Social Psychology: How Others Shape Our Behavior

Conformity and Social Influence

Solomon Asch (1951): line judgment experiment — 75% of participants conformed to an obviously wrong group answer at least once. Informational influence: conforming because others may have better information (ambiguous situations). Normative influence: conforming to fit in and avoid social rejection. Factors increasing conformity: group size (up to 4-5), unanimity, public response, high group status. Sherif's autokinetic effect (1935): group norms emerge in ambiguous situations and persist even when individuals are alone. Social norms: descriptive (what people do) vs. injunctive (what people approve of). Minority influence (Moscovici): consistent minorities can shift majority views over time — key: consistency, confidence, flexibility. Social media and conformity: likes, shares, and algorithmic amplification create powerful conformity pressures.

Obedience and Authority

Stanley Milgram (1963): 65% of participants administered seemingly lethal electric shocks when ordered by an authority figure. Key finding: ordinary people can commit harmful acts under authority pressure — "banality of evil" (Arendt). Factors affecting obedience: proximity to victim (decrease), proximity to authority (increase), institutional prestige (increase), presence of defiant peers (decrease). Replications: Burger (2009) found similar rates 45 years later. Ethical debates: Milgram's experiments caused significant participant distress — transformed research ethics. Stanford Prison Experiment (Zimbardo, 1971): guards became abusive within days — demonstrates power of situational roles. Criticisms: demand characteristics, selection bias, Zimbardo's active involvement as "superintendent." Modern applications: understanding military atrocities, corporate fraud, cult dynamics, whistleblowing barriers.

Prejudice and Discrimination

Prejudice: negative attitude toward a social group. Stereotype: cognitive component — generalized belief about group characteristics. Discrimination: behavioral component — unequal treatment based on group membership. Implicit bias: unconscious associations (Implicit Association Test — Greenwald, 1998). Intergroup dynamics: Social Identity Theory (Tajfel): in-group favoritism emerges with minimal group assignment. Realistic Conflict Theory: competition for resources fuels intergroup hostility (Robbers Cave, Sherif 1954). Contact hypothesis (Allport, 1954): intergroup contact reduces prejudice under specific conditions — equal status, common goals, institutional support, personal interaction. Stereotype threat (Steele & Aronson, 1995): awareness of negative stereotypes impairs performance. Microaggressions: subtle, often unintentional expressions of bias in everyday interactions. Reducing prejudice: perspective-taking, intergroup cooperation, individuation, diverse representation.

Persuasion and Prosocial Behavior

Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty & Cacioppo): central route (thoughtful, lasting) vs. peripheral route (superficial, temporary). Cialdini's six principles of persuasion: reciprocity, commitment/consistency, social proof, liking, authority, scarcity. Cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957): discomfort from holding contradictory beliefs → attitude change to reduce dissonance. Bystander effect (Darley & Latané, 1968): the more bystanders, the less likely any individual helps (diffusion of responsibility). Kitty Genovese case: sparked bystander research (though the original report was exaggerated). Factors promoting helping: clear emergency, sole witness, similarity to victim, empathy, personal competence. Altruism debate: genuine selfless helping vs. egoistic motivation (empathy-altruism hypothesis vs. negative-state relief). Prosocial behavior development: empathy emerges in infancy, moral reasoning develops through childhood (Kohlberg's stages). Dark side of persuasion: propaganda, misinformation, cult recruitment — understanding persuasion helps build resistance.

❓ Frequently Asked Questions

Solomon Asch (1951): line judgment experiment — 75% of participants conformed to an obviously wrong group answer at least once. Informational influence: conforming because others may have better infor...

Stanley Milgram (1963): 65% of participants administered seemingly lethal electric shocks when ordered by an authority figure. Key finding: ordinary people can commit harmful acts under authority pres...

Prejudice: negative attitude toward a social group. Stereotype: cognitive component — generalized belief about group characteristics. Discrimination: behavioral component — unequal treatment based on ...

Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty & Cacioppo): central route (thoughtful, lasting) vs. peripheral route (superficial, temporary). Cialdini's six principles of persuasion: reciprocity, commitment/con...

Try it live

Everything above runs in your browser — open The Dunning-Kruger Effect: Why Low Skill Can Hide Its Own Existence and change the parameters while it is running. Nothing is installed, nothing is uploaded, the whole model lives in one tab.