Psychology theories A -

Acquiescence Effect Acquired Needs Theory Activation Theory Actor-Observer Difference Affect Infusion Model Affect Perseverance Aggression Ambiguity effect Amplification Hypothesis Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic Anticipatory Regret see Regret Theory Appraisal Theory Attachment Theory Attachment Style Attitude Attitude-Behavior Consistency Attribution Theory Automatic Believing Augmenting Principle Availability Heuristic - B - Balance Theory see Consistency Theory Barnum Effect see Personal Validation Fallacy Belief Bias Belief Perseverance Below-Average Effect Ben Franklin Effect Bias blind spot Bias Correction Biased sampling Body language see Non-verbal Behavior Bounded Rationality Buffer effect of Social Support Bystander Effect - C - Cannon-Bard Theory of Emotion Cautious Shift see Risky Shift Phenomenon Central Route see Elaboration Likelihood Model Certainty Effect Charismatic Terms see Ultimate Terms Choice Shift see Risky Shift Phenomenon Choice-supportive bias Choice Theory see Control Theory Classical Conditioning Clustering Illusion Coercion Cognitive Appraisal Theories of Emotion Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive Evalution Theory Commitment Communication Accommodation Theory Compensation Confirmation Bias Conjunction Fallacy Consistency Theory Constructivism Contact Hypothesis Control Theory Conversion Contagion Conversion Theory Correspondence Bias Correspondent Inference Theory Counter-Attitudinal Advocacy (CAA) Counterfactual Thinking Covariation Model Credibility - D - Decisions Deindividuation Devil Terms see Ultimate Terms Disconfirmation bias Discounting Dissonance see Cognitive Dissonance Drive Theory Durability bias - E - Ego Depletion Elaboration Likelihood Model Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis Endowed Progress Effect Endowment Effect Epistemological Weighting Hypothesis Equity Theory ERG Theory Escape Theory Expectancy Violations Theory Expectancy Theory Explanatory Coherence Extended Parallel Process Model External Justification Ethnocentric Bias see Group Attribution Error Extrinsic Motivation - F - False Consensus Effect False Memory Syndrome Fatigue Focalism Focusing Effect Forced Compliance Forer Effect see Personal Validation Fallacy Four-factor Model Filter Theory Framing Friendship Frustration-Aggression Theory Fundamental Attribution Error - G - Gambler's Fallacy Goal-Setting Theory God Terms see Ultimate Terms Group Attribution Error Group Locomotion Hypothesis Group Polarization Phenomenon Group-serving Attributional Bias see Group Attribution Error Groupthink - H - Halo Effect Hedonic Relevance see Correspondent Inference Theory Heuristic-Systematic Persuasion Model Hostile Media Phenomenon Hot Hand Phenomenon Hindsight Bias Hyperbolic discounting - I - Illusion of Asymmetric Insight Illusory Correlation Imagination Inflation see False Memory Syndrome Imagined Memory Impact Bias Implicit Personality Theory Impression Management Inattentional Blindness Information Bias Information Manipulation Theory Information Processing Theory Informational Social Influence In-Group Bias In-Group Linguistic Bias see In-Group Bias Inoculation Insufficient Punishment Interpersonal Deception Theory Interpersonal Expectancy Effect Interview Illusion Intrinsic motivation Investment Model Invisible Correlation see Illusory Correlation Involvement Ironic Reversal - J - James-Lange Theory of Emotion Justification of Effort Just-world phenomenon - K - Kin Selection see Prosocial Behavior - L - Lake Wobegon effect Language Expectancy Theory Law of Attraction Lazarus Theory see Appraisal Theory Leader-Member Exchange Theory Learned Helplessness Theory Learned Need Theory see Acquired Needs Theory Least Interest Principle Linguistic Inter-group Bias Locus of Control Looking-glass Self Love - M - Matching Hypothesis Mental Models see Schema Mere Exposure Theory Mere Thought Effect Minimum Group Theory Minority Influence Mood-Congruent Judgment Mood memory Multi-Attribute Choice - N - Negative Face see Politeness Theory Neglect of probability bias Non-Verbal Behavior Normative Social Influence Norms see Social Norms - O - Objectification Object Relations Theory Operant Conditioning Opponent-Process Theory. Optimism Bias see Valence Effect Other-Enhancement see Impression Management Outcome Dependency Out-Group Bias see In-Group Bias Out-Group Homogeneity Overconfidence Barrier Overjustification Effect - P - Perceived Behavioral Control see Planned Behavior Theory Perceptual Contrast Effect Perceptual Salience Peripheral Route see Elaboration Likelihood Model Personal Construct Theory Personal Validation Fallacy Personalism see Correspondent Inference Theory Persuasion Persuasive Arguments Theory Placebo Effect Planning Fallacy Planned Behavior Theory Plasticity Pluralistic Ignorance Polarization Politeness Theory Positive Face see Politeness Theory Positive psychology Positive Test Strategy see Confirmation Bias Positivity Effect Post-Decision Dissonance Power The Pratfall Effect Primacy Effect Priming Private Acceptance see Informational Social Influence Propinquity Effect Prosocial Behavior Prospect Theory Pseudo-certainty effect see Certainty Effect Psychological Accounting Public Compliance see Informational Social Influence Pygmalion Effect see Self-Fulfilling Prophecy - Q - - R - Rationalization Trap Reactance Theory Reasoned Action, see Planned Behavior Theory Realistic Conflict Theory Recency Effect Reciprocity Norm Regret Theory Reinforcement-Affect Theory Relative Deprivation Theory Relationship Dissolution, see Terminating Relationships Representativeness Heuristic Repulsion Hypothesis Restraint Bias Risk Preference Risky Shift Phenomenon Roles - S - Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis Satisficing Scapegoat Theory Scarcity Principle Schema Selective Exposure Selective Perception Self-Affirmation Theory Self-Completion Theory Self-Determination Theory Self-Discrepancy Theory Self-Enhancement see Impression Management Self-Enhancing Bias see Self-Serving Bias Self-Evaluation Maintenance Theory Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Self-Monitoring Behavior Self-Perception Theory Self-Protective Bias see Self-Serving Bias Self-Regulation Theory Self-Serving Bias Self-Verification Theory Side Bet Theory Sleeper Effect Small World Theory Social Comparison Theory Social Desirability Bias Social Exchange Theory Social Facilitation Social Identity Theory Social Impact Theory Social Influence Social Judgment Theory Social Learning Theory Social Loafing Social Norms Social Penetration Theory Social Proof see Informational Social Influence Social Representation Theory Social-Role Theory Sociobiology Theory Source Credibility Speech Act Theory Spiral of Silence Theory Stage Theory Stereotypes Stockholm Syndrome Story Model Stimulus-Value-Role Model Strategic Contingencies Theory Subjective Norms see Planned Behavior Theory Subliminal Messages Sunk-Cost Effect Symbolic Convergence Theory Symbolic Interaction Theory - T - Terminating relationships Theory of Mind Three-factor Theory see Acquired Needs Theory Transtheoretical Model of Change Two-Factor Theory of Emotion - U - Ultimate Attribution Error Ultimate Terms Uncertainty Reduction Theory Unconscious Thought Theory Urban-Overload Hypothesis - V - Valence Effect VIE Theory see Expectancy Theory - W - Weak Ties Theory Wishful Thinking see Valence Effect Worse-Than-Average Effect see Below-Average Effect - X - - Y - Yale Attitude Change Approach A Acquiescence Effect

Description

When asked a question by another person, our answer is based not just on a rational consideration of what is being asked. In particular, our identity needs lead us to consider how we will appear to others.

We thus will tend to answer more in the positive rather than the negative, particularly if a leading question is used. We seek to acquiesce to the needs and direction of others, particularly when:

 They seem to be a superior in some way.

 They have a need whereby we can easily help them.

 Answering the question fully seems like hard work.

People thus tend to agree with one-sided statements. They will also agree with two contradictory statements when they are framed for agreement.

Example

If you were asked 'Do you think the government makes mistakes?', you may well say yes. If you were asked whether the government generally gets it right, you may also agree.

Lawyers will ask complex questions of people in the witness box, who may give in and agree rather try to unravel what is being asked of them.

A butcher asks a customers 'Do you want the best cut?'. The customers agrees.

So What?

Using it

Use leading questions to get people to agree with you. Use neutral questions if you want a more honest response.

Defending

Before you answer a question, consider the bias in the question and also the bias in your head. Don't say 'yes' just to make others happy. Acquired Needs Theory

Description

Need are shaped over time by our experiences over time. Most of these fall into three general categories of needs:

 Achievement (nAch)

 Affiliation (nAff)

 Power (nPow)

Acquired Needs Theory is also known as the Three-Need Theory orLearned Need Theory.

We have different preferences

We will tend have one of these needs that affects us more powerfully than others and thus affects our behaviors:

 Achievers seek to excel and appreciate frequent recognition of how well they are doing. They will avoid low risk activities that have no chance of gain. They also will avoid high risks where there is a significant chance of failure.

 Affiliation seekers look for harmonious relationships with other people. They will thus tend to conform and shy away from standing out. The seek approval rather than recognition.

 Power seekers want power either to control other people (for their own goals) or to achieve higher goals (for the greater good). They seek neither recognition nor approval from others -- only agreement and compliance. Identifying preferences

A common way of discovering our tendencies towards these is with a Thematic Apperception Test, which is a set of black-and-white pictures on cards, each showing an emotionally powerful situation. The person is presented with one card at a time and asked to make up a story about each situation.

So what?

Using it

Challenge achievers with stretching goals.

Offer affiliation-seekers safety and approval.

Beware of personal power-seekers trying to turn the tables on you or use other Machiavellian methods. Make sure you have sufficient power of your own, or show how you can help them achieve more power.

Defending

Understand your own tendencies. Curb the excesses and, especially if you seek affiliation, beware of those who would use this against you and for their own benefit alone.

Activation Theory

Description

Also known as 'Arousal Theory', activation theory describes how mental arousal is necessary for effective functioning in that we need a certain level of activation in order to be sufficiently motivated to achieve goals, do good work and so on.

The Yerkes-Dodson Law points out how people need a certain amount of activation to be motivated but not have too much stimulation. We have an upper limit to activation, beyond which we become overly stressed and fall intosatisficing. People will seek activation through different types of stimulation, including novelty, complexity, variation and uncertainty. At a low level of activation, performance is decreased due to three factors:

 A lack of alertness

 Dulling of the senses

 Limited muscular coordination

These in turn can lead to increased error or accident, and slower completion of tasks. Underactivation also leads to boredom and seeking of alternative stimulation (including by sabotage), unless the person has a low activation preference, where they are happy to daydream or otherwise be lazy.

Example

A person designing a job considers carefully the level of activation needed and includes just enough challenges and stimulation to keep the job-holder interested but not so much that they get overloaded.

So What?

Using it

When seeking to get people to things for you, ensure the work is stimulating and keeps their attention.

Defending

When others are keeping you busy without any time for yourself, pause and wonder what it is all about. Actor/Observer Difference

Description

We tend to see other people’s behaviors as being caused by their personal disposition, whilst perceiving our own actions as due to situational factors.

We also tend to see ourselves as being less stable and predictable, whilst others are assumed to be more one-dimensional, with less possible behaviors.

This can be due to the fact that we have far more consistency and distinctiveness data about ourselves than observers have (see Covariation Model). That is, we know better how and why our behavior varies between different situations. People watching us have to guess.

The effect can be reversed when we put ourselves in the place of the other person, such as when we like them. In these cases, we will make dispositional attributions.

We will also reverse the actor/observer difference when we are making negative conclusions. We thus make situational attributions when we make mistakes and dispositional attributions when other people do something reprehensible.

Research

Storms (1973) sat two people facing each other for a conversation, with two observers, one either side. Afterwards, they were all asked to make dispositional and situational attributions about the conversationalists. The observers made more attributions to the disposition of the conversationalists they were facing. After watching a videotape, the conversationalists made even more situational attributions about themselves.

So what?

Using it

Beware of causing conflict and losing trust by making internal attributions about other people who are likely to be making external attributions about their own behavior. Demonstrate empathy by putting yourself in their place. Affect Infusion Model

Description

Mood affects our judgments, but not consistently. For the mood to have an effect on our judgment, it has to override the forces that would normally lead to the 'standard' judgment.

Mood has no effect when:

 We are making judgments that are based on direct retrieval of a simple pre-formed conclusion.

 We are trying to satisfy strong directional goals.

Mood does have an effect when:

 We are using short-cut methods, such as heuristics, for making decisions.

o Mood sneaks in at the subconscious level, biasing our judgments without us noticing. At this level we typically use 'How would I feel?' type of evaluations, which are clearly affected by our current mood.

 Elaborate reasoning, where we are using substantive processes.

o Mood is not so strong at the decision level here. It does have an effect, however, at the more detailed level such as when what we recall is biased by our mood.

Example

If I know I like bacon, then my mood will not affect my having bacon for breakfast.

So what? Using it

Do not try to use mood to affect judgments for simple decisions. Create the mood and then distract people or lead them to short-cut decisions. When they are thinking in detail, help them recall information that is congruent to both their mood and also your desired outcome.

Defending

Notice your mood. Beware of hasty decisions. Include a mood check in your analytical decision processes.

Affect Perseverance

Description

Affect Perseverance occurs where an emotional preference continues, even after the thoughts that gave rise to the original emotion are invalidated.

Feelings are often independent of facts and evidence, and once initiated tend to take on a life of their own. Almost by definition, they are not rational.

Affect Perseverance is similar to Belief Perseverance.

Research

Participants in a study by Sherman and Kim learned associations between neutral stimuli, Chinese ideographs and affectively valenced English words. They measured whether participants preferred the ideographs associated with positive English words to the ideographs associated with negative English words. Then they invalidated the cognition by associating new, neutral English words with the same ideographs. Despite this change in cognition, the affective preference persevered.

Example

A woman falls in love with a man because he is kind to her. When he becomes abusive, her affection remains.

So What?

Using it

To get someone emotionally engaged with an item or topic, start with some rational purpose that makes sense to them. Then, when the emotions are established, slowly ignore and remove the rationale. Reinforce the emotion as its own justification.

Defending

Pay attention to the rationale behind your feelings. Why do you feel that way towards things? What was the original reason? Is that reason still valid?

Aggression

Description Although aggression is a natural emotion, it is a very social act. It is learned from parents, peers and the media and people are likely to be more aggressive when they believe it will increase their social standing. It can also be cathartic, allowing us to let of steam.

Aggression also increases when:

 You think you are safe from response.

 The other person deliberately acts against you.

 You hurt, physically or emotionally (not necessarily caused by the other person).

 You have been drinking alcohol or taking other stimulants.

 Testosterone is present.

 There was aggression in your early life.

 You think you are getting less than you deserve.

 You have been attacked and are defending or responding.

 You blame your victim and then take further revenge.

 You watched a lot of violence on TV, especially when you were a child.

Seeing violence, whether it is real-life or via the media gives legitimacy, teaches people how to do it and desensitizes them to the horrors.

Research

Phillips (1983, 1986) found that homicides increased after a well-publicized boxing match. When white boxers lost, more white men were killed, and vice versa.

So What?

Using it

Feign aggression in order to get short-term immediate response.

If you really do feel aggressive, take a break to cool down. Otherwise you'll likely do something you regret later.

Defending

Severe punishment usually requires significant aggression and does not reduce it. It is more effective to use the threat of mild punishment. Give people space to vent their frustrations by such as competitive sports. Even letting them say ‘I am angry’ will help. Apology also reduces anger. Teach them empathy. Be a model non- aggressive person.

Apologize (even it if is not your fault). Say that it will not happen again. Empathize with their pain (but not with their aggression or aggressive acts). Show that you are human (defend against them dehumanizing you).

Ambiguity Effect

Description

When people make choices, sometimes they have a good understanding of the probability of something happening whilst other times the situation is ambiguous, whereby the probability of the event is unknown. In such situations, people are more likely to choose the former situation, preferring a known probability over an unknown probability.

Taking a decision on something that may not happen is a risk. When the probability is unknown this can increase the sense of discomfort beyond even that of a known low probability.

Example

I know that there is at best a moderate chance of my winning a local singing competition as the local singers are good. There is a competition in the next town but I do not know how good the singers are there. Rather than 'risk it' I just enter for the local competition.

So What?

Using it

To get people to choose an option, ensure they have a view on how likely it is to succeed for them. To dissuade them from other options, show that little is known about the chances of success there.

Defending

Try assessing the probability range for ambiguous choices. Amplification Hypothesis

Description

Displaying certainty about an attitude when talking with another person will act to increase and harden that attitude. When the attitude displayed is more uncertain, then it will act to soften the attitude.

Using an emotional attack on a cognitive attitude will increase resistance, whilst a cognitive attack will be more effective. The same effect happens in reverse, where a logical argument has little impact on a person who is emotional whilst an emotional argument is more powerful.

Research

Clarkson, Tbormala and Rucker found that increasing attitude certainty strengthened attitudes and increased resistance to persuasion when the attitudes was univalent but weakened them when they were ambivalent.

Example A cleric wants to persuade another towards a religion. When the target person states opposing beliefs, the cleric shows vague agreement. When the person states better beliefs, the cleric becomes more confirmatory.

So What?

Using it

To persuade another person, align your projected attitude with theirs. If you are non-aligned you will only act to create resistance.

Defending

To put off a persuader, mis-match their attitudes. When they are logical, be emotional, and vice versa.

Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic

Description

We tend to base estimates and decisions on known ‘anchors’ or familiar positions, with an adjustment relative to this start point. We are better at relative thinking than absolute thinking. The Primacy Effect and anchoring may combine, for example if a list of possible sentences given to a jury, they will be anchored by the first option.

Research

Englich and colleagues found that even judges can be influenced by this. Some judges had to imagine a sentence being greater or less than one year, whilst others were asked whether the sentence would be more or less than three years. In later imaginary sentencing, the judges were clearly influenced by the earlier anchoring.

Example

If asked whether the population of Turkey was greater or less than 30 million, you might give one or other answer. If then asked what you thought the actual population was, you would very likely guess somewhere around 30 million, because you have been anchored by the previous answer.

So What?

Using it

If a negotiation starts with one party suggesting a price or condition, then the other party is likely to base their counter-offer relative to this given anchor. So start a good way from your real position (but beware of over-doing this). When giving choices, put the ones you want them to choose at the beginning.

Defending

If the other person makes the first bid, do not assume that this is close to their final price. Anticipatory regret/Regret Theory

Description

People know that when they make a decision they will feel regret if they make the wrong decision. They thus take this anticipated regret into account when they decide.

This is probably what makes them loss-averse.

When thinking ahead, they may experienceanticipatory regret, as they realize that they may regret in the future. This can be a powerful dissuader or create a specific motivation to do one thing in order to avoid something else.

Example

When I go to buy a car, I am so terrified of buying a heap of junk, I read many magazines and ask lots of knowledgeable friends first. And I listen to their advice rather than buying the car that I think looks the nicest.

So what?

Using it

Remind the other person of what they may lose if they do not agree with you. Show what they may regret.

Defending

Remember to anticipate the joy of gain. Be realistic about gains and losses. Appraisal Theory

Description

Things happen. We appraise them, assessing them against various criteria. We then feel emotions based on those appraisals.

We do this in real-time, appraising and feeling as we go. We also do in reflectively, thinking further about what has happened and what may happen. When we think of the past or future we hence may feel good or bad about it.

Primary appraisal is an assessment of how significant an event is for a person, including whether it is a threat or opportunity. Secondary appraisal then considers one's ability to cope or take advantage of the situation.

A structural model of appraisal describes the relationships between:

 Perception: The environment and the person's perception of this

 Appraisal: The person's appraisal processes that evaluate the perceived environment in terms of values on a set of measures called appraisal dimensions.

 Mediation: The processes that relate appraisal values to the person's emotions.

A process model of appraisal describes the detail of cognitive operations, mechanisms and dynamics by which the appraisal happens. In other words, the structural model is the static map and the process model is the dynamic operation.

This is a cognitive approach to understanding emotions. Other theories view emotion as more reactive, without the opportunity to think. Indeed, we sometimes do not get the chance to think, for example when a fierce creature leaps out at us and we react with animal instinct that short- circuits the slower cortical appraisal. However, such reactive emotion is not necessarily how we feel in all situations. Originated in the 1940s by Magda Arnold, research was taken up in the 1970s by Richard Lazarus.

Appraisal Theory is a Cognitive Appraisal Theory. It is also known as Lazarus Theory, after the originator.

Example

I see someone running towards me. I don't recognize them and feel afraid they may be going attack me. Then I recognize them as a friend, reappraise the situation and feel a sequence of relief and joy.

So What?

Using it

Design your interactions with others to create the appraisal and consequent emotions that you desire in them. You can also work backwards from their apparent emotions to discover their appraisal (maybe also you could ask questions to elicit this).

Reframing is a common way of changing how people appraise and react to the things.

Defending

When you feel something, rather than just reacting quickly reflect on what appraisal you made that led you to that feeling. If you change the appraisal, you can change how you feel.

Attachment Theory

Description

Infants have a number of component instinctual responses that bind the infant to the mother and vice versa, including sucking, clinging, and following, as well as the signaling behaviors of smiling and crying. These develop during the first year and continue through life into healthy adult relationships.

When attached people (attachment figures) are separated three phases of separation response appear:

 Protest (related to separation anxiety)  Despair (related to grief and mourning)

 Denial or Detachment (related to defence mechanisms, especially repression)

Secure attachment is significantly related to maternal sensitivity. If the mother does not feel attached then the infant will not show secure attachment behavior.

Note that two-way attachment is not the same as one-way dependency. An affectional bond may be one-way (eg. child to parent figure) or two-way (eg. a married couple) and leads to the person seeking to be physically close to the particular person to which they are attached. If they are separated, the person feels sadness and distress.

As children develop, so does their motivational style going from fixed action patterns to to complex plan hierarchies with various sub-goals and ongoing goal correction.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Bowlby studied both attachment and loss, as the breaking of an attachment leads to a reversal in an equivalent sense of loss, which can have a deeply depressive effect.

Research

Ainsworth’s research with many mothers and children showed three infant attachment patterns:

 Securely attached infants cried little and seemed content to explore in the presence of mother;

 Insecurely attached infants cried frequently, even when held by their mothers, and explored little

 Not-yet attached infants manifested no differential behavior to the mother.

Babies whose mothers had been highly responsive to crying during the early months now tended to cry less, relying for communication on facial expressions, gestures, and vocalizations. Those whose mothers had provided much tender holding during the first quarter sought contact less often during the fourth quarter.

So What?

Using attachment theory in psychotherapy is the reappraisal of inadequate, outdated working models of self in relation to attachment figures. This is a particularly difficult task if important others, especially parents, have forbidden their review.

A person with inadequate and rigid working models of attachment relations is likely to impose these models on interactions with the therapist -- which is that something that the therapist must beware, of course. Using it

Understand the other person's attachment style and hence create attachment with them using subtle use of primitive connection mechanisms.

Defending

When others attempt to attach with you, watch for the methods they use and make a conscious, rather than unconscious, decision whether or not to respond.

Attachment Style

Description

People attach themselves to others in different ways, possibly based on very early parental relationships. These include:

 Secure Attachment Style: Trusting, without concerns for abandonment, feeling self- worth and being liked.

 Avoidant Attachment Style: Suppression of needs due to repeated rejection. Difficulty in forming intimate relationships.

 Anxious/Ambivalent Attachment Style: Worry that others will not reciprocate intimacy. Caused by inconsistent experiences.

Perhaps unexpectedly, secure people sustain longer and more fulfilling relationships. Heterosexual partners are often chosen from those with the same attachment style as the opposite-sex parent.

Research

Hazan and Shaver (1987) surveyed adults and found 56% were secure, 25% avoidant and 19% Anxious.

So What?

Using it

To build a relationship play the parent role, supporting the anxious and coaxing avoidant people. You can even play anxious yourself to give secure people someone to coddle. Defending

Know your own style, perhaps by looking at your opposite-sex parent. Do not let your style get in the way of what you want. Get therapy or otherwise shed harmful styles.

Attitude

Description

Attitudes are:

 Predispositions towards action.

 About or towards people and things.

 Evaluative of people, objects and ideas.

 Made up of emotional reactions (affective), thoughts and beliefs (cognitive), and actions (behavioral) components.

Strength of attitude increases with accessibility and knowledge about the topic in question. Attitudes are often learned from other people and are often a defining characteristic of groups. It can also be genetic. A strong attitude is very resistant to change.

Attitudes are often shown through deliberate signals. As such, they act as warning systems which allow other people to avoid conflict or making a social faux pas.

Attitudes are most easily changed through social influence and cognitive dissonance.

So What? Using it

To change attitude, spot and match the balance of affective/cognitive/behavioral components, especially in the person’s self-image. Where there is affective attention, offer emotional arguments. For cognitive listeners, use a rational argument. For the behaviorally focused, do something.

