A course on
Honours College version2015
WWW.VANDESANDEINLEZINGEN.NL
Lecturer: Hans van de Sande
Activities implying social influence
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Advertising
Application
Associating
Attitude change
Befriending
Brainstorming
Buying
Caring
Communication
Competing
Conforming
Copulating
Crime
Crying
Dating
Drinking
Eating
Educating
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
Following
Forming
Hiring
Hypnotizing
Individual sports
Kissing
Laughing
Law giving
Leading
Lying
Marketing
Marrying
MPI
Murdering
Norming
Panic
Performing
Persuading
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
Resistance
Resisting
Scares
Scoring
Selling
Smiling
Smoking
Squatting
Stealing
Talking
Team sports
Teen spirit
Tempting
The wave
Another example
In fact: everything in and about this page is (attempted) social influence
CONTENTS of the course
There are 3 themes, corresponding to 3
lectures, each divided in subparts
I. Human nature and social influence
–
–
Orientation, What is social psychology? Themes in SP
Human nature, McDougall, Nature vs nurture in humans and society
–
–
Belonging vs Excelling, Dominance, Formal vs. informal hierarchies
Power is potential influence, Power is given, Philosophical basics.
(Tönnies)
II. The situation and social influence
–
–
–
–
Ethology the study of behaviour
Appraisal, Ecological psychology
Reversal theory,
General Theories: Social Impact Theory, Groupmind, Ecological Ps.
III. Leadership and social influence: Power vs
Rules
–
–
–
–
Gaining power
Rules and conflicts, rule formation, Elias
Varieties of leadership, Charisma Narcism
Influencing the larger public
Theme 1
Lecture 1 Nov 11
Human nature and social influence
part 1
Social psychology described
The canon of Social Psychology is
mainly the canon of Social Influence
some SP quotes
• ALLPORT: Social psychologists consider their
science as an endeavour to understand and
explain the way in which thoughts, emotions and
behaviour of the individual are influenced by the
real, imagined or implied presence of other
human beings
• MCGARTY& HASLAM:[]all people are [necessarily]
amateur social psychologists. {But many people can escape being an
amateur cognitive psychologist, cell biologist, economist, astronomer, sociologist or physicist.}
•
• Groffen: Every theory selects its own facts
• Stapel: Every scientist makes his own facts
• Hegel: So much the worse for the facts
Grand themes in SocPsych
• Approach-avoidance
• Motivation, fight-flight, ethology, conflict, attraction, cohesion
• Communication
• Communication theory, mass comm., NV comm., lying
• Decision
• Ratio, bounded rationality, altruism, game theory, dilemma's,
SEU, prospect theory, economic psychology, choice of partner
• Image formation
• Cognitive SP, prejudice, attitude theory, social representations
• Imitation
• Conformity, modelling, fashion, contamination,
synchronisation
• Power
• Social influence, hierarchies, leadership, authority, control,
rules, norms
• This subject is studied in the field called Group Dynamics
Three kinds of GD, Three kinds of SP
1. Scientific reserch, mostly through experiments, on
behaviour in small task-groups
(Triplett, 1895, Mayo, 1930, Lewin, 1940, Festinger, 1950, etc)
2. The application of the results of these studies in
practice (J.Remmerswaal, Handboek Groepsdynamica)
3. The ideology that goal directedness is the core of
work, that work is always work in teams, that
leadership should always be democratic, that
performance is always enhanced by rewards and
that equity is the goal of every human being (eg ‘belief
in a just world’)
Part 2
Human nature
Making top quality can be time consuming
5
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
4
3
2
1
Earth: 5 billion years
Life on earth: 3 billion years
Poly-cellular: 1 billion years
Vertebrates : 500 million years
Mammals: 200 million years
Primates: 30 million years
Hominides: 2 million years
Homo sapiens: 200.000 years
200 mil
100 mil
20 mil
William McDougall(1871-1938)
The
main instincts
and emotions
to McDougall
• McDougall
studied
medicine according
and physiology
at the University of
Cambridge and in London, and Göttingen. After teaching at
1. University
Flight :College
Fear London and Oxford, he was recruited by
William James to Harvard University, where he served as a
of psychology
from 1920 to 1927. He then moved to
2. professor
Avoidance
; Disgust
Duke University where he remained until his death. He was a
of the Royal
Society. Among his students was Cyril Burt
3. Fellow
Curiosity
: Amazement
Yet in the main I have lived
hitherto the sort of life which in
( http://www.webcitation.org/5Y7KtO9iC )
my youth I judged to be the most
desirable; and that perhaps is all a
In 1907 I wrote my Social Psychology, which, I imagine, will be
reckoned my most original contribution to psychology. It was written by man can properly demand. Even
if my books are very much at
invitation as a member of a projected series of semipopular scientific
fault, many of their readers may
books, after the style of the old international series. The other members
of the series never materialized. I had no thought that it might be used as have profited in some degree
a college textbook. I wrote for the general public. The genesis of the main from the intellectual effort to
comprehend them.
thesis of that book is, I think, of some slight interest. Lecturing one day
I have done no great wrongs;
in 1906, I found myself making the sweeping assertion that the energy
and, as I often tell myself, it is
displayed in every human activity might in principle be traced back to
some inborn disposition or instinct. When I returned home I reflected that something to have done my
part in bringing up a little flock
this was a very sweeping generalization, one not to be found in any of the
of whom I may justly be proud.
books; and that, if it was true, it was very important. I set to work to
And yet, was it right to
apply the principle in detail, becoming more and more convinced both of bring them into existence?
its truth and of its importance; and my Social Psychology emerged.
Was the Buddha's teaching true?
It is a deep question, and I have
found no answer
• Uit: Murchison A History of Psychology in Autobiography
4. Fighting : Anger
•
5. Dominance : Pride
6. Child care : Love
7. Procreation : ??????
8. Herd instinct
9. Collecting : Avarice
10. Construction
Some conjectures about ‘Nature’
© 2015 JP van de Sande RuG
• SELECTION
Nature is the underground.
Culture,
andCONCERNS
thus learning,(≈isinstinct)
what grows
CRITERIA FOR
BASIC
on it. Everyone is his own gardener. Gardeners copy
•Common
Does nature
provide
with Fixed Action Patterns?
to animals
andusman
– In lower animals often, in higher ones seldom. What is given is a possibility and
Must
be
universal for all human cultures (e.g. Brown, 1991)
a motivation. The rest we have to acquire through playing, modelling and
Must give
pleasure
in success
failure of ideas
rehearsing.
Humans
moreoverand
are pain
great in
ruminators
Must
be important
for fitness
• What
is this ‘motivation?
Must
inborn,
not acquired
– be
Positive
emotion
when we succeed, negative when we fail (proximate)
Must
and malleable
through
learning
– be
Plusflexible
a good memory
for experience:
succes
stamps in, pain stamps out
(Thorndike
1910,
Law ofEarnest
effect) (proximate)
Must occur
in two
forms:
and Play
•Must
Isn’t
thata ahigh
resuscitation
hedonism (epicurism), and thus of
have
degree of of
generality
reinforcement
theory? in terms of behaviour
Must
be easily interpretable
– Indeed, but in an evolution-theoretical context, and of wider scope
•In humans:
What could have been the evolutionary mechanism? (ultimate)
–Must
Animals
don’t like eating/copulating/child
care/equity/hoarding
what other
be sothat
dependable
in its potential profit
that a wholeor and
basic concern, have less off spring. So we all descend from people who juist
important
branch of industry
can be founded
onother
it basic concern
loved eating/copulating/child
care/equity/hoarding
or what
© 2010 JP van de Sande RuG
Man travels along two rails
NATURE
Procreation
Child care
Belonging
Reconnoitering
Status
Aggression
Communication
Foraging
Hoarding
Territoriality
Hunting
Building
Exchange
Body care
Resting
Migration
Play
CULTURE
RELATIONS, EDUCATION, PEDAGOGICS
FORMS OF SOCIETY, STATES, UNIONS
IDEALS, VALUES, EVALUATIONS
HEROES, MYTHS, FAIRY TALES
GOVERNMENT, POLITICS, JURIDICAL
SYSTEM, ARGUMENTATION,
RHETORICS
RULES, NORMS, CUSTOMS, FOLKLORE,
LAWS
SCIENCE, RELIGION, PHILOSOPHY,
RATIONALITY, ECONOMICS
WARFARE, FORTIFICATION
LANGUAGE, POETRY, NOVELS, FILM
EATING, DRINKING, GOURMANDISE,
WINE, FESTIVALS, CAFE’S
TECHNOLOGY, MEDICINE, APPARATUS,
WEAPONS, MAGIC, COMPUTERS
ART, BUILDINGS, ORNAMENTATION
TRADE, BANKING, ADMINISTRATING
CLOTHING, COSMETICS, BATHING
IMMIGRATION, VACATION, TRAVEL
GAMES, SPORTS, CHESS, THEATRE
COMPUTERGAMING
Status
© 2014 JP van de Sande RuG
• In animals: Dominance hierarchy, Tournaments, Fights, Signalling
systems
• In humans: Ambition, Competition, Respect, Obedience, Mercedes,
Apple, Armani, Gucci, Aristocracy, Outdo the neighbours, Mobbing,
Power struggle, Arrogance, Body building, Breast implants,
Conspicuous consumption, Jewellery, Skyboxes, Platforms and
moreover: a lot of JEALOUSY
• As play: All competitions: football, hockey, bridge, golf, Alpinism,
Championships, Political debates, Board games, Coma drinking
• Societal consequences: Hierarchies, Monarchy, Rat race,
Competitive society, Status symbols, Status industry, Sports, Top
10/50/100 etc, Lists, High and Low culture, Differentiation in
neighbourhoods, schools & universities, Honours college
• Regulation by culture: Informal: hardly; Formal: strong; Culture is
in itself a status system
© 2014 JP van de Sande RuG
Mankind is changing tracks
NATURE
We are emotional mammals
‘Instincts’ and emotions
Weak impulse control
Narcism is an illness
Slow development
SOCIETY: Gemeinschaft
Need to belong
Group goals
Rules for behaviour
Duty; Honour; Tradition
Conservative; Stability
Religion; Magic
Charismatic leadership
STRONG TIES
In crisis:
Cohesion & cooperation up
Improvisation
Fight/flight
CULTURE
We are rational thinkers
Norms & Values
Cost-Benefit analysis
Narcism is normal
Quick planning
SOCIETY: Gesellschaft
Need for freedom
Goals are individualistic
Fashions for behaviour
Freedom; Money; Change
Progressive; Dynamic
Ideology; Science
Transactional leadership
WEAK TIES
In crisis:
Cohesion & cooperation down
Planning & priorities
Professionalism
Part 3
Belonging vs Excelling
© 2015 JP van de Sande RuG
The social animal II
• The basic concern to Belong tells us that we must stick to
our groups, and, if necessary, search new groups
• If we live in a Gemeinschaft it is mostly sticking to, and that
forever. In a Gesellschaft it is continuous search and change
• The basic concern of Dominance tells us that we must try
to get one up on our fellow beings
• (The other side of the coin is that we also are very good in
submission [see Milgram studies] )
• If we live in a Gemeinschaft we must submit to an often
harsh ruler: The a. In a Gesellschaft we are much more
free, e.g. in changing jobs or partners or friends. But here
we often function in a formal hierarchy.
• There seems to be a catch somewhere: Cooperation vs Dominance
The catch
© 2011 JP van de Sande RuG
• Being social (friendly, adaptable, cooperative,
empathic) is necessary to belong
• But being social does not get you an position
• Striving after dominance and status implies being
competitive, egoistical and ruthless
• But being competitive tends to drive you out of the group
• In the Gemeinschaft this conflict was institutionally solved
by common goals (e.g. religion)
• The individual was therefore in continuous danger (eg.sacrifice)
• In the Gesellschaft there is a lack of these common goals
• Therefore in a Gesellschaft the institutions are in danger
Two kinds of dominance (Kalma, 1992)
CORE GROUP
S
T
A
T
U
S
a
Soc.Dom.
Aggr.Dom.
PERIFERAL MEMBERS

INCLUSION
Formal vs Informal hierarchy
Differences between F and I
F
Designed/≈rational
Positions
Externally composed
Higher level decides
Can be reorganised
Mixed sex
In- & Extrinsic rewards
Many at the bottom
I
Evolved/≈emotional
Persons
Internally composed
Coalition decides
Stable
Same sex
Intrinsic rewards
Only 1 at bottom
Part 4
What is power?
fMRI: Dominance research
© 2014 JP van de Sande RuG
• Schjelderupp-Ebbe was the first to investigate dominance hierarchies
• Function of this (norm) system is to get more time for other concerns
• That implies that individuals are less aroused in an existing and stable
dominance hierarchy than in uncertain hierarchies
• This was indeed the outcome of:
• Zink, Tong, Chen, Bassett, Stein & Meyer-Lindenberg (2008)
Know Your Place: Neural Processing of Social Hierarchy in Humans
Neuron, 58, 273-283
De alpha
When thinking or talking about power we are easily blinded:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
By size
By beautiful colours
By impressing displays
By bluffing (seeming ruthlessness)
By frightening or threatening behaviour
By conspicuousness
By earnestness of expression
© 2012 JP van de Sande RuG
Influential thinkers on Power
• Machiavelli (1513) Power is something you can possess.
In order not to loose it drastic measures may be necessary,
because they work better than the ethical correct ones
• Hobbes (1651) The natural state of mankind is the “war
of all against all”. To mitigate that, a strong state
(Leviathan) is necessary. ‘The mitre and the sword’
• Nietzsche (1885) Man, but in fact all of nature, has a
stong will to power: Wille zur Macht. Will, in this sense, is
that which happens necessarily
• Adler (1920) Power is the ground of all our thinking and
feeling. If we feel to have not enough power we may
develop an Inferiority complex.
Power as SP sees it
© 20011JP van de Sande RuG
• Influence is when something acts in a way it would
otherwise not have acted
• P can influence O by physical or social power
• Power is potential influence
• If we use power it tends to wear thin
• Power only works when O is susceptible to it
• So power rests in the needs of the subordinate
• So power is rather given than taken
• Therefore democracy often works better than
despotism
• But not always
The bases of power (French & Raven, 1958)
• Power must of course be founded on something.
According to SP canon power bases are:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Reward
Punishment
Identification
Authority
Expertise
Information
economic
relation
knowledge
• The bases of power lie in the needs of O. (the less powerful)
• Because these needs change through habitation , power
wears down
• Power is always reciprocal: both parties have power sources
(power and counter power: The balance of Power)
Kelman’s 3 kinds of influence (1958)
• Compliance
– Behavioral theory/Exchange theory
– Impression related motives
• Identification
– Depth psychology
– Validity seeking motives
• Internalization
– Cognitive Psychology
– Ego defensive motives
Under high pressure
to conform.
No pressure
to conform
Influence differentially appreciated
1. In some circumstances influence is very welcome:
1. When coming from friend (help, advice, support)
2. When giving advantage for self (subsidy, investment)
3. But only when both these factors are certain (trust)
2. In many circumstances influence is not welcome:
1. When coming from possible enemy
2. When involving possible cost for self
3. When situation is uncertain
3. Therefore people show Resistance to change
1. Reactance: resistance to influence attempt
2. Skepticism: doubt about the content of proposal
3. Inertia: not wanting to change
ASSIGNMENT I
© 2006 JP van de Sande RuG
• WRITE A SHORT ESSAY and send it to me Sunday 24:00
– The subject is: Influences in the life of a student
• First step: Friday gather data
– For Instance: Tomorrow you take note every hour at exactly XX:00 hours, what
influence attempts you have undergone that hour and which you exerted, or
devise something even more brilliant
– Note whether it was a question of personal influence or norm following
• Second step: Saturday do some analysis
• Pose yourself questions like: How many of each kind?
• Is there a daily trend? What causes the eventual trend?
• How sure are you of the reliability and validity of your data?
• Third step: Sunday write a paper
– of about 678 words ;-), consisting of
• a) a beginning
• b) a middle part and
• c) an ending (cf: Aristotle, POETICS, ca 350 bC)
Theme 2
Lecture 2 Nov 18th
The situation and social influence
Part 1
ETHOLOGY: behaviour as a reaction on niche
Ethology
© 2006 JP van de Sande RuG
Ethology is the study of behaviour, be it of animals or of Humans.
In Psychology it often is not so much behaviour as thoughts and
constructs that are studied
•
Darwin (1872) The expression of the emotions in men and animals
•
Schjelderupp-Ebbe, T. (1912) Beiträge zur psychologie des
haushuhns
•
Lorenz, K. (1948) Er sprach mit dem Vieh, den Vogel und den
Fischen
•
Tinbergen, N. (1951) The study of instinct
•
•
•
•
Two perspectives: Proximate en Ultimate
De Waal, F. (1982) Chimpanzee politics (partially in Google books)
Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. (1989) Human ethology
Kim, McFee, Olguin, Waber & Pentland. (2012) Sociometric
badges: Using sensor technology to capture new forms of
collaboration. Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol 33, 412-427.
Niko Tinbergen
• The
stickle
back
study
• (1938)
• Fixed
Action
Patterns
The social animal I
• Man is a social animal, thus great importance of
–
–
–
–
Groups (membership/reference; primary/secondary)
Sense of belonging (to family, friends, society etc.)
Communication (Style, source, credibility)
Norms and rules
– (Once borders of ‘Normal’ are passed, stopping is difficult)
– Knowing when and how to rule, knowing when and
how to obey: STATUS
• Man is a rational and flexible animal and thus
– He easily accepts a replacement as the real thing
(the mother and the mouse trap)
• E.g. Nescafe, Twitter, drugs, prostitution, TV, canned vegs,
cell phone communication, botox
THE PERSONALITY OF PIGS (Bolhuis, 2004)
© 2011 JP van de Sande RuG
PROACTIVE
–First acting, then thinking
–Enterprising
–Not concerned about objections
–Not easily scared
–Confused when surprised
–Likes stable patterns and
predictability
–High pressure: Overactive
REACTIVE
–cautious, Wait-Watch
–Attentive to surroundings
– Sensitive to impressions
–Adroit in adapting behaviour
to situation
–High pressure: Freezing
CONCLUSIONS
© 2006 JP van de Sande RuG
• We share Human nature with our animal brethren
– This gives us drive and emotions
• Humans moreover have inherited enormous cognitive
capabilities
– This gives us flexibility and enormously increased learning capacity
– This makes that the play-period is much longer than in other species
• These two aspects reflect themselves in societies
• Societies are impossible without Social influence
– In Gemeinschaft-like societies SI is often exerted for group purposes
– In Gesellschaft-like societies typically for individual purposes
• SI has many forms: modelling, leadership, imitation, norms,
rules, laws, threats, identification etc.
• People differ in the way they react on their surroundings
– Pigs as well!
Part 2
Appraisal of the situation
Van Heck’s taxonomy of situations
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Interpersonal conflict, disasters, fights
Cooperation, exchange of ideas
Intimacy, relations en sexual activity
Recreation, amusement, partying
Travelling
Rituals, religion, funerals
Sports and competition
Excesses (sex and booze), gambling, hypnosis
House keeping, serving
Buying, selling, trading
Interaction between Person and Situation
• Situation influences person:
probabilities of behaviour change through:
–
–
–
–
Possibilities and impossibilities of certain behaviours (affordances)
Activating c.q. suppressing of fixed action patterns (FAPs)
Generating an idea in the head of the person (‘Priming’)
Contaminating the person with an emotion or an idea (eg. Contagious
songs)
• Person influences situation:
–
–
–
–
Seeking out certain types of situations
Influence the situation by conserving or changing it
Look for a different situation
Deny the characteristics of the situation or misperceive it
HOW BEHAVIOUR IS DIRECTED
PERSON
habits
characteristics
sex, class, age
education
abilities
character
PERCEPTION of SITUATION
COMFORTABLE? (LEUK) STIMULATING?
CONTROL? (BANG) CHALLENGE? (SAAI)
US/THEM FEELING? FORMAL?
SITUATION
compulsiveness
of situation
EMOTION
CENSORSHIP,
RUMINATION
& CONTROL
BEHAVIOUR
Appraisal
Review vdSande (27 studies)
Work or task oriented/SE
12
Involvement/indifferent
10
8
Businesslike/Emotional
6
Friendly/Hostile
4
2
Good/Bad
0
Fate control/Behavior control
These 6 dimensions were used most frequently to make sense of
Situations. Consequently these dimensions are important in
determining the way we react on situations.
