influence - power

Question 1

majority influence: conformity
- compliance
- conversion

Answer 1

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

Question 2

conformity: social impact theory
= fSIN

Answer 2

= 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

Question 3

who conforms? 8 individual differences

Answer 3

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

Question 4

2 types of nonconformity

Answer 4

independence
- has always disagreed publically + privately

anticonformity
- publically disagree after discussion
- BUT has no opinion / interest privately

Question 5

congruence

Answer 5

has always privately and privately agreed

Question 6

minority influence
- Asch vs Moscovici

Answer 6

same as Asch but with colours
minorities were making errors
8.4% of participants agreed with the confederates

Question 7

Moscovici’s conversion theory

Answer 7

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

Question 8

5 ways minorities are more influential

Answer 8

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

Question 9

minority influence: 4 sources

Answer 9

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

Question 10

power: Jim Jones case study

Answer 10

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

Question 11

power: Milgram experiment

Answer 11

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

Question 12

French & Raven 6 bases of powerful leaders

Answer 12

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

Question 13

3 power tactics

Answer 13

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

Question 14

power: bullying

Answer 14

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

Question 15

who seeks power

Answer 15

animals
scale for need for power
physiology of power -> testosterone -> M>W
bullies

Question 16

2 ways of claiming power

Answer 16

verbal
- powerful speech: direct, frequent, loud
- more likely to tell others what to do / interrupt them

nonverbal
- body language
- open positions > power positions

Question 17

achieving status expectancy theory
- status cues

Answer 17

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

Question 18

achieving status: status generalization

Answer 18

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

Question 19

status hierarchies

Answer 19

Forsyth
- clear consensual leadership patterns after 15 mins

Michel’s iron law of oligarchy
- power concentrated in the few -> all groups

Question 20

status hierarchies: why

Answer 20

evolved adaption

advantages
- coordination / decision making / defence / resolve conflict

modern human
- instinctively prepared to accept / understand
- prefer status difference

Question 21

status hierarchies: evidence

Answer 21

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

Question 22

paradoxical effects of power
- kelter’s approach-inhibition model of power

Answer 22

power
- approach behaviour
- (+) affect / self-promotion / energy increase

powerless
- inhibition
- (-) affect / self-protection / vigilance / inaction

Question 23

paradoxical effects of power
- changes in powerholder

Answer 23

(+) 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

Question 24

3 reactions to the use of power

Answer 24

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