SOCIAL INFLUENCE (Psych 201 - Chapter 9 - Spring 2014)

This Week’s Playlist
Artist Song Title/Psych Concept
1. Jimmy Eat World The Authority Song
(Obedience)
2. The Rolling Stones Under My Thumb
(Obedience/Authority)
3. Green Day American Idiot
(Unconformity)
4. Malvina Reynolds Little Boxes
(Conformity)
5. Justin Bieber U Smile
(Emotional Mimicry)
6. Pink Floyd Another Brick In The Wall
(Conformity)
7. The Beatles Hello, Goodbye
(Reactance Theory)

Chapter 9: 
Social Influence
Melanie B. Tannenbaum, M.A.
Psych 201
Spring 2014

Social Influence
• What is Social Influence?
!
• The collection of ways that
people impact one another.
!
• Changes in attitudes, beliefs,
feelings, or behaviors resulting
from the real or imagined
presence of others.

Social Influence
• Conformity
!
• Compliance
!
• Obedience

Social Influence
• Conformity
• Changing behavior in response to real
or imagined pressure from others
!
• Compliance
• Changing behavior by responding
favorably to an explicit request,
possibly from a superior
(but not necessarily)
!
• Obedience
• Responding to an explicit request from
someone who has power over you

Social Influence
• Obedience
• Do as others command
!
• Compliance
• Do as others want
!
• Conformity
• Do as others do Strength of
social influence

Automatic Mimicry
• Conformity can be automatic (or unconscious), like in the
case of automatic mimicry
!
• Examples:
• Yawning when others yawn
• Laughing when others laugh
!
• People with an empathic orientation or those with a high
need to affiliate are more likely to automatically mimic
others!

Conformity
• Conformity can also be conscious, including changing
one’s behavior or beliefs in response to real or
imagined pressure from others.
!
• Examples:
• Wearing casual clothing to class (not suits & ties)
• Lining up when boarding at the airport
!
• Videos!!

Conformity Videos
!
!
Elevator example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuvGh_n3I_M
!
Japanese prank example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3ZjG3TMkx4
!
Gendered door example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySU-5PcMZEs
!
Picketing against everything with nothing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Njz9TrLjz5k&NR=1
11

Two Main Types of Conformity
• 1. Informational Social Influence
• Other people can be useful sources of information
about what is appropriate in a given situation
!
!
• 2. Normative Social Influence
• Sometimes we want to be accepted by others, so we do
what they do because going against them would cause
conflict, disapproval, or judgment

Informational Social Influence
!
• Sometimes, situations are ambiguous.
!
!
• You need to look to others to figure out the best way
to act in an unclear situation.

• Sherif (1936)
• Participants were in a dark room
• A point of light was shown on the wall
• Asked: How far did the light move?
• In reality, it doesn’t move at all, but the situation is ambiguous.
• Autokinetic Illusion: A point of light will appear to move in a dark room.
• This is an ambiguous, difficult task!
• Participants first reported how far they thought the light moved
while they were alone, and then made their judgments around
other judging participants.
• Participants can easily doubt their own judgment (“Was it really 1
inch, or was it 2?? I don’t know!”)

• Sherif (1936)
• People’s judgments converged over time!
• Individual judgments converged towards a group norm
!
!
!
!
• Ambiguous situation = People used other answers as a
source of help/information.

!
• Based on the desire to be correct (or accurate).
• We can use other people’s knowledge as a source of info.
!
• When is informational social influence more likely?
• Situation is ambiguous/difficult.
• These are the situations when we feel low in knowledge/
competence about the topic, so we need help.

Normative Social Influence
• Peer Pressure!
• This is when you use others’ behavior/comments as a
guide for how to fit in and avoid disapproval.
• Guides behavior to avoid social punishment

• This is conformity based on the desire to be liked or
socially accepted when the situation is clear/
unambiguous but one’s own beliefs conflict with
those of the group.

