logging in or signing up conformity Churchill Download Post to : URL : Related Presentations : Share Add to Flag Embed Email Send to Blogs and Networks Add to Channel Uploaded from authorPOINTLite Insert YouTube videos in PowerPont slides with aS Desktop Copy embed code: (To copy code, click on the text box) Embed: URL: Thumbnail: WordPress Embed Customize Embed The presentation is successfully added In Your Favorites. Views: 1047 Category: Entertainment License: All Rights Reserved Like it (0) Dislike it (0) Added: December 11, 2007 This Presentation is Public Favorites: 0 Presentation Description No description available. Comments Posting comment... Premium member Presentation Transcript Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience: Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience Slide2: Close your eyes and think about anything that you want. Keep them closed until I ask you to open them.Conformity: Conformity the tendency to change our perceptions, opinions, and/or behaviors in ways that are consistent with social normsConformity: Conformity don’t stand too close to people don’t talk to other people in an elevator do say “Please” and “Thank you”Conformity: Conformity two basic types of conformity public conformity private conformityConformity: Conformity autokinetic effect observed light alone observed light in a group asked to estimate again in private (Sherif, 1936)Conformity: Conformity autokinetic effect final estimate closer to group’s estimate than the original in ambiguous situations, people tend to be suggestible private conformity (Sherif, 1936)Conformity: Conformity epidemic psychogenic illness (EPI) illustrates two things: group norms can be subtle, yet very powerful ambiguity = more susceptibility to conformityConformity: Conformity conformity in unambiguous situations groups of 8 confederates erred on 12 of 18 judgments 37% conformed (only 1% error rate in private) public conformity (Asch 1951, 1956)Conformity: Conformity subsequent studies group size influences conformity ally dissenter decreases conformity by 80% (Asch 1951, 1956)Conformity: Conformity two reasons for conformity normative social influence (public conformity) want to “fit in”; don’t want to be deviant e.g., teenagers, REP sign-up sheetConformity: Conformity two reasons for conformity informational social influence (private conformity) ambiguous situation, we look to others e.g., new bus routeConformity: Conformity extra credit opportunity choose a social norm and violate it write-up due next Monday (3/28) describe how you violated a social norm How did others respond to your norm violation? How did the norm violation make you feel? nothing illegal do not implicate me or my familyCompliance: Compliance changes in behavior that are elicited by direct requestsWeapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence tap into our automatic processes compliance professionals use this processing to their advantage (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence reciprocation: repay in kind what another person has given us powerful and pervasive (cross-culturally) (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence reciprocation study of “art appreciation”; done in pairs IV: likable/not likable and Coke/no Coke DV: # of raffle tickets (Regan, 1971)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence reciprocation Coke condition bought more raffle tickets liking did not matter (Regan, 1971)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence reciprocation door-in-the-face technique: real request is prefaced by one so large that it is rejected; real request seen as a concession Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence reciprocation “County Youth Counseling Program” supervising 2 hours at the zoo -- 17% agreed 2 hrs/wk for 2 years as a counselor -- 0 agreed then the same zoo request -- 50% agreed (Cialdini et al., 1975)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency: taps our strong desire to be consistent over time “Foolish consistency is the hobgoblins of little minds.” Ralph Waldo Emerson (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency foot-in-the-door technique: real request is preceded by first getting compliance with a much smaller request Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency questions about household products 3 days later asked to allow an inventory of their household products (Freedman & Fraser, 1966)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency initially answered questions -- 53% agreed not asked questions -- 22% agreed (Freedman & Fraser, 1966)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency California homeowners asked to display a 3-inch square sign that read “Be a Safe Driver” 2 weeks later: display a PSA billboard in the front lawn that read “Drive Carefully” (Freedman & Fraser, 1966)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency only asked to display billboard -- 17% complied asked first and second request -- 76% complied (Freedman & Fraser, 1966)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency low-balling: secure agreement with a request, but then increase the size of the request by revealing hidden costs e.g., used car salesman Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency low-balling Why does it work? Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence social proof: the situation may be fabricated to influence you to act in a certain way (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence social proof works best in ambiguous situations e.g., door-to-door salesman, bartenders, Three-Card Monty Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence liking: people are more persuasive the more we like them and the more similar they are to us (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence liking physical attractiveness what-is-beautiful-is-good stereotype Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence liking physical attractiveness similarity Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence liking physical attractiveness similarity complementary people Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence The Tupperware Party one starts every 2.7 seconds $2.5 million/day -- almost $1 billion/year (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence The Tupperware Party reciprocity prizes and grab bags (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence The Tupperware Party reciprocity commitment and consistency talk about the usefulness of Tupperware products (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence The Tupperware Party reciprocity commitment and consistency social proof order forms passed around (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence The Tupperware Party reciprocity commitment and consistency social proof liking house of a friend or acquaintance (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence authority: we tend to have an automatic response to authorities (i.e., a heuristic) (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence authority effect of people’s clothing on others willingness to comply “You see that guy over there by the meter? He’s over-parked and doesn’t have any change. Give him a dime!” plain clothing or security guard Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence authority exploited in advertising “4 out of 5 dentists recommend…” “9 out of 10 doctors prefer…” Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence scarcity: arouses a threat to our personal autonomy to control and make decisions (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence scarcity Dade County, Florida -- ban on cleaning products containing phosphates “soap caravans”; 20-year supplies phosphate detergents: rated more gentle, more powerful on stains, more easily pourable Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence scarcity banned books or movies Beanie Babies/Cabbage Patch Kids Home Shopping Network Obedience: Obedience an act in response to a request from authority Obedience: Obedience Milgram studies Pay attention to the factors that affect the influence of the authority figure and the obedience of the participants. Obedience: Obedience Milgram studies social class, education, nor gender has a significant effect on participants’ obedience the effects lie in the situation Obedience: Obedience Milgram studies requirement of informed consent development of Institutional Review Boards debate about the use of deception in psychology Conclusion: Conclusion conformity occurs in response to social norms social norms are pervasive and powerful compliance occurs in response to a direct request obedience occurs in response to an authority figure Next Time: Next Time How do social psychologists’ understand stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination? You do not have the permission to view this presentation. In order to view it, please contact the author of the presentation.
conformity Churchill Download Post to : URL : Related Presentations : Share Add to Flag Embed Email Send to Blogs and Networks Add to Channel Uploaded from authorPOINTLite Insert YouTube videos in PowerPont slides with aS Desktop Copy embed code: (To copy code, click on the text box) Embed: URL: Thumbnail: WordPress Embed Customize Embed The presentation is successfully added In Your Favorites. Views: 1047 Category: Entertainment License: All Rights Reserved Like it (0) Dislike it (0) Added: December 11, 2007 This Presentation is Public Favorites: 0 Presentation Description No description available. Comments Posting comment... Premium member Presentation Transcript Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience: Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience Slide2: Close your eyes and think about anything that you want. Keep them closed until I ask you to open them.Conformity: Conformity the tendency to change our perceptions, opinions, and/or behaviors in ways that are consistent with social normsConformity: Conformity don’t stand too close to people don’t talk to other people in an elevator do say “Please” and “Thank you”Conformity: Conformity two basic types of conformity public conformity private conformityConformity: Conformity autokinetic effect observed light alone observed light in a group asked to estimate again in private (Sherif, 1936)Conformity: Conformity autokinetic effect final estimate closer to group’s estimate than the original in ambiguous situations, people tend to be suggestible private conformity (Sherif, 1936)Conformity: Conformity epidemic psychogenic illness (EPI) illustrates two things: group norms can be subtle, yet very powerful ambiguity = more susceptibility to conformityConformity: Conformity conformity in unambiguous situations groups of 8 confederates erred on 12 of 18 judgments 37% conformed (only 1% error rate in private) public conformity (Asch 1951, 1956)Conformity: Conformity subsequent studies group size influences conformity ally dissenter decreases conformity by 80% (Asch 1951, 1956)Conformity: Conformity two reasons for conformity normative social influence (public conformity) want to “fit in”; don’t want to be deviant e.g., teenagers, REP sign-up sheetConformity: Conformity two reasons for conformity informational social influence (private conformity) ambiguous situation, we look to others e.g., new bus routeConformity: Conformity extra credit opportunity choose a social norm and violate it write-up due next Monday (3/28) describe how you violated a social norm How did others respond to your norm violation? How did the norm violation make you feel? nothing illegal do not implicate me or my familyCompliance: Compliance changes in behavior that are elicited by direct requestsWeapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence tap into our automatic processes compliance professionals use this processing to their advantage (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence reciprocation: repay in kind what another person has given us powerful and pervasive (cross-culturally) (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence reciprocation study of “art appreciation”; done in pairs IV: likable/not likable and Coke/no Coke DV: # of raffle tickets (Regan, 1971)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence reciprocation Coke condition bought more raffle tickets liking did not matter (Regan, 1971)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence reciprocation door-in-the-face technique: real request is prefaced by one so large that it is rejected; real request seen as a concession Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence reciprocation “County Youth Counseling Program” supervising 2 hours at the zoo -- 17% agreed 2 hrs/wk for 2 years as a counselor -- 0 agreed then the same zoo request -- 50% agreed (Cialdini et al., 1975)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency: taps our strong desire to be consistent over time “Foolish consistency is the hobgoblins of little minds.” Ralph Waldo Emerson (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency foot-in-the-door technique: real request is preceded by first getting compliance with a much smaller request Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency questions about household products 3 days later asked to allow an inventory of their household products (Freedman & Fraser, 1966)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency initially answered questions -- 53% agreed not asked questions -- 22% agreed (Freedman & Fraser, 1966)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency California homeowners asked to display a 3-inch square sign that read “Be a Safe Driver” 2 weeks later: display a PSA billboard in the front lawn that read “Drive Carefully” (Freedman & Fraser, 1966)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency only asked to display billboard -- 17% complied asked first and second request -- 76% complied (Freedman & Fraser, 1966)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency low-balling: secure agreement with a request, but then increase the size of the request by revealing hidden costs e.g., used car salesman Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence commitment and consistency low-balling Why does it work? Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence social proof: the situation may be fabricated to influence you to act in a certain way (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence social proof works best in ambiguous situations e.g., door-to-door salesman, bartenders, Three-Card Monty Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence liking: people are more persuasive the more we like them and the more similar they are to us (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence liking physical attractiveness what-is-beautiful-is-good stereotype Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence liking physical attractiveness similarity Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence liking physical attractiveness similarity complementary people Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence The Tupperware Party one starts every 2.7 seconds $2.5 million/day -- almost $1 billion/year (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence The Tupperware Party reciprocity prizes and grab bags (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence The Tupperware Party reciprocity commitment and consistency talk about the usefulness of Tupperware products (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence The Tupperware Party reciprocity commitment and consistency social proof order forms passed around (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence The Tupperware Party reciprocity commitment and consistency social proof liking house of a friend or acquaintance (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence authority: we tend to have an automatic response to authorities (i.e., a heuristic) (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence authority effect of people’s clothing on others willingness to comply “You see that guy over there by the meter? He’s over-parked and doesn’t have any change. Give him a dime!” plain clothing or security guard Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence authority exploited in advertising “4 out of 5 dentists recommend…” “9 out of 10 doctors prefer…” Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence scarcity: arouses a threat to our personal autonomy to control and make decisions (Cialdini, 2000)Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence scarcity Dade County, Florida -- ban on cleaning products containing phosphates “soap caravans”; 20-year supplies phosphate detergents: rated more gentle, more powerful on stains, more easily pourable Weapons of Social Influence: Weapons of Social Influence scarcity banned books or movies Beanie Babies/Cabbage Patch Kids Home Shopping Network Obedience: Obedience an act in response to a request from authority Obedience: Obedience Milgram studies Pay attention to the factors that affect the influence of the authority figure and the obedience of the participants. Obedience: Obedience Milgram studies social class, education, nor gender has a significant effect on participants’ obedience the effects lie in the situation Obedience: Obedience Milgram studies requirement of informed consent development of Institutional Review Boards debate about the use of deception in psychology Conclusion: Conclusion conformity occurs in response to social norms social norms are pervasive and powerful compliance occurs in response to a direct request obedience occurs in response to an authority figure Next Time: Next Time How do social psychologists’ understand stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination?