Psych 241 Midterm 2

Social Influence

The study of how our thoughts, feelings, and behaviours change when we are in the presence(real or imagined) of other people

Persuasion

Attempts to change attitudes by applying external messages

Conformity

Attitude or behavior change in response to an implied soical norm

Obedience

Attitude or behavior change in response to a direct, or explicit order

Descriptive Norm:

Information about what most people do in a situation

information about the perceived prevalence of a behavior

eg how often do most UofA students drink alcohol

Injunctive Norms

Information about what is generally approved or disapproved of in a situation

how we should feel or act

what do more uofa students think is an appropriate amount of alcohol to drink

situations where descriptive norm=injunctive norm

Sherifs AutoKinetic studies

Can a group of strangers form a social norm in an ambiguous situation?

Trials alone, trials with others

Partcipants estimate of how much the dot moved

Over time participants estimates converged, meaning they got more similar to each other

concldued this was evidence of a social norm forming

people were looking to others for information about what the correct answer could be

Social Norms

Social norms are specific to groups (group norms)

are a set of beleifs about one’s group and are shared consensually by group members. They make up the groups prototype

Depersonalization

can occur when people categorize themselves in groups

involves internalizing the group prototype

can lead to self-sterotyping

Self-stereotyping

Defining the self in terms of stereotypical representations of the group

Conformity Asch

Line comparison on what is the same length

told it was a visual test exam

when people were on their own they would correctly identify the line but in a group setting with confederates saying the wrong line number they would go with the group

if they had a partner who also chose the correct answer, they were more likely to chose the right answer as they had a partner

Informational Influence

People conform with the group because they think it is a trustworthy source of information

gain information and reduce uncertainty

explanation for sherifs study

focus on what you can learn from the behavior of others

Normative Influence

People conform with the group because they want to gain social acceptance or avoid exclusion

conformity occurs to gain acceptance and praise or to avoid punishment and exclusion

explanation for Asch’s study

focus is fitting in with the group

Compliance

When a persons public attitude changes, but not their private attitude

tends to be short lived

evidence of attitude change tends to go away from the person is not being watched

associated with normative influence

Conversion

When a person’s public and private attitudes change

effects tend to be more long lasting

attitude persists without surveillance

associated with informational influence

Referent Informational Influence

Proposes that for important group memberships, informational and normative influence can blend together

You may conform to group norms because you want to gain-maintain acceptance and because fellow group members are a valuable source of self-relevant information

once someone is depersonalized, people will turn to prototypical group members as models for how to think

Moderator

Factors that either increase or decrease the level of social influence in a situation

Group Cohesiveness

Having more interdependent group members increases normative influence

Group Size

Normative influence increases with group size but levels off after 3 people

Social Support

Having social support decreases normative influence

eg having a dissenter in Aschs study, partner

Self Confidence

Being sure of yourself decreases informational influence

Task Difficulty

More difficult tasks increase informational influence

Cultural norms

Informational influence increases in people who value conformity in or view themselves as linked to others

Social Identity Salience

Being made aware of a social identity increases referent informational influence

Group Identification

Having the group membership strongly define your identity increases reference informational influence

Identity related Uncertainty

Feeling uncertainty about who you are or your place in the world can increase reference informational influence

Group Polarization

The tendency for the starting attitude of a group to become more extreme after the group has engaged in discussion

Normative Influence explanation

People take on slightly more extreme views to gain group acceptance

Informational Influence Explanation

People learn more information supporting the starting attitude, making it stronger

Referent Informational Influence Explanation

People want to make their groups position distinct from that of outgroups

meta contrast principle

Groupthink

when a group makes a bad decision due to excessive desire to achieve consensus

hallmarks include, deteriorating mental efficacy

decreased reality testing

decrease in moral decision making

more likely in situations with high group cohesion, high stress situations, strong leader

Avoiding groupthink

appointing a devils advocate

having a diverse team

create a culture that values dissent

having a leader express their opinions last

3 ways a group can be considered

status, power, numbers

Minority Influence

The study of when and how minority and majority groups can exert influence

consistency draws peoples attention (makes people wonder what info the majority doesn’t have, makes people think more deeply about the minorities message or position'

distinct minorities stand out against the majority

Obedience

Attitude or behavior change in response to a direct or explicit order

milgrim obedience studies with shocks

Potential Moderators

no differences between men and women

setting has an impact

social support (eg someone saying no to ocntinuing woulld decrease obedience)

confederate proximity (seeing the person in milgrims study)

experimenter proximity (eg on phone vs in person)

