1. PSY 321 Social Influence: Compliance, Conformity, & Obedience Dr
PSY 321 Social Influence: Compliance, Conformity, & Obedience Dr. Sanchez

2. Today’s Outline Compliance Conformity Majority vs. Minority Influence
Techniques and Experiments
Conformity
Majority vs. Minority Influence
Obedience

3. Compliance
Changes in behavior that are elicited by direct requests.

4. The Language of Requests
Talking fast and catching people off guard can improve compliance rates.
People can be disarmed by the simple phrasing of the request.
How you ask for something can be more important than what you ask for.
Langer: We often respond mindlessly to words without fully processing the information they are supposed to convey.

5. The language of requests: Experiment Langer et al., 1978
IV: Request did or did not include a reason
“I have five copies. May I use the Xerox machine?”
“I have five copies. May I use the Xerox machine, because I’m in a rush?”
“I have five copies. May I use the Xerox machine, because I have to make copies?”

6. Langer et al. (1978)

7. Breaking the Mindless Routine (Santos et al. 1994)

8. Norm of Reciprocity
The powerful norm of reciprocity dictates that we treat others as they have treated us.
This norm leads us to feel obligated to repay for acts of kindness, even when unsolicited.
Example: writing “thank you” on back of check increases tip
Coca-Cola study
Norm of reciprocity is relatively short-lived.

9. Sequential Request Strategies: Foot-in-the-Door Technique
Person begins with a very small request; secures agreement; then makes a separate larger request.
Why is it effective?
Self-perception theory (Bem)
Consistency

10. Foot-in-the-Door: Experiment Freedman & Fraser, 1966
IV: Small request first, or not
Initial request (small):
By phone, asked women to complete short survey on household products
Intrusive request (big):
3 days later, asked women to allow a few men into the house for 2 hours to rummage through drawers

11. Freedman & Fraser (1966)

12. Sequential Request Strategies: Low-Balling
Person secures agreement with a request and then increases the size of that request by revealing hidden costs.
Why is it effective?
Psychology of commitment.
Sense of obligation to salesperson.

13. Low-balling: Experiment Cialdini et al., 1978
Asked intro psych students to participate in experiment
IV: low-balling or upfront
half were told in advance that it would start at 7am;
half were told after agreeing that it would start at 7am

14. Cialdini et al. (1978)

15. Sequential Request Strategies: Door-in-the-Face Technique
Person begins with a very large request that will be rejected; then follows that up with a more moderate request.
Why is it effective?
Perceptual contrast?
Reciprocal concessions?
Guilt?

16. Door-in-the-Face Technique: Experiment Cialdini et al., 1975
IV: Large request first?
Asked students to volunteer for 2 hrs/week for 2 yrs to work with juvenile delinquents
Or no large request first
Followed by smaller request: Will you escort juvenile delinquents to zoo?

17. Cialdini et al. (1975)

18. Sequential Request Strategies: That’s Not All, Folks!
Person begins with a somewhat inflated request; then immediately decreases the apparent size of the request by offering a discount or bonus.
Why?
People think they’re getting a deal

19. That’s-Not-All Technique: Experiment Burger, 1986
IV: Did the deal get “sweeter”?
½ of Ps told cupcakes cost 75 cents
½ of Ps first told cupcakes cost $1, then told the price would be reduced to 75 cents

20. Burger (1986)

21. Sequential Request Strategies

22. Assertiveness: When People Say No
To be able to resist the trap of compliance techniques, one must:
Be vigilant.
Not feel indebted by the norm of reciprocity.
Compliance techniques work smoothly only if they are hidden from view.

23. Conformity
Tendency to change perceptions, opinions, or behavior in ways that are consistent with group norms.

24. The Chameleon Effect

25. Conformity: Autokinetic Phenomenon
Sherif (1935, 1937)
Study of “norm formation”
Dark room, pinpoint of light appears 15 feet in front of you
Asked, “How far did light move?”
First time, you’re alone
Subsequent times, you’re with others (this is the IV)

26. A Classic Case of Suggestibility

27. Conformity: Asch Line-Matching
P surrounded by 6 confederates
Asked to judge length of a line
IV: Confederates give correct or incorrect answer

28. Line Judgment Task Used in Asch’s Conformity Studies

29. What Did Asch’s Participants Do?
Participants went along with the clearly incorrect majority 37% of the time.
However, 25% of the participants NEVER conformed.
Of the conformists, 50% conformed for at least half of the critical presentations.
The rest conformed on an occasional basis.

30. Sherif’s vs. Asch’s Studies
Sherif: Because of ambiguity, participants turned to each other for guidance.
Maybe group was right
Asch: Found self in awkward position.
Obvious that group was wrong

31. Why Do People Conform?
Informational Influence: People conform because they believe others are correct in their judgments
Sherif autokinetic effect
2 heads better than one?
Implications for eyewitness testimonies

32. Why Do People Conform?
Normative Influence: People conform because they fear the consequences of appearing deviant.
Asch line-matching
Effects of Ostracism
Cyberball
“Minority Slowness Effect”

33. Types of Conformity
Private Conformity: Changes in both overt behavior and beliefs.
Sherif autokinetic effect
Enduring conformity
Public Conformity: Superficial change in overt behavior only.
Asch line-matching
If wrote answers privately, effect went away

34. Distinguishing Types of Conformity
From Robert Baron et al., (1996) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, Copyright (c) 1996 by the American Psychological Association. Adapted with permission.

35. Model of the Types of Conformity

36. Majority Influence: Group Size
Conformity increases with group size -- but only up to a point.
Why?
Law of “diminishing returns”?
Perception that others are either in “collusion” or “spineless sheep”?

37. Majority Influence: Awareness of Norms
Conform only when know about and focus on social norms.
Often misperceive what is normative.
Pluralistic ignorance
1) members of a group who think that they have different perceptions, beliefs, or attitudes from the rest of the group
2) adjust their attitude

38. Majority Influence: Having an Ally in Dissent
When there was an ally in Asch’s study, conformity dropped by almost 80%.
Why does having an ally reduce majority influence on our behavior?
Substantially more difficult to stand alone for one’s convictions than when one is part of even a tiny minority.
Any dissent can reduce the normative pressures to conform.
EVEN AN INCORRECT ALLY OR AN ALLY WITH POOR VISION SKILLS REDUCED CONFORMITY

39. Majority Influence and Gender Differences
IV: Masculine, Feminine, or Stereotype Neutral Q’s
DV: Percent agreeing w/majority response
Results?
Men conformed more to feminine qs
Women conformed more to masculine qs
No difference on neutral items