social psych exam 3

agentic state

state in which an individual places responsibility for actions on an authority; grants a greater likelihood to obey disagreeable requests

autokinetic effect

apparent movement of bright light on a dark background due to the lack of fixed referent

ben franklin theory

you will like someone else more if you do something for them

cognitive dissonance

discomfort people feel when two cognitions - behavior and attitudes - conflict

cognitive dissonance theory

different to adding a constant cognition as you're not consciously setting up a first thing; two requests have to be related

compliance

behavior change as the result of a direct request (conforming is indirect)

conformity

any chance in behavior as a result of implicit social influence, real or imagined; INDIRECT

counterattitudinal advocacy

if we endorse/argue for something we don't believe, we may come to believe it

descriptive norms

people's perceptions of how other people actually behave in a given situation, regardless of whether the behavior is approved or disapproved of by other people

dissonance rates are often lower in

collectivist cultures (asian)

do no harm

normative to not hurt people

door in the face

if you are unlikely to get agreement with a request
- devise a much larger request
- have your larger request denied
- "negotiate down" to your real request

duelling experts

experts with conflicting opinions causes subject to side with the person whose opinion they agree with and causes dissent easier

external justification

behaviors are the result of an external factor; adding a consonant cognition

foot in the door

if you are unlikely to get agreement with a request
- create a smaller related request
- gain compliance with the smaller request
- wait a while and then request your larger request

high importance + low ambiguity

semi-low conformity

how to reduce dissonance

- change behavior
- change attitude
- justify behavior by adding new attitudes

hypocrisy induction

the arousal of dissonance by having individuals make statements that run counter to their behaviors and then reminding them of the inconsistency between what they advocated and their behavior; lead individuals to more responsible behavior

idiosyncrasy credits

the tolerance a person earns over time by conforming to group norms; if enough credits are earned the person can on occasion deviate from the group without retribution

illusory irrevocability

get the effects of permanence on dissonance reduction without the behavior really being permanent

immediacy

how close is the group to you physically at the time of the decision
- increased proximity \= increased conformity

informational social influence

relying on others for accurate knowledge and cues to appropriate behavior

injunctive norms

people's perceptions of what behaviors are approved of or disapproved of by other people; more powerful than descriptive norms

insufficient punishment effect

valuation of a desired object/activity decreases if there's no good external justification for resisting the desired object/activity
- not enough external justification

internal justification

changes in behavior or attitude to reduce dissonance

justification of effort

if you work hard to attain something you're more likely to enjoy it more

low importance + low ambiguity

high conformity

low-balling

after committing to a behavior, the cost can be raised to a point that would not have been initially agreed to, without the actor withdrawing

minority influence

minority opinions will sway majorities if
- majority is unsure about position
- minority is consistent and unwavering in their position

narcissism

combination of excessive self-love and a lack of empathy towards others

normative influence

conforming in order to be liked/accepted by others

normative social influence

public compliance without private acceptance

number

how many people are in the group
- increased number \= increased conformity

obedience

behavior change as the result of a request from an authority figure; expectation that authority figures will get compliance with you because of their authority

obey authority

nature of authority is such that it can compel obedience

post-decision dissonance

dissonance aroused after making a decision, typically reduced by enhancing the attractiveness of the chosen alternative and devaluating the rejected alternatives

principle of reciprocal concessions

in negotiation situations, concessions by one party should be met with concessions from the other

private acceptance

conforming to other people's behavior out of a genuine belief that what they're doing/saying is right

propaganda

deliberate, systematic attempt to advance a cause by manipulating mass attitudes and behaviors, often through misleading or emotionally charged information; common in normative conformity

public compliance

conforming to other people's behavior publicly without necessarily believing in what the other people are doing/saying

reciprocity

if someone does something for you, it creates an expectation that you will repay those actions in kind; doesn't last very long

self-affirmation theory

idea that people can reduce threats to their self-esteem by affirming themselves in areas unrelated to the source of threat

self-evaluation maintenance theory

idea that people experience dissonance when someone close to us outperforms us in an area that is central to our self-esteem

social impact theory

the likelihood that one responds to social influence relies on three variables: strength, immediacy, number (all direct relationships)

strength

how important is the group to you
- increased importance \= increased conformity

terror management theory

theory that self-esteem serves as a buffer, protecting people from terrifying thoughts about their own mortality

when does informational social influence occur

- ambiguous situation
- crisis situation
- situation in which others are experts

when does normative influence occur

- larger group
- important group
- no allies
- collectivist group