Social Influence (Relationship Problems end)

• Relationship after 1st year on average = deteriorating
• Gottman's "Big 3" Predictors of Relationship Problems
• Verbal contempt- hostility and answering negative emotion with negative emotion
• [normal] "You are insufferable! [normal---> respond angrily]
• Defensiveness- inability to agree with other on anything
• "Yes.. but"
• Stonewalling by husbands- detaches emotionally from other in argument
• anger and no response
• Markman's couple communication skills (just the Gist; don't memorize)
• General
• Relate first then resolve
• Eye contact; smile and nod responsively
• Monitro your own attempts to change too
• Speaker skills
• Express your side as uncritically as possible
• Short statements
• Gripes specific and behavioral
• Polite
• Declarative sentences
• Listener skills
• Edit out typical response; really listen to what other is saying
• don't confuse understanding with agreement
• understanding only happens when wife feels understood
• Clark and Hatfield (1989)
• Experimenter says "I've noticed you around campus, you're very attractive"
• Asks one of three questions
• Will you go out with me tonight?
• Will you go to apartment with me tonight?
• Will you go to bed with me tonight?
• Results (opposite for men and women)
• Male- highest = bed
• Female - highest = go out

Social Influences

• 3 types of Social Influences
• Most Direct = Obedience: A change in behavior due to Commands of others. 
• Middle= Compliance: Yielding to Direct explicit Appeal meant to produce Certain behavior or agreement to particular point of view (influence)
• Most Indirect = Conformity: Brought about by a Desire to follow the beliefs/standards of others
• Milgram's Obedience study
• Study effect of Punishment on Learning
• Heard responses via intercom: ow----owww----heart problem said-------agonizing scream------silence
• Used prompts to keep subject going; 1 level higher per mistake
• Results:
• Prior estimation study:
• Self estimates = 135 volts; none expected >300
• Other estimates = slightly higher than self
• Actual study:
• Only 25% = 300 volts; 63% = 450 volts
• Take home message: People will most likely obey orders that they would not even think of doing normally
• Martin (1976)
• ID people who possess rare ability to hear ultra high frequencies
• Noise apparatus: dial 0-10
• Teahcer = experimenter--told subjects to move dial to next level. hear sound, indicate it (no sound given).
•  No Prods given
• Question: How far do students follow pre-given order
• Results:
• 95%= Level 6; 54% further  = Level 10
• Take home message: Blind obedience = powerful
• Compliance strategies
• Foot-in-the door technique
• Door-in-the-face technique
• That's not all technique
• Lowballing
• Bait and Switch
• Labeling
• Foot-in the door technique - small request, then larger request
• Critical = Yes to first, small request
• Larger 1st = Larger 2nd
• Larger 1st = Less likely Yes
• Freedman and Fraser (1966)
• Asked sign petition for safe driving
• Weeks later, different experimenter asked same people to put huge billboard in their yards (large request). Control = just large request
• Results:
• Agreed to prior small request = 55%
• Not solicited for prior small request = 17%
• Door-in-the-face technique - refusal of larger request, then small request
• Cialdini (1975)
• Asked willing to spend 2 hrs/week over 2 years as "big brothers/sisters" None agreed
• Followed with 2nd request: willing 2 hrs Once taking kids to zoo
• Results:
• Preceding large request = 50%
• No preceding large request = 16%
• That's not all technique: offered deal, then offers an addition
• "buy this and get.."
• Lowballing- initial agreement reached, then adds cost (negative piece of info)
• "I forgot to tell you, you need $ for ___ for the car"
• Identity process - My car; 300 for air conditioner = minor annoyance
• Additional Cost doesn't have much effect compared to Total cost
• Cialdini (1978)
• Two conditions:
• Control - told experiment began 7 AM
• Lowball- agreed to participate for experiment, then says see you at 7 AM
• Results:
• Control = 31% ( less than 1/4 of these showed up)
• Lowball = 56% ( over 1/2 of these showed up)
• Bait and Switch- initial commitment, then product not available, then more costly offer
• Joule (1989)
• participate in interesting study; paid $6
• arrive, told experiment cancelled; told volunteer uninteresting experiment w/ no $
• baseline- tell them before they arrive
• Results:
• Baseline = 15%
• Bait and Switch = 47%
• Labeling - label assigned, Request Consistent with the Label
• ex: profile of someone = voter ; they show up when invited to voting booth
• Exposure to Compliance techniques ------> Resistance to their effectiveness
• Two types of Influence in Conformity
• Informational influence- accepting evidence of reality provided by others from desire to be right
• assume others' interpretations of ambiguous situations are correct and follow suit
• Sherif (1936)
• Autokinetic effect
• Sealed in dark room and asked estimate how much stationary light moved
• Next day returned and said Aloud estimate with 2 others
• Repeated 3rd and 4th day- Group estimation
• Question: Do group members' estimates converge when said aloud?
• Results:
• Convergence
• 1st day - scattered answers
• 2nd day - much convergence
• 3rd day - more convergence
• 4th day - complete agreement
• Publicly and Privately Conforming
• Individually = all at group's converged result
• Normative influence- desire to fulfill others' expectations (often for acceptance)
• situation is not ambiguous; know the answer
• do what others are doing to be accepted/not stand out
• Asch (1955)
• Given unambiguous Line matching/comparison task said right answer aloud
• Two conditions:
• Control condition: answered solo
• Group condition: trial confederates said wrong answer
• Results:
• Control condition= < 1%
• Group condition = 35%
• 75% subjects = incorrect answer at least once
• Factors influencing when people conform
• Group Size
• 1 other person-----> 5 or 6 others much more influence; > 6 doesn't change much
• Cohesiveness of group
• Unanimity of group
• all or nothing
• Status of group members
• higher status, more conformity
• Prior commitment
• changing response after public stating belief rare
• Resisting Conformity
• Reactance - desire to protect/restore one's sense of freedom when one feels it's threatened
• Opposite done of what's told/conformed to do
• Reactance triggered, Conformity fails
• Desire for Uniqueness
• Uncomfortable if Too Similar to everyone else
• e.g. identical twins
• Minority Influence - contrary to what the majority does
• feels rejected by the majority group
• can be "trampled" by majority
• Factors that Affect Minority Influence
• Consistency
• deviation from consistent matter = no more influence
• Confidence
• more likely to have listeners
• Flexible and Open-minded, Not Rigid
• not viewed as close-minded or rigid-----> majority group shuts them down
• Not Too Deviant from the Majority
• someone A Little Ahead of the Curve ; Future Oriented
• Too Deviant = "that's person's out of his mind"
• Originally held Majority view
• most credible; "must see something in other side"
• ear of the majority group member
• Research on Majority and Minority Influence- Sum
• Majority Influence = Public acceptance, Normative
• don't want to face social rejection
• don't deviate from social norms
• Minority Influence = Private acceptance, Informational
• join minority group because you think they know something you and everyone else doesn't
• " I know the truth now; Everyone else are suckers"