Chapter 8 Conformity Influencing Behavior Copyright 2016 2013

Conformity A change in one’s behavior due to the real or imagined influence

Informational Social Influence: The Need to Know What’s“Right” Informational Conform See Social Influence because: others as a source of information to guide our behavior. Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Halloween Goes to France Eight thousand pumpkins meet the Eiffel Tower. While the holiday is based on ancient British and Irish traditions surrounding All Hallows’ Eve, Halloween as we know it is a completely American phenomenon—until October 1997, that is, when “Ah-lo-ween” was introduced to the French public by retailers in an effort to boost consumer spending to spark a sagging French economy (Cohen, 1997). (Associated Press, 2002) Source: Jeremy Bembaron/Sygma/Corbis Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Private Acceptance Conforming to other people’s behavior out of a genuine belief that what they are doing or saying is right Informational social influence often results in private acceptance! Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Public Compliance Conforming to other people’s behavior publicly without necessarily believing in what we

The Importance of Being Accurate Informational social influence affected by how important it is to make an accurate judgment We are more susceptible to social influence in high-importance conditions. Results showed 35% conformity w/confederates in low-importance; 51% conformity in high importance. Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

When Informational Conformity Backfires Contagion The rapid spread of emotions or behaviors through a

“We’re Being Invaded by Martians!” Orson Welles, renowned actor and director, whose War of the Worlds radio broadcast in 1938 sparked a public scare that spread, in large part, due to informational social influence. Source: Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division [LC-USZ 62 -119765] Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

When Will People Conform to Informational Social Influence? When the situation is ambiguous a crisis When other people are experts Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

When the Situation Is Ambiguous Ambiguity is the most crucial variable. When you are uncertain, you will be most open to influence from others. The greater the uncertainty, the more reliance there is on others! Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

When the Situation Is a Crisis Don’t have time to stop and think about action we should take Need to act—immediately May be scared, panicked See how other people are responding, and do the same Problem The people we imitate may not be behaving rationally! Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

When Other People Are Experts Usually, greater expertise associated with better information Experts are not always reliable sources of information! Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Expertise Under Pressure: Landing on the Hudson Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger became a hero in January 2009 when he safely landed USAir flight 1549 on the Hudson River after its engines had shut down. In interviews, “Captain Sully” always has been quick to credit his flight crew for their heroism as well. Informational social influence suggests that the passengers would have looked to the expertise of the flight attendants to figure out what was going on during the mid-air crisis. The crew’s ability to remain calm and follow procedure helped keep the passengers calm and safely in their seats during the emergency landing and deplaning. Source: Eric James/NASA Images Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Normative Social Influence: The Need to Be Accepted Humans are a social species. Other people are important to our well-being. Being deprived of human contact is stressful and traumatic. Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Normative Social Influence: The Need to Be Accepted Normative Conform social influence in order to be liked and accepted by others Results in public compliance with the group’s beliefs and behaviors but not necessarily private acceptance of those beliefs and behaviors. Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Ice Bucket Challenge In August 2014, the “ice bucket challenge” exploded on social media, capitalizing on normative conformity to raise unprecedented amounts of money in the battle against ALS. Here, one of millions of participants takes her turn with the challenge, with a little help from an overeager friend and photographer. Source: Anna Daren Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Asch Experiment Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Conformity and Social Approval (1 of 3) Asch’s Line Judgment Studies Participants guessed which line in the right box is the same length as the line on the left. Sometimes, everyone else gets it wrong. Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Conformity and Social Approval (2 of 3) Classic normative reasons for conforming Don’t want to feel peculiar Don’t want to feel like a fool Belief that what others think is important, even if they are strangers Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Conformity and Social Approval (3 of 3) Variation of original Asch study (Insko, Smith, Alicke, Wade, & Taylor, 1985; Nail, 1986) Participants wrote answers on paper instead of saying them out loud Conformity Occurred dropped dramatically on average of only 1. 5 of the 12 trials Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Figure 8. 2 Asch’s Line–Judgment Task In a series of studies of normative social influence, participants judged which of the three comparison lines on the right was closest in length to the standard line on the left. The correct answer was always obvious (as it is here). However, members of the group (actually confederates) gave the wrong answer out loud. Now the participant faced a dilemma: Give the right answer and go against the whole group, or conform to their behavior and give an obviously wrong answer? (Adapted from Asch, 1956) Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Sherif’s & Asch’s Studies of Conformity Summary Sherif Asch Ambiguous Unambiguous stimuli Conformity occurred Private acceptance “need right” to know what’s stimuli Conformity occurred Public compliance to be accepted” “need Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Conformity and Brain Imaging (f. MRI)(1 of 2) When participants conformed to group (gave incorrect answer) Vision and perception areas active in brain Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Conformity and Brain Imaging (f. MRI)(2 of 2) When participants disagreed (gave correct answer) Different brain areas active Amygdala Negative Right emotions caudate nucleus modulating social behavior Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Importance of Being Accurate, Revisited Conformity can occur Even when the group is wrong The correct answer is obvious There are strong incentives to be accurate People Even find it difficult to risk social disapproval by strangers Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Consequences of Resisting Normative Social Influence If you disregard the group norms of your friends and fail to conform: Group Long If would try to bring you “back into the fold” discussions, teasing comments discussions don’t work Friends Start may say negative things to you and about you to withdraw from you Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Violating Norms with Louis CK Whether through stand-up routines in which he explores taboo topics and embarrassing revelations that most of us would never address in public or via his sitcom alterego who once showed up to a black-tie gala in the Hamptons in a T-shirt and jeans, Louis CK is one contemporary comedian who produces many of his laughs (and cringeworthy moments) by exploring the consequences of norm violation. Source: Suntzulynn for LE/Splash News/Newscom Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