Part 3
An original vision on motivation
REVERSAL THEORY (Apter, 2002)
© 2006 JP van de Sande RuG
• Humans (and animals) do not always function in the same
manner, in fact differences between you today and you
tomorrow may be greater than between you and me :
STATES instead of TRAITS
• States are Bi-stable (either one or the other) and vary along different
dimensions
• E.g. TELIC----PARATELIC ( telos = goal)
– Sometimes we are goal directed and serious
– Sometimes we look for new goals, in a playful way
• Reversals between states can be frequent or infrequent:
–
–
–
–
Satiation : And now for something completely different
Situation : The situation elicits a reversal (eg. Sports field)
Frustration : You don’t succeed, or it becomes too dangerous
Imitation : Others can be highly contagious
Reversal Theory (Apter, 1980)
agreeable
paratelic
aversive
telic
quiet
sensation
Reversal Theory (Apter, 2002)
© 2006 JP van de Sande RuG
PLAY
SERIOUS
GOALS
RULE
CONFORM
SYMPA
REBEL
RULES
EGO
ALTER
TRANSACTION
RELATION
Part 4
Endeavours towards general theories
Social Impact theory (Latane, 1981)
• Law of social impact (=influence)
I = f (SIN)
• Or: Impact of a sender of influence is a
function of Strength, Immediacy en Number
• A considerbly more complicated version is:
I = f a(SpIqNr)
• Moreover Latane made a Dynamic variant: Consolidation (majority
wins), Clustering (forming of Subgroups), Correlation (Convergence
on several points) & Continuing diversity
The GROUP-MIND
PRO
• Group mind exists :
– LeBon (1895),
Durkheim (1912)
• Group mind result of
identification:
– Freud (1922)
• Groups are more than
the sum of parts:
– Lewin (1939)
• Group has personality
– Cattell (1952)
CONTRA
• Group mind doesn’t
exist; Group = sum
of parts
– Allport (1924)
• Group mind is
artefact of social
identity
– Reicher (1990)
• Group behaviour is
normal synchronised
behaviour
– McPhail (1992)
– Social cognition
Barker & Gump (1964). Under- en over- manning
Also see: Ganster & Dwyer. (1995) J.Management
Undermanned
Overmanned
1.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Show strong, frequent and varied
actions in carrying out goal related
behaviour
Act to correct inadequate behaviour
of others
Be reluctant to reject group members
whose behaviour is inadequate
Feel important, responsible and
versatile as a result of their
participation
Be concerned about the continued
maintenance of the group
Be less sensitive to and evaluative
of individual differences among
group members
Think of themselves and other group
members in terms of the jobs they do
rather than in terms of personality
characteristics
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Perform tasks in a perfunctory,
lackadaisical manner
Show a high degree of task
specialisation
Demonstrate little concern for the
quality of the group product
Exert little effort in helping others in
the group
Feel cynical about the group and its
functions
Evidence low self esteem, with little
sense of competence and versatility
Focus on personalities and
idiosyncrasies of people in the group
rather than on task related matters
Assignment II
© 2006 JP van de Sande RuG
WRITE A SHORT ESSAY and hand it to me next time
The subject is: Situations
in the life of a student
Think of 3 different situations in which you often find yourself
(e.g. studying in UB, drinking with friends in pub, doing
sports, shopping or whatever)
Describe which rules you feel that govern your behaviour
Which rules are general and which situation specific?
In how far are you a different person in each of these
situations?
Some 621 words should do the trick.
Theme 3
Lecture 3 Nov 25th
Leadership and social influence: Power vs Rules
Part 1
Influence theory applied
Falbo’s view on power tactics
RATIONAL
IRRATIONAL
Often towards superiors
DIRECT
Often by superiors
INDIRECT
Often by inferiors
DISCUSSION
REQUEST
INSTRUCTION
NEGOTIATION
PERSUASION
SHOWING
EXPERTISE
CLAIMING
EXPERTISE
DISENGAGEMENT
HINTING
PUNISHING
PERSISTING
FAIT ACCOMPLI
PRESSURE
THREATENING
DEMANDING
MANIPULATE
SUPPLICATE
INGRATIATE
AVOIDING
EVADING
How to become powerful
• A good beginning is: the silver spoon, a good
marriage or a good education
• Everybody can become powerful (meritocracy) but you
have to work for it
• Others must have the idea that they profit from what
you do
• Initially you must show that you like the group by showing
conformity. For OKP (OSM) that is relatively simple
• If you don’t you will not be trusted and your achievements
won’t be appreciated too
• If you do, you can try to achieve. If you’re trusted that is
seen as positive for the group, you will slowly gain
idiosyncrasy credit (Hollander, 1971)
A similar model (EST Berger, 1980)
Status
Charac
teristics
Expec
tation
State
Opportunity
to behave
Behavior
Evaluation
Status
• Observable Status-related-characteristics form beginning (appearance,
relations, behavior, sex, race)
• Every group member gets his own Expectation state (≈reputation)
• Behavior is important > achievements (=evaluation) but also grouporientedness (=trust)
• Informal status is given by colleagues, Formal status by superiors
• High status members have more privileges qua unimportant rules, but
demands are higher qua central rules (status liability)
Personal power vs. Rules
Social influence has two forms
• Direct, through personal power and influence on basis of respect
– Quick; Often simple tactics like threat are enough
– Can be perceived as inequitable, negative and aversive: Power wears down
• Indirect, through rules and impersonal influence
– Slow: rules must be made and refined. They must become ‘normal’
– Are felt as equitable: if well vindicated, no wear and tear
• Just like power, rules are a means of having your way
• When the existing rules suit you, it becomes unnecessary to
use your personal power
• In the human world rules are very important, but we only
notice a very small part of them, as we are ‘rule-blind’
• Humans are not very fond of the unpredictable
• The more culture, the more rules (cf. Elias, The civilisation process, 1938)
Part 2
Rules and conflicts
How we form rules
• Essentially by making an agreement (implicit or explicit)
• This agreement can be subconscious (such as in Fashion, Fads,
Fears, Norms etc)
• Two kinds of agreement:
– Formal (laws, contracts): Difficult to change, detrimental for trust
– Informal (understanding, gentlemen’s agreement): Can be changed
if trust exists
• Other way of looking at norms (Cialdini, 1995) :
a) Norms in the form of rules (injunctive )
b) Norms in the form of what others do (descriptive)
c) Moreover: idiosyncratic norms
• If a) & b) are conflicting, “the turnips are cooked”
(cf. Cialdini, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, 2001)
Figurationsociology: Norbert Elias (1938-2008)
Human culture changes, and these
changes are caused by social influence.
How?
• Humans tend to copy the habits
of their equals
• People who consider themselves
better, take care to develop
‘better’ norms (e.g. ‘gentleman-like)
• So: Aristocracy walks in front
• The general status characteristic
affect control is very important for
distinguishing oneself as superior
• Innovation is caused by copying
habits of superiors and thus the
more simple norms and rules (But
not always the affect control!)
• So civilisations develop into a
more and more detailed system of
norms
Agression as a‘normed’ phenomenon, a historical view
TORTURE
DUELLING
DEATH PENALTY
USE OF FIREARMS
POSSESSION OF FIREARMS
RAPE
BEATING SPOUSE
COLONIALISM
FIGHTING
BEATING CHILDREN
RESISTANCE AGAINST STATE
1700
1800
1900
2000
Us/Them (Intergroup) conflict
C
EXT.ATTRIBUTION
MISPERCEPTION
COMPETITION
O
RECIPROCITY
N
F
NEG. POWER
TACTICS
MORAL
L
I
C
CATEGORISATION
ING- OUTG.BIAS
STEREOTYPES
T
(DIABOLISATION)
C
O
N
F
L
VIRILE
I
COMMITMENT
C
COHESION
IN-G-COOPERATION
AROUSAL
T
Part 3
Leadership as influence
POWER IS GIVEN not taken
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
To gain power one has to prove himself as trustworthy
If inferiors have no trust, the powerholder will be sabotaged
The impression of shared interest is central here
That’s why social network is important (de Waal, 1982)
Coalitions are the motor of evaluations and thus of
attribution of status
Evaluation of behaviour is therefore important
Two aspects critical: Treatment & Social skills
Power, like trust, comes on foot and leaves on horseback
This means that much power is based on COMPLIANCE,
some on IDENTIFICATION and a little bit on
INTERNALISATION, all on the side of the followers
PROBLEMSOLVING for FOLLOWERS
LEADERSHIP
• Leadership implies something that is being led
• Is that “the organisation”? Not in a ‘Gemeinschaft’
• It is always a group of people, and the processes
within this group, that are being influenced
• Leading is influencing in a desired direction, but
also influencing the desires
• The more leading is felt to be ‘natural’ the better
•
•
•
•
Two main types: Task leader & Social-emotional leader (Bales, 1950)
Some leaders score high on both
Other typology: Transactional & Transformational leader
Last type derived from Charismatic leadership
(Weber, 1922,http://www.textlog.de/7415.html)
Another 2 varieties of being a leader
•
Visions on leadership
• Hitler: to be a leader means to be able to move masses
• Ho Chi Minh: to use people is like using wood. A skilled
worker can make use of all kinds of wood, be it big or small, straight
or crooked
• Eisenhower: leadership is the ability to decide what is to be
done, and then to get others to want to do it
• Truman: a leader is a man who has the ability to get other people
to do what thay don’t want to do, and like it
• Disraeli: I must follow the people. Am I not their leader?
• Ford: The question who must be the boss is like the question who
will sing bass in a quartet
• Bonaparte: A leader is a merchant in hope
THE SUBJECTS
• The leader attracts all attention, in the media,
in daily life, and even in science
• But we rather should look at the followers,
because:
POWER IS GIVEN
•
•
•
•
Power rests essentially on coalitions (de Waal,1982)
Many people have a talent for subordination
Less people have a talent for leadership
Many people find responsibility aversive
(Dalrymple, 2001, Life at the bottom)
• People love to identify with power and success
Charismatic leadership. Freud’s vision (1921)
• Basics
– Man is born with the aptitude for many social mechanisms
– In the Primal horde, these are seen in their purest form
– Hierarchy and despotism are the rule. Love and hate for the leader occur together
• Starting points
–
–
–
–
Leader has special competences (practical and verbal) and fascination for an idea
Leader has personal liking for his inferiors and tends to seek them out
Leader has Narcistic personality
Therefore leader needs constant confirmation of excellency of own self by inferiors
• Development
–
–
–
–
–
On the basis of these competences leader gains credit
Credit is seen by leader as proof that his narcistic choice was right
Leader keeps gaining strength (vicious circle)
Followers feel that they contributed to this growing strength
Followers feel important through libidinous identification with the leader
• Effects:
– Leader’s wish is felt as own wish (identification)
– Every follower has the idea that he has a personal relation with leader
– Strong and self-willed followers get into conflict and either leave group or win
Some charismatics in contact with themselves
On an unconscious level this may well be
explained as caring for oneself, by touch, stroking
or whatever.
On a more rational level this could be explained as
a question of impression management
(e.g.Goffman, 1959)
We all play roles, life is a theatre, and living amounts to
being an actor
“Dramaturgy of life” Father Cats: The world is a theatr
Part 4
Influencing publics
rhetorics
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
© 2006 JP van de Sande RuG
Has very long history, eg. China and India
In Greece Sophists (Gorgias), later Aristoteles
In Rome Seneca and Cicero
In middle ages Augustinus and Scholastics
During reformation Propaganda
From 1900 psychology: Le Bon, Freud, Bernays
Then a deluge of marketing and advertisement
MODERN RHETORICS
© 2011 JP van de Sande RuG
• ARISTOTELES (384-322 BC)
• RHETORICA RESTS ON THREE PILLARS:
• Ethos, logos en pathos
» Correctness of principles and character (credibility)
» Effectiveness and correctness of arguments (logic)
» Engagement of emotions (populism)
• It uses a playing field not always under control: the ‘atechnoi’
• PRATKANIS (2007, The science of Social Influence, p. 30 ff)
– Credibility through Altercasting (putting self & other in certain roles):
• Altercasting through: Contact, Authority, Expertise, High
status, Physical attraction, Similarity, Intimacy, Responsibility,
Minority, Social identity, Consensus, Modeling,
Reinforcement, etc.
• CIALDINI (2001) Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion
Truth or relativism?
• Things that people believe to be real, are real
in their consequences (Thomas’ dictum)
Truth may exist, but we can only
experience it through our senses and
cognitive apparatus (Kant, 1781)
Or:
• Truth is therefore not a useful concept
• Truth is something like a value: you should strive towards it
• The experience of truth depends on many factors, of which
expectation and credibility of source are only two
• Important are the emotional consequences of happenings
• Two emotions are paramount in deciding about truth:
• Fears and Wishes
Factors contributing to the impact of a message
• Attention to source of message
• Noise, being occupied, lost GSM, or GSM not working
• Perception of message
• Visibility, bad eyes, not able to read
• Understanding of total message
• Language, Wording, length, emotional tone, signs of danger
• Integrating message in own knowledge
• Evaluation of message, congruity with situation
• Knowing how to behave
• Having insufficient knowledge to assimilate the full meaning
• Having possibility to behave
• Being constrained, taking care of others, being stuck
NEGATIVE FACTORS WORK STRONGER UNDER STRESS
Simple model of communication
© 2006 JP van de Sande RuG
PSYCHOLOGICAL
DISTORTION
BY PROPERTIES
fact
sender
medium
PHYSICAL
DISTORTION
BY NOISE
receiver
THE GATEKEEPER SYSTEM
Mass communication mainly has an indirect effect
Some people in a community are trusted by the others and thus they are
influential in what is believed by the community, and what not
They are the gatekeepers (Lewin, 1947) or connectors (Gladwell, The Tipping point, 2000)
It is necessary and sufficient to identify them and aim your message for
these people
εσχατον