fbpx
Wikipedia

Social influence

Social influence comprises the ways in which individuals change their behavior to meet the demands of a social environment. It takes many forms and can be seen in conformity, socialization, peer pressure, obedience, leadership, persuasion, sales, and marketing. Typically social influence results from a specific action, command, or request, but people also alter their attitudes and behaviors in response to what they perceive others might do or think. In 1958, Harvard psychologist Herbert Kelman identified three broad varieties of social influence.

  1. Compliance is when people appear to agree with others but actually keep their dissenting opinions private.
  2. Identification is when people are influenced by someone who is liked and respected, such as a famous celebrity.
  3. Internalization is when people accept a belief or behavior and agree both publicly and privately.

Morton Deutsch and Harold Gerard described two psychological needs that lead humans to conform to the expectations of others. These include our need to be right (informational social influence) and our need to be liked (normative social influence). Informational influence (or social proof) is an influence to accept information from another as evidence about reality. Informational influence comes into play when people are uncertain, either because stimuli are intrinsically ambiguous or because there is social disagreement. Normative influence is an influence to conform to the positive expectations of others. In terms of Kelman's typology, normative influence leads to public compliance, whereas informational influence leads to private acceptance.

Contents

Social influence is a broad term that relates to many different phenomena. Listed below are some major types of social influence that are being researched in the field of social psychology. For more information, follow the main article links provided.

Kelman's varieties

There are three processes of attitude change as defined by Harvard psychologist Herbert Kelman in a 1958 paper published in the Journal of Conflict Resolution. The purpose of defining these processes was to help determine the effects of social influence: for example, to separate public conformity (behavior) from private acceptance (personal belief).

Compliance

Photo: Silence is Compliance

Compliance is the act of responding favorably to an explicit or implicit request offered by others. Technically, compliance is a change in behavior but not necessarily in attitude; one can comply due to mere obedience or by otherwise opting to withhold private thoughts due to social pressures. According to Kelman's 1958 paper, the satisfaction derived from compliance is due to the social effect of the accepting influence (i.e., people comply for an expected reward or punishment-aversion).

Identification

Identification is the changing of attitudes or behaviors due to the influence of someone who is admired. Advertisements that rely upon celebrity endorsements to market their products are taking advantage of this phenomenon. According to Kelman, the desired relationship that the identifier relates to the behavior or attitude change.

Internalization

Main article: Internalization

Internalization is the process of acceptance of a set of norms established by people or groups that are influential to the individual. The individual accepts the influence because the content of the influence accepted is intrinsically rewarding. It is congruent with the individual's value system, and according to Kelman the "reward" of internalization is "the content of the new behavior".

Conformity

Main article: Conformity

Conformity is a type of social influence involving a change in behavior, belief, or thinking to align with those of others or with normative standards. It is the most common and pervasive form of social influence. Social psychology research in conformity tends to distinguish between two varieties: informational conformity (also called social proof, or "internalization" in Kelman's terms ) and normative conformity ("compliance" in Kelman's terms).

In the case of peer pressure, a person is convinced to do something that they might not want to do (such as taking illegal drugs) but which they perceive as "necessary" to keep a positive relationship with other people (such as their friends). Conformity from peer pressure generally results from identification with the group members or from compliance of some members to appease others.

Minority influence

Main article: Minority influence

Researchers have been studying social influence and minority influence for over thirty years. The first publication covering these topics was written by social psychologist Serge Moscovici and published in 1976. Minority influence takes place when a majority is influenced to accept the beliefs or behaviors of a minority. Minority influence can be affected by the sizes of majority and minority groups, the level of consistency of the minority group, and situational factors (such as the affluence or social importance of the minority). Minority influence most often operates through informational social influence (as opposed to normative social influence) because the majority may be indifferent to the liking of the minority.

Self-fulfilling prophecy

A self-fulfilling prophecy is a prediction that directly or indirectly causes itself to become true due to positive feedback between belief and behavior. A prophecy declared as truth (when it is actually false) may sufficiently influence people, either through fear or logical confusion, so that their reactions ultimately fulfill the once-false prophecy. This term is credited to sociologist Robert K. Merton from an article he published in 1948.

Social contagion

Main article: social contagion

Social contagion involves the spontaneous spread of behaviors or emotions through a group, population or social network. Unlike conformity, the emotion or behavior being adopted may not represent a social norm.

Reactance

Reactance is the adoption of a view contrary to the view that a person is being pressured to accept, perhaps due to a perceived threat to behavioral freedoms. This phenomenon has also been called anticonformity. While the results are the opposite of what the influencer intended, the reactive behavior is a result of social pressure. It is notable that anticonformity does not necessarily mean independence. In many studies, reactance manifests itself in a deliberate rejection of an influence, even if the influence is clearly correct.

Obedience

Obedience is a form of social influence that derives from an authority figure, based on order or command. The Milgram experiment, Zimbardo's Stanford prison experiment, and the Hofling hospital experiment are three particularly well-known experiments on obedience, and they all conclude that humans are surprisingly obedient in the presence of perceived legitimate authority figures.

Persuasion

Main article: Persuasion

Persuasion is the process of guiding oneself or another toward the adoption of an attitude by rational or symbolic means. US psychologist Robert Cialdini defined six "weapons of influence": reciprocity, commitment, social proof, authority, liking, and scarcity to bring about conformity by directed means. Persuasion can occur through appeals to reason or appeals to emotion.

Psychological manipulation

Psychological manipulation is a type of social influence that aims to change the behavior or perception of others through abusive, deceptive, or underhanded tactics. By advancing the interests of the manipulator, often at another's expense, such methods could be considered exploitative, abusive, devious, and deceptive.

Social influence is not necessarily negative. For example, doctors can try to persuade patients to change unhealthy habits. Social influence is generally perceived to be harmless when it respects the right of the influenced to accept or reject it, and is not unduly coercive. Depending on the context and motivations, social influence may constitute underhanded manipulation.

Abusive power and control

Controlling abusers use various tactics to exert power and control over their victims. The goal of the abuser is to control and intimidate the victim or to influence them to feel that they do not have an equal voice in the relationship.

Photo: Buy war bonds

Propaganda

Main article: Propaganda

Propaganda is information that is not objective and is used primarily to influence an audience and further an agenda, often by presenting facts selectively to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is presented.

Hard power

Main article: Hard power

Hard power is the use of military and economic means to influence the behavior or interests of other political bodies. This form of political power is often aggressive (coercion), and is most effective when imposed by one political body upon another of lesser military and/or economic power. Hard power contrasts with soft power, which comes from diplomacy, culture and history.

Many factors can affect the impact of social influence.

Social impact theory

Main article: Social impact theory

Social impact theory was developed by Bibb Latané in 1981. This theory asserts that there are three factors which increase a person's likelihood to respond to social influence:

  • Strength: The importance of the influencing group to the individual
  • Immediacy: Physical (and temporal) proximity of the influencing group to the individual at the time of the influence attempt
  • Number: The number of people in the group

Cialdini's "weapons of influence"

Robert Cialdini defines six "weapons of influence" that can contribute to an individual's propensity to be influenced by a persuader:

  • Reciprocity: People tend to return a favor.
  • Commitment and consistency: People do not like to be self-contradictory. Once they commit to an idea or behavior, they are averse to changing their minds without good reason.
  • Social proof: People will be more open to things that they see others doing. For example, seeing others compost their organic waste after finishing a meal may influence the subject to do so as well.
  • Authority: People will tend to obey authority figures.
  • Liking: People are more easily swayed by people they like.
  • Scarcity: A perceived limitation of resources will generate demand.

Unanimity

Social Influence is strongest when the group perpetrating it is consistent and committed. Even a single instance of dissent can greatly wane the strength of an influence. For example, in Milgram's first set of obedience experiments, 65% of participants complied with fake authority figures to administer "maximum shocks" to a confederate. In iterations of the Milgram experiment where three people administered shocks (two of whom were confederates), once one confederate disobeyed, only ten percent of subjects administered the maximum shocks.

Status

Main article: Appeal to authority
See also: Reputation

Those perceived as experts may exert social influence as a result of their perceived expertise. This involves credibility, a tool of social influence from which one draws upon the notion of trust. People believe an individual to be credible for a variety of reasons, such as perceived experience, attractiveness, knowledge, etc. Additionally, pressure to maintain one's reputation and not be viewed as fringe may increase the tendency to agree with the group. This phenomenon is known as groupthink. Appeals to authority may especially effect norms of obedience. The compliance of normal humans to authority in the famous Milgram experiment demonstrate the power of perceived authority.

Those with access to the media may use this access in an attempt to influence the public. For example, a politician may use speeches to persuade the public to support issues that he or she does not have the power to impose on the public. This is often referred to as using the "bully pulpit." Likewise, celebrities don't usually possess any political power, but they are familiar to many of the world's citizens and, therefore, possess social status.

Power is one of the biggest reasons an individual feels the need to follow through with the suggestions of another. A person who possesses more authority (or is perceived as being more powerful) than others in a group is an icon or is most "popular" within a group. This person has the most influence over others. For example, in a child's school life, people who seem to control the perceptions of the students at school are most powerful in having a social influence over other children.

Culture

Culture appears to play a role in the willingness of an individual to conform to the standards of a group. Stanley Milgram found that conformity was higher in Norway than in France. This has been attributed to Norway's longstanding tradition of social responsibility, compared to France's cultural focus on individualism. Japan likewise has a collectivist culture and thus a higher propensity to conformity. However, a 1970 Asch-style study found that when alienated, Japanese students were more susceptible to anticonformity (giving answers that were incorrect even when the group had collaborated on correct answers) one third of the time, significantly higher than has been seen in Asch studies in the past.

While gender does not significantly affect a person's likelihood to conform, under certain conditions gender roles do affect such a likelihood. Studies from the 1950s and 1960s concluded that women were more likely to conform than men. But a 1971 study found that experimenter bias was involved; all of the researchers were male, while all of the research participants were female. Studies thereafter found that the likelihood to conform almost equal between the genders. Furthermore, men conformed more often when faced with traditionally feminine topics, and women conformed more often when presented with masculine topics. In other words, ignorance about a subject can lead a person to defer to "social proof".

Emotions

Main article: Appeal to emotion

Emotion and disposition may affect an individual's likelihood of conformity or anticonformity. In 2009, a study concluded that fear increases the chance of agreeing with a group, while romance or lust increases the chance of going against the group.

Social networks

A social network is a social structure made up of nodes (representing individuals or organizations) which are connected (through ties, also called edges, connections, or links) by one or more types of interdependency (such as friendship, common interests or beliefs, sexual relations, or kinship). Social network analysis uses the lens of network theory to examine social relationships. Social network analysis as a field has become more prominent since the mid-20th century in determining the channels and effects of social influence. For example, Christakis and Fowler found that social networks transmit states and behaviors such as obesity, smoking, drinking and happiness.

However, important flaws have been identified in the contagion model for social influence which is assumed and used in many of the above studies. In order to address these flaws, causal inference methods have been proposed instead, to systematically disentangle social influence from other possible confounding causes when using observational data.

Provisional introduction

As described above, theoretical approaches are in the form of knowledge clusters. A global theory of Influence is missing for an easy understanding and an education to protect from manipulators.