Group

3 or more people connected through social relationships

Dyad

two people connected by social relationships

Entitativity

The degree to which a group of people appears as a cohesive entity

“how groupy is this group”

can include visual attributes (similarity, proximity, synchronicity)

can also include structural features (shared goals, interdependence, importance)

Visual Elements of Entitativity

Proximity: members are physically close together

Similarity: members look alike

Common Fate: Members’ movements are synchronized

Structural Elements of Entitativity

Interaction: Members communicate and work together

Shared Goals: Member’s are working towards the same goals

Common outcome: Members will all experience the same outcome

Importance of the Group: Members values being part of the group

Variations in Entitativity

Loose Associations

Social Categories

Task Groups

Intimacy Groups

Loose Association

Waiting in line for a store

concert attendees

Social Categories

pretty broad

gender

religion

Task Groups

formed to carry out a specific goal then disband

eg juries

Intimacy Groups

groups who’s membership defines your identity

friends, loved ones

Why do we Join Groups (2)

Groups help us meet our basic needs(food protection, water, shelter) and psychological needs(belonging, uncertainty reduction, sense of identity, self-relevant info)

Social Facilitation

When performance improves in the presence of others

eg cyclists biking faster in head-to-head competitions rather than time trials alone

Social Inhibition

When performance worsens in the presence of others

Common Tasks, social facilitation or inhibition

facilitation

Complex Tasks, social facilitation or inhibition

Inhibition

Cockroach Maze Expiriments

When cockroaches were in the simple maze, they completed the task faster in the presence of an audience (social faciliation)

In the more complex maze, they completed the task faster alone (social inhibition)

Yerkes-Dodsen Law: Relationship Between Stress and Performance

Drive Theory

presence of others creates physiological arousal, which makes the dominant response more likely

if the dominant response is correct = social facilitation

if the dominant response is incorrect = social inhibition

Dominant Response

Most familiar or well-learned response

Evaluation Apprehension

Some theorists argue the possibility of being evaluated is what creates physiological arousal

concern about being evaluated by others

Evaluation Apprehension Blind Fold Experience

Social facilitation will only occur in front of a non-blind folded audience, when participants complete a simple task, aloine, with a blind folded audience, or a normal audience

Distraction Conflict

Evaluation apprehension doesn’t well explain social facilitation and inhibition in animals

physiological arousal occurs from having to attend to the task and the immediate surroundings

also explains inhibition from on-social distractions

Social Loafing

tendency to exert less effort when working collectively than when working alone

more likely in situations with diffusions of responsibility

Ringelmann Effect

Had participants pull on a rope alone and then together in a group

how hard the group pulled was less than the sum of how hard each partcipant pulled alone

diffusion of responsibility

when people in a group feel individually less responsible for the task at hand

Diffusion of Responsibility and Task Complexity

diffusion of responsibility can increase performance on complex tasks

having your efforts pooled with that of other people reduces evaluation apprehension

easy tasks= social loafing

complex tasks= better performance

Social Comprehension

The Tendency to perform better on a group task than when working alone

Social Dilemma

A conflict where the most beneficial action for the individual will, if chosen by enough people, have harmful effects on everyone

Public Goods Dilemma

A social dilemma where individuals need to contribute to a common pool to maintain a shared resource

eg donating to charities

Commons dilemma

A social dilemma where everyone takes from a common pool of good which will disappear if used unsustainably

eg farm animals grazing on public land

Norm Violations

Members who violate group norms can pose a threat to the groups standing and social identity

norm violations can make the group seem less cohesive and postively distinct

Black Sheep Effect

The tendency to view ingroup norm violators more negatively than outgroup norm violators

Pro-Norm Deviant

Someone who’s position is more extreme away from the ingroup

Anti-Norm Deviant

Someone who’s position is closer to that of the out group

we tend to like outgroup members tho that are closer to our ingroup than people who are in our ingroup but closer to that of an outgroup(even if they have the same values)

Leader

Most influential person in a group

Social Influence (leadership)

Leadership is non-coercive

Followers are motivated to aid the leader through social influence

Mobilizing the Aid of Others (leadership)

Leaders work cooperatively

doing all the work yourself is noy leadership

Collective Goals (leadership)

Leadership is a group process

followers are being mobilized to achieve the group goals

Trait Approaches to Leadership

“Great Man” approach: a great man was though to have the innate ability to be exceptional at most endeavors, history being shaped by exceptional individuals

personality traits are determined to be the main determinant of leadership effectiveness

Traits associated with Leadership

Confidence: associated with higher ratings of leadership potential

Intelligence: many studies conducted in the relationship between intelligence and leadership(small to moderate positive correlation)

Big-5: Extraversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness(all positively correlated with leadership), whereas neuroticism that is negatively correlated with leadership

leadership potential:

perceived likelihood of succeeding in a leadership position

Physical Characteristics and Leadership

Height and physical attractiveness are both positively associated with leadership

Psychopathy and leadership

A personality trait characterized by boldness, disinhibition and lack of empathy

• weak positive correlation with leadership emergence

• weak negative correlation between psychopathy and leader effectiveness

Strengths of Trait Approach

Intuitively appealing: reflects how most people think and talk about leadership, reflects cultural views about exceptional people achieving great things

Practical: Its attractive to label people as leadership material when hiring

lots of research over a long time

Critiques of Trait Approach

failed to produce a definitive list of traits

ignores situational factors

not useful in training and development (if being a leader is innate, you cannot train them to be an effective leader)

Autocratic Leadership

Does not seek input from followers, is very directive and stays focused on what needed to be done

aggressive atmosphere is created

high productivity was present only when the leader was present to mange the group

Democratic Leadership

Discusses plans with followers and seeks their input, had hands-on involvement in the group’s work

most effective overall, well-liked by followers, cooperative, focused atmosphere, high productivity even of the leader isn’t present

Laissez-faire leadership:

Gives the group free-rein to do whatever they want, showed little interest in the group’s work

pleasant atmosphere but low productivity

Task-focused Leader Behavior

Related to setting expectations and defining the groups work

eg scheduling work activities, defining role responsibilities, sharing relevant knowledge

Socio-emotional Leader Behaviors

Related to creating mutual trust and a positive, respectful working environment

checking in with people, sorting out disagreements

Spectrum of Leadership behavior

Originally thought that a leader can only be task-focused or socio-emotional but now its believed that you can do both and they exist independent of one another

Contingency Theory

Least preferred Co-worker scale was created for this theory

proposes that the effectiveness of the behavior types depends on the leader’s level of situational control

• leader-member relations are harmonious?

• tasks and goals well defined?

• Leader having legitimate authority over the group?

Low Situational Control Contingency Theory

Low situational control means that task-focused leadership is better

group needs guidance

Medium Situational Control Contingency Theory

Socio-emotional leadership is better

more collaborative approach will help the leader reestablish authority and generate more creative situations

High Situational Control Contingency Theory

Task-focused leadership is better

relations in group are strong so leader does not need to spend time earning trust and respect

Transformational Leadership

The ability to transform a groups vision by motivating followers to work towards group goals rather than personal self interest

• charisma, individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation

Inspirational Motivation

Communicates a clear and ambitious vision for the group

Leader-Member Exchange Theory

Proposes that leader effectiveness is determined by the quality of the dyadic relationship between the leader and individual followers

Leaders have a high exchange relationship with some followers- mutual influence, trust, respect, negotiation (better performance, more motivated, greater psych well being)

Leaders may have low exchange relationships with other followers (more transactional)(comply with group goals but don’t internalize them)

ingroups and outgroups with leader

Social Attraction

once someone is depersonalized, group prototypes become an influential standard against which other group members are evaluated

group members who are prototypical become more socially attractive

Social Identity Theory of Leadership

Proposes that prototypical group members are more likely to emerge as leaders

prototypical leaders tend to receive greater support from followers

Prototypical Leader Advantage

Identity entrepreneurship

attribution of charismatic (charisma is not a stable trait)

License to Fail

Innovation Credit (more leeway to make changes in the group)

Identity Entrepreneurship

Freedom to craft a unique vision for the group by selectively emphasizing or deemphasizing aspects of the group identity

Role Incongruity Theory

Connection between gender stereotypes and who gets to be a leader

Women are stereotyped by having more communal attributes

men are stereotyped as having more agentic attributes

Leaders are associated with more agentic traits so man and leader are congruent whereas women and leader are incongruent

double blind that women face for being in a leadership role