Resisting

Understand your own attitudes and how they appear to other people. When changing your attitude in the company of other people, notice what is causing the change. If one person in particular seems to be pressing your buttons, stop being a puppet. If you cannot stop yourself, leave the room.

Attitude-Behavior Consistency

Description

Our attitudes (predispositions to behavior) and actual behaviors are more likely to align if the following factors are true:

 Our attitude and behavior are both constrained to very specific circumstances.

 There have been many opportunities to express attitude through behavior.

 We have a history of attitude-behavior consistency.

 The attitudes are based on personal experience, rather than being copied from others.

 The attitudes are proven by past experience.  There is no social desirability bias, where the presence of others will lead us into uncharacteristic behavior.

 We are low in self-monitoring, so we do not distract

 The attitude is strongly held and is around core beliefs.

So What?

Using it

If you want people to behave in a certain way, check out the above list before assuming their attitude will actually lead to the desired behavior.

Defending

Beware of causing confusion and sending mixed messages if you act outside of your visible attitudes.

Attribution Theory

Description We all have a need to explain the world, both to ourselves and to other people, attributing causeto the events around us. This gives us a greater sense of control. When explaining behavior, it can affect the standing of people within a group (especially ourselves).

When another person has erred, we will often useinternal attribution, saying it is due to internal personality factors. When we have erred, we will more likely use external attribution, attributing causes to situational factors rather than blaming ourselves. And vice versa. We will attribute our successes internally and the successes of our rivals to external ‘luck’. When a football team wins, supporters say ‘we won’. But when the team loses, the supporters say ‘they lost’.

Our attributions are also significantly driven by our emotional and motivational drives. Blaming other people and avoiding personal recrimination are very real self-serving attributions. We will also make attributions to defend what we perceive as attacks. We will point to injustice in an unfair world. People with a high need to avoid failure will have a greater tendency to make attributions that put themselves in a good light.

We will even tend to blame victims (of us and of others) for their fate as we seek to distance ourselves from thoughts of suffering the same plight.

We will also tend to ascribe less variability to other people than ourselves, seeing ourselves as more multifaceted and less predictable than others. This may well because we can see more of what is inside ourselves (and spend more time doing this).

In practice, we often tend to go through a two-step process, starting with an automatic internal attribution, followed by a slower consideration of whether an external attribution is more appropriate. As with Automatic Believing, if we are hurrying or are distracted, we may not get to this second step. This makes internal attribution more likely than external attribution.

Research

Roesch and Amirkham (1997) found that more experienced athletes made less self-serving external attributions, leading them to find and address real causes and hence were better able to improve their performance.

So What?

Using it

Beware of losing trust by blaming others (i.e. making internal attributions about them). Also beware of making excuses (external attributions) that lead you to repeat mistakes and leads to Cognitive Dissonance in others when they are making internal attributions about you.

Defending

Watch out for people making untrue attributions. Automatic Believing

Description

People initially believe everything they see and hear ('seeing is believing'), but then rapidly assess whether it is true or not and consequently reject or continue to believe things. This assessment and decision takes time and energy, so the more tired people get or more distracted by other things, the more they are likely to believe false information.

Research

Gilbert, Tafarodi and Malone (1993) asked people to read crime reports and recommend prison sentences, including some false statements which were marked in red to indicate them as such. In normal situations, they were not affected by the false statements. However, when they were overloaded by additional work, the false statements affected their judgment.

So What?

Using it

Persuade people when they are tired distracted. Make then tired by spending a long time with them in exhausting activities, physical or mental. Distract them by giving them a lot of information or points of special interest and then slipping in the thing you really want them to believe.

Defending

Do not make commitments when you are tired or distracted. Watch out for people trying to persuade you during such times when you cannot give the matter your full and proper attention. Augmenting Principle

Description

When making a decision, each piece of evidence we glean will add in some way towards our decision. But when does additional evidence have a disproportionate effect?

Evidence has a disproportionate incremental effect when it is unexpected, when it goes against what is normal.

The discounting principle works in the opposite way, when we ignore evidence that we expected.

Example

A person who gets a high grade in a university history examination may be considered clever. But if you are told that the person is only 16, you may well consider them extremely clever. And if they were already a professor, you would be singularly unimpressed.

So What?

Using it

When giving evidence to support an argument, include surprises. Defending

If you are surprised by an argument, wonder why. Are they trying deliberately to shock you in to a decision?

Availability Heuristic

Description

We make a judgment based on what we can remember, rather than complete data. In particular, we use this for judging frequency or likelihood of events.

Because we remember recent experiences or reports, then the news has a significant effect on our decisions. After a news feature about a rape case, many women will be more nervous about going out alone at night. We have thus beenprimed by the news, increasing the accessibility of this information.

Various factors can affect availability. Things which are easier to imagine, for example if they are very vivid makes themselves more available. Things which are uncomfortable to think about can push people into denial, making these thoughts unavailable. This may also be why we can seem egocentric: because our own experiences are more available to us. Research

Schwartz (1991) asked some people for six examples when they had been assertive (most could think of six). He then asked other people for twelve examples, which few people could think of. He then asked both how assertive they were. The ‘six’ people scored themselves higher because their available data had a greater proportion of being assertive.

So What?

Using it

Make those things which you want the person to use for decision-making (perhaps at a later date) vivid and very easy to bring to mind, for example with repetition and visual language. Make those things that you do not want them to use vague, abstract, complex or uncomfortable.

Defending

When making important decisions, pause and think why you are deciding as you are. Is it because of information you have recently received? Who from? Why did they give it to you?

B Balance theory/Consistency Theory

Description

When our inner systems (beliefs, attitudes, values, etc.) all support one another and when these are also supported by external evidence, then we have a comfortable state of affairs. The discomfort of cognitive dissonance occurs when things fall out of alignment, which leads us to try to achieve a maximum practical level of consistency in our world. We also have a very strong need to believe we are being consistent with social norms. When there is conflict between behaviors that are consistent with inner systems and behaviors that are consistent with social norms, the potential threat of social exclusion often sways us towards the latter, even though it may cause significant inner dissonance.

Ways we achieve consistency between conflicting items include:

 Denial or ignoring : 'I didn't see it happen.'

 Rationalization and excuses : 'It was going to fall anyway.'

 Separation of items :'I don't use my car enough to make a difference .'

 Transcendence : 'Nobody is perfect.'

 Changing item : 'I'll be more careful next time.'

 Persuasion : 'I'm good, really, aren't I?'

Example

If you make a promise, you will feel bad if you do not keep it.

So what?

Using it

Highlight where people are acting inconsistently with beliefs, etc. that support your arguments. Show how what you want is consistent with the other person’s inner systems and social norms.

Defending

You will always be inconsistent in some areas. When changing to fit in with the inconsistencies that someone else is pointing out, think about the other, potentially more serious, inconsistencies that you will be opening up. Barnum Effect/Personal Validation Fallacy

Description

When asked to assess the accuracy of general words that supposedly describe our personality, we tend to score them as highly accurate. This is particularly true if they are positive and show us in a good light (although an occasional 'incisive' criticism can be very powerful).

This effect increases if we trust the source of the 'analysis' and believe that it is customized just for us.

This also works when we are asked to give or choose words that describe ourselves, where we tend to use sweeping generalisms that could describe many other people.

The personal validation fallacy is also called theForer effect, after its originator. It is also called the Barnum effect, after the old Barnum circus, because of the way that fortune tellers will amaze us with their accuracy by using broad terms based on a simple assessment of us.

Research

Forer gave students a 'personality test' and then gave them all the same general analysis, based on an combination of horoscopes. He then asked them to rate the accuracy of the analysis, from 1 (inaccurate) to 5 (accurate). They gave an average score of 4.26.

Example

When did you last read a newspaper horoscope about you and thought it quite accurate? If you had read the other horoscopes, you might also have found that they seemed quite accurate too.

So What?

Using it

Use general terms to show you understanding of others and build trust and rapport with them.

Defending

Beware of personality assessments that use rather general descriptions. Read those for other people and share your own to check that yours works for you only. Belief Bias

Description

People will tend to accept any and all conclusions that fit in with their systems of belief, without challenge or any deep consideration of what they are actually agreeing with.

The reverse is also true, and people will tend to reject assertions that do not fit in with their belief systems, even though these statements may be perfectly logical and arguably possible.

This is particularly true when people ignore the premises and focus solely on the conclusions being drawn.

It is even more true of people who are not educated in logic and argumentation, as such people reason by experience and not at all by logic.

Research

Luria (1976) asked illiterate farmers in Central Asia to reason deductively, giving them statements like: "In the far north, where there is snow, all bears are white. Novaga Zamlya is in the far north. What color are the bears there?"

The responses were such as, "I don't know...I've seen a black bear, but not others. Each area has it's own type of animals, you know..."

Example I will accept that some good ice skaters are not professional hockey players, but will reject an assertion that some professional hockey players are not good ice skaters (which, although it seems unlikely, is possible).

So What?

Using it

Do not try to persuade people with pure logic when you are talking about things that are outside their beliefs.

The converse is also true: If you argue within their belief system then you can persuade them of things that are not strictly true.

Defending

When you are listening to arguments of others, think not only whether something 'makes sense' - think also with a cold logic as to whether it is possible or true.

Belief Perseverance

Description

Once we have decided that we believe something, we will tend to keep on believing it, even in the face of disconfirming evidence.

Particularly if other people know of our belief, it can be embarrassing to climb down from our previous assertions. It is also difficult to remove a belief which has been woven into a wider web of belief, without disturbing those other beliefs. Research

Ross, Lepper and Hubbard (1975) asked experimental participants to look at suicide notes to determine which were real. A third each of the participants were told that they were right 10, 17 and 24 out of 25 times. They were then told that they had been lied to and asked to estimate more correctly. Those who had been told higher numbers continued to guess high.

So What?

Using it

Do not get people to describe their beliefs publicly if you want to change them.

Get people to describe the beliefs you want them to keep publicly.

Defending

Pay attention to evidence. Avoid skipping past what you see just because you have already concluded something. Below-Average Effect

Description

For some people and in some situations, we believe that we are somewhat below average in ability.

People with low self-esteem or who are in a depressed state may perceive things in this way.

This effect also happens for particular abilities and situations, where people say 'Oh, I can't do that', for example juggling or diving, where the reality is that with a few lessons they could be as good as most people.

This effect may also appear when people are risk-averse and are seeking to minimize losses.

One benefit of believing that you are worse than average is that you can excuse yourself from ever trying.

The below-average effect is also known as theWorse-than-average effect.

Example

A person believes they are really bad at singing and could never learn. They rate themselves a real dunce at singing.

So What?

Using it

Frame something that you do not want others to try as being impossibly difficult. Talk about the risks and potential losses.

Defending

Do not discount your abilities. You can do more than you realize. Ben Franklin Effect

Description

When we do a person a favor, we tend to like them more as a result. This is because we justify our actions to ourselves that we did them a favorbecause we liked them.

Benjamin Franklin himself said, "He that has once done you a kindness will be more ready to do you another than he whom you yourself have obliged."

The reverse effect is also true, and we come to hate our victims, which helps to explain wartime atrocities. We de-humanize the enemy, which decrease the dissonance of killing and other things in which we would never normally indulge.

Research

Jecker and Landy (1969) involved students in an intellectual contest where they could win significant money. Afterwards:

 A: 1/3 were approached by the researcher and asked to return money as he had been using his own funds and was running short.

 B: 1/3 were approached by a secretary and asked to return money as it was from the psychology department and funds were low.

 C: 1/3 were not approached.

Then all were surveyed to see how much they liked the researcher. Group B rated him lower than Group C (so impersonal request for a favordecreases liking). Group A rated him higher than group C (so personal request for a favor increasesliking).

So what? Using it

Ask people to do you a small favor. Don’t return it immediately.

Defending

When people ask you for favors, watch out for feeling better about them.

Bias blind spot

Description

We often know that people have biases. If we think about it, we also realize that we also use bias in our decisions, yet we still do not compensate sufficiently for our biases.

In particular, we will consider ourselves as being relatively unbiased compared with others.

Research

Pronin, Lin and Ross described how we are biased to a set of people, and yet they still used that bias in decisions, for example they rated peers and other Americans as having significantly more bias than themselves.

Example I take an IQ test which shows myself as having a lower IQ. I believe it wrong. I find more credible the results from another test which shows me as having a very high IQ, even though I know the test is less valid.

So What?

Using it

Use the effects of bias in persuasion - even if people know this, they will still be biased.

Defending

Think twice about your biases. Be honest with yourself, and especially if someone seems to be using your bias blindness against you.

Bias Correction

Description When we believe we are showing bias (or are likely to do so), our efforts to neutral easily end up with us displaying bias in the opposite direction.

In this way, people who are trying to be 'politically correct' end up breaking their own rules of equality.

Another difficult situation where bias correction occurs is where juries actually either put extra emphasis on evidence that is ruled inadmissible or over-compensate in the opposite direction.

Research

Petty et al (1998) asked subjects to avoid letting their biases about an unpleasant person influence their judgements of the person's persuasive efforts. The subjects ended up being more persuaded by the person's efforts than when they were presented by a likeable person.

Example

A manager who has a new disabled member of staff working for them, and is concerned to treat them fairly, ends up spending more time with that person than with other members of staff and also is more lenient with them during personal performance assessments. This does not help the relationship that the disabled person has with other people in the department.

So What?

Using it

To get a person to offer bias towards a person or argument, tell them that they are being biased against from the person or argument. Indicate that this is a bad thing.

Defending

When you know you may show bias or overcompensate in the opposite direction, pause to consider objectively if you are truly being neutral. If in doubt, as somebody else. Biased sampling

Description

When we need to make a decision and when we have very little real information about the subject in question, we will blithely base our decision on that very limited and hence biased sample.

For example, if we go to a restaurant for one meal and then someone asks us what the restaurant is like, we will give an authoritative pronouncement, based on that single experience.

Research

Hamill, Wilson and Nisbett (1980) gave people a hardship story about a woman on welfare. Some they told she was typical of people on welfare, others that she was atypical and to others (control group) they said nothing. Both those who were told she was typical and atypical rated her as less likely than the control group.

Example

An early political poll in the 1930s was to select random names from car owners and telephone directories. But only richer people had these, so the results were biased (and hugely incorrect).

So what?

Using it

To help someone else decide in your favor, constrain and control the information available to them.

Defending

Beware of deciding on small samples, especially if they come from a single and possibly suspect source. Bounded Rationality

Description

We are, to some extent, rational beings in that we will try to logically understand things and make sensible choices.

However, the world is large and complex, and we do not have the capacity to understand everything. We also have a limited time in which to make decisions. We are also limited by theschemas we have and other decisional limitations.

Harder problems require more thinking, increasing the cognitive load. If there is too much to think about this causes cognitive overload as we try to cope.

As a result, many of our decisions are not fully thought through and we can only be rational within the limits of time and cognitive capability. Herbert Simon indicated that there were thus two major causes of bounded rationality:

 Limitations of the human mind

 The structure within which the mind operates

This impacts decision models that assume us to be fully rational. For example when calculating expected utility, you may be surprised to find that people do not make the best choices.

Example I choose a new hi-fi system based on reading a few magazines and listening to several friends. When the sales person offers me a better bargain, I still turn it down.

So what?

Using it

Either play within the bounds of rationality by giving the other person few choices and limited criteria, or break their existing bounds by showing how these are ineffective (then help them set up cognitive camp elsewhere).

Defending

When you make a decision, pause to reflect whether what seems rational is adequate. As necessary, test your decision with other people. Do not be hurried into a decision by others.

Buffer Effect of Social Support

Description

People who feel supported by others feel less stress. If you know your friends will support you and there is someone with whom you can talk things through, somehow stressful situations are more tolerable.

Research

Nucholls, Callell and Kaplin (1972) investigated complications in pregnant women suffering different levels of stress. They found that 91% with high stress and low social support suffered complications, compared with only 33% had complications who also had high stress but did have social support.

Example

Terminally ill people who join support groups are likely to live longer.

So what?

Using it

Make sure you have social support. If you want to coerce the other person, try to remove their social support, for example by enticing their friends away from them.

Defending

Keep talking with different groups of friends. Ensure they continue to support you through difficult times. Bystander Effect

Description

When there is an emergency, the more bystanders there are, the less likely it is that any of them will actually help.

Pluralistic ignorance is where they assume nothing is wrong because nobody else looks concerned.

Bystanders go through a five-step process, duringeach of which they can decide to do nothing.

 Notice the event (or in a hurry and not notice).

 Realize the emergency (or assume that as others are not acting, it is not an emergency).

 Assume responsibility (or assume that others will do this).

 Know what to do (or not)

 Act (or worry about danger, legislation, embarrassment, etc.)

Research

Latané and Darley sat a series of college students in a cubicle amongst a number of other cubicles in which there were tapes of other students playing (the student thought they were real people). One of the voices cries for help and makes sounds of severe choking. When the student thought they were the only person there, 85% rushed to help. When they thought there was one other person, this dropped to 65%. And when they thought there were four other people, this dropped again to 31%.

They also faked epileptic seizures on the streets of New York and found that when there was only one bystander, they were helped 85% of the time, but when there were five bystanders, help came only in 30% of these trials.

Example

A famous case occurred in the early 1960, where Kitty Genovese was attacked and eventually murdered over a 45 minute period during which 38 people witnessed the attack and did not lift a finger to help in any way.

This was caused partially by social proof, whereby when people are uncertain, they look to other people as to what to do. It can also be caused by people losing themselves in the crowd and assuming a smaller share of the responsibility, expecting others to help in their stead. So what?

Using it

If you want someone to do something, ask them specifically (by name) or make sure they cannot assume that somebody else will do it. You can also set an example and ask for collaboration.

Defending

If you think somebody else should be doing what you have been asked to do, question the motives of the person asking you (even ask why they are not doing it themselves!).

C Cannon-Bard Theory of Emotion

Description

When a stimulating event happens, we feel emotions and physiological changes (such as muscular tension, sweating, etc.) at the same time.

The sequence thus is as follows:

Event ==> Simultaneous arousal and emotion

In neurobiological terms, the thalamus receives a signal and relays this both to the amygdala, which is connected with emotion. The body then gets signals via the autonomic nervous system to tense muscles, etc.

This was a refutation of the James-Lange theory (which proposed that emotions followed arousal) by Cannon and Bard in the late 1920s.

Example

I see a bear. I feel afraid. I tense in readiness to run away. So what?

Using it

Watch for emotions as displayed in physiological signals.

Cautious Shift/Risky Shift Phenomenon

Description

When people are in groups, they make decision about risk differently from when they are alone. In the group, they are likely to make riskier decisions, as the shared risk makes the individual risk less.

They also may not want to let their compatriots down, and hence be risk-averse (this is sometimes called cautious shift). The overall tendency towards a shift in risk perception is also sometimes called choice shift.

There are a number of reasons as to why this might happen. Theories have included:  Wallach, Kogan, and Bem (1964) proposed that greater risks are chosen due to a diffusion of responsibility, where emotional bonds decrease anxieties and risk is perceived as shared.

 Collins and Guetzkow (1964) suggested that high risk-takers are more confident and hence may persuade others to take greater risks.

 Brown (1965) indicates that social status in groups is often associated with risk- taking, leading people to avoid a low risk position.

 Bateson (1966) suggests that as people pay attention to a possible action, they become more familiar and comfortable with it and hence perceive less risk.

Research

Myers and Bishop (1970) put highly prejudiced students together to discuss racial issues. They became even more prejudiced. The reverse happened with unprejudiced students, who became even more unprejudiced.

Example

Entire football teams sometime get into aggressive or defensive moods as they either throw caution to the winds trying to score or desperately try to avoid being caught out.

Juries given weak evidence will become very lenient after discussion, whilst when given strong evidence they are likely to give harsh judgment.

So what?

Using it

Show the other person how other people are making the same decision. Frame the risk as individually less.

Defending

Make decisions on your own. Shared risk is still the same risk. Central Route/Elaboration Likelihood Model

Description

There are two ways we make decisions and hence get persuaded:

 When we are motivated and able to pay attention, we take a logical, conscious thinking, central route to decision-making. This can lead to permanent change in our attitude as we adopt and elaborate upon the speaker’s arguments.

 In other cases, we take the peripheral route. Here we do not pay attention to persuasive arguments but are swayed instead by surface characteristics such as whether we like the speaker. In this case although we do change, it is only temporary (although it is to a state where we may be susceptible to further change).

One of the best ways motivating people to take the central route is to make the message personally relevant to them. Fear can also be effective in making them pay attention, but only if it is moderate and a solution is also offered. Strong fear will just lead to fight-or-flight reactions.

The central route leads to consideration of both arguments for and against and a choice is carefully considered.

People are more motivated to use the central route when the issue has personal relevance to them. Some people have a higher need for cognition, deliberately thinking about more things than people with a lower need. These people with a higher need for cognition are more likely to choose the central route.

When they are feeling good, they will want to sustain this and will avoid focusing on things that might bring them down again, so they take a more cursory, peripheral route. People in a negative or neutral mood are more likely to take the central route.

In practice, this is more of a spectrum than a bipolar model. We may increasingly notice and consider evidence or steadily let events act simply as cues to automatic responses.

So what?

Using it

To effect longer-term changes in attitude, use the central route. For simple compliance, use the peripheral route.

If you have their attention, be logical and present a compelling argument. If, however, they are not really paying attention to you (and you can deliberately distract them), put them in a good mood (eg. with a joke) then use subtle cues such as attractive clothes and leading statement. Then quickly lead them one more step at a time to where you want them to be. Defending

Learn to pay attention to how you are making decisions. In particular, pause when you are about to make a commitment (and especially if it means signing a legal document). Think back about how you made your decision. Was it reasoned, or did you somehow seem to arrive at the point of commitment without much conscious thought (perhaps being distracted by the other person)?

Certainty Effect

Description

When an outcome is certain and it becomes less probable, this has a greater impact than when the outcome was merely probable before the probability was reduced by the same amount. Thus 100% - 10% = 90% has more psychological impact than 50% - 10% = 40%.

There is also a pseudo-certainty effect, where the certainty is only perceived.

Overall, this works because of our preference for absolutes and our inability to really understand the meaning of the difference between different probabilities. To most people, 70%, 80% and 90% all mean the same: not certain, but fairly likely. Thus we would rather eliminate risk rather than reduce it.

Research

Kahneman and Tversky (1979) asked students to evaluate insurance costing only 50% of normal, but which would only pay out in 50% of cases (though their premium would be refunded if they did not get the payout). 80% of students chose to refuse the insurance.

Example

Most people would pay more to remove the only bullet in the gun in a game of Russian Roulette than they would to remove one bullet when there were four in the gun.

So what? Using it

Instead of offering four for the price of three, offer one free with three purchased. The zero price has greater certainty.

Defending

Beware of making decisions based on absolutes. Distinguish the real difference between 80% and 90%.

Charismatic Terms/Ultimate Terms

Description

There are words which have special meaning within each culture and carry power where they are used.

 God terms carry blessings, demand sacrifice and obedience. E.g. progress, value.

 Devil terms are reviled and evoke disgust. E.g. fascist, pedophile.

 Charismatic Terms are not like God and Devil terms, which are associated with observable things. These terms are more intangible. E.g. freedom, contribution.

These terms can change, and God or Charisma terms that are over-used can turn into Devil terms. They are also sometimes called power words, especially by sales people. Words used in sales often appeal to basic needs, such as:

 Safety: guarantee, proven

 Control: powerful, strong

 Understanding: because, as, so, truth, real

 Greed: money, cash, save, win, free, more

 Health: safe, healthy, well

 Belonging: belong, happy, good, feel

 Esteem: exclusive, only, admired

 Identity: you, (their name), we

 Novelty: new, discover

Negative words are also used in this context to scare people into action. These often address those self-same needs, but now from the opposite direction:

 Safety: dangerous,

 Control: uncertain, scarce

 Understanding: change, complicated

 Greed: lose, stolen

 Health: unhealthy, sick, old

 Belonging: wrong, alone, rejected

 Esteem: ridicule, laughed at

 Identity: they, he

 Novelty: outdated, unfashionable

Example

‘Quality’ was a God term in many companies during the TQM era of the early 1990s. Then it became a Devil term as those companies got it wrong and needed to blame something. So what?

Using it

Know the terms, and employ them well. Misuse them at your peril. There are many crass advertisements that beat ultimate terms to death. To be effective, they must be subtle, and done with a light touch. If the listener/reader realizes what you are trying to do, not only will this take the effectiveness out of the words, it will also cause a negative reaction.

Defending

Listen to the use of ultimate terms. Where people are abusing them, let them know you know. If necessary, expose their trickery Choice-supportive bias

Description

When we recall a past decision, we distort memories to make the choices we made appear to be the best that could be made.

Thus when we have selected from a set of options, we will attribute more positive and less negative attributes to the option we have chosen (and vice versa for options we rejected).

As a result, we feel good about ourselves and our choices and have less regret for bad decisions.

Older people tend more towards this bias.

