Book contents
- Critical Thinking in Psychology
- Critical Thinking in Psychology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Chapter 1 An Introduction to Critical Thinking: Maybe It Will Change Your Life
- Chapter 2 Nobelists Gone Wild
- Chapter 3 Why Science Succeeds, and Sometimes Doesn’t
- Chapter 4 Critical Thinking and the Rejection of Unsubstantiated Claims
- Chapter 5 Promoting Critical Thinking by Teaching, or Taking, Psychology Courses
- Chapter 6 Avoiding and Overcoming Misinformation on the Internet
- Chapter 7 Critical Thinking Impacts Our Everyday Lives
- Chapter 8 Research Suffers When We All Agree
- Chapter 9 When All Is Just a Click Away
- Chapter 10 Critical Thinking
- Chapter 11 Evaluating Experimental Research
- Chapter 12 Critical Thinking as Scientific Reasoning
- Chapter 13 Critical Thinking in STEM Disciplines
- Chapter 14 Why Would Anyone Do or Believe Such a Thing?
- Chapter 15 Conclusion: How to Think Critically about Politics … and Anything Else!
- Index
- References
Chapter 14 - Why Would Anyone Do or Believe Such a Thing?
A Social Influence Analysis
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 December 2019
Book contents
- Critical Thinking in Psychology
- Critical Thinking in Psychology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Chapter 1 An Introduction to Critical Thinking: Maybe It Will Change Your Life
- Chapter 2 Nobelists Gone Wild
- Chapter 3 Why Science Succeeds, and Sometimes Doesn’t
- Chapter 4 Critical Thinking and the Rejection of Unsubstantiated Claims
- Chapter 5 Promoting Critical Thinking by Teaching, or Taking, Psychology Courses
- Chapter 6 Avoiding and Overcoming Misinformation on the Internet
- Chapter 7 Critical Thinking Impacts Our Everyday Lives
- Chapter 8 Research Suffers When We All Agree
- Chapter 9 When All Is Just a Click Away
- Chapter 10 Critical Thinking
- Chapter 11 Evaluating Experimental Research
- Chapter 12 Critical Thinking as Scientific Reasoning
- Chapter 13 Critical Thinking in STEM Disciplines
- Chapter 14 Why Would Anyone Do or Believe Such a Thing?
- Chapter 15 Conclusion: How to Think Critically about Politics … and Anything Else!
- Index
- References
Summary
Why do we do and believe crazy things? Two common but mostly wrong answers to this question are: (a) you have to be crazy to do crazy things and (b) people who do crazy things must be infected by crazy influence. A social-influence analysis addresses this question by identifying and describing the social-influence tactics that are common to situations producing crazy beliefs and behavior. Identification of these tactics and their typical effects is essential for understanding the power of the situation and for developing our own critical skills at appraising situations. The chapter concludes with six steps to take for reducing susceptibility to undue influence.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Critical Thinking in Psychology , pp. 328 - 353Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
AARP. (2003). Off the hook: Reducing participation in telemarketing fraud. Washington, DC: AARP.Google Scholar
Abrams, D., Wetherell, M., Cochrane, S., Hogg, M. A., & Turner, J. C. (1990). Knowing what to think by knowing who you are: Self-categorization and the nature of norm formation, conformity, and group polarization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 97–119.Google Scholar
Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon modification and distortion of judgment. In Guetzkow, H. (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men (pp. 177–190). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Press.Google Scholar
Bickman, L. (1974). The social power of a uniform. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 4, 47–61.Google Scholar
Campbell, M. C., & Kirmani, A. (2000). Consumers’ use of persuasion knowledge: The effects of accessibility and cognitive capacity on perceptions of an influence agent. Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 69–83.Google Scholar
Carreyrou, J. (2018). Bad blood: Secrets and lies in a Silicon Valley startup. New York: Alfred Knopf.Google Scholar
Cialdini, R. B., & Petty, R. E. (1979). Anticipatory opinion effects. In Petty, R. E., Ostrom, T. M., & Brock, T. C. (Eds.), Cognitive response in persuasion (pp. 217–235). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Davison, W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 1–15.Google Scholar
Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of the normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629–636.Google Scholar
Farquhar, P. H., & Pratkanis, A. R. (1993). Decision structuring with phantom alternatives. Management Science, 39, 1214–1226.Google Scholar
Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenwald, A. G., Pratkanis, A. R., Leippe, M. R., & Baumgardner, M. H. (1986). Under what conditions does theory obstruct research progress? Psychological Review, 93, 216–229.Google Scholar
Horvitz, T., & Pratkanis, A. R. (2002). A laboratory demonstration of the fraudulent telemarketers’ 1-in-5 prize tactic. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 310–317.Google Scholar
Hovland, C. I., & Janis, I. L. (Eds.). (1959). Personality and persuasibility. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hyman, R. (1977). “Cold reading:” How to convince strangers that you know all about them. The Zetetic, Spring/Summer, 18–37. Online. http://www.skepdic.com/Hyman_cold_reading.htmGoogle Scholar
Kirmani, A., & Campbell, M. C. (2009). Taking the target’s perspective: The persuasion knowledge model. In Wänke, M. (Ed.). Social psychology of consumer behavior (pp. 297–316). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Lewin, K. (1947). Group decision and social change. In Newcomb, T. M. & Hartley, E. L. (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 330–344). New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., & Lohr, J. M. (Eds.). (2003). Science and pseudoscience in clinical psychology. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Lord, C. G., Lepper, M. R., & Ross, L. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2098–2109.Google Scholar