  1. Kelman, H. (1958). "Compliance, identification, and internalization: Three processes of attitude change"(PDF). Journal of Conflict Resolution. 2 (1): 51–60. doi:10.1177/002200275800200106. S2CID 145642577.
  2. Deutsch, M. & Gerard, H. B. (1955). "A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment"(PDF). Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 51 (3): 629–636. doi:10.1037/h0046408. PMID 13286010.
  3. Aronson, Elliot, Timothy D. Wilson, and Robin M. Akert. Social Psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2010. Print.
  4. Mucchi-Faina, A., Pacilli, M. G., & Pagliaro, S. (2010). Minority Influence, Social Change, and Social Stability. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(11), 1111–1123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00314.x
  5. Moscovici, S. and Nemeth (1974) Minority influence. In C. Nemetn (ed.), Social psychology: Classic and contemporary integrations (pp. 217–249), Chicago:Rand McNally
  6. Wood, W.; Lundgren, S.; Ouellette, J.; Busceme, S. & Blackstone, T. (1994). "Minority Influence: A Meta-Analytic Review of Social Influence Processes". Psychological Bulletin. 115 (3): 323–345. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.3.323. PMID 8016284.
  7. Merton, Robert K. (1948), "The Self Fulfilling Prophecy", Antioch Review, 8 (2 (Summer)): 193–210, doi:10.2307/4609267, JSTOR 4609267
  8. Stephen G. Harkins; Kipling D. Williams; Jerry M. Burger, eds. (2017). "7 , 23". The Oxford Handbook of Social Influence. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199859870.
  9. Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. Academic Press
  10. Frager, R (1970). "Conformity and anti-conformity in Japan". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 15 (3): 203–210. doi:10.1037/h0029434.
  11. Gibson, S. (2019). Obedience without orders: Expanding social psychology’s conception of “obedience.” British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(1), 241–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12272
  12. Cialdini, Robert B. (2001). Influence: Science and practice (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. ISBN 0-321-01147-3
  13. Braiker, Harriet B. (2004). Who's Pulling Your Strings ? How to Break The Cycle of Manipulation. ISBN 978-0-07-144672-3.
  14. Jill Cory; Karen McAndless-Davis. When Love Hurts: A Woman's Guide to Understanding Abuse in Relationships. WomanKind Press; 1 January 2000. ISBN 978-0-9686016-0-0. p. 30.
  15. Smith, Bruce L. (17 February 2016). "Propaganda". britannica.com. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. Retrieved23 April 2016.
  16. Daryl Copeland (Feb 2, 2010). "Hard Power Vs. Soft Power". The Mark. Archived from the original on 1 May 2012. Retrieved26 April 2012.
  17. Latané, B (1981). "The psychology of social impact". American Psychologist. 36 (4): 343–356. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.36.4.343.
  18. "What are the 6 principles of influence?". conceptually.org. RetrievedOctober 25, 2017.
  19. Sussman, R. & Gifford, R. (2013). "Be the Change You Want to See: Modeling Food Composting in Public Places". Environment & Behavior. 45 (3): 323–343. doi:10.1177/0013916511431274. S2CID 46022154.
  20. Milgram, Stanley (1963). "Behavioral Study of Obedience". Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 67 (4): 371–378. CiteSeerX10.1.1.599.92. doi:10.1037/h0040525. PMID 14049516. Archived from the original on 2012-07-17. Full-text PDF. Archived June 11, 2011, at the Wayback Machine
  21. Ivory Tower Unswayed by Crashing Economy. New York Times.
  22. C. Mugny; L Souchet; C Codaccioni; A Quiamzade (2008). Social Representation and Social Influence. 53 (2), pp. 223–237.
  23. Blass, T. (2004). The man who shocked the world: The life and legacy of Stanley Milgram. New York: Basic Books.
  24. Sistrunk, Frank; McDavid, John W.; Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 17(2), Feb, 1971. pp. 200–207.
  25. EurekAlert. (2009). Fear or romance could make you change your mind, U of Minnesota study finds.
  26. Christakis, N.A.; Fowler, J.H. (2007). "The Spread of Obesity in a Large Social Network Over 32 Years". New England Journal of Medicine. 357 (4): 370–379. CiteSeerX10.1.1.581.4893. doi:10.1056/nejmsa066082. PMID 17652652.
  27. Christakis, N.A.; Fowler, J.H. (2008). "The Collective Dynamics of Smoking in a Large Social Network". New England Journal of Medicine. 358 (21): 2249–2258. doi:10.1056/nejmsa0706154. PMC2822344. PMID 18499567.
  28. Gina Kolata, "Study Finds Big Social Factor in Quitting Smoking," The New York Times, May 22, 2008.
  29. Rosenquist, J.N.; Murabito, J.; Fowler, J.H.; Christakis, N.A. (2010). "The Spread of Alcohol Consumption Behavior in a Large Social Network". Annals of Internal Medicine. 152 (7): 426–433. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-152-7-201004060-00007. PMC3343772. PMID 20368648.
  30. Fowler, J.H.; Christakis, N.A. (2008). "The Dynamic Spread of Happiness in a Large Social Network: Longitudinal Analysis Over 20 Years in the Framingham Heart Study". British Medical Journal. 337: a2338. doi:10.1136/bmj.a2338. PMC2600606. PMID 19056788.
  31. Lerman, Kristina (13 May 2016). "Information Is Not a Virus, and Other Consequences of Human Cognitive Limits". Future Internet. 8 (4): 21. arXiv:1605.02660. Bibcode:2016arXiv160502660L. doi:10.3390/fi8020021.
  32. Lyons, Russell (2011). "The spread of evidence-poor medicine via flawed social-network analysis". Statistics, Politics, and Policy. 2 (1). arXiv:1007.2876. doi:10.2202/2151-7509.1024. S2CID 14223489.
  33. Tufekci, Zeynep (2014). "Big questions for social media big data: Representativeness, validity and other methodological pitfalls". Eighth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. arXiv:1403.7400. Bibcode:2014arXiv1403.7400T.
  34. Liotsiou, Dimitra; Halford, Susan; Moreau, Luc (2016). "Social Influence: From Contagion to a Richer Causal Understanding"(PDF). Social Informatics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 10047. pp. 116–132. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-47874-6_9. ISBN 978-3-319-47873-9.
  35. Shalizi, Cosma Rohilla; Thomas, Andrew C (2011). "Homophily and contagion are generically confounded in observational social network studies". Sociological Methods & Research. 40 (2): 211–239. doi:10.1177/0049124111404820. PMC3328971. PMID 22523436.
  36. http://www.theory-influence.com/books/Document_UK_WEB.pdf

