Social (WS) Exam 3

informational conformity

copy others because you don’t know what to do and think they’re right

compliance

changing your behavior because someone asks you to (do what they want)

persuasion

process that uses a message to change attitudes/thoughts or behaviors

descriptive norm

what you think others are doing, regardless of what you think they think is right

normative conformity

do what others are doing because you want to fit in (for acceptance)

attitude inoculation

challenge beliefs in small ways now, strengthens your ability to defend later

source amnesia

you forget where/how you learned something – but you remember the ‘fact’

sleeper effect

old info takes on new power when you forget original source was untrustworthy

obedience

changing your behavior because an authority figure tells you to

social norms

set of beliefs/behaviors that are accepted and expected by a group

conformity

copy others – you initiate – do because you choose – general term for this

ego depletion

state of vulnerability, difficult to resist temptation, fall for weak arguments

reactance

we want things more if we think we cannot have them

idiosyncrasy credits

group members who usually follow rules get a pass sometimes if they don’t

compliance tactics

techniques that can be used to increase chance someone does what you want

injunctive norm

what we believe people think is right, what we should do, the rules

selective avoidance

we don’t even realize that we avoid info that conflicts with our beliefs

contagion

rapid spread of behavior through a crowd – unconscious conformity

pre-suasion

ways to make sure audience is ready for your persuasive message (Cialdini)

forewarning

it is harder to persuade someone who knows in advance you will try to do so

Investment Model of Commitment

Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love

Three basic components of Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love

Intimacy

Passion

Commitment

Communal Relationships

primary concern is to be responsive to the other person, we give even if won’t get back

Exchange Relationships

keeping track of what we get and give in the relationship

Yale Attitude Change Approach

study of conditions under which people are most likely to change attitude in response to a persuasive message

_____ matters in persuasiveness

who says what to whom

Impact of credibility on persuasion

more likely to listen to those with power/experts

Impact of attractiveness on persuasion

Attractive people (physically or personality vise) persuade people more than unattractive speakers do

Impact of similarity on persuasion

if they are similar to us we are more likely to agree and believe

Impact of likeability on persuasion

If we like the person we are more likely to agree with them compared to someone we don’t like

Impact of source amnesia on persuasion

if the content of a message has become detached from its source it will impacts persuasion

Impact of sleeper effect on persuasion

a delayed increase in the persuasive impact of a message, occurring when a message from a low-credibility source becomes more influential over time

Impact of age on persuasion

Younger individuals often more influenced by social proof and peers, that older people

Impact of mood on persuasion

Those in a good mood are more open to persuasion than those in a bad mood

Impact of one sided on persuasion

People are less likely to be persuaded if you only present one side of an argument

Impact of two sided on persuasion

Presenting both sides works best to refute the argument of the opposing side

Impact of going first on persuasion

If the speeches are given back to back then delay before they make up their mind it is better to go first due to the primacy effect

Impact of going last on persuasion

If there is a delay between speeches and people make their mind up after the last one it is better to go last due to the recency effect

Elaboration Likelihood Model

2 paths of processing info (fully and superficially)

Central Route

fully

systematic (controlled) processing

focus on arguments/reasons (deep)

refleCtive

Peripheral route

heuristic (automatic) processing

focus on superficial associated factors

status/credibility of speaker, likability, emotion, peers

if I like/feel good; agree; used by advertisers

refleXive

Who uses central route processing?

People who are interested, relevant, motivated, able audience and/or if attitude is cognitively based

Who uses peripheral route processing?

People who are distracted, uninvolved or incapable audience and if attitude is affectively based

Jerry Burger

given permission to do a partial re-do of Milgram’s Classic Study to study obedience more recently

Stanley Milgram

Told testing effects of punishment on learning really testing obedience

Shock study

65 percent went all the way

Solomon Asch

studied normative conformity in group settings

higher number of people, public response, relationship with the group, high status, public statement, all are factors that will make people conform more

Muzafer Sherif

studied informational conformity by using an ambiguous task

jealousy

concerns we are losing the attention of another (seen as a threat to our self esteem)

reciprocal liking

we are more likely to like those who like us, especially if we think they only like us!