When Will People Conform to Normative Social Influence? (1 of 2) Social Impact Theory The idea that conforming to social influence depends on: Strength Importance of group to person Immediacy Closeness Number in time and space of people in the group Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

When Will People Conform to Normative Social Influence? (2 of 2) More conformity to normative pressures when group is: More important More immediate But, number (group size) operates differently Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

When the Group Is Important Normative pressures are much stronger when there is a cost to losing the group People whose friendship, love, and respect we value 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 Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

When the Group Grows Larger Conformity increases as the number of people in the group increases. But, once the group reaches 4 or 5 other people, conformity does not increase much. Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Figure 8. 4 Effects of Group Size on Conformity Asch varied the size of the unanimous majority in his study and found that once the majority numbered four, adding more people had little influence on conformity. (Adapted from Asch, 1955) Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

When One Has No Allies in the Group(1 of 2) Variation on original Asch study 6 of 7 confederates selected incorrect line instead of unanimous Participant had an “ally” Person not alone in dissenting Conformity dropped to 6% of the trials (compared to 32% when the person was the only dissenter) Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

When One Has No Allies in the Group (2 of 2) U. S. Supreme Court Most common decision ratio Unanimous, Least 8 -1 It 9 -0 vote common decision ratio (single dissenter) is difficult to be the lone dissenter! Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

When the Group’s Culture Is Collectivistic Greater conformity in collectivist cultures Asch’s line judgment task Norway more conformity than France Collectivistic cultures view conformity as a valued trait, not as a somewhat negative one. Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

China’s Synchronized Drummers The extent to which conformity is valued varies across cultures. In the Opening Ceremony of the 2008 Beijing Olympics, a worldwide television audience was mesmerized by the sight of 2, 008 drummers performing in perfect synchronization. Source: Aflo Co. , Ltd. /Alamy Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Minority Influence: When the Few Influence the Many (1 of 2) Minority The influence case where a minority of group members influence the behavior or beliefs of the majority Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Minority Influence: When the Few Influence the Many (2 of 2) Consistency is key People with minority views must express the same view over time Members of the minority opinion must agree with one another Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Strategies for Using Social Influence 8. 4 How can people use their knowledge of

The Role of Injunctive and Descriptive Norms (1 of 2) Can use social norms to induce people to conform to correct, socially approved behavior (Cialdin, Reno & Kallgren). First, must identify the norm that is operating in the situation Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Role of Injunctive and Descriptive Norms (2 of 2) Injunctive norms People’s perceptions of what behaviors are approved or disapproved of by others Descriptive norms People’s perceptions of how people actually behave in given situations, regardless of whether the behavior is approved or disapproved of by others Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

How Does Littering Become the Norm? Invoking conformity to social norms can be used in the effort to address societal problems such as littering. Source: Craig Steven Thrasher/Alamy Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Figure 8. 5 The Effect of Injunctive and Descriptive Norms on Littering The data for the control group (left) indicate that 37% to 38% of people litter a handbill found on their car windshield whether the environment (a parking lot) is littered or clean. When a descriptive norm is made salient, littering decreases significantly only in the clean environment (middle). When an injunctive norm is made salient, littering decreases significantly in both types of environment, indicating that injunctive norms are more consistently effective at changing behavior. (Adapted from Reno, Cialdini, & Kallgren, 1993) Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Using Norms to Change Behavior: Beware the “Boomerang Effect” Invoking descriptive norms may backfire Depending E. g. , on pre-existing behavior college binge drinking, energy use Invoking descriptive plus injunctive most successful Example: energy use (Schultz et al) Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Other Tactics of Social Influence Using norms is not the only way to change other people’s behavior Compliance techniques: Foot-in-the-door Door-in-the-face Propaganda Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Foot-in-the-Door Technique Getting people to agree first to a small request makes them more likely to agree later to a second, larger request Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Door-in-the-Face Technique First asking people for a large request that they will probably refuse makes them more likely to agree later to a second, smaller request Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Propaganda A deliberate, systematic attempt to advance a cause by manipulating mass attitudes and behaviors, often through misleading or emotionally charged information Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Power of Propaganda Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights

Nazis on Parade Nazi propaganda permeated all facets of German life in the 1930 s and 1940 s. Here, huge crowds attend the 1934 Nuremberg rally. Such large public gatherings were a technique frequently used by Goebbels and Hitler to promote loyalty and conformity to the Nazi party. Source: Pictorial Press Ltd/Alamy Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Obedience to Authority 8. 5 What have studies demonstrated about people’s willingness to obey

