General Psychology An Introduction Chapter 15 Social Psychology

Chapter 15 Social Psychology 28 Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping Susan People are often biased against others outside of their own social group , showing prejudice ( emotional bias ) stereotypes ( cognitive bias ) and discrimination ( behavioral bias ) In the past , people used to be more explicit with their biases , but during the century , when it became less socially acceptable to exhibit bias , such things like prejudice , stereotypes , and discrimination became more subtle ( automatic , ambiguous , and ambivalent ) In the century , however , with social group categories even more complex , biases may be transforming once again . Learning Objectives Distinguish prejudice , stereotypes , and discrimination . Distinguish , blatant biases from contemporary , subtle biases . Understand biases such as social dominance orientation and . authoritarianism . Understand subtle , unexamined biases that are automatic , ambiguous , and ambivalent . Understand 21 st century biases that may break down as identities get more complicated . Introduction Even in ones own family , everyone wants to be seen for who they are , not as just another

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 501 typical But still , people put other people into groups , using that label to inform their evaluation of the person as a process that can result in serious consequences . This module focuses on biases against social groups , which social sort into emotional prejudices , mental stereotypes , and behavioral discrimination . These three aspects of bias are related , but they each can occur separately from the others ( 2010 , gender or race or religion . But as complex as we perceive ourselves to be , we often define others merely by their most distinct social group , and 1998 ) FOI example , sometimes unfortunately having biases against these social groups is part of human have a negative psychology . reaction to a Soda group ( prejudice ) without knowing even the most superficial reasons to dislike them ( stereotypes ) You are a complex individual , full dreams , beliefs , identities , and more that help make you unique . You do want to be labeled just by your This module shows that today biases are not yesterday biases in many ways , but at the same time , they are troublingly similar . First , we discuss biases that might have belonged to our grandparents and even the people nowadays who have yet to leave those wrongful times . Next , we will discuss late century biases that affected our parents and still linger today . Finally , we will talk about today century biases that challenge fairness and respect for all . Biases Almost Gone You would be hard pressed to find someone today who openly admits they do believe in equality . Regardless of one demographics , most people believe everyone is entitled to the same , natural rights . However , as much as we now collectively believe this , not too far back in our history , this ideal of equality was an unpracticed sentiment . Ofall the countries in the world , only a few have equality in their constitution , and those who do , originally defined it for a select group of people . At the time , biases were simple people openly put down those not from their

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 502 own group . For example , just 80 years ago , American college students unabashedly thought Turkish people were cruel , very religious , and treacherous ( Kat ( So where did they get those ideas , assuming that most of them had never met anyone from Turkey ?

fashioned stereotypes were overt , unapologetic , and expected to be shared by we now call blatant Blatant biases are conscious beliefs , feelings , and behavior that people are perfectly willing to admit , which mostly express ( while one own group ( For example , organizations that preach contempt for other races ( and praise for their own ) is an example of a blatant bias . And scarily , these blatant biases tend to run in packs People who openly hate one also hate many others . To illustrate this pattern , we turn to two personality scales next . Social Dominance Orientation Social dominance orientation ( describes a group hierarchies are are idea to maintain order and stability ( Those Who Score high on believe that some groups are inherently better than others , and because of this , there is no such thing as group equality . At the same time , though , is not just about being personally dominant and controlling of others describes a preferred some on top ( preferably one own group ) and some on the bottom . For example , someone high in would likely be from an moved into his or her neighborhood . It not that the person high in wants to member does it that moving into this nice People with a social dominance orientation are more likely to be attracted to certain types of careers , such as law enforcement , that maintain group hierarchies . Photo neighborhood disrupts the social hierarchy the person high in believes in ( living in a nice neighborhood denotes one place in the social place reserved for ones members )

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 503 Although research has shown that people higher in are more likely to be politically conservative , there are other traits that more strongly predict one . For example , researchers have found that those who score higher on are usually lower than average on tolerance , empathy , altruism , and community orientation . In general , those high in have a strong belief in work hard work always pays off and leisure is a waste of time . People higher on tend to choose and thrive in occupations that maintain existing group hierarchies ( police , prosecutors , business ) compared to those lower in , who tend to pick more equalizing occupations ( social work , public defense , psychology ) The point is that preference for inequality as normal and predicts endorsing the superiority of certain groups men , residents , heterosexuals , and believers in the dominant religion . This means seeing women , minorities , homosexuals , and as inferior . Understandably , the first list tend to score higher on , while the second group tends to score lower . For example , the gender difference ( men higher , women lower ) appears all over the world . At its heart , rests on a fundamental belief that the world is tough and competitive with limited number of resources . Thus , those high in see groups as battling each other for these resources , with winners at the top of the social hierarchy and losers at the bottom ( see Table ) Social Dominance Orientation Authoritarianism Groups compete for economic resources Groups compete over values Belief Group hierarchies are inevitable . good Groups must follow authority Belief must be tough , competitive must unite . protect Belief They are trying to beat us They have had values Table . Fashioned Biases Authoritarianism authoritarianism ( focuses on value conflicts , whereas focuses on the economic ones . That is , endorses respect for obedience and authority in the service of group conformity ( 1988 ) Returning to an example from earlier , the homeowner

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 504 who high in may dislike the member moving into his or her neighborhood because it threatens one economic resources ( lowering the value ofone house fewer openings in the school ) Those high in may equally dislike the member moving into the neighborhood but for different reasons . Here , it because this member brings in values or beliefs that the person high in disagrees with , thus threatening the collective values ofhis or her respects group unity over individual preferences , wanting to maintain group values in the face of differing opinions . Despite its name , though , is not necessarily limited to people on the right ( conservatives ) Like , there does appear to be an association between this personality scale ( the preference for order , clarity , and conventional values ) and conservative beliefs . However , regardless of political ideology , focuses on groups competing of values . Extreme scores on predict biases against while demanding loyalty and conformity Notably , the combination of high and high hate groups that openly endorse aggression against minority groups , immigrants , homosexuals , and believers in dominant religions ( 2004 ) African American European American or have diminished over the Bad century and into the 21 st century . Openly expressing prejudice is like blowing cigarette smoke in someone face It just not done any more in most circles , and if it is , people are readily criticized for their behavior . Still , these biases exist in people just less in view than before . These subtle biases are unexamined and sometimes unconscious but real in their consequences . They are automatic , ambiguous , and ambivalent , but nonetheless biased , unfair , and ( disrespectful to the belief in the keys do not work , lick me mouse inside the white box and try again . If the red . press the other key to make the red go away . to test a person reaction time ( measured in milliseconds ) to an array of . equality . stimuli that are presented on the screen . This particular item is testing an individual unconscious reaction towards members of various ethnic groups . Courtesy from Project Implicit Biases

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 505 Most people like themselves well enough , and most people identify themselves as members of certain groups but not others . Logic suggests , then , that because we like ourselves , we therefore like the groups we associate with more , whether those groups are our hometown , school , religion , gender , or ethnicity . Liking yourself and your groups is human nature . The larger issue , however , is that preference often results in liking other groups less . And whether you recognize this favoritism as wrong , this is relatively automatic , that is , unintended , immediate , and irresistible . Social psychologists have developed several ways to measure this relatively automatic group preference , the most famous being the Test ( itself is rather simple and you can experience it yourself if you Google implicit or go to . Essentially , the is done on the computer and measures how can sort words or pictures into different categories . For example , ifyou were asked to categorize ice cream as good or bad , you would quickly categorize it as good . However , imagine you ate ice cream , you gota brain freeze . When it comes timeto categorize ice cream as good or bad , you may still categorize it as but you will likely be a little slower in doing so compared to someone who has nothing but positive thoughts about ice cream . Related to group biases , people may explicitly claim they do discriminate against this is very likely true . However , when they given this computer task to categorize people from these , that automatic or unconscious hesitation ( a result of having mixed evaluations about the ) will show up in the test . And as countless studies have revealed , people are mostly faster at pairing their own group with good categories , compared to pairing others groups . In fact , this finding generally holds regardless if one group is measured according race , age , religion , nationality , and even temporary , insignificant memberships . This tendency would remain a mere interesting discovery except that reaction time on the predicts actual feelings about individuals from other groups , decisions , and them , nonverbal behavior ( biased , his or her automatic or implicit biases may result in unconsciously acting distant and indifferent , which can have devastating effects on the hopeful interviewee ability to perform well ( Word , Cooper , 1973 ) Although this is unfair , sometimes the automatic this section and the next two sections on subtle biases .

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping Type of Bias Example Automatic Implicit Association Test Social identity theory theory Aversive racism Ambiguous Ambivalent Table Subtle Biases Stereotype Content Model 506 what It Shows People link good , bad People favor . distance from Same but emphasizes self as a member of People avoid , avoid their own prejudices People divide groups by warmth and competence Ambiguous Biases Whether we are aware of it or not ( and usually not ) we sort the world into us and them categories . We are more likely to treat with bias or discrimination anyone we feel is outside our own group . Photo As the indicates , people biases often stem , at the expense ofthe other . Social identity theory ( I ! iS ) describes this tendency to favor one own over another . And as a result , disliking stems from this liking ( For example , if two classes of children want to play on the same soccer field , the classes will come to dislike each other not because of any real , objectionable traits about the other group . The dislike originates from each favoritism toward itself and the fact that only one group can play on the soccer field at a time . With this preferential perspective for one own group , people are not punishing the other one so much as neglecting it in favor of their own . However , to justify this preferential treatment , people will often exaggerate the differences between their and the turn , people seethe as more similar in personality than they are . This results in the perception that they really differ from us , and they are all alike . Spontaneously , people categorize people into groups just as we categorize furniture or food into one type or

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 507 another . The difference is that we people inhabit categories ourselves , as theory points out ( Because the attributes of group categories can be either good or bad , we tend to favor the groups with people like us and incidentally disfavor the others . favoritism is an ambiguous form of bias because it the by exclusion . For example , if a politician has to decide between funding one program or another , may be more likely to give resources to the group that more closely represents his . And this decision stems from the simple , natural human tendency to be more comfortable with people like yourself . A specific case of comfort with the is called aversive racism , because people do not like to admit their own racial biases to themselves or others ( Tensions between , say , a White person own good intentions and discomfort with the perhaps novel situation of interacting closely with a Black person may cause the White person to feel uneasy , behave stiffly , or be distracted . As a result , the White person may give a good excuse to avoid the situation altogether and prevent any awkwardness that could have come from it . However , such a reaction will be ambiguous to both parties and hard to interpret . That is , was the White person right to avoid the situation so that neither person would feel uncomfortable ?

Indicators of aversive racism correlate with discriminatory behavior , despite being the ambiguous result of good intentions gone bad . Bias Can Be Complicated Ambivalent Biases Not all stereotypes of are all bad . For example , ethnic Asians living in the United States are commonly referred to as the model minority because of their perceived success in areas such as education , income , and social stability . Another example includes people who feel benevolent toward traditional women but hostile toward nontraditional women . Or even people who feel respect toward older adults but , at the same time , worry about the burden they place on public welfare programs . A simple way to understand these mixed feelings , across a variety , results from the Stereotype Content Model ( When people learn about a new group , they first want to know if its intentions ofthe people in this group are for good or Like the guard at night Who goes there , friend or foe ?

Ifthe other group has good , cooperative intentions , we view them as warm and trustworthy and often consider them part of our However , ifthe other group is cold and competitive or full of exploiters , we often view them as a threat and treat them accordingly . After learning the group intentions , though , we also want to know whether they are competent enough to act on them ( ifthey are incompetent , or unable , their intentions matter less ) These two simple

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 508 and map how groups relate to each other in society . Paternalistic Admiration Example Example Housewives Contemptuous Envious Warmth Example Example Poor People Rich People Competence Figure Stereotype Content Model kinds form from perceptions of competence and warmth There are common stereotypes of people from all sorts of categories and occupations that lead them to be classified along these two dimensions . For example , a stereotypical housewife would be seen as high in warmth but lower in competence . This is not to suggest that actual housewives are not competent , of course , but that they are not widely admired for their competence in the same way as scientific pioneers , or captains of industry . At another end ofthe spectrum are homeless people and drug addicts , stereotyped as not having good intentions ( perhaps exploitative for not trying to play by the rules ) and likewise being incompetent ( unable ) to do anything useful . These groups reportedly make society more disgusted than any other groups do . Some group stereotypes are mixed , high on one dimension and low on the other . Groups stereotyped as competent but not warm , for example , include rich people and outsiders good at business . These groups that are seen as competent but cold make people feel some envy , admitting that these others may have some talent but resenting them for not being people like The model minority stereotype mentioned earlier includes people with this excessive competence but sociability .

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 509 The other mixed combination is high warmth but low competence . Groups who fit this combination include older people and disabled people . Others report pitying them , but only so long as they stay in their place . In an effort to combat this negative stereotype , and activists try to eliminate that pity , hopefully gaining respect in the process . Altogether , these four kinds of stereotypes and their associated emotional prejudices ( pride , disgust , envy , pity ) occur all over the world for each of society own groups . These maps of the group terrain predict specific types of discrimination for specific kinds of groups , underlining how bias is not exactly equal opportunity . Pity Pride Example Example Disabled Students People Disgust Envy Example Example Homeless Successful People Outsiders Competence Figure Combinations of perceived warmth and confidence and the associated prejudices . Conclusion Century Prejudices As the world becomes more collaborations between countries , more between different and more people are encountering greater diversity of others in everyday ask yourself ifyou ever been asked , What are you ?

Such a question would be preposterous if you were only surrounded by members of your own group . Categories , then , are becoming more and more uncertain , unclear , volatile , and complex ( Peery , 2009 ) People identities are multifaceted , intersecting across gender , race , class , age , region , and more . Identities are not so simple , but maybe as

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 51 the 21 st century unfurls , we will recognize each other by the content of our character instead of the cover on our outside .

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 511 Outside Resources Web Website exploring the causes and consequences of prejudice . Discussion Questions . Do you know more people from different kinds of social groups than your parents did ?

How often do you hear people criticizing groups without knowing anything about them ?

Take the . Could you feel that some associations are easier than others ?

What groups illustrate ambivalent biases , seemingly competent but cold , or warm but incompetent ?

Do you or someone you know believe that group hierarchies are inevitable ?

Desirable ?

How can people learn to get along with people who seem different from them ?

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 51 Vocabulary Automatic bias Automatic biases are unintended , immediate , and irresistible . Aversive racism Aversive racism is unexamined racial bias that the person does not intend and would reject , but that avoids contact . Blatant biases Blatant biases are conscious beliefs , feelings , and behavior that people are perfectly willing to admit , are mostly hostile , and openly favor their own group . Discrimination Discrimination is behavior that advantages or disadvantages people merely based on their group membership . Implicit Association Test Implicit Association Test ( measures relatively automatic biases that favor own group relative to other groups . Prejudice Prejudice is an evaluation or emotion toward people merely based on their group membership . authoritarianism authoritarianism ( focuses on value conflicts but endorses respect for obedience and authority in the service of group conformity . theory theory develops social identity theory point that people categorize themselves , along with each other into groups , favoring their own group . Social dominance orientation Social dominance orientation ( describes a group hierarchies are inevitable in all societies and even good , to maintain order and stability . Social identity theory

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 51 Social identity theory notes that people categorize each other into groups , favoring their own group . Stereotype Content Model Stereotype Content Model shows that social groups are viewed according to their perceived warmth and competence . Stereotypes Stereotype is a belief that characterizes people based merely on their group membership . Subtle biases Subtle biases are automatic , ambiguous , and ambivalent , but real in their consequences .

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 514 References , 2004 ) Highly dominating , highly authoritarian personalities . Psychology , 144 ( 1988 ) Enemies of freedom Understanding authoritarianism . San Francisco . Peery , 2009 ) Social categorization and stereotyping in vivo The challenge . Social and Personality Psychology Compass , Brewer , Brown , 1998 ) relations . In Gilbert , The handbook psychology , and ( ed . New York . Devine , 1989 ) Stereotypes and prejudice Their automatic and controlled components . journal and Social Psychology , 56 ( 2010 ) bias . In , Gilbert , Vol . ed . 21 ) Wiley . 1998 ) Stereotyping , prejudice , and discrimination . In Gilbert , The handbook psychology , ed . New York . Cuddy , 2007 ) Universal dimensions of social cognition Warmth and competence . Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 11 ( 2002 ) A unified theory of implicit attitudes , stereotypes , and . Psychological Review , 109 ( Schwartz , 1998 ) Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition The implicit association Psychology , 74 ( 2009 ) Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test III . of predictive validity . journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 97 ( 1933 ) Racial stereotypes ofone hundred college students . of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 28 ( 2007 ) Discrimination and the implicit association test . Group Processes Relations , 10 (

Prejudice , Discrimination , and Stereotyping 515 , 1999 ) Social dominance An theory hierarchy and oppression . New York Cambridge University Press . Bundy , 1971 ) Social categorization and behaviour . European journal of Social Psychology , Turner , 1975 ) Social comparison and social identity Some prospects for behaviour . Psychology , Word , Cooper , 1974 ) The nonverbal mediation of prophecies in interracial interaction . journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 10 ( 74 )

29 Persuasion So Easily Fooled Robert Levine This module introduces several major principles in the process of persuasion . It offers an overview of the different paths to persuasion . It then describes how mindless processing makes us vulnerable to undesirable persuasion and some of the tricks that may be used against us . Learning Objectives Recognize the difference between the central and peripheral routes to persuasion . Understand the concepts , fixed action patterns , and mindless thinking , and how these processes are essential to our survival but , at the same time , leave us vulnerable to exploitation . Understand some common tricks persuasion artists may use to take advantage of us . Use this knowledge to make you less susceptible to unwanted persuasion . Introduction Have you ever tried to swap seats with a stranger on an airline ?

Ever negotiated the price of a car ?

Ever tried to convince someone to recycle , quit smoking , or make a similar change in health behaviors ?

you are well versed with how persuasion can show up in everyday life . Persuasion has been defined as the process by which a message induces change in beliefs , attitudes , or behaviors ( Myers , 201 ) Persuasion can take many forms . It may , for example ,

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 517 differ in whether it targets public compliance or private acceptance , is or term , whether it involves slowly escalating commitments or sudden interventions and , most of all , in the benevolence of its intentions . When persuasion is , we might call it education . When it is manipulative , it might be called mind control ( Whatever the content , however , there I is a similarity to the form of the persuasion process itself . As the advertising commentator Sid once observed , Of course , you sell candidates for political office the same way you sell soap or sealing wax or Obama whatever because , when you get right down to it , that is sold ( Levine , 2003 ) Ama Persuasion is one of the most studied of all social psychology phenomena . This module provides an introduction to several of its most important The instruments of persuasion work the same for selling products or politicians . Brian components . Two Paths to Persuasion Persuasion theorists distinguish between the central and peripheral routes to persuasion ( The central route employs direct , relevant , logical messages . This method rests on the assumption that the audience is motivated , will think carefully about what is presented , and will react on the basis ofyour arguments . The central route is intended to produce . For , you particular political candidate after hearing her finding her logic and proposed policies to be convincing . The peripheral route , on the other hand , relies on superficial cues that have little to do with logic . The peripheral approach is the way . It requires a target who thinking carefully about what you are saying . It requires low effort from the target and often exploits that trigger mindless reactions ( see below ) It may be intended to persuade you to do something you do not want to do and might later be sorry you did . Advertisements , for example , may show celebrities , cute animals , beautiful scenery , or provocative sexual images that have nothing to do with the product . The peripheral

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 518 approach is also common in the darkest of persuasion programs , such as those and cult leaders . Returning to the example , you can experience the peripheral route in action when you see a provocative , emotionally charged political advertisement that tugs at you to vote a particular way . Triggers and Fixed Action Patterns The central route emphasizes objective communication of information . The peripheral route relies on psychological techniques . These techniques may take advantage of a target not thinking carefully about the message . The process mirrors a phenomenon in animal behavior known as fixed action patterns ( These are sequences of behavior that occur in exactly the same fashion , in exactly the same order , every time they elicited . 2993 ) compares it to a prerecorded tape that is turned on and , once it is , always plays to its finish . He describes it is as ifthe animal were turning on a tape recorder ( There is the feeding tape , the territorial tape , the migration tape , the nesting tape , the aggressive each sequence ready to be played when a situation calls for it . In humans fixed action patterns include many of the activities we engage in while mentally on . These behaviors are so automatic that it is very difficult to control them . If you a baby , for instance , nearly everyone mimics each bite the baby takes by opening and closing their own mouth ! people near you look up and point you will automatically look up yourself . We also operate in a reflexive , way when we make many decisions . We are more likely , for example , to be less critical about medical advice dispensed from a doctor than from a friend who read an interesting article on the topic in a popular magazine . A notable characteristic of fixed action patterns is how they are activated . At first glance , it appears the animal is responding to the overall situation . For example , the maternal tape appears to be set off when a mother sees her hungry baby , or the aggressive tape seems to be activated when an enemy invades the animal territory . It turns out , however , that the off switch may actually be controlled by a specific , minute detail of the a sound or shape or patch of color . These are the hot buttons of the biological refers to as trigger features and biologists call . Humans are not so different . Take the example of a study conducted on various ways to promote a campus bake sale for charity ( Simply displaying the cookies and other treats to passersby did not generate many sales ( only out of 30 potential customers made a purchase ) In an alternate condition , however , when potential customers were asked

Persuasion Easily 51 to cookie for a good cause the number rose to 12 out of 30 . It seems that the phrase a good cause triggered a willingness to act . In fact , when the phrase a good cause was paired with a charity ( known for its homeless program ) the numbers held good cause was used instead ( the make believe Levine House ) still 11 out of 30 potential customers made Certain triggers can cause people to switch into an automatic pattern purchases and not one asked about of behavior . In an experiment , potential customers were more easily the purpose or nature of the cause . The phrase for a good cause was an influential enough hot button thatthe persuaded to cause . Photo Alameda County Library exact cause did seem to matter . The effectiveness of peripheral persuasion relies on our frequent reliance on these sorts of fixed action patterns and trigger features . These mindless , are generally effective shortcuts for coping with the overload of information we all must confront . They serve as that enable us to make decisions and solve problems quickly and efficiently . They also , however , make us vulnerable to uninvited exploitation through the peripheral route of persuasion . The Source of Persuasion The Triad of Trustworthiness Effective persuasion AUTHORITY trusting the source of the communication . Studies have identified three characteristics that lead to trust perceived authority , honesty , and likability . The Triad of Trust When the source appears LIKABILITY to have any or all of HONESTY

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 520 these characteristics , people not only are more willing to agree to their request but are willing to do so without carefully considering the facts . We assume we are on safe ground and are happy to shortcut the tedious process of informed decision making . As a result , we are more susceptible to messages and requests , no matter their particular content or how peripheral they may be . Authority From earliest childhood , we learn to rely on authority figures for sound decision making because their authority signifies status and power , as well as expertise . These two facets often work together . Authorities such as parents and teachers are not only our primary sources of wisdom while we grow up , but they control us and our access to the things we want . In addition , we have been taught to believe that respect for authority is a moral virtue . As adults , it is natural to transfer this respect to society designated authorities , such , doctors , bosses , and religious leaders . We assume their positions give them special access to information and power . Usually we are correct , so that our willingness to defer to authorities becomes a convenient shortcut to sound decision making . Uncritical trust in authority may , however , lead to bad decisions . Perhaps the most famous study ever conducted in social psychology demonstrated that , when conditions were set up just so , ofa sample of psychologically normal men were willing to administer potentially lethal shocks to a stranger when an in a laboratory coat ordered them to do so ( 974 Burger , Uncritical trust in authority can be problematic for several reasons . First , even if the source of the message is a legitimate , authority , they may not always be correct . Second , when respect for authority becomes mindless , expertise in one domain may be confused with expertise in general . To assume there is credibility when a successful actor promotes a cold remedy , or when a psychology professor offers his views about politics , can lead to problems . Third , the authority may not be legitimate . It is not difficult to fake a college degree or professional credential or to buy an badge or uniform . Honesty Honesty is the moral dimension of trustworthiness . Persuasion professionals have long understood how critical it is to their efforts . Marketers , for example , dedicate exorbitant resources to developing and maintaining an image of honesty . A trusted brand or company name becomes a mental shortcut for consumers . It is estimated that some new products come out each year . Forrester Research , a marketing research company , calculates

Persuasion So Easily 521 that children have seen almost six million ads by the age of 16 . An established brand name helps us cut through this volume of information . It signals we are in safe territory . The real suggestion to convey , advertising leader Theodore observed in 1910 , is that the man manufacturing the product is an honest man , and the product is an honest product , to be preferred above all others ( Fox , 1997 ) Likability If we know that celebrities are really experts , and that they are being paid to say what they saying , why do their endorsements sell so many products ?

Ultimately , it is because we like them . More than any single quality , we trust people we like . Roger , a public relations adviser to Presidents Reagan and George . Bush , observed If you could master one element of personal communication that is more powerful than anything . it is the quality of being likeable . I call it the magic bullet , because if your audience , everything else you do wrong . If they do like you , you can hit every rule right on target and it does matter . The mix that make a person likable are complex and often do not generalize from one situation to another . People tend to favor products that are . One clear finding , however , is that physically attractive key ingredient to celebrity endorsements . people tend to be liked more . In fact , we prefer them to a While there are a lot of factors that can disturbing extent Various studies have shown we perceive contribute to likability , being physically attractive is right at the top of the list in terms of importance . Photo Georges attractive people as smarter , kinder , stronger , more successful , more socially skilled , better poised , better adjusted , more exciting , more nurturing , and , most important , of higher moral character . All of this is based on no other information than their physical appearance ( Dion , Manipulating the Perception of Trustworthiness The perception of trustworthiness is highly susceptible to manipulation . Levine ( 2003 ) lists some of the most common psychological strategies that are used to achieve this effect

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 522 Manipulating Trustworthiness Testimonials Endorsements Presenting the Message as Education Word of Mouth The Maven Testimonials and Endorsement This technique employs someone who people already trust to testify about the product or message being sold . The technique goes back to the earliest days when satisfied customers might be shown describing how a patent medicine cured their battle with nerves or how Scott Electric Hair Brush healed their baldness ( My hair ( was ) falling out , and I was rapidly becoming bald , but since using the brush a thick growth of hair has made its appearance , quite equal to that I had before previous to its falling out , reported a satisfied customer in an 1884 ad for the product ) Similarly , Kodak had Prince Henri and others endorse the superior quality of their camera ( The results are sic . The enlargements which you sent me are superb , stated Prince Henri in a 1888 ad ) Celebrity endorsements are a frequent feature in commercials aimed at children . The practice has aroused considerable ethical concern , and research shows the concern is warranted . In a study funded by the Federal Trade Commission , more than 400 children ages to 14 were shown one commercials for a model racing set . Some ofthe commercials featured an endorsement from a famous race car driver , some included real racing footage , and others included neither . Children who watched the celebrity endorser not only preferred the toy cars more convinced the an expert toys . This held true for children ofall ages . In addition , they believed the toy race cars were bigger , faster , and more complex than real race cars they saw on film . They were also less likely to believe the commercial was staged ( Ross et , 1984 ) Presenting the Message as Education The message may be framed as objective information . Salespeople , for example , may try to impression they are less interested in selling a product than helping you make the best decision . The implicit message is that being informed is in everyone best interest , because they are confident that when you understand what their product has to offer that

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 523 you will conclude it is the best choice . Levine ( describes how , during training for a job as a used car salesman , he was instructed Ifthe customer tells you they do not want to be bothered by a salesperson , your response is not a salesperson , I a product consultant . I do give prices or negotiate with you . I simply here to show you our inventory and help you find a vehicle that will fit your Word of Mouth Imagine you read an ad that claims a new restaurant has the best food in your city . Now , imagine a friend tells you this new restaurant has the best food in the city . Who are you more likely to believe ?

Surveys show we turn to people around us for many decisions . A 1995 poll found that 70 rely on personal advice when selecting a new doctor . The same poll found that 53 of moviegoers are influenced by the recommendation ofa person they know . In another survey , 91 said they likely to use another person recommendation when making a major purchase . Persuasion professionals may exploit these tendencies . Often , in fact , they payfor the surveys . Using this data , they may try to disguise their message as word of mouth from your peers . For example , Cornerstone Promotion , a leading marketing firm that advertises marketing specialists , sometimes hires children to log into chat rooms and pretend to be fans of one oftheir clients or pays students to throw parties where they subtly circulate marketing material among their classmates . The Maven More persuasive yet , however , is to involve peers . Rather than in formal advertising , businesses and organizations may plant seeds at the grassroots level hoping that consumers themselves will then spread the word to each other . The seeding process begins by identifying information the marketers believe can and will reach the most other people . The seeds may be planted with established opinion leaders . Software companies , for example , give advance copies of new computer programs to professors they hope will recommend it to students and colleagues . Pharmaceutical companies regularly provide travel expenses and speaking fees to researchers willing to lecture to health professionals about the virtues of their drugs . Hotels give travel agents free weekends at their resorts in the hope they later recommend them to clients seeking advice .

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 524 There is a Yiddish word , maven , which refers to a person who an expert or a connoisseur , as in a friend who knows where to get the best price on a sofa or the you can turn to for advice about where to buy a computer . They ( a ) know a lot of people , communicate a great deal with people , are more likely than others to be asked for their opinions , and ( enjoy spreading the word about what they know and think . Most important of all , they are trusted . As a result , are often targeted by persuasion professionals to help spread their message . Other Tricks of Persuasion There are many other mindless , mental and fixed action leave us susceptible to persuasion . A few examples Free Gifts Reciprocity Social Proof Getting a And That Not All ' The Sunk Cost Trap Scarcity Psychological Reactance Reciprocity There is no duty more indispensable than that of returning a kindness , wrote Cicero . Humans are motivated by a sense of equity and fairness . When someone does something for us or gives us something , we feel obligated to return the favor in kind . It triggers one of the most powerful norms , the reciprocity rule , feel compelled to repay , in equitable value , what another person has given to us . in his seminal study ofthe reciprocity rule , found it appears in every culture . It lays the basis for virtually every type of social relationship , from the legalities of business arrangements to the subtle exchanges within a romance . A salesperson may offer free gifts , concessions , or their valuable time in order to get us to do something for them in return . For example , ifa colleague helps you when you busy with a project , you might feel obliged to support might decide to buy more from a supplier if they have offered you an aggressive discount . Or , you might give money to a charity

Persuasion So Easily 525 fundraiser who has given you a flower in the street ( 2008 Levine , 2003 ) Social Proof If everyone is doing it , it must be right . People are more likely to work late if others on their team are doing the same , to puta tip in contains money , or eat in a restaurant that is busy . This principle derives from two extremely powerful social comparison and conformity . We compare our behavior to what others are doing and , ifthere is a discrepancy between the other person and ourselves , we feel pressure to change ( The principle of social proof is so ' common that it easily passes unnoticed . Advertisements , for example , often consist of little more than attractive social models appealing to our desire to be one of the group . For example , the German candy company suggests that when you purchase their products you are joining a larger society of satisfied customers Kids and ups love it the happy world of . Sometimes social cues are presented with Such Specificity that it is anyway in certain situations . If enough people are willing to wait it as if the target being manipulated by a ( usually ) is a sign that there is something worth having at the end . the Laugh A line in front of a restaurant , movie , etc . is social proof that will tracks on Situation Comedies that likely influence other people to thy . Photo instruct one not only when to laugh but how to laugh . Studies find these techniques work . Fuller and ( for example , found that audiences laughed longer and more when a laugh track accompanied the show than when it did not , even though respondents knew the laughs they heard were connived by a technician from old tapes that had nothing to do with the show they were watching . People are social proof ( a ) when uncertain , and ( ifthe people in the comparison group seem to be similar to ourselves . As . once said , Nothing draws a crowd like a While few people really like to wait in long lines , we might do it Commitment and Consistency

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 526 Westerners have a desire to both feel and be perceived to act consistently . Once we have made an initial commitment , it is more likely that we will agree to subsequent commitments that follow from the first . Knowing this , a clever persuasion artist might induce someone to agree to a small request and follow this with progressively larger requests that were his target from the beginning . The process is known as getting a foot in the door and then slowly escalating the commitments . Paradoxically , we are less likely to say No to a large request than we are to a small request when it follows this pattern . This can have costly consequences . Levine ( 193 ) for example , found members tend to agree with the statement Nobody a cult . Theyjust postpone the decision to A Door in the Face Some techniques bring a paradoxical approach to the escalation sequence by pushing a request to or beyond its acceptable limit and then backing off . In the ( sometimes called the ) procedure , the persuader begins with a large request they expect will be rejected . They want the door to be slammed in their face . Looking forlorn , they now follow this with a smaller request , which , unknown to the customer , was their target all along . In one study , for example , and ( posing as representatives California Mutual Insurance , asked university students walking on campus if they be willing to fill out a survey about safety in the home or dorm . The survey , students were told , would take about 15 minutes . Not surprisingly , most of the students one out of four complied with the request . In another condition , however , the researchers them by beginning with a much larger request . The survey takes about two hours , students were , to participate , the experimenters retreated to the target request . look , one part of the survey is particularly important and is fairly short . It will take only 15 minutes to administer . Almost twice as many now complied . And That Not All ! The technique also begins with the salesperson asking a high price . This is followed by several seconds pause during which the customer is kept from responding . The salesperson then offers a better deal by either lowering the price or adding a bonus product . is a variation on . Whereas the latter begins with a request that will be rejected , however , that gains its influence by putting the customer on the

Persuasion So Easily 527 fence , allowing them to waver and then offering them a comfortable way off . Burger ( demonstrated the technique in a series of field experiments . In one study , for example , an told customers at a student bake sale that cupcakes cost 75 cents . As this price was announced , another salesman held up his hand and said , Wait a second , briefly consulted with the first salesman , and then announced ( that ) that the price today included two cookies . In a control condition , customers were offered the cupcake and two cookies as a package for 75 cents right at the onset . The bonus worked magic Almost twice as many people bought cupcakes in the that condition ( 73 ) than in the control group ( 40 ) The Sunk Cost Trap Sunk cost is a term used in economics referring to nonrecoverable investments of time or money . The trap occurs when a person aversion to loss impels them to throw good money after bad , because they do want to waste their earlier investment . This is vulnerable to manipulation . The more time and energy a cult recruit can be persuaded to spend with the group , the more invested they will feel , and , consequently , the more of a loss it will feel to leave that group . Consider the advice of billionaire investor Warren Buffet When you find yourself in a hole , the best thing you can do is stop digging ( Levine , 2003 ) Scarcity and Psychological Reactance People tend to perceive things as more attractive when their availability is limited , or when they stand to lose the opportunity to ( willful child is familiar with this principle . In a classic study , for example , placed boys in a room with a pair of equally attractive toys . One of the toys was placed next to a plexiglass wall the other was set behind the plexiglass . Forsome boys , foot high , which allowed the boys to easily reach over and touch the distant toy . Given this easy access , they showed no particular preference for one toy or the other . For other boys , however , the wall was a formidable feet high , which People may be more attracted supplies or time is limited .

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 528 required them to walk around the barrier to touch the toy . When confronted with this wall of inaccessibility , the boys headed directly for the forbidden fruit , touching it three times as quickly as the accessible toy . Research shows that much of that remains in adults , too . People resent being controlled . When a person seems too pushy , we get suspicious , annoyed , often angry , and retain morethan ( 1966 ) principle of psychological reactance . The most effective way to circumvent psychological reactance is to first get a foot in the door and then escalate the demands so gradually that there is seemingly nothing to react against . Hassan ( who spent many years as a in the cult , describes how theywould shape behaviors subtly at first , then more material that would make up the new identity of a recruit was doled out gradually , piece by piece , only as fast as the person was deemed ready to assimilate it . The rule of thumb was to tell him only what he can accept . He continues Do sell them the converts more than they can handle . If a recruit started because he was learning too much about us , the person working on him would back offand let another member move in Defending Against Unwelcome Persuasion The most commonly used approach to help people defend against unwanted persuasion is known as the inoculation method . Research has shown that people who are subjected to weak versions of a persuasive message are less vulnerable to stronger versions later on , in much the same way that being exposed to small doses ofa virus you against blown attacks . In a classic study by McGuire ( subjects were asked to state their opinion on an issue . They were then mildly attacked for their position and then given an opportunity to refute the attack . When later confronted by a powerful argument against their initial opinion , these subjects were more resistant than were a control group . In effect , they developed defenses that rendered them immune . and his colleagues have developed a more aggressive version of this technique that they refer to as stinging ( Their studies focused on the popular advertising tactic whereby authority figures are employed to sell products they know nothing about , for example , ads showing a famous astronaut pontificating on Rolex watches . In a first experiment , they found that simply forewarning people about the deviousness ofthese ads had little effect on peoples inclination to product later . Next , they stung the subjects . This time , they were immediately confronted with their gullibility .

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 529 Take a look at your answer to the first question . Did you find the ad to be even somewhat convincing ?

If so , then you got fooled . Take a look at your answer to the second question . Did you notice that this stockbroker was a fake ?

They were then asked to evaluate a new set of ads . The sting worked . These subjects were not only more likely to recognize the of deceptive ads they were also less likely to be persuaded by them . trainings such as these can be helpful . Ultimately , however , the most effective defense against unwanted persuasion is to how vulnerable we are . One must , first , accept that it is normal to be vulnerable and , second , to learn to recognize the danger signs when we are falling prey . To be forewarned is to be . Conclusion This module has provided a to the psychological processes and subsequent tricks involved in persuasion . It has emphasized the peripheral route of persuasion because this is when we are most vulnerable to psychological manipulation . These vulnerabilities are side effects of normal and usually adaptive psychological processes . Mindless offer shortcuts for a hopelessly complicated world . Theyare necessities for human survival . All , however , underscore the dangers that accompany any mindless thinking .

