PSYC342: Psychology of Social Influence
door-in-the-face technique (DITF)
- 2 step compliance technique - prefaces real request with request that is so large, it is rejected
foot-in-the-door (FITD) technique
- 2-step compliance technique - requester prefaces real request by first getting target comply with a much smaller request
proof that physical attractiveness influences liking (increasing compliance)
- attractive defendants are more likely to avoid incarceration - attractive candidates in Canadian federal election received 2.5 times more votes - attractive American Heart Association workers raised more money
informational influence: definition and application to Sherif & Asch study
- conformity as a result of individuals believing others are correct in their judgement - Sherif study: group norms persisted, suggesting they were seen as valid - Asch study: follow-up interviews reveal that Ps really believed the group was correct
Theoretical perspectives in social influence
- deliberative/ nondeliberative social influence (social influence tends to occur when people aren't paying attention) - Cialdini's assumption of nondeliberative social influence
reciprocity by proxy technique
- feelings of reciprocity are activated by providing benefit to a valued third party on behalf of the target of compliance
evidence for liking in similarity effects (compliance)
- fingerprint study replicated to measure liking rather than compliance - control and common similarity condition produced same levels of liking - uncommon similarity condition produced increased liking - but this does not prove liking is responsible for compliance effects because there's no measure of compliance
nature of conformity research now vs. in the past
- in the past conformity research focused on negative features of conformity - now it is not seen as inherently good or bad (has potential to be adaptive or maladaptive)
Common examples of using reciprocity principle to increase compliance
- non-contingent gifts in mail for completing surveys - free product samples
critique of research on physical attractiveness as factor influencing liking (and compliance)
- this effect could be due to other processes - physical attractive people tend to receive more positive social feedback --> increased social skills --> more likely to be liked
that's-not-all (TNA) technique
- two step compliance technique - involves asking a request, then before the responder can answer, increases attractiveness of the request (either through increasing benefits or decreasing costs of request)
factors that decrease DITF effect
- using different requesters for each request - time delay in requests - presenting target and large request simultaneously concession - unreasonably large requests - low credibility of requester
measuring self-perception during FITD effect
- we can only measure perceptions of helpfulness and show they enhance after complying to initial request - disappointing results problems: - issues with specificity: unclear whether it causes a general or specific change in self-perceptions - issues with quality of measures
types of social goals, corresponding norms & corresponding types of influence
1. effective action (accuracy) - descriptive norms: what other people usually do in a given situation - informational influence: conformity because people believe others are correct - e.g. littering or not littering 2. social relationships (affiliation) - injunctive norms: what people approve of or disprove of - normative influence: conformity because people fear the social consequences of appearing deviant - e.g. attitudes toward littering 3. self-concept (self-enhancement/ self-consistency) - personal norms: self-based standards or expectations for behaviour that derives from internalized values (norms that reinforce what we think of ourselves already) - e.g. being eco-friendly
6 mechanisms of compliance divided into social groups
1. effective action (accuracy) - social proof - scarcity - authority 2. social relationships - liking - reciprocity 3. self-concept - commitment and consistency
5 factors influencing (social relationship goal) conformity
1. group member interdependence -> increases conformity 2. liking of group members -> increases conformity 3. personality factors (e.g. self-monitoring) -> increase conformity 4. implicit priming -> increases conformity 5. gender differences: suggests women conform more in public interactions
factors influencing liking & compliance
A. physical attractiveness B. similarity C. mere exposure (to stimulus) D. compliments E. cooperation
study on principle of reciprocity influencing compliance: description, conditions, & results
DESCRIPTION: - C pretends to be another P in study - phone rings while researcher is out of the room - after talking on phone, C leaves room to get a pop - later C asks P to buy raffle tickets (DV) - measures avg. number of raffle tickets bought likability conditions: - likeable: polite answering phone - unlikeable: rude answering phone reciprocity conditions: - favour: C gave pop to P - no favour results (highest- lowest compliance rate): - likeable/favour - unlikable/favour - likeable/no favour - unlikeable/ no favour analysis: - reciprocity effect= stronger than liking effect - reciprocity occurs whether you like them or not
"silly" reason experiment: description, conditions & results
DESCRIPTION: - P ask to cut in line to use photocopy machine 3 CONDITIONS: - control: may I use the machine (no reason) - reason: cause I'm in a rush - silly reason: cause I need to make some copies RESULTS: - People are equally likely to say yes to silly reason as they are a regular reason - People are not engaging in deep analysis of question - Justification alone is enough for people to say yes
positive/negative/mixed comment study (liking and compliance)
POSITIVE/ NEGATIVE/ MIXED COMMENT: - person given type of comment from someone needing a favour - results: Ps liked person giving positive comment more even if they knew it was only for a favour; inaccurate praise works just as well as accurate praise
types of conformity
PRIVATE CONFORMITY: - the change in beliefs that occur when a person privately accepts the position taken by others PUBLIC CONFORMITY: - superficial change in overt behaviour without corresponding change of opinion - produced by real or imagined group pressure
explanations for DITF technique
RECIPROCITY NORM: - the movement from large to small request seems like the requester is doing you a favour, increasing feelings of psychological debt/ obligation to compromise PERCEPTUAL CONTRAST: - perception of contrast between large and small request - target request seems small compared to larger request
social norms perspective: theorist, theory description, formation of norms & norm transmission
THEORIST: - Cialdini DESCRIPTION: - social norms as foundation for social influence - social norms: rules that guide/ constrain social behaviour without the force of laws FORMATION OF NORMS: - societal-value perspective (norms are culturally specific and arbitrary) - functional perspective (norms have functional value and are not arbitrary) NORM TRANSMISSION: - via education: taught by parents, peers, institutions - via inferences: acquired indirectly by observing others' behaviour
social impact theory: theorist, description & components
THEORIST: - Latané DESCRIPTION: - suggests social influence is a function of 3 components: SIN COMPONENTS: 1. Strength (of source/ target) - e.g. expertise, power, social prestige 2. Immediacy (of source to target) - e.g. physical distance, nature of relationship 3. Number (of sources influencing target) - e.g. i person vs. 10 ppl trying to influence target)
research on compliments influencing tips ( and compliance): trends & implications
TRENDS: - servers/ hair stylers complimenting customers --> higher tips IMPLICATIONS: - tipping is not an explicit request (involved in compliance) - tipping is normative behaviour - compliments may enhance customers' views of products/ services
example of research on conformity and culture
Kim & Markus experiment: - Ps asked to choose between pens of 2 colours - East Asians picked the most common pen - Americans picked the most unique pen - suggests conformity is greater in collectivist cultures
6 basic mechanisms underlying compliance processes (Cialdini)
1. commitment and consistency 2. liking 3. authority 4. scarcity 5. social proof 6. reciprocity
explanations for low-balling technique
1. commitment to target/ action 2. commitment to requester 3. self-presentation (fear of being viewed negatively) (has not been tested)
3 types of non-deliberative social influence
1. "silly" reasons 2. pique technique 3. disrupt-then-reframe (DTR) technique
experiments on incidental similarity effects (and compliance): description, conditions & results
1. BIRTHDAYS - C and P share same birthday - C asks for feedback on essay Conditions: - control: different birthdays - similarity: same birthday Results: - double compliance rates for similarity condition 2. NAMES - C and P share same name - C asks P to donate money for charity - measured avg. money donated Conditions: - control: different names (avg. $1.00) - similarity: same names (avg. $2.07) Results: - double compliance rates for similarity condition 3. FINGERPRINTS - took fingerprints of C and P - C asks P for feedback on essay Conditions: - uncommon similarity: fingerprint pattern they share is rare (2%) - common similarity: fingerprint pattern they share is common (80%) - control: no comment on fingerprints Results: - more compliance in uncommon similarity condition - control and common similarity condition relatively similar rates of compliance BUT: these experiments do not provide proof for liking
