New version page

FSU SOP 3004 - Social Influence

Documents in this Course
CHAPTER 1

CHAPTER 1

13 pages

Chapter 4

Chapter 4

14 pages

Notes

Notes

52 pages

Chapter 1

Chapter 1

10 pages

Chapter 7

Chapter 7

10 pages

Notes

Notes

9 pages

Load more
Upgrade to remove ads

This preview shows page 1-2-3-4-5 out of 15 pages.

Save
View Full Document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 15 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 15 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 15 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 15 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 15 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Upgrade to remove ads
Unformatted text preview:

Social Influence Conformity Obedience Group Influence PersuasionConformity Adjusting one’s behavior to coincide with a group standard Asch’s line experimentso Almost all correct when alone (95%)o 75% of P’s went against their own eyes at least once (if their group gave the wrong answer)… almost all incorrect in order to conformReasons to Conform Normative influence Informational InfluenceNormative Influence- being liked Public conformity not private acceptance… people fear social rejection A strong group consensus leads people to do things they wouldn’t normally doInformational influence- crowd knows best Public conformity private acceptance People assume majority is correct, we use the group as a source of informationObedience Following orders from an authority figureo Usually good for the group! Milgrams shock experimento People followed orders by someone who looked legitMilgram and obedience Ethical considerations SusceptibilitySocial Facilitation The tendency to perform well when others are presento Children wind string faster when working around others than alone Sometimes the presence of others makes performance worse (social inhibition)o Arousal enhances a person’s dominant responseo If you are good at it, a crowd makes you even better, if you aren’t good at it a crowd makes you worseSocial loafing People often reduce effort when working in a group3/19/13Deindividuation People in groups feel anonymous Deindividuation: loss of self-awareness, responsibility, and evaluation apprehensionDiener’s trick or treat study Some kids were alone, some were in groups and then the groups were either anonymous or noticed (name/dob/etc). Then kids were told to take one piece of candy without experimenter in the roomo Kids who were anonymous and in a group were the most likely situation to take more than one piece. Kids who were not in a groups still were more likely to take candy if anonymous, but not that high because they were the only one in the room. Zimbardo test Dressed women in white coats and hoods (anonymous) or without uniform and with name tag (identifiable) Women pressed a button to shock a person (actually a confederate) Anonymous women pressed shock button twice as long as identifiable womenDeindividuation Can lead to increased anti-social behavioro Physical harmo StealingPower Social Power- the capacity to influence others’ outcomes, behaviors, etc Most groups are hierarchicalo What are the effects of having power?Example: Participants asked to think about a time they had power (high power) or think about a time someone else had power over them (low power) Then asked to write an “E” on their foreheado If you are thinking for other people, then it would be drawn so others could read it. Whereas, if you are thinking about yourself… it’ll be drawn so you can read it (mirror). Those who thought they had high power were more likely to be self-oriented or write the E so only they can read it.  Power decreases empathyExample: Participants are put into high power or low power situations Taken to another room to complete paper and pencil task, there is a fan blowing where they are trying to write. Trying to see what people are more likely to getup and turn off the fan. High power condition was much more likely to turn off the fan.  Power motivates actionExample: What do we do to keep our power? People were assigned to have power over others (in charge of determining how to work on project) You have to unscramble a bunch of anagrams for money. You have to be quicker than the other team.  Told everyone that they were the only one who had power over the rest of the team to eliminate one person from the team (because too many people showed up) after completing a preliminary anagram project How likely are they to exclude the really skilled person?  Varied stability of powero Stable power: you are in power throughout the experiemento Unstable power: depending on how your group members do on this task, you might lose power within the group Measured Power Motivation Unstable power, and the person likes being in power then they are very likely to want to get rid of the very skilled person because they could lose their power to him/her In unstable power positions, for power-driven people: Power motivates behavior to protect powerPower Decreases empathy Motivates action Motivates behavior to protect powero In unstable power positions, for power-driven peopleSocial Influence Powerful Important HelpfulOverall, conformity and obedience are pro-social behaviors that allow groups to function Business Military Science and medicineSocial Influence and Persuasion Elaboration Likelihood Modelo Central Route to persuasion- when interested people focus on the arguments and respond with favorable thoughts Buy the sandwich, its healthy, high quality, and cheapo Peripheral Route to Persuasion- when people are influenced by incidental cues, such as speaker’s attractiveness He spits on you when he talks, hes greasy looking, the sandwich truck is rusty and covered in bugsCentral Route Audience is analytical and motivated Processing is high, elaborate, and includes agreement or counter-arguing Cogent arguments evoke enduring agreement Scientific studies, lots of facts written down, published information.o Then people will either agree or disagree with the facts but this takes A LOT of energy to read, understand, and then argue. But people have very strong and hard to change opinions from this route.Peripheral Route Audience is not analytical or as involved Processing with low effort using peripheral cues and heuristics Cues trigger liking and acceptance, but often only temporary Cute pictures, sad music, attractive speaker. Not as resilient of opinions made.Example: Participants listened to argument for policy change Manipulated:o Personal Involvement: Next year (high involvement) vs. 10 years later (low involvement)o Source expertise: Either hard the argument by a high school class (non-expert) or Princeton Professor (expert)o Argument Quality: Strong (backed by data) vs. Weak (personal opinion Highly involved people: opinion isn’t shaped by expert vs. non expert (central route), but is shaped if it is a strong argument (policy is more desirable) Low involved


View Full Document
Download Social Influence
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Social Influence and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Social Influence 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?