New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

Social Psych Week 8

by: Katie Truppo

Social Psych Week 8 Psych 360

Katie Truppo
GPA 3.4

Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

Interpersonal relationships, social influence
Social Psych
Dr. Lowell Gaertner
Class Notes
social, Psychology
25 ?




Popular in Social Psych

Popular in Psychology (PSYC)

This 6 page Class Notes was uploaded by Katie Truppo on Friday August 26, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to Psych 360 at University of Tennessee - Knoxville taught by Dr. Lowell Gaertner in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 4 views. For similar materials see Social Psych in Psychology (PSYC) at University of Tennessee - Knoxville.


Reviews for Social Psych Week 8


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 08/26/16
Interpersonal Relationships (Cont. 2) III. Interdependence Theory (Thibaut & Kelley, 1959; Kelley & Thibaut, 1978) A. Satisfaction and Dependence 1. Average outcome (AVE): take pros and cons of relationship, find AVE goodness/what you’re getting out of relationship 2. Comparison Level (CL): what you expect to get out of a relationship, satisfied or unsatisfied 3. Comparison level for Alternatives (CL-ALT): level of outcome you think you could get in your next best relationship/by yourself Why remain in a bad Relationship? B. Transformation of Motivation C. The Investment model of Commitment (Caryl Rusbult 1983) Dependence is subjectively experienced as commitment Commitment is psychological state of dependence 1. What Affects Commitment? Commitment = Satisfaction – Alternatives + Investments 2. Commitment (i.e., dependence) Affects Relationship Maintenance A. Stay vs. Leave E.g., Rusbult and Martz (1995) Completed measures of the investment model and accommodation at an abuse shelter Tracked who returned to abuser and who left Found that committed women were more likely to return, dependent women with low alternatives returned B. Accommodation When committed, tendency to suppress gut level instinct to respond destructively when partner is behaving badly E.g,. Rusbultt, Verrette, Whitney, Slovik, & Lipcus (1991) Completed measures of the investment model and accommodation Accommodation measure: series of statements describing negative partner behaviors & potential reactions When my partner yells at me, I: (a) think about ending our relationship, (b) avoid my partner, (c) talk to him/her about it, (d) give my partner the benefit of the doubt and forget about it. C. Willingness to Sacrifice Willingness to sacrifice other things to protect relationship E.g., Van Lange, Rusbult, Drigotas, Arriaga, Witcher, & Cox (1997, Study 1) Completed measures of the investment model and willingness to sacrifice (WTS). WTS: Ps listed the 3 most important activities in their life (outside of their relationship) “imagine that it was not possible to engage in Activity X and maintain your relationship with your partner. To what extent would you consider ending your relationship with your partner?" (0 = definitely would not consider ending relationship, 8 = definitely would consider ending relationship)” People who were more committed were more willing to sacrifice for relationship E.g., Van Lange, Rusbult, Drigotas, Arriaga, Witcher, & Cox (1997, Study 2) Time 1: Couple separately completed measures of Study 1 Time 2: Couple separately completed stair task (step-up-and-down a step as quickly as possible in 1 min) Repeat stair task and told partner would be paid $0.10 for each step beyond previous total More committed and willing to sacrifice, the more steps people did Social Influence Social influence examines how behavior changes in response to social pressures Conformity: behaving in response to indirect pressure, want to liked or right Compliance: behaving in response to a direct request Obedience: behaving in response to a direct order I. Conformity A. Conformity in an Ambiguous Situation: Sherif’s Autokinetic Study Auto kinetic effect: light in dark room looks like its moving but it’s our eyes moving Study had people initially estimate how much light was moving, then got in groups to discuss how much it was moving Initial estimates varied more than group estimates, converged B. Conformity in an Unambiguous Situation: Asch’s Line Judging Study Answer is clear, but people still conform to wrong answer 5 people sat in table, 1 real participant Random trials scripted to unanimously agree, participant agreed with wrong answer 75% of participants would conform at least once C. Two Reasons to Conform: To be Right and Liked Informational social influence: use other people to be right social influence: want to fit in and be liked Deutsch and Gerard (1955) 1. Informational Social Influence: The need to be right 1. Personal Source: our own experiences and knowledge 2. Social Source: information from others 2. Normative Social Influence: The need to liked e.g., Schacter (1951) Johny Rocco Study (deviant and moderate) 3 participants, 2 researchers Had to figure out how to punish fake juvenile delinquent 1 researcher told to go against group, other go with group, watched how they were treated Early on, discussion with deviant. Later, he was ignored. After session, decided who got horrible task and who got good task, group punished deviant with horrible task Insko Experiment 1 participant, 4 researchers Asked what color crayon was (ambiguous color) Manipulated if told there was a right answer or no right answer Manipulated if had to say answer out loud or privately Each variable had own effect, not dependent on each other II. Compliance A. The Norm of Reciprocity Norm that if someone does something for us, we feel obligated to do something in return Eg., Reagan (1971) 1 participant, 1 researcher Shown pictures of art and rate preferences for different paintings Take a break, researcher does nothing or brings participant a coke At end of study, researcher asked participant to buy raffle tickets Participants given the coke bought more tickets B. Foot in the Door Effect Agree to do something small in order to get you to agree to big request E.g., Freedman & Fraser (1966) Called homes in 1960’s Asked either: “Will you allow a team of six persons in your home for 2 hours to classify all items stored in kitchen?” Or, called once before in the week to ask about type of soap used Big request: 22% said yes Small then big: 53% said yes Compliance to Big Request Only Big Small-then-Big 22% 53% Additional studies suggest: Agreeing to the initial request, not actually completing the small request is necessary Small & large request need not come from same person Why? Only thing that matters is agreeing to first request C. Door in the Face Effect Intentionally ask big request, then follow up with small request, more likely to comply with small request E.g., Cialdini, Vincent, Lewis, Catlan, Wheeler, & Darby (1975) Researchers walked around campus, asked either: "Would you be willing to work with juveniles for the next 2 years for 2 hours a week”, followed by “Will you chaperone a group of juvenile delinquents on a trip to to the zoo?” Or, just “Will you chaperone a group of juvenile delinquents on a trip to to the zoo?” Only chaperone was 17% agreement, big then small was 50% agreement Compliance to Smaller Request only Big-then- Smaller Smaller 17% 50% Additional studies suggest: Big & Smaller request must come from same person - not a contrast effect 2ndrequest must be smaller – not a persistence effect Since person changes request, we feel we owe them (reciprocity) D. Low-Balling: Get Person to Commit then reveal the negatives E.g., Cialdini, Cacciopo, Bassett, & Miller (1978) Call people, told about study Either “would you participate” then “it’s 7 AM Saturday” Or, “would you participate in a study at 7 AM Saturday" Condition Agree Show-up % of Agree who Show- up Control (participate in 31% 24% 79% study @ 7AM?) Low-ball (participate?…@ 56% 53% 95% 7AM) Why? Maybe knowing about negatives after make it less bad


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

25 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."

Jennifer McGill UCSF Med School

"Selling my MCAT study guides and notes has been a great source of side revenue while I'm in school. Some months I'm making over $500! Plus, it makes me happy knowing that I'm helping future med students with their MCAT."

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."


"Their 'Elite Notetakers' are making over $1,200/month in sales by creating high quality content that helps their classmates in a time of need."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.