Social Influence
Social Influence • Efforts by one or more individuals to change the attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, or behaviors of others • Conformity • Compliance • Obedience
Conformity • Type of social influence in which individuals change their attitudes or behavior in order to adhere to existing social norms • Social Norms: Rules indicating how individuals are expected to behave in certain situations • Explicit (written) • Implicit (unwritten)
Asch’s Conformity Experiments
Asch’s Conformity Experiments
Asch’s Conformity Experiments • 25% never conformed • 75% conformed at least once • Average conformity: 33% of trials • Number of people in the majority are important • One person giving correct answer almost eliminated conformity
Why do people conform? • Informational social influence • Based on desire to be correct • Social Comparison: • Evaluate the accuracy of beliefs or the quality of personal attributes by comparing themselves to others
Why do people conform? • Informational social influence • Based on desire to be correct • Normative social influence • Based on desire to be liked and accepted • Negative consequences of nonconformity? • Internalized standards
Why do people conform? • Informational social influence • Based on desire to be correct • Normative social influence • Based on desire to be liked and accepted • Cohesiveness • Accept influence from those we like • Group size • As group size increases, conformity increases
Resisting Pressure to Conform • Reactance • React against threats to a personal freedom by asserting that freedom
Resisting Pressure to Conform • Asserting Uniqueness • Need to see ourselves as unique results in less conformity
Compliance • Type of social influence in which a person changes attitudes or behavior in response to another’s direct request • Six principles involved in getting people to comply with requests • Friendship/Liking • Commitment and Consistency • Scarcity • Reciprocity • Social Validation • Appeals to Authority
Compliance • Friendship/Liking • Ingratiation: If someone likes you, they are more apt to agree with your request • Self-enhancement: If you look good, use appealing nonverbal behavior, people will come to like your request as well! (think of classical conditioning) • Enhancing the other: flattery will get you places; gifts and favors work too
Compliance • Commitment and Consistency • Once we make a choice or take a stand, we encounter pressure to behave consistently with that commitment • Foot-in-the-door • Lowballing • Bait-and-switch • Effortful commitment
Compliance • Scarcity • Opportunities seem more valuable when they are less available • Limited number—Item is rare and hard-to-get • Limited-time offer
Compliance • Reciprocity • We should try to repay what another has provided us • Door-in-the-face • That’s not all • Foot-in-mouth
Compliance • Social Validation • We view a behavior as correct in a given situation to the extent we see others performing that behavior • Bystander intervention
Compliance • Appeals to Authority • Authority provides benefits to society • Automatic compliance with authority can cause trouble • Titles • Material culture • Experts agree…
Obedience • Type of social influence in which a personobeys a direct order from another to perform an action • Nazi Germany—Many people were simply following orders. Is this legitimate? Are normal people capable of true evil when ‘following orders’?
Stanley Milgram’s Obedience Experiments • 40 males, aged 20 to 50, each paid $4.50 for a study onlearning and memory • Participant is the ‘teacher’—teach a list of word pairs to the‘learner’ and shock him in increasing levels if he gets it wrong
Stanley Milgram’s Obedience Experiments • At certain levels, the ‘teacher’ hears the ‘learner’ protest • If the ‘teacher’ asks to end the experiment, the experimenter responds with a verbal prod • How far would you go? How far do you think the average person would go?
Stanley Milgram’s Obedience Experiments • Every participant went to 300 volts • 26 participants — 65% — went all the way to 450 volts (“X X X”) • Many showed signs of considerable distress • Participants were carefully debriefed and follow-ups conducted
Stanley Milgram’s Obedience Experiments • Replications • Distance from participant to ‘learner’ • Distance from participant to experimenter • Outside the Yale University setting • Women, other cultures • Autonomy of participant
What Breeds Obedience? • Emotional Distance of the Victim • If ‘learner’ is in same room, full obedience drops to 40% • If ‘teacher’ has to hold ‘learner’s’ hand to a shock plate, full obedience drops to 30% • Depersonalization
What Breeds Obedience? • Closeness and Legitimacy of Authority • If experimenter gives commands by phone, full obedience drops to 21% • If experimenter leaves, and a ‘clerk’ decided that the shock should be increased, 80% of participants defied the illegitimate authority
What Breeds Obedience? • Institutional Authority • Authority of Yale University influenced volunteers • Milgram replicated the experiment in Bridgeport, Connecticut – 48% fully obeyed
What Breeds Obedience? • Disobedience of a fellow group member liberates us from obedience • If another person defied the experimenter, only 10% of Milgram’s participants fully obeyed
Intense Indoctrination: Cults
Intense Indoctrination: Cults • Compliance breeds acceptance • Foot-in-the-door • Charismatic leader • Vivid, appealing message • Potential converts are often at a turning point in their lives • Isolation from outside influences • Social validation
