LB, Social Influence, W8 Flashcards
What is social influence?
- We have our own attitudes + behaviours but other people can influence this > regardless of whether they are real people or not
- people do not need to be directly acting on anything, their presence alone is enough to have a measurable impact on other peoples attitudes and behaviours > robust, real and replicable
- People tend to underestimate how influential they are to others (Bohns, 2016) And how easily they are influenced (Third person effect, Gunter 1991)
What is social influence a function of?
• The extent of SI is a function of individual differences > some people are more easily influenced than others
• Group level aspects > the level of social pressure is also important and depends on how many people there are
• Content of the influence > does it fit with previous knowledge, what kinds of attitudes/behaviours does it target
These different functions interact > there are different types of social influence including conformity, compliance, obedience, group dynamic influence (Mere presence, De-individualisation, minority group) > first 3 are most studied
Types of Social Influence
- Informational influence: Accepting information from another person/group (external info) to get evidence about reality > you think someone else has accurate info about something regardless of whether they actually do
- Normative influence: People are driven to conform to the expectations of others to gain social approval or avoid social disapproval > informational is different because you accept new knowledge + change your mind whereas normative does not necessarily mean you change your mind but you change superficially to act according to what other people say for approval
- Referent informational influence: pressure to conform to group norms because you have defined yourself as a group member
Conformity (Asch)
• Had control group where there are no confederates + experimental group where there is the real ppt and the rest are confeds
• Showed a series of lines to the group + asked which two are the same length > on the trials some were very clearly the same length + obvious to tell
• In the exp group, the confederates would say the two lines which are very clearly NOT the same, are the same > the actual ppt is asked last, which lines are the same to see if the confeds influenced their decision
• 40% of people conformed to what the confederates said even when it was clearly wrong > tendency to conform differed so some people conformed 100% of the time while others may have conformed less
- Ppts here are showing normative influence and informational influence > could be that ppts did not change their actual mind + conformed to fit in OR, they doubted reality + questioned their vision (showed doubt about their beliefs) > normative + informational influence converge
Separating types of social influence isn’t always good
• This is because most information we get in the reality of the world is social > social info is derived from experience, study, intuition > arguably everything has a social source
• Sheriff’s moving dot study looked at the auto kinetic effect + demonstrates convergence of types of influence
○ When a dot is shined in a dark room, you tend to see the dot move > when you tell people the dot moves rapidly to the right then present them with it, they start to see it move too > this is them changing their perception of reality
○ See dot moving at different speeds depending on social info
○ Suggests it is not about normative/informational influence, they actually experience change in their reality
- Listening to social info publicly means there may be private or public acceptance which can cause instability internally + may be more involved
Compliance
agreeing to social requests > e.g. if someone approaches you asking for money for charity + you agree = compliance
Compliance: Norm of Reciprocity
- Why people comply > we feel compelled to comply when someone has helped us in the past
- This is used by marketers using the “that’s not all” and “door in the face” technique
- Door in the face technique: works by the persuader making a large request first to the respondent which they will most likely disagree to, then make a smaller request so the respondent feels compelled to comply > increases likeliness of compliance
- That’s not all technique: offering something at an initial price which the respondent will probably disagree to but then reducing the price or adding other products to make it look more attractive to buy + comply to
That’s not all: Burger (1986)
- Did an experiment where in the experimental condition, the persuader would offer a cupcake for 75p but then say that is not all, I will add 2 cookies for free > control group offered the cupcake AND cookie for 75p
- Results showed the experimental group had successful sales 73% of the time whereas the control group was only successful 40%
- Shows that not all technique in action > works because the person is thinking they’re doing me a favour + I should do it because I feel obligated > example of norm of reciprocity
Door in the face: Cialdini (1975)
• Translated to a modern example: Imagine you leave a shop having bought a PS5 and 2 fidget spinners > if a stranger asks for the PS5, you will say no because it is very expensive + rare to find, but if the stranger then asks can I have the fidget spinner instead > people are more likely to comply 50% of the time
- Control condition: if a stranger asks for the fidget spinner only w/o acknowledging the PS5, people comply only 16.7% of the time > this shows the door in the face technique > works because saying no to the first, feels obligated to the second > is a norm of reciprocity
What is prosocial behaviour?
• Prosocial behaviour = acts that are positively valued by society > you commit prosocial acts because society says it is good + has positive social consequences such as cooperation, charity + trust
• Is the opposite of anti-social behaviour where we take away from other people
• Prosocial behaviour is defined by social norms > in some societies, certain types of behaviours are seen as prosocial whilst other societies may not consider this prosocial
• Helping is a subcategory of prosocial behaviour + are acts that intentionally benefit someone else > prosocial behaviour itself is different because it is not directly intentional to be good
• A subcategory of helping is altruism where help given without any expectation of personal gain + sometimes at a personal cost > e.g. donating blood to help others but then in future you may need that blood for an injury you might sustain
- Controversy as to whether altruism exists + people can do something fully positively > if you do something which helps others, you will feel good about it which is a personal gain
Why are we prosocial?: Evolutionary theory
- We do prosocial behaviour because it is an innate instinct > doing good things has survival benefits, that is if you do good things around others, they are more likely to help you too
- Altruistic behaviour is more common in other animals too
- Kin selection: people tend to do more good things for those they are related to because it propagates their own genes + is selected for > People who are a altruistic make better mates
Why are we prosocial?: Neurobiological view
• Argues prosocial behaviour is just a side effect of having to react to others + understand others to navigate social environment > we end up acting more altruistic because to understand social situations, we become more empathetic thus more prosocial
- Could be just an accidental effect of the brain + that neurobiology has evolved to cause altruism
Why are we prosocial?: Social Learning
• People do good things because they are rewarded for this > reinforcement
• Societal norms also impact prosocial behaviour > people do good things because society expects them to
• Modelling of good behaviours may encourage others to also be prosocial
Essentially, prosocial behaviour is learnt + there is an evolutionary + neurobiological reason to do so
Things associated with prosocial behaviour
• Low masculinity (Tice & Baumeister, 1985) > if you are hypermasculine, you are less likely to enact prosocial behaviour
• Having the same social identity + seeing yourself as a member of the same group means you tend to do more prosocial behaviours such as charity + help more
○ Platow et al, 1999: Study where there are people standing outside the stadium + if they were wearing the same colour as your team, you are more likely to help/ donate money for charity + if it is a different team you are less likely to donate. However, also found that if the same team won, they are likely to help others regardless of the team they were supporting
• Personality traits may dictate prosocial behaviour > is most predictive of prosocial behaviour when the people are on the extreme end of agreeableness, noble + openness
People who are young tend to be more prosocial
Are people naturally prosocial?
• Initially, focus of psychology would say no, largely due to story of Kitty Genovese who was stabbed multiple times by a thief > original account was that lights were on, she screamed + crawled to a stairwell where there was people but nobody helped > suggests callousness of not helping others is the default
• Latane & Darley argue this is due to the bystander effect > default is that people don’t help, there is a sequence which people attend to before deciding to enact in a prosocial way or not
• There are a lot of steps to go through before deciding to help or not > attend to what is happening, decide it is an emergency, take responsibility, decide whether or not they can help and then finally give the help
This model suggests prosocial behaviour is unlikely
