Test 3 lecture notes Flashcards
Types of social influence
conformity: going along and changing your behavior in order to match others
compliance: changing your behavior based on direct request
obedience: a type of compliance, going along with a request from an authority figure
Normative
Going along with the group to be liked and accepted and not rejected.
Descriptive normative influence
When you conform to what is typically done
injunctive normative influence
when you are going along with behaviors that are typically approved of
there are instances when they are the same, but there are others where they are different
rejection
fear of what happens when you stand out
what is the difference between descriptive and injunctive normative influence
???
shatter (1951)
put people into groups with a confederate, and the confederates job was to disagree with the group. they observed what happened when this confederate refused to go along with the group. Found that there were three stages of behavior. 1. argue with the outlier 2. ignore the outlier 3. if given the opportunity they would punish the outlier
What are the factors that influence normative influence
- size: the larger the group, the stronger the normative influence
(moscovivi’s theory: majority sways by size, minority sways by style) - Group unanimity: if the group is all saying the exact same thing then you are more likely to see normative influences occur, In one of the paradigms that Asch tested he gave the actual participants a teammate that also went against the group, this if someone else also disagrees with the group it will be easier
- immediacy: stronger when group pressure happens right before behavior
- social strength: if you are in a group withy people who matter with you, normative influence will be stronger
bond and smith (1996)
the Asch studies that were done in more collectivist cultures have more conformity than the studies done in individualistic cultures
informational influence
occurs because you want to be right and you assume the group is right. works off of the accuracy motivation
Normative vs informational influence
those going along with the group for normative influence will revert to their initial opinion when asked alone, those going along with the informational influence will go on and say what the group says because they truly think the group is correct
social validation
using our social connections to come to a ‘correct’ conclusion
Sherif (1935) auto kinetic effect
if you beam a dot of light onto a solid space you are going to perceive some movement in the light. There is no actual movement, it is perceived movement. He had people report what they saw individually, and then he brought them back into the lab with three other participants and had them report what they saw as well. Based on those two tactics we would not know if it is normative or observational. he then brought them back in alone to see if there motivation was observational or normative (I am not so sure this is correct)
what happens in cases with decision making during ambiguity
if there is not a clear and definitive correct answer we tend to be more risk averse and go along with the group more
crisis
during times of crisis we tend to be more risk averse and go along with the group more, this could also be because of higher rates of ambiguity during crisis
crisis and experts
when we are in a crisis we tend to look towards experts more, we assume a level of knowledge can help us avoid these negative consequences
social contagion
once one thing starts in a social group it is easy for that thing to spread across a culture like memes
mass psychogenic illness
when a biological illness seems to occur but has no biological reason nd seems to occur because of social contagion
what are three examples of mass psychogenic illness
Tanganyikan laughing epidemic: three girls in a school started laughing and could not stop. quickly it spread to other students, eventually they had to shut down the school, family members and neighbors started showing the same problem
dancing plague of 1518: from July to September there were groups of people who could no stop dancing, led to heart attacks and stroke
warren county high school: a teacher reported smelling gasoline and started getting lightheaded. This led to 99 people going to the er, and couldn’t ink any source, only those who showed symptoms smelled gas, the school then reopened and 71 people went to the er, found that symptoms were passed only by sight
make sure to know milligram well! go over the video
thanks Elias you’re the best, I believe in you!
How does the drive for consistency affect persuasion
people like to be consistent, people will go along with what you ask for with this in mind
foot in the door
when you start with a very small and reasonable request that most people are going to say yes to, but then follow it up with a slightly larger request then another and another until you get to the request you actually want. Ie, the traveling salesman who knocks on the door and just asks for a glass of water, then asks them to just try the product, then asks them to try their pitch on them, finally after being so consistent with saying yes to small asks, the salesman asks their real question and they feel stronger to answer yes because of the need for consistency.
Freedman and Fraser (1966) asked people to wear a sticker that says be a safe driver and asked the other half of the group nothing. then followed up and asked the whole group if they could put up a big ugly sign that says be a safe driver. Those who wore the sticker agreed 73% to put up the sign, those who did not get offered a sticker only 3% agreed to put up the sign
Low ball
when you get a low introductory element that has other hidden costs involved. because you have already agreed to the low ball offer, you are unlikely to change your opinion once you have been made aware of the other hidden costs
bait and switch
where you get people in the store for a really attractive offer, then switch it out to a less attractive offer. ie Black Friday sakes, they offer a ps5 for 200$ but only have like two in the store, then when you go it is sold out but you buy something else because you have already made this mental commitment to spending money and going to the store
labeling
if you give someone a label they tend to be more consistent with that label. ie voter vs voting speech. Ie cars salesman who tells the consumer you look like someone who cares about the environment
what are the four consistency techniques for getting people to do what you want. why do they work
foot in the door, low ball, bait and switch, labeling. they work under the idea of obligation
door in the face and what are the two requirements
you ask someone for something ridiculous that you expect a no for, when they say no you ask them something reasonable. you came down from a big request so they should reciprocate and come up.
