the effect that the words, actions or mere presence of others have on our thoughts feelings or behaviors.  Normative or informational social influence.

1. conformity
2. obedience
3. compliance

changing behavior due to the real or imagined influence of others

private acceptance-change behavior because we generally believe that what others are doing is right

Sherif=light movement...estimates converged over trials when in groups

changing behavior due to an order from an authority figure.  usually very adaptive, but authority may not always be legit.

WWII  and nazis

Milgram- p's thought they were in a study about effects of punishment on learning.  teacher or p gives learner an electric shock for each mistake with increasing voltage.

"the experiment must go on"

changing ones behavior due to a direct request. compliance has 6 variables...

explicit 

implicit

examples: salesman, ads, commericals, con-men, asking for a favor

when we change our behavior bc we think its the right thing to do.

fulfills the need to be right

• private acceptance- changing our behavior out of a genuine belief that what theyre doing or saying is right. 

people likely to change behavior bc of ISI when

• the situation is ambiguous (most crucial)
• the situation is a crisis
• other people are experts (police)

change behavior to fulfill the need to be liked and accepted.  happens when we change our behavior to match social norms (implicit or explicit rules that a group has for the acceptable behaviors, values and beliefs of its members)

• public compliance- changing our behavior to match others' without necessarily believing in what we're doing or saying

conditions where social norms have the greatest influence 

• conditions uncertain
• source is similar
• concerned about relationship with source

when will ppl change thier behavior bc of normative social influence?

• social impact theory.
• Asch line study- how people react in an unambiguous situation, where the group is clearly wrong.  

• strength- how important is group to you?
• immediacy- how close is group to you in space and time during the attempt to influence you
• number- how many ppl are in the group?  adding additional group members beyond 4 or 5 has little impact.  unanimity creates teh strongest pressure to change your behavior even one ally significantly decreases the likelihood of conformity.

1. reciprocity
2. consistency
3.  social validation 
4. friendship/liking
5. authority 
6. scarcity

tit for tat

we feel obligated to return favors that we ahve received...one of most powerful norms in all societies

"free" gift, door-in-the-face, thats-not-all

examples:

liking

cooperation/competition

self-disclosure

persuasion

harm

desire for consistency is a prime motivator of our behavior.  dissonance rises when we experience inconsistency.

• way to manage self-concept
• what might we feel is we behave in a manner that is in consistent with our positive self-image or our past behaviors...dissonance
• commitment leads to consistency- if we make some kind of commitment to a product, youre more likely to continue that commitment.  

we look to others to determine appropriate ways to behave.

everyones doing it...evoking a norm and informational social influence 

• to fit in
• use as source of information 

normative and invormational social influence

"largest selling, fastest growing" everyones donating, it must be the thing to do.

list-request made only after the target is shown a list of similar others who have already complied.  validates the product/donation.

liking

we help our friends and people we like

who do we like?

• physically attractive 
• similar to us: mirror and match technique
• ppl who compliment us
• ppl who cooperate with us: good cop bad cop routine 

we assume usually correctly that authorities have superior knowledge talent or fortune

However leads us to complyu when authority is not legitimate...con-men

• fashionable mens clothing since 1841
• actors celebrities atheletes
• symbols- lab coat=doctor, suit and tie=businessman. (if you look the part)

opportunities seem more valuable when less available- why diamonds cost so much.

two reasons:

• rare is good heuristic 
• loss of freedom-reactance theory...if you dont buy it now, you wont get one and miss out!

limited time offer!

people are motivated by loss- they want to avoid losses...you can loose several health benefits by failing to go to the dentist.

1. physical attractiveness
2. proximity
3. familiarity
4. similarity
5. reciprocity
6. secrecy

physical attractiveness

Walster, (1966)- 

what is beautiful is also good

attractive people seen as sociable po;ular intellectual successful etc.

Snyder Tanke and B.- when men thought the woman they were speaking with on the phone was attractive, they acted more warmly to her.  

radiating effect of beauty

evolutionary explanation

proximity

best predictor of where two people will be friends is how far apart they live.  

Festinger, schacter and back (1950)- apartment study

familiarity

 mere exposure effect

m.e.e.- the more we are exposed to a stimulus, the more we ten to like it

• even works for our own faces
• exception: if we initally feel negative toward the stimulus.

Moreland and Beach- equally attractive confederate women attended a lecture and never interacted with the students.

