laatste social influence

authority effects (studies)

1. milgrim’s obedience studies

2. wilson, perceived professors to be taller than students

3. higam & carment, politicians perceived to be taller after they win

4. peters & ceci, 8 out of 9 ‘manuscripts’ refused after prestegious affiliation was gone

5. real life, adversiting stesses expertise

taco bell study findings

• low scarcity / weak argument - 4.5%

• low scarcity / strong argument - 2.5%

  • argument quality doesn’t do anything for compliance in low scarcity condition

• high scarcity / weak argument - 1.5%

  • if ciadini was true then it would also be significant in this condition (he says it’s automatic, but this is not the case here

• high scarcity / strong argument - 9.5%

  • only one significant

goals of the stanford prison experiment (1971)

1. deindividuation/ dehumanisation in isolated environment

2. ability of social situation to overcome individual dispositions in the absense of direct imposition of authority

conclusions of the stanford prison experiment (1971)

1. situations can make people act in unpredictable ways

2. situational power highest in novel settings, when people cannot call upon previous guidelines

3. situational power involves ambiguity of role boundaries and institutionalised/ authoritative permission to behave in prescibed ways

4. role playing can have realistic impact

5. highly isolated environments can make good people perform anti-social behaviour

6. controlled experiments can capture essential features of real-world psychological processes

7. prisons are bad

social influence in politics, 3 models

1. direct effects model (hypodermic perspective)

2. limited-effects model

3. powerful effects under limited conditions perspective

agenda setting experiment question

what is the most important problem?

issue priming in naturalistic context

• increased coverage of Iran-Contra Affair

  • used to evaluate Reagon (decreased approval ratings)

• increased coverage of Gulf Crisis

  • used to evaluate Bush (increased approval ratings)

    • when clinton came, shift to economics, his popularity declined

experiments in showing who is most susceptible to priming effects?

1. experiment one: perceived national importance mediated the effect in the group

2. experiment two: there was no evidence for mediation of accessibility of issue on the effect

   1. “the ease with which people can retreive their opinion didn’t matter for the effects”

impact of polls experiment, rated perceptions

1. candidates’ prospects (sig)

2. voting preferences (sig)

3. voting intentions (not sig)