4 types of social influence: definition, nature & example
1. Conformity - tendency to change perceptions/ opinions/behaviours in ways that are consistent with group norms - passive/ internal or external nature - e.g. waiting in line to get on a bus 2. Compliance - changes in behaviour that are elicited by direct requests - active/ external nature - e.g. someone on the street asking you for money 3. Obedience - changes in behaviour that are produced by the commands of an authority figure - active/ external nature - e.g. parents asking you to do something 4. Persuasion - an active attempt by a person (usually through some form of communication) to change another person's attitude - active/ internal nature - e.g. someone trying to convert your religious beliefs
2 research examples of norms influencing behaviour: description, conditions & results
1. LITTERED PARKING LOT: Description: - Ps exposed to C either walking by or littering in a parking lot - flyers placed on windshield of car to see if they would litter - IVs: whether parking lot was clean or already littered Conditions: - control: C only walks by - descriptive norm: C litters Results: - more people littered when parking lot was already littered and when C littered - littering occurred the least when parking lot was clean and C littered - when C littered it made the descriptive norm (littering vs. not littering) salient, causing them to be sensitized to the norm that has been broken 2. "IRON EYES CODY" PSA: Description: - recorded theft of pieces of wood in Arizona National Park Conditions: - control: no sign - descriptive norm: "many ppl have stolen wood" + picture of two people stealing - injunctive norm: "please don't steal wood to preserve the park's natural state" + pic of Cialdini with red crossed circle over picture Results: - most theft occurred when sign outlining descriptive norms was present
3 classic research examples on conformity
1. SHERIF - Ps sit in dark room staring a at fixed point of light - autokinetic effect made light appear to move - Ps make estimates alone then later in a group (about how much light moved) - each group gradually converged answer to common estimate - group norms persisted if individuals were asked again later - Ps have internalized the group norm because they believe the answer is correct 2. ASCH - line comparison task (where objective truth is obvious) - participants in alone condition were wrong 1% of trials; wrong in 37% of trials in group condition - conformity drops by 2/3 when asked to write down their answer 3. MILGRAM ET. AL. - Ps stand on sidewalk and stare up at window in a building - researchers filmed passing pedestrians, coding for those who stopped/ looked up - likelihood of Ps stopping/ looking up related to number of Ps looking up
evidence for self-perception processes in FITD and potential problems
1. size of initial request: - bigger initial requests should produce stronger FITD effects, since this should produce greater self-perception shifts - BUT if initial request is too big, P may not comply 2. actual performance of initial request vs. only agreeing to perform request 3. extrinsic rewards for initial request: - rewarding initial request should undermine FITD effect - once we reward initial request, their behaviour is no longer because of change in self-perception) - BUT this may cause contrast effect: rewarding small request with reward then not rewarding large request may cause large request to seem unappealing 4. consensus information (P is told others complied with initial request) - learning others complied should undermine FITD effect since they will no longer think they are special in their tendencies 5. labelling (compliance behaviour) - feedback to P about compliance of initial task should influence FITD effect - feedback may enhance self-perception and FITD effect - problems: positive feedback may cause mood effects
5 factors influencing (effective action goal) conformity during group tasks
1. unanimity -> reduce but don't eliminate conformity 2. increased task difficulty -> increase conformity 3. lower self-perception of task competence -> increase conformity 4. group size: up to 3 members in Asch paradigm increases conformity 5. perception that other group members are independent -> increase conformity
study on compliments as reciprocity: description, conditions & results
