Cialdini, Robert B.

National research university “Higher School of Economics”

Department of Psychology

Course syllabus for the discipline

“Social Influence”

For the students of the MSc program “Applied social psychology”

(Specialization 37.04.01. “Psychology”)

Authors:

Zarina Lepshokova, PhD, Senior Lecturer, zlepshokova@hse.ru

Anna Lipatova, Lecturer, alipatova@hse.ru

Moscow 2015

The given syllabus cannot be used by other departments of HSE or other universities without the allowance of the author

1.

Scope of application and reference to regulatory documents

This syllabus establishes the requirements for the knowledge and skills of the students, and defines the content of the course and the forms of evaluation.

The syllabus is designed for the teachers, teaching assistants, and students of the

MSc program «Applied social psychology».

The program is designed in accordance with:



Educational standard of HSE;



Educational program for the specialization 37.04.01. Master of Psychology;



University curriculum for the program «Applied Social Psychology».

2.

Course objectives

The aim of this course is to provide in-depth knowledge of social influence main theories and concepts to master students by achieving the following goals:



Enhance students’ understanding of the concepts, principles, theories, and research findings central to the study of social influence



Promote students’ scientific thinking through reviewing, evaluating, and discussing existing literature on social influence



Promote students’ academic skills through conducting, writing and presenting empirical project on using social influence techniques

3.

Student’s competences after the course

General competencies

Student has profound knowledge in the field of social influence

Specific competencies

Student is capable to define theoretical and applied aspects of social influence.

Student knows main theoretical approaches, practical questions,

psychology course concepts, techniques of social influence

Student owns the system of main categories, principles, theories, tactics of social influence as the part of social

Student is capable to define main categories, principles, theories and to use tactics

of social influence in daily life

Students will be able to apply obtained knowledge of main principles, techniques and tactics of social influence in professional and everyday life

Students will be able to identify concrete methods and techniques of social influence in professional and everyday life

Students will be able to communicate effectively using the principles, tactics and techniques of social influence in professional and everyday life

Student is capable to present the results of his/her research in English, both in public and individually

Student knows international standards of presenting the results of the social psychological research in English (both in written and verbal forms)

Student is able to present home tasks in

English

Student is able to use specific concepts, models, and methods to solve complex

Student knows criteria of a good study in the field of social psychology and social problems in governmental, social and business organizations, administration bodies, and in the areas of research and consulting influence

Student is able to apply different statements of psychological theories to solve problems arising in the field of social psychology and social influence

4.

Place of the course in the structure of the educational program

The Social Influence course is an elective discipline for the 1 st year master students of the MSc program «Applied Social Psychology». For those who attend the course it is required to have knowledge of the theories of general psychology and social psychology.

The knowledge and skills built within this course will be needed to study the following disciplines:



Psychology of Consumer Behavior;



Leadership and Organization;

 Research seminar «Social and Cross-cultural psychology».

5.

Course schedule

№ Theme

1 General Introduction to psychology of social influence

2 Six principles of social influence. Reciprocity as the first principle of social influence

3 Commitment (and

Consistency) as the second principle of social influence

4 Social Proof as the third principle of social influence

5 Liking as the fourth principle of social influence

Total number of hours

Class hours lectures seminars practical classes

Individual work

30 5 8 8 9

25

25

25

15

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

19

19

19

9

6 Authority as the fifth principle of social influence

7 Scarcity as the sixth principle of social influence

8 Minority influence and social change

9 Unconscious influence

10 Techniques of social influence

Total

6.

Course content

25

15

28

20

20

228

2

2

1

1

1

20

2

2

2

2

4

28

2

2

2

2

4

28

19

9

23

15

11

152

1. General Introduction to psychology of social influence

What is social influence? How do psychologists study social influence?

Types of social influence. Obedience to authority. Conformity. Processes of conformity. Situational factors in conformity. Informational influence. Normative influence. Referent informational influence.

Literature:

1.

Blass T. (ed.).

(1999). Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on the

Milgram paradigm. – Psychology Press.

2.

Cialdini, R. B.

(1993). Influence: The psychology of persuasion.

3.

Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J.

(2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 55, 591-621.

4.

Nolan, J. M., Schultz, P. W., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., & Griskevicius,

V. (2008). Normative social influence is underdetected. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 34(7), 913-923.

5.

Turner, J. C.

(1991). Social influence. Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.

6.

Zimbardo, P. G., & Leippe, M. R. (1991). The psychology of attitude change

and social influence. Mcgraw-Hill Book Company.

2. Six principles of social influence. Reciprocity as the first principle of social influence

How the Rule of Reciprocity Works. The Rule of Reciprocity Is

Overpowering. The Not-So-Free Sample. The Rule Enforces Uninvited Debts. The

Rule Can Trigger Unequal Exchanges. Reciprocal Concessions. Rejection-Then-

Retreat. Reciprocal Concessions, Perceptual Contrast, and the Watergate

Mystery.Rejecting the Rule.

Basic Literature:

1.

Cialdini, Robert B.

(2001). Influence. Science and Practice, 4th ed., 19-52.

Literature:

1.

Regan R. T.

(1971). Effects of a favor and liking on compliance. Journal of

Experimental Social Psychology, 7, 627-639.

2.

Gergen, K., Ellsworth, P., Maslach, C., & Seipel, M.

(1975).Obligation, donor resources, and reactions to aid in three cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 390-400.

3.

Clark, M. S., & Waddell, B.

(1985). Perceptions of exploitation in communal and exchange relationships. Journal of Personal and Social Relationships, 2,

403-418.

4.

Thompson, L.

(1990). An examination of naive and experienced negotiators.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 82-90.

5.

Cialdini, R. B., & Ascani, K.

(1976). Test of a concession procedure for inducing verbal, behavioral, and further compliance with a request to give blood. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 295-300.

6.

Gaudeul, A., & Giannetti, C.

(2013). The role of reciprocation in social network formation, with an application to LiveJournal. Social Networks, 35,

317-330

7.

Zhang, Z., & Han, Y.

(2007). The effects of reciprocation wariness on negotiation behavior and outcomes. Group Decision & Negotiation, 16(6),

507-525.

8.

Davidson, T. W. (2008). Six Principles of Persuasion You Can Use to

Influence Others. Physician Executive, 34(5), 20-23.

3. Commitment (and Consistency) as the second principle of social influence

Why do we want to look and be consistent in most situations? Consistency as a weapon of social influence. Commitment is the factor of consistency. Four factors cause a commitment to affect a person's self-image and consequent future action. What makes written commitments so effective?


1.



Literature:

1.

Moriarty, T.

(1975). Crime, commitment, and the responsive bystander.


2.

Schlenker. B. R., Dlugolecki, D. W., & Doherty, K.

(1994). The impact of self-presentations on self-appraisals and behavior. The power of public commitment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 20-33.

3.

Cioffi, D., & Garner, R.

(1996). On doing the decision: The effects of active versus passive choice on commitment and self-perception. Personality and

Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 133-147.

4.

Pallak, M. S., Cook, D. A., & Sullivan, J. J.

(1980). Commitment and energy conservation. Applied Social Psychology Annual, 1, 235-253.

5.

Pardini, A., & Katzev, R. (1983-1984). The effect of strength of commitment on newspaper recycling. Journal of Environmental Systems, 13, 245-254.

6.

Leite, N. P., de Aguiar Rodrigues, A. C., & de Albuquerque, L. G.

(2014).

Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction: What Are the Potential

Relationships?. BAR - Brazilian Administration Review, 11(4), 476-495.

4. Social Proof as the third principle of social influence

Description of the principle of social proof. Two factors which maximize the influence of social proof on an individual. Which naturally occurring conditions of city life reduce the chance of bystander intervention in an emergency? What is the

Werther effect?


1.



Literature:

1.

Festinger, L., Riecken, H. W., & Schachter, S.

(1964). When prophecy fails.

New York: Harper &Row.

2.

Kim, J., Kim, S., Choi, J., Park, E., Nam, J., Cho, J., & Cho, E.

(2013). The werther effect of two celebrity suicides: An entertainer and a politician. Plos

ONE. 8(12).

3.

Siebers, T. (1993).

The Werther effect: the esthetics of suicide. Mosaic

(Winnipeg), (1), p15.

4.

Latane, B., & Darley, J. M.

(1968). Group inhibition of bystander intervention in emergencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

10, 215-221.

5. Liking as the fourth principle of social influence

The halo effect. The relationship between a person's physical attractiveness and that person's general attractiveness in the eyes of others. Procedures which successfully reduced the hostility.


1.


(2001). Influence. Science and Practice, 4th ed., 143-

178.

Literature:

1.

Taylor, R.

(1978). Marilyn's friends and Rita's customers: A study of party selling as play and as work. Sociological Review, 26, 573-611.

2.

Frenzen, J. R., & Davis, H. L. (1990). Purchasing behavior in embedded

markets. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 1-12.

3.

Budesheim, T. L., & DePaola, S. J.

(1994). Beauty or the beast? The effects of appearance, personality, and issue information on evaluations of political candidates. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 339-348.

4.

Hammermesh, D., & Biddle, J. E.

(1994). Beauty and the labor market. The

American Economic Review, 84, 1174-1194.

5.

Stewart, J. E.

(1980). Defendant's attractiveness as a factor in the outcome of trials. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 10, 348-361.

6. Authority as the fifth principle of social influence

The Power of Authority Pressure. The Allures and Dangers of Blind

Obedience. Authoritative Authority. The three most influential symbols of authority.


1.



203.

Literature:

1.

Milgram, S.

(1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371-378.

2.

Wilson, P. R.

(1968). The perceptual distortion of height as a function of ascribed academic status. Journal of Social Psychology, 74, 97-102.

3.

Mauro, R.

(1984). The constable's new clothes: Effects of uniforms on perceptions and problems of police officers. Journal of Applied Social

Psychology, 14, 42-56.

4.

Mayhew, B. W., & Murphy, P. R.

(2014). The Impact of Authority on

Reporting Behavior, Rationalization and Affect. Contemporary Accounting

Research, 31(2), 420-443.

7. Scarcity as the sixth principle of social influence

The Rule of the Few (limited numbers, time limits). Psychological Reactance.

What makes the terrible twos and the teenage years especially susceptible to reactance effects? The effects of the scarcity principle.


1.



233.

Literature:

1.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.

2.

Aguirre-Rodriguez, A.

(2013). The Effect of Consumer Persuasion

Knowledge on Scarcity Appeal Persuasiveness. Journal Of Advertising,

42(4), 371-379.

3.

Brehm, S. S.

(1981). Psychological reactance and the attractiveness of unattainable objects: Sex differences in children's responses to an elimination of freedom. Sex Roles, 7, 937-949.

4.

Knishinsky, A.

(1982). The effects of scarcity of material and exclusivity of information on industrial buyer perceived risk in provoking a purchase decision. The doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe.

5.

Worchel, S., Lee, J., & Adewole, A.

(1975). Effects of supply and demand on ratings of object value. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32,

906-914.

8. Minority influence and social change

Moscovici’s studies. Conformity bias. Behavioural style and the genetic model. Conversion theory. Convergent-divergent theory. Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications.


1.

Moscovici’s, R.

(2012). Minority influence. Social Psychology: Revisiting the Classic Studies, 91.

Literature:

2.

Mugny, G., &Perez, J.A.

(1991). The social psychology of minority influence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. An overview of research on minority influence by two leading scholars of this not ably

Europe an topic; also cover age of Mugny and Moscovici's own theories of minority influence.

3.

Martin, R., & Hewstone, M.

(2007). Social influence processes of control and change: Conformity, obedience to authority, and innovation. In M.A.

Hogg & J.Cooper (eds), The SAGE handbook of social psychology Concise student edition (pp.312-32). London: SAGE. An up-to-date and comprehensive review of social influence research, including conformity, obedience and minority influence.

4.

Mackie, D. M. (1987). Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social


5.

Moscovici, S., Lage, E., & Naffrechoux, M.

(1969). Influence of a consistent minority on the responses of a majority in a color perception task. Sociometry, 365-380.

6.

Moscovici S.

(1980). Toward a theory of conversion behavior // Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. 13, 209-239.

7.

Maass, A., & Clark, R. D.

(1984). Hidden impact of minorities: Fifteen years of minority influence research. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 428.

9. Unconscious influence

Types of unconscious influence. The main research. Mimicry vs.

Complementarity effects.

Literature:

1.

Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A.

(1999). The chameleon effect: The perception-behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 76, 893-910.

2.

Tiedens, L. Z., & Fragale, A. R.

(2003). Power moves: Complementarity in dominant and submissive nonverbal behavior. Journal of Personality and


3.

Philips, D. P.

(1979). Suicide, motor vehicle fatalities, and the mass media:

Evidence toward a theory of suggestion. American Journal of Sociology, 84,

1150-1174.

4.

Newell, B. R., & Shanks, D. R.

(2014). Unconscious influences on decision making: a critical review. Behavioral And Brain Sciences, (1), 1.

10. Techniques of social influence

The foot-in-the-door technique. The low-ball technique. The bait-and-switch technique. The labeling technique. The legitimization-of-paltry-favors technique.

The door-in-the-face technique. The that’s-not-all technique.

Literature:

1.

Howard, D, J.

(1990). The influence of verbal responses to common greetings on compliance behavior: The foot-in-the-mouth effect. Journal of

Applied Social Psychology, 20, 1185-1196.

2.

Green, F.

(1965). The "foot-in-the-door" technique. American Salesmen, 10,

14-16.

3.

Freedman, J.L. & Fraser, S.C.

(1966). Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4,

195-202.

4.

Cialdini, R. B., Vincent, J. E., Lewis, S. K., Catalan, J., Wheeler, D., &

Darby, B. L.

(1975). Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The door-in-the-face technique. Journal of Personality and


5.

Gerstner, E., & Hess, J. D.

(1990). Can bait and switch benefit consumers?

Marketing Science, 9(2), 114-124.

6.

Pollock, C. L., Smith, S. D., Knowles, E. S., & Bruce, H. J.

(1998).

Mindfulness limits compliance with the that’s-not-all technique. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1153-1157.

7.

Goldman, M., Seever, M., & Seever, M. (1982). Social labeling and the footin-the-door effect. The Journal of Social Psychology, 117(1), 19-23.

8.

Andrews, K. R., Carpenter, C. J., Shaw, A. S., & Boster, F. J. (2008). The legitimization of paltry favors effect: A review and metaanalysis. Communication Reports, 21(2), 59-69.

9.

Burger, J.M., Reed, M., DeCesare, K., Rauner S. & Rozolis, J.

(1999). The effects of initial request size on compliance: More about the That's-Not-All

Technique. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21, 243-249.

10.

Janssen, L., Fennis, B.M., Pruyn, A., & Vohs, K. (2008). The path of least resistance: Regulatory resource depletion and the effectiveness of social influence techniques. Journal of Business Research, 61, 1041-1045.

11.



12.

Miller M.

(2002). Effects of a guilt induction and guilt reduction on door in the face. Communication research, 29, 666-680.

13.

Cialdini, R. B., Cacioppo, J. T., Bassett, R., & Miller, J. A.

(1978). Low-ball procedure for producing compliance: commitment then cost. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 36(5), 463.

7.

Education technologies

The interactive forms of teaching will be used in the course: group discussions, case analyses (life stories, book or video materials). Recognized and well-known professors in the field of social psychology are invited to give «master classes».

1.

Forms of evaluation for the current assessment and attestation

Form of the assessment Criteria

Colloquium

Students in small groups (2-3 people) must

1) Depth and thoroughness of material analysis

2) Clear structure of report (critical parts of read articles on specific topics selected by the teacher and then present the main content of these articles to the whole group. Next step is group discussion. HSE electronic resources to be used for articles’ selection presentation: research problem, method, substantial results and conclusion)

3) Consistency and logical structure of report

4) Quality of answers to the questions from audience (complete and detailed answers)

5) Active participation in the discussion

1)

Homework №1.

1) One basic principle of social influence

Students prepare in written form analysis of six should be presented in one advertisement, examples of advertisement connected to six usage of this or that particular commercial basic principles of social influence. Each basic example should be argumented by student principle should be presented in one actual 2) Analysis of efficiency of given examples advertisement of some product/service, using knowledge of basic social influence students should analyze efficiency of every techniques commercial. 3) Clear suggestions and proposals of making advertisement more efficient

2) Homework №2.

Presentation of an empirical project on one of

1) Problem statement, aims and objectives of the project are clear and concise; social influence techniques. Students should 2) Literature review is deep and analytical; work in groups of 3-4 people. 3) Chosen methodology is relevant to the

The project should involve: main aim of the study;

1) Formulating and presenting problem 4) High quality of data analysis; statement, aims and objectives of the 5) Presentation contains all necessary study;

2) Analysis of the relevant literature;

3) Methodology description (including descriptive elements of project sample, experimental procedure, etc);

4) Fieldwork;

5) Analysis of the results;

6) Writing up and presenting the results.

The final exam Final grade is proportional to the number of

The final test consists of 20 closed-ended correct answers to test questions. questions. Each question has four answer options. 1-2 correct answers – 1 point

10-point scale will be used in assessment of the 3-4 correct answers – 2 points resultsof the test. 5-6 correct answers – 3 points

7-8 correct answers – 4 points







Example of questions for the final test:

1.

Pauline reads an article citing several reasons for having life insurance.

When she notices that the article is really an insurance company advertisement, she decides that life insurance is a waste of money. When the topic of insurance comes up a few weeks later, Pauline thinks that life insurance is a good use of money.

This change in attitude over time represents the _____ effect. a. primacy b. reactance c. recency d. sleeper

2.

Maureen is very intelligent, Audrey is moderately intelligent, and Denise is not very intelligent. A two-sided persuasive message will probably be most effective on _____. a. Audrey b. Denise c. Maureen d. The three women should be equally affected

3.

While listening half-heartedly to a lecture, Jamaal hears his professor cite several reasons why playing violent video games increases aggression. Jamaal

accepts these reasons solely because his professor has been correct before. In this example, Jamaal is using _____ processing. a. alpha b. central route c. omega d. peripheral route

4.

Research shows that a person who is distracted from a message is more likely to be persuaded by that message. The elaboration likelihood model explains this by suggesting that _____. a. distractions take up most of the person’s peripheral processing ability b. distractions serve as cues for rewards and punishments concerning being persuaded c. a distracting attitude makes the source more likable d. distractions prevent people from engaging in central route processing of information

2.

Forms of knowledge assessment and grading procedures

Knowledge should be assessed in 10-point scale. Grades on the following forms of knowledge assessment constitute the final grade:

Grade accum

= 0.6* G class

+ 0.4* G hw

Grade class

= 0.4* activity

+ 0.6* reports

Grade hw

= 0.5* G hw1

+ 0.5* G hw2

G accum

– the grade for participating in the classes and making all home works

G class

– the grade for being active during the discussions, and preparing presentations for the seminars

G hw

– the grade for homeworks = 0.5*homework1 + 0.5*homework2

G final test

– the grade for the final examination (in the form of test)

Grade total

= 0.7* G accum

+ 0.3* G final test

3.

Learning aids



(2001). Influence. Science and Practice, 4th ed.

Literature:

Aguirre-Rodriguez, A.

(2013). The Effect of Consumer Persuasion Knowledge on

Scarcity Appeal Persuasiveness. Journal Of Advertising, 42(4), 371-379.

Andrews, K. R., Carpenter, C. J., Shaw, A. S., & Boster, F. J. (2008). The legitimization of paltry favors effect: A review and metaanalysis. Communication Reports, 21(2), 59-69.

Blass T. (ed.).

(1999). Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on the Milgram paradigm. – Psychology Press.

Brehm, S. S.

(1981). Psychological reactance and the attractiveness of unattainable objects: Sex differences in children's responses to an elimination of freedom.

Sex Roles, 7, 937-949.

Budesheim, T. L., & DePaola, S. J.

(1994). Beauty or the beast? The effects of appearance, personality, and issue information on evaluations of political candidates. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 339-348.

Burger, J.M., Reed, M., DeCesare, K., Rauner S. & Rozolis, J.

(1999). The effects of initial request size on compliance: More about the That's-Not-All

Technique. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21, 243-249.

Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A.

(1999). The chameleon effect: The perceptionbehavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social


Cialdini, R. B.

(1993). Influence: The psychology of persuasion.

Cialdini, R. B., & Ascani, K.

(1976). Test of a concession procedure for inducing verbal, behavioral, and further compliance with a request to give blood.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 295-300.





Cialdini, R. B., Cacioppo, J. T., Bassett, R., & Miller, J. A.

(1978). Low-ball procedure for producing compliance: commitment then cost. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 36(5), 463.

Cialdini, R. B., Vincent, J. E., Lewis, S. K., Catalan, J., Wheeler, D., & Darby, B.

L.

(1975). Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The door-in-the-face technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31,

206-215.

Cioffi, D., & Garner, R.

(1996). On doing the decision: The effects of active versus passive choice on commitment and self-perception. Personality and Social

Psychology Bulletin, 22, 133-147.

Clark, M. S., & Waddell, B.

(1985). Perceptions of exploitation in communal and exchange relationships. Journal of Personal and Social Relationships, 2, 403-

418.

Davidson, T. W. (2008). Six Principles of Persuasion You Can Use to Influence

Others. Physician Executive, 34(5), 20-23.

Festinger, L., Riecken, H. W., & Schachter, S.

(1964). When prophecy fails. New

York: Harper &Row.

Freedman, J.L. & Fraser, S.C.

(1966). Compliance without pressure: The foot-inthe-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 195-202.

Frenzen, J. R., & Davis, H. L. (1990). Purchasing behavior in embedded markets.

Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 1-12.

Gaudeul, A., & Giannetti, C.

(2013). The role of reciprocation in social network formation, with an application to LiveJournal. Social Networks, 35, 317-330

Gergen, K., Ellsworth, P., Maslach, C., & Seipel, M.

(1975).Obligation, donor resources, and reactions to aid in three cultures. Journal of Personality and


Gerstner, E., & Hess, J. D.

(1990). Can bait and switch benefit consumers?

Marketing Science, 9(2), 114-124.

Goldman, M., Seever, M., & Seever, M. (1982). Social labeling and the foot-in-thedoor effect. The Journal of Social Psychology, 117(1), 19-23.

Green, F.

(1965). The "foot-in-the-door" technique. American Salesmen, 10, 14-

16.

Hammermesh, D., & Biddle, J. E.

(1994). Beauty and the labor market. The

American Economic Review, 84, 1174-1194.

Howard, D, J.

(1990). The influence of verbal responses to common greetings on compliance behavior: The foot-in-the-mouth effect. Journal of Applied Social

Psychology, 20, 1185-1196.

Janssen, L., Fennis, B.M., Pruyn, A., & Vohs, K. (2008). The path of least resistance: Regulatory resource depletion and the effectiveness of social influence techniques. Journal of Business Research, 61, 1041-1045.

Kim, J., Kim, S., Choi, J., Park, E., Nam, J., Cho, J., & Cho, E.

(2013). The werther effect of two celebrity suicides: An entertainer and a politician. Plos

ONE. 8(12).

Knishinsky, A.

(1982). The effects of scarcity of material and exclusivity of information on industrial buyer perceived risk in provoking a purchase decision. The doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe.

Latane, B., & Darley, J. M.

(1968). Group inhibition of bystander intervention in emergencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 215-221.

Leite, N. P., de Aguiar Rodrigues, A. C., & de Albuquerque, L. G.

(2014).

Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction: What Are the Potential

Relationships?. BAR - Brazilian Administration Review, 11(4), 476-495.

Maass, A., & Clark, R. D.

(1984). Hidden impact of minorities: Fifteen years of minority influence research. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 428.

Mackie, D. M. (1987). Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social


Martin, R., & Hewstone, M.

(2007). Social influence processes of control and change: Conformity, obedience to authority, and innovation. In M.A. Hogg &

J.Cooper (eds), The SAGE handbook of social psychology Concise student edition (pp.312-32). London: SAGE. An up-to-date and comprehensive review of social influence research, including conformity, obedience and minority influence.

Mauro, R.

(1984). The constable's new clothes: Effects of uniforms on perceptions and problems of police officers. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14,

42-56.

Mayhew, B. W., & Murphy, P. R.

(2014). The Impact of Authority on Reporting

Behavior, Rationalization and Affect. Contemporary Accounting Research,

31(2), 420-443.

Milgram, S.

(1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and


Miller M.

(2002). Effects of a guilt induction and guilt reduction on door in the face. Communication research, 29, 666-680.

Moriarty, T.

(1975). Crime, commitment, and the responsive bystander. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 370-376.

Moscovici S.

(1980). Toward a theory of conversion behavior // Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. 13, 209-239.

Moscovici, S., Lage, E., & Naffrechoux, M.

(1969). Influence of a consistent minority on the responses of a majority in a color perception task. Sociometry, 365-380.

Mugny, G., &Perez, J.A.

(1991). The social psychology of minority influence.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. An overview of research on minority influence by two leading scholars of this not ably Europe an topic; also cover age of Mugny and Moscovici's own theories of minority influence.

Newell, B. R., & Shanks, D. R.

(2014). Unconscious influences on decision making: a critical review. Behavioral And Brain Sciences, (1), 1.

Nolan, J. M., Schultz, P. W., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., & Griskevicius, V.

(2008). Normative social influence is underdetected. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 34(7), 913-923.

Pallak, M. S., Cook, D. A., & Sullivan, J. J.

(1980). Commitment and energy conservation. Applied Social Psychology Annual, 1, 235-253.

Pardini, A., & Katzev, R. (1983-1984). The effect of strength of commitment on newspaper recycling. Journal of Environmental Systems, 13, 245-254.

Philips, D. P.

(1979). Suicide, motor vehicle fatalities, and the mass media:

Evidence toward a theory of suggestion. American Journal of Sociology, 84,

1150-1174.

Pollock, C. L., Smith, S. D., Knowles, E. S., & Bruce, H. J.

(1998). Mindfulness limits compliance with the that’s-not-all technique. Personality and Social

Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1153-1157.

Regan R. T.

(1971). Effects of a favor and liking on compliance. Journal of

Experimental Social Psychology, 7, 627-639.

Schlenker. B. R., Dlugolecki, D. W., & Doherty, K.

(1994). The impact of selfpresentations on self-appraisals and behavior. The power of public commitment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 20-33.

Siebers, T. (1993).

The Werther effect: the esthetics of suicide. Mosaic

(Winnipeg), (1), p15.

Stewart, J. E.

(1980). Defendant's attractiveness as a factor in the outcome of trials.

Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 10, 348-361.

Taylor, R.

(1978). Marilyn's friends and Rita's customers: A study of party selling as play and as work. Sociological Review, 26, 573-611.

Thompson, L.

(1990). An examination of naive and experienced negotiators.


Tiedens, L. Z., & Fragale, A. R.

(2003). Power moves: Complementarity in dominant and submissive nonverbal behavior. Journal of Personality and


Turner, J. C.

(1991). Social influence. Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.

Wilson, P. R.

(1968). The perceptual distortion of height as a function of ascribed

academic status. Journal of Social Psychology, 74, 97-102.

Worchel, S., Lee, J., & Adewole, A.

(1975). Effects of supply and demand on ratings of object value. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 906-

914.

Zhang, Z., & Han, Y.

(2007). The effects of reciprocation wariness on negotiation behavior and outcomes. Group Decision & Negotiation, 16(6), 507-525.

Zimbardo, P. G., & Leippe, M. R. (1991). The psychology of attitude change and social influence. Mcgraw-Hill Book Company.

Cialdini, Robert B.

Related documents

Products

Support

Cialdini, Robert B.

Related documents

Add this document to collection(s)

Add this document to saved

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib