Psychology

Peer vs. Expert: The Effects of Influence Source on Conformity

Document Type

Oral Presentation

Location

Indianapolis, IN

Subject Area

Psychology

Start Date

11-4-2014 10:15 AM

End Date

11-4-2014 12:00 PM

Description

"Social proof" (Cialdini, 1993) or "informational social influence" (Deutsch & Gerard, 1955), is the tendency for people to use the behavior of others as persuasive information. For example, people are more likely to buy something if they know that 9 out of 10 consumers chose it over another product. We were interested in whether participants were more likely to be influenced by social proof that was based on their peers' opinions or on experts' opinions. In this study, participants from Hanover College were first given the text of a new smoking policy and then told the percentage of their college peers and the percentage of faculty from biology and kinesiology departments who were in favor of the policy. Participants were randomly assigned to a specific group that dictated which set of opinions would be depicted through pie charts (one of four conditions: peers against and experts against, peers in favor of and experts against, peers against and experts in favor of, and peers in favor of and experts in favor of). They then rated their own opinion using a (1 - 6) Likert scale regarding the new smoking policy. We expect that students who participate in our study will be more influenced by faculty rather than by their peers.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Apr 11th, 10:15 AM Apr 11th, 12:00 PM

Peer vs. Expert: The Effects of Influence Source on Conformity

Indianapolis, IN

"Social proof" (Cialdini, 1993) or "informational social influence" (Deutsch & Gerard, 1955), is the tendency for people to use the behavior of others as persuasive information. For example, people are more likely to buy something if they know that 9 out of 10 consumers chose it over another product. We were interested in whether participants were more likely to be influenced by social proof that was based on their peers' opinions or on experts' opinions. In this study, participants from Hanover College were first given the text of a new smoking policy and then told the percentage of their college peers and the percentage of faculty from biology and kinesiology departments who were in favor of the policy. Participants were randomly assigned to a specific group that dictated which set of opinions would be depicted through pie charts (one of four conditions: peers against and experts against, peers in favor of and experts against, peers against and experts in favor of, and peers in favor of and experts in favor of). They then rated their own opinion using a (1 - 6) Likert scale regarding the new smoking policy. We expect that students who participate in our study will be more influenced by faculty rather than by their peers.