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

Chapter 8 Group Influence Notes

by: Sarah Notetaker

Chapter 8 Group Influence Notes Psych 3430-02

Marketplace > Tulane University > Psychlogy > Psych 3430-02 > Chapter 8 Group Influence Notes
Sarah Notetaker
GPA 3.9

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

These notes cover Chapter 8
Intro To Social Psych
Mrs. O'Brien
Class Notes
social psych
25 ?




Popular in Intro To Social Psych

Popular in Psychlogy

This 5 page Class Notes was uploaded by Sarah Notetaker on Saturday March 5, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to Psych 3430-02 at Tulane University taught by Mrs. O'Brien in Summer 2015. Since its upload, it has received 111 views. For similar materials see Intro To Social Psych in Psychlogy at Tulane University.


Reviews for Chapter 8 Group Influence Notes


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: 03/05/16
Group Influence 2/29/16 What is a group? A group is 2 or more people who, for longer than a few moments, interact with and influence one another and perceive one another as ‘us’ - Definitions may vary, but what is important is that definitions are clear when used in an experiment Things that influence the definition: - Direct interaction – is it required? • People who are the same religion may not have direct interaction with every single person who is that religion but still consider themselves a group - Membership in social category (gender, race, sexuality etc) - Common fate – Does the future look the same for the members involved? - Perception of “us” – what language do people use to address the others in the group? Do they consider the other people and themselves a “we”? - How ‘groupy’ is a group? • Entitivity – do a collection of individuals consider themselves an entity? - Group continuum Low Entitivity High entitivity Fans of a Racial, Coworkers Family, friends team religious groups Social Task groups Intimacy groups Collectives categories (most cohesive) Important Features of Groups - Roles – expected behaviors differ between individuals of a group • Fraternity – someone is President, social chair, other people are just members • Can be formal (like a position) or informal (like how people should treat the other members) - Norms – unwritten rules for members • Different people may accept different things in different settings • May have a group of home friends who have one standard for how much alcohol you should consume, but group of school friends has a different standard for how much alcohol you should consume - Cohesiveness – focus that push members together • Facing adversity can bring a group closer together • Presence of a rival out group that challenges your group can bring the group closer Forming Groups - Voluntary or involuntary? • Family, nationality, gender* – involuntary (some don’t believe gender is involuntary*) • There is often wiggle room, as people are able to leave a family or community, get a new nationality, people may not think that things that appear involuntary actually are - Functions of groups • Same group could serve different functions for different people • Big reason is the fundamental human need to belong • Not all groups provide this sense of belonging • Social identity – influence self-concept, how other people see us and how we see ourselves • Self-enhancement – make yourself look better, feel better, often people have a goal with joining a particular group of what they want to get out of it • Accomplishing tasks – groups may have a purpose, such as protesting for social change with a group of like-minded individuals Social Facilitation Theory = the strengthening of dominant responses in the presence of others - People perform a task better when they are in the presence of others (oldest research done in Social psych) - The Zajonc Solution – mere presence of others creates physiological arousal • Arousal facilitates dominant responses (the response most likely in a given situation) • If a task is hard, dominant response would be to perform poorly, if a task is easy, the dominant response would be to perform the task well • Found that in the presence of others, people performing an easy task had accurate performance, and people performing an easy task had inaccurate performance according to the dominant response that was expected Cockroach Study - Cockroaches don’t like light, so mazes were created where they had to find a way to get out of the light - The mazes were either easy or hard - Put the cockroaches in boxes either alone or with other cockroaches - Results showed that the presence of other cockroaches made the cockroaches do the easy maze faster, and made the cockroaches do the hard task slower than expected Alternative Explanations - Evaluation apprehension • Researchers had people perform tasks in front of an audience • The audience was either watching or had blindfolds on • Results found that if the group is blindfolded, they don’t get the dominant response • performance is affected more when we think we are being evaluated • theory says that arousal from worry of evaluation leads to this response, Zajonc believes it’s the mere presence of other people that elicits this response - Both explanations seem to be correct - Distraction explanation – presence of other people can be distracting • Can improve easy task performance • Can make a hard task harder • Attention conflict leads to this Social Loafing = people put less effort into a task when they are in a group where their individual response can’t be monitored