- conceivable: if the initial request is absurd than they don’t feel like you did anything by coming down
- same person: it must be the same person doing both requests
reciprocation
because it seems like they are doing something for you, you feel compelled to do something for them, door tin the face, that’s not all, favors, scarcity
that’s not all
if you call in the next 20 minutes we will double the offer for free. the seller is making their deal worse for you so you should reciprocate and agree. Berger cupcake that’s not all, bargain, control - 56, 25, 20
favors: if you a favor for someone, they are more likely to do it for you
scarcity: works off the idea that something being limited makes it better - what is rare is good - buildingg pressure makes you more willing to buy that limited number, and if it seems like there is a possibility you could miss out on something you are more likely to agree
amount of time
if you feel like there is a fast approaching deadline you are more likely to say yes
attention
if you catch their attention they are more willing to go along with something you ask for
pique
disrupt then reframe
you in some way try to disrupt their cognitive processing, then you reframe your request in a way that makes it easier for them to say yes. the goal of this technique is to get people to consume the cognitive resources so they can’t reframe and won’t go through that process leading them to say yes
David and Knowles (1999) sold postcards for either three dollars or three hundred pennies. By reframing the price as pennies it disrupted people’s cognitive processing. Thirty percent of participants bought a postcard in the three dollar condition, sixty five percent bought a postcard in the three hundred pennies
incidental similarity
people will in some way try to draw attention to how you are similar to them in some way, if they think they are similar to you they are more likely to go along with your request
ingratiation and self promotion
they are going to compliment you as well as show their virtues, in doing so they build a foundation for liking. one important component is that t seems genuine
persuasion
three things to look at when it comes to successful persuasion
who is doing the persuasion, what are they persuading about, what (is this how) are they trying to persuade you to do
who
source credibility - you are more likely to be persuaded by someone who seems credible on the topic at hand
sleeper effect
information from a non credible source can be persuasive but it often times takes longer to see that effect
credibility + expertise
no! get more on this what is the difference between the two?
trustworthiness
you need to be able to trust the source in order to find them credible
source likeablitiy
if you like a source you will find them more persuasive, similarity also comes into play here, so does attractiveness
majority vs minority
majority by size minority by swagger
personal importance
if we can highlight how this idea is connected to us we are more likely to be persuaded bye it
humor
if we find things funny we are more likely to be persuaded by it - think Super Bowl commercials
fear
can be effective, but it is important to note it has a bell curve, if you make people too afraid you will paralyze them, you want to make them feel a little bit afraid so they feel some stakes and are motivated to act, and also tell them how to avoid it
one sided messages
if you argue one side of an issue it is effective for uniformed listeners, people who are informed tend not to be persuaded by this
primacy vs recency
primacy is more effective when all of you options are given at once, recency is more effective when your options are given across time
emotional state
people in a more positive emotional state are more open to persuasion
intelligence
you want a middle zone, people who are really smart don;t think they need to hear your opinion, people with a lower level have a similar mindset - they all might be low in a need for cognition
self -esteem
similar pattern to intelligence, middle level
higher need for cognition
will be more persuaded by a stronger argument
lower need for cognition
will be more persuaded by a weaker argument
self presentation
if your audience cares about how they come off to other people then arguments about status will be more effective
individualist culture
arguments focused on independence or self achievement are going to be the most influential
collectivist culture
arguments focused on the group will be most effective
ego depletion
when your self control is lowest people tend to be more open to persuasion
whom
emotional state, intelligence, self-esteem, higher vs lower need for cognition, self presentation, individualist vs collectivist culture, ego depletion
active vs passive arguments
active is a direct argument for something, passive is more about exposure. active is necessary for opinions that are strongly held
repetition
can be useful as long as it is positive of neutral, if people don’t like art at first they will get more anode at repeated exposure
ads wear out, repitition with variation like Flo
straightforwardness
we are more persuaded by arguments we overhear than arguments directed to us, we think they are more honest when we overhear
subliminal advertisement
for the most part it is not effective at all,
elaboration likelihood model
this model is a theory of persuasion, there are two paths and depending on who you are talking to and what you are trying to persuade them either path will be more effective
central: based on the message that you are saying, where you think strong arguments will create lasting change
peripheral: using everything but the message to create change, ie cereal mascots - ends up creating immediate change but less lasting change
what are three ways to resist
attitude inoculation, forwarding, stop being lazy
attitude inoculation
introduce people to a weak counter argument which makes the feel stronger about there own argument as ling as the counter argument is not too persuasive
forewarning
often times they go through reactance