Lund, F. H. (1925). The psychology of belief. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 20, 174–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, R. D. (1959). A review of relationships between personality and performance in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 241–270.Google Scholar
Marion County C.C. (2001). Oregon v. Publishers Clearinghouse. Preliminary Injunction Proceedings, No. 00C-10706.Google Scholar
McGuire, W. J. (1968). Personality and susceptibility to social influence. In Borgatta, E. F. & Lambert, W. W. (Eds)., Handbook of personality theory and research (pp. 1130–1187). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Milgram, S., Bickman, L., & Berkowitz, L. (1969). Note on the drawing power of crowds of different size. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 79–82.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R. (1989). The cognitive representation of attitudes. In Pratkanis, A. R., Breckler, S. J., & Greenwald, A. G. (Eds.), Attitude structure and function (pp. 71–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R. (1992). The cargo-cult science of subliminal persuasion. Skeptical Inquirer, 16, 260–272.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R. (2000). Altercasting as an influence tactic. In Terry, D. J. & Hogg, M. A. (Eds.), Attitudes, behavior, and social context (pp. 201–226). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R. (2007a). Social influence analysis: An index of tactics. In Pratkanis, A. R. (Ed.), The science of social influence: Advances and future progress (pp. 17–82). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R. (2007b). Why would anyone do or believe such a thing? A social influence analysis. In Sternberg, R. J., Roediger, III H. L., & Halpern, D. F. (Eds.), Critical thinking in psychology (pp. 232–250). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R. (2017). The (partial but) real crisis in social psychology: A social influence analysis of the causes and solutions. In Lilienfeld, S. O. & Waldman, I. D. (Eds.), Psychological science under scrutiny: Recent challenges and proposed solutions (pp. 141–163). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R., & Aronson, E. (2001). Age of propaganda: The everyday use and abuse of persuasion (Revised ed.). New York: W. H. Freeman/Holt.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R., Eskenazi, J., & Greenwald, A. G. (1994). What you expect is what you believe (but not necessarily what you get): A test of the effectiveness of subliminal self-help audiotapes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 15, 251–276.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R., & Farquhar, P. H. (1992). A brief history of research on phantom alternatives: Evidence for seven empirical generalizations about phantoms. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13, 103–122.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R., & Gliner, M. D. (2004). And when shall a little child lead them? Evidence for an altercasting theory of source credibility. Current Psychology, 23(4), 279–304. DOI:10.1007/s12144-004-1002-5Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (1989). A socio-cognitive model of attitude structure and function. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 22 (pp. 245–285). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R., & Shadel, D. (2005). Weapons of fraud: A source book for fraud fighters. Seattle, WA: AARP.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R., & Uriel, Y. (2011). The expert snare as an influence tactic: Surf, turf, and ballroom demonstrations of the compliance consequences of being altercast as an expert. Current Psychology, 30, 335–344.Google Scholar
Rucker, D. D., & Pratkanis, A. R. (2001). Projection as an interpersonal influence tactic: The effects of the pot calling the kettle black. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1494–1507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sagarin, B. J., Cialdini, R. B., Rice, W. E., & Serna, S. B. (2002). Dispelling the illusion of invulnerability: The motivations and mechanisms of resistance to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 526–541.Google Scholar
Sagarin, B. J., & Wood, S. W. (2007). Resistance to influence. In Pratkanis, A. R. (Ed.), The science of social influence: Advances and future progress (pp. 321–340). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Segal, J. (1957). Correlates of collaboration and resistance behavior among U.S. Army POWs in Korea. Journal of Social Issues, 13, 31–40.Google Scholar
Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thistlethwaite, D. (1950). Attitude and structure as factors in the distortion of reasoning. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 45, 442–458.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Toris, C., & DePaulo, B. M. (1984). Effects of actual deception and suspiciousness of deception on interpersonal perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1063–1073.Google Scholar
Turner, M. E., & Pratkanis, A. R. (1998). A social identity maintenance theory of groupthink. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 210–235.Google Scholar
Urbany, J. E., Bearden, W. O., & Weilbaker, D. C. (1988). The effect of plausible and exaggerated reference prices on consumer perceptions and price search. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 95–110.Google Scholar
Wang, T. H., & Katsev, R. D. (1990). Group commitment and resource conservation: Two field experiments on promoting recycling. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20, 265–275.Google Scholar
Wood, W., & Quinn, J. M. (2003). Forewarned and forearmed? Two meta-analysis syntheses of forewarning of influence appeals. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 119–138.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by