Journalism 614: Social Influence & Networks

Levels of Analysis Micro: (psychological): Individual-level phenomena Explanations: derived from individual differences Meso: (social-psychological / social-relational) Interactions between individuals E.g., dyads and social networks Macro: (social-structural): Societal-level phenomena Explanations: derived from group/social differences

Social Psychology of Opinion Mixes elements of: Psychology (micro) and sociology (macro) Psychological aspects: Methods: Experiments and Interviews Focus: cognition, perceptions, attitudes Sociological aspects: Methods: Surveys and Observation Focus: Group influence, norms

Political, Economic, Cultural Leaders Connections Between Elites and the Public Political, Economic, Cultural Leaders Contact mechanisms: -press events -advertising -reports -buzz /viral Perceptual mechanisms: -personal contact -reading mail/email -monitor social media -public opinion polls -perceptions of opinion Contact mechanisms: -personal contact -letters/email -social media production -feedback to mass media -opinion polls Perceptual mechanisms: -media coverage -commericals -personal contact -interpersonal talk Public

Macro-social Perspective Social Forces Public Opinion Social Consequences * Two types of macro-social questions….

Social Antecedents Social Forces Public Opinion * How do social factors shape opinions?

Social Effects Public Opinion Social Consequences What kinds of effects does public opinion have on society?

Social Forces & Opinion Influence of culture, social norms Influence of conformity/compliance Influence of social networks/social circle Influence of group affiliations/memberships Influence of major social events

Opinion & Social Consequences Effects on politics and society Elections and policy development Social movements and activism Effects on consumption and economy Consumer confidence and buying Political consumerism and products Effects on changing social norms

Research on Social Influence Considers effects of group settings on: attitudes, opinion expression, behavior Largely based on experimental research Stems in part from interest in compliance and obedience to authority in WWII Asch – conformity experiment Milgram – compliance experiment Zimbardo – authority experiment

Asch’s Conformity Experiment Unambiguous situation Small group setting (10-12) Uniform incorrect assessment Nearly 1/3 concur with incorrect assessment What is the nature of the effect?: Perception? Opinion expression?

Conformity vs. Conversion Agreeing publicly with majority opinion independent of own view Going along with the group Pressure toward unanimity Conversion: Privately adopting new view Opinion expressed and acted upon

Milgram’s Obedience Experiment Design (set up as a learning study) Subject (teacher) and Actor (learner) Teacher administers shocks for mistakes Shocks get dangerously high Student grunts, shouts, screams, falls silent 65% continue to highest level when prodded

Zimbardo’s Prison Experiment Dramatic simulation of prison life conducted in 1971 at Stanford University Planned two week full role-playing by college students randomly assigned as guards or prisoners Had to be ended after just six days In only a few days, guards became sadistic, torture prisoners, prisoners became anxious/depressed Evidence of the role of authority, group divisions, obedience, and how easily we fall into group roles

Other Factors in Group Influence Social comparison Opinions vary depending on perceptions of: Self in relation to various reference groups Who do I compare myself to? Social categorization: Individual opinions influenced by: Group membership - race, gender Assigned social roles - profession Social positions within groups and society

Social Influence on Opinion Early voting studies (Lazarsfeld et al.) found strong social influence Two-stage model: Media  opinion leader  average citizen Emergence of social network theories Importance of opinion leaders Who are the influencers?

Social Networks – Concepts Network composed of interpersonal ties to conversational partners Ties can be of varying strength Shape of network changes by topic One’s political discussion network is likely different from one’s sports talk network Opinion leaders vary by topic too

Social Networks – Size Large networks are those in which one has many discussion partners: Small networks are those in which one has few discussion partners: B E G F C A Self B C A Self

Social Networks - Heterogeneity Heterogeneous networks feature diverse discussion partners Homogeneous networks feature similar discussion partners B D C A Self B D C A Self

The importance of talk How does talk shape opinions?: Allows exchange of information Provides exposure to alternate views Prompts reflection on opinions, information Gives cues about broadly held views Forms central act of ‘public sphere’

Frequency of talk High frequency of talk linked to: higher levels of political interest Higher levels of social participation High frequency of talk is linked to: More consistent opinions More complex opinions Better informed opinions

Diversity of talk Network heterogeneity leads to: Diversity of talk promotes: Greater tolerance Diversity of talk is linked to: More consistent opinions More complex opinions Better informed opinions Effects on participation are less clear

Promise and Perils Social influence and social networks have both positive and negative consequences Social influence encourages conformity and compliance, often in dangerous ways Social networks and conversation encourage learning, sophistication, tolerance, and action Need to consider how group influences, especially opinion leaders, are central to this