influence - power Flashcards
majority influence: conformity
- compliance
- conversion
changing one’s thoughts, feelings, behaviours to match those of the other people
- average rate = 36%
compliance
- publically agree BUT has always disagreed privately
conversion
- disagree before discussion
- publically + privately agree after discussion
conformity: social impact theory
= fSIN
= fSIN
magnitude of social pressure depends on situation or strength / immediacy / number
strengths
- low status / informed majority / cohesive group
- impression management / difficult problem
immediacy
- Crutchfield situation
- unknown identity / online groups
number
- size of the group / unanimity
- 4 people = 32% / >7 = 37& conformity
who conforms? 8 individual differences
age - most in adolescence
introverts / agreeable / conscientiousness / stable
collectivists
less intelligent - non-experts
low self-esteem
- BUT adolescents with high SE tend to conform
across eras
authoriarnism
gender?
- experiment: white males
- but after they saw that women tend to conform more, and topics were more in the expertise of men
2 types of nonconformity
independence
- has always disagreed publically + privately
anticonformity
- publically disagree after discussion
- BUT has no opinion / interest privately
congruence
has always privately and privately agreed
minority influence
- Asch vs Moscovici
same as Asch but with colours
minorities were making errors
8.4% of participants agreed with the confederates
Moscovici’s conversion theory
minorities influence in a different way than majorities do
group discussion
-> majority influence -> comparison -> compliance
direct / immediate / temporary
-> minority influence -> validation -> conversion
indirect / delayed / durable
5 ways minorities are more influential
experts
- have power / strong argument / loud / confidence
consistency
- consistent minority is most effective
- have to be a committed member
status
- high-status minorities are most effective
- more protected from sanctions
quality of arguments
- minorities exert more effort in their attempts to influence
decision rules
- majority ruling favours majority
- unanimity ruling favours minorities
minority influence: 4 sources
interpersonal
- ostracism and rejection, the black sheep effect
implicit
- mimicry, mindlessness
informational
- social comparison, dual process (either thinking or just going by heuristics)
normative
- cognitive dissonance
power: Jim Jones case study
religious cult
powerful, charismatic, bullying leader
isolated the group in South America
ordered the people to kill themselves and others when a delegation came to investigate
power: Milgram experiment
people obey orders from authority
- normal people / any authority / highly distressing task
illustrates situational power
- we easily get influenced by the power of the group
doesn’t answer why people obey
French & Raven 6 bases of powerful leaders
reward
- leader control rewards / punishments
coercive
- leader is forcing the followers
legitimate
- how legitimate is the leader
referent
- when the leader is admirable
expertise
informational
- leader controls the info
3 power tactics
soft / hard
collaboration, socializing, ingratiation VS bullet, threat, punish
rational / non-rational
reasoning, logic, persuasion VS evasion, ingratiation
unilateral / bilateral
demands disengagements VS discussion negotiation
power: bullying
deliberately inflicting injuries or harm on person who cannot defend themselves
- coercive interpersonal influence
- group-level process
- power process
keep power by harming powerless people - both men and women do it with different tactics
physical aggression VS verbal aggression
who seeks power
animals
scale for need for power
physiology of power -> testosterone -> M>W
bullies
2 ways of claiming power
verbal
- powerful speech: direct, frequent, loud
- more likely to tell others what to do / interrupt them
nonverbal
- body language
- open positions > power positions
achieving status expectancy theory
- status cues
specific status cues
- relevant qualities -> competence, intelligence
diffuse status cues (heuristics)
- general qualities people use, often mistakenly when allocating status
- e.g. age, race
-> X displays specific and diffuse status characteristics
-> other members form (+) expectations about X
-> members permit X to influence them
-> X gains status
achieving status: status generalization
irrelevant characteristics influence the allocation of prestige: race, gender
privileged categories
- males -> achieve status more easily
solos / underrepresented minorities
- particularly unfair
online groups
- sometimes status effects on participation are muted
status hierarchies
Forsyth
- clear consensual leadership patterns after 15 mins
Michel’s iron law of oligarchy
- power concentrated in the few -> all groups
status hierarchies: why
evolved adaption
advantages
- coordination / decision making / defence / resolve conflict
modern human
- instinctively prepared to accept / understand
- prefer status difference
status hierarchies: evidence
hierarchy is functional -> enduring implicit preference
distributed power
- (-) intragroup conflicts (+) coordination + productivity
interpersonal complementarity
- dominant actions can trigger submissive actions from others
- e.g. confident, respect / lead, obey
paradoxical effects of power
- kelter’s approach-inhibition model of power
power
- approach behaviour
- (+) affect / self-promotion / energy increase
powerless
- inhibition
- (-) affect / self-protection / vigilance / inaction
paradoxical effects of power
- changes in powerholder
(+) effects power
- Proactive, engaged / positive, strong emotions / goal focused
- Enhanced cognitive functioning / insulates from influence
(-) effects power
- Risky / negatively affect other’s emotional experiences
- Self-satisfaction & esteem / coercive methods to influence others
- Loss of empathy, social attentiveness
- Less compassionate / ethical → Bathsheba syndrome
especially men
3 reactions to the use of power
conversion : kelman’s three-stage model
- compliance -> identification -> internalization
destructive obedience : Milgram’s agentic state
- Zimbardo prison study -> power of the situation
resistance : revolutionary coalitions
- conflict and rebellion authority -> ripple effect
