Download This is Where You Type the Slide Title

Chapter 7
Social Thinking and Social Influence
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Forming Impressions of Others
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Cite the five sources of information people use to
form impressions of others.
• Explain the key differences between snap judgments
and systematic judgments.
• Define attributions and describe two attributionbased expectations that can distort observer’s
perceptions.
• Recognize four important cognitive distortions and
how they operate.
• Identify some ways in which perceptions of others
are efficient, selective, and consistent.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Forming Impressions of Others
Key Sources of Information
• As we engage in person perception, “the process
of forming impressions of others”, we rely on five
key sources of information:
1. Appearance
2. Verbal behavior
3. Actions
4. Nonverbal messages
5. Situations
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Forming Impressions of Others, continued
Snap judgments vs. systematic judgments
• Snap judgments about others “are those made
quickly and based on only a few bits of information
and preconceived notions."
• They are “shortcuts” that rely on automatic
processing, and are used when we are not
motivated to form an accurate impression of
another person.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Forming Impressions of Others, continued
• Systematic judgments require more controlled
processing and tend to occur when forming
impressions of others that can affect our happiness
or welfare.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Forming Impressions of Others, continued
Attributions are “inferences that people draw about
the causes of their own behavior, others’ behavior, and
events." There are two types:
1. Internal attributions – when people attribute the
cause of others’ behavior to personal dispositions,
traits, abilities, or feelings.
2. External attributions – when people attribute the
cause of others’ behavior to situational demands or
environmental constraints.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Forming Impressions of Others, continued
• We are most likely to make attributions about
others’ behavior when
– Others behave in unexpected or negative ways
– When events are personally relevant
– When we are suspicious about others’
motives
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Forming Impressions of Others, continued
Perceiver expectations
• How we expect others to behave can influence
our actual perceptions of them.
• Confirmation bias – “the tendency to seek
information that supports one’s beliefs while not
pursuing disconfirming information."
• Self-fulfilling prophecies – occur when
“expectations about a person cause him or her to
behave in ways that confirm the expectations”
(see Figure 7.3).
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Source: Adapted from Smith, E.R., & Mackie, D.M. (1995). Social Psychology.
New York: Worth, p. 103. Copyright © 1995 Worth Publishing. Reprinted with
permission.
Forming Impressions of Others, continued
Cognitive distortions
• Social categorizations – cognitive “shortcuts” in
which we categorize people on the basis of
nationality, race, gender, etc.
– People perceive similar individuals to be
members of their ingroup (us) and dissimilar
people to be members of the outgroup
(them).
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Forming Impressions of Others, continued
• Categorizing has three important results:
1. People have more negative attitudes toward
outgroup members.
2. People see outgroup members as more alike
than they really are (the outgroup
homogeneity effect).
3. The visibility of outgroup members is
heightened when they comprise the minority
in a crowd.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Forming Impressions of Others, continued
• Stereotypes – “widely held beliefs that people
have certain characteristics because of their
membership in a particular group."
• Stereotypes persist because of
– They are functional in that they require less
effort, cognitively (we are “cognitive misers”)
– But, the trade-off for simplicity is inaccuracy
– Confirmation bias
– Self-fulfilling prophecy
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Forming Impressions of Others, continued
The fundamental attribution error – refers to “the
tendency to explain other people’s behavior as the
result of personal, rather than situational, factors."
• Making attributions requires two steps:
1. Focusing on the person (making an internal
attribution)
2. Taking the situation into account (allowing for
external attributions)
• The second step is more effortful, so we often
skip it (see Figure 7.4).
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Adapted from Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2011
Forming Impressions of Others, continued
• A defensive attribution is “the tendency to blame
victims for their misfortune, so that one feels less
likely to be victimized in a similar way."
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Forming Impressions of Others, continued
• Key themes in person perception:
– Efficiency – when forming impressions of others,
we default to automatic processing.
– Selectivity – we “see what we expect to see” by
focusing on aspects of the person that confirm our
expectations (see Figure 7.5).