• Line Judgment Study (Asch, 1956)
• Very easy (Judge whether two lines are the same length)
• One true participant in a group of confederates
!
• After a couple of rounds, the confederates start to give
an (obviously) wrong answer

• Overall, participants conformed on 1/3 of the
“critical trials,” and 75% of participants conformed at
least once!
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRh5qy09nNw
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYIh4MkcfJA

Informational vs. Normative
• Sherif: Informational Social Influence
• Difficult task; unsure of answer
• Ambiguous
• Actually use others’ responses to form an opinion
• Actually believe what others say & internalize it
• Asch: Normative Social Influence
• Clear/easy task; sure of answer
• Not ambiguous
• Own beliefs clearly conflict with those of the group
• Conform on the outside, but not on the inside

• Very rare to find a situation in which only one is at work.
!
• However, sometimes one is more important.

• Informational influence leads to internalization (private acceptance) of
the majority opinion/behavior
• You actually change your attitude/belief
• Normative influence leads to temporary public compliance with the
majority opinion/behavior
• Your attitude remains the same, you just behave inconsistently with your
attitude for the moment

Informational Influence often leads to private acceptance.
!
Normative Influence has a greater influence on public compliance
than on private acceptance.

You don’t really like Red Lobster;
you’d rather eat at Golden Harbor.
However, all of your friends love Red
Lobster and want to go there for
dinner, so you agree, even though in
your head Golden Harbor still remains
your preference.
Is this…
A. Private Acceptance?
B. Public Compliance?

You have never eaten at Red Lobster or
Golden Harbor before, so you don’t know
anything about how much you’d like
either of them. Your friends all love Red
Lobster, and they say that Golden Harbor
isn’t great. When deciding on dinner
plans, you agree to go with them to Red
Lobster because you decide it must be
better.
Is this…
A. Private Acceptance?
B. Public Compliance?

What factors influence conformity?
• Group Size: Larger groups have more informational
and normative social influence.
• However, three people in a group are enough to elicit conformity!
• After about 3-4 people, the effect of group size levels off.
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GA8z7f7a2Pk
• What constitutes “conformity” in the beginning of this
video? What constitutes “conformity” at the end?

What factors influence
conformity?
• Group Size: Larger groups have more informational
and normative social influence.

conformity?
• Unanimity: If there is a break in unanimity, even if it
is not in line with the person’s private belief, it is
enough to reduce conformity.
• If there are other dissenters, it becomes easier to
dissent, even if you are dissenting in different ways.

conformity?
• Expertise & Status: Expert opinions carry more weight,
and the disapproval of high-status people hurts more.
• High-status people (like celebrities, authority figures,
etc.) most likely to lead to normative social influence.

conformity?
• Culture: Interdependent (collectivist) groups and
females tend to conform more (focus on social
relationships).

conformity?
• Construal of Disagreement (Ross et al., 1976)
• If there is a good reason for the majority view to differ
from yours, you don’t feel pressure to conform.
• Example: If others have an incentive for taking their stance.

Test Your Knowledge
• Henry goes to see the movie Need For Speed with his
friends, even though he thinks it looks awful and he’d
rather go see Frozen.
!
• Henry is demonstrating…
• A. Automatic Mimicry
• B. Conformity: Normative Social Influence
• C. Conformity: Informational Social Influence
• D. Obedience to Authority

Test Your Knowledge
• Henry has not heard any information about any
movies that are out right now. He goes to see the
movie Need For Speed with his friends, because he
trusts their judgment.
!
• Henry is demonstrating…
• A. Automatic Mimicry
• B. Conformity: Normative Social Influence
• C. Conformity: Informational Social Influence
• D. Obedience to Authority

Conformity: Summary
• Conformity can happen automatically (mimicry)
• Two types of intentional conformity
• Informational
• Ambiguous situation
• Use others as a source of information
• Normative
• Clear situation
• Do what others do to avoid social judgment/criticism
• Leads to public compliance, but not private acceptance
• There are many factors that influence the probability
of conformity

Compliance
• Compliance occurs when we are influenced via a direct attempt
by someone without authority/power over us.
!
• The authority/power of the requester is what differentiates
obedience and compliance.
!
• Three main types
• Reason-Based
• Emotion-Based
• Norm-Based

Reason-Based
• 1. Reciprocal Concessions
• AKA “Door-In-The-Face”
• Requesting a very large favor that you know the target
will decline, and then following it up with a more
modest request for what you really want
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqvYJ23AAqI
!
• NOTE: It has to be the REQUESTER who makes a
concession! You can’t just follow up someone else’s
big request with a separate smaller request. You have
to seem like you are sacrificing something.

