Based on the information provided in the C
Based on the information provided in the Chapter 8 lecture regarding the Sleeper Effect, what examples of this effect can you see today, especially in social media or tv? Do you think this is something that can negatively impact societal views in the long run?
Chapter 8
Social Influence & Persuasion
Today’s Outline
Social Influence
Normative influence
Informational influence
Social Influence Techniques
Commitment/Consistency techniques
Reciprocation
Scarcity
Capturing & Disrupting Attention
Persuasion
Who, what, and to whom
Social Influence
Two important types of social influence:
Normative Influence
When someone goes along with the crowd to be liked and to not get rejected
“But Mooom, everyone is doing it”
Informational Influence
When someone goes along with crowd because he/she thinks they’re right
E.g. when you missed a day of class and your professor asks the class a question; you’re not sure so you go along with what the class thinks
Likely when there’s ambiguity or during a crisis when people don’t have time to think
Social Influence
Normative Influence:
But once we graduate high school, no one just goes along with the crowd to be accepted any more right?
Classic study by Asch (1955):
Participants were shown a line and then asked which of three other lines it matched up with. It’s pretty easy
(When people perform this task alone, there’s a 9% error rate)
Asch study
In some conditions, several confederates (plants) were present
The confederates were all instructed to choose the clearly incorrect line
Upon seeing those responses, participants had an error rate as large as 35%
The error rate for participants went up the more confederates there were
Beyond 9 confederates there was no increase in error rates
Asch study continued
Remember this task is very easy, it’s very unlikely people really thought they were wrong, they were just conforming to not stand out
In other conditions, Asch had one of the confederates ‘dissent’ and give the correct answer
This decreased conformity by up to ¾
Having just that one person providing the correct answer helped participants a ton to also provide the right answer, despite all the contrary opinions
Informational Influence
Sherif’s study on conformity
Asked participants to estimate how many inches a light that they were seeing in the darkness moved
It doesn’t really move, but the illusion of a point of light moving in the dark is called the autokinetic effect
Day 1: participants estimated how far the light moved by themselves
Day 2: participants estimate again but this time with two confederates present who gave inflated estimated
Participants’ estimations converged to be closer to those of confederates
Social Influence
Normative influence, like that in Asch’s line study, produces ‘public compliance’
People go along but don’t privately agree
Informational influence, like in Sherif’s light study, produces private acceptance
People go along and really agree
Social Influence Techniques
Techniques based on commitment & consistency:
Foot-in-the-door technique
Get someone to agree to a small/easy task, then later ask for something big/more difficult
Freedman & Fraser (1966)
Went up to homes and asked people to put a large, kinda ugly sign in their yard that said drive carefully
Only 20% agreed
In another condition, he first asked to put a small safe driving sign in their yard, all agreed
Two weeks later went back and asked to put the large sign in their yard, now 80% agreed
Foot-in-the-door effect
Sometimes cult leaders use this effect to rope people in
Jonestown Massacre
Crazy preacher Jim Jones
Asked for easy favors when
trying to recruit someone
E.g. help me stuff these envelopes
Slowly asked for more, like tithe money
Got his parish to move to a remote island
Convinced over 900 of them to commit suicide
They drank Kool-aid laced with cyanide
Commitment & Consistency techniques
Low-ball technique
When someone agrees to something promising, but then, later, a hidden cost/problem is revealed
Car sales, “Bad news, you’ll have to pay for…”
One study on research participation:
Only 24% of students agreed to participate in a 7 a.m. study
But in the experimental condition, participants first agreed
To take part in the study, then were told about the time and given the chance to change their mind
56% still agreed to do it
Labelling Technique
When you tell someone, “I know that you’re a reasonable person, so…”
Or “You look like the kind of person who knows how important ___ is.”
The more plausible the label, the better
People want to be consistent with the expectations of others
And it relates to their self-concept
Legitimizing Paltry Favors
Asking for a smaller amount than the amount needed to make a difference
E.g. A fundraiser asking for a few dollars
E.g. Or a beggar asking for 10 cents
Generally the amount donated is the same as if one asked for more, but the frequency of donations is much higher when it’s couched in a smaller request
People are motivated to be helpful
Also it combats what people usually do to say no, such as “Sorry I can’t afford that.” Can’t afford 10 cents?
Techniques based on Reciprocation
Door-in-the-face technique
A large request is made up-front
The person to whom the request is made says ‘no way’ (slams the proverbial door)
A smaller request is made
People are now more likely to agree
The key factor being that it seems like a favor has been done when the requester lowers what they’re asking for
So people feel obligated to reciprocate by agreeing
That’s not all technique
A large request is made up-front, similar to door-in-the-face
Then, before the person can respond, the requester sweetens the deal
Lowers original price
Adds more things to the deal
Adds more features, etc.
Again, people feel compelled to reciprocate
Defense against Commitment and consistency techniques & reciprocity
Step 1. Identify and recognize that they are using one of those techniques
Step 2. Realize that you don’t owe someone who is trying to trick you anything
Step 3. Feel free to be inconsistent or rude because the initial premise for consistency was false
E.g. for example, if a car salesman comes back with “bad news,” don’t feel a pull to be consist even though you had agreed to the prior deal
Techniques based on scarcity
Limited-number technique
There’s only so many
Fast-approaching-deadline
Buy this in the next two hours before the offer will expire!
In general, scarcity is a heuristic: what’s rare is good
Just think about rare toys,
cars, antiques, jewelry, etc.
(these were rare back in my day)
Techniques based on scarcity
How many of us have experienced something similar to the results of the following study?
Some participants received a Nabisco cookie from a jar containing 10 cookies
Others received a cookie from a jar containing 2 cookies.
As you’ll surely predict by now, the people who ate the cookies from the 2 cookie jar rated it better
The last chip, last donut, etc. is always the best!
Defending against scarcity techniques
Step 1. Identify that they’re being used
Step 2. Take a step back and calm down, scarcity techniques play on emotion (“omg I gotta this before it’s gone” or “while it’s on sale!”)
Step 3. Rationally ask yourself why you need it
There should be reasons why you want the item beyond it being scarce or on sale
Techniques based on capturing and disruption attention
Pique technique
Grab someone’s attention before they tune out or activate their typical refusal ‘scripts’
Disrupt-then-reframe technique
Attention disrupted with unusual offer
E.g. Buy a pack of cards for 300 pennies
Then it’s ‘reframed’
“It’s a bargain”
In control condition, 40% bought the 3$ pack of cards, in the disrupt-reframe condition, 80% did
Defending against attention capturing and disruption attention strategies
Step 1. Identify them
It will help that you’ve been
inoculated against these
techniques now and can more
readily spot them
Step 2. Stop and think. These techniques focus on disrupting your attention, so pay extra attention and see through whatever is disruption it
E.g. convert pennies back to dollars, in keeping with the earlier example of buying a deck of cards
Theme with these techniques
With all of the techniques we have discussed, one of the main themes is this:
The seller/requester is trying to address the non-conscious mind
Play on the drive to be consistent, to be liked (and thus reciprocate), to secure ‘rare and valuable’ items, etc.
The rational mind is their enemy
E.g. 300 pennies is no different than 3$
Remember these techniques even after this course ends. Don’t let people get more out of you than they deserve!!!
Persuasion
Persuasion is an attempt to change someone’s attitude
Aristotle’s definition of what makes an effective speaker is still relevant today
Charisma, intellectual appeal, and emotional appeal
Hovland and colleagues set the standard for how we understand persuasion in modern times
“Who says what to whom”
Persuasion
Who (the speaker)
Source likability
Similarity – is there a match between the speaker and the audience
Attractiveness – why does this matter?
Halo effect: attractive people are assumed to posses a myriad of other good traits, like intelligence.
Source credibility:
Trustworthiness
Expertise
This is situational. You wouldn’t take fashion advice from me, your psychology professor.
