique
requestor presents large request first, expecting rejection, then follows with smaller ask
Authority & Normative Influence
normative pressures make ppl want to please authority with good work
Authority & Informational Influence
when unclear on how to proceed, ppl will follow orders of authority
Obedience Conformity
once conformed to a norm of obedience, it becomes difficult to change/abandon said norm
Solomon Asch
known for line judgment experiments, demonstrated normative influence and how people even conform to group pressure against their own perceptions
Stanley Milgram
conducted obedience to authority experiments, also provided insights on informational & normative influence and how authority can pressure conformity
Muzafer Sherif
autokinetic effect study on informational social influence, showing people use others as reference point when uncertain of answer
Social Norms
implicit or explicit rules/expectations a group has for accepted behaviors/beliefs
Social Impact Theory
concept that conforming to social influence depends on three factors: importance, immediacy, and size of the group
Idiosyncrasy Credits
earned over time via conforming to group norms, building such credit increases group tolerance of the occasional deviation from norms
Minority Influence
when a small contingency of the group influences behavior/beliefs of the whole
Burger (2009) vs. Milgram
Burger’s experiment, held under more acceptable conditions, found a statistically similar obedience rate, Burger finding 70% vs Milgram’s 82.5%
Stanley Schachter
study found that those who resist normative influence are often silenced and even excluded by the majority
Reciprocity
the expectation that one will repay the actions done to them
Reciprocal Concessions
in negotiations, expectations that concessions by one party should matched by the other
Compliance
the changing of behavior in response to direct request
Agentic State
when individuals place responsibility for their actions on authority figure, offers lack of personal culpability
Obedience
behavior change as result of request
from authority
Personal Responsibility
in the agentic state, a greater likelihood to obey in exchange for authority taking responsibility
Freedman & Fraiser
how small initial requests increase compliance for larger requests, foot-in-the-door technique
Cialdini (1975)
large initial request expecting refusal, followed by smaller reasonable request, increase compliance to smaller request by making it appear as concession
door-in-the-face technique
Autokinetic Effect
where stationary point of light in a dark room appears to move, without actually moving. without reference points, the brain has trouble determining the light’s position, creating the ambiguous scenario used by Sherif’s study of informational influence