Door-In-The-Face
• Cialdini et al. (1975)
• Condition 1: Chaperone a group of juvenile delinquents on a zoo day trip?
• Condition 2: Counsel juvenile delinquents 2 hours/week for 2 years?
followed by Chaperone a group of juvenile delinquents on a zoo day trip?
!
• Percent who agreed to chaperone: 17% vs. 50%
!
• The requester makes a concession, so you feel obligated to
make a concession as well (from “no” to “yes”)

• 2. Foot-In-The-Door Technique
• Make a small, initial request that virtually everyone
would agree to, and then follow it up with a larger
request for what you really want
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJdhGr5lVg4
Reason-Based

Foot-In-The-Door
• Freedman & Fraser (1966)
• Condition 1: “Will you display this large sign in your yard?”

Foot-In-The-Door
• Condition 2: “Will you display this small sign in your window?”
followed by “Will you display this large sign in your yard?”

Foot-In-The-Door
!
• Percent who agreed to the large sign: 17% vs. 76%

Foot-In-The-Door
!
• Percent who agreed to the large sign: 17% vs. 76%
!
• Committing to the first act causes a change in your self-
schema via self-perception
• “If I agreed to the first one, then I must be the kind of
person who supports this cause.”

• 3. That’s-Not-All Technique
• Adding something to an original offer
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=i5Ms_5WBhZo&feature=relmfu
Reason-Based

That’s-Not-All Technique
• Burger (1986)
• Sold desserts at Santa Clara U. arts fair for the Psych Club
• Condition 1: 1 cupcake + 2 cookies, $0.75
• Condition 2: 1 cupcake for $0.75...
“and we’ll throw in 2 cookies!”
• Percent who purchased: 40% vs. 73%
• The add-on feels like a gift
• This elicits the norm of reciprocity
• “If you are offering to give me something extra, I
should offer something in return...like buying.”

Reason-Based
• 4. “Even A Penny Helps” Technique
• By legitimizing tiny contributions, you do two things:
• You invalidate the thought that someone “can’t really
afford to give”
• You make people feel OK about giving what they can
(someone may want to donate a little, but be too
embarrassed to be seen giving such a small amount).
• This technique increases the percent of people who
donate money to charities, but doesn’t lower the
amount that is typically given.
• This suggests that the technique mainly works due to Reason A

What Is This?
• A. Foot-In-The-Door
• B. Door-In-The-Face
• C. Even-A-Penny-Helps
• D. That’s-Not-All

Emotion-Based
• 1. Positive Mood
• Increases compliance
• Isen et al. (1976)
• Participants got a phone call from someone who “spent
my last dime on this misdialed phone call” and
requested that the participant “dial the intended
number and relay a message”
• Condition 1: Simply received the phone call
• Condition 2: 20 minutes before the call, participant
received a small gift
• Percent who made the call: 10% vs. up to 100%

Positive Mood & Compliance
• Why does positive mood increase compliance?
• 1. Construal
• If you’re happy and you feel good, you assume other
people’s intentions are good
• Forgas & East (2008)
• Participants watched a happy, neutral, or sad film clip
• Watched a deceptive or truthful interview of an individual
who denied committing a theft
• Results
• Positive mood increased trust, decreased lie detection
• Negative mood decreased trust, increased lie detection

Positive Mood & Compliance
• Why does positive mood increase compliance?
• 2. Positive Mood Maintenance
• Saying no to a request is awkward and creates negative affect
• To stay feeling good, you have to comply
• Isen & Levin (1972)
• Participants given a cookie (positive mood) or not (neutral mood)
• Asked if they would serve as a confederate for a quick experiment
• ½ told their role was to help the “real” participant
• ½ told their role was to harm the “real” participant
• Result: Positive mood increased compliance only when the
task involved helping someone else, not hindering them.

Emotion-Based
• 2. Negative Mood
• Increases compliance...specifically guilt
!
!
• Harris et al. (1975)
• Asked Catholics to donate money to March of Dimes
• Condition 1: Asked while walking into confession
• Condition 2: Asked while walking out of confession

Negative Emotions & Compliance
• More donations before confession than afterward
• Before, they were probably feeling more guilty

Negative Emotions &
Compliance
• Negative State Relief Hypothesis
• Negative moods increase compliance because doing
something for someone else helps to make you feel
better

Reactance
• When your freedom is threatened, you experience
negative arousal and try to re-assert your freedom by
engaging in the forbidden behavior.
• Sort of like “acting out.”
!
• Think back to fear appeals.
!
• Why might fear appeals encourage reactance?

Norm-Based
!
• Descriptive Norms
• Objective, factual description of what most people do
• Example: “Most people sleep less than 8 hours per night.”
!
• Prescriptive Norms
• What most people should do according to some rule or tradition
• Example: “People should sleep more than 8 hours per night.”

Norm-Based
• By providing information about how other people typically
behave, you can elicit conformity
• Descriptive norms usually work via informational influence
• Prescriptive norms usually work via normative influence
• However, they are less likely to work than descriptive norms
!
• Descriptive = What People Do
!
• Prescriptive = What People Should Do

Norm-Based
• Schultz et al. (2007)
• CA homeowners received messages about how much
electricity they used in previous weeks and how much the
average use was in their neighborhood
!
• Result: People who consumed more than average started
using less; people who consumed less than average started
using more
!
• To counteract the negative effect, the info was
accompanied by a smiley or frowny face to indicate approval
or disapproval

“Opower's Energy Reports incorporate the behavioral
science techniques of Robert Cialdini, Opower's chief
scientist and the author of Influence, a 1984 book on
persuasion. The reports include targeted tips that
seek to motivate customers to lower their energy
consumption to the "normal" neighborhood rate.
https://twitter.com/Opower
http://www.opower.com/

In November 2013, Opower was named the #1 fastest
growing tech company in the DC region, and #20 in
the US, by Deloitte.

“President Barack Obama visited Opower
headquarters in Arlington on March 5, 2010. He
touted the company as an economic "success story"
amid a troubled economy and as a "great emblem"
for clean-energy jobs.”

Norm-Based
• Goldstein et al. (2006)
• Placed small cards in hotel rooms asking guests to reuse their towels
• Normative information on the cards was manipulated
!
• Condition 1: No normative information
• Condition 2: “Majority of past guests have reused their towels.”
• Condition 3: “Majority of past guests who stayed in this room reused towels.”
!
• Results: The stronger the norm info, the more compliance.
!
• Reuse Rates: Majority in this room > Majority > No norm

Norm-Based
• Cialdini et al. (2006)
• Placed signs in Petrified Forest National Park (AZ) to stop
people from taking petrified wood with them
!
• Different signs
• Sign 1: “Many past visitors have removed the petrified wood
from the park, changing the state of the Petrified Forest.
Please help stop this problem.”
!
• Sign 2: “The majority of past visitors have left the petrified
wood in the park, preserving the natural state of the
Petrified Forest.”

Norm-Based
• Results: Theft was 4x lower for Sign #2 than Sign #1!
!
• When trying to change norms, people often
highlight how common it is for people to do the
wrong thing...
• ...but this encourages people to continue doing the
wrong thing!!
!
• People are very responsive to descriptive norms.

Compliance: Summary
• Reason-Based Approaches
• Door-In-The-Face (Reciprocal Concessions)
• Foot-In-The-Door
• That’s-Not-All
• Even-A-Penny-Helps
!
• Emotion-Based Approaches
• Positive & negative moods both increase compliance
• Reactance
!
• Norm-Based Approaches
• Descriptive Norms
• Prescriptive Norms

The Milgram Experiments
• Experiment was described as a “study on learning”
!
• Participants were told that they were randomly assigned to
be the “teacher,” and that they would be delivering
punishments (electric shocks) to the “learner” whenever he/
she answered a question incorrectly.
!
• In reality, the “learner” was a confederate who never
received any shocks.

• Shock level began at 15 volts and increased to a maximum
of 450 volts
• For each incorrect response, the shock level went up 15
more volts
• During the experiment, the confederate begins to scream in
pain, says his heart hurts, and demands to be let out
• Towards the end, he/she stops making any noises
• Whenever the participant wants to stop, the experimenter
says vague things like “the experiment requires you to
continue” or “There is no permanent tissue damage. Please
continue.”

• Milgram didn’t believe that many would go all the way
!
!
• A panel of expert psychiatrists predicted that no more
than 1% of subjects would continue to 450V
!
• 66% of participants completed the experiment and
delivered the maximum shock of 450V!

• Replication of Milgram:
!
• Link 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcvSNg0HZwk
!
• Link 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzTuz0mNlwU
!
• Link 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmFCoo-cU3Y

• Milgram conducted many variations on the original
study, manipulating factors that he thought might
lead to a decrease in conformity rates.
• Proximity to victim
• Proximity to authority
• Legitimacy of experiment
• Location of experiment
!
• Overall, he ran 1000+ subjects across his experiments

• Proximity To Victim
• As the “learner” becomes more salient, conformity decreases

• Proximity To Authority
• As the “authority” becomes less salient, conformity decreases
• “Absent” = Authority gives orders over the phone

• How do you make it easier for participants to disobey?
• Make the victim closer (more salient)
• Make the authority further away (less salient)
!
• Making it easier to disobey is more effective than
increasing desire to disobey
!
Core theme of social psychology:
The power of the situation!

Why was this ideal for obedience?
• 1. Released From Responsibility
• Experimenter claims responsibility for outcome
!
• 2. Step-by-Step Procedure
• Shock only goes up 15V each time
• “Slippery Slope”
!
• 3. Lack Of Practice Disobeying Authority
• Most participants tried to end the experiment at some point,
but weren’t effective
• Most people don’t have practice being bold against authority

• Important to note...
!
• Almost all of the participants pointed out that the
learner was suffering.
!
• Many participants did say, out loud, that they refused to
continue.
!
• Humans are not awful, I promise!

• A final word on Milgram, from your textbook...
• “This distinction [between failing to stop the
experiment and not wanting to stop] is critical. Most of
us have had the experience of having good intentions
but being unable to translate those intentions into
effective action. We wanted to speak up more forcefully
and effectively against racist or sexist remarks, but we
were too slow to respond or the words didn’t come out
right. Or we have wanted to reach out to those who are
ignored at social gatherings but were distracted by all
that was going on and our own social needs. Most of us
can relate to being good-hearted but ineffective, but
not to being uncaring.”

Obedience: Summary
• Milgram experiments
• People obey authority, even when they don’t want to

Chapter 9 Summary
• Conformity
• Changing behavior in response to explicit/implicit pressure
• Informational (Sherif) & Normative (Asch)
!
• Obedience
• Submitting to demands from a more powerful person
• Milgram experiments
!
• Compliance
• Responding favorably to explicit requests from others
• Reason-Based, Emotion-Based, and Norm-Based

Top 10 Things To Know
• Conformity vs. Compliance vs.
Obedience
• Autokinetic Effect
• Know the Sherif study!
• Foot-In-The-Door vs. Door-In-
The-Face vs. That’s-Not-All
• Informational vs. Normative
Social Influence
• What are the different factors
that influence conformity?
• Public Compliance vs. Private
Acceptance
• Mood & Compliance
• Descriptive vs. Prescriptive Norms
• Reactance Theory
• Milgram Experiments
• What do they say about
increasing/decreasing obedience?
• What do they have in common
with the foot-in-the-door
technique?

SOCIAL INFLUENCE (Psych 201 - Chapter 9 - Spring 2014)

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Destacado

Destacado (18)

Similar a SOCIAL INFLUENCE (Psych 201 - Chapter 9 - Spring 2014)

Similar a SOCIAL INFLUENCE (Psych 201 - Chapter 9 - Spring 2014) (20)

Más de Melanie Tannenbaum

Más de Melanie Tannenbaum (20)

Último

Último (20)

SOCIAL INFLUENCE (Psych 201 - Chapter 9 - Spring 2014)