•  attended class 0, 5, 10, or 15 times.  
• cognitive explanation- familiar people tent to be more similar to ourselves

does similarity lead to liking or does liking lead to similarity?

Newcomb (1961)

transfer students at the u of michigan moved into same boarding house on first day of semester.

• major background info measured on day 1
• liking measured after 13 weeks

why does similarity lead to liking?

validates our own self-worth

expectancy-value-theory: people tend to approach the most desirable person they can realistically expect to attract.  

similarity and propinquity- similar people choose similar situations

• generally we like those who like us
• self-fulfilling prophecy: we act more likeable to those whom we think like us.  they in turn like us for liking them
• but self esteem moderates effect

"the commonest thing is delightful only if one hides it" -oscar wilde

wegner lane and dimitri- footsie under teh table while playing cards

IV: no contact, secret footsie, nonsecret footsie

DV: attraction for partner

why do we seek out relationships?

• humans are social animals- we tend to seek 
• reproduction drives 

love and attraction are functions of ability to propagate genes ( Buss 88, 89, 90)

• males- frequent pairings-younger healthier women=more attractive
• females-provider-status and resources=more attractive

evolutionary theories are difficult to test

over yrs empirical support has decreased 

alternate explanation: women and resources (Ganestead 1993)

association btwn a womans economic resources and preference for a hot man

attachment styles

secure

easy to ge tclose to others, no worrying about abandonment 

(56%) 

coping strategy: talking to partner

seek intimacy but sworry that toehrs wont reciprocate or stay.  emotional highs and lows.  obsession, jealousy, love at first sight

19%

coping: ruminition- mulling it over 

uncomfortable getting close, jealousy, fear of intimacy. 

relatively brief sexual encounters

25%

coping: distancing

the sharing of intimate information and feelings with another person

two types:

• descriptive- the info we provide that describes ourselves...hometown, age, name...
• evaluative- the info we provide that describes our personal assessment of somethning...opinions polictical affiliations...

expression- getting things off our chest

self-clarification- understand ourselves better

social control- we can have power b y not disclosing.  you know more about them than they do you.

relationship development- sharing info. about ourselves with each other is important to relationships.  

altman and taylor

as relationships develop, we disclose more and more personal things aobut ourselves.  occurs along  2 dimensions:

• depth- how personal it is
• breadth- the range of info/categories of info we disclose

tit for tat

there is a strong reciprocity effect for self-disclosure

• if you violate this norm of reciprocity with self disclosure or self disclose too much too early, you are liked less

interdependence theory of relationships

thibaut and kelley

maximize rewards adn minimize costs

• rewards= love, money, status, info, goods, services
• costs= time and energy, conflict, disapproval of others, opportunity to do other rewarding activities

information we use when deciding whether or not to remain in a relationship:

• CL comparison level- the quality of outcomes a person believes he/she deserves.  reflects past relationship experiences.  our personal belief ab what constitutes an acceptable relationship
• CL-ALT- assessing how our relationship compares to others that are available.  other fish in the sea.

investment model

rusbult 1983

a third component=investment model

expanded interdependence theory to long term relationships (includes investments)

now commitment determined by:

satisfaction

• cost 
• rewards
• CL

investments (new piece)

• intrinsic
• extrinsic

alternatives

• CL-ALT

equity theory

Farkas and Anderson 1979

relationship satisfaction determined by the ratio of benefits to contributions.  contributions can be positive or negative.

your benefits        =   partner's benefits

your contributions       partner's contributions

if equal, we're satisfied; 30/60 = 50/100

if balanced, there is harmony in rel.

when not balanced- both under and over benefited partners feel distress.

communal vs. exchange relationships

Clark and Mills '79

• exchange- tit for tat relationships
• communal- desire for/expectations of mutual responsiveness.  we dont keep track of 1 for 1 exchanges.  it comes out in the wash

close friendships and meaningful romantic relationships=communal 

superficial interactions with strangers/acquaintances=exchange relationships

breaking up 

rusbult

behaviors in troubled relationships

two dimensions

• active vs. passive
• constructive vs. destructive

4 types of behaviors

• exit- harming or terminating rel. active destructive
• voice- talking it out. active constructive
• loyalty- waiting for rel to improve.  passive constructive 
• neglect- allowing conditions to deteriorate. passive destructive