Cheerleading Study - Had people cheer, either alone, with another person, with 4 people or with 6 people - Measured how much sound they made - Results found that as the group got bigger, peoples individual efforts decreased - Social loafing less us off the hook, can reduce motivation • Reduces efforts toward collective tasks • In tug of war, more likely to pull more when you are alone than if you are with other people - Social loafing is less likely to occur if: • Individual performance is identifiable (professors making students give feedback on how much work people do in a group project) • Task importance – people are less likely to not put in as much effort if the task is important • If we believe personal efforts are necessary for the group outcome (make each person feel important for the group to succeed) • If group will be punished for performance, more likely to put in effort • Group size – less likely to occur in small groups because performance can be easily monitored - Social loafing outside the lab • Communist countries – Russia and Hungry allowed people to have private plots to make their own profit from the land • Found that people working on private farms worked harder than people working on communal farms – shows that incentives play a role in how hard peole work - Less social loafing occurs in collectivists countries, because they value the group, and people wouldn’t want to let the group down Woodstock - 1969 – festival emphasized peace, love and music (everyone who attended had these ideas in mind during the festival) - 1999 – reunion resulted in people engaging in deviant behavior (incidents of rape and riot were reported) - Calls into question what determines how a group will act (even though the reunion was supposed to be commemorating a peaceful event, the feel of the event was very different) Deindividuation = happens when self-awareness is lowered, as you feel less evaluation apprehension - Traditional view • Thought it would lead to antisocial behavior • Increased arousal + anonymity = reduced personal responsibility - Modern view • Makes group norms more salient (if group norms are to be peaceful, then they will be really peaceful, if group norms are to be violent, then they will be really violent) • Positive norm = prosocial • Negative norm = antisocial Deindividuation Study – Johnson and Downing - First condition - gave people uniforms to wear, either a KKK uniform (antisocial group) or a nurses uniform (prosocial group) - Another condition was whether they were deindividuated or not (either gave them a name tag, or didn’t give them a name tag) - Participants were then placed in groups with other people, and it was similar to the Milgrim Study - Told that they had to shock someone if they got a question wrong, and it was up to the participants to decide how long and how strong the electric shock should be - People wearing the KKK costume without nametags delivered the most shocks, compared to people wearing the KKK costume with nametags - Results found the opposite with people wearing the nurses costume – when they were wearing the nametags, they gave more shock than when they weren’t wearing nametags Halloween Study - Different condition was how much you could see people in their costume (separated into groups of people who’s identity was more hidden and less hidden - Researcher put out candy at a house, and told the children to take 1 piece of candy - The researcher then turned around, allowing people to have the opportunity to take more - Results found that people who were more hidden by their costume took more (were more likely to take more) than 1 piece of candy Note: group polarization = when group discussion strengthens an attitude shared by group members Interacting with Others - Making group decisions – peoples opinions become stronger after they talk about their opinion in a group - More likely to happen if the members of the group are similar – strengthens individual ideas when groups come together to talk about like-minded topics Myers Study – Group Polarization and Prejudice - Measured participant’s racial attitudes, and placed them in groups of either low prejudice or high prejudice - Had the groups have a discussion about race - results found that in the group with high prejudice, their prejudice became more extreme (increased) and in the group with low prejudice, their prejudice became less extreme (decreased) Polarization Process - Informational influence – finding out new information to further support what you think • If someone thinks it is important to recycle, they will talk to others who have a similar view point • Other people may bring up new points during this discussion which will further support their original view that it is important to recycle - Normative influence – feeling pressure to adopt a certain position • Might feel that you have to have more extreme views because of what other people think - TED Talk – internet is becoming specific to the user, so that people receive information similar to what they search for and what they want to see


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

Bentley McCaw University of Florida

"I was shooting for a perfect 4.0 GPA this semester. Having StudySoup as a study aid was critical to helping me achieve my goal...and I nailed it!"

Kyle Maynard Purdue

"When you're taking detailed notes and trying to help everyone else out in the class, it really helps you learn and understand the I made $280 on my first study guide!"

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.