romantic love

relationship that involves passion and intimacy (Sternberg) (aka passionate)

commitment

cognitive decision to stay in a relationship long term

loneliness

fewer social connections than desired, associated w/ poor physical and psych health

consummate love

contains passion, intimacy and commitment – a.k.a. complete love

passion

physical attraction and excitement and arousal in a relationship (Sternberg)

companionate love

relationship that involves intimacy (closeness) and commitment (Sternberg)

communal relationship

relationship based on long term care and responsiveness to the other person

proximity

amount of interaction used to be based on physical closeness, tech changed that a bit

avoidant attachment

an independent style, may be distant in relationships, resent dependence

(two types: dismissing and fearful)

investments (relationship)

things you put into a relationship that you cannot get back (e.g.,time + $$)

‘fatal attraction’

the thing that first attracted you becomes the most annoying (attentive→smothering)

exchange relationship

relationship value based on the balance between what you give and what you get

relationship satisfaction

compare the balance of pros and cons in a relationship to what you expect

intimacy

closeness and sharing in a relationship, the bond (Sternberg)

nonconscious synchrony

coordination of body + language patterns w/o realizing, may indicate compatibility

mere exposure effect

more you see something, more you tend to like it (unless first was negative)

anxious attach (preoccupied)

wants close relationships, fears rejection, clingy, tends to be jealous (aka resistant)

propinquity

term used to represent combination of proximity and familiarity

similarity

we are drawn to those like us (looks, values, age, SES, education level, etc)

dissimilarity

differences can push us apart more than similarities attract us!

secure attachment style

comfortable in relationships, confident, positive outlook on world, often successful

lowballing

get them to say yes to something, then reveal hidden ‘costs’ (or extras)

door-in-the-face

get them to say no to a big request, then reduce pressure, ask for smaller

gifting

give something small to increase chance they give back something bigger

foot-in-the-door

get them to say yes to a small request, then ask for something bigger

“limit 6”

people buy more (want more) if you make them think supply is short (or can't have)

Why does the principle of reciprocity work?

Most are socialized to give back for what they get.

ie. Gifting and door-in-the-face

Why does the principle of consistence work?

We like to be consistent, stick to our commitments

ie. Foot-in-the-door and lowballing

Why does the principle of scarcity work?

It triggers reactance – we want things more if we think we can’t have them

ie. “limit 6” and anything else that makes us think we will miss out or can’t get what we want

Ways to resist persuasion

Be Forewarned

Make a Personal commitment

Non-ego depleted

High in reactance

High need for uniqueness

Selective Avoidance

The 3 times we are most likely to see informational conformity

if ambiguous

if there’s a crisis

if others seen as expert

Factors that increase the chance of seeing conformity

high task difficulty, ambiguity, or a unanimous majority of three to five people

Factors that increase chance of obedience

Authority

Commands change gradually

Events move quickly

Victim’s distance or depersonalization

Closeness and legitimacy

Institutional authority

Others obeying

Common beliefs of those who didn’t obey to hurt stranger

Don’t impose your will on another (most common)

You are responsible for what you do

You are free to disobey commands to hurt others

Factors that increase the chance the minority opinion will influence the majority

Self-Confidence

Defections from the Majority

How we ‘pick’ friends and partners

Proximity

Familiarity

Similarity

Physical attractiveness

Reciprocal liking

Values and personality traits

Cialdini’s 7 Principles of Influence

Reciprocity, Scarcity, Authority, Consistency, Liking, Social Proof, and Unity.

Reciprocity

we are socialized to give back for what we get

Scarcity

we want it more if we think we cannot have it

Authority

credibility matters - more likely to listen to those with power/experts

Consistency

we tend to stick to past, don’t like to be wrong, like to see ourselves as coherent and following our beliefs

Liking

similarities helps, attracted to, more likely to believe

Social Proof

we tend to go along with the group/peers

Unity

shared identities, not just liking increase draw

Name Gottman’s 7 principles of successful relationships

Truly Know Each Other

Nurture fondness and admiration

Turn toward each other as friends

Let your partner influence you

Solve solvable conflicts together

Overcome gridlock (perpetual conflicts)

Create shared meaning

John Gottman’s 4 Horsemen

criticism, defensive, contempt, stonewalling

Most recently added fifth horseman

Belligerence

What is the most predictive of divorce?

contempt

Risk factors for and consequences of chronic loneliness

- psychological distress

- reduced physical health and life expectancy

Effective strategies / techniques used to address loneliness

 Improve Emotional Intelligence

 Prevent Self fulfilling prophecy

 Video record and watch to identify interaction issues

 Change relationship expectations; be more realistic; more flexible

 Use internet to build skills

 Change self-defeating attributional style

 Treat depression/anxiety/other disorders, if necessary