– Consistency – First impressions do matter! Once a
perceiver has formed an impression of someone,
he or she tunes out subsequent information. This is
called the primacy effect.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Problem of Prejudice
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Explain how “old-fashioned” and modern
discrimination differ.
• Understand how authoritarianism and cognitive
distortions can contribute to prejudice.
• Clarify how intergroup competition and threats to
social identity can foster prejudice.
• Describe the operation of several strategies for
reducing prejudice.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Problem of Prejudice, continued
Prejudice – “a negative attitude toward members of
a group”
Discrimination – “involves behaving differently,
usually unfairly, toward the members of a group”
– Prejudice and discrimination often go
together, but this is not always the case (see
Figure 7.6).
– Sometimes, we are not even aware of our
prejudices as demonstrated by the Implicit
Association Test.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Problem of Prejudice, continued
“Old-fashioned” vs. modern discrimination
• “Old-fashioned”, or overt, discrimination has
declined in recent years, but a more subtle
(“modern”) form of discrimination has emerged.
• Modern discrimination occurs when “people
privately harbor negative attitudes toward minority
groups, but express them only when they feel such
views are justified, or that it’s safe to do so” (see
Figure 7.7).
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Source: From Swim, J.K., Aikin, K.J., Hall, W.S., & Hunter, B.A. (1995). Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern
prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 199-214. Copyright © 1995 American Psychological Association.
Reprinted by permission of the author.
The Problem of Prejudice, continued
Causes of prejudice
1. Authoritarianism
• The authoritarian personality is a “personality
type characterized by prejudice toward any
group perceived to be different from oneself."
2. Cognitive distortions and expectations such as
stereotyping, fundamental attribution error,
defensive attributions, and expectations.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Problem of Prejudice, continued
Causes of prejudice, continued
3. Competition between groups – perceived threats
to one’s group, such as conflict over scarce
resources, causes prejudice against outgroup
members.
4. Threats to social identity – when the collective
self-esteem of a group is threatened, two
response may occur:
• Ingroup favoritism
• Outgroup denigration
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Problem of Prejudice, continued
Reducing prejudice
• Cognitive strategies – make an effort to override
stereotypes by using controlled processing
• Intergroup contact
– Superordinate goals – “goals that require two
or more groups to work together to achieve
mutual ends” can reduce intergroup hostility
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Power of Persuasion
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Cite the key elements in the persuasion process, and
describe how each one operates.
• Discuss the evidence on one-sided versus two-sided
messages and the value of arousing fear or positive
feelings in persuasion.
• Explain how the two cognitive routes to persuasion
operate.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Elements of the Persuasion Process
• Persuasion – “involves the communication of
arguments and information intended to change
another person’s attitudes”
– Attitudes – include “beliefs and feelings about
people, objects, and ideas”
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Power of Persuasion, continued
The elements of persuasion, continued (see Figure
7.12).
1. The source is “the person who sends a
communication."
2. The receiver is “the person to whom the
message is sent."
3. The message is “the information transmitted
by the source."
4. The channel is “the medium through which
the message is sent."
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Power of Persuasion, continued
Source factors
• Persuasion is more effective when:
1. The source has high credibility. Sources are
deemed credible if they have expertise and
are trustworthy.
2. The source is likable. Likability is increased
when the source is attractive and/or similar to
the receiver.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Power of Persuasion, continued
Message factors
• Messages are most effective when:
1. Two-sided arguments are used. This also
increases credibility.
2. Persuaders use emotional appeals to shift
attitudes.
3. They create positive feelings in the receiver.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Power of Persuasion, continued
Receiver factors
1. Mood (optimistic vs. pessimistic)
2. The receiver’s need for cognition, or “tendency to
seek out and enjoy effortful thought, problem
solving activities, and in-depth analysis”
3. Forewarning, which reduces the impact of
arguments on receivers
4. Receivers are harder to persuade when the
message content is incompatible with existing
beliefs
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Power of Persuasion, continued
The whys of persuasion
• According to the elaboration likelihood model,
our thoughts about a persuasive message are
most important in determining whether attitudes
will change.
– Messages can be perceived either through a
peripheral route (not mindful processing) or
central route (mindful processing). (See
Figure 7.12.)
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Power of Persuasion, continued
Peripheral versus central routes, continued
• Messages perceived through central routes are
usually more effective, longer-lasting, and a
better predictor of behavior.
• For the central route to override the peripheral
route,
1. The receiver must be motivated to process
the persuasive message.
2. Receivers must be able to grasp the
persuasive message.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Power of Social Pressure
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Summarize what Asch discovered about conformity.
• Distinguish between normative and informational
influences on conformity.
• Describe Milgram’s research on obedience, and
explain how to resist demands from an authority.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Power of Social Pressure, continued
• Conformity and compliance pressures
– Conformity – “occurs when people yield to real or
imagined social pressure”
– The dynamics of conformity
o Solomon Asch’s (1955) classic study
demonstrated that people conformed easily to
wrong answers given by others in a mock
perception test (see Figure 7.14).
o Conformity also increased, to a point, as group
size increased, peaking at seven members.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Source: Adapted from illustration on p. 35 by Sarah Love in Asch, S. (1995, November). Opinions and social
pressure. Scientific American, 193(5), 31-35. Copyright © 1955 by Scientific American, Inc.
The Power of Social Pressure, continued
• Conformity versus compliance
– Conformity – “occurs when people yield to real or
imagined social pressure.”
– Compliance – “occurs when people yield to social
pressure in their public behavior, even though their
private beliefs have not changed."
• The whys of conformity
– Normative influence – “operates when people
conform to social norms for fear of negative social
consequences."
– Informational influence – “operates when people
look to others for how to behave in ambiguous
situations."
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Power of Social Pressure, continued
Conformity, continued
• Resisting conformity pressures
– Pressure can come from normative and
informational influences.
o
The bystander effect, or “the tendency for
individuals to be less likely to provide help
when others are present than when they are
alone”, is an example of the problem of
informational influence.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Power of Social Pressure, continued
Conformity, continued
• Tips for resisting conformity pressures
– Pay more attention to social forces operating
on you.
– Identify someone in the group whose views
match yours.
– Bring along a friend with similar views if you
know that you will confront pressure.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
The Power of Social Pressure, continued
Pressure from authority figures
• Obedience – “is a form of compliance that occurs
when people follow direct commands, usually from
someone in a position of authority."
• The dynamics of obedience
– Stanley Milgram’s classic study (1963)
demonstrated that people’s tendency to obey is
strong, even if they are asked to harm another
person (see Figure 7.16).
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Photos copyright 1965 by Stanley Milgram. From the film Obedience, distributed by The Pennsylvania State University.
Reprinted by permission of Alexandra Milgram.
The Power of Social Pressure, continued
Obedience, continued
• The causes of obedience
– Obedience is strongest when
o Demands increase gradually
o Others take responsibility for your actions
o We are motivated to meet the authority
figure’s expectations
– Thus, human behavior is determined more by
the power of the situation than by the character
of the person.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Application:
Seeing through Compliance Tactics
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
• Describe compliance strategies based on the
principles of consistency and reciprocity.
• Discuss how the principle of scarcity can increase a
person’s desire for something.
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Application: Compliance Tactics, continued
1. The consistency principle states that “once people
agree to something, they will tend to stick with it."
Two common techniques are
• The foot-in-the-door technique – “getting
people to agree to a small request so that they
agree to a larger request later” (see Figure
7.17a).
• The lowball technique – “getting someone to
commit to an attractive proposition before its
hidden costs are revealed."
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Application: Compliance Tactics, continued
2. The reciprocity principle exploits the tendency
for people to think they should pay back in kind
what they receive from others.
• The door-in-the-face technique “involves
making a large request that is likely to be
turned down in order to increase the changes
that people will agree to a smaller request
later” (see Figure 7.17b).
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.
Application: Compliance Tactics, continued
3. The scarcity principle
• People believe that if something is scarce, it
must be good, and they are more likely to buy
it.
• This can be exploited by ads claiming
– “Limited supply available”
– “For a limited time only”
– Order “while they last”
– “Time is running out”
©2015 Cengage Learning.
All Rights Reserved.