Social influence
Social influence Language Watch Edit Social influence comprises the ways in which individuals change their behavior to meet the demands of a social environment It takes many forms and can be seen in conformity socialization peer pressure obedience leadership persuasion sales and marketing Typically social influence results from a specific action command or request but people also alter their attitudes and behaviors in response to what they perceive others might do or think In 1958 Harvard psychologist Herbert Kelman identified three broad varieties of social influence 1 Compliance is when people appear to agree with others but actually keep their dissenting opinions private Identification is when people are influenced by someone who is liked and respected such as a famous celebrity Internalization is when people accept a belief or behavior and agree both publicly and privately Morton Deutsch and Harold Gerard described two psychological needs that lead humans to conform to the expectations of others These include our need to be right informational social influence and our need to be liked normative social influence 2 Informational influence or social proof is an influence to accept information from another as evidence about reality Informational influence comes into play when people are uncertain either because stimuli are intrinsically ambiguous or because there is social disagreement Normative influence is an influence to conform to the positive expectations of others In terms of Kelman s typology normative influence leads to public compliance whereas informational influence leads to private acceptance 1 Contents 1 Types 1 1 Kelman s varieties 1 1 1 Compliance 1 1 2 Identification 1 1 3 Internalization 1 2 Conformity 1 3 Minority influence 1 4 Self fulfilling prophecy 1 5 Social contagion 1 6 Reactance 1 7 Obedience 1 8 Persuasion 1 9 Psychological manipulation 1 10 Abusive power and control 1 11 Propaganda 1 12 Hard power 2 Antecedents 2 1 Social impact theory 2 2 Cialdini s weapons of influence 2 3 Unanimity 2 4 Status 2 5 Culture 2 6 Emotions 3 Social structure 3 1 Social networks 4 Global approach to the phenomenon of influence 4 1 Provisional introduction 5 See also 6 ReferencesTypes EditSocial influence is a broad term that relates to many different phenomena Listed below are some major types of social influence that are being researched in the field of social psychology For more information follow the main article links provided Kelman s varieties Edit There are three processes of attitude change as defined by Harvard psychologist Herbert Kelman in a 1958 paper published in the Journal of Conflict Resolution 1 The purpose of defining these processes was to help determine the effects of social influence for example to separate public conformity behavior from private acceptance personal belief Compliance Edit Main article Compliance psychology Photo Silence is Compliance Compliance is the act of responding favorably to an explicit or implicit request offered by others Technically compliance is a change in behavior but not necessarily in attitude one can comply due to mere obedience or by otherwise opting to withhold private thoughts due to social pressures 3 According to Kelman s 1958 paper the satisfaction derived from compliance is due to the social effect of the accepting influence i e people comply for an expected reward or punishment aversion 1 Identification Edit Main article Identification psychology Identification is the changing of attitudes or behaviors due to the influence of someone who is admired Advertisements that rely upon celebrity endorsements to market their products are taking advantage of this phenomenon According to Kelman the desired relationship that the identifier relates to the behavior or attitude change 1 Internalization Edit Main article Internalization Internalization is the process of acceptance of a set of norms established by people or groups that are influential to the individual The individual accepts the influence because the content of the influence accepted is intrinsically rewarding It is congruent with the individual s value system and according to Kelman the reward of internalization is the content of the new behavior 1 Conformity Edit Main article Conformity Conformity is a type of social influence involving a change in behavior belief or thinking to align with those of others or with normative standards It is the most common and pervasive form of social influence Social psychology research in conformity tends to distinguish between two varieties informational conformity also called social proof or internalization in Kelman s terms and normative conformity compliance in Kelman s terms 3 In the case of peer pressure a person is convinced to do something that they might not want to do such as taking illegal drugs but which they perceive as necessary to keep a positive relationship with other people such as their friends Conformity from peer pressure generally results from identification with the group members or from compliance of some members to appease others Minority influence Edit Main article Minority influence Researchers have been studying social influence and minority influence for over thirty years The first publication covering these topics was written by social psychologist Serge Moscovici and published in 1976 4 Minority influence takes place when a majority is influenced to accept the beliefs or behaviors of a minority Minority influence can be affected by the sizes of majority and minority groups the level of consistency of the minority group and situational factors such as the affluence or social importance of the minority 5 Minority influence most often operates through informational social influence as opposed to normative social influence because the majority may be indifferent to the liking of the minority 6 Self fulfilling prophecy Edit Main article Self fulfilling prophecy A self fulfilling prophecy is a prediction that directly or indirectly causes itself to become true due to positive feedback between belief and behavior A prophecy declared as truth when it is actually false may sufficiently influence people either through fear or logical confusion so that their reactions ultimately fulfill the once false prophecy This term is credited to sociologist Robert K Merton from an article he published in 1948 7 Social contagion Edit Main article social contagion Social contagion involves the spontaneous spread of behaviors or emotions through a group population or social network Unlike conformity the emotion or behavior being adopted may not represent a social norm 8 Reactance Edit Main article Reactance psychology Reactance is the adoption of a view contrary to the view that a person is being pressured to accept perhaps due to a perceived threat to behavioral freedoms This phenomenon has also been called anticonformity While the results are the opposite of what the influencer intended the reactive behavior is a result of social pressure 9 It is notable that anticonformity does not necessarily mean independence In many studies reactance manifests itself in a deliberate rejection of an influence even if the influence is clearly correct 10 Obedience Edit Main article Obedience human behavior Obedience is a form of social influence that derives from an authority figure based on order or command 11 The Milgram experiment Zimbardo s Stanford prison experiment and the Hofling hospital experiment are three particularly well known experiments on obedience and they all conclude that humans are surprisingly obedient in the presence of perceived legitimate authority figures Persuasion Edit Main article Persuasion Persuasion is the process of guiding oneself or another toward the adoption of an attitude by rational or symbolic means US psychologist Robert Cialdini defined six weapons of influence reciprocity commitment social proof authority liking and scarcity to bring about conformity by directed means Persuasion can occur through appeals to reason or appeals to emotion 12 Psychological manipulation Edit Main article Psychological manipulation Psychological manipulation is a type of social influence that aims to change the behavior or perception of others through abusive deceptive or underhanded tactics 13 By advancing the interests of the manipulator often at another s expense such methods could be considered exploitative abusive devious and deceptive Social influence is not necessarily negative For example doctors can try to persuade patients to change unhealthy habits Social influence is generally perceived to be harmless when it respects the right of the influenced to accept or reject it and is not unduly coercive Depending on the context and motivations social influence may constitute underhanded manipulation Abusive power and control Edit Main article Abusive power and control Controlling abusers use various tactics to exert power and control over their victims The goal of the abuser is to control and intimidate the victim or to influence them to feel that they do not have an equal voice in the relationship 14 Photo Buy war bonds Propaganda Edit Main article Propaganda Propaganda is information that is not objective and is used primarily to influence an audience and further an agenda often by presenting facts selectively to encourage a particular synthesis or perception or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is presented 15 Hard power Edit Main article Hard power Hard power is the use of military and economic means to influence the behavior or interests of other political bodies This form of political power is often aggressive coercion and is most effective when imposed by one political body upon another of lesser military and or economic power 16 Hard power contrasts with soft power which comes from diplomacy culture and history 16 Antecedents EditMany factors can affect the impact of social influence Social impact theory Edit Main article Social impact theory Social impact theory was developed by Bibb Latane in 1981 This theory asserts that there are three factors which increase a person s likelihood to respond to social influence 17 Strength The importance of the influencing group to the individual Immediacy Physical and temporal proximity of the influencing group to the individual at the time of the influence attempt Number The number of people in the groupCialdini s weapons of influence Edit Robert Cialdini defines six weapons of influence that can contribute to an individual s propensity to be influenced by a persuader 12 18 Reciprocity People tend to return a favor Commitment and consistency People do not like to be self contradictory Once they commit to an idea or behavior they are averse to changing their minds without good reason Social proof People will be more open to things that they see others doing For example seeing others compost their organic waste after finishing a meal may influence the subject to do so as well 19 Authority People will tend to obey authority figures Liking People are more easily swayed by people they like Scarcity A perceived limitation of resources will generate demand Unanimity Edit Social Influence is strongest when the group perpetrating it is consistent and committed Even a single instance of dissent can greatly wane the strength of an influence For example in Milgram s first set of obedience experiments 65 of participants complied with fake authority figures to administer maximum shocks to a confederate In iterations of the Milgram experiment where three people administered shocks two of whom were confederates once one confederate disobeyed only ten percent of subjects administered the maximum shocks 20 Status Edit Main article Appeal to authority See also Reputation Those perceived as experts may exert social influence as a result of their perceived expertise This involves credibility a tool of social influence from which one draws upon the notion of trust People believe an individual to be credible for a variety of reasons such as perceived experience attractiveness knowledge etc Additionally pressure to maintain one s reputation and not be viewed as fringe may increase the tendency to agree with the group This phenomenon is known as groupthink 21 Appeals to authority may especially effect norms of obedience The compliance of normal humans to authority in the famous Milgram experiment demonstrate the power of perceived authority Those with access to the media may use this access in an attempt to influence the public For example a politician may use speeches to persuade the public to support issues that he or she does not have the power to impose on the public This is often referred to as using the bully pulpit Likewise celebrities don t usually possess any political power but they are familiar to many of the world s citizens and therefore possess social status Power is one of the biggest reasons an individual feels the need to follow through with the suggestions of another A person who possesses more authority or is perceived as being more powerful than others in a group is an icon or is most popular within a group This person has the most influence over others For example in a child s school life people who seem to control the perceptions of the students at school are most powerful in having a social influence over other children 22 Culture Edit Culture appears to play a role in the willingness of an individual to conform to the standards of a group Stanley Milgram found that conformity was higher in Norway than in France 23 This has been attributed to Norway s longstanding tradition of social responsibility compared to France s cultural focus on individualism Japan likewise has a collectivist culture and thus a higher propensity to conformity However a 1970 Asch style study found that when alienated Japanese students were more susceptible to anticonformity giving answers that were incorrect even when the group had collaborated on correct answers one third of the time significantly higher than has been seen in Asch studies in the past 10 While gender does not significantly affect a person s likelihood to conform under certain conditions gender roles do affect such a likelihood Studies from the 1950s and 1960s concluded that women were more likely to conform than men But a 1971 study found that experimenter bias was involved all of the researchers were male while all of the research participants were female Studies thereafter found that the likelihood to conform almost equal between the genders Furthermore men conformed more often when faced with traditionally feminine topics and women conformed more often when presented with masculine topics In other words ignorance about a subject can lead a person to defer to social proof 24 Emotions Edit Main article Appeal to emotion Emotion and disposition may affect an individual s likelihood of conformity or anticonformity 9 In 2009 a study concluded that fear increases the chance of agreeing with a group while romance or lust increases the chance of going against the group 25 Social structure EditSocial networks Edit Main article Social network analysis A social network is a social structure made up of nodes representing individuals or organizations which are connected through ties also called edges connections or links by one or more types of interdependency such as friendship common interests or beliefs sexual relations or kinship Social network analysis uses the lens of network theory to examine social relationships Social network analysis as a field has become more prominent since the mid 20th century in determining the channels and effects of social influence For example Christakis and Fowler found that social networks transmit states and behaviors such as obesity 26 smoking 27 28 drinking 29 and happiness 30 However important flaws have been identified in the contagion model for social influence which is assumed and used in many of the above studies 31 32 33 In order to address these flaws causal inference methods have been proposed instead to systematically disentangle social influence from other possible confounding causes when using observational data 34 35 Global approach to the phenomenon of influence EditProvisional introduction Edit As described above theoretical approaches are in the form of knowledge clusters A global theory of Influence is missing for an easy understanding and an education to protect from manipulators 36 See also EditAuthority bias Bystander effect Influence for hire Impression management Judge advisor systemReferences Edit a b c d e f Kelman H 1958 Compliance identification and internalization Three processes of attitude change PDF Journal of Conflict Resolution 2 1 51 60 doi 10 1177 002200275800200106 S2CID 145642577 Deutsch M amp Gerard H B 1955 