1. The desire to be accepted by others underlies much of social influence In surveying the body of research and theory on social influence, one cannot help being struck by the frequent recurrence of a single, simple idea: Human beings have a remarkably strong desire to be approved of by other human beings nearby. Why do people experience arousal and a strong drive to do well—leading to either social interference or facilitation—when they know that their performance is being evaluated, even if the evaluator is a stranger and the evaluation doesn’t count for anything? Why are people so concerned with impression management? Why did subjects in Asch’s experiments deny the clear evidence of their own two eyes when it ran counter to what others were saying? Why are people so motivated to abide by social norms? Why do group polarization and groupthink occur? Why do people find it hard to refuse a direct request? Why do people find it hard not to reciprocate a favor, even one that they did not want in the first place? Why did Milgram’s subjects find it hard to tell the experimenter that he was asking them to do a terrible thing and that they would not do it? Why do subjects in prisoner’s dilemma games find it much easier to take a competitive stance if they have colleagues (a group) on their side than if they play alone?
We don’t want to oversimplify. The desire to be accepted is surely not the whole answer to these questions, but it seems to be a big part of it. As you review each of the phenomena and experiments described in the chapter, you might ask yourself: To what extent (if at all) can this be explained by the desire for acceptance, and what additional explanatory principles seem to be needed?
2. Conformity derives from both normative and informational influences Normative social influences reflect people’s desire to behave in accordance with group norms so as to be accepted or liked by the group. Informational social influences reflect people’s use of others’ responses as information to be included in solving a problem, so as to arrive at the objectively best solution. The difference between these two types of social influence was discussed explicitly in relation to (a) Asch’s conformity experiments, (b) the effect that other bystanders have on any one bystander’s willingness to help a person in distress, and (c) the polarizing effect that group discussion has on people’s opinions or attitudes. As you review the chapter, you might think about how these two types of influence may apply to other phenomena as well. For example, how might both sorts of influence be involved in obedience, as observed by Milgram’s experiments, and in cooperation, as studied in social-dilemma games?
3. Much of human nature can be understood as adaptation for group living As social beings, we are endowed with characteristics that draw us to other members of our species and help us to function effectively in groups. We feel lonely when separated from companions, pained when rejected, and satisfied or proud when accepted. We tend to adopt the attitudes, behavioral styles, and emotions of others in our group, which helps the group to function as a unit. We also have characteristics that keep us from being exploited by others in the group, as demonstrated by our concern for fairness and our tendency to either punish or avoid those who treat us unfairly. As you review each social-influence phenomenon discussed in this chapter, you might think about the aspects of human nature that underlie it and help to make group living possible and beneficial.