Example

I buy a car, based on a set of criteria I have developed. Later, I am sure that the car I bought passed more criteria than it actually did.

Research

Mather, Shafir and Johnson gave subjects a choice between two job candidates, each of which had four positive and four negative attributes. When later asked to recall the attributes of these, the subjects recalled more positive attributes of their choice and more negative attributes of the candidate they had rejected.

So What?

Using it

Get people to make choices early on that they will use in the main point you want them to choose. Make these choices easy to make in the direction to support your later choice. Defending

Think hard when recalling a choice, to remember the real reasons for your choice.

Choice Theory/Control Theory

Description

We have a deep need for control that itself, paradoxically, controls much of our lives. The endless effort to control can lead us to be miserable as we fail in this impossible task of trying to control everything and everyone around us.

The alternative is to see the world as a series of choices, which is why Glasser later renamed Control Theory asChoice Theory. Control theory was also taken up by Wiener in his study of cybernetics and other behaviorists.

A principle of direct control theory is that of negative feedback, where outcomes are compared with intent (or 'goals') and consequently used to moderate actions until intent is optimally achieved. (The 'negative' in the feedback is the difference between the intent and the outcome).

An important consequent aspect of control theory is self-regulation. People are seen as intelligent, goal-driven individuals who control their activities in order to achieve their objectives, goals and needs. So what?

Using it

Give people things to control, help them control the things in their path, or threaten their sense of control.

Defending

Do not try to control everything -- instead see the world as a series of choices.

Classical Conditioning

Description

If a stimulus that results in an emotional response is repeated alongside another stimulus which does not cause an emotional response, eventually the second stimulus will result in the same emotional response. Classical Conditioning is thus ‘learning by association’. In more detail, we are pre-conditioned tounconditionally respond in certain ways to stimuli. For example a sudden noise (an unconditional stimulus, US) makes us flinch (the unconditional response, UR). If a movement is made at the same time as, or just before the noise, such as moving hands to clap loudly (conditional stimulus, CS), then the person will learn to flinch when the movement is made without the noise necessarily being there (the conditional response, CR). Thus the association is made between the US and CS, with either stimulating the same response.

Classical Conditioning does not work in all circumstances. In particular it is more effective where the conditioning may be of evolutionary benefit.

Research

Pavlov did famous experiments with dogs, ringing a bell and then feeding them. After a while, he could ring the bell and their mouths would salivate.

Garcia and Koelling (1966) showed that rats soon learned to avoid a sweet-tasting liquid when it was followed by an injection that made them ill, but they did not learn to avoid the liquid when they received electric shocks afterwards. Presumably this is connected with learning what foods they could safely eat. The rats did, however, learn to avoid the electric shock when it was paired with light and noise (but injection+light/noise failed). Maybe this is related to learning about natural hazards like lightning or falling objects.

Example

I liked my aunt, she always made me feel warm and wanted. She always wore a particular perfume. When I smell the perfume now, I immediately feel warm and wanted.

So what?

Using it

If you want to persuade someone to do something, get them to do it at the same time as doing something they like doing.

Do something specific every time they do something you want (like touching them somewhere or making a specific sound). Then do that specific thing and they'll think of doing the desired behavior.

Defending

Watch out for people repeatedly touching you or having strange behaviors. Check that they're not trying to program you. Clustering Illusion

Description

We often see patterns where they do not exist.

This is particularly true of gamblers who desperately try to 'beat the system' by seeing patterns of events in cards and other games of chance.

We are 'pattern machines' and recognize people and things from their overall pattern rather than full detail. This is very useful, but it does also mean we can see patterns where there are none.

Research

Gilovich, Vallone and Tversky investigated the myth of the 'hot hand' in basketball where players are supposed to have winning streaks. It turned out that it was all random patterns.

Example

Is 'OXXXOXXXOXXOOOXOOXXOO' random? Or can you see patterns? Many could, yet it is almost perfectly random.

So What?

Using it

Use patterns of events in your persuasive pitch. People will likely cotton on and believe you.

Defending

Think hard before betting on any apparent pattern, especially if somebody else is selling it to you. Coercion

Description

This is the acting to change a person’s behavior, even when they do not wish to do so. Coercive methods work mostly be threat or bribery. Both use extrinsic motivation with the message ‘do this and you will get that.’

Threats can be for new action that is painful, such as physical or psychological attack. Threats can often take the form of denial, such as removal of benefits or prevention from access to a desired resource.

Social position is very important to us, so rejection from a group or public embarrassment can be very serious threats. We can coerce by framing desired behaviors as necessary because of social rules such as returning favors or adherence to group norms (with implied social rejection as the threatened punishment).

Example

Parents regularly coerce their children, even physically. Where the line of legitimacy is depends on your morals and is a topic of heated debate.

At the highest level, war is ultimate coercion between countries.

So what? Using it

Find what people want or fear, gain control over it, then offer access as a bribe or denial as a threatened punishment.

Defending

There are four types of defense against coercion.

 Stonewall: refuse outright, just saying no.

 Identity separation: Refuse on the grounds that it is ‘not the kind of thing I do’.

 Justification: Show cause and negative effect, saying why you will not comply.

 Negotiation: Make counter-offers to allow the other person to achieve their goals.

Cognitive Appraisal Theories of Emotion

Description

In the absence of physiological arousal, we decide what to feel after interpreting or explaining what has just happened. Two things are important in this: whether we interpret the event as good or bad for us, and what we believe is the cause of the event.

The sequence thus is as follows:

Event ==> thinking ==> Simultaneousarousal and emotion This challenges the two-factor separation of arousal and emotion, supporting the Cannon and Bard theory albeit with the addition of the thinking step.

In primary appraisal, we consider how the situation affects our personal well-being. Insecondary appraisal we consider how we might cope with the situation.

This is sometimes also called Lazarus Theory orAppraisal Theory.

Example

When a colleague gets promoted, I might feel resentful if I think I deserve the promotion more than they do.

So what?

Using it

Demonstrate how what you want people to believe or do is good for them, and explain why. Cognitive Dissonance

Description

This is the feeling of uncomfortable tension which comes from holding two conflicting thoughts in the mind at the same time.

Dissonance increases with:

 The importance of the subject to us.

 How strongly the dissonant thoughts conflict.

 Our inability to rationalize and explain away the conflict.

Dissonance is often strong when we believe something about ourselves and then do something against that belief. If I believe I am good but do something bad, then the discomfort I feel as a result is cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance is a very powerful motivator which will often lead us to change one or other of the conflicting belief or action. The discomfort often feels like a tension between the two opposing thoughts. To release the tension we can take one of three actions:

 Change our behavior.

 Justify our behavior by changing the conflicting cognition.

 Justify our behavior by adding new cognitions.

Dissonance is most powerful when it is about our self-image. Feelings of foolishness, immorality and so on (including internal projections during decision-making) are dissonance in action.

If an action has been completed and cannot be undone, then the after-the-fact dissonance compels us to change our beliefs. If beliefs are moved, then the dissonance appears during decision-making, forcing us to take actions we would not have taken before.

Cognitive dissonance appears in virtually all evaluations and decisions and is the central mechanism by which we experience new differences in the world. When we see other people behave differently to our images of them, when we hold any conflicting thoughts, we experience dissonance.

Dissonance increases with the importance and impact of the decision, along with the difficulty of reversing it. Discomfort about making the wrong choice of car is bigger than when choosing a lamp.

Note: Self-Perception Theory gives an alternative view. Research

Festinger first developed this theory in the 1950s to explain how members of a cult who were persuaded by their leader, a certain Mrs Keech, that the earth was going to be destroyed on 21st December and that they alone were going to be rescued by aliens, actually increased their commitment to the cult when this did not happen (Festinger himself had infiltrated the cult, and would have been very surprised to meet little green men). The dissonance of the thought of being so stupid was so great that instead they revised their beliefs to meet with obvious facts: that the aliens had, through their concern for the cult, saved the world instead.

In a more mundane experiment, Festinger and Carlsmith got students to lie about a boring task. Those who were paid $1 for the task felt uncomfortable lying.

Example

Smokers find all kinds of reasons to explain away their unhealthy habit. The alternative is to feel a great deal of dissonance.

So what?

Using it

Cognitive dissonance is central to many forms of persuasion to change beliefs, values, attitudes and behaviors. The tension can be injected suddenly or allowed to build up over time. People can be moved in many small jumps or one large one.

Defending

When you start feeling uncomfortable, stop and see if you can find the inner conflict. Then notice how that came about. If it was somebody else who put that conflict there, you can decide not to play any more with them. Cognitive Evaluation Theory

Description

When looking at task, we evaluate it in terms of how well it meets our needs to feel competent and in control. If we think we will be able to complete the task, we will be intrinsically motivated to complete the task, requiring no further external motivation.

Where a person has a stronger internal locus of control they will feel they are in control of how they behave. Where they have a stronger external locus of control, they will believe the environment or others have a greater influence over what they do.

People may see external rewards as achieving some degree of control over them or may see the reward as informational, such as where they reinforce feelings of competence and self- determination. When people see the reward as mostly for control they will be motivated by gaining the reward but not by enacting the requested behavior.

Cognitive Evaluation is occasionally also called Self-Perception Theory, although this confuses it with Bem's Self-Perception Theory.

Example If you tell me that I have to run for President, I will not exactly throw my heart into the job. If, however, you tell me how the local council is looking for someone like me, who wants to help in local schools, then I'll be there before you have finished the sentence!

So what?

When you ask someone to do something, if you want them to be motivated then ensure that it falls within their current level of competency.

Commitment

Description

A commitment is a public or private decision to act. If we make a commitment, we often feel bound to follow through on it, for fear of social rejection or simply due to the threat of cognitive dissonance.

When we are committed to something, we will not change our minds very easily, especially if that commitment was public. Research

Knox and Inkster (1968) asked people about to make a $2 bet on a horse how likely they horse was to win. They also asked people who had just placed the same value bet. They found that people who had just bet on a horse were even more convinced that it would win.

Example

People who volunteer to help a political party will over-estimate their chances of winning.

So what?

Using it

When getting people to make a commitment, make sure it will cause more dissonance for them to break the commitment than to fulfill the commitment. For example by making the commitments written and public.

Defending

Refuse to make commitments until you are ready. Do not be rushed. Communication Accommodation Theory

Description

When we talk with other people, we will tend to subconsciously change our style of speech (accent, rate, types of words, etc.) towards the style used by the listener. We also tend to match non-verbal behaviors.

This signals agreement and liking. It should create greater rapport and them such that they approve of us more.

This can be unwelcome, especially if it is perceived as aping or being overly familiar.

The reverse also happens: people deliberately assert their identity by speaking and acting differently from the other person.

Communication Accommodation Theory used to be called Speech Accommodation Theory.

So what?

Using it

Be a chameleon! Copy the other person’s modes of speech (but not so much you sound like a mimic). Also listen to how they are copying you: it may be a signal that they are seeking your approval.

Defending

If it seems like a person is trying to copy you, change how you are speaking and see if they follow. If they do, have fun! Try some subtle and weird variations and see if they will follow you to the ends of the linguistic earth. Compensation

Description

When we believe other people perceive us in a negative way, we will deliberately act in a way to disconfirm this belief.

Example

When you first meet people, you may fear that they find you unfriendly, so you act in a way that is more friendly than you usually are.

So what?

Using it

Infer to a person or otherwise let them know that they are considered greedy. Then ask them for something that will require them to act in a generous way.

Defending

Be yourself. Avoid getting railroaded by people who tell you that you are what you are not. Confirmation Bias

Description

When we have made a decision or build a hypothesis, we will actively seek things which will confirm our decision or hypothesis. We will also avoid things which will disconfirm this. The alternative is to face the dissonance of being wrong.

We use this approach both for searching our memory and looking for things in the external world. This has also been called the Positive Test Strategy.

Confirmation bias has also been calledConfirmatory Bias, Myside Bias and Verification Bias.

Research

Snyder and Cantor (1979) gave participants a description of a person called Jane that included mixed items such as sometimes showing her as introverted and sometimes as extraverted. A couple of days later, half were asked to assess her for an extraverted job (real estate agent) and the rest asked to assess her for a librarian's job. Each group were better at remembering the attributes that supported the job for which they were assessing. This implied they were using a positive-test strategy when trying to remember things about Jane.

Example

After having bought a piece of clothing, we will look for the same clothing in a more expensive store to confirm that we have bought a bargain. This is caused by the post-decisional dissonance between the decision made and the possibility of being wrong.

So what?

Using it

After having persuaded a person of something, help them feel good by letting them find examples that confirm their good example.

Defending

After a decision is made, consider whatever evidence you can find, even if it disconfirms the decision—at least you will make a better decision next time. Also beware of people feeding you confirming evidence.

Conjunction Fallacy

Description

When two events can occur separately or together, the conjunction, where they overlap, cannot be more likely than the likelihood of either of the two individual events. However, people forget this and ascribe a higher likelihood to combination events, erroneously associating quantity of events with quantity of probability.

Research

Kahneman and Tversky offered the following problem to a number of people: Linda is 31, single, outspoken and very bright. She majored in philosophy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with issues of discrimination and social justice and also participated in antinuclear demonstrations.

They then asked whether she was more likely to be (a) a bank teller, or (b) a bank teller and active in the feminist movement. 86% answered (b).

Example

If someone says an out-of-stock product in a shop may be in within the next two weeks and it may be in this week, and it may be in tomorrow, then it seems more likely it will be in sooner rather than later.

So what?

Using it

When persuading about something that is not guaranteed every time, show how it appears in several different scenarios.

Defending

Remember your mathematics! Just because something can happen in different circumstances it does not make it more likely. Constructivism

Description

We try to make sense of the world by making use of constructs, which are perceptual categories that we use when evaluating things.

People who have many different and abstract constructs have greater flexibility in understanding the world and are cognitively complex, whilst others are cognitively simple. Cognitively complex people are better able to accept both complex and inconsistent messages. They also have a greater need to understand things and will question deeply anything that is new to them. However, once persuaded, they stay persuaded and are less likely to change their minds as their new constructs will support the argument.

Example

Some people have a construct about being fat that says fat people are lazy and greedy. Others may perceive it as a medical condition.

So what?

Using it

Help cognitively complex people to build new constructs that support your argument. Do not bother with this detail for the cognitively simple.

Defending

Do not let others take charge when building new constructs. Contact Hypothesis

Description

This is the principle that bringing people together who are in conflict (or where one is bullying the other), the conflict will subside as they get to understand one another.

When first tried in such as multi-racial schools, this often failed dramatically. In practice, it requires other conditions:

 Remove conflict: It is not sufficient just to nullify the source of problems, but it is necessary.

 Mutual Interdependence: Where one party can safely pull out, then this position of power can destroy common understanding.

 Equal status: If one party has advantages that the other does not, then this again unbalances power.

 Positive contact: The context for contact between parties must be conducive to friendly interactions.

 Typical contact: The people that are met must be perceived as typical of the other groups, so that the positive perceptions are generalized to the rest of the population.

 Social norms of equality: In the situation of contact, it must be a general norm that all parties are equal.

Research

Sherif et al (1961) in the famous boy's camp study where they stirred up rivalry between two groups found that they could cool the hostility down by giving them tasks where no one group could complete it by themselves. Thus forced to work together, the boys became friends again.

Example Judicial systems sometimes insist on petty criminals directly helping the people they have hurt. Done well, this helps both parties.

So what?

Using it

To mediate between conflicting parties, use the above principles to set up a situation where they can meet and increase understanding.

Conversion

Description

This is a sudden change in beliefs, such as when someone ‘experiences’ a religious conversion. The experience is often felt very strongly and leads to radical changes in behaviors.

Cults often attract people who are searching for meaning in their lives and who have built up massive tension around this. The converts experience a significant emotional release, often within a carefully engineered context of ritual and socialization, as they ‘see the light’.

When this happens to an individual, it is often after they have been thinking about something for some time, and a cognitive breakthrough at last appears. This happens with beliefs much in the same way as an inventor or scientist gets an ‘eureka’ experience on how to solve a problem.

Example

When H.G. Wells’ ‘War of the Worlds’ was read on the US radio by Orson Welles in 1938, many listeners suddenly believed the world really was being attacked by aliens, and mass panic ensued. This was due to the ‘news broadcast’ style that was used, as well as the way radio- listening was, at that time, a social activity. The impending war probably did not help either. So what?

Using it

Find or build significant tensions in the other person. Let them build to almost breaking point, where they are desperately looking for a solution. Then provide the solution, preferably in an engineered context where all cues point to the same conclusion. Follow up by giving them experiences that allow them to ‘prove’ the change to themselves.

Defending

When you have a significant tension in your life, such as when you have been searching for meaning, beware of people offering pat solutions. In particular question what they might be getting (or might ask in return) from your conversion.

Contagion/Social Contagion

Description

Emotion can spread rapidly through large crowds, as the massive social proof leads us into extreme states. This explains much of crowd behavior, where ‘normal’ people act in ways they may later deeply regret.

Social contagion effects can also occur when people believe they have been infected by a disease. As more people show the (psychosomatic) symptoms, this is taken as proof that ‘I am bound to get it’. Example

Just watch football matches and see how the crowd reacts almost as one. Or go along and experience it for yourself!

So what?

Using it

To wind someone up, take them to an exciting mass-audience event, from sports to rock concerts. Whilst they are in the flow of the moment, start whooping and dancing wildly. They may well join in. Then take a photo of them and show all your friends...

Defending

When at crowd events, by all means get swept up in the enjoyment, but keep a part of you separate, watching for inappropriate behavior in other people. Let it step in to prevent you from slipping over the cliff into hysteria. Conversion Theory

Description

In groups, the minority can have a disproportionate effect, converting many 'majority' members to their own cause.

This is because many majority group members are not strong believers in its cause. They may be simply going along because it seems easier or that there is no real alternative. They may also have become disillusioned with the group purpose, process or leadership and are seeking a viable alternative.

There are four major factors that give the minority its power:

1. Consistency: Being consistent in expressing minority group opinion.

2. Confidence: Being sure about the correctness of ideas and views presented.

3. Unbiased: Appearing to be reasonable and unbiased in presenting ideas.

4. Resistance: Resisting the natural social pressure and abuse that the majority may bring to bear on minority members.

In addition, to gain the confidence of the 'silent majority', the minority shows that it is not like the leadership of the majority, typically by visibly opposing them (something most of the silent majority would not dare do). They they show empathy and similarity with the target people, steadily subverting them and convincing them to join their alternative group.

Example

A business executive board is keen to acquire another company, although the decision is mostly being driven by the CEO and CFO. There seems to be consensus on this, but the CTO thinks it is crazy. He asks public and challenging questions about the move whilst talking quietly to other board members until he is confident he can call a motion of no confidence in the move.

An extremist group holds regular demonstrations against the local government, but does this peacefully, engaging people passing by in reasonable and persuasive conversation, getting them sign a petition and maybe come along to the next meeting...

So What? Using it

If you are in the minority, do not worry. Find others who are like minded and teach them to be straightforward and consistent. Develop clear messages that position yourself as the 'voice of reason'. Spread the word whilst undermining the opposition.

Defending

When a minority starts up against you, as a majority leader or advocate, mobilize quickly to expose their methods and verbalize their message

Correspondence Bias

Description

When we see a person doing something, we tend to assume that they are doing this more because this is 'how they are' -- that is because of their internal disposition -- than the external environmental situational factors.

There are four main reasons for this correspondence bias:

 Lack of awareness. If you do not know that a person is being threatened, then you are far more likely to assume they have a nervous disposition. This can easily happen when the situation is not physically apparent, such as when a person is in the first day of a new job.

 Unrealistic expectations. If I believe that a teacher is all-knowing, then I expect their first lesson to be as good as their hundredth. Likewise if they have just taught a lesson that bombed. Even if am aware of these factors, I expect them to perform consistently.

 Inflated categorization. My expectations of the teacher are made worse if I expect allteachers to be equally competent. Likewise, if I categorize all questions as showing that you don't know things, then I might assume that when the teacher asks the student questions it is because the teacher does not know the answer.  Incomplete corrections. I can further infer incorrectly about the teachers questions, such as that they are asking the wrong questions and hence do no understand their subject.

Research

Jones and Harris found that people decided that students who had written pro- or anti-Castro essays were actually pro- or anti-Castro, even when the participants knew that the students had been instructed to write the essays in this way.

Example

When I buy something from the corner shop and the owner does not serve me with a smile, I assume it is because he is a miserable old fool.

So what?

Using it

If you want a person to be perceived by others to have a certain disposition, maneuver them into a situation where they perform actions whereby it may easily be assume that this is because of their disposition.

Defending

When you do something and others are observing, think about how they are attributing to your disposition. Correct their perception as necessary.

Correspondent Inference Theory

Description

When we are making attributions about other people, we compare their actions with alternative actions, evaluating the choices they have made. It is easier for us to make internal attributions when there fewer non-common effects between these choices. That is, when both choices have a lot in common and there are thus fewer things which differentiate them. When the behavior is not what we would have forecast, we assume that it is due to their internal preferences or character traits.

Information about five factors is sought to make these inferences:

 Whether the behavior being considered is voluntary and freely chosen.

 What is unexpected about the behavior (‘non-common effects’).

 Whether the behavior is socially desirable.

 Whether the behavior impacts the person doing the inferring (‘hedonic relevance’).

 Whether the behavior is of personal interest to the person doing the inferring (‘personalism’).

Example

A person is choosing between two jobs. They are very similar apart from location and salary. This makes it easier for us to attribute their choice to the person’s individual preferences. If they choose the lower salary job, it is easy for us to assume that the person is not money-driven.

So what?

Using it

When surprised by another person’s actions, it may seem obvious that this is because this is just because of ‘who they are’. We should be careful to look closer in these cases as this may not be true. Counter-Attitudinal Advocacy

Description

Sometimes people will state an opinion or otherwise support a point of view that is actually against their own beliefs.

For example, where we tell white lies in order to help other people or where stating our beliefs could harm us. When we do this, we will seek to reduce dissonance by justifying our actions. If we cannot find external justification, we will seek internal justification. This then leads to us change our beliefs.

Counter-Attitudinal Advocacy is particularly effective where it is difficult for the person to later deny that the dissonance-causing behavior actually took place. Thus written (and especially signed) statements and public activities can be powerful tools of persuasion.

Research

Festinger and Carlsmith (1959) got experiment participants to do a boring task and then tell a white lie about how enjoyable it was. Some were paid $1, others were paid $20. Later, they were asked openly how much they had enjoyed the task. Those who were paid $20 said it was boring. Those who had been paid $1 rated the task as significantly more enjoyable.

Example

Counter-Attitudinal Advocacy has been extensively used for brainwashing, both with prisoners- of-war and peacetime cult members. It usually is done by making incrementally escalating requests. Small rewards are offered, which are too small for the victims to use to attribute their behavior change to, thus forcing internal attribution.

So what?

Using it

Get people to agree with you, perhaps on a small point, about something which you want to persuade them. Ensure there is no significant external justification. After a while, their beliefs will change. Counterfactual Thinking

Description

Counterfactual thinking is thinking about a past that did not happen. This often happens in 'if only...' situations, where we wish something had or had not happened.

This can be so powerful we can change our own memories, adjusting the facts and creating new memories. It can happen to cover up trauma or may be just excuses to avoid facing uncomfortable truths. It can also be to explain what is otherwise unexplainable.

This effect is increased by:

 Replication: if we can easily reconstruct events as happened or as wished for.

 Closeness: if the unwanted event is close, such as just missing winning the lottery by one number or just missing a taxi.

 Exception: if the event occurred because of a non-routine action that might well not have happened ('if only...').

 Controllability: if something could have been done to avoid the event.

 Action: in the short term, we regret actions that cause problems more than inaction that might have the same effect (although in the longer term, this effect is reversed).

We can also do the reverse, thinking about bad things that did not happen, such as when we narrowly avoid being in an accident. Counterfactual thinking often happens around situations of perceived 'luck'.

Research Kahneman and Tversky offered the following scenario to a number of people:

"Mr. Crane and Mr. Tees were scheduled to leave the airport on different flights, at the same time. They traveled from town in the same limousine, were caught in a traffic jam, and arrived at the airport 30 minutes after scheduled departure time of their flights. Mr. Crane is told that his flight left on time. Mr. Tees is told that his flight was delayed, and just left five minutes ago. Who is more upset, Mr. Crane or Mr. Tees?"

96% of participants felt that Mr. Tees would be more upset. Just missing the flight would increase the chance of him generating the counterfactual thoughts of having caught it.

Example

Silver medal winners do it all the time. The closeness to winning causes much regret and they need to excuse themselves for their 'failure'. In a reverse effect, Bronze medal winners often feel lucky to get a medal, as they were very close to not getting a medal at all.

Young people may regret taking a course at college that they do not enjoy. Older people will regret dropping out or not switching to the right course.

So what?

Using it

Cause tension by highlighting something about the other person that will cause dissonance, then offer a new thought that can replace the uncomfortable thought. Encourage them to accept the new thought. A neat form is 'What if you had...'.

