Week 6 - Conformity Flashcards
Conformity
Tendency to change perceptions, opinions or behaviour in ways that are consistent with group norms
Informational Influence
People conform because they believe others are correct in their judgements
Normative Influence
People conform because they fear the consequences of appearing deviant.
Private conformity
Changes in both overt behav. and beliefs
Public Conformity
Superficial change in overt behaviour only
Sherifs study produces
ambiguous private acceptance (informational influence)
Asch’s line judgements study produces
public conformity (normative influence)
Process of mimicry
people mimic others more when they are highly motivated to affiliate—say, because they are similar to these others or are feeling excluded—than when they are not
purpose of mimicry
Serves an important social function, that being “in sync” in their pace, posture, mannerisms, facial expressions, tone of voice, accents, speech patterns, and other behaviors enables people to interact more smoothly with one another.
implications of mimicry for
questions concerning the automaticity of social influence.
- mimicry appears automatic
ostracism
by being neglected, ignored, and excluded
ostracism and conformity
people conform to reduce the risk of ostracism
minority influence on people’s behaviour
The process by which dissenters produce change within a group.
ways in which the discourse of making requests affects compliance with
reference to mindlessness.
although a state of mindlessness can make us vulnerable to compliance, it can also have the opposite effect. For example, many city dwellers will automatically walk past panhandlers on the street looking for a handout.
(xerox study)
norm of reciprocity
that we treat others as they have treated us ( Gouldner, 1960).
foot-in-the-door
technique (and resisting)
A two-step compliance technique in which an influencer sets the stage for the real request by first getting a person to comply with a much smaller request.
To be able to resist the trap of
compliance techniques, one must:
Be vigilant
Not feel indebted by the norm of reciprocity
low-balling (and resisting)
A two-step compliance technique in which the influencer secures agreement with a request but then increases the size of that request by revealing hidden costs.
the door-in-the-face technique (and resisting)
A two-step compliance technique in which an influencer prefaces the real request with one that is so large that it is rejected.
that’s-not-all technique (and resisting)
A two-step compliance technique in which the influencer begins with an inflated request, then decreases its apparent size by offering a discount or bonus.
Summarize how participant characteristics predicted levels of obedience in the study
no difference between males and females
Summarise how proximity of the victim predicted levels of obedience in the study
obedience reduced the closer the proximity to victim
Meeus and
Raaijmakers (1995) and Milgram
ordered them to cause psychological harm. When participants arrived at a university laboratory, they met a confederate supposedly there to take a test as part of a job interview. If the confederate passed the test, he’d get the job; if he failed, he would not.
hassassing comments - 92% exhibited complete obedience despite seeing the task as unfair and distasteful.
Gamson et al. (1982) and Milgram
William Gamson and others (1982) recruited people to participate in a supposed discussion of “community standards.
One key difference is that people in Milgram’s studies took part alone and those in Gamson’s were in groups.
only 1 of 33 groups even came close to following the script.
social impact theory (Latane, 1981)
Social influence depends on three
factors
The strength of the source
The immediacy of the source to
the target in time and space
The number of sources
