1. 2.People who are similar (to us) are more likable. Suedfeld et. al., 1971: Antiwar petition

2. British Negotiation Study (Bulryne) 9 year study of professional contract and labor negotiators Negotiators categorized as “average” or “skilled” based on success How do negotiators spend their time in discussion? Average Skilled 2.People who are similar (to us) are more likable. Emphasize Dissimilarity Emphasize Similarity

3. Stanford/Northwestern Online Negotiation Game Two negotiation conditions: “Strictly Business”: personal talk prohibited 2.People who are similar (to us) are more likable.

4. Online Negotiation Study Stanford vs. Northwestern MBA students negotiate via internet Two negotiation conditions: “Strictly Business”: personal talk prohibited “Soc. Info. Exchange”: personal talk allowed in first 30 minutes

5. 2.People who are similar (to us) are more likable. Van Baaren et al: Mimicry and Tipping

6. 2.People who are similar (to us) are more likable. Van Baaren et al: Mimicry and Tipping Problems: Waitress not naïve; did mimicry inrease Tip size or did non-mimicry decrease it?

7. 3. People who cooperate with us are more likable. Robbers Cave Experiment (Sherif et al., 1958) –22 5 th grade boys in summer camp in 1954 –Divided into two groups (“Eagles” and “Rattlers”) for one week –Groups interact in competitions (e.g., football, tug-of-war) –rivalry became violent

8. 3. People who cooperate with us are more likable. Robbers Cave Experiment (Sherif et al., 1958) How to reduce violence and prejudice? 1. Neutral, non-competitive activities (e.g., watching movies) didn’t help. 2.Cooperating to solve staged “emergencies” (e.g., towing camp truck) did help eventually.

9. 3. People who cooperate with us are more likable. Group 1: Ethnic/gender mix of 5 kids learning about pets Child 1 Canaries Child 2 Hamsters Child 3 Goldfish Child 4 Dogs Child 5 Cats The Jigsaw Classroom (Aronson et al., 1978) a.Divide class into 5-6 person groups b. Each student responsible for one part of lesson plan

10. 3. People who cooperate with us are more likable. Group 1: Ethnic/gender mix of 5 kids learning about pets Child 1 Canaries Child 2 Hamsters Child 3 Goldfish Child 4 Dogs Child 5 Cats Canary expert group Hamster expert group Goldfish expert group Dog expert group Cat expert group The Jigsaw Classroom (Aronson et al., 1978) a.Divide class into 5-6 person groups b.Each student responsible for one part of lesson plan (“expert”) c.Experts from different groups gather to learn about topic

11. 3. People who cooperate with us are more likable. Group 1: Ethnic/gender mix of 5 kids learning about pets Child 1 Canaries Child 2 Hamsters Child 3 Goldfish Child 4 Dogs Child 5 Cats Canary expert group Hamster expert group Goldfish expert group Dog expert group Cat expert group The Jigsaw Classroom (Aronson et al., 1978) a.Divide class into 5-6 person groups b.Each student responsible for one part of lesson plan (“expert”) c.Experts from different groups gather to learn about topic d.Experts return to their groups to teach others about topic.

12. 3. People who cooperate with us are more likable. OutcomeMinority StudentsMajority Students # of classmate friendships Increase # of fights, disagreements Decrease Reported belief in ethnic stereotypes Decrease Reported liking of school IncreaseNo Difference Test PerformanceIncreaseNo Difference Jigsaw vs. Traditional Classroom Outcomes

13. 3. People who cooperate with us are more likable. Good Cop/Bad Cop (clip) Bad Cop: offers threats, abuse Good Cop: offers advice and protection from bad cop Perceptual Contrast (good vs. bad) Reciprocity (protection for confession) Likability (“cooperation” = likability)

14. 4.People we associate with good (bad) things are more (less) likable. + + + Your photo here Celebrity Source

15. 4.People we associate with good (bad) things are more (less) likable. + + + Your photo here Good Food Lunch Host The “Luncheon Technique” (Razran, 1938)

16. The Mum Effect (Tesser & Rosen, 1970) Q: Why do people “keep mum”? A1: They don’t want to hurt people’s feelings. A2: Don’t want to be associated with bad news! G.L. just received a call from his parents. They said they have GOOD news. G.L. just received a call from his parents. They said they have GOOD news. Your parents called. (~100%) They have good news. (~75%) Your parents called. (~100%) They have good news. (~75%) Experimenter ParticipantConfederate (G.L.) G.L. just received a call from his parents. They said they have BAD news. G.L. just received a call from his parents. They said they have BAD news. Your parents called. (~100%) They have bad news. (~20%) Your parents called. (~100%) They have bad news. (~20%) BUT: When anonymous, they don’t mind transmitting bad news.

17. 5. Familiar people are more likable. Frequency of Exposure and Liking in the Classroom (from Moreland & Beach, 1992) # of Times the RA came to Class Attraction Rating

19. Mere Exposure effect (Zajonc 1968, 1980)

21. Exposure Explanation for the Mere Exposure Effect –Fluency (Bornstein and D’Agostino 1994): high levels of exposure make it easier to process the information, which makes consumers like it more. It is an automatic, unconscious process. PERCEPTION

22. What product is being advertised? CS  Cowboy, “Swish” US  Marlboro, Nike