PS270 Lecture Notes - Lecture 14: Pluralistic Ignorance, Group Polarization, Social Proof
Decision Dilemma – chess maneuver
● Have to state possible odds you would be comfortable in giving him advice to play this
risky maneuver (chance out of 10)
● When participants thought about that alone, they recommended a 30% risk of chance
● When brought into small groups they became more tolerant of risk and picked a ten%
chance of winning
● When in groups, decisions are often riskier
● Don’t simply become riskier, but in fact become more polarized. The situations generally
given in these studies were generally ones where ppl favour a risky decision anyways. If
situation generally breeds caution, ppl in groups were even more cautious.
● Group polarization à cautious items become more cautious, risky items become more
risky
● The tendency for groups to make decisions that are more extreme than initial inclinations
of their members
● Two explanations
○ 1) Persuasive arguments you get arguments favouring your initial position,
making it more extreme - Informative influence.
○ 2) Social comparison à want to hold desireable opinions and outshine others -
Normative influence.
● Pluralistic ignorance
○ Groups establish norms for behavior
○ Many ppl actually misperceive the norm
○ They don’t realize that others advice may be more extreme than your own
○ The discussion reveals this fact, and leads to more extreme recommendations
○ When you believe your private attitudes differ from others, even though your
public behaviors are the same (asking questions in class, drinking, etc)
○ Drinking on campus study: surveyed student on campus, people often perceived
that students comfort with heavy drinking was much higher than what ppl actually
indicated.
○ Discussion groups: women met to discuss the role of alc on campus life.
Assessed personal beliefs ahead of time. All women believed the others were
more comfortable with excessive drinking than they were, and also believed that
they also gave the impression that they were more comfortable. Didn’t think own
behavior was reflective of true beliefs, but though others behavior was.6ygt
TOPIC
Prosocial Behavior
Prosocial Behavior: any act performed with the goal of benefiting another person (not always
selfless) - an act
Altruism: desire to help another person even if it involves no benefit, or even a cost, to the
helper. - a motive
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Have to state possible odds you would be comfortable in giving him advice to play this risky maneuver (chance out of 10) When participants thought about that alone, they recommended a 30% risk of chance. When brought into small groups they became more tolerant of risk and picked a ten% chance of winning. When in groups, decisions are often riskier. Don"t simply become riskier, but in fact become more polarized. The situations generally given in these studies were generally ones where ppl favour a risky decision anyways. If situation generally breeds caution, ppl in groups were even more cautious. Group polarization cautious items become more cautious, risky items become more risky. The tendency for groups to make decisions that are more extreme than initial inclinations of their members. 1) persuasive arguments you get arguments favouring your initial position, making it more extreme - informative influence. 2) social comparison want to hold desireable opinions and outshine others -