Persuasion
Who (the speaker) continued
It’s great that we evaluate the credibility of the speaker, but there’s a big problem
The sleeper effect
Over time, people lose track of who said what
Hovland & Weiss (1951)
Participants read a speech advocating the development of an atomic submarine
In some conditions, the speaker was a famous physicist (Oppenheimer), in others it was a writer for Pravda, the newspaper of the communist party in the former Soviet Union
The physicist (credible source) produced more opinion change
One month later, there was more opinion change for the Pravda speaker and less for physicist
Participants remember the speech but not the speaker
Implications of the sleeper effect
The sleeper effect makes people who are loud and stupid very dangerous
We currently give air time on TV to lots of people who bring their network traffic because they’re ‘entertaining’
This is an issue, anyone who has a public platform to spout their ideas, but whose ideas are clearly insane, becomes a problem
They may come up with ridiculous solutions to our society’s problems and then people might misattribute where they heard that idea and believe it generally came from a news network or someone who would have been credible
Persuasion
Who (the speaker) continued
One last note about the speaker
‘Convert communicators’
Being a convert communicator gives what you say extra credibility
For example, if someone begins a speech on the death penalty by saying they used to be pro-death penalty, but now they’re against it, that’s a strong statement
It violates how people like to be consistent and it stands out to us because someone is admitting being inconsistent
Additionally it can make people more likable
E.g. an alcoholic who got sober, very respectable
Persuasion
What (the message)
Emotional appeal
Humor – if there’s humor in the speaker’s message, this makes people feel good, which in turn makes people more receptive to persuasion
This is why around 40% of ads use humor
Humor makes the source more likable
Fear – fear can be extremely powerful and can alter how people make decisions
Fear appeals can backfire, though
Persuasion
What (the message) continued
Fear appeals
Many agencies/advertisers have tried to use fear effectively to reduce drug use (‘you’ll overdose’), reduce risky sexual activity (‘you’ll get AIDS’), get people to go to the doctor or dentist (‘you’ll get cavities’) more often, etc.
Attitude change and fear have an inverted U shaped relationship
Too little or too much fear means
no attitude change
People don’t want to feel
bad and certainly not
existential dread, so will
reject the message outright
if too scary
Persuasion
What (the message) continued
Stealing thunder
Refers to the courtroom where a defense attorney may reveal incriminating evidence (thunder) about his client before the prosecution, so as to reduce its impact
It is effective at improving jurors’ attitudes towards the defendant
Or another example would be an advertiser who mentions a minor flaw in his/her product
Seems against their own self-interest, so the overall message becomes more compelling
Persuasion
What (the message) continued
Repetition
Repeating a message will help it to be better remembered and more liked (as long as the message is neutral or slightly liked to begin with)
Changing up the message while repeating it will prevent people from tuning it out due to boredom
Persuasion
Whom (the audience)
Self-esteem and intelligence level both predict people’s unwillingness to yield to an argument presented to them
Moderately intelligence people, though, are easier to persuade
Age and persuasion follows an inverted U, similar to fear
Young and old (over 84) are most likely to be persuaded
Persuasion
Whom (the audience)
Overhead messages
Audiences have their guard down when someone isn’t actively trying to persuade them
This is why product placement, when subtle, works very well
Distraction
If someone has a shoddy argument, they may try to distract their audience to get the audience to process it non-consciously instead of conscious scrutinize it
The audience can also be essentially distracted if they are too tired to pay attention
Persuasion
How to resist persuasion:
Attitude Inoculation
Like viral inoculation, being exposed to weaker counterarguments can strengthen your original position
Forewarning
When people know someone will try to persuade them, they will often be psychologically prepared to resist it
Reactance explains this, people dislike someone attempting to change their views, especially if those views are close to one’s self-concept
Can trigger a boomerang effect or negative attitude change, where the audience ends up further entrenched in their original position
In sum:
*Be very aware of people trying to persuade you, especially when evaluating something a politician is saying
Beyond what you’ve learn in this class, I highly recommend taking a class on rhetoric if you can find one.
In sum:
Just remember that almost everyone has some kind of agenda and keep your guard up
There’s lots of dirty tricks people may use to make a garbage argument seem plausible
E.g. people who are excellent debaters may use a snuck premise, where they make something sound like a given that isn’t, but if you don’t immediately realize it it’s too late to say, ‘wait, back up.’
In sum
If someone is ever trying to persuade you about something that’s important, don’t decide or give-in in that moment
Go home, write their argument down, see if there are any points that are flawed or assumptions that are being made
Take your time to digest and to decide whether there are flaws in their argument, or whether they were, in fact, right
Process it rationally, not quickly or emotionally
Looking ahead
We’ll cover a bit more on whether a message is processed centrally or peripherally when we cover social cognition and decision-making in model 3.
image2.jpeg
image3.jpeg
image4.jpeg
image5.jpeg
image6.jpeg
image7.jpeg
image8.png
image9.jpeg
image10.jpeg
image11.jpeg
image12.jpeg
image1.jpeg
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
