SI Flashcards
Hermans et al., (2003)
When people eat in groups….
They tend to eat more than when alone
de Castro + de Castro (1989)
What was the method?
Food diary (7 days)
Recorded whether alone/social
de Castro + de Castro (1989)
Called their finding -
Social correlation
de Castro + de Castro (1989)
Named their finding
Social correlation
de Castro + de Castro (1989) named their finding ‘social correlation’, as as the number of…
People increased, so did food intake
de Castro + de Castro (1989)
Findings
Meals eaten with others were
44% larger than when alone
de Castro + de Castro (1989)
Findings
How were the findings further strengthened
Multiple studies confirmed
de Castro + de Castro (1989)
2 limitations
- Self-reported eating
2. Correlational data; no cause and effect
de Castro + de Castro (1989)
A limitation could be the lack of control for alcohol, as alcohol
Increases food intake
Experimental (lab) evidence for social facilitation comes from
Clendenen et al., (1994)
Clendenen et al., (1994) (Social Facilitation)
What were the research questions? (2)
- Is SF found in lab settings?
2. Effect still found when with strangers?
Clendenen et al., (1994) (Social Facilitation)
Students ate with either ______ or ______
Friends
Strangers
Clendenen et al., (1994) (Social Facilitation)
Students ate with either friends or strangers, in (3) groups…
- Solo eating
- Paired eating
- Eating in fours
Clendenen et al., (1994) (Social Facilitation)
Findings (Solo vs Social)
(2)
- Greater intake in 2s/4s
2. No difference BETWEEN 2s/4s
Clendenen et al., (1994) (Social Facilitation)
Findings (Strangers Vs Friends)
(1)
- Greater intake amongst friends compared to strangers
FOUR explanations for social facilitation?
- Time extension theory
- Arousal
- Distraction
- Modelling
What was de Castro (1995)’s social facilitation theory?
Time extension theory
de Castro (1995)’s Time Extension Theory proposes that
Group meals take longer –> inc. food cue exposure –> more intake
de Castro (1995) Time Extension Theory
Group meals take longer –> ____________ –> more intake
More food cue exposure
de Castro (1995) Time Extension Theory
____________ –> more food cue exposure –> more intake
Group meals take longer
Zajonc (1965)’s Arousal theory of social facilitation?
Arousal = activated appetite
Why is Zajonc (1965’s) theory of arousal unlikely?
Arousal can also SUPPRESS appetite
Bellisle (2001) Distraction theory is a theory of
Social facilitation
Time Extension
Arousal Theory
Distraction Theory
Modelling Theory
All theories of
Social facilitation
Bellisle (2001) distraction theory states that distraction from social setting may result in
Less monitoring of food intake/reduced awareness of fulness
Who came up with the Time Extension Theory?
de Castro, 1995
Modelling refers to….
Using social others as a ‘model’ for eating behaviour
Nisbett and Storm (1974) found that the more a confederate eats
The more the participant does
Conger et al., (1980) found that when a confederate eats less
So does the participant
Pliner and Chaiken (1990)
RQ: Will an _______ confederate influence the amount eaten by participants?
Attractive
Pliner and Chaiken (1990)
(Confederate Attractiveness)
Findings:
- FEMALES ate less when the confederate was attractive
Pliner and Chaiken (1990)
(Confederate Attractiveness)
Findings (males):
Non-significant difference
Pliner and Chaiken (1990)
Why did the researcher’s propose that this effect occurred?
‘Self-presentation’
Pliner and Chaiken (1990)
‘Self-presentation’ - the females may have eaten less to convey
A feminine social identity
2 Studies (Core Reading)
- Robinson, Flemming and Higgs (2014) - Norms
2. Lim et al., (2018) - Stress + Gender
Robinson, Flemming and Higgs (2014)
RQ: Are social norm messages more effective than
Health-based messages
Robinson, Flemming and Higgs (2014)
Hypothesis: Social norm messages would
Lead to greater F/V take than health messages
Robinson, Flemming and Higgs (2014)
Descriptive norm message: students eat
More vegetables than you’d think
Robinson, Flemming and Higgs (2014)
Health message: cancer risk….
