Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
71 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Normative influence |
conformity based on a persons desire to fulfill others' expectations, often to gain acceptnace |
|
|
obedience |
bending to commands of authority figure |
|
|
compliance |
bending to requests of others |
|
|
impact of milgrams study |
power of situation, not personality |
|
|
how does milgram back up la piere |
attitidues do not always predict behavior |
|
|
what issues did milgrams study bring up |
ethical issues |
|
|
5 factors that effect conformity |
group size unanimity cohesion status public response |
|
|
milgram expierement |
shock expirement |
|
|
sherifs expirement |
autokinetic effect expirement different perception on how much light moves |
|
|
4 features of milgrams study design |
slippery slope of small requests that escalate framing of shock giving as social norm in situation opportunity to deny responsibility limited time to reflect on decision |
|
|
what happens in sherifs study |
reported movement of light changes when in group. normative influence |
|
|
4 factors that determine obedience |
victims emotional distance authorities closeness and legitmacy whether authority was part of respected institution liberating effects of disobedient fellow participant |
|
|
Aschs study |
line judging. |
|
|
cognitive dissonance |
negative state that threatens self view. motivated to get out of state |
|
|
asch study what happened |
obvious that line was the one shown. two people before them give wrong answer, so they give wrong answer |
|
|
fessinger significance |
cognitive dissonance |
|
|
central route |
occurs when interested people focus on arguments and respond with favorable thoughts |
|
|
peripheral route |
people influenced by incidental cues, such as speakers attractiveness |
|
|
cohesion |
how bonded together group is |
|
|
groupthink |
faulty thinking in which critcal scrutiny that should be devoted to the issue at hand is subverted to raech consensus
|
|
|
ways to avoid groupthink |
leader statys quiet subgroups outside opinions devils advocate alternate plan |
|
|
groupthink effect on behavior |
deindividuation |
|
|
deindividuation |
loss of individuality. reduces normal constraints on behavior. feeling or anonymity, real or perveives |
|
|
4 groupthink symptoms |
overestimate groups might and right closed minded uniformity mindguard self censor |
|
|
halloween study |
deindividuation. increase in impulsive or deviant acts when kids are masked or in group |
|
|
challenger space shuttle |
example of groupthink |
|
|
primacy effect |
information presented early are most persuasive when other things are equal |
|
|
recency effect |
information presented last sometimes has most influence. less common then primacy |
|
|
when is primacy effect occuring |
when two persuasive messages are back to back and audience must pick one after |
|
|
when is recency effect occuring |
when two messages are seperated and audiences responds soon after second message. |
|
|
conformity |
complying to social norms due to group pressure |
|
|
2 types of conformity |
informational influence and normative |
|
|
informational influence |
conform because someone has peice of info we do not have but want |
|
|
social roles |
lower classes more likely to conform |
|
|
suceptibility to social influence |
age (younger more easy to persuade) expertise (more expertise= more questions) need for cognition |
|
|
4 elements of persuasion |
communicator message how message is communicated audience |
|
|
ciabaldi 6 principles |
authority liking social proof reciprocity consistency scarcity |
|
|
authority |
people defer to credible experts |
|
|
liking |
people respond more affirmatively to those they like |
|
|
social proof |
people allow the example of others to validate how to think feel and act |
|
|
reciprocity |
people feel obliged to repay in kind what they have received |
|
|
consistency |
people tend to honor their public commitments |
|
|
scarcity |
people prize what is scarce |
|
|
cult |
use small activities which turn to larger charismatic leader audience matters |
|
|
audience of cult |
at turning point of life, facing personal crises. people have needs and cult has answers
|
|
|
group polarization |
group discussion strengthens average group members initial inclinations |
|
|
deindividualization |
loss of self awareness and evaluation apprehension. occurs in group situations that foster responsiveness to group norms |
|
|
3 parts of deindividuation |
bigger mod= more deindividuation anonymity arousing and distracting activities |
|
|
warriors depersonalize |
body and face paint depersonalizes warriors. more likely to brutalize enemies |
|
|
selective exposure |
seek media that supports ones views. way to decrease cognitive dissonance |
|
|
2 routes of persuasion (Elaboration Likelihood model) |
Central and peripheral |
|
|
Which route of persuasion we use is based on ___ |
ability and motivation |
|
|
ELM argument quality |
Message- strong arguments |
|
|
ELM superficial cues |
Message-emotionally vivid Source- attractiveness, credibility, something to gain |
|
|
ELM motivation |
need for cognition expertise personal relevance cognitive resources |
|
|
ELM the message |
Motivation/ ability? Yes- argument strength det. persuas. no- superficial persuasion |
|
|
Robert Zajonc |
cockroach- social facilitation& social arousal easy tasks are better performed in groups (not the case for difficult tasks) |
|
|
social arousal |
social arousal facilitates dominant response |
|
|
evaluation apprehension |
concerned for how ohers are evaluating us |
|
|
social facilitation |
presence of other people affects performance |
|
|
social loafing |
tendency to exert less effort when working on a group task which individ. contributions cannot be monitored |
|
|
when does social loafing occur |
when individual performance cannot be evaluated |
|
|
what happens in social facilitation |
people do better on easy tasks people do worse on difficult tasks only when performance can be individually evaluated |
|
|
distraction conflict |
attention divided between task and audience |
|
|
3 ways other people effect performance |
evaluation apprehension distraction conflict mere presence |
|
|
cause of zajoncs findings |
arrousal from others presence strengthens dominant resposnse |
|
|
is deindividuation always bad |
no. positive norm leads to positive behacior |
|
|
2 environmental cues that decrease due to deindividuation |
accountability attention to the self |
|
|
2 effects of groups on performance |
social facilitatoin social loafing |
|
|
2 effects of decision making on groups |
group polarization groupthink |
|
|
groups effect on behavior |
deinidividuation |