DESCRIPTION: - Ps talk on computer mediated chat with 'another P' - computer responses pre-programmed COMPLEMENT CONDITIONS: - compliment - control: mild positive statement RECIPROCITY CONDITIONS: - reciprocity: P was primed with reciprocity in first task ("scratch my back and i'll scratch __") - control: priming with normal sentences ("the __ is always greener..") - P rated liking of other "P" and mood (to rule out mood effects) - P then asked to provide feedback on essay RESULTS: - compliments increased liking and positive mood (compared to control) - neither liking nor mood had effect on compliance - interaction between compliment condition and reciprocity prime on compliance suggests a role of reciprocity - when reciprocity was primed, compliments had greater influence on compliance
1 research example of low-balling technique: description, conditions & results
DESCRIPTION: - called Ps to participate in study - hidden cost: time CONDITIONS: - control: Ps knew hidden cost before agreeing - low-balling: Ps agreed, then were told hidden hosts RESULTS: - higher compliance rates in low-balling condition than control condition
study on reciprocity by proxy technique: description, conditions & results
DESCRIPTION: - examined towel reuse in hotel CONDITIONS: - control: please reuse your towels - incentive-by-proxy: a third party will benefit (low social obligation) - reciprocity-by-proxy: informs they have already helped a third party and asks for your help (high social obligation) RESULTS: - control and incentive-by-proxy message similar participation rates - reciprocation by proxy condition produced significant compliance rates
new research on self-perception explanation for FITD effect: description, conditions, measures, hypothesis, results
DESCRIPTION: - looks at whether people will take part in responsible drinking program - real/ large request: joining responsible drinking program - small request: signing petition supporting alcohol awareness program at Queen's 4 CONDITIONS: - control: asking to join program - standard FITD: asking to sign petition - FITD with self-perception enhancing feedback: "wow you seem like the person to be concerned with these issues: - FITD with self-perception inhibiting feedback: "i realize this is nbd and means you don't feel strongly about these issues" 4 MEASURES: - specific attitudes (toward responsible drinking) - general self-perception (helpfulness) - compliance to small request (petition) - compliance to large request (signing up for program) HYPOTHESIS: - if self-perception does explain the FITD effect, then providing self-perception enhancing feedback should produce compliance that exceeds standard FITD effect - if the FITD effect changes self-perception at general or specific there is a greater chance this is enhancing compliance RESULTS: - compliance to target request: not greater than standard FITD - compliance to small request: not significantly greater than standard FITD - general helpfulness: not significantly greater than standard FITD (self-perception is not occurring on a general level) -
"pique technique" experiment: description, conditions & results
DESCRIPTION: - pique effect: disrupting people's natural script by presenting an unexpected request (i.e. asking for unusual amount of $) - natural script/ response is to reject the request - Ps asked "excuse me can you spare $____?" 3 CONDITIONS: - control: 25 cents - control: 50 cents - pique technique: 37 cents (followed by either a specific reason or vague reason) RESULTS: - odd request (pique effect) disrupts natural script (to say no) - if people followed up with a question, the majority still gave money whether they were given a specific or vague reason - the structure of the interaction matters, rather than the content of the conversation
original FITD study: description, conditions, results
DESCRIPTION: - real request: display huge billboard in yard promoting safe driving - small request: display small sign in window - 2 weeks between each request CONDITIONS: - FITD: get P to comply with small request, then ask real request - control: ask real/ large request RESULTS: - FITD produced over 3X compliance rates than control condition
"DTR technique" experiments: descriptions, conditions & results
