chapter 10: groups and influence - textbook

Attitude change

A shift in a person’s attitudes about an issue or person or situation

Attitude inoculation

A process that helps someone resist persuasion attempts by exposing them to a weak version of potential persuasive arguments

Authority

The capacity to direct or regulate other group members’ behavior by invoking rights vested in one’s role

Communication–persuasion paradigm

A research approach examining the source and message and target and channel and impact. It asks who says what to whom through which medium and with what effect

Communicator credibility

The extent to which an audience perceives a persuasive communicator as a believable source of information

Compliance

Following a source’s requests or demands. It can occur with or without a change in attitudes

Discrepant message

A persuasive message advocating a position different from what the target believes

Five-factor model

A personality model organizing traits into agreeableness and conscientiousness and extraversion and openness and neuroticism. Also called the Big Five

Agreeableness

A Big Five personality factor associated with warmth and friendliness

Conscientiousness

A Big Five personality factor associated with efficiency and dependability

Extraversion

A Big Five personality factor associated with outgoingness and assertiveness

Openness

A Big Five personality factor associated with curiosity and insight

Neuroticism

A Big Five personality factor involving a tendency toward emotional instability and negative emotions

Moral foundations

Hypothesized patterns in the fundamental principles that different groups and societies use to distinguish right from wrong

Persuasion

An effort by a source to change a target’s beliefs or attitudes using information or argument

Promise

An influence technique communicating that if you do something the source wants then the source will do something you want

Reactance

Resistance to a persuasion attempt because it threatens the target’s independence or freedom

Social impact theory

A theory stating that the impact of an influence attempt depends on the strength and immediacy and number of sources present

Social influence

An interaction in which one person’s behavior causes another person to change an opinion or perform an action they otherwise would not

Source

The person who intentionally uses an influence attempt to change another person’s behavior

Target

The person affected by a social influence attempt. In aggression it means the person toward whom an aggressive act is directed

Threat

An influence technique communicating that if you do not do something the source wants then the source will do something you do not want

Open influence

An influence attempt in which the target knows someone is trying to change their attitudes or behavior

Manipulative influence

An influence attempt hidden from the target

Elaboration likelihood model or ELM

A model explaining how motivation and ability to think about a message affect the route through which persuasion occurs

Elaboration

Thinking carefully about a message and its arguments

Central route to persuasion

Persuasion through careful evaluation of a message’s arguments. It usually produces more lasting attitude change

Peripheral route to persuasion

Persuasion based on cues such as attractiveness or likability or perceived expertise instead of careful evaluation of arguments

Source expertise

The source’s perceived knowledge or skill relevant to the topic

Source trustworthiness

The extent to which the source seems honest and sincere

Sleeper effect

A delayed increase in a message’s persuasiveness as the message becomes dissociated from a cue that initially caused people to discount it

Rational appeal

An attempt to persuade using facts and evidence and reasoning

Emotional appeal

An attempt to persuade by arousing feelings

Fear appeal

A message emphasizing negative consequences that may occur unless the target takes a recommended action

One-sided message

A message presenting only arguments supporting the source’s position

Two-sided message

A message presenting the source’s position and opposing viewpoints

Refutational appeal

A message that presents an opposing argument and explains why it should be rejected or discounted

Issue involvement

How personally important or relevant an issue is to the target

Need for cognition

A tendency to enjoy thinking carefully and working through problems

Moral framing

Presenting an argument in terms of the audience’s moral values

Obedience

Following an order from someone perceived as having authority

Forewarning

Advance notice that a persuasion attempt is coming. It can encourage people to prepare counterarguments

Transmitter

Someone who passes an authority’s orders to another person

Executant

Someone who actually carries out the orders

Reward power

Influence based on the target wanting a reward the source controls

Coercive power

Influence based on the target wanting to avoid a punishment the source controls

Referent power

Influence based on admiration or identification with someone or a desire for acceptance by a valued group

Legitimate power

Influence based on accepting the source’s right to give orders because of their role

Informational power

Influence based on the information itself convincing the target to change

Expert power

Influence based on trusting the source’s relevant expertise even without understanding all the details

How do persuasion and compliance and obedience differ?

Persuasion seeks to change beliefs or attitudes through information or arguments. Compliance means following a request. Obedience means following an authority’s order

Does compliance or obedience require attitude change?

No. Someone can follow a request or obey an order while privately disagreeing

What conditions favor the central route to persuasion?

High motivation and sufficient ability to think carefully about the message

What conditions make peripheral cues more influential?

Low involvement or distraction or limited motivation or ability to evaluate the arguments

Does central processing guarantee agreement?

No. Careful evaluation can lead someone to accept or reject a message

What source characteristics can affect persuasion?

Expertise and trustworthiness and likability

What message and audience characteristics can affect persuasion?

Argument quality and the audience’s knowledge and involvement and personality and values

Why does no single persuasion technique work equally well for everyone?

Persuasion depends on the interaction among the source and message and target

When are one-sided messages often more effective?

When audiences already agree or know little about the issue

When are two-sided messages often more effective?

When audiences are knowledgeable or initially opposed to the source’s position

How does a refutational appeal address opposition?

It presents opposing arguments and then responds to them

When do fear appeals work best?

When the threat seems serious and plausible and the audience has a specific and effective action it can take

What can happen when a fear appeal becomes overwhelming?

The audience may respond with denial

How does message discrepancy affect attitude change?

A message must differ somewhat from the target’s existing position to change it. Extremely different messages may be dismissed

How does source credibility affect acceptable message discrepancy?

A credible source can generally advocate a more discrepant position before losing the audience

What are the three factors in social impact theory?

Strength and immediacy and number of sources

When are multiple sources more persuasive?

When they seem independent of one another

What happens to the benefits of adding more influence sources?

Additional sources tend to produce diminishing benefits

What makes threats and promises effective?

The target must care about the reward or punishment and believe the source can and will follow through

What percentage of participants reached the maximum indicated shock level in the Milgram study described?

65 percent or 26 out of 40 participants

Did the learner receive actual shocks in Milgram’s study?

No. The learner received no actual shocks

What conditions tended to increase obedience in the Milgram studies described?

Direct authority surveillance and greater distance from the victim and transmitting orders instead of personally executing them

How do inoculation and forewarning and reactance differ?

Inoculation provides practice resisting weakened arguments. Forewarning provides notice of an upcoming persuasion attempt. Reactance involves resistance to a perceived threat to freedom

What is a possible boomerang effect of reactance?

A persuasion attempt can cause the target to move in the opposite direction from what the source intended