Obedience to Authority (1 of 3) Obedience is a social norm Universally valued Without We obedience, would be chaos are socialized to obey legitimate authority figures Internalize social norm of obedience Obey even if authority figure isn’t present e. g. , traffic lights Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Obedience to Authority (2 of 3) Obedience can have serious, tragic consequences Obey the orders of an authority figure to hurt or even kill other human beings Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Obedience to Authority (3 of 3) The Milgram studies Most famous series of studies

Victims of the Holocaust A burial pit holds hundreds of victims from the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, 1945. Source: Prisma Bildagentur AG/Alamy Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Milgram’s Studies (1 of 3) How many people do you think would continue to obey the experimenter and increase the levels of shock until they had delivered the maximum amount, 450 volts? Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Milgram Experiment Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Milgram’s Studies (2 of 3) Average maximum shock delivered was 360 volts 62. 5%

Milgram’s Studies (3 of 3) 80% of participants Continued giving the shocks even after the learner cried out in pain, said heart was bothering him Note—no learners were harmed in the making of Milgram’s experiments! The learner was Milgram’s confederate, pretending to get shocked. Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Scenes from the Milgram Study Left: The shock generator used in Milgram’s research. Right: The learner (an accomplice of the experimenter) is strapped into the chair, and electrodes are attached to his arm. Source: From the film Obedience copyright © 1968 by Stanley Milgram. Copyright renewed 1993 by Alexandra Milgram, distributed by Penn State Media Sales. left: Alexandra Milgram; right: Alexandra Milgram Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Figure 8. 6 Transcript of the learner’s protests in Milgram’s obedience study and of the prods used by the experimenter to compel people to continue giving shocks. (Adapted from Milgram, 1963, 1974) Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Role of Normative Social Influence (1 of 4) Don’t want to disappoint experimenter Insistent experimenter Difficult to say no Variations on original study Other teachers (confederates) refused to continue Only 10% gave maximum shock Compared to 62. 5% in original study Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Role of Normative Social Influence (2 of 4) When someone wants us to do something, it’s difficult to say no If they said no, experimenter may have been disappointed, hurt, or maybe angry Experimenter actively tried to get people to conform “It is absolutely essential that you continue” Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Role of Normative Social Influence (3 of 4) Variations 3 on original study teachers, two of which were confederates One confederate read word pairs Other confederate told the learner whether the response was correct or not Real participant delivered shocks Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Role of Normative Social Influence (4 of 4) Variations on original study (cont. ) Confederates study stop at different points in the Confederate 1 at 150 volts Confederate 1 at 250 volts Results? Seeing peers disobey made it easier for the participant to disobey Only 10% gave the maximum shocks Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Role of Informational Social Influence (1 of 3) Participants were free to get up and leave. Why didn’t they do so? Confusing circumstance, not sure what to do Informational social influence is powerful when Situation is ambiguous Situation is a crisis Other people in the situation have expertise All three characteristics describe the Milgram experiment Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Role of Informational Social Influence (3 of 3) Variations Results? on original study (cont. ) Compliance dropped to 20% “Teacher” lacked expertise, but some still used this nonexpert as a guide Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Figure 8. 7 Results of Different Versions of the Milgram Study In the standard version of Milgram’s study, obedience was 62. 5%. This rate dropped when the study took place in a nondescript office location rather than the Yale Psychology Department. It dropped further when the teacher had to physically place the learner’s hand on a shock plate, when the experimenter issuing commands was located remotely, and when two other “teachers” (actually confederates) refused to continue with the study. Finally, when participants were left to their own to determine the level of shock, almost none of them went to the end of the shock panel. The variation in these bars demonstrates just how context -dependent obedience to authority can be. (Data from Milgram, 1974) Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Other Reasons Why We Obey Conform to wrong norm Fast-paced No nature of experiment time to reflect Self-justification Shock levels increased in small increments Internal Loss pressure to continue to obey of a personal responsibility Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Death by Electric Chair Research indicates that one way prison officials deal with the potential dissonance and distress of having to carry out a death sentence is to morally disengage from their work and deny personal responsibility for the actions in question. Source: Keith Mc. Intyre/Shutterstock Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Obedience Studies, Then and Now (1 of 2) Research considered unethical for several reasons: Involved deception Lacked fully informed consent Role as teacher caused psychological distress Not made clear that the participants could withdraw from study Participants experienced inflicted insight Learned unpleasant things about themselves Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Obedience Studies, Then and Now (2 of 2) Burger (2009) replicated Milgram’s study Changed procedures: Reduced psychological distress by stopping the study after 150 volts Disobedience was most likely to occur at this point Participants were prescreened by a clinical psychologist Burger explicitly and repeatedly told the participants and the learner that they could leave at any time Results? : 70% obeyed at 150 volts (compared to 82. 5% that continued up until that point in Milgram’s original study) Difference not statistically significant Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved

It’s Not about Aggression Milgram conducted another version of his study Everything was the same except, participants could choose any level of shock Results? Participants chose to give mild shocks Only 2. 5% gave the maximum shock Copyright © 2016, 2013, 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved