UNIT 2

SOCIAL PERCEPTION, SOCIAL

INFLUENCE AND
INTERPERSONAL ATTRACTION
AND CLOSE RELATIONSHIPS
• Have you heard your own voice over the phone or a
random recording of your voice in a conversation?
• How does it feel?
• have you ever enjoyed a new food more than you thought
you would, or enjoyed a movie you expected to like much
less than you anticipated?
• And have you ever been surprised to learn that other people
view you very differently than the way you view yourself?
• At one time or another, most of us have these kinds of
experiences, and when we do, they tell us that our self-
knowledge is far from perfect.
• If we don’t know or understand ourselves very accurately,
how can we hope to understand or know others?
• Accomplishing these tasks is crucial because to the extent
we perform them well, we can predict others’ future
feelings and actions accurately; to the extent we remain
“clueless” about them, we have very little chance of
achieving that important goal, and very little likelihood of
getting along well with them.
• So, how do we do it? How do we manage to perform the
task of social perception— the process through which
we seek to know and understand other people?
• Social perception refers to the ability to make
accurate interpretations and inferences about
other people from their general physical
appearance, verbal, and nonverbal patterns of
communication.
• Things like facial expressions, tone of voice, hand
gestures, and body position or movement are all ques
people with higher levels of social perception pick up
on to work out what other people are thinking, feeling
or are likely to do next. (Aronson et al, 2010)
WHAT ARE BEING STUDIED?
• First, we consider the ways in which we learn about others from
nonverbal communication—information provided not by their
words, but by their facial expressions, eye contact, body movements,
postures, and even changes in their body chemistry, which are
communicated through tiny amounts of substances released into the
air (e.g., Ekman, 2003; Miller & Maner, 2010).
• Next, we examine attribution, the process through which we attempt
to understand the reasons behind others’ behavior—why they have
acted as they have in a given situation, what goals they are seeking, and
what intentions they have (e.g., Burrus & Roese, 2006).
• Third, we examine the nature of impression formation— how we
form first impressions of others, and impression management (or
self-presentation)—how we try to ensure that these impressions are
favorable ones.
• Nonverbal communication -
Communication between individuals that does
not involve the content of spoken language. It
relies instead on an unspoken language of facial
expressions, eye contact, and body language.
Channels of Non verbal communication
• People tend to behave differently when experiencing
different emotional states. But precisely how do
differences in your inner states—your emotions,
feelings, and moods—show up in your behavior?
• This question relates to the basic channels
through which such communication takes
place.
• Research findings indicate that five of these
channels exist: facial expressions, eye contact,
body movements, posture, and touching.
Facial expressions
• “Face is the image of the soul.”
• In fact, it appears that five different basic emotions are represented
clearly, and from a very early age, on the human face: anger, fear,
happiness, sadness, and disgust.
• It’s important to realize that the fact that only five different
emotions are represented on our faces does not imply that human
beings can show only a small number of facial expressions.
• On the contrary, emotions occur in many combinations (e.g., joy
together with sorrow, fear combined with anger) and each of these
reactions can vary greatly in strength.
• Thus, while there may be only a small number of basic themes in
facial expressions, the number of variations on these themes is
immense.
• Are facial expressions universal?
• Research in this area has shwon that –
• Some facial expressions provide clear signals of
underlying emotional states, and are recognized as
doing so all over the world.
• Cultural differences certainly do exist with respect
to the precise meaning of facial expressions, but
unlike spoken languages, they do not seem to
require much in the way of translation.
Gazes And Stares: Eye Contact As A
Nonverbal Cue
• Ancient poets often described eyes as “windows to the
soul.”
• In one important sense, they were correct: We do often
learn much about others’ feelings from their eyes.
• For example, we interpret a high level of gazing from
another as a sign of liking or friendliness (Kleinke,
1986).
• In contrast, if others avoid eye contact with us, we may
conclude that they are unfriendly, don’t like us, or are
simply shy.
• While a high level of eye contact with others is usually
interpreted as a sign of liking or positive feelings, there
is one exception to this general rule.
• If another person gazes at us continuously and
maintains such contact regardless of what we do, he or
she can be said to be staring.
• A stare is often interpreted as a sign of anger or hostility
—as in cold stare—and most people find this particular
nonverbal cue disturbing.
• In fact, we may quickly terminate social interaction with
someone who stares at us and may even leave the scene.
Body Language: Gestures, Posture, And
Movements
• Body langauge -Cues provided by the position, posture,
and movement of others’ bodies or body parts -can
provide useful information about others.
• First, body language often reveals others’ emotional
states.
• Large numbers of movements— especially ones in
which one part of the body does something to another
part (touching, rubbing, scratching)—suggest emotional
arousal.
• The greater the frequency of such behavior, the higher
the level of arousal or nervousness
• More specific information about others’ feelings
is often provided by gestures.
• These fall into several categories, but perhaps
the most important are emblems —body
movements carrying specific meanings in a given
culture.
• Some may have simpler common meanings
some may vary across cultures.
Touching: What Does It Convey?
• Touching – Perception of touch is dependent on many factors
• who does the touching (a friend, a stranger, a member of your
own or the other gender);
• the nature of this physical contact (brief or prolonged, gentle or
rough, what part of the body is touched);
• and the context in which the touching takes place (a business
or social setting, a doctor’s office).
• Depending on such factors, touch can suggest affection, sexual
interest, dominance, caring, or even aggression.
• Despite such complexities, existing evidence indicates that
when touching is considered appropriate, it often produces
positive reactions in the person being touched.
• One acceptable way in which people in many different
cultures touch strangers is through handshaking.
• Other forms of touching, too, can sometimes be
appropriate.
• For instance - a light, comforting pat on the arm can
induce feelings of security.
• In sum, touching can serve as another source of
nonverbal communication, and when it is appropriate -it
can induce positive reactions.
• If it is viewed as inappropriate, however, it can encourage
negative perceptions of the person doing the touching
Scent: Another Source of Nonverbal
Social Information

• Although facial expressions, body movements,

gestures, eye contact, and touching are basic and
important sources of nonverbal information, they
are not the only ones.
• Much can also be learned from what are termed
paralinguistic cues—changes in the tone or
inflection of others’ voices (quite apart from the
meaning of their words).
• And recent research indicates that even subtle cues
relating to others’ body chemistry can be revealing
• In a research, a large number of women were asked to
wear clean T-shirts several nights during the month—
either right around the time they were ovulating (days
13–15 of their menstrual cycles), and when ovulation
had passed (days 20–22).
• The T-shirts were then sealed in plastic bags and
presented to men who opened the bags slightly and
smelled the shirts.
• The men did not know anything about the women
involved or their menstrual cycles, but when their
testosterone was measured, clear results emerged:
• Men’s own testosterone was
higher when they sniffed T-
shirts worn by ovulating
women than when they sniffed
T-shirts worn by women who
were not longer ovulating, or
clean T-shirts not worn by
anyone.
• These findings indicate that
changes in body chemistry,
reflected in subtle changes in
body odor, can serve as an
informational nonverbal cue.
(Source: Based on data from
Miller & Maner, 2010).
The Facial Feedback Hypothesis
• The facial feedback hypothesis (Laird, 1984)
suggests that there is a close link between the
facial expressions we show and our internal
feelings, and that this relationship works both
ways.
• The expressions we show reflect our internal
feelings or emotions, and in addition, these
expressions also feed back into our brains and
influence our subjective experiences of emotion.
• In short, we don’t only show what we feel inside
on our faces—we also sometimes feel, inside,
what we show!
• Recent research (Davis, Senghas, Brandt, & Ochsner,
2010) - compared the emotional reactions to
positive and negative video clips - of two groups of
people who received injections of anti-wrinkle drugs.
• One group received injections of Botox, a drug that
paralyzes muscles involved in facial expressions,
while another received Restylane, a drug that simply
fills in wrinkles without paralyzing facial muscles.
• Both groups rated how they felt after viewing each
video clip on a scale of very negative to very positive.
• Botox people reported weaker emotional reactions to
the video clips.
Deception: Recognizing It Through Nonverbal Cues, and Its
Effects on Social Relations

• Given the fact that nearly everyone engages in

deception at least occasionally, how can we
recognize such actions?
• The answer seems to involve careful attention to
both nonverbal and verbal cues that can reveal
the fact that others are trying to deceive us.
• With respect to nonverbal cues, the following
information has been found to be very helpful.
• Microexpressions: These are fleeting facial
expressions lasting only a few tenths of a second.
Such reactions appear on the face very quickly
after an emotion-provoking event and are difficult
to suppress. As a result, they can be very revealing
about others’ true feelings or emotions.
• Interchannel discrepancies: These are
inconsistencies between nonverbal cues from
different basic channels.. For instance, they may
manage their facial expressions well, but may have
difficulty looking you in the eye as they tell their
lie.
• Eye contact: People who are lying often blink
more often and show pupils that are more
dilated than people who are telling the truth.
They may also show an unusually low level of
eye contact or—surprisingly—an unusually high
one as they attempt to fake being honest by
looking others right in the eye.
• Exaggerated facial expressions: They may
smile more—or more broadly—than usual or
may show greater sorrow than is typical in a
given situation.
• In addition to these nonverbal cues, other signs of
deception are sometimes present in nonverbal
aspects of what people actually say, or in the words
they choose.
• When people are lying, the pitch of their voices often
rises—especially when they are highly motivated to
lie.
• Similarly, they often take longer to begin—to
respond to a question or describe events.
• And they may show a greater tendency to start
sentences, stop them, and begin again. In other
words, certain aspects of people’s linguistic style can
be revealing of deception
ATTRIBUTION: UNDERSTANDING THE CAUSES
OF OTHERS’ BEHAVIOR

• Often, we want to know more than simply how another

person is feeling right now.
• In addition, we want to know why they have said or done
various things, and further, what kind of person they really
are—what lasting traits, interests, motives, and goals they
have.
• For instance, to mention just one of countless possibilities,
we want to know if other people are high or low in self-
control.
• If they are high in self-control we tend to view them as
trustworthy, while if they are low on this aspect of self-
regulation, we may conclude that they are unpredictable and
not someone we can rely on .
• Social psychologists believe that our interest in such questions
stems, in large part, from our basic desire to understand cause-
and effect relationships in the social world.
• We don’t simply want to know how others have acted—that’s
something we can readily observe. We also want to understand
why they have done so, too, because this knowledge can help
us to understand them better and also can help us to better
predict their future actions.
• The process through which we seek such information and draw
inferences is known as Attribution.
• More formally, attribution refers to our efforts to understand
the causes behind others’ behavior and, on some occasions, the
causes behind our behavior, too.
Theories of Attribution
• Jones and Davis’s (1965) theory of
correspondent inference —asks how we use
information about others’ behavior as a basis for
inferring their traits.
• In other words, the theory is concerned with how
we decide, on the basis of others’ overt actions,
whether they possess specific traits or
dispositions likely to remain fairly stable over
time.
• At first glance, this might seem to be a simple
task.
• The task is complicated, however, by the
following fact: Often, individuals act in certain
ways not because doing so reflects their own
preferences or traits, but rather because external
factors leave them little choice.
• For example – being smiled and greeted warmly
by a waiter/waitress at a restaurant doesn’t
necessarily mean he/she is a friendly person – it
is more of their role/ custom/ duty in their job.
• According to Jones and Davis’s theory we
accomplish this task by focusing our attention on
certain types of actions—those most likely to
prove informative.
• First, we consider only behavior that seems to
have been freely chosen, while largely ignoring
ones that were somehow forced on the person in
question.
• Second, we pay careful attention to actions that
show what noncommon effects—effects that
can be caused by one specific factor, but not by
others
• Finally, Jones and Davis suggest that we also
pay greater attention to actions by others that
are low in social desirability than to actions
that are high on this dimension.
• In other words, we learn more about others’
traits from actions they perform that are
somehow out of the ordinary than from actions
that are very much like those of most other
people.
• In sum, according to the theory proposed by
Jones and Davis, we are most likely to conclude
that others’ behavior reflects their stable traits
(i.e., we are likely to reach correspondent
inferences about them), when that behavior
• (1) is freely chosen;
• (2) yields distinctive, noncommon effects; and
• (3) is low in social desirability.
Kelley’s Theory Of Causal Attributions
• We want to know why other people have acted as
they have or why events have turned out in a
specific way.
• We often begin with a preliminary question: Did
others’ behavior stem mainly from internal
causes (their own traits, motives, intentions),
mainly from external causes (some aspect of the
social or physical world); or from a combination
of the two?
• According to Kelley, in our attempts to answer the why question
about others’ behavior, we focus on three major types of
information.

First, we consider consensus—the extent to which other people react to a

given stimulus or event in the same manner as the person we are
considering. The higher the proportion of people who react in the same
way, the higher the consensus.

Second, we consider consistency—the extent to which the person in

question reacts to the stimulus or event in the same way on other
occasions, over time.

And third, we examine distinctiveness—the extent to which this person

reacts in the same manner to other, different stimuli or events
• According to Kelley’s theory, we are most likely to
attribute another’s behavior to internal causes under
conditions in which consensus and distinctiveness are
low but consistency is high.
• In contrast, we are most likely to attribute another’s
behavior to external causes when consensus,
consistency, and distinctiveness are all high.
• Finally, we usually attribute another’s behavior to a
combination of internal and external factors
when consensus is low but consistency and
distinctiveness are high
• Imagine that you see a server in a restaurant flirt with a customer.
• This behavior raises an interesting question: Why does the server act this
way? Because of internal causes or external causes?
Attribution: Some Basic Sources of Error
• Correspondence bias—the tendency to explain
others’ actions as stemming from (corresponding to)
dispositions even in the presence of clear situational
causes.
• Eg: A man arrives at a meeting 1 hour late. Upon
entering, he drops his notes on the floor. While trying to
pick them up, his glasses fall off and break. Later, he
spills coffee all over his tie. How would one explain these
events? - “This person is disorganized and clumsy.
• One would be less likely to consider such potential
external causes of his behavior
• This bias seems to be so general in scope that many social
psychologists refer to it as the fundamental attribution
error.
• The tendency to overestimate the impact of dispositional cues
(internal cues) on others’ behavior.
• In short, we tend to perceive others as acting as they do because
they are “that kind of person,” rather than because of the many
external factors that may influence their behavior.
• This tendency occurs in a wide range of contexts but appears to be
strongest in situations where both consensus and
distinctiveness are low, as predicted by Kelley’s theory, and
when we are trying to predict others’ behavior in the far-off
future rather than the immediate future
• Social psychologists have conducted many studies on why
this bias occurs:
• When we observe another person’s behaviour, we tend to
focus on his or her actions – hence potential situational
causes of behaviour fade into background.
• Another explanation – we notice such situational causes
but give them insufficient weights in our attributions.
• When we focus on another person’s behaviour , we tend to
assume their actions reflect their underlying
characteristics- attempt to correct for any possible
(external world) – often insufficient – attribute
internal causes.
• We also tend to perceive that we are less likely to fall
victim to correspondence bias than others.
• Cultural factors in FAE:
• FAE appears to be more common or stronger in
individualistic cultures – western Europe, US,
Canada than in collectivist cultures that emphasise
group membership, conformity, interdependence.
• Not only we make attributions about the behaviour of
an individual person but also about the behaviour of
groups. – Prejudice?
• Eg: “why did so many Germans hate Jews? - researchers
– people who visited a museum related to holocaust –
German atrocities were as a result of their aggressive
nature (internal) or the historical context (external)? –
Jewish participants – internal; German participants –
external.
• Actor-observer effect - The tendency to
attribute our own behavior mainly to situational
causes but the behavior of others mainly to
internal (dispositional) causes.
• “You fell; I was pushed.”
• Why does this occur? – we are quite aware of the
many external factors that affect our own actions
but are less aware of such factors that can affect
other people’s actions.
• The Self-serving Bias
- The tendency to
attribute positive
outcomes to internal
causes (e.g., one’s own
traits or characteristics)
but negative outcomes
or events to external
causes (e.g., chance,
task difficulty).
• “I’m Good; You Are
Lucky”
• Why does this tilt in our attributions occur?
• Several possibilities have been suggested, but most of
these fall into two categories: cognitive and
motivational explanations.
• The cognitive model suggests that we attribute positive
outcomes to internal causes, but negative ones to
external causes because we expect to succeed and
have a tendency to attribute expected outcomes
to internal causes more than to external causes.
• In contrast, the motivational explanation suggests that
the self-serving bias stems from our need to protect
and enhance our self-esteem or the related desire
to look good to others.
Applications of Attribution Theory
• Attribution and Depression
• Depression is the most common psychological disorder.
• Although many factors play a role in depression, one that
has received increasing attention is what might be termed
a self-defeating pattern of attributions.
• In contrast to most people, who show the self-serving bias
described above, depressed individuals tend to adopt an
opposite pattern.
• They attribute negative outcomes to lasting, internal
causes such as their own traits or lack of ability, but
attribute positive outcomes to temporary, external causes
such as good luck or special favors from others.
• As a result, such people perceive that they have
little or no control over what happens to.
• Then they become depressed and tend to give up
on life!
• And once they are depressed, the tendency to
engage in this self-defeating pattern is
strengthened, and a vicious cycle is often
initiated.
IMPRESSION FORMATION AND IMPRESSION
MANAGEMENT
• When we meet another person for the first time,
we are—quite literally—flooded with
information.
• Although the amount of information reaching us
is large, we somehow manage to combine it into
an initial first impression of this person—a
mental representation that is the basis for our
reactions to him or her
 Solom We do
Early on not form
Rather, we
perceive
resea Asch- impressi these traits
Asch ons in relation
rch applied simply by to one
another, so
into Gestalt adding
together that the
ideas -
how “The
all of the traits cease
to exist
Central
we whole is and
individuall
y and
form often Periphe become,
greater ral traits instead,
impr than the we part of an
essio sum of observe integrated,
dynamic
its in other
ns? people.
whole.
parts.”
ACTIVITY

A Intelligent-skillful-warm-determined-practical-
cautious
RESULTS

Series A(WARM)- A person who believes certain things to be right ,

wants others to see his point , would be sincere in an argument and
would like to see his point won .

Series B (COLD) – A very ambitious and talented person who would

not let anything or anyone stand in the way in achieving his goal.

Wants his own way , determined , not to give in no matter what

happens.
How quickly do we form impressions?

Many studies have reported that even working with what are known as thin
slices of information about others—for instance, photos or short videos of
them—perceivers’ first impressions are reasonably accurate.

Research findings indicate that although first impressions formed on the

basis of a “thin slice” of information can be somewhat accurate, such
accuracy is not closely related to confidence in the impressions.

In fact, the relationship between rated confidence and actual accuracy

appears to be curvilinear in nature.

At very low levels of confidence, accuracy is also low, but as confidence rises,
so, too, does accuracy— but only up to a point, beyond which even if
confidence continues to increase, accuracy declines.
• Social psychologists also believe in implicit
personality theories— beliefs about what traits or
characteristics tend to go together
• These theories, which can be viewed as a specific kind
of schema, suggest that when individuals possess
some traits, they are likely to possess others, too.
• Such expectations are strongly shaped by the cultures
in which we live.
• Eg : “what is beautiful is good”, “only children are self
centered, spoilt”
Impression Management: Tactics
for “Looking Good” to Others
• Two braod categories - self-enhancement—efforts to increase their
appeal to others—and other-enhancement—efforts to make the
target person feel good in various ways.

With respect to self-enhancement, specific strategies include efforts to

boost one’s appearance— personal grooming, clothing etc.,

Additionally - efforts to appear competent and accomplished through such

steps as describing past achievements, overcame past struggles etc.,
Other enhancement strategies

Perhaps the most commonly used tactic of this type is

Ingratiation—flattering others in various ways.

Expressing agreement with the target person’s views

Showing a high degree of interest in this person

Doing small favors for them

Asking for their advice and feedback in some manner

Expressing liking for them nonverbally

 Impression Management – The Role Of Cognitive Load

Making favorable impression

Wanting to look good to others – in an interview, on a first date .

Positive self presentation

Cognitive load –When many things are going on , we cant concentrate solely on good first impression . Ex:- Politician –
campaigning – diff locations , diff audiences – fatigue – experience cognitive load - make blunders sometimes.
 SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Obe
dien
ce

Efforts by
one or more
persons to
change the
behavior,
Conf
ormi
attitudes,
ty beliefs ,
perceptions
or
behaviours
of one or
more people
Com
plian
ce
 CONFORMITY: GROUP INFLUENCE IN
ACTION
During an exam, another
student’s cell phone
begins to ring loudly.
What does thisperson do?

You are driving on a street

when you see and hear an
ambulance approaching you
from behind. What do you
do?

In a supermarket, a new
checkout line suddenly opens,
right next to a checkout with a
long line of shoppers. Who gets
to go first in that new line?
• Conformity, in other words, refers to pressures to behave
in ways consistent with rules indicating how we should or
ought to behave.
• These rules are known as social norms, and they often
exert powerful effects on our behavior.
• In some instances, social norms are stated explicitly and
are quite detailed. Eg: No Parking!
• In other situations, norms may be unspoken or implicit,
and, in fact, may have developed in a totally informal
manner EG: “Look ur best for an interview!”
• Regardless of whether social norms are explicit or implicit,
formal or informal - Most people follow most of the time!
 Another reason people conform
At first glance, conformity may is, simply, to “look good” to
seem objectionable – restrictions others—to make a positive
on personal freedom! impression on them.
Asch’s Research on Conformity: Social Pressure—the
Irresistible Force?

• Asch’s Line Judgment Task

• Participants in Asch’s research were asked to report their judgments on problems such as
this one. Their task was to indicate which of the comparison lines (1, 2, or 3) best matched
the standard line in length. To study conformity, he had participants make these
judgments out loud, only after hearing the answers of several other people—all of whom
were Asch’s assistants. On certain critical trials the assistants all gave wrong answers.
This exposed participants to strong pressures toward conformity.
• Across several different studies, fully 76 percent of those tested went along with the group’s
false answers at least once; and overall, they voiced agreement with these errors 37 percent
of the time. In contrast, only 5 percent of the participants in a control group, who responded
to the same problems alone, made such errors.
Factors Affecting Conformity
Cohesiveness- “GO ALONG” extent to which we are attracted to a social group
and want to belong to them

Group size-larger the group greater the tendency to conform

Norms affect behaviour

A)Descriptive norms-tell what people would do in a given situation ex:-

Library
B) Injunctive norms-specify what ought to be done and what is approved and
disapproved. Ex:- Cheating in exams , Cut into line in front of others etc
Both these exert influence on our behaviour ,just because a few disobey doesn’t
change anything.
Social roots of conformity

Why do people often choose to go along with these social rules instead of resisting them?

Normative social influence - Social influence based on the desire to be liked or accepted
by other people.

Informational social influence - Social influence based on the desire to be correct (i.e., to possess accurate perceptions of
the social world) ; -we want to make right decisions and for this we depend on others as a source of information about many
aspects of the social world.
Situational norms – Automaticty in
normative behaviour

These are quite automatic responses even though we consciously don’t process
Tell us how to behave in a given environment(library)
them.
DOWNSIDE OF CONFORMITY

Gender norms-limits career opportunities,

career aspirations, affects personal happiness

Internalising myths to be true( rape

myths),using violence to get sex due to false
information)
Why sometimes we choose to not
conform?
• The need to maintain individuality-
makes us different from others
• Ex:- No parking , no smoking
(Proving themselves right)
• Individuality is greater in
individualistic cultures(USA ,
Europe) than collectivistic
cultures(Asia, Africa)
• The desire for personal control-
they want to maintain control over
the events in their lives
 Minority Influence: Does the Majority
U
n
d
ers

d
it
o
n
o
m
ec
o
n

s,m
i
n
T
o
h
ritsc
em
a
in
o
rity
n
sC
d
o
h
u
n
o
sitec
u
n
ld
tevn
i
n
la
n
’tb
rg
erio
p
em
g
ip
o
a
sito
d
j
o
n
a
.rites
n
to
d
d
c
o
h
g
a
m
n
a
tic.g
e
th
eira
Always Rule?
ti
u
d
es
o
r
b
eh
a
vi
o
r:

I
f

m
i
n
o
r
i
t
y

a
r
g
u
e
s

w
i
t
h

c
u
r
r
e
n
t

s
o
c
i
a
l

t
r
e
n
d
s
.
COMPLIANCE: Getting Others to Say “Yes”
• Robert Cialdini, a well-known social
psychologist – concluded that although
techniques for gaining compliance take many
different forms, they all rest to some degree on
six basic principles.
Friendship/liking: In general, we are more willing to comply with requests
from friends or from people we like than with requests from strangers or people
we don’t like.

Commitment/consistency: Once we have committed ourselves to a position or

action, we are more willing to comply with requests for behaviors that are consistent
with this position or action than with requests that are inconsistent with it.

Scarcity: In general, we value, and try to secure, outcomes or objects that are
scarce or decreasing in availability. As a result, we are more likely to comply with
requests that focus on scarcity than ones that make no reference to this issue.

Reciprocity: We are generally more willing to comply with a request from

someone who has previously provided a favor or concession to us than to
someone who has not.

Social validation: We are generally more willing to comply with a request for some action
if this action is consistent with what we believe people similar to ourselves are doing (or
thinking). We want to be correct, and one way to do so is to act and think like others.

Authority: In general, we are more willing to comply with requests from

someone who holds legitimate authority—or simply appears to do so.
Tactics Based on Friendship or Liking
Ingratiation—
getting others
Flattery—
to like us so
praising others
that they will
in some
be more
manner—is
willing to
one of the best.
agree to our
requests. Incidental
Another is
similarity—
known as self-
calling
promotion—
attention to
informing
small and
others about
slightly
our past
surprising
accomplishme
similarities
nts or positive
between them
characteristics.
and ourselves
Tactics Based on Commitment or
Consistency

Foot-in-the-door technique - A
Low-ball procedure - A technique
procedure for gaining compliance in
for gaining compliance in which an
which requesters begin with a small
offer or deal is changed to make it
request and then, when this is
less attractive to the target person
granted, escalate to a larger one (the
after this person has accepted it.
one they actually desired all along).
Tactics Based on Reciprocity

Door-in-the-face
That’s-not-all technique
technique -A
-Atechnique
procedure forfor
gaining
gaining
compliance
compliance inin
which
which
requesters
requestersbegin
offerwith
additional
a largebenefits
request to
andtarget
then,people
when before
this is refused,
they haveretreat
decided
to a
smaller
whether one
to (the
comply
onewith
theyoractually
reject specific
desired requests.
all along).
Tactics Based on Scarcity
Playing hard to get - A
technique that can be
used for increasing
compliance by suggesting
that a person or object is
scarce and hard to
obtain.

Deadline technique - A
technique for increasing
compliance in which target
people are told that they
have only limited time to
take advantage of some
offer or to obtain some item
 OBEDIENCE
A form of social influence in which one person simply orders one or more others to
perform some actions

( Milgram's experiment)- Indicate that many people readily obey orders from a relatively
powerless source of authority , even if requires them to harm an innocent person.
https://www.simplypsychology.org/viadeo/ezoic/view?
videoID=8da8c4b069747c411fb3b3e37af1fa046e5399a4&_ez_video_link_src=1

It was found that ordinary people obey although with reluctance to harm innocent
stranger if ordered to do so by someone in authority
DESTRUCTIVE OBEDIENCE-WHY DOES IT
OCCUR?
Destructive Obedience: Resisting Its Effects
Firstly people can be They can be told that
reminded that they, not
total submission to
authorities are
responsible for harmful destructive commands
effects. can be inappropriate

If individuals
question the
motives

Knowing the
power of
authority figures
INTERPERSONAL ATTRACTIONS AND CLOSE
RELATIONSHIPS

Why do
Interperso
Whypeople
do fall
What is
people
nal inlike
love
love?
attraction-
/dislike?
and with
whom?
 Internal Determinants Of
Attraction
There are individual differences in the need to affiliate

Could depend on genes or experience

More or less stable trait

When its not met?

Leads to social exclusion with anger sadness and guilt

Results in less cognitive functioning

Situational Influences

Helps us in
seeking cognitive
clarity(know Mortality
what's happening
)and emotional
clarity(understan
ding of our own
feeling)

Helps in social
Natural
comparison/su
disasters
pport

Lab experiments
proved that any
threat /danger
evokes affiliation
External Sources of Attraction
• Proximity - In attraction research, the physical
closeness between two individuals - The smaller the
physical distance, the greater the probability that
the two people will come into repeated contact
experiencing repeated exposure to one another,
positive affect, and the development of mutual
attraction.
• Why? - Repeated exposure effect - Zajonc’s
finding that frequent contact with any mildly
negative, neutral, or positive stimulus results in an
increasingly positive evaluation of that stimulus.
Observable Characteristics of Others- The Effects of Physical
Attractiveness:

• Beauty May Be Only Skin Deep, But We Pay A

Lot Of Attention To Skin.
• The “What Is Beautiful Is Good” Effect.
Factors Based on Social Interaction:
Similarity and Mutual Liking
CLOSE RELATIONSHIPS

FAMILY

SPOU FRIE
SES NDS

LOVERS
Loneliness(Life Without Close Relationships)
Despite the The
biological unpleasant
need to
emotional

Lon
establish
relationships and
and the cognitive
many state based
rewards of
being in a
relationship
elin on desiring
close

ess
relationshi
; may
individuals
p but being
are unable to unable to
achieve that attain
goal. them
 Consequences of Being Lonely
Not as prevalent in India when compared to west as family support and
pressure to get married . …Loneliness among elderly is growing

Leads to depression, anxiety, unhappiness ,dissatisfaction pessimism about

future ,self blame, shyness, maladjusted .

All these could be because of sleep problems, and Poor health

 Why are some people lonely?
Origins of dispositional loneliness is a combination of GENETIC FACTORS,
ATTACHMENT STYLES ,EARLY SOCIAL EXPERIENCES WITH PEERS. ..Could be
inherited … identical twins are more similar in loneliness than others

Could be traced to attachment styles . People who fear intimacy could would
never get close to anybody – Insecure attachment styles

People who perceive themselves to be more giving than receiving – Perceived

lack of reciprocity.

Failure to develop social skills leading to avoidance , verbal aggression, etc.

Reducing loneliness

Social skills training

Cognitive therapy
Romantic relationships and falling in love
• Different from friendship
• Involves arousal , intimacy , sex
and commitment
• Romantic relationships often
involve three overlapping schemas
– Self, One’s partner and the
relationships. The three schemas
overlap and the thoughts , ideas at
this intersection of the schemas
play an important role un the
nature and success of the
relationship.
 SELECTING POTENTIAL MATE
MALES FEMALES

• Female beauty as it ensures • Man’s resources –(protective )

reproductive success
• Economic power
• Characteristics that indicate
youth(fertility) and health • Interpersonal power
(endurance of childbirth and
raising)
• Intelligence, self confidence,
social positions etc
• Bilateral symmetry (Body parts
alike )

• Symmetrical face- (having

identical right and left sides)
 Love
• Love - A combination of emotions, cognitions, and behaviors
that often play a crucial role in intimate relationships.

Passionate love -
An intense and often
unrealistic emotional Companionate
Types response to another love - Love that is
Unrequited love -
of love person. When this based on friendship,
Love felt by one
emotion is mutual attraction,
person for another
experienced, it is shared interests,
who does not feel love
usually perceived as respect, and concern
in return.
an indication of true for one another’s
love, but to outside welfare.
observers it appears
to be infatuation.
 Selfless
love-an
Game Logical
Possessive individual
playing love-
Types love-fear of would
love-having whether
of love losing ones suffer
two lovers partner is
lover rather than
at once suitable
let lover
suffer
Sternberg’s triangular model of love
• This theory suggests that each love relationship is made up of three
basic components that are present in varying degrees in different couples .
• One component is intimacy— the closeness two people feel and the strength
of the bond that holds them together. Intimacy is essentially companionate
love. Partners high in intimacy are concerned with each other’s welfare and
happiness, and they value, like, count on, and understand one another.
• The second component, passion, is based on romance, physical attraction,
and sexuality—in other words, passionate love.
• The third component, decision/commitment, represents cognitive factors
such as the decision that you love and want to be with the other person plus a
commitment to maintain the relationship on a permanent basis.
• When all three angles of the triangle are equally strong and balanced, the
result is consummate love—defined as the ideal form, but something
difficult to attain.