Can be improved by eating Veg
Robinson, Flemming and Higgs (2014)
What was measured?
Veg intake at lunch
Robinson, Flemming and Higgs (2014)
Which message was more effective?
Descriptive norm
Robinson, Flemming and Higgs (2014)
How did the descriptive norm message influence students?
They increased veg. intake
Robinson, Flemming and Higgs (2014)
Was there a difference for already high-vegetable consumers?
No, not in either condition
Robinson, Flemming and Higgs (2014)
The results may have been found because the low consumers were more motivated to…
Adhere to the presented norm
Robinson, Flemming and Higgs (2014)
What is a limitation of this study?
No control group to compare
Thomas et al., (2017) investigated social norms in
Real-world settings (UK restaurant)
Thomas et al., (2017)
Where was the setting of the study?
UK restaurant
Thomas et al., (2017)
UK restaurants
What was measured?
No. of meals purchased containing veg
Pre/during/post
Thomas et al., (2017)
UK restaurants
What was found?
Signif. increase in purchase of vegetables pre to post
Thomas et al., (2017)
UK restaurants
Two limitations of study
- Wastage not recorded
2. No data on WHO’s intake increased
Stok, de Ridder, de Vet + Wit (2014)
96 students allocated to (3) different types of message
Descriptive
Injunctive
Control
Stok, de Ridder, de Vet + Wit (2014)
What was the INJUNCTIVE message?
Majority of students think other students should eat sufficient fruit
Stok, de Ridder, de Vet + Wit (2014)
What was the DESCRIPTIVE message
Most students try to eat sufficient fruit
Stok, de Ridder, de Vet + Wit (2014)
Findings
________ norms had no effect compared to control
Injunctive
Stok, de Ridder, de Vet + Wit (2014)
Which out of descriptive/injunctive/control was the most effective?
Descriptive
Sparkman + Walton (2017)
What is a dynamic norm?
Refers to how behaviour changes over time
Sparkman & Walton (2017)
Pps were presented with an online survey with either ______ or ______ messages. Asked:
Dynamic/Static
“How interested are you in consuming less meat?”
Sparkman+ Walton (2017)
“3 in 10 people eat less meat than they otherwise would”
What condition is this?
Static
Sparkman + Walton (2017)
“In recent years, 3 in 10 people have changed their meat-eating behaviours”
What condition is this and why?
Dynamic
Describes how behaviour has changed
Stok, de Ridder, de Vet + Wit (2014)
“Most high school students think others should eat more fruit”
What condition is this?
Injunctive
Stok, de Ridder, de Vet + Wit (2014)
“Most high-school students try to eat fruit”
What condition is this?
Descriptive
Sparkman & Walton (2017)
Which condition was more effective - static or dynamic?
Dynamic
Sparkman & Walton (2017)
Dynamic condition was more effective, although pps in the static condition
Reported some interest
Vartanian et al., (2015) identified (4) limitations of social norm studies…
- Mostly lab experiments
- Uncertain situations
- Demand Cs
- Sample (e.g. males less influenced than females)
Cruwys et al., (2015) identified 3 individual differences in who is affected by social norms. These are
- Low self esteem/high need for acceptance
- Body weight
- In group/outgroup
Cruwys et al., (2015)
How might body weight of others affect social influence?
More modelling if social others are same size
Cruwys et al., (2015)
If an undesirable outgroup norm is to eat healthy, we are MORE likely/LESS likely to eat healthy
Less likely
Cruwys et al., (2015)
We tend to do the _______ of whatever an….
Opposite
Undesirable outgroup does
Descriptive norms are worse/better than injunctive
Better
_________ _________ influence the impact of social influence
Individual differences
What was the core reading
- Robinson, Fleming + Higgs (2014)