DTR TECHNIQUE: - disrupting traditional request script with a new (typically positive) reframing of the request EXP.1 DESCRIPTION: - sold xmas cards door-to-door for charity EXP.1 CONDITIONS: - price (control): they're $3 - positive reframe: they're $3. it's a bargain - DTR: they're 300 pennies... that's $3. it's a bargain EXP.1 RESULTS: - sales were twice as high when using DTR technique EXP.2 DESCRIPTION: - sold xmas cards with 4 conditions - added "disrupt" condition to determine whether (positive) reframe is needed in DTR (vs. just disrupting) EXP.2 CONDITIONS: - same 3 conditions as previous experiment plus.. - disrupt: they're 300 pennies... that's $3 EXP.2 RESULTS: - reframe is needed for this technique to be effective EXP.3 DESCRIPTION: - must determine whether reframe and disrupt must occur in specific order - use reframe then disrupt (RTD) condition EXP.3 CONDITIONS: - price (control): they're $3 - RTD: they're $3. it's a bargain... that's 300 pennies - DTR: there's 300 pennies... that's $3. it's a bargain EXP.3 RESULTS: - only reframe and disrupt in specific order are effective - social influence is likely to occur when people aren't carefully thinking
Social influence: definition
Definition: the ways in which people exert influence on the behaviours, beliefs, feelings, and attitudes of others
research example testing norms & thoughtfulness: description, conditions & results
Description: - presented Ps with message about campus fitness program - 2X2 design: 2 types of messages; 2 levels of thought conditions Message type: - descriptive norm: discussed others signing up - injunctive norm: discussed why fitness is valuable Conditions: - high thought: no distractions while processing - low thought: given 8-digit phone number to remember Results: - descriptive norms are more powerful under low thought conditions - injunctive norms are more powerful under high thought conditions
2 comprehensive research examples of compliments as compliance tactic: description, conditions, results, implications
EXP.1 - C interacted with P - P rated how much they like C - C later asked P for help handing out flyers Conditions: - compliment: positive comment about clothing - control: neutral statement Results: - liking did not influence whether P would comply with Cs request - suggests compliments influence something else (not liking) that influences compliance implications: - no way to tell whether Ps actually handed out flyers - experimenter expectancy effect (C might smile more in compliment condition) EXP.2 - Ps interacted with 'another person' via online chat - responses were pre-programmed (removes chances of experimenter expectancy) - P rated 'person' they were talking to then were asked for feedback on essay Conditions: - insult - compliment - control: neutral/ mild positive statement Liking results: - compliment increased liking - insult lowered liking Compliance results: - compliment increased compliance; insult didn't lower compliance relative to control BUT: - still no effect of liking on compliance
research on mere exposure and compliance: description, conditions, results, criticisms & solutions
EXP.1 - Ps completed experimental task - Cs asked Ps for feedback on essay Conditions: - control: no prior exposure to C - mere exposure: P in same room as C but no interaction - interaction: C and P briefly talked Results: - mere exposure condition produced same levels of compliance as interaction condition Criticisms: - could be due to mood effect since company of C may enhance Ps mood, increasing compliance SOLUTION: EXP.2 - replicated above study using 2 Cs - results: mere exposure effect only works when C asking request was the same C present in the room
3 examples of research on behavioural mimicry and conformity
EXP.1 - Ps talk with C who either smiles or doesn't smile & rubbed face or shook foot during interaction - counted times per min the P smiled, rubbed face, and shook foot Results: - when C was smiling, P smiled more often - when C rubbed their face, P rubbed theres more often - when C shook their foot, P shook theres more often - smiling is most 'contagious' expression - interviews revealed Ps were unaware of Cs behaviour EXP.2 - Ps talked with C who either mirrored their mannerisms or didn't - Ps later rated liking of C and smoothness of the convo Results: - Ps liked C more when they were mirroring their mannerisms - interviews revealed Ps were unaware of Cs behaviour EXP.3 - people high in perspective taking engage in more behavioural mimicry
bake sale experiments on TNA effect
EXP.1 conditions: - control: 1 cupcake + 2 cookies= 75 cents - TNA: 1 cupcake for 75 cents... but today adding 2 cookies results: - almost double compliance rates in TNA condition EXP.2 conditions: - control: 75 cent cupcake - TNA: $1 cupcake then reduced price to 75 cents - same results as other experiment
2 examples of commitment to requester motivation in low-balling technique: description, conditions & results