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 530 Outside Resources Book , 2008 ) Predictably irrational . New York , NY Harper . Book , 2008 ) Influence Science and practice ( Boston , MA and Bacon . Book , 2010 ) Persuasion , social influence , and compliance gaining ( Boston , MA Pearson . Book , 201 ) Thinking fast and slow . New York , NY , Book Levine , 2006 ) The power of persuasion how bought and sold . Wiley Book , 2011 ) Mistakes were made ( but not by me ) New York , NY , Student Video Kyle Ball and Brandon Do Principles of Persuasion . This is a made video highlighting key principles of persuasion that we encounter in our everyday lives . It was one of the winning entries in the 2015 Student Video Award . Persuasion , created Teeny and Ben , compares the central and peripheral routes to persuasion and also looks at how techniques of persuasion such as Scarcity and Social Proof influence our consumer choices . It was one of the winning entries in the 2015 Student Video Award . Student Video Persuasion in Advertising is a humorous look at the techniques used by companies to try to convince us to buy their products . The video was created by the team of Edward Puckering , Chris Cameron , and Kevin Smith . It was one of the winning entries in the 2015 Student Video Award . Video A brief , entertaining interview with the celebrity pickpocket shows how easily we can be fooled . See A Pickpocket Tale at

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 531 Video Cults employ extreme versions ofthe principles in this excellent documentary tracing the history of the cult is the American Experience production , The Life and Death of Peoples Temple at Video Philip video , Quiet Rage , offers a powerful , insightful description of his famous Stanford prison study Video The documentary Outfoxed provides an excellent example of how persuasion can be masked as news and education . Video The video , The Science of Countering Terrorism Psychological Perspectives , a talk by psychologist , is an excellent introduction to the process recruitment and thinking Discussion Questions . Imagine you are commissioned to create an ad to sell a new beer . Can you give an example ofan ad that would rely on the central route ?

Can you give an example ofan ad that would rely on the peripheral route ?

The reciprocity principle can be exploited in obvious ways , such as giving a customer a free sample ofa product . Can you give an example ofa less obvious way it might be exploited ?

What is a less obvious way that a cult leader might use it to get someone under his or her grip ?

Which trick in this module are you , personally , most prone to ?

Give a personal example ofthis . How might you have avoided it ?

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 532 Vocabulary Central route to persuasion Persuasion that employs direct , relevant , logical messages . Fixed action patterns ( Sequences of behavior that occur in exactly the same fashion , in exactly the same order , every time they are elicited . Foot in the door Obtaining a small , initial commitment . Gradually escalating commitments A pattern of small , progressively escalating demands is less likely to be rejected than a single large demand made all at once . Mental shortcuts that enable people to make decisions and solve problems quickly and efficiently . Peripheral route to persuasion Persuasion that relies on superficial cues that have little to do with logic . Psychological reactance A reaction to people , rules , requirements , or offerings that are perceived to limit freedoms . Social proof The mental shortcut based on the assumption that , if everyone is doing it , it must be right . The norm of reciprocity The normative pressure to repay , in equitable value , what another person has given to us . The rule of scarcity People tend to perceive things as more attractive when their availability is limited , or when they stand to lose the opportunity to acquire them on favorable terms . The triad of trust We are to persuasion when the source is perceived as an authority , as honest

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 533 and likable . Trigger features Specific , sometimes minute , aspects of a situation that activate fixed action patterns .

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 534 References Barrett , 2010 ) Supernormal stimuli How primal urges overran their evolutionary purpose . New York , NY Norton . 1966 ) A theory reactance . New York , NY Academic Press . 1977 ) Physical barriers and psychological reactance olds responses to threats to Personality and Social Psychology , 35 , 836 . Burger , 2009 ) Replicating Would people still obey Psychologist , 64 ( Burger , 986 ) Increasing compliance by deal The technique . journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 51 , 2008 ) Influence Science and practice ( Boston , MA and Bacon . Dion , 1972 ) What is beautiful is and Social Psychology , 24 , Fox , Stephen ( 1997 ) The mirror makers A history of American advertising and its creators . Champaign , IL University of Illinois Press . Fuller , A . 1974 ) Effects of group laughter on responses to humorous materials A replication and extension . Psychological Reports , 35 , 531 . 960 ) The norm of reciprocity A preliminary Sociological Review , 25 , Hassan , 1988 ) Combating cult mind control . Rochester , Park Street Press . Levine , 2003 ) The power How we bought and sold . Wiley . Levine , 2003 ) The power How we bought and sold . John Wiley Sons McGuire , 1964 ) Inducing resistance to persuasion Some contemporary approaches . In Berkowitz ( Ed . Advances in psychology ( Vol . 306 ) New York , NY Academic Press . 1974 ) Obedience to authority An experimental view . New York , NY Harper Row . 1980 ) On implementing the compliance technique in a business Research , 17 , Myers , David ( 2011 ) New York , NY Worth . Petty , 1986 ) The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion . In .

Persuasion So Easily Fooled 535 Berkowitz ( Ed . Advances in ( Vol . 19 , San Diego , CA Academic Press . Ross , Campbell , Wright , A . Rice , Turk , 984 ) When celebrities talk , children listen An experimental analysis responses with celebrity endorsement . journal of Applied Developmental Psychology , Rice , 2002 ) Dispelling the illusion of invulnerability The motivations and mechanisms of resistance to of Personality and Social Psychology , 83 ,

30 Conformity and Obedience Jerry Burger We often change our attitudes and behaviors to match the attitudes and behaviors of the people around us . One reason for this conformity is a concern about what other people think of us . This process was demonstrated in a classic study in which college students deliberately ratherthan go reason we conform to the norm is because other people often have information we do not , and relying on norms can be a reasonable strategy when we are uncertain about how we are supposed to act . Unfortunately , we frequently misperceive how the typical person acts , which can contribute to problems such as the excessive binge drinking often seen in college students . Obeying orders from an authority figure can sometimes lead to disturbing behavior . This danger was illustrated in a famous study in which participants were instructed to administer painful electric shocks to another person in what they believed to be a learning experiment . Despite vehement protests from the person receiving the shocks , most participants continued the procedure when instructed to do so by the experimenter . The findings raise questions about the power of blind obedience in deplorable situations such as atrocities and genocide . They also raise concerns about the ethical treatment of participants in psychology experiments . Learning Objectives Become aware of how widespread conformity is in our lives and some ofthe ways each of us changes our attitudes and behavior to match the norm . Understand the two primary reasons why people often conform to perceived norms . Appreciate how obedience to authority has been examined in laboratory studies and some ofthe implications of the findings from these investigations . Consider some ofthe remaining issues and sources of controversy surrounding

Conformity and Obedience 537 obedience studies . Introduction When he was a teenager , my son often enjoyed looking at photographs of me and my wife taken when we were in high school . He laughed at the hairstyles , the clothing , and the kind of glasses people wore back And when he was through with his ridiculing , we would point out that no one is immune to fashions and fads and that someday his children will probably be equally amused by his high school photographs and the trends he found so normal at the time . Everyday observation confirms that we often adopt the actions and attitudes of the people around us . Trends in clothing , music , foods , and entertainment are obvious . But our views on political issues , religious questions , and lifestyles also reflect to some degree the attitudes of the people we interact with . Similarly , decisions about behaviors such as smoking and drinking are influenced by whether the people we spend time with engage in these activities . Psychologists refer to this widespread tendency to act and think like the people around us as conformity . Fashion trends serve as good , and sometimes embarrassing , examples of our own susceptibility to conformity .

Conformity and Obedience 538 Conformity What causes all this conformity ?

To start , humans may possess an imitate the actions of others . Although we usually are not aware of it , we often mimic the gestures , body posture , language , talking speed , and many other behaviors of the people we interact with . Researchers find that this mimicking increases the connection between people and allows our interactions to flow more smoothly ( Beyond this automatic tendency to imitate others , psychologists have identified two primary reasons for conformity . The first of these is normative influence . When normative influence is operating , people go along with the crowd because they are concerned about what others think ofthem . We do want to look out of step or become the target just because we like different kinds of music or dress differently than everyone else . Fitting in also brings rewards such as camaraderie and compliments . How powerful is normative influence ?

Consider a classic study conducted many years ago by Solomon ( The participants were male college students who were asked to engage in a seemingly simple task . An experimenter standing several feet away held up a card that depicted one line on the left side and three lines on the right side . The participants job was to say aloud which of the three lines on the right was the same length as the line on the left . Sixteen cards were presented one at a time , and the correct answer on each was so obvious as to make the task a little boring . Except for one thing . The participant was not alone . In fact , there were six other people in the room who also gave their answers to the task aloud . Moreover , although they pretended to be fellow participants , these other individuals were , in fact , confederates working with the experimenter . The real participant was seated so that he always gave his answer after hearing what five other participants said . Everything went smoothly until the third trial , when inexplicably the first participant gave an obviously incorrect answer . The mistake might have been amusing , except the second participant gave the same answer . As did the third , the fourth , and the fifth participant . Suddenly the real participant was in a difficult situation . His eyes told him one thing , but five out of five people apparently saw something else . It one thing to wear your hair a certain way or like certain foods because everyone around you does . But , would participants intentionally give a wrong to conform with the other participants ?

The confederates uniformly gave incorrect answers on 12 ofthe 16 trials , and 76 percent of the participants went along with the norm at least once and also gave the wrong answer . In total , they conformed with the group on of the 12 test trials . Although we might be impressed that the majority ofthe time participants answered honestly ,

Conformity and Obedience 539 most psychologists find it remarkable that so many college students caved in to the pressure of the group rather than do the job they had volunteered to do . In almost all cases , the participants were incorrect answer , but their concern forwhat these other people might be thinking about them overpowered their desire to do the right thing . Variations of procedures have been conducted numerous times ( Bond , 2005 Bond es of the cards used in the experiment . How Smith 1996 ) We now know that the findings power ?

are easily replicated , that there is an increase in conformity with more confederates ( up to about five ) that teenagers are more prone to conforming than are adults , and that people conform significantly less often when they believe the confederates will not hear their responses ?

This last finding is consistent with the notion that participants change their answers because they are concerned about what others think of them . Finally , although we see the effect in virtually every culture that has been studied , more conformity is found in collectivist countries such and China than in individualistic countries such as the United States ( Bond Smith , to give a clearly incorrect answer , like many participants in the experiment did , to better match the thoughts of a group of peers ?

commons higher value on the goals of the group than on individual preferences . They also are more motivated to maintain harmony in their interpersonal relations . The other reason we sometimes go along with the crowd is that people are often a source of information . Psychologists refer to this process as informational influence . Most of us , most ofthe time , are motivated to do the right thing . deems that we put litter in a proper container , speak softly in libraries , and tip our waiter , then that what most of us will do . But sometimes it not clear what society expects of us . In these situations , we often rely on descriptive norms ( That is , we act the way most most people like . This is not an unreasonable strategy . Other people often have information that we do not , especially when we find ourselves in new situations . If you have ever been part of a conversation that went something like this , Do you think we should ?

Sure . Everyone else is doing , Conformity and Obedience 540 you have experienced the power of informational influence . However , it not always easy to obtain good descriptive norm information , which means we sometimes rely on a flawed notion ofthe norm when deciding how we should behave . Agood example of how norms can lead to problems is found in research on binge drinking among college students . Excessive drinking is a serious problem on many campuses ( There are many reasons why students binge drink , but one ofthe most important is their perception ofthe descriptive norm . How much students drink is highly correlated with how much they believe the average student drinks ( Neighbors , Lee , Lewis , boisterous heavy drinker at the party but fail to consider all the students not attending the party . As a result , students typically overestimate the descriptive norm for college student ?

Students believe they consume significantly less alcohol than the norm , a miscalculation that creates a dangerous push toward more and more excessive alcohol consumption . On the positive side , providing students with accurate information about drinking norms has been found to reduce ( Burger , Hendricks , Neighbors , Researchers have demonstrated the power of descriptive norms in a number of areas . used when they learned that they were consuming more energy than their neighbors ( Schultz , Nolan , option when led to believe that other students had made this choice ( Hotel guests were more likely to reuse their towels when a hanger in the bathroom told them that this is what most guests did ( Efforts to influence people to engage in healthier or more sustainable behaviors have benefitted from use Using the Stairs of the elevator when , hotels have informed that the vast majority of people took been able to significantly increase the numbers of the Stairs to go up one or two ( Burger people who reuse bath towels ( reducing water and Shelton 2011 ) energy use ) by informing them on signs in their rooms that towels is a typical behavior of other hotel guests . ObedienCe

Conformity and Obedience 541 Although we may be influenced by the people around us more than we recognize , whether we conform to the norm is up to us . But sometimes decisions about how to act are not so easy . Sometimes we are directed by a more powerful person to do things we may not want to do . Researchers who study obedience are interested in how people react when given an order or command from someone in a position of authority . In many situations , obedience is a good thing . We are taught at an early age to obey parents , teachers , and police officers . It also important to follow instructions , firefighters , and lifeguards . And a military would fail to function if soldiers stopped obeying orders from superiors . But , there is also a dark side to obedience . In the name of ' following orders or just doing myjob , people can violate ethical principles and break laws . More disturbingly , obedience often is at the heart of some of the worst of human , atrocities , and even genocide . led to some ofthe most famous and most controversial research in the history of psychology ( wanted to know why so many otherwise decent German citizens went along with the brutality ofthe Nazi leaders during the Holocaust . These inhumane policies may have originated in the mind of a single person , 371 ) wrote , but they could only be carried out on a massive scale if a very large number of persons obeyed Photographs of victims of Cambodian dictator Pol Pot . From 197579 the Rouge army obediently carried out orders to execute tens of thousands of civilians . Rusty Stewart To understand this obedience , conducted a series of laboratory investigations . In all but one variation ofthe basic procedure , participants were men recruited from the community surrounding Yale University , where the research was carried out . These citizens signed up for what they believed to be an experiment on learning and memory . In particular , they were told the research concerned the effects of punishment on learning . Three people were involved in each session . One was the participant . Another was the experimenter . The third was a confederate who pretended to be another participant . The experimenter explained that the study consisted of a memory test and that one of the men would be the teacher and the other the learner . Through a rigged drawing , the real always assigned the teacher role and the confederate was always the learner . The teacher watched as the learner was strapped into a chair and had electrodes attached to his wrist . The teacher then moved to the room next door where he was seated in front of

Conformity and Obedience 542 a large metal box the experimenter identified as a shock The front of the box displayed gauges and lights and , most noteworthy , a series of 30 levers across the bottom . Each lever was labeled with a voltage figure , starting with 15 volts and moving up in increments to 450 volts . Labels also indicated the strength ofthe shocks , starting with Slight Shock and moving up to Danger Severe Shock toward the end . The last two levers were simply labeled in red . Through a microphone , the teacher administered a memory test to the learner in the next room . The learner responded to the items by pressing one of four buttons that were barely within reach of his hand . If the teacher saw the correct answer light up on his side of the wall , he simply moved on to the next item . But if the learner got the item wrong , the teacher pressed one ofthe shock levers and , thereby , delivered the learners punishment . The teacher was instructed to start with the lever and move up to the next highest shock for each successive wrong answer . in In reality , the learner received no shocks . But he did make a lot of mistakes on the test , which forced the teacher to administer what he believed to be increasingly strong shocks . The purpose of the study was to see how far the to receive the shocks but who was actually an actor teacher would go before refusing to Continue cooperating with the experimenter , The teacher first hint that something was amiss experiment by Fred the Oyster came after and hearing commons through the wall the learner say The learner reactions became stronger and louder with each lever press . At 150 volts , the learner yelled out , Experimenter ! That all . Get me out of here . I told you I had heart trouble . My heart starting to bother me now . Get me out of here , please . My heart starting to bother me . I refuse to go on . Let me out . the experimenter , the teacher , who was the focus of Diagram of the Experiment . the experiment , the learner , the person expected The experimenter role was to encourage the participant to continue . anytime the teacher asked to end the session , the experimenter responded with phrases such as , The experiment requires thatyou continue , and You have no other choice , you must go The experimenter ended the session only after the teacher stated four successive times that he did not want to

Conformity and Obedience 543 continue . All the while , the learner protests became more intense with each shock . After 300 volts , the learner refused to answer any more questions , which led the experimenter to say that no answer should be considered a wrong answer . After 330 volts , despite vehement protests from the previous shocks , the teacher heard only silence , suggesting that the learner was now physically unable to respond . teacher reached 450 end ofthe experimenter told him to continue pressing the 450 volt lever for each wrong answer . It was only after the teacher pressed the lever three times that the experimenter announced that the study was over . Ifyou had been a participant in this research , what would you have done ?

Virtually everyone says he or she would have stopped early in the process . And most people predict that very few if any participants would keep pressing all the way to 450 volts . Yet in the basic procedure described here , 65 percent ofthe participants continued to administer shocks to the very end of the session . These were not brutal , sadistic men . They were ordinary citizens who nonetheless followed the experimenter instructions to administer what they believed to be excruciating dangerous electric shocks to an innocent person . The disturbing implication from the findings is that , under the right circumstances , each of us may be capable of acting in some very uncharacteristic and perhaps some very unsettling ways . ounce on 255 , A ' se i . i . Ifyou had been a teacher in the experiment , would you have behaved differently than the majority who delivered what they thought were massive shocks ?

Photo Sharon conducted many variations of this basic procedure to explore some of the factors Conformity and Obedience 544 that affect obedience . He found that obedience rates decreased when the learner was in the same room as the experimenter and declined even further when the teacher had to physically touch the learner to punishment . Participants also were less willing to continue the procedure after seeing other teachers refuse to press the shock levers , and they were significantly less obedient when the instructions to continue a person they believed to be another participant rather than from the experimenter . Finally , found that women participants followed the experimenter instructions at exactly the same rate the men had . obedience research has been the subject of much controversy and discussion . Psychologists continue to debate the extent to which studies tell us something about atrocities in general and about the behavior of German citizens during the Holocaust in particular ( Certainly , there are important features of that time and place that can not be recreated in a laboratory , such as a pervasive climate of prejudice and dehumanization . Another issue concerns the relevance of the findings . Some people have argued that today we are more aware of the dangers of blind obedience than we were when the research was conducted back in the . However , findings from partial and modified of procedures conducted in recent years suggest that people respond to the situation today much like they did a half a century ago ( Another point of controversy concerns the ethical treatment of research participants . Researchers have an obligation to look out for the welfare of their participants . Yet , there is little doubt that many of participants experienced intense levels of stress as they went through the procedure . In his defense , was not unconcerned about the effects of the experience on his participants . And in questionnaires , the vast majority of his participants said they were pleased they had been part ofthe research and thought similar experiments should be conducted in the future . Nonetheless , in part because of studies , guidelines and procedures were developed to protect research participants from these kinds of experiences . Although intriguing findings left us with many unanswered questions , conducting a full replication ofhis experiment remains out of bounds by today standards . Social psychologists are fond of saying that we are all influenced by the people around us more than we recognize . Of course , each person is unique , and ultimately each of us makes choices about how we will and will not act . But decades of research on conformity and obedience make it clear that we live in a social world and better or of what we do is a reflection ofthe people we encounter .

Conformity and Obedience 545 Outside Resources Student Video Christine Winston and The Experiment gives an excellent overview of one of the most famous experiments in the history of psychology . It was one of the winning entries in the 2015 Student Video Award . Video An example of information influence in a field setting ?

Video Scenes from a recent partial replication of obedience studies ?

Video Scenes from a recent replication of conformity experiment ?

Web Website devoted to scholarship and research related to obedience studies Discussion Questions . In what ways do you see normative influence operating among you and your peers ?

How difficult would it be to go against the norm ?

What would it take for you to not do something just because all your friends were doing it ?

What are some examples of how informational influence helps us do the right thing ?

How can we use descriptive norm information to change problem behaviors ?

Is conformity more likely or less likely to occur when interacting with other people through social media as compared to encounters ?

When is obedience to authority a good thing and when is it bad ?

What can be done to prevent people from obeying commands to engage in truly deplorable behavior such as atrocities and massacres ?

In what ways do experimental procedures fall outside the guidelines for research with human participants ?

Are there ways to conduct relevant research on obedience to authority without violating these guidelines ?

Conformity and Obedience 546 Vocabulary Conformity Changing one attitude or behavior to match a perceived social norm . Descriptive norm The perception of what most people do in a given situation . Informational influence Conformity that results from a concern to act in a socially approved manner as determined by how others act . Normative influence Conformity that results from a concern for what other people think of us . Obedience Responding to an order or command from a person in a position .

Conformity and Obedience 547 References , 1956 ) Studies of independence and conformity I . A minority of one against a unanimous majority . Psychological , 70 ( Whole No . 416 ) 1979 ) Developmental changes in peers and parents . Developmental Psychology , 15 , Bond , 2005 ) Group size and conformity . Group Processes Relations , 331 . Bond , Smith , 1996 ) Culture and conformity A of studies using ( 1956 ) task . Psychological Bulletin , 119 , Carey , 2003 ) Descriptive and injunctive norms in college drinking A analytic Studies on Alcohol , 64 , 331 . Burger , 2009 ) Replicating Would people still obey today ?

American Psychologist , 64 , Burger , Shelton , 2011 ) Changing everyday health behaviors through descriptive norm manipulations . Social Influence , Burger , Bell , Harvey , Johnson , Stewart , Dorian , 2010 ) Nutritious or delicious ?

The effect of descriptive norm information on food of Social and Clinical Psychology , 29 , Burger , Hendricks , 2011 ) Partying before the party gets started The effects of descriptive norms on behavior . Basic Social Psychology , 33 , Bargh , A . 1999 ) The chameleon effect The link and social of Personality and Social Psychology , 76 , Reno , 990 ) conduct Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public of Personality and Social Psychology , 58 , 1955 ) Conformity and character . American Psychologist , 10 , Gerard , 1955 ) A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual and Social Psychology , 51 , 2008 ) A room with a viewpoint Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in Consumer Research , 35 , 1974 ) Obedience to authority . experimental view . New York , NY Harper Row .

Conformity and Obedience 548 , 1965 ) Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority . Human Relations , 18 , 1963 ) Behavioral study of and Social Psychology , 67 , 371 . 2004 ) What can the obedience experiments tell us Holocaust ?

the social psychology laboratory . Miller ( Ed . ofgood and evil ( New York , NY Press . 2009 ) College binge drinking still on the journal of the American Medical Association , 302 , Lee , Lewis , 2007 ) Are social norms the best predictor of outcomes among college students ?

journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs , 68 , Lee , Lewis , Walter , 2009 ) personalized feedback to reduce drinking A randomized controlled trial of an prevention of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 77 , Perkins , Haines , Rice , 2005 ) the college drinking norm and related problems A nationwide study of exposure to prevention information , perceived norms , and student alcohol on Alcohol , 66 , Schultz , Nolan , 2007 ) The constructive , destructive , and reconstructive power of social norms . Psychological Science , 18 ,