A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment PDF Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51 3 629 636 doi 10 1037 h0046408 PMID 13286010 a b Aronson Elliot Timothy D Wilson and Robin M Akert Social Psychology Upper Saddle River NJ Prentice Hall 2010 Print Mucchi Faina A Pacilli M G amp Pagliaro S 2010 Minority Influence Social Change and Social Stability Social and Personality Psychology Compass 4 11 1111 1123 https doi org 10 1111 j 1751 9004 2010 00314 x Moscovici S and Nemeth 1974 Minority influence In C Nemetn ed Social psychology Classic and contemporary integrations pp 217 249 Chicago Rand McNally Wood W Lundgren S Ouellette J Busceme S amp Blackstone T 1994 Minority Influence A Meta Analytic Review of Social Influence Processes Psychological Bulletin 115 3 323 345 doi 10 1037 0033 2909 115 3 323 PMID 8016284 Merton Robert K 1948 The Self Fulfilling Prophecy Antioch Review 8 2 Summer 193 210 doi 10 2307 4609267 JSTOR 4609267 Stephen G Harkins Kipling D Williams Jerry M Burger eds 2017 7 23 The Oxford Handbook of Social Influence Oxford University Press ISBN 978 0199859870 a b Brehm J W 1966 A theory of psychological reactance Academic Press a b Frager R 1970 Conformity and anti conformity in Japan Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 15 3 203 210 doi 10 1037 h0029434 Gibson S 2019 Obedience without orders Expanding social psychology s conception of obedience British Journal of Social Psychology 58 1 241 259 https doi org 10 1111 bjso 12272 a b Cialdini Robert B 2001 Influence Science and practice 4th ed Boston Allyn amp Bacon ISBN 0 321 01147 3 Braiker Harriet B 2004 Who s Pulling Your Strings How to Break The Cycle of Manipulation ISBN 978 0 07 144672 3 Jill Cory Karen McAndless Davis When Love Hurts A Woman s Guide to Understanding Abuse in Relationships WomanKind Press 1 January 2000 ISBN 978 0 9686016 0 0 p 30 Smith Bruce L 17 February 2016 Propaganda britannica com Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc Retrieved 23 April 2016 a b Daryl Copeland Feb 2 2010 Hard Power Vs Soft Power The Mark Archived from the original on 1 May 2012 Retrieved 26 April 2012 Latane B 1981 The psychology of social impact American Psychologist 36 4 343 356 doi 10 1037 0003 066x 36 4 343 What are the 6 principles of influence conceptually org Retrieved October 25 2017 Sussman R amp Gifford R 2013 Be the Change You Want to See Modeling Food Composting in Public Places Environment amp Behavior 45 3 323 343 doi 10 1177 0013916511431274 S2CID 46022154 Milgram Stanley 1963 Behavioral Study of Obedience Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 67 4 371 378 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 599 92 doi 10 1037 h0040525 PMID 14049516 Archived from the original on 2012 07 17 Full text PDF Archived June 11 2011 at the Wayback Machine Ivory Tower Unswayed by Crashing Economy New York Times C Mugny L Souchet C Codaccioni A Quiamzade 2008 Social Representation and Social Influence 53 2 pp 223 237 Blass T 2004 The man who shocked the world The life and legacy of Stanley Milgram New York Basic Books Sistrunk Frank McDavid John W Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Vol 17 2 Feb 1971 pp 200 207 EurekAlert 2009 Fear or romance could make you change your mind U of Minnesota study finds Christakis N A Fowler J H 2007 The Spread of Obesity in a Large Social Network Over 32 Years New England Journal of Medicine 357 4 370 379 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 581 4893 doi 10 1056 nejmsa066082 PMID 17652652 Christakis N A Fowler J H 2008 The Collective Dynamics of Smoking in a Large Social Network New England Journal of Medicine 358 21 2249 2258 doi 10 1056 nejmsa0706154 PMC 2822344 PMID 18499567 Gina Kolata Study Finds Big Social Factor in Quitting Smoking The New York Times May 22 2008 Rosenquist J N Murabito J Fowler J H Christakis N A 2010 The Spread of Alcohol Consumption Behavior in a Large Social Network Annals of Internal Medicine 152 7 426 433 doi 10 7326 0003 4819 152 7 201004060 00007 PMC 3343772 PMID 20368648 Fowler J H Christakis N A 2008 The Dynamic Spread of Happiness in a Large Social Network Longitudinal Analysis Over 20 Years in the Framingham Heart Study British Medical Journal 337 a2338 doi 10 1136 bmj a2338 PMC 2600606 PMID 19056788 Lerman Kristina 13 May 2016 Information Is Not a Virus and Other Consequences of Human Cognitive Limits Future Internet 8 4 21 arXiv 1605 02660 Bibcode 2016arXiv160502660L doi 10 3390 fi8020021 Lyons Russell 2011 The spread of evidence poor medicine via flawed social network analysis Statistics Politics and Policy 2 1 arXiv 1007 2876 doi 10 2202 2151 7509 1024 S2CID 14223489 Tufekci Zeynep 2014 Big questions for social media big data Representativeness validity and other methodological pitfalls Eighth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media arXiv 1403 7400 Bibcode 2014arXiv1403 7400T Liotsiou Dimitra Halford Susan Moreau Luc 2016 Social Influence From Contagion to a Richer Causal Understanding PDF Social Informatics Lecture Notes in Computer Science 10047 pp 116 132 doi 10 1007 978 3 319 47874 6 9 ISBN 978 3 319 47873 9 Shalizi Cosma Rohilla Thomas Andrew C 2011 Homophily and contagion are generically confounded in observational social network studies Sociological Methods amp Research 40 2 211 239 doi 10 1177 0049124111404820 PMC 3328971 PMID 22523436 http www theory influence com books Document UK WEB pdf Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Social influence amp oldid 1051599565, wikipedia, wiki, book,

books

, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.