EXP.1: DESCRIPTION: - called Ps on phone asking them to participate in research - small request: participate in research - hidden cost: would receive no credit CONDITIONS: - control: told hidden costs before told request - low-balling with same req: no credit after securing agreement with same requester - low-balling with diff req: no credit after securing agreement with different requester RESULTS: - LB with same req produced higher compliance rates - LB with diff req had lower compliance than control condition EXP.2 DESCRIPTION: - small request: sign petition about tuition increase - real request: write letter about tuition increase CONDITIONS: - control: told petition is full then asked to write letter before agreeing - low-balling with different requests: asked to sign petition about bus service, then told petition is full and asked to write letter - low-balling with same requests: agree to sign petition, told its full then asked to write letter RESULTS: - low-balling with same requests produced higher compliance, revealing commitment to requester motivation
examples of DITF studies
EXP.1: blood donation: - C asks P to join blood donation program - large request: long-term donation plan - small request: one-time donation conditions: - control: only small/ target request - DITF: large then small request results: - DIFT condition= greater compliance EXP.2: help from prof - C asks prof for help with course work - large request: meeting 2hr each week - small request: 10-20 mins after class conditions: - control: small request only - DITF: large then small request results: - DIFT condition had greatest compliance OTHER EXPS. - DITF technique has been replicated +78 times
2 experiments looking at liking in similarity and compliance effects: description, results & criticisms
EXPERIMENT 1: Description - fingerprint study replicated to measure liking rather than compliance Results: - control and common similarity condition produced same levels of liking - uncommon similarity condition produced increased liking Criticisms: - but this does not prove liking is responsible for compliance effects because there's no measure of compliance - this only proves similarity influences liking, not that liking influences compliance EXPERIMENT 2 EXP.2 - Ps complete adjective checklist describing themselves - Ps given personality 'feedback' about C - Ps indicate liking toward C - C later asks for feedback on essay Conditions: dissimilar: matched 3 of 20 adjectives neutral: matched 10 of 20 similar: matched 17 of 20 Results on liking: - dissimilar: 40% - neutral: 60% - similar: 77%:
research example on role of mindfulness in TNA effect: hypothesis, conditions for each IV, results & analysis
HYPOTHESIS: - the effects of the reason will not be the same in high thought vs. low thought conditions IV 1: amount of thought - low thought: $1 candy - high thought: $5 IV 2: whether people are told TNA - control: offering set price ($1/$5) - TNA: offering higher price ($1.25/$5.25), then lowering to set price IV 3: reason for buying candy - control: no reason - silly reason: they're made of chocolate and sold in this box - real reason: they're hand-dipped LOW THOUGHT RESULTS: - IV 2: TNA produced more compliance than control (TNA works when people aren't thinking in depth) - IV 3: silly/placebic reason have same compliance rate HIGH THOUGHT RESULTS: - IV 2: TNA produced lower compliance rates than control condition - IV 3: real reason produced highest compliance rates, followed by control condition, than placebic reason ANALYSIS: - since $1 condition does not induce much thought, TNA should best in low thought conditions - in low thought conditions, reason is valid enough
self-perception theory: description & application to FITD technique
SELF-PERCEPTION THEORY: - we usually have poor access to our internal states/attitudes - when access is poor we engage in attributional processes to infer our internal states APPLIED TO FITD: - when P agrees to put a small sign in the window, that tells her something about herself (e.g. that she is helpful) - when asked a larger request, they feel the need to maintain consistency - since agreeing to a small request changes their self-perception, they are more susceptible to the second request
"hippie" vs. "straight" study: results, description & criticisms
description: - Ps dress as "hippie" or "straight" and ask college students for a dime results: - double compliance rates when Ps clothes were similar to Cs clothes criticisms: - experimenter expectancy effect
types of norm influence (AKA goal and norm conflict)
situational influence: - certain contexts can activate norms dispositional influence: - people can be predisposed to value certain norms conflict between these two: - sometimes context and disposition can produce competing or complementary norms