Defending

You are human and imperfect. That's ok. Beware of people trying to change history

Covariation Model

Description

When explaining other people’s behaviors, we look for similarities (covariation) across a range of situations to help us narrow down specific attributions. There are three particular types of information we look for to help us decide, each of which can be high or low:

 Consensus: how similarly other people act, given the same stimulus, as the person in question.  Distinctiveness: how similarly the person acts in different situations, towards other stimuli.

 Consistency: how often the same stimulus and response in the same situation are perceived.

People tend to make internal attributions when consensus and distinctiveness are low but consistency are high. They will make externalattributions when consensus and distinctiveness are both high and consistency is still high. When consistency is low, they will make situational attributions.

People are often less sensitive to consensus information.

Example

If a manager yells at a person, we assume it is his nature if he is the only person to yell at that person (low consensus), he yells at other people too (low distinctiveness) and he yells at them often. However, if everyone else gets cross with the same person (high consensus) and the manager does not yell at other people (high distinctiveness), we assume it is something external —probably the person being yelled at. Finally, if the manager has not yelled at the person before, we assume that something unusual has happened (situational attribution).

So what?

Using it

Use this to help understand how others are thinking. Credibility

Description

A credible source of information makes for quicker and firmer decisions.

A credible person is expert (experienced, qualified, intelligent, skilled) and trustworthy (honest, fair, unselfish, caring). Charisma can increase credibility. Charismatic people, in addition to credible, are extroverted, composed and sociable.

Credibility is context-dependent, and an expert in one situation may be incompetent in another. It is also a cue that is used in selecting the peripheral route to decision-making.

Credibility-enhancing actions include:

 Highlighting your own experience and qualifications.

 Showing you care about the other person and have their best interests at heart.

 Showing you are similar to them by using their language, body language, dress, etc.

 Being assertive. Quickly and logically refuting counter-arguments.

 Leveraging the credibility of others, e.g.

o Highlighting the credibility of your sources of information.

o Getting introduced by a credible person.

Language that reduces credibility includes:

 Ums, ers and other, ah, hesitation.

 Totally and absolutely excessive exaggeration.

 Kinds of qualifications that sort of lack assertion, I guess.

 Politeness, sir, that indicates subordination.

 I know it is silly to say this, but disclaimers do reduce credibility.

So what? Using it

Build your credibility before persuading. Understand what builds and destroys it. Protect it like a baby, because once lost it can be impossible to recover. Use it to gain commitment without having to argue your case.

Defending

When you are making a big decision, be careful to examine the real credibility of your advisors, including what they stand to gain from your decision.

D Decisions

There are many tidbits of research that are of interest in decision-making, but not really big enough to . This is a parking place for these.

Closure goals

When people have achieving closure as a goal in itself, such as when they pressed for time, they will cease or significantly reduce analytical thinking about the subject in hand and just seek closure.

When people are motivated to avoid closure, then this goal makes them think harder about the subject as they seek for objections.

So what?

When people dive for closure, they may not be really bought in and you may need later to work hard on sustaining commitment.

When people are objecting, they are thinking and you have their attention, so help them think around objections. Deindividuation

Description

We normally carry our sense of identity around with us and are thus well aware of how we are relating to other people. There are ways, however of losing ourselves, including:

 Becoming a part of a large group, such as a mob or army.

 Becoming engrossed in an interesting task, such as a hobby.

 Meditation and other contemplative activities.

Deindividuation into a group results in a loss of individual identity and a gaining of the social identity of the group. When two groups argue (and crowd problems are often between groups), it is like two people arguing. The three most important factors for deindividuation in a group of people are:  Anonymity, so I can not be found out.

 Diffused responsibility, so I am not responsible for my actions.

 Group size, as a larger group increases the above two factors.

When you are in a group, you may feel a shared responsibility and so less individual responsibility for your actions. In this way a morally questionable act may seem less personally wrong. You may also feel a strong need to conform to social norms.

A paradox of deindividuation is that when you let go of your self, returning to you self can be an exhilarating experience. This is one of the rewards of engrossing hobbies and meditation.

Significant external stimulation helps deindividuation as it distracts you from internal chatter and rumination. This is one reason that pop and rock music (and orchestral music, for that matter) is often played loudly along with dramatic visual lighting effects.

Research

Diener et al gave trick-or-treaters the opportunity steal candy. When they were in groups and when they were sure of their anonymity, the stealing went up threefold.

Example

The effects of mobs are particularly alarming as lynchings, riots and wartime atrocities have all been done during periods of deindividuation. Crowds give you the opportunity to hide and also allow you to share the blame, reducing the sense of individual responsibility. Uniforms and war- paint also help hide your true identity. Even sunglasses can support aggressive attitudes as they hide the eyes, a very important part of the individual.

So what?

Using it

To get someone to do something they would not normally do, provide lots of external distractions, including noise and visual action. Also camouflage or disguise them so they do not worry about being discovered by others.

Defending

Beware of crowd effects and especially other people who encourage you to join in and do things that you would not normally do. If things get nasty, fade into the background. Others who are caught up by the mass hysteria will not notice.

To reduce deindividuation in others, make them more self-aware. Use their name. Tell them what they are doing. Disconfirmation bias

Description

When people are faced with evidence for and against their beliefs, they will be more likely to accept the evidence that supports their beliefs with little scrutiny yet criticize and reject that which disconfirms their beliefs.

Generally, we will avoid or discount evidence that might show us to be wrong.

Research

Lord, Ross and Lepper had 24 each of pro- and anti-death penalty students evaluate faked studies on capital punishment, some of which supported the death penalty and some which did not. Students concluded that the studies that supported their views were superior to those that did not.

Example

I am a scientist who is invited to investigate a haunted house. I rubbish the idea and decline the invitation. When given a paper which supports my pet theories, however, I laud the fine research with little questioning as to the methods used.

So What?

Using it

When you want to change beliefs, you may need to give significant evidence to overcome the disconfirmation bias.

Defending

Try to be open when faced with evidence and viewpoints, even if it is contrary to what you know to be true. Discounting

Description

We often underestimate the effects of one cause of our behavior when another cause is more conspicuous.

Example

If you like playing the guitar in a band, and get a lot of adulation from your fans, you might end up discounting your simple enjoyment of playing music and conclude that you are really in it for the fame.

So what?

Using it

Keep reminding people of the lesser-attended-to causes of their desirable behaviors. Or shift perceived causes by emphasizing a cause which may be a step on the way to a change of behavior. Drive Theory

Description

We all have needs. which lead to internal stimuli prodding us into action, driving us to reduce those stimuli by satisfying the relevant needs. Drive theory is consequently also known as Drive Reduction Theory.

These drives are necessary, otherwise needs would not be satisfied. It is also important for the person to perceive the stimulus and response in order to learn.

Primary drives are those related to basic survival and procreation. Secondary drives are related to social and identity factors which are less important for survival.

As we act to satisfy needs we become conditioned and acquire habits and other unconscious forms of response or reaction. Behavior is changed only if habits no longer satisfy needs, such that drives remain.

If enacting of drives is frustrated or the driven action does not satisfy needs, this can lead to anxiety and other negative emotions.

Example

A person in a strange house is hungry and looks for food. They find some under the staircase. When they are in another house and hungry the first place they look is under the stairs.

So What? Using it

Understand what drives people and stimulate these in order to get a person into action. Ensure you motivate the drive such that the person acts in a way that you want them to.

Defending

When you feel driven to do something, pause and wonder why. Have you been wound up like a toy by someone?

Durability bias

Description

When we predict how long we will feel about some event, we tend to over-estimate the duration of the emotional impact.

Whatever our emotions, although we have ups and downs, we tend to return to a neutral 'home' position within a relatively short time.

This may be caused by focalism, where people focus too much on the event in question and not enough on other future events.

Durability bias is a form of impact bias. Research

Wilson et al found that football fans were less likely to over-predict how long the outcome of a football game would influence their happiness if they first thought about how much time they would spend on other future activities

Example

I think about how I would feel if my girlfriend left me. I suspect I would feel very upset and believe I would feel this way for a long time to come. The fact that I might meet someone else before long and change how I feel does not come into my thinking.

So What?

Using it

Getting people to think about other events that will happen in the future and how they will react to these will reduce their misperception about how long they will feel about current events and the emotional impact of this.

You can also use this by getting people to think only about the impact of a desirable/undesirable event and how long the feelings about this will last.

Defending

When thinking about how long you will feel about something, include the possibilities of other events changing how you feel now. E Ego Depletion

Description

As humans, we have have natural urges and tendencies which, if we indulged, would not always be socially acceptable. We therefore need to control these and a key part of childhood is spend in learning this discipline. We also need to do things that we do not necessarily want to do, which also requires inner control.

There are a number negative emotions that we may experience, from anger to fear, yet in social situations there is a common value that such emotions should be suppressed rather than expressed. Such control also takes ongoing effort, peaking at the moments when there internal pressure to say or do something that might later be regretted.

This self-management takes constant emotional and cognitive effort. In these acts of self-control and will-power, some acts take more effort than others. Overall, though, there is almost always some ongoing effort in staying socially acceptable.

We have limited resources for this task, which can run low, leaving us exhausted and vulnerable. In this state we may make more errors and our decision-making ability may well be impaired. We may also be more liable to outbursts, such as of anger or shock. As control loosens emotions intensify, including positive ones, and the person may become more excited.

In a Freudian sense, this self-control uses the conscious 'ego' to control the basic desires of the 'id'. Hence as it gets worn down through exercise, the ego becomes depleted.

Ego depletion tend to result in greater attention to the short term with priority being given to this and consequent ignoring of longer-term factors. This can lead to unwise decisions.

The depletion that is caused may be restored to some extend by rest and positive experiences. It has also been found that ingesting glucose has a significant restorative effect. This depletion and restoration has contributed to the metaphor of will as a 'muscle'.

Research

Baumeister et al (1998) put subjects in either the position of having to resist taking chocolates or resist eating radishes, or having nothing to resist. They then gave them an impossibly difficult problem to solve. Those who had to resist chocolates reported being more exhausted and gave up on the problem earlier than either of the other two conditions.

Subsequent research by Baumeister has shown that people who are less intelligent, and so find it harder to do mental problems, suffer greater ego depletion. He also found that ego depletion in shoppers was more likely to lead to impulse purchases.

Example A person who is from a social group where swearing is common goes to a party in polite company. They try not to swear, but as the evening wears on, a few expletives do slip out.

So What?

Using it

Asking people to do things they would not normally do, and which requires cognitive and emotional effort, will act to tire them, making them more liable to accept later suggestions.

Defending

When you seem to be putting effort into something, beware of making subsequent significant decisions. Take a good rest and refresh yourself before deciding.

Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis

Description

If we feel empathy towards a person who needs help, we are likely to help them (in proportion to the empathy felt) without any selfish thoughts. Otherwise, we will help them only if the rewards of helping them outweigh the costs.

Rewards of helping can be many and various, including relief from the distress of seeing another in trouble. This means separating true altruism from selfish concerns can be very difficult.

Beggars live totally off empathy and can be expert at putting themselves in situations to increase this, such as using children and animals.

Research

Toi and Batson (1972) played a ‘radio station interview’ to students about a disabled person who needed help. Afterwards they received an anonymous request for help. When instructed before the experiment to be objective about what they heard, the students were much less likely to offer help than when they had been asked to focus on how the person might be feeling.

Example

So what? Using it

Find empathetic people or create an empathetic situation before you ask for help.

Endowed Progress Effect

Description

When people feel they have made some progress towards a goal then they will become more committed towards continued effort towards achieving the goal.

Perception is critically important with this and the appearance of progress can have a strong effect whilst actual progress that is not recognized can be demotivating.

The corollary is that people who feel they are making little or no progress will be more likely to abandon efforts.

As people get closer to the goal, their commitment is likely to deepen as they strive increasingly harder to achieve success.

Research Nunes and Dreze set up a system in a car wash where you needed eight stamps on a loyalty card to get a free car wash. In variant (A) customers theoretically needed ten stamps, though the card already had two 'free' stamps on it. In (B) the card had only space for eight stamps.

In variant (A), with two 'free' stamps, the redemption rate was 34%. In (B) the redemption rate was only 19%. Also, the customers in (A) also came back more often and the time between washes got shorter and shorter as they got closer to the free car wash.

Example

A teacher gives homework where the first couple of questions are short and easy. The questions then slowly get harder.

So What?

Using it

If you are seeking to create change or keep somebody committed to a longer term goal, show them that they are making progress. This may be helped by making the first steps very easy for them.

Defending

If you feel you have to keep working towards something that you actually do not really want, then take a deep breath and quit.

Endowment Effect

Description When I own something, I will tend to value it more highly. If I have to sell it, I will probably want to ask more than it is really worth.

Research

In a Duke University study, students who had won prized basketball tickets would sell them at around $2400. Those who had not won would pay about $170.

Example

Look around your house. Pick something. How much would you sell it for? How much would people really pay for it? How much would you pay for something like this at a second-hand store? The contents of your house are more valuable to you than other people.

So what?

Using it

When you want somebody to feel well-off, get them to total up their net worth.

Defending

When you are buying something, take along a neutral sales guide to show people what they are selling is really worth. Epistemological Weighting Hypothesis

Description

We gain knowledge in two ways:

(a) By ourselves, by both active trial and error and passive observation.

(b) Through others, by communication and observation.

When our views differ from the group’s view, these conflict with one another. The degree to which we will conform with the group norms depends on the weighting we place between personal and social knowledge.

So what?

Using it

Find the weighting that other person uses and play to it. For example, if they are biased towards social knowledge, then talk about what other people have done.

Defending

Know your own preference. Beware of people who play too much to it. Equity Theory

Description

People are happiest in relationships where the give and take are about equal. If one person is getting too little from the relationship, then not only are they going to be unhappy with this—the person getting the lion’s share will also be feeling rather guilty about this imbalance. This is reinforced by strong social norms about fairness.

In short-term relationships we tend to trade in things, such as loaning small sums or buying beers. In longer-term relationships the trade is more emotional.

Overall, though, it is still better to be getting more than less—although you could feel better about the relationship, the benefits you get from it can buy you compensatory happiness elsewhere.

Equity Theory is also called Inequity Theory as it is the unequal difference that is often the area of interest.

Example

Men who have been pulled away from their family by their work sometimes try to even the scales with expensive holidays. This does not work well as they are trying to trade (short-term value) money for (long-term value) emotion.

So what? Using it

If you are getting the short end of the stick in a relationship, use this to make the other person feel even more guilt than they already feel. Get them to focus on the value of the relationship itself rather than the more material things they are getting from it.

Defending

If you are getting what you want from a relationship, resist attempts to change the balance.

ERG Theory

Description

Clayton Alderfer extended and simplified Maslow's Hierarchy into a shorter set of three needs: Existence, Relatedness and Growth (hence 'ERG'). Unlike Maslow, he did not see these as being a hierarchy, but being more of a continuum.

Existence

At the lowest level is the need to stay alive and safe, now and in the foreseeable future. When we have satisfied existence needs, we feel safe and physically comfortable. This includes Maslow's Physiological and Safety needs. Relatedness

At the next level, once we are safe and secure, we consider our social needs. We are now interested in relationships with other people and what they think of us. When we are related, we feel a sense of identity and position within our immediate society. This encompasses Maslow's Love/belonging and Esteem needs.

Growth

At the highest level, we seek to grow, be creative for ourselves and for our environment. When we are successfully growing, we feel a sense of wholeness, achievement and fulfilment. This covers Maslow's Self-actualization and Transcendence.

So what?

Using it

Find the relative state of the other person's needs for each of existence, relatedness and growth. Find ways of either threatening or helping to satisfy the needs.

Defending

Know how well your own needs in this model are met, and what would threaten or improve them. Be careful when other people do things that threaten or promise to improve them. Escape Theory

Description

Many of the activities in which we indulge help us to get away from our lives or our characters with which we are not happy. These can be relatively harmless, such as sports or hobbies. they can also be hazardous and even fatal, including taking drugs and indulging in extreme sports. At the most extreme, some commit suicide to escape an unhappy life.

In effect, we are trying to escape from our selves or some aspect of our character. Of course this cannot be done but this does not stop us from repeatedly trying.

Research

Heatherton and Baumeister found significantly more dysfunction with regard to body esteem, suicidal ideation other irrational thoughts with those who indulged in binge drinking, as compared with non-binge-drinkers.

Baumeister found escape behavior in such as sexual activities and suicide.

Example

I have a boring and unfulfilling job and have difficulty sustaining love relationships. I often go out drinking with my friends at the weekend.

So What?

Using it

Offer people escape as a negotiation chip or to create a sense of reciprocity.

You can also perhaps help people who you can see escaping, for example by enabling them to live more fulfilling lives.

Defending

Note your own tendency to escape. Re-think your life and motivations as appropriate, getting help where you can. Expectancy Violations Theory

Description

We predict the future based on our schemas and other beliefs we have formed. Having made the prediction, we then expect our predictions to come true. When they do not, an expectancy violation has occurred.

What happens next is that we are surprised. This draws us in, capturing our attention as we try to understand what has happened and perhaps modify our schema to cope with this new situation.

Socially, we have expectations about how other people should and will behave. Our reaction to the deviations of others from expectancy depends on what we have to lose or gain.

How we react to violations depend on reward value, or what we expect to get from the relationship. Thus a man is likely to react more positively towards an attractive younger woman standing close than a larger man from an out-group.

Research

Karmarkar and Tormala found that people who’d read tentative professional review of a restaurant were willing to pay 56% more than people who read the highly certain professional review. Yet those who read a confident amateur review were willing to pay 54% more for a meal than those who read an uncertain amateur review.

People expect experts to be confident and amateurs to be uncertain. When this expectation was violated, the resulting surprise seems to have led the subjects to conclude particular significance in the statements.

Example A sales person showing a person a pricey hi-fi system that has moderate quality. This sets the price-performance expectation. They then show them a mid-priced one which sounds much better. They then 'share' (and so amplify) the person's surprise at the superior quality. The person happily walks out with the system (which has a good margin), convinced they have a bargain.

So What?

Using it

Surprise people. Set their expectations then do something different. A good way is to set expectations low then exceed them.

Defending

Beware of people who surprise you, then try to convince you about something.

Expectancy Theory Description As we constantly are predicting likely futures, we create expectations about future events. If things seem reasonably likely and attractive, we know how to get there and we believe we can 'make the difference' then this will motivate us to act to make this future come true. Motivation is thus a combination of:

 Valence: The value of the perceived outcome (What's in it for me?)

 Instrumentality: The belief that if I complete certain actions then I will achieve the outcome. (Clear path?)

 Expectancy: The belief that I am able to complete the actions. (My capability?) Of course you can have an unpleasant outcome, in which case the motivation is now one of avoidance. Expectancy Theory is also called Valence-Instrumentality-Expectancy Theory or VIE Theory. So what? Motivate people to do something by showing them something desirable, indicating how straightforward it is to get it, and then supporting their self-belief that they can get there.

Explanatory Coherence

Description

When we are trying to understand something, we will often build several candidate hypotheses as possible explanations. We will tend to prefer those explanations which:

 Have greater explanatory breadth, which explains a wide number of factors.

 Are simple, requiring very little thought to fully understand.

 Are plausible, being easy to explain from other information. Once the scales are tipped and one hypothesis starts to look good compared with the others, the acceptability of the hypothesis rapidly increases until it is the only 'logical' choice.

Example

If a friend is unpleasant to me, I like to think that they have had a bad day. This explains other behaviors too, is simple and can easily be explained away.

So what?

Using it

When explaining something help the other person to develop an internal hypothesis that is easy for them to accept.

Defending

Beware plausible explanations. Extended Parallel Process Model

Description

People who are threatened will take one of two courses of action: danger control or fear control. Danger control seeks to reduce the risk. Fear control seeks to reduce the perception of the risk. Danger control is outer-focused and towards a solution. Fear control is inner-focused and away from a solution.

For danger control to be selected, a person needs to perceive that an effective response is available (response efficacy) and that they are capable of utilizing this response to reduce the risk (self efficacy). If danger control is not selected, then action defaults to fear control.

So what?

Using it

If you want a person to take an action, show them the threat, but also ensure they can see that there is a solution which they can use (probably your solution).

Defending

When feeling threatened, pause before taking the ‘obvious’ solution to reduce the threat. Consider who else will benefit from you using the solution. External Justification

Description

When we do something that causes uncomfortable cognitive dissonance, we will have a greater tendency to justify it by making external attributions, blaming it on something outside of us. This is as opposed to internal justification, where we attribute it to our character or some personal trait or belief.

Example

When you last had a car accident, did you blame yourself? Or did you blame the road, the rain, or something else?

So what?

Using it

When the other person runs away from the truth, maintain the tension by holding up a mirror so they cannot externally justify their actions. Or take the opposite approach: when they are suffering dissonance, build trust by helping them externally justify.

Defending

Beware of people blaming you as they externally justify their actions. Ethnocentric Bias/Group Attribution Error

Description

Groups tend to behave in many ways like individuals, making decisions in similar ways. However, the rules for group decisions are not necessarily the same as for the individuals within the group.

The group attribution error occurs where it is assumed that individuals in the group agree with the decisions of the group. When people make decisions in groups they often follow group rules and are influenced by the social dynamic within the group at the time, thus downplaying their own real preferences.

Attribution often tends to be done at group level, whether in-group or out-group, assuming that those within an identified group think in the same way. This helps us talk about 'them' as a coherent concept, but falsely assuming that people within the group are more similar than they actually are.

Example

Business meetings are a minefield of bias and false attribution, often with decisions forced by individual members. Yet the whole team may well be seen as owning the decision, including by themselves and by others.

So what? Using it

Just because a team has made a decision, don't assume that everyone agrees. You can change decisions by approaching individuals.

Defending

When in a group, you don't have to buy into decisions made. Also beware of others assuming that you agree with decisions the group makes.

Extrinsic Motivation

Description

Extrinsic motivation is when I am motivated by external factors, as opposed to the internal drivers of intrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivation drives me to do things for tangible rewards or pressures, rather than for the fun of it.

When I do something, I have to explain why I do it. If I am being rewarded extrinsically for doing it, then I can explain to myself that I am doing it for the reward. In this way, rewards can decrease internal motivation as people work to gain the reward rather than because they like doing the work or believe it is a good thing to do.

In effect, extrinsic motivations can change a pleasurable into work. There are three primary types of extrinsic motivation, as in the table below:

Behavior sustained Motivation Example by...

...environmental reward Do work because paid to External motivation or punishment do it. contingencies.

...desire to avoid Do work to earn money to Introjected motivation internally imposed guilt sustain family. and recrimination .

...desire to express Do work because it is Identified motivation important self- 'what I want to do'. identifications.

Research

Lepper, Greene and Nisbett (1973) asked two groups of children to do some drawings. One group was promised a 'good player medal' for their work and the other was promised nothing. On a return visit, the groups were given paper and crayons and what they did was observed. The group who had been given the medal for drawing previously spent significantly less this time drawing as compared with the no-reward group.

Example

Supermarkets use loyalty cards and discounts, airlines use air miles, companies use bonuses and commissions. Extrinsic motivation is everywhere.

So what?

Using it

You can offer positive motivations such as rewards and other bribery or you can use negative motivation such as threats and blackmail. Either way, extrinsic motivation is crude, easy and often effective. However it focuses people on the reward and not the action. Stop giving the reward and they’ll stop the behavior. This can, in fact, be useful when you want them to stop doing something: first give them extrinsic rewards for doing the unwanted behavior, then remove the reward. F False Consensus Effect

Description

We tend to overestimate how the degree to which our own behavior, attitudes, beliefs, and so on are shared by other people.

This may be because our friends and people we spend time with are indeed like us, and we use theAvailability Heuristic to deduce that many other people are similar (our own beliefs, etc. are also very available). When there is limited information on which to base a good estimate, then what we believe is a fair alternative to a wild guess. We will use false consensus more when we attribute our own behavior to external factors as these are the same factors which presumed to affect others. False consensus also helps reinforce my own motivations.

False consensus is stronger when:

 The behavior is seen to come from strong situational factors.

 The matter at hand is seen as being important to the person.

 When we are largely sure we are correct.

Research

Ross and colleagues asked students to walk around campus with a sign saying ‘Eat at Joe’s’. Those who agreed said that 62% of other people would agree to carry the sign. Those who disagreed said that 67% would not carry the sign.

Example

Romantic relationships between people often start off with a glow as hormones and False Consensus overshadow real differences. However, the cloud-9 effect eventually wears off as the loving couple eventually discover that they are not, after all, that similar (and in fact often are amazingly incompatible!).

So what?

Using it

Build rapport by assuming their behavior, attitudes and beliefs. Other people are very often taken in by such false empathy as they see it as normal that you are like them.

Defending

See other as they are, not as you want them to be. False Memory Syndrome

Description

We can have quite vivid memories of past experiences which are actually false but which we absolutely believe to be true.

This can be caused by such as police questioning or helpful psychotherapists. When we are sufficiently motivated, we can actually change what we remember.

People are better at creating false memories when asked to imagine the supposed event in detail, and if they are also good imagers.

We can also easily create a false memory when two things are similar. For example we may be sure a specific person was at an event when actually it was someone else who looked like them.

False memory can appear when we want something to have happened just because it is pleasant to recall.

This is caused by what is sometimes called 'imagination inflation'.

Example

In a famous 1988 case, Paul Ingram was accused by his daughters of having committed sexual abuse, satanic rituals and even murder (they suddenly remembered these events after many years). Even he eventually became convinced that he must have committed these crimes and then somehow repressed the memories. He was given a long prison sentence. Many believe that he is innocent and a victim of false memory syndrome.

So what? Using it

If you pressurize someone, they may suddenly 'recall' something that reduces that pressure, either giving you what you want or giving them a way out. Beware of such sudden memories.

Defending

Do not depend on your memory to be completely accurate (or even any way accurate), especially if you want to believe a memory and even more especially if someone else wants to believe the memory and they are pressing you to recall it.

Fatigue

Description

Causes of fatigue include:

 Insufficient, interrupted or irregular sleep

 Disruption of the biological clock and daily patterns of activity

 Incorrect nutrition, especially deficiencies of B vitamins, vitamin C, magnesium, sodium, zinc, L-tryptophan, L-carnitine, coenzyme Q10, and essential fatty acids.

 Insufficient water intake.

 Various drugs, especially those that affect muscles.  Conditions such as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

 Age

 Physical activity

 Stress

 Cognitive effort

 Boredom

 High levels of noise

Symptoms of fatigue include:

 Forgetfulness

 Reduced ability to communicate clearly

 Yawning

 Always tired

 Closing eyes, nodding off

 Lack of alertness

 Drowsiness

 Socially withdrawn

 Moodiness, quick to anger

 Sore eyes

 Depression

 Lack of self-regulation

 Impaired decision skills

Physical fatigue reduces the ability to perform physical activities such as running and lifting. Fatigue also affects cognitive functioning and it becomes harder to think and make effective decisions. This is significant wherever choice is important, such as for doctors and nurses, soldiers, etc. We like choice as it gives us a sense of control. Yet increased choice requires more cognitive effort, which is more tiring, causing decision fatigue. This can lead to people preferring less choice, which can seem counterintuitive (Iyengar and Lepper, 2000).

Research

Fletcher et al. (2003) and others have found similar patterns of performance loss when comparing the effects of fatigue and alcohol.

Example

A tired nurse forgets to administer critical drugs to a patient.

Near the end of an energetic match, a footballer passes the ball to an opposing player when a team-mate was nearby and could easily have taken the ball.

So What?

Using it

People may well be easier to persuade when they are tired, both because they do not have the energy to argue and because they will put less effort into deciding.

When giving people a choice, you can give them less to make it easier, or give them a lot if you want to tire them so you may then make a recommendation that is easier to accept.

Defending

Avoid important decisions when you are tired. Sleeping on decisions is a good way to make better decisions. Focalism

Description

When we are experiencing emotions about a current or anticipated event, we tend to think just about that event and forget about the other things that happen.

Focalism thus happens where we tend to assume that our feelings are driven by a single event in current focus and not the complexity of events we experience.

Example

When a mother is asked to imagine how she would feel seven years after the death of her child, she will likely focus exclusively on that tragedy and fail to consider the many other events that will happen over that time period, capture her attention, require her participation, and hence influence her general emotional state.

So What?

Using it

Focus on one thing when persuading and the other person may forget other factors.

Defending

Keep your mind open about the multiple causes of how you feel. Focusing Effect

Description

When we are making judgments, we tend to weigh attributes and factors unevenly, putting more importance on some aspects and less on others.

This is typically due to factors such as stereotyping and schemas that we use that bring certain factors to mind and downplay others.

Research

Schkade and Kahneman asked people who would be happier, Californians or Mid-westerners. Many said Californians because they placed disproportionate focus on the assumption of there being more sun in California and that the lifestyle was more relaxed. The higher crime rate and threat of earthquakes in California was not given any focus.

Example I am deciding between buying one of several houses. I choose the house with the biggest kitchen, perhaps because my current kitchen is small and this causes me problems.

So What?

Using it

Get people thinking about the topic for decision long ahead of the decision to be made. Put particular emphasis on, and play up, attributes that you want them to use when deciding.

Defending

When making a decision, pause to identify all attributes first and give them rational weighting.

Forced Compliance

Description

People sometimes feel obliged to comply with commands against their will or better judgment. When this happens, some expected and some odd effects can happen:  People will comply with perceived authority, even acting in strongly immoral ways or doing other things that contradict their values.

 Attempts at forced compliance can easily create a backlash effect, particularly amongst those who refuse to comply.

 Persuaders who are disliked are more likely to be successful in creating a change in attitude.

The reason why disliked persuader are more effective is possibly because of the way people seek to explain and justify their actions. If they comply with someone attractive or otherwise likable, they can tell themselves they were acting as a favor to the person or because they liked them.

Research

Zimbardo et al (1965) used an authority figure to pressure students into eating Japanese grasshoppers. When the persuader acted politely, a significant number of students later reported a lower affinity with eating grasshoppers than when the persuader was brusque.

Example

A sales manager rudely interrupts a sales person's spiel to correct performance details about car. The customer finds the car more interesting.

So What?

Using it

Be careful with this as having other people liking you is generally good for persuasion. An effective way of using this is with a collaborator who plays the persuasive 'bad guy' on a particular point to your 'good guy' who completes the overall persuasion.

Defending

Notice how you react to persuasive comments. You can sometimes be persuaded by attractive people and, as noted here, also by people who are less attractive! Four-factor Model

Description

When people tell lies, there are four underlying mechanisms at work:

 Arousal: Lying causes anxiety and arousal, either because of dissonance at conflicting values and behavior, or due to fear of getting caught. This can be detected via lie detectors, speech errors and hesitations, repetitions, fidgeting and displacement activity, blinking, higher vocal pitch and pupil dilation.

 Behavior control: We try to control body language that might give us away. In fact this is impossible and leakage often occurs, for example where we are controlling our face and our legs give us away.

 Emotion: Our emotions change when we are lying. For example, duping delight, where the liar is secretly pleased at their perceived success. Guilt may also appear. Micro-motions in facial muscles can betray hidden emotions.

 Thinking: To lie, we usually have to think a lot harder, such as to ensure coherence in our arguments. This leads us to take longer in speaking with more pauses. We also tend to use more generalities to avoid getting trapped by specific detail.

Research

Zuckerman et al. found pupil dilation to be a fairly good indicator of deception. Many other indicators have been found, such as fidgeting, blinking, vocal pitch, etc. Like non-verbal behavior, however, no single method is guaranteed to work each time.

Example

Poker players often wear dark glasses to hide the dilation of their pupils when they are aroused that they cannot control. Otherwise, they are often masters of controlling their non-verbal behavior.

So what?

Using it

Do not lie, especially in front of someone (like the police) who are trained to spot lies. Use the above pointers to detect when others are lying. Filter Theory

Description

We make some choices through a series of selection filters. The more important, the more effort and filtration. One of the most important selections is of our friends and partners.

Relationships go though stages whereby different criteria are used at successive stages. It starts with social variables, such as class and religion. Then it moves to internal values. Finally, it moves to personality traits. Note that we seek similarity in social variables and values, but personality traits may be complementary.

Example

Men often seek female partners initially on looks. Other compatibility factors are considered after the initial advance (or even much later in the relationship).

So what?

Using it

Be aware of the social, values and trait stages and be ready to match the other person at each stage. Point out how rivals do not fit the current filter.

Defending

Watch out for too-close matching. If someone fits all of your criteria all of the time, check whether they are like this with other people. Framing

Description

A frame is the combination of beliefs, values, attitudes, mental models, and so on which we use to perceive a situation. We effectively look through this frame in the way we would look through tinted spectacles. The frame significantly effects how we infer meaning and hence understand the situation.

Kahneman and Tversky defined a decision frame as ‘the decision-maker’s conception of the act, outcomes and contingencies associated with a particular choice.’

Research

Tversky and Kahneman offered people one of the following choices:

 A: A sure gain of $240

 B: A 25% chance to gain $1000 and 75% chance of getting nothing.

84% of people chose the more certain A. They then offered them one the following choices:  C: A sure loss of 750

 D: A 75% chance of losing $1000 and a 25% chance to lose nothing.

Now 73% preferred to gamble.

The framing of the question in each case was important, as B and D actually have higher expected utility (value) than A and C. It also shows how framing a choice in terms of gain will push people towards a certain decision, whilst framing it in terms of a loss increases the chance that people will choose to gamble.

Example

I see a holiday in the hills as a opportunity for outdoor exercise. My friend sees is as a chance for a quiet read. My son sees it as a long period of boredom.

So what?

Using it

Change elements of a person's frame (reframing) and hence how they view the world). This is a powerful persuasive technique.

Being able to see things through many frames yourself gives you a broader perspective and able to understand more of how others think.

Defending

When people ask you to look at something from another viewpoint, be aware that there are manyviewpoints, many of which are valid and legitimate.

Friendship Description Factors which increase the chance of making friends include:  Similarity: How much we have in common with them (‘birds of a feather’). Similar friends provide social validation for our beliefs, characteristics, etc. In practice, opposites seldom attract.

 Proximity: The Propinquity Effect leads us to like most people we see often.

 Reciprocity: We like people who like us and dislike those who dislike us.

 Beauty: Physical attraction counts, although how it is defined varies around the world.

 Competence: We like people who are competent (but they should not be tooperfect). Example Think about your friends. How many have the above characteristics? What about people who you see to whom you feel immediate attraction? Frustration-Aggression Theory

Description

When people perceive that they are being prevented from achieving a goal, their frustration is likely to turn to aggression.

The closer you get to a goal, the greater the excitement and expectation of the pleasure. Thus the closer you are, the more frustrated you get by being held back. Unexpected occurrence of the frustration also increases the likelihood of aggression.

Research

Barker, Dembo and Lewin (1941) put toys behind a wire screen where children could see them. When they eventually got to play with them, their play was very destructive.

Example

Football crowds can become aggressive when their team starts to lose. People in business can also become aggressive when others start to frustrate their ambitions.

So what?

Using it

You can cause tension by frustrating the other person, but beware of it turning to aggression.

Defending

Beware of people winding you up. If they dangle a carrot then whisk it away, either refuse to play or play hard, early and fast. Fundamental Attribution Error

Description

When we are trying to understand and explain what happens in social settings, we tend to view behavior as a particularly significant factor. We then tend to explain behavior in terms of internal disposition, such as personality traits, abilities, motives, etc. as opposed to external situational factors.

This can be due to our focus on the person more than their situation, about which we may know very little. We also know little about how they are interpreting the situation.

Western culture exacerbates this error, as we emphasize individual freedom and autonomy and are socialized to prefer dispositional factors to situational ones.

When we are playing the role of observer, which is largely when we look at others, we make this fundamental attribution error. When we are thinking about ourselves, however, we will tend to make situational attributions.

Research

Edward Jones and Victor Harris (1967) asked people to assess a person’s pro- or anti-Castro feelings given an essay a person had written. Even when the people were told the person had beendirected to write pro- or anti- arguments, the people still assumed the author believed what they were writing.

Example

I assume you have not done much today because you are lazy, rather than perhaps tired or lack the right resources.

So what? Using it

Beware of people blaming you for things outside of your control. Also watch out for people doing it to you. You can make friends and build trust when individuals are blamed by others, by showing that you understand how it is not to do with their personality.

Defending

Watch how others make attributions. When they seem to go against the trend and be in your favor, be curious about their motives.

G Gambler's Fallacy

Description

The 'Gambler's Fallacy' (first noted by Laplace in 1796) occurs where people assume they can predict random events.

A number of descriptions define this solely in terms of reversals, where it is assumed that when one alternative happens it is less likely to happen in subsequent events. This is to misunderstand the law of large numbers, where a large number of random events, such as coin tossing, will closely approach the natural distribution (eg. 50% heads and 50% tails).

This fallacy can appear as a contradiction to the Hot Hand Phenomenon, where a run of success is assumed to continue. In the more general description of the gambler's fallacy, it includes the assumption of a run of luck or 'winning streak', where because I have won several times I feel I am more likely to continue winning.

Other false predictions around luck include assumptions of luck running out and being on a losing streak.

Generally we all need to explain our experiences (as in attribution theory) and gamblers are no different. They thus form theories about why they are winning or losing based on luck and their own skill. Recency and availability effects also have an impact on predictions.

Example

I toss a coin and it comes down heads. I expect the next coin to be more likely to be tails than heads. It comes down heads. Now I am even more convinced that the subsequent coin will very likely be tails. If I am a betting person, I might double my bet each time, sure that I will walk away a winner.

So What?

Using it

Encourage people to take risks by telling them they (or your or the investment firm, etc.) are lucky or on a 'winning streak'.

Defending

Understand probability. Avoid depending on luck. Watch out for people who encourage otherwise. Goal-Setting Theory

Description

In order to direct ourselves we set ourselves goals that are:

 Clear (not vague) and understandable, so we know what to do and what not to do.

 Challenging, so we will be stimulated and not be bored.

 Achievable, so we are unlikely to fail.

If other people set us goals without our involvement, then we are much less likely to be motivated to work hard at it than if we feel we have set or directed the goal ourselves.

Feedback

When we are working in the task, we need feedback so we can determine whether we are succeeding or whether we need to change direction. We find feedback (if it is sympathetically done) very encouraging and motivating. This includes feedback from ourselves. Negative self- talk is just as demotivating as negative comments from other people.

Directional and accuracy goals

Depending on the type of goal we have, we will go about achieving it differently.

A directional goal is one where we are motivated to arrive at a particular conclusion. We will thus narrow our thinking, selecting beliefs, etc. that support the conclusion. The lack of deliberation also tends to make us more optimistic about achieving the goal.

An accuracy goal is one where we are motivated to arrive at the most accurate possible conclusion. These occur when the cost of being inaccurate is high. Unsurprisingly, people invest more effort in achieving accuracy goals, as any deviation costs, and a large deviation may well more. Their deliberation also makes them realize that there is a real chance that they will not achieve their goal. When we have an accuracy goal we do not get to a 'good enough' point and stop thinking about it--we continue to search for improvements.

Both methods work by influencing our choice of beliefs and decision-making rules.

Research

Tetlock and Kim motivated people to use accuracy goals by giving them a task and telling them they would have to explain their thinking. The people wrote more cognitively complex responses than the control group.

So what? Using it

If you want someone to deliberately think about what they are doing, give them an accuracy goal.

Defending

Choose your own goals. Notice the difference between when you are diving into action and when you are carefully thinking.

Group Locomotion Hypothesis

Description

Members of a group are motivated to help achieve the goals of the group. This is a classic situation of conformity, where the individual replaces their own desires with the greater good.

Example

I am a member of the Parents Association at the local school where my children attend. I know many teachers there and spend many hours helping out the school.

So what?

Using it

Be a member of a group. Ensure the group goals are aligned with your goals. Ensure the others in the group know the goals.

Defending

When looking at a group, find out their goals and decide whether these make sense to you before joining. Group Polarization Phenomenon

Description

In groups, people tend to be more extreme in their decisions.

Imagine you are arguing your point with someone else: to make the point and separate what you have to say from other people, you may exaggerate your position somewhat. The problem then is that having taken a position you feel obliged to support it, even if you think it actually is a bit extreme.

People who tend to take risky decisions will make riskier decisions in a group as the risk is shared (risky shift). People who are more conservative will tend to make very conservative decisions as they take on the persona of the group and try to protect them from the effects of any risky decisions.

Example

Groups of young people will often do stupid things that they later bitterly regret. So what?

Using it

To get risky decisions made, bring together people who tend towards risk. To sustain the status quo, use groups of conservative people.

Defending

When a group you are in makes a decision, highlight the real risk vs. the assumed risk in the decision.

Groupthink

Description

Groups sometimes fall into a style of thinking where the maintenance of the group’s cohesion and togetherness becomes all-important and results in very bad decision-making. Janis (1972) defines it as "a way of deliberating that group members use when their desire for unanimity overrides their motivation to assess all available plans of action."

The eight primary symptoms of groupthink are:

 Illusions of invulnerability where the group think it is invincible and can do no wrong.

 Collective efforts to rationalize or discount warnings.

 Unquestioned belief in the moral correctness of the group.

 Stereotyped views of the out-group, often as too evil, weak or stupid to be worth bothering with.

 Self-censorship as people decide not to rock the boat.

 Pressure to conform.

 A shared illusion of unanimity (everyone always agrees with everyone else).

 Protecting the group from contrary viewpoints, by self-appointed ‘mind-guards’.

As a result, groups 'suffering' from group think are more likely to:

 Be dogmatic.

 Justify irrational oor decisions.

 See their actions as highly moral.

 Stereotype outsiders.

Groupthink happens most often when the group is already cohesive, is isolated from conflicting opinions and where the leader is open and directive. The lack of a formal decision process is also common.

Problem-solving and task-oriented groups are particularly susceptible.

Resulting decisions are often based on incomplete information and fail to consider alternatives and risks.

Example

The most famous example of Groupthink is the presidential advisory group who almost led Kennedy into invading Cuba and potential nuclear war in the Bay of Pigs affair. The Challenger disaster was another effect where NASA officials disregarded engineer’s concerns and decided to launch the shuttle.

For an enjoyable example, watch the movie 'Twelve Angry Men', which is about blind agreement and dissent on a jury.

So what?

Defending

The leader should avoid being too directive and be vigilant for groupthink effects. External opinions should be taken seriously or even having external people included in meetings. The group should be split into subgroups for reporting back and discussion. Individuals should be privately polled for personal opinions.

H Halo Effect

Description

When we consider a person good (or bad) in one category, we are likely to make a similar evaluation in other categories.

It is as if we cannot easily separate categories. It may also be connected with dissonance avoidance, as making them good at one thing and bad at another would make an overall evaluation (which we do anyway) difficult.

Research

Edward Thorndike found, in the 1920s, that when army officers were asked to rate their charges in terms of intelligence, physique, leadership and character, there was a high cross-correlation.

Example

Just because I dress like a rock star, it does not mean I can sing, dance or play the guitar (come to think of it, the same is true of some real rock stars!).

So what? Using it

Show how you are good at something, even somewhere relatively unimportant, and then talk about something else where the other person can infer you are equally good.

Heuristic-Systematic Persuasion Model

Description

People either use heuristics and short-cuts in decision-making or they systematically process the merits and demerits of a given argument.

Heuristics include our own emotions as we ask ‘How do I feel about this?’ although this can cause a problem where we mix up the cause and effect of our emotions.

Systematic processing is more likely when:

 Careful thought is likely to generate judgment confidence.  The message is uncertain or unexpected and more thought is needed to work out what it means.

 The message is particularly relevant to the person, such as when it is about them personally or about their goals or interests.

 The person does not agree with the message or feels threatened, and is seeking to resist any persuasive attempts.

Example

When asked to donate to a charity I will quickly dig into my pocket. If asked to help more actively, I will think about it more carefully.

So what?

Using it

Embed heuristics and trite statements in a peripherally-aimed speech and there’s a good chance they will get through.

Defending

When things are important do not use short-cut decision-making, especially if others are encouraging you to do so. Hostile Media Phenomenon

Description

Opposite groups, such as at football matches, will both perceive balanced and neutral views as hostile to their side. This is why referees are universally disliked.

We see the world through the eyes of our own side and thus have very biased view of anything about situations where we compete.

Research

Vallone, Ross and Lepper (1985) showed news broadcasts about the Middle East to Arabs and Israelis. Each group thought the broadcasts were biased towards the other side.

Example

Fighting children will both will see intervening teachers as being 'unfair'.

So what?

Using it

Beware of treating innocent bystanders as being 'on the other side' (they are actually potential recruits!). The Hot Hand Phenomenon

Description

The Hot Hand Phenomenon occurs where people believe that 'success breeds success' such that when a person succeeds at something then they are more likely to succeed in subsequent attempts, whereas the truth is that they are still governed by the laws of chanced.

Whilst there is some truth in this in that a person may be particularly fit or their confidence is boosted by an initial success, the 'Hot Hand' phenomenon goes past this where people make assumptions that are statistically inaccurate.

The Hot Hand Phenomenon is also known as the Hot Hand Fallacy, and is sometimes contrasted with the Gambler's Fallacy, where reversals of fortune are assumed.

Research

Gilovich, Vallone, & Tversky questioned 100 basketball fans. 91% thought a player has a better chance of making a shot after having just made his last two or three shots than he does after having just missed his last two or three shots.

Given a player who makes 50% of his shots, these subjects thought that the shooting percentage would be 61% after having just made a shot 42% after having just missed a shot.

84% thought it important to pass the ball to someone who has just made several shots in a row.

A later statistical analysis of shots showed that these assessments were wildly inaccurate.

Example

A soccer player scores two goals. More of his team mates start passing him the ball more often in the assumption he is 'on the ball'.

So What? Using it

Talk up how you (or others) are 'on form' as you encourage them to support you.

Defending

If a player (including you) seems hot, enjoy the skill but do not bet on the 'run' continuing.

Hindsight Bias

Description

It can be embarrassing when things happen unexpectedly. To cover up this embarrassment we will tend to view things which have already happened as being relatively inevitable and predictable.

This can be caused by the reconstructive nature of memory. When we look back, we do not have perfect memory and tend to ‘fill in the gaps’.

This is also known as the ‘I-knew-it-all-along’ effect, reflecting a common response to surprise.

Hindsight bias can be reduced when people stop to think carefully about the causes of the surprise. It is also important to consider how other things might have happened.

Research

Fischhoff gave participants a detailed description of an event that could have had various outcomes. When the people were told of what 'happened' (this was varied for the experiment, of course) and then asked to estimate the probabilities of the various outcomes, they increased the likelihood of the 'actual' outcome.

Example

Fatalism is a whole branch of philosophy dedicated to explaining how things are inevitable. It is very helpful for those using hindsight bias.

So what?

Using it

If you want someone to believe something, engineer a slightly disturbing surprise such that they will have to change their beliefs (and even their memories) in order explain it.

Defending

When you are surprised, bite your tongue before you say you are not surprised. It is not a sin to be surprised and it is a great opportunity for real learning.

Hyperbolic discounting

Description

Given a choice, we choose a small benefit in the short term over a larger benefit in the longer term. However, if all choices appear to be in the longer term, larger benefits will be chosen, even if these appear even later than the smaller benefit.

The name 'hyperbolic' comes from the fact that when plotted on a graph, the change in preferences for short and long-term gives a hyperbolic shape over time. This reflects the way we that value things is inversely proportional to delay.

A contributory reason for this may be that our perception of time is non-linear. The year ahead seems quite long, whilst a year in ten years time is conceived as being shorter. In our conception of time, we often use a 3-D visual representation, in which the effects of perspective foreshorten more distant periods.

Research

Ainslie showed that this effect happens with pigeons, implying that it was a deep instinct.

Example

If you were offered the choice between $50 now and $100 a year from now, most would ask for the $50.

However, given the choice between $50 in nine years or $100 in ten years you would be likely choose the $100 in ten years.

So What?

Using it

Offer immediate payment and you may well get a discount. When selling, you can sell for a higher price if you allow the other party to pay later.

Defending

Be rational about the utility of things. When offered 'pay later' deals, understand the real effect on your finances. I Illusion of Asymmetric Insight

Description

We commonly believe that we understand others better than they understand us.

The rationale for this stems from our external, objective viewpoint and the assumption that the other person has a significant blind self, whilst our own blind self is small.

There is also asymmetry in the reverse situation -- we believe we understand ourselves better than others understand us and may feel insulted if they try to show they understand us more than we do.

The same effect happens for groups, where the in-group believes they understand out-groups better than out-groups understand them.

Overall, this is a position where we generally assume we know more than others, perhaps because we know more about what we know.

Research

Pronin et al found that college roommates believed that they knew themselves better than their roommates knew themselves.

Example

In an argument with another person you tell them what they are like in great detail because clearly they have very little self-knowledge. They argue back telling you things about yourself that are clearly wrong or that you knew anyway. How can people be so stupid?

So What?

Using it

Be cautious about judging others and assumptions that they do not know themselves.

Defending

When others try to read your mind, forgive them their foolishness. Do not be drawn into slanging matches. Illusory Correlation

Description

We often mistakenly assume things are correlated when they are not. When we make this mistake, we will find ways to ‘prove’ it or simply believe and assert the correlation.

This is particularly likely when the things we are correlating stand out in a distinctive way.

The opposite is an invisible correlation where an actual correlation is missed, for example the link between smoking and cancer was not realized for a long time.

Research

Redelmeier and Tversky (1996) assessed 18 arthritis patients over 15 months, whilst also taking comprehensive meteorological data. Virtually all of the patients were certain that their condition was correlated with the weather. In fact the actual correlation was close to zero.

Example

I meet people from around the world. One of the ways I assess people is how generous they are. I meet a person who is very generous. I like them and ask where they are from, which turns out to be Iceland. I later meet another generous person who also turns out to be from from Iceland.

I assume that most people from Iceland are, by my standards, generous. In fact, I've spoken to many people from Iceland before who were not that generous, but I did not pay attention to their origins.

So what?

Using it

Assert correlation between the use of your product and the health, wealth and happiness of everyone who uses it.

Defending

When a correlation is asserted, ask for proof. Beware also when you find yourself finding correlation—it may have been caused by subtle manipulation of your expectations.

Imagined Memory Description Although we reconstruct memory, we can often tell the difference between what is a real memory and what is an imagined memory. Real memories include more:

 Sensory data. We recall colors, how things physically felt, smells, etc.

 Detail, including irrelevant stuff. Where books were on the bookshelf. What a person at the bus stop looked like. etc.

 Association, such that the memories logically link to other memories and events.  Logic. Imagined memories can be impossible. We can also get confused and turn an imagined memory into what we think is a real memory. Repeated thinking about something can add the necessary detail. Example Police cross-questioning witnesses can implant false memories. Hypnotic techniques are particularly susceptible. Police also know what to look for in liars. So what? Detect lying by asking about sensory data, detail, etc.

Impact Bias

Description

When we think about some emotional event, we tend to over-estimate how strongly we will feel, how long this will last and other factors that impact us. This applies to both negative and positive events.

In doing so, we tend to forget that other events in our life, as well as our general ability to recover from trauma will mitigate these feelings. Gilbert et al called this ability to recover the 'psychological immune system', in the way that we psychologically fight bad feelings and hence recover from trauma faster than we might otherwise do.

Research

Gilbert et al demonstrated in 6 studies that participants overestimated the duration of their affective reactions to the dissolution of a romantic relationship, the failure to achieve tenure, an electoral defeat, negative personality feedback, an account of a child's death and rejection by a prospective employer.

Example

When I think about breaking up with my girlfriend, I believe I will be so upset I will unable to do my job effectively for a long time to come.

So What?

Using it

Persuade people by asking them to think about the emotional impact of events you describe. They will over-estimate and hence be more open to suggestions.

Defending

Think twice when considering your emotional response to events. Know that we are better able to cope than we sometimes give ourselves credit for. Implicit Personality Theory

Description

This is the general expectations that we build about a person after we know something of their central traits. For example when we believe that a happy person is also friendly.

Example

I may assume intelligent people are arrogant, quiet people are timid and aggressive people are stupid.

So what?

Using it

Understand the traits that are implicitly linked with traits with which you want to be associated. Then display these traits and by inference, you will assumed to have the other traits. For example, a person who is polite and attentive may well be assumed to be trustworthy also.

Defending

Think carefully about people to whom you are giving trust. Do you have real evidence about their trustworthiness, or are you guessing it from other cues. Impression Management

Description

When we are under scrutiny, we will try to deliberately manage the impressions that others form of us.

We will use self-enhancement to make us seem good, for example through smart dress, careful language, etc. The alternative is other-enhancement to make the other person feel good, such as with flattery.

Example

Watch people being interviewed on TV. Notice how a good interviewer uses other-enhancement to relax them. Spot how people use self-enhancement to look good.

So what?

Using it

Look good, sound good, make the other person feel good. But don’t over-do it!

Defending

Appearances are deceptive. Inattentional Blindness escription

Inattentional Blindness occurs where attention to one thing causes us to miss what to others may seem to be blindingly obvious.

We have a limited ability to focus and attention in one area can distract us from another area.

Visually, if we are engaged in imagination we create internal pictures that uses some of the bandwidth of the image processing parts of the brain. This may impede the ability to process real-world images.

This effect is significantly increased after drinking even a small amount of alcohol, which may dull our ability to attend.

Research

Simons and Chabris served participants drinks, which unbeknownst to the subjects either contained alcohol or did not.

After downing their drinks, the participants watched a 25-second video clip of six people playing with a ball. They were instructed to count the number of passes.

Halfway through the video, a person dressed in a gorilla suit ran through the game beating its chest.

Subjects who had consumed the alcoholic beverage were twice as likely to miss seeing the gorilla, even though it was onscreen for nearly a third of the test. Example

A person driving whilst talking on a mobile phone misses a red light at a crossroads and has a serious accident.

If I look for red things, all red things seem to jump out at me. In doing so, I am less likely to notice green things.

So What?

Using it

To distract people away from one thing, get them to focus on something else thing. Giving them even a bit of alcohol increases this effect.

Defending

When people seem to be distracting you, look elsewhere to see what is happening.

Information Bias

Description

When we are trying to make a decision, we generally seek data on which to rationally base the choice. Where this goes wrong, is when we assume that all information is useful, and that 'more is better'.

Sometimes, extra information adds no significant value. Sometimes it simply serves to confuse.

Research Baron, Beattie, and Hershey (1988), gave subjects a diagnostic problem involving fictitious symptoms, tests and diseases. Many subjects said they would need additional tests even when they had sufficient data.

Example

A manager gets consultants to do a study of the marketplace when a third party report is already available at far less cost.

So What?

Using it

When you want people to pay attention to your information, even when they have other information you may well be able to present it, for example as 'new findings'.

You can also deliberately create overload by encouraging people to seek more and more data.

Defending

Think first about what information you need and go for that which is just sufficient and necessary. Information Manipulation Theory

Description

In order to persuade or deceive, a person deliberately breaks one of the four conversational maxims:

 Quantity: Information given will be full (as per expected by the listener) and without omission.

 Quality: information given will be truthful and correct.

 Relation: information will be relevant to the subject matter of the conversation in hand.

 Manner: things will be presented in a way that enables others to understand and with aligned non-verbal language.

Example

A student is late handing in an essay. They approach the lecture trembling and weeping, saying how they have just been dumped by their long-term partner and forgot to hand in the essay (they had done it in time, honestly!).

So what?

Using it

Persuade by omitting information, telling untruths, going off the subject and confusing the other person. Use excuses. Be economical with the truth. Woffle.

Defending

Question what you are told, especially you find yourself changing your mind as a result. Probe for detail. Seek corroborating evidence. Watch the body language. Information Processing Theory

Description

To be persuaded, you have to first pay attention to a message and then agree with it. To agree with it, you must compare your previous view with the new view and reject the previous view.

Example

'Testimonial' promotions often have people telling how they used to think that their old washing powder was good until they tried the new Sudso brand. This is telling the audience how to think.

So what?

Using it

Ensure the other person hears your message. Elicit any opposing views they have and guide them through the comparison with your message.

Defending

Beware of people telling you how to think and make decisions. Do not be led. Informational Social Influence

Description

When we do not know how to behave, we copy other people. They thus act as information sources for how to behave as we assume they know what they are doing. Also because we care a great deal about what others think about us, this provides a safe course of action—at the very least, they cannot criticize us for our actions.

We are more likely to use this principle when the task in question is important to us.

This leads to such effects as people ignoring public muggings and cult members being led into bizarre and even suicidal acts.

Private acceptance occurs when we genuinely believe the other person is right. This can lead to permanent changes in beliefs, values and behaviors.

Public compliance occurs when we copy others because we fear ridicule or rejection if we behave otherwise.

Informational social influence (also called social proof) occurs most often when:

 The situation is ambiguous. We have choices but do not know which to select.

 There is a crisis. We have no time to think and experiment. A decision is required now!  Others are experts. If we accept the authority of others, they must know better than us.

In other words, when we are not sure of our own ability to know what to do, we will look to others to tell us.

Example

Police often find themselves in situations of ambiguity and crisis. People will naturally turn to the police for advice in such situations.

So what?

Using it

Get the other person into a state of relative confusion where they are uncertain about what to do next, then lead them to where you want them to be. It works best if you go first, doing it. Telling them what to do can also be effective, but requires them to accept you as an authority.

For permanent change, precede this by sufficient work that they trust you completely and view you as an authority with enviable values and beliefs.

Defending

When the situation is ambiguous or in crisis, do not just look to other people (who may well be looking to you). In particular, beware of people who set themselves up as an authority without adequate proof (and a white coat or commanding attitude is not proof).

Know that you always have individual choice, just as you have individual responsibility for your own actions. In any situation, you always have common sense available to you. Do not abandon it.

In-Group Bias

Description

If we believe that someone else is in a group to which we belong, we will have positive views of them and give them preferential treatment. This works because we build our self-esteem through belonging, and the presence of someone from an in-group reminds us of that belonging.

The opposite of in-group bias is out-group biaswhere, by inference, out-group people are viewed more negatively and given worse treatment. This is the basis of racial inequality.

In-group linguistic bias is where out-group people are described in abstract terms (which depersonifies them) when they conform to the out-group stereotype. Out-group people will be referred to in more specific, concrete terms when they act in unexpected ways.

Research

Henri Tajfel visibly divided people in to random groups. They rapidly found in-group people preferable to out-group people, even finding rational arguments about how unpleasant and immoral the out-group people were.

Example

Watch children in the school yard. Notice how they form groups and how they treat those not in their gang.

So what?

Using it

Make yourself and the other person a part of the same group, and they will be biased towards you (and away from anyone you cast as out-group). Inoculation

Description

Like in medicine, this is using a weak dose of a counter-argument to make a person resistant to it.

Inoculation works because it exposes people to arguments, making them think about and rehearse opposing arguments. When they hear the arguments again, even stronger versions, they pay less attention to them, especially if they believe their opposing argument is stronger.

There are three stages to inoculation:

 Warning: Tell the person that it is about to happen so they are forced to get ready.

 Weak attack: Attack them, but weakly so they can easily resist.

 Active defending: The person must actively defend them self (and find it relatively easy to do so).

Example

My child was being verbally abused at school. I play-acted with him the situation. I played the abuser, but with weak and stupid insults. He played himself, laughing them off. When he got to school, he found verbal abuse easy to dismiss.

So what?

Using it

After persuading someone, inoculate them to prevent anyone else later undoing your good work. Tell them about people who will try to persuade them otherwise and help them develop counter- arguments.

Defending

Just because an argument works against something, it does not mean it is valid in other, similar circumstances. Insufficient Punishment

Description

This is the dissonance felt when a person lack sufficient external justification for having resisted a desired activity or object. This often results in the person devaluing the forbidden thing.

Research

Aronson and Carlsmith (1963) threatened children with either mild or severe punishment if they played with favored toys. None of them played with toys, even when left alone with them. Afterwards the children who had only been mildly threatened favored the toys less. Lacking a strong external justification, they had made internal attributions that they actually did not like the toys so much.

Example

Company disciplinary systems often start with a weak dissuasion. This is all that most people need. Before long they not only follow but believe the company line.

So what?

Using it

To stop someone doing something, don’t threaten massive punishment. Threaten only just enough (or use some other minimal technique) to stop them for a while. Eventually, they will give up voluntarily. Interpersonal Deception Theory

Description

Lying happens in a dynamic interaction where liar and listener dance around one another, changing their thoughts in response to each other’s moves. Liar behavior includes:

 Manipulating information: to distance themselves from the message, so if the message is found to be false, they can extricate themselves. Thus they use vague generalities and talk about other people.

 Strategically control behavior: to suppress signals that might indicate that they are lying. For example their face may be more impassive and body more rigid.

 Image management: for example by smiling and nodding more.

Example

Watch small children who have found out about lying. They point at their siblings, put on their best 'innocent' expression, hold their hands behind their backs. At that age they are very flexible and learn fast. Before long they can pull the wool very well over their parent's eyes. So what?

Using it

To detect liars, watch for the above behavioral patterns. People who are liars themselves tend to be better at detecting lying because they know the techniques better.

Interpersonal Expectancy Effect

Description

The way we act towards others depends on how we perceive them and hence predict how they will behave. The way they behave is then impacted by our expectation of them as they act to fulfill this expectation and so a self-fulfilling prophecy is created.

As a part of this process we expect and look for particular attributes and behaviors in the other person and ignore those factor which we do not expect. This helps confirm our suspicions. It also downplays the importance of these behaviors for the target person.

This is also known as the 'Pygmalion Effect', after the book by George Bernard Shaw. A related effect is the Galatea Effect, whereby we meet the expectations (high or low) we place upon ourselves.

Research

Rosenthal and Jacobson told teachers that random students were 'late bloomers' and would soon show a marked improvement in their performance. These children did improve, because of the expectancy that had been created in the teachers and their subsequent change in behavior towards these students.

Example

A manager tells subordinate that they are good at analysis but bad at interpersonal influence. The person's analysis results improve but their relationships with others deteriorates.

So What?

Using it

To get someone to behave in a certain way, first believe that they are capable of doing this and then communicate your expectation to the other person.

Defending

When people expect you to fail, reject this and set your own expectations. Interview Illusion

Description

After only a brief conversation with another person, we believe we understand them well enough to be able to predict their behavior in all kinds of different situations. As we learn more about the person, we may change this view, but each time we will end up believing our revised model is sufficient to predict.

We also tend to integrate this perception so well we forget how we felt before we created this perception. We believe that we have always seen the person in this way.

Our deep need to predict and the limited time we have with others leads us to use this short-cut approach. Our needs for consistency and Hindsight Bias affects our changing perception of ourselves.

Example

Parents and especially grandparents are often shocked at the behavior of young people. They have forgotten and revised their perception of their former adolescent misbehaved selves.

So what?

Particularly when you first meet people, help them to form a useful prediction model of yourself. If things go wrong, don't worry. Although it is more difficult, once you have convinced them that you have changed, unless you have seriously betrayed them, they will forget how they previously perceived you (literally forgiving and forgetting). Intrinsic Motivation

Description

Intrinsic motivation is when I am motivated by internal factors, as opposed to the external drivers of extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation drives me to do things just for the fun of it, or because I believe it is a good or right thing to do.

There is a paradox of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation is far stronger a motivator than extrinsic motivation, yet external motivation can easily act to displace intrinsic motivation (see the Overjustification Effect).

Example

Most people's hobbies are intrinsically motivated. Notice the passion with which people collect little bits of china or build detailed model ships. Few people carry that amount of passion into their workplace.

So what?

Using it

If you can get someone to believe in an idea or align their values with what you want, then you have set very powerful motivation in place. Seek to make them feel good about what you want.

Also minimize extrinsic motivation. So, for example, pay them fairly, then do everything to keep money out of the equation of why they come to work. Investment Model

Description

Our commitment to a relationship depends on how satisfied we are about:

 Rewards and costs and what we see as a fair balance.

 A comparison with potential alternative relationships

 How much we have already invested in the relationship.

Investments can be financial (like a house), temporal (such as time spend together) or emotional (such as in the welfare of the children). Investments can thus has a ‘sunk cost’ effect, where a person stays in a relationship simply because they have already invested significantly in it.

Research

Rusbult tracked relationships of college students. Their satisfaction and investment were key predictors staying in the relationship, with availability of alternatives as a trigger for getting out.

Example

Cults often have a sequence of 'inner circles', each of which requires increasing investment. To get through these doors cult members have to donate their worldly wealth, go through bizarre rituals, learn lengthy texts, and so on. So what?

Using it

To keep a person in a relationship, get them to invest heavily in it.

Defending

If you are unhappy with a relationship, remember that the past is past. Look to the future and what you can get there rather than what you have spent and can never retrieve. All you have is the rest of your life.

Involvement

Description

When a person is emotionally involved in an issue they will process information and hence react in a different way to when the issue is not important and they are not really paying attention to it.

Involved people want to make their own decisions. Non-involved people do not want to put effort into decisions and will probably let you tell them what to think.

Involved people want clear and sufficient information from which to draw conclusions. People can be encouraged to become non-involved people when they are snowed with a lot of complex information. Quantity may thus be inaccurately equated to quality. Example

When a charity can get someone involved, they know that they can get that person for life. The first involvement need only be a small one-day helping with a collection, but you are already on the hook. Once they have you on the local committee, then you are definitely a lifer.

So what?

Using it

Draw people in. Get them involved. Give them things to do. Let them make decisions.

Defending

Just because you are involved it doesn't mean you have to go all the way. Always ensure you have a way out.

Ironic Reversal

Description When we are trying to avoid doing, saying or thinking about something, we often find that this is impossible.

This is because of the 'Catch 22' situation that in order to avoid thinking about something, we need to know what we are trying to avoid and hence we have to think about it. The situation then gets worse as our failure to succeed causes us to work harder at the task.

The thought can also act as a block against other thoughts. When searching for a word for a particular situation, the more available words that pop into our minds first become more available and consequently keep coming back when we try to think of other words.

As we get worn out by this fruitless task, our ability to control the situation weakens, we get stuck in the cycle and thinking can easily turn into saying and doing. Repetition also tends to strengthen our belief in what we are thinking, as inMere Exposure Theory.

This spiral can easily fall into obsessive-compulsive behaviors and many psychological disorders include an inability to stop thinking about something uncomfortable.

Research

Wegner and associates asked people not to mention a word and then talked to them giving them cues that would trigger the participants into saying the words. When the participants were put into a higher-stress situation, then mentioned the words far more often.

Example

Hypnotists use this in phrases like 'You may notice how, as your eyes close, your hand gets heavier and you sink into a deep trance.'

When you are trying to solve a crossword puzzle or quiz question, even though your first idea is not right, it gets in the way of you finding the correct answer.

Telling children not to drop a plate makes them think about dropping it, thus taking them a step closer to the act!

So what?

Using it

If you want someone to think about something, talk about it (or even tell them not to do/say/think about it). To accentuate the effect, get them cognitively overloaded and stressed beforehand.

Defending

The way out of the trap is not to try. It's like going to sleep: the more you try, the more you can't. The trick is to not be bothered about it, reducing the stress. J James-Lange Theory of Emotion

Description

We have experiences, and as a result, our autonomic nervous system creates physiological events such as muscular tension, heart rate increases, perspiration, dryness of the mouth, etc. This theory proposes that emotions happen as a result of these, rather than being the cause of them.

The sequence thus is as follows:

Event ==> arousal ==> interpretation ==> emotion

The bodily sensation prepares us for action, as in the Fight-or-Flight reaction. Emotions grab our attention and at least attenuate slower cognitive processing.

This is not a new theory and was proposed in 1884. It combined the ideas of William James and Danish physiologist Carl Lange, who largely independently arrived at the same conclusion. William James described it thus:

"My theory ... is that the bodily changes follow directly the perception of the exciting fact, and that our feeling of the same changes as they occur is the emotion. Common sense says, we lose our fortune, are sorry and weep; we meet a bear, are frightened and run; we are insulted by a rival, and angry and strike. The hypothesis here to be defended says that this order of sequence is incorrect ... and that the more rational statement is that we feel sorry because we cry, angry because we strike, afraid because we tremble ... Without the bodily states following on the perception, the latter would be purely cognitive in form, pale, colorless, destitute of emotional warmth. We might then see the bear, and judge it best to run, receive the insult and deem it right to strike, but we should not actually feel afraid or angry"

Lange particularly added that vasomotor changes are the emotions.

It was largely supplanted by the Cannon-Bard theory, but of late, it has made something of a come-back, although the notion of causality is not as strong and there is ongoing uncertainty as to the chicken-and-egg question of which comes first, physiological and emotional feelings. Example

I see a bear. My muscles tense, my heart races. I feel afraid.

So What?

Using it

Watch people's physiological signals (facial color, etc.) and deduce what emotions will result.

Defending

Notice your own physical feelings and muse about how these lead to emotion. If you could relax deliberately, would you feel better?

Justification of Effort

Description

If I have to work hard to achieve something, I will afterwards find it more attractive.

This effect works because the thought of having wasted effort would show me to be stupid and consequently damage my self-esteem. If others know about the effort, then the cost of backing out is even higher.

Research

Aronson and Mills (1959) recruited students for a discussion group, making it varyingly difficult for each third. When asked to rate a boring tape recording, it was scored most highly by those who had had the most severe initiation.

Example

Gangs and secret societies have known this for years, with sometimes very painful and degrading initiation rites. So what?

Using it

Make entrance examinations, rituals, etc. difficult. This will not only help keep members—it will also give your club an air of exclusivity.

Just-world phenomenon

Description

We tend to believe that the world is, on the whole, fair, and that wrongs will be punished and rights rewarded at some time in the indeterminate future.

The Bible agrees: 'whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.' (Galatians 6:7). The Christian religion also includes the potential for reward and punishment to be meted out after death in the fields of heaven or fires of hell. This attitude helps us make sense of the world as we translate events as being just, fore- ordained or inevitable.

This is also a mindset of bullies, who believe that they are punishing their victims.

Research

A number of studies have shown beliefs that people who suffer deserve it and have brought their ills upon themselves.

Example

A common belief is that homeless people are obviously lazy, whilst rich people probably got their wealth through diligent hard work.

So What?

Using it

Help people attribute cause where it serves your purpose.

Defending

Be charitable. Beware of assuming the unfortunate deserve what they get. K Kin Selection / Prosocial Behavior

Description

Prosocial behavior occurs when someone acts to help another person, particularly when they have no goal other than to help a fellow human.

So why does this altruistic behavior appear? One thought, of Kin Selection, is that it is a genetic response to supporting the broader gene pool. Social conditioning can also have be a cause and prosocial parents lead to prosocial children.

The Reciprocity Norm may also have an effect, where people help others, knowing that one day they may want someone else to help them in the same unselfish way. Demonstrating such social norms is likely to get you admiration from other people around you.

Prosocial behavior varies with context as much as between people. Men will tend to be chivalrous for short periods, whilst women will work quietly for longer periods. People who are in a good mood are more likely to do good, as are people who are feeling guilty. People in small towns are more likely to help than those squashed together in cities.

Example

Evidence abounds of people helping others without asking for anything in return. This is the whole principle of charity. Their rationale for helping others is often Intrinsic Motivation.

So what?

Using it

Ask for help. It is surprising how often people will give it, without thought of asking for something in return.

Defending

When you are helping other people out of the goodness of your heart, beware of people taking advantage of you. This does not mean you should not be altruistic; just beware of vampires. L Lake Wobegon Effect

Description

We tend to over-estimate our abilities and achievements, particularly in comparison with other people.

Most importantly, we like to consider ourselves 'above average'. High achievers (or those who consider themselves to be such) think themselves in the top X percent, where X may be 25, 10, 5, 2 or 1, depending on the frame of reference.

This happens largely because we derive our sense of self-worth in contrast with other people. Thus, rather than considering myself 'good', I actually seek to be 'better'.

Lake Wobegon appears in the radio series 'A Prairie Home Companion', by Garrison Keillor, where "all the children are above average".

Research

This effect has been found in many studies, for example Zuckerman and Jost found that most students considered themselves more popular than average.

Example

I am a consultant and am therefore more knowledgeable about most areas than all of my clients. I am also cleverer than most other consultants.

So What? Using it

Flatter people by recognizing them as above average or deflate them by being honest about how average they are.

Defending

Look in the mirror and know that you are not perfect. Accept this and accept yourself. Beware of acting cleverer than you are and hence appearing stupid to others.

Language Expectancy Theory

Description

In any situation we will have expectations about what language will and will not be used. When language outside this region is used, we will be surprised and possibly shocked.

For example men are expected to use stronger language than women. Men are also expected to use stronger language when they are with other men than when a woman is present. And men on a football field are expected to use stronger language still.

When language that is unexpected or vivid is used, then it is often remembered more, possibly because the listener thinks about it more, perhaps to try and understand why it was used or to process the mental pictures created.

Research Burgoon, Jones and Stewart (1975) found that women using intense language were less persuasive than men using the same language.

Example

My teenage daughter has picked up some rather choice language from her peers and has started to use it at home. I find use of such foul-mouthed words in my home appalling, especially from her.

So what?

Using it

Understand the effects of language in a given situation. Know when you will surprise and shock and use the appropriate words for desired effect.

Law of Attraction

Description The more we have similar attitudes to other people, the more we are attracted by them. This is a pretty linear relationship. 'Birds of a feather flock together' much more than 'Opposites attract'.

Research

Byrne (1971) asked people to complete a questionnaire on their personal characteristics. The people were then shown (fabricated) descriptions of a range of different people and asked how they felt towards them. Those with characteristics similar to the person being studied were rated as more attractive.

Example

Professional societies, religious groups, sports clubs. All are opportunities for birds of a feather to find one another.

So what?

Using it

Assume the attitudes of the person you are trying to persuade.

Defending

Notice who you like. Notice the similarity of your and their attitudes. Now notice what they may have to gain from this similarity. Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory

Description

Leader-Member Exchange Theory, also called LMXor Vertical Dyad Linkage Theory, describes how leaders in groups maintain their position through a series of tacit exchange agreements with their members.

In-group and out-group

In particular, leaders often have a special relationship with an inner circle of trusted lieutenants, assistants and advisors, to whom they give high levels of responsibility, decision influence, and access to resources. This in-group pay for their position. They work harder, are more committed to task objectives, and share more administrative duties. They are also expected to be fully committed and loyal to their leader. The out-group, on the other hand, are given low levels of choice or influence.

This also puts constraints upon the leader. They have to nurture the relationship with their inner circle whilst balancing giving them power with ensuring they do not have enough to strike out on their own.

The LMX process

These relationships, if they are going to happen, start very soon after a person joins the group and follow three stages.

1. Role taking

The member joins the team and the leader assesses their abilities and talents. Based on this, the leader may offer them opportunities to demonstrate their capabilities.

Another key factor in this stage is the discovery by both parties of how the other likes to be respected.

2. Role making

In the second phase, the leader and member take part in an unstructured and informal negotiation whereby a role is created for the member and the often-tacit promise of benefit and power in return for dedication and loyalty takes place. Trust-building is very important in this stage, and any felt betrayal, especially by the leader, can result in the member being relegated to the out-group.

This negotiation includes relationship factors as well as pure work-related ones, and a member who is similar to the leader in various ways is more likely to succeed. This perhaps explains why mixed gender relationships regularly are less successful than same-gender ones (it also affects the seeking of respect in the first stage). The same effect also applies to cultural and racial differences.

3. Routinization

In this phase, a pattern of ongoing social exchange between the leader and the member becomes established.

Success factors

Successful members are thus similar in many ways to the leader (which perhaps explains why many senior teams are all white, male, middle-class and middle-aged). They work hard at building and sustaining trust and respect.

To help this, they are empathetic, patient, reasonable, sensitive, and are good at seeing the viewpoint of other people (especially the leader). Aggression, sarcasm and an egocentric view are keys to the out-group wash-room.

The overall quality of the LMX relationship varies with several factors. Curiously, it is better when the challenge of the job is extremely high orextremely low. The size of the group, financial resource availability and the overall workload are also important.

Onwards and upwards

The principle works upwards as well. The leader also gains power by being a member of their manager's inner circle, which then can then share on downwards. People at the bottom of an organization with unusual power may get it from an unbroken chain of circles up to the hierarchy.

So what?

Using it

When you join a team, work hard to also join the inner circle. Take on more than your share of administrative and other tasks. Demonstrate unswerving loyalty. See your leader's point of view. Be reasonable and supportive in your challenges to them, and pick your moments carefully.

As a leader, pick your inner circle with care. Reward them for their loyalty and hard work, whilst being careful about maintaining commitment of other people. Defending

If you want to be an 'ordinary' member of a team, play your part carefully. There will be others with more power. If you want to lead an equal team, beware of those who curry favor.

Learned Helplessness Theory

Description

How we attribute the events that occur in our lives has a significant effect on our attitudes and efforts in improving our lot. In particular there are three types of belief affect us:

 Stable or unstable cause: If we believe that events are caused by factors which do not change, we assume that it is not worth us trying to change them. So if I believe my success is based on an unchangeable ability, it will seem that it is not worth my trying to improve myself.  Internal or External cause: We can believe that events are caused by ourselves or something outside of ourselves. If I assume a serious car crash was my fault, I will be less likely to drive again than if I attribute it to a greasy road.

 Global or Specific cause: If we believe that events are caused by a large number of factors then we feel we can do less to change things than if we see few and specific causes.

Research

Seligman rang a bell whilst shocking a restrained dog. He then allowed it to move out of the way and rang the bell again. The dog did not move! What it had learned was not that ringing a bell means pain, but that it is futile trying to get away from shocks.

Example

If a poor test result is attributed to a lack of intrinsic capability as evidenced by many past failures, then we are likely to reduce our efforts, be more depressed and view ourselves in an ever-fading light.

So what?

Using it

To build influence, make and encourage attributions about other people so they learn helplessness and become dependent on you.

To help people become less helpless, show them what is happening. Help them make attributions that lead to positive actions and 'learned confidence'.

Defending

Positively seek unstable, external and specific causes that mean you can change your world. Guard against friends and others who push you into dependence. Least Interest Principle

Description

In any relationship, the person who has the least interest in continuing the relationship (i.e. has the best walk-away strategy) has the greatest power.

Example

If I am thinking vaguely about selling my house and the buyer is desperately keen on buying it, I have no need at all to reduce my price. I could even invent 'another interested person' to help crank the price up.

So what?

Using it

Develop your walk-away position. Ensure you can leave at any time. Try to damage the other person’s ability to walk away. Watch out for them damaging your walk-away position.

Defending

Never appear desperate for agreement: you will only lose. Linguistic Inter-group Bias

Description

We tend to communicate positive in-group and negative out-group behaviors more abstractly than negative in-group and positive out-group behaviors, which are communicated more explicitly.

Abstract communications tends to be persistent over time. Thus we use abstraction to imply that in-group people are more consistently good and out-group people are consistently bad.

When an item is communicated abstractly, it may be followed up with more detail, perhaps to explain cause.

Research

In a review of Italian reports, Riva and Giuseppe found differences where Berlusconi (head of the right-wing coalition) said: "Previti [a member of his coalition] asked the Rome judge for a suggestion." Referring to the same event, a sample of out-group discourse followed: Rutelli (head of the left-wing coalition) said: "When Previti intended to bribe the Rome judge, he invited him in[to] his office."

Example

My friend John was helpful.

My enemy Jim failed again.

John did not help Jennifer cook the fish last night, because he was not feeling well and had helped at lunchtime.

Jim helped Jennifer pick up the fish from the supermarket this morning.

So What? Using it

To establish yourself in a group, use these patterns to indicate your positive regard for the group and lower regard for out-group members.

Defending

When others talk about you in a way that indicates out-group thinking, challenge them or otherwise correct the language to establish your in-group linguistic pattern.

Locus of Control

Locus of Control as a principle was originated by Julian Rotter in 1954. It considers the tendency of people to believe that control resides internally within them, or externally, with others or the situation.

Note that, like other preferences, this is a spectrum. Some people have a wholly internal or external locus of control, but many will have some balance both views, perhaps varying with situation. For example some may be more internal at home but more external at work.

Internal

People with a high internal locus of control believe in their own ability to control themselves and influence the world around them. They see their future as being in their own hands and that their own choices lead to success or failure.

Rotter (1990) describes the internal locus of control as:

'the degree to which persons expect that a reinforcement or an outcome of their behavior is contingent on their own behavior or personal characteristics' Their belief in their ability to change things may well make them more confident and they will hence seek information that will help them influence people and situations. They will also likely be more motivated and success-oriented. These beliefs may even lead them to be more politically active.

They are more likely to have expectancy shifts, where a sequence of similar events are expected to have different outcomes. They tend to be more specific, generalizing less and considering each situation as unique. People in middle age tend to have the highest internal locus of control.

A downside of an internal locus of control is that, in accepting responsibility, the person has to also accept blame for failures.

External

People with a high external locus of control believe that control over events and what other people do is outside them, and that they personally have little or no control over such things. They may even believe that others have control over them and that they can do nothing but obey.

Rotter (1990) describes the external locus of control as:

'the degree to which persons expect that the reinforcement or outcome is a function of chance, luck, or fate, is under the control o f powerful others, or is simply unpredictable.'

With such beliefs, people with an external locus of control tend to be fatalistic, seeing things as happening to them and that there is little they can do about it. This tends to make them more passive and accepting. When they succeed, they are more likely to attribute this to luck than their own efforts.

They are less likely to have expectancy shifts, seeing similar events as likely to have similar outcomes. they hence step back from events, assuming they cannot make a difference. Younger and older people tend to have higher external locus of control than people in middle age.

Stability

A factor that affects both internal and external locus of control is the stability of the causal factor. Common attributed causes in each of the four cases are shown the table below:

Locus of Control Four common attributed causes Internal External Task Stable Ability difficulty

Stability Unstable Effort Luck

Hence a person with stable internal locus of control will likely assume that failure is due to a lack of their ability, whilst a person with unstable external locus of control might say they were unlucky.

So what?

Understand the preference of the person and the stability of the cause being discussed. If you want to build rapport, attribute to similar causes. If you want to challenge, get them to consider alternative causes or change their locus of control.

If you want people to take more control of their lives, act in a more healthy way or become more successful at studies or work, then encouraging them to take a more internal position may well help. Looking-glass Self

Description

We see ourselves through the eyes of other people, even to the extent of incorporating their views of us into our own self-concept.

Example

Teenagers are often strongly influenced by their peers and will go beyond conforming to changing their self-image to match.

So what?

Using it

If you want someone to believe something about themselves, act towards them as if it were true. Love

Description

Love is a massive motivator and can lead people to perform all kinds of self-sacrificial acts.

In the ninteenth century, the French writer Stendhal described the stages of the 'crystallization' of love as:

 Admiration: Marvelling at the qualities of the other person.

 Acknowledgement: Realizing the pleasure of gaining their attention.

 Hope: Imagining having the love reciprocated.

 Delight: Happiness with the inflated view of the other person's beauty and merit. More recently, Sternberg describes three styles of love:

 Intimacy: Closeness to, and liking of, the other person.

 Passion: Intense longing and physiological arousal. Ecstasy on reciprocation, despair on rejection.

 Commitment: The readiness to do anything for the sake of the love.

These combine to create seven styles:

 Liking: Intimacy alone

 Infatuation: Passion alone

 Empty love: Commitment alone

 Romantic love: Passion + Intimacy.

 Companionate love: Intimacy + Commitment

 Fatuous love: Passion + Commitment

 Consummate love: Intimacy + Passion + Commitment

The games of love are played on six different stages, and individuals will have preferred modes (Lee):

 Eros: Passionate and physical. Looks are important.

 Ludus: love as a non-serious game. Harm is not intended but often happens.

 Storge: slow-growing, evolving out of friendship and affection. Similarity is important.

 Pragma: Commonsense and pragmatic. Known conditions must be met.

 Mania: An emotional roller-coaster. Stereotyped romantic love.

 Agape: Unselfish and giving. Spiritual and other-focused.

Peterson and Seligman reduce love to three prototypical forms:

 Romantic love

 A child’s love for a parent

 A parent’s love for a child Love can be viewed as a form of transferencewhereby one person puts a part of themself into another person and then feeling lost without that part, and subsequently feeling whole again when they relate to that person.

Example

Many romantic mismatches occur when partners both state their love for one another, but each is talking about a different style of love. Maybe you have experience of this?

So what?

Using it

If you want blind followers, look good and build a passionate image. Otherwise find the history of love of the other person and play to their needs.

Great sales people know that the true secret is to love both their products and their customers. They also know that true love binds, and devious trickery is out of the question.

Defending

If you dive into love heart first, pause first and ask whether the other person is truly committed. Beware of blind love. Love can be the best thing ever, but also know that love hurts, especially when betrayed. M Matching Hypothesis

Description

People who become romantic partners tend to have a similar level of physical attractiveness. This also tends to be true about normal friends.

This does not work when one person has particularly low self-esteem. If I don’t like myself, then I won’t like other people who are like me. Also, in times of uncertainty, we may prefer someone different who is more likely to be able to handle the uncertainty.

Research

Walter et al. ran a 'computer dating' dance where people were actually matched up with others, based on attractiveness criteria. Those who were of similar attractiveness were more likely to continue dating afterwards.

Example

Look at the romantic partners you know--are they generally of similar physical attractiveness? Chances are that the majority will be.

So what?

Using it

If your level of physical attractiveness is different from the person you want to partner with, take action! Dress differently. If you’re desperate, consider plastic surgery. Defending

Look beyond attractiveness! Beauty is only skin deep. Find out those other things which are important before making any lasting commitments.

Mental Models/Schema

Description

A schema is a mental structure we use to organize and simplify our knowledge of the world around us. We have schemas about ourselves, other people, mechanical devices, food, and in fact almost everything.

Schemas can be related to one another, sometimes in a hierarchy (so a salesman is a man is a human).

Schemas affect what we notice, how we interpret things and how we make decisions and act. They act like filters, accentuating and downplaying various elements. We use them to classify things, such as when we ‘pigeon-hole’ people. They also help us forecast, predicting what will happen. We even remember and recall things via schemas, using them to ‘encode’ memories. Schemas help us fill in the gaps. When we classify something we have observed, the schema will tell us much about its meaning and how it will behave, hence enabling threat assessment and other forecasting.

Schemas appear very often in the attribution of cause. Themultiple necessary cause schema is one where we require at least two causes before a ‘fit’ to the schema is declared.

Once we have created or accepted a schema, we will fight hard to sustain it, for example by ignoring or force-fitting observations that do not comply with the schema. It is only after sustained contrary evidence that many of us will admit the need to change the schema.

Schemas are often shared within cultures, allowing short-cut communications. Every word is, in effect, a schema, as when you read it you receive a package of additional inferred information.

We tend to have favorite schema which we use often. When interpreting the world, we will try to use these first, going on to others if they do not sufficiently fit.

Schemas are also self-sustaining, and will persist even in the face of disconfirming evidence. This is because if something does not match the schema, such as evidence against it, it is ignored. Some schema are easier to change than others, and some people are more open about changing any of their schemas than other people.

Other types of schema include:

 Social schemas are about general social knowledge.

 Person schemas are about individual people.

 Idealized person schemas are called prototypes. The word is also used for any generalized schema.

 Self-schemas are about oneself. We also hold idealized or projected selves, or possible selves.

 Role schemas are about proper behaviors in given situations.

 Trait schemas about the innate characteristics people have.

 Event schemas (or scripts) are about what happens in specific situations.

 Object schemas about inanimate things and how they work.

The plural of Schema is Schemas (USA) or Schemata (UK). Schemas are also known as mental models, concepts, mental representations and knowledge structures (although definitions do vary--for example some define mental models as modeling cause-effect only).

Research Cohen showed people a videotape of a scene including a librarian drinking. The people recalled (reconstructed) it with the librarian drinking wine, because their schemas for librarians classified them as being more likely to drink wine.

Example

Some people dislike police because they have a schema of police as people who perceive everyone as guilty until proven innocent. Other people feel safe around police as their schemas are more about police as brave protectors.

So what?

Using it

Find people's schemas around the area of interest, then either create trust by utilizing their schema or reframe to change their schema.

Defending

Become more self-aware, knowing your own schemas and why there are useful for you. When people try to change them, you can then more rationally understand whether your or their schemas are better. Mere Exposure Theory

Description

The more exposure we have to a stimulus, the more we will tend to like it. Familiarity breeds liking more than contempt. Things grow on us and we acquire tastes for things over time and repeated exposure.

This stimulus can be people, commercial products, places, etc. We can get to like most things, given time. We can even get to like unpleasant things, such as when prisoners miss prison.

When we make choices, the familiar is often chosen over the unfamiliar. ‘Better the devil you know’ as they say.

Exposure can be overdone. After a certain number of exposures we will ignore the message. If the exposures continue, we will get irritated and ‘take revenge’ by assuming negative responses to the message.

The exposure effect is linked to the disgraced world of subliminal messages and subliminal (<50ms) exposure has increased liking.

Research

Zajonc (1968) showed Chinese characters to people from one to 25 times, asking them to guess the meaning. The more they saw a character the more positive a meaning they gave.

Miller (1976) showed people posters about stopping foreign aid up to 200 times. They were persuaded most by moderate exposure. After 200 exposures they reacted negatively to the message!

Kunst-Williams and Zajonc briefly (1 ms) showed octagons to experimental participants. Although they were later unable to identify the octagons, their liking for the shapes increased.

Example Adverts use this effect. By repeated exposure, viewers gradually start to like the product without every having tried it. It is also possible to become sick of endlessly repeated ads, so advertisers will regularly change the advertisement (thereby giving rise to a highly profitable industry).

So what?

Using it

To convince someone to buy a product, let them use it or even borrow it for a while. Find ways of getting it in front of them, whether it is by advertisements, giveaways or whatever. Repeat advertisements, but not too often.

Defending

When you keep seeing something, wonder why. Notice if someone or some organization is presenting that something to you. Decide consciously about what you like.

Mere Thought Effect

Description

Just thinking about something makes it seem more significant and important. This leads us towards increasingly more extreme attitudes as the item, fresh in the mind, seems bigger and, in contrast, other things seem smaller. In this way, mere thought creates polarization of attitudes.

When people have long enough to muse about something, the mere thought effect may be reversed as their continued reflection and consideration of alternatives acts to balance out the effect, reducing the polarization effect.

Example

Just before a customer visit, a sales person sends the customer some research in areas related to and supporting the salesperson's product. In the sales meeting, they then mention aspects of what they are selling that coincide with the research, which the customer mentions. They discuss this further, after which the customer places an order. The down-sides of the product being sold are never mentioned.

So What?

Using it

To persuade somebody of something, get them thinking about it. Also prevent them thinking about alternatives.

Defending

Always take time to consider multiple viewpoints when making a major decision. Do not get hurried into a decision.

Minimum Group Theory

Description

Even when a people are arbitrarily assigned to unimportant group categories, they will still act in classic ways towards in-group and out-group people. Research

Tajfel (1970) randomly allocated schoolboys to groups who ‘preferred’ paintings by Klee or Kandinsky. When asked to allocate points, they were biased toward their own group.

Example

People in a crowded elevator will silently act together to dissuade additional people from trying to get in.

So what?

Using it

Find a minor point of similarity with the other person and put yourself and the other person in it, with rivals in outside. Talk about ‘us and them.’

Defending

Decide on who your friends are by substantial and sustained evidence, not sudden chumminess and belonging to a common and unimportant category. Minority Influence

Description

Minorities can have disproportionate influence. One person has little influence on a larger group (other than in the position they hold relative to others), and so a stranger will have very little influence. However if that lone voice is joined by one other, they now form a minority group and their confidence and ability to influence jumps significantly, provided that they are in clear agreement.

The social cost of holding a view that is different from that of the majority is relatively high, which means minorities often hold their views more strongly. Their passion often leads them to acquire significant expertise in their areas of interest, thereby increasing their ability to persuade from a position of authority.

Although groups seek to normalize their members’ behaviors, they also will often tolerate minorities. Sometimes this is unavoidable, when the group is a coalition where the minority holds a disproportionate power, such as in coalition governments or where the minority controls key resources, such as a oil supply.

Many people in majorities are only there because they do not hold strong views and are generally conservative in nature and are willing to flex their views to fit in with others. This accepting position also makes them vulnerable to influence and, when faced with a strongly-held minority view, they may be shocked into considering the arguments.

For minorities to be taken seriously, they must be very tight knit, expressing the same viewpoint over a period of time. If they do not do this, they will be ignored as a bunch of individual eccentrics. Given their size, there is more likely to be dissenting voices within any majority. A consistent minority exerts as much influence as a non-unanimous majority, particularly if they can 'divide and conquer'.

Minorities can strengthen their social validity by claiming the ethical high ground in particular areas of interest, such as human rights, and so position themselves in the moral right. They can also leverage and express the views of external, but influential groups, such as when a single person of a given racial background can threaten anti-racial adverse publicity.

Majorities tend to exert normative social influence, whilst minorities tend to use informational social influence.

Example

Trade Unions for specific professions have had disproportionate effect for example through in crippling strikes. Some companies have countered by closing down and then restarting as a non- union employer. So what?

Using it

If you disagree with norms of groups in which you work or socialize, start a minority group. If possible, ensure the minority group controls a critical resource or other form of effective blackmail which can be used to prevent rejection or punishment.

An effective approach is to accumulate ‘brownie points’ by first supporting the majority, and then branching out. With luck and skill, you may take a number of others with you.

You can also remain in the main group and quietly support minority groups who can be used to do things you could not otherwise perform.

Defending

Where you are in the main group and have an influential minority, seek ways of either accommodating or circumventing them. You can also seek to divide and conquer, sowing seeds of discontent within the minority group.

Mood-Congruent Judgment

Description

Our judgments are not cold and logical: they are biased by our moods. When we are in a good mood, we see the world in a more friendly light, and our judgments are more positive. Likewise, when we are grumpy we evaluate things around us as being bad.

This can create a spiral, as positive judgments lead to positive moods. They also lead to positive moods in others, who then infect us back again.

Mood can be affected by such as movies, music and comments of others.

Research

Isen and colleagues gave some people in the street small gifts. Another person then asked them to participate in a 'consumer survey' where they asked about how satisfied they were with their televisions, cars, etc. People who had receive the gift were more positive.

Example

Depressed people see the world as unfriendly and threatening, which keeps them depressed. So what?

Using it

If you want someone to make a decision, either wait until they are in a supporting mood or work to get them into that mood.

Defending

Before making decisions, consider the mood you are in and how this might affect your decisions. After the decision also review the affect of your mood. Consider how you got in the mood and who influenced this.

Mood Memory Description When we encode a memory, we not only record the visual and other sensory data, we also store our mood and emotional state. Our present mood thus will affect the memories that are most easily available to us, such that when we are in a good mood we recall good memories (and vice versa). The associative nature of memory also means that we tend to store happy memories in a linked set. Mood-congruent memory occurs where current mood helps recall of mood-congruent material, regardless of our mood at the time the material was stored. Thus when we are happy, we are more likely to remember happy events. Mood-dependent memory occurs where the congruence of current mood with the mood at the time of memory storage helps recall of that memory. When we are happy, we are more likely to remember other times when we were happy. Research Eich and his associates got people into good or bad moods, gave them neutral words and asked them what past memories came to mind. The memories recalled often had associated moods similar to those that had been induced. Example I like going to the movies. I'm feeling good this evening. I know--I'll go to the movies! I'm depressed. My whole life seems a misery. So what? Find people's current moods by asking about neutral things. Accentuate their current mood and demonstrate how good they can feel by eliciting things from the past. If you want to remember something, get into the mood you were in when you experienced it.

Multi-Attribute Choice

Description

How do people make choices when there are many attributes to compare (which is most of the time). When there are simple choices, they will usecompensatory strategies, trading off different attributes, such as condition against color. Traded attributes are often of similar priority. Another approach is to focus on differences.

With complex choices, non-compensatorystrategies are often used.

 The conjunctive rule is used to eliminate choices that are outside boundaries, such as price levels.

 The disjunctive rule is used to evaluate each choice in terms of its best attribute.

 Lexicographic choice is used to choose on one dimension only.

 Elimination-by-aspects compares one key dimension at a time, eliminating those that do not fit.

Example

When I bought a new pair of loudspeakers, I used a compensatory strategy to compare and trade off differences between the speakers available in the shop.

So what?

Using it

Find out the strategies that they prefer, for example with a discussion about previous choice and then play to it.

Defending

Be aware of the strategies you use and the alternatives. Watch out for people leading you up the garden path. N Negative Face/Politeness Theory

Description

We maintain two kinds of face:

 Positive face, when others like, respect and approve of us.

 Negative face, when we feel that others cannot constrain us in any way.

Both of these may be threatened when someone makes a request of us.

This causes a dilemma, as if I ask in a pleasant way, positive face is satisfied but negative face may lead them to think they can take advantage of us. The reverse is also true, as defensive talk will threaten the positive face.

Conformance to the social rules of politeness is treading a central and safe path which neither threatens nor signals that you may be threatened.

Politeness means acting to help save face for others.

Example

When I am with my boss, I show positive face. When I am with the new guy (who seems pretty incompetent) I show negative face.

So what?

Using it

Build trust by being polite. Use negative face with out-group people or those who would dissuade the other person.

Defending

Just because a person is polite it does not mean they have good intentions towards you. Neglect of probability bias

Description

Probability is sometimes a difficult concept to cope with, particularly when you want to make an absolute yes or no decision. As a result some people completely ignore it, assigning either 100% or 0% to the likelihood of future events.

This leads to an easy black-and-white decision-making process, but a likely disappointment when things do not turn out as expected.

Research

Baron, Granato, Spranca, and Teubal asked children what should be done in a scenario about wearing seat belts. They prevaricated between use and not depending on arguments used.

Example

A person managing a software project promises that it will be delivered on a certain date after planning for all tasks but without including any contingency for risks and unexpected issues.

So What? Using it

Use black and white arguments to test whether people will avoid probability and then (if they do) argue in this way for your case and against alternatives.

Defending

Always know that there is no black and white. Every future event has a probability, which may also change over time with other events.

Non-Verbal Behavior

Description

The communication without words. The face is used a great deal. Hand signals, shrugs, head movements, etc. also are used. It is often subconscious. It can be used for:

 Expressing emotion (e.g. smiling to show happiness)

 Conveying attitudes (e.g. staring to show aggression)

 Demonstrating personality traits (e.g. open palms to show accepting qualities)  Supporting verbal communication

Non-verbal behavior also varies across cultures (such as the ‘ok’ finger O), although the six major emotions (anger, fear, disgust, sadness, happiness and surprise) are common across the world.

Non-verbal behavior is commonly calledbody language.

Research

Mehrabian (1971) found that non-verbal aspects were a significant part of communication, particularly when mixed messages are sent.

Later studies showed the situation to be more complex, with percentages varying with the situation or even with individual things being said. For example, if a person is not moving, then words and tone take far greater proportion.

Example

Try the difference between listening to someone with your eyes closed and listening/watching with your eyes open. It is much easier to understand when you are watching them.

So what?

Using it

Read the other person’s non-verbal behavior. Watch for changes in response to your communications. Also spot mixed messages for when the voice says one thing body says another—this can be a sign of attempted deception.

Beware of popular myths about body language (such as crossing arms signifying defensiveness). Many such anecdotes are at best dangerous half-truths. Body language is most significant when they appear in clusters, at the same time as a significant event (such as being asked an embarrassing question) and when it is unlikely that the other person is trying to control their non-verbal behavior.

Watch your own body language too for signs of what your subconscious is thinking. Be careful when controlling it, as this can lead perceived mixed messages from you.

Defending

Watch your own and other’s non-verbal behavior. Use it to improve your understanding of what is going on, especially at the subconscious level. Make conscious decisions. Normative Social Influence

Description

There is a fundamental human need to belong to social groups. Evolution has taught us that survival and prosperity is more likely if we live and work together. However, to live together, we need to agree on common beliefs, values, attitudes and behaviors that reduce in-group threats act for the common good.

We thus learn to conform to rules of other people. And the more we see others behaving in a certain way or making particular decisions, the more we feel obliged to follow suit.

This will happen even when we are in a group of complete strangers. We will go along with the others to avoid looking like a fool. However the forces are strongest when we care most about respect and love from others in the group. Thus families and friends can apply very strong normative influence.

People with lower self-esteem and who crave approval of others may well be more easily influenced this way.

When a person in a group does not conform, then they may be considered a deviant and both private and public advice may be given to them on how to fit in. If they still do not obey norms, they will eventually be ejected and membership of the group revoked.

National culture also has a significant effect, and people in countries like Japan, who have collectivist cultures, are far more likely to be influenced than in more individualistic cultures, such as in the USA (although it is a testament to the power of this effect that it still has a massive impact here).

Research

Solomon Asch showed a group of people a line on a card and asked them to find a matching line from a group of three lines on another card, one of which was pretty obviously the right choice. The catch was that all except one person in the group were collaborators and chose the wrong line. When it came to the ‘victim’s turn, guess what? In a range of experiments, 76% of them followed suit. The presence of just one supporter reduced this to 18%.

Example

Fads and fashions lean heavily on normative social influence. So do racial, political and other situations of persuasion. So what?

Using it

To change a person’s behavior, put them in a group who (perhaps primed) clearly all exhibit the desired behavior. Then engineer the situation so the person must exhibit the behavior or face potential rejection or other social punishment. If they do not comply, ensure the group gives steadily increasing social punishment rather than rejecting the target person immediately. When they do comply, they should receive social reward (eg. praise, inclusion).

Defending

Where you want to do something and the group in which you currently are socially punishes you for doing it, make a conscious decision as to whether it is worth fighting back or just giving up and leaving. If they mean nothing to you, just carry on and ignore them.

It can also be very heartening to watch other people resisting (and your doing so may well give heart to other doubters).

You can also acquire idiosyncrasy credits,where the group puts up with your eccentricities. To do this, be consistent in what you do, whilst also showing that in doing so you are not threatening the integrity of the group. O Objectification

Description

Complex ideas are, almost by definition, difficult to understand. To help us make sense of them, we turn them into concrete images. There are three processes by which objectification is done:

 Ontologizing gives an idea physical properties, for example by using close metaphors like the ‘mind as a computer’.

 Figuration turns the ideas into pictures or images, for example traffic ‘jams’.

 Personification turns the idea into a person. For example, a genius as Einstein.

The term 'objectification' or depersonification is also used to describe the way we treat other people as objects, in particular the way men can treat women as sex 'objects'. By reducing other people to things, it permits us to treat them with less care and human concern, bypassing our values around this subject.

Example

This car is like a thoroughbred race-horse. Just imagine thundering up the roads, with trees and houses flying by. People will think you are Michael Schumacher. In war, effort is often put into depersonifying the other side, thus legitimizing and even encouraging killing them.

So what?

Using it

Explain your ideas through analogous or metaphorical things, pictures or people.

Defending

Just because the other person can explain their ideas clearly, it does not mean they are good ideas.

Object Relations Theory

Description

Object Relations Theory is a theory of relationships between people, in particular within a family and especially between the mother and her child. A basic tenet is that we are driven to form relationships with others and that failure to form successful early relationships leads to later problems.

It is also concerned with the relation between the subject and their internalized objects, as well as with external objects. Thus we have a relationship with the internal mother as well as an external one. The development of male gender identity is seen as more difficult as the first person with whom the infant identifies is female.

Winnicott differentiated between object-relating and object-usage. Object-relatingis a phenomenon of the subject and thus about Projection and the earlyundifferentiated unity when the mother facilitates the child's illusion of omnipotence. Object-usage is more developed, as it requires cognitive separation from the object.

Discussion

The idea of object relations was invented and developed in a paper by Karl Abraham (1927), however Melanie Klein is largely credited with developing the modern theory, particularly with the mother as the principal object.

Unlike Freud, who focused on introjectionof same-sex parents, Object Relations Theory considers the child having multiple internal objects.

Klein saw relations with the breast as significant. As the child feeds, it feels gratified and satiated when the breast produces sufficient milk, in which case it is loved and cherished. When the child is prematurely withdrawn or the breast does not provide sufficient food, the child is frustrated and the breast is hated and the recipient of hostile thoughts. The mother thus receives love or destructive attack depending on this.

The baby experiences extremes of feeling. When he is angry, it is total anger and rejects and thrusts away the mother. When he is happy, he loves and adores her. He projects his bad feeling and associates her with it.

ORT is related to Attachment Theory. Operant Conditioning

Description

A behavior will increase if it is followed by positive reinforcement. It will decrease if it is followed by punishment.

Operant Conditioning is thus ‘learning by consequences’.

Whereas Classical Conditioning involves automatic, pre-programmed responses, Operant Conditioning involves learned behaviors. Also, whilst Classical Conditioning associates two stimuli, Operant Conditioning associates a stimulus and a response.

Favorable circumstances are generally known as reinforcing stimuli or reinforcers, whilst unfavorable circumstances are known as punishing stimuli or punishers.

Operant Conditioning is also known as Instrumental Conditioning.

Research

Skinner put rats and pigeons in a box where pressing a lever resulted in food being dispensed. From accidental knocking of the lever, they quickly learned to deliberately press it to get food.

Example

Parents often try to balance praise and punishment. To be effective, they should punish only behaviors they wish to extinguish--they should not punish for not doing what should be done.

So what?

Using it

If you want someone to work harder, do not punish them when they do not work—reward them when they do. If you want them to stop smoking, make it unpleasant when they do rather than pleasant when they refrain. Opponent-Process Theory

Description

We have pairs of emotions that act in opposing pairs, such as happiness and sadness, fear and relief, pleasure and pain. When one of these is experienced, the other is temporarily suppressed. This opposite emotion, however, is likely to re-emerge strongly and may curtail or interact with the initial emotion.

Thus activating one emotion also activates its opposite and they interact as a linked pair.

To some extent, this can be used to explain drug use and other addictive behavior, as the pleasure of the high is used to suppress the pain of withdrawal.

Sometimes these two conflicting emotions may be felt at the same time as the second emotion intrudes before the first emotion wanes. The result is a confusing combined experience of two emotions being felt at the same time that normally are mutually exclusive. Thus we can feel happy-sad, scared-relieved, love-hate, etc. This can be unpleasant but as an experiential thrill it can also have a strangely enjoyable element (and seems to be a basis of excitement).

Research

Solomon and Corbit (1974) analyzed the emotions of skydivers. Beginners experienced extreme fear in their initial jump, which turned into great relief when they landed. With repeated jumps, the fear of jumping decreased and the post-jump pleasure increased.

Example

A person buys something to cheer themselves up but later feels guilty at having spent so much. So they buy something else to cheer up again.

A thrill seeker goes rafting. The excitement of the journey is a mix of fear of the next rapids and relief at having survived the last one. So What?

Using it

To stop a person feeling one thing, stimulate the opposite emotion.

Tell people good and bad news in close succession. Then in the confusion get them to agree to your real request.

Defending

When you are stimulated to feel one emotion, pause and think about the future: will the opposite appear afterwards? Is this what you want?

When you feel conflicting emotions, take care not to agree to anything. Calm down first.

Optimism Bias/Valence Effect

Description

We are generally more optimistic than pessimistic and tend to over-estimate the probability of good things happening as compared to the chance of bad things happening.

The valence of anything is the emotional charge that we feel when we think about it. This can be positive or negative emotion, which indicates positive valence or negative valence.

It is natural for us to want good things and so we think more about them. The reverse is generally true when we think less of bad things. The availability that this creates when we are assigning probability tends to make good things seem more likely.

Of course if people are pessimistic, then they may think bad things more likely. However, most of us, most of the time, find optimism a more effective state as it can create a self-fulfilling prophecy through the motivational effects it causes. It also likely has evolutionary benefits. Because of the bias towards optimism, being slightly pessimistic is likely to make you more realistic. People whose future is inescapable, such as those with a terminal illness can be more realistic in this way.

FMRi tests have shown that optimism is related to reduced coding of undesirable information about the future in the frontal cortex that has been is sensitive to negative estimation errors.

The 'Polyanna' effect is where a person sees good in all things and is overly optimistic. Whilst some optimism can be helpful, being unremittingly positive is probably not the best survival strategy.

The valence effect is sometimes also called 'wishful thinking' or 'optimism bias'.

Research

Rosenhan and Messnick offered subjects a pack of cards that had an equal number of smiling faces and frowning faces. When asked to predict the likelihood of picking particular cards, the subjects over-estimated the chance of picking a smiling face.

Example

A young person asked about the chance of them being successful in a difficult task will more likely think they can succeed than that they may fail.

So What?

Using it

Play to the natural tendency of the valence effect and be positive when persuading others.

Defending

When accurate forecasting is important, remember this tendency and carefully balance the positive and negative effects. Other Enhancement/Impression Management

Description

When we are under scrutiny, we will try to deliberately manage the impressions that others form of us.

We will use self-enhancement to make us seem good, for example through smart dress, careful language, etc. The alternative is other-enhancement to make the other person feel good, such as with flattery.

Example

Watch people being interviewed on TV. Notice how a good interviewer uses other-enhancement to relax them. Spot how people use self-enhancement to look good.

So what?

Using it

Look good, sound good, make the other person feel good. But don’t over-do it!

Defending

Appearances are deceptive. Outcome dependency Description When we have something we are trying to achieve, then we will tend to bias our judgments about the world and people around us to make the achievement of that goal more believable. This works in positive and negative ways: we will like our potential friends and dislike our potential enemies. This is a form of optimism, preparing us give the situation the best chance to succeed. Research Berscheid and colleagues took people going on a blind date and showed them a video of their potential partner in conversation with two other people. They then asked the participants to rate the people in the video for likeability. The participants tended to rate their prospective partner higher than the other people in the video. Example If you and I are put on the same team, I will believe that you are a likable, competent and cooperative person. So what? Find a task to share with the other person. They will automatically like you more. Out-Group Bias/In-Group Bias

Description

If we believe that someone else is in a group to which we belong, we will have positive views of them and give them preferential treatment.

This works because we build our self-esteem through belonging, and the presence of someone from an in-group reminds us of that belonging.

The opposite of in-group bias is out-group bias where, by inference, out-group people are viewed more negatively and given worse treatment. This is the basis of racial inequality.

In-group linguistic bias is where out-group people are described in abstract terms (which depersonifies them) when they conform to the out-group stereotype. Out-group people will be referred to in more specific, concrete terms when they act in unexpected ways.

Research

Henri Tajfel visibly divided people in to random groups. They rapidly found in-group people preferable to out-group people, even finding rational arguments about how unpleasant and immoral the out-group people were.

Example

Watch children in the school yard. Notice how they form groups and how they treat those not in their gang.

So what?

Using it

Make yourself and the other person a part of the same group, and they will be biased towards you (and away from anyone you cast as out-group). Out-Group Homogeneity

Description

We tend to classify people who are not in our in-group as being similar to one another. ‘They’re all like that’ is a common reference term. In contrast, we see people in out in-group as being more individual.

We thus tend to use a set of stereotypes for people from different countries, cities and companies. These generalizations lead us to discriminate uniformly towards people from these groups.

When visiting a new country or group, the behavior of the first few people we meet will quickly be used to create a stereotype of the others in the same group.

Research

Students shown videos of other students making a choice about music were asked to assess whether other students from the same college would make the same or different choices. When they were told the other students were from their college, they forecast that the other students would make a wide range of choices. When they were told that the other students were from another college, they forecast that other students from that college would choose very similar music.

Example Much of the fighting around the world is based on differences of religion. Zealots cast the other side as jointly and severally guilty for the sins of their peers and equally likely to commit the same acts of war. Thus genocide seems the only answer as they blindly fight on.

So what?

Using it

To form your own group, visibly cast selected other people as all having specific undesirable attributes. Act in a hostile manner to these out-group people when people you want to be in your group are around.

Defending

When dealing with a person, find their out-group biases and them deliberately show how you do not fall into any of those groups. Faced with overwhelming disconfirming evidence, they will be likely to accept you into their group.

Overconfidence Barrier

Description

We tend to have too much confidence in the accuracy of our own judgments. As we find out more about a situation, the accuracy of our judgments may well not increase, but our confidence will, as we equate quantity with quality. Confidence also tends to increase if we are given incentives to perform well.

Overconfidence is greatest when accuracy is near chance levels, and reduces as accuracy increases from 50% to 80%. Once accuracy exceeds 80%, people become under-confident. Related to this, in what has been called the 'God Complex', we tend to believe that we know the answer to complicated problems. This can be seen in daily gossip where individuals confidently propose solutions to world issues.

Research

Fischhoff, Slovic and Lichtenstein (1977) gave subjects a general knowledge test and then asked them how sure they were of their answer. Subjects reported being 100% sure when they were actually only 70%-80% correct.

Example

Teachers sometimes decide that some individuals and groups are more intelligent than others. This can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy.

So what?

Using it

Ask the other person something they don’t know about. Then use their over-confidence. Or take something they know and lever the seeds of doubt as to the absolute accuracy.

Defending

When making a judgment, stop to consider the reasons why you may be wrong. Practice this. Before long, you confidence will more closely match the accuracy of your decisions. Overjustification Effect

Description

This occurs where I attribute my behavior more to a conspicuous extrinsic motivator than to intrinsic reasons.

This effect is less when rewards are given for performance success rather than simply completing tasks, but can still be significant.

Research

Greene, Sternberg and Lepper (1976) played mathematical games with schoolchildren, which the children seemed to enjoy. After a while, they started giving rewards for success. When they took away the rewards, the children quickly gave up playing the games.

The explanation was that the children had decided that they were playing for the reward, not for the fun.

Example

I fly largely with one airline, where I do not think I get particularly good service. I do it only because I have been trapped into collecting their 'air miles' loyalty points.

So what?

Using it

If you want someone to really buy into something, do not use big extrinsic rewards.

Defending

Beware of short-cuts in thinking. Understand when someone rewards you what your real motivation is. Even notice the effects of emotional rewards like smiling and congratulations. P Perceived Behavioral Control/Planned Behavior Theory

Description

The best predictors of person’s planned and deliberate behaviors are:

 Their attitudes towards specific behaviors (not general attitudes).

 Subjective norms, which are their beliefs about how their friends will view the specific behaviors.

 Perceived behavioral control, which is how easily they can perform the behaviors.

The Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) was described in 1967 by Fishbein and includes the idea that behavior is driven by intentions, which a function of an individual's attitude toward the behaviour and subjective norms around the performance of the behavior. In 1985, this was extended as the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB).

Research

A number of women were asked a broad set of questions, including their attitude towards the birth control pill and whether they might use it within the next two years. Two years later, they were asked whether they had used the pill. Their previous general attitude turned out not to be a very good predictor of their actions. Only when very specific questions had been asked were these good predictors.

Example Interviewers for jobs will often probe or otherwise test for these factors in an attempt to discover whether the interviewee will fit well into the target environment.

So what?

Using it

Ask specific questions to elicit attitudes. Be careful about asking what their friends will think. Show how easy it is to do the thing you want them to do.

Perceptual Contrast Effect

Description

When we make decisions, we tend to do it by contrasting between the decision item and reference items. When two things appear close to one another, we will tend to evaluate them against one another more than against a fixed standard.

Research

Sherif, Taub and Hovland (1958) found that when subjects first lifted a heavy weight, they underestimated the weight of lighter weights they were subsequently asked to lift.

Example When you meet two other people, you are likely to compare each against the other on several dimensions to decide which you prefer. This may include physical beauty, similarity of interests and various personality factors.

A simple physical way of illustrating perceptual contrast is to put one hand into hot water and other into cold water, then move them both to lukewarm water. The cold hand will feel hot and the hot hand will feel cold.

So what?

Using it

To make something look good, first show something of inferior quality. To get someone to buy something expensive, first show them something even more expensive.

Defending

When you make a decision, think about the comparison standards you are using. If it is something you have recently seen, consider whether the person who showed you the first thing is using it for the contrast effect.

Perceptual Salience

Description We tend to over-estimate the causal role (salience) of information we have available to us.

Research

Taylor and Fiske (1975) arranged two people facing each other having a conversation, with other people sat in a circle around them. Afterwards, they asked the people from the circle to attribute cause for several incidents. The people attributed more to the people whose faces they could see better.

Example

When we see news of criminal muggings, we become more fearful when we go out, even though the chance of us being hurt remains unchanged and very small.

So what?

Using it

Give the other person plenty of information that will help them make the decisions you want of them.

Defending

When making important decisions, look beyond the available data. Peripheral Route/Elaboration Likelihood Model

Description

There are two ways we make decisions and hence get persuaded:

 When we are motivated and able to pay attention, we take a logical, conscious thinking, central route to decision-making. This can lead to permanent change in our attitude as we adopt and elaborate upon the speaker’s arguments.

 In other cases, we take theperipheral route. Here we do not pay attention to persuasive arguments but are swayed instead by surface characteristics such as whether we like the speaker. In this case although we do change, it is only temporary (although it is to a state where we may be susceptible to further change).

One of the best ways motivating people to take the central route is to make the message personally relevant to them. Fear can also be effective in making them pay attention, but only if it is moderate and a solution is also offered. Strong fear will just lead to fight-or-flight reactions.

The central route leads to consideration of both arguments for and against and a choice is carefully considered.

People are more motivated to use the central route when the issue has personal relevance to them. Some people have a higher need for cognition, deliberately thinking about more things than people with a lower need. These people with a higher need for cognition are more likely to choose the central route.

When they are feeling good, they will want to sustain this and will avoid focusing on things that might bring them down again, so they take a more cursory, peripheral route. People in a negative or neutral mood are more likely to take the central route.

In practice, this is more of a spectrum than a bipolar model. We may increasingly notice and consider evidence or steadily let events act simply as cues to automatic responses.

So what? Using it

To effect longer-term changes in attitude, use the central route. For simple compliance, use the peripheral route.

If you have their attention, be logical and present a compelling argument. If, however, they are not really paying attention to you (and you can deliberately distract them), put them in a good mood (eg. with a joke) then use subtle cues such as attractive clothes and leading statement. Then quickly lead them one more step at a time to where you want them to be.

Defending

Learn to pay attention to how you are making decisions. In particular, pause when you are about to make a commitment (and especially if it means signing a legal document). Think back about how you made your decision. Was it reasoned, or did you somehow seem to arrive at the point of commitment without much conscious thought (perhaps being distracted by the other person)?

Personal Construct Theory

Description

People develop internal models of reality, called constructs in order to understand and explain the world around them in the same way that scientists develop theories. Like scientists, they develop these constructs based on observation and experimentation. Constructs thus start as unstable conjecture, changing and stabilizing as more experience and proof is gained.

Constructs are often defined by words, but can also be non-verbal and hard to explain, such as the feeling you get when your football team just won the championship.

When constructs are challenged or incomplete the result is emotional states such as anxiety, confusion, anger and fear.

Constructs are often polar in that they have opposites (and are hence dichotomous). Thus the construct of good implies another of bad. Polar constructs create one another: thus 'good' cannot exist without 'bad'. When poles are denied, they are said to besubmerged.

Although we share the idea of constructs through words, the detail of constructs are particular to the individual and hence are called personal constructs.

Constructs that are important to the person are core constructs, whilst others are calledperipheral constructs. Constructs may be expanded (dilated) to accommodate new ideas or constricted to become more specific.

Kelly's (1955) basic postulate is that 'A person's processes are psychologically channelized by the ways in which he anticipates events'. He followed this with eleven corollaries.

 The construction corollary: We conservatively construct anticipation based on past experiences.

 The experience corollary: When things do not happen as expected, we change our constructs (thus reconstructing). This changes our future expectations.

 The dichotomy corollary: We store experience as constructs, and then look at the world through them.

 The organizational corollary: Constructs are connected to one another in hierarchies and network of relationships. These relationships may be loose ortight.

 The range corollary: Constructs are useful only in limited range of situations. Some ranges are broad, whilst other ranges are narrow.

 The modulation corollary: Some construct ranges can be 'modulated' to accommodate new ideas (e.g. 'big'). Others are 'impermeable'.

 The choice corollary: We can choose to gain new experiences to expand our constructs or stay in the safe but limiting zone of current constructs.

 The individuality corollary: As everyone's experience is different, their constructs are different.

 The commonality corollary: Many of our experiences are similar and/or shared, leading to similarity of constructs with others. Discussing constructs also helps to build shared constructs.

 The fragmentation corollary: Many of our constructs conflict with one another. These may be dictated by different contexts and roles.

 The sociality corollary: We interact with others through understanding of their constructs.

Example

I look at a teenager and consider him uncouth, arrogant and thoughtless. All of these are constructs that I have created or learned in order to explain the behavior of teenagers I have met.

So what? Using it

Listen to people. Hear the constructs they use. Then talk to them using their constructs. They will be amazed at how much you understand them.

You can also lead them in building new constructs.

To destabilize the other person, attack their constructs.

Defending

When you are building new ideas, consider where these have come from. Was there a conversation with an influential other person involved? Personal Validation Fallacy

Description

When asked to assess the accuracy of general words that supposedly describe our personality, we tend to score them as highly accurate. This is particularly true if they are positive and show us in a good light (although an occasional 'incisive' criticism can be very powerful).

This effect increases if we trust the source of the 'analysis' and believe that it is customized just for us.

This also works when we are asked to give or choose words that describe ourselves, where we tend to use sweeping generalisms that could describe many other people.

The personal validation fallacy is also called the Forer effect, after its originator. It is also called the Barnum effect, after the old Barnum circus, because of the way that fortune tellers will amaze us with their accuracy by using broad terms based on a simple assessment of us.

Research

Forer gave students a 'personality test' and then gave them all the same general analysis, based on an combination of horoscopes. He then asked them to rate the accuracy of the analysis, from 1 (inaccurate) to 5 (accurate). They gave an average score of 4.26.

Example

When did you last read a newspaper horoscope about you and thought it quite accurate? If you had read the other horoscopes, you might also have found that they seemed quite accurate too.

So What?

Using it

Use general terms to show you understanding of others and build trust and rapport with them.

Defending

Beware of personality assessments that use rather general descriptions. Read those for other people and share your own to check that yours works for you only. Personalism/Correspondent Inference Theory

Description

When we are making attributions about other people, we compare their actions with alternative actions, evaluating the choices they have made. It is easier for us to make internal attributions when there fewer non-common effects between these choices. That is, when both choices have a lot in common and there are thus fewer things which differentiate them. When the behavior is not what we would have forecast, we assume that it is due to their internal preferences or character traits.

Information about five factors is sought to make these inferences:

 Whether the behavior being considered is voluntary and freely chosen.

 What is unexpected about the behavior (‘non-common effects’).

 Whether the behavior is socially desirable.

 Whether the behavior impacts the person doing the inferring (‘hedonic relevance’).

 Whether the behavior is of personal interest to the person doing the inferring (‘personalism’).

Example

A person is choosing between two jobs. They are very similar apart from location and salary. This makes it easier for us to attribute their choice to the person’s individual preferences. If they choose the lower salary job, it is easy for us to assume that the person is not money-driven. So what?

Using it

When surprised by another person’s actions, it may seem obvious that this is because this is just because of ‘who they are’. We should be careful to look closer in these cases as this may not be true.

Persuasion Description Persuasion occurs when a person causes someone else to change. The change may either be to their inner mental systems or to their external behavior. Inner systems include values, attitude, beliefs, schema, goals. The change may creation of something new, or extinguishing or modifying something that already exists. Elements of persuasion include:

 Intent: We usually persuade intentionally, but we can also accidentally persuade. In fact every interpersonal interaction causes a change to both parties.

 Coercion: Coercion gains compliance, where behavior is changed, but without any internal commitment or change of inner mental systems (in fact these may be strengthened in the opposite direction).

 Context: A changed behavior may be constrained to limited context.  Plurality: You can persuade one person or many people. You can even persuade just yourself.

 Presence: You can be physically with the other person (allowing maximum communication) or communicating via such as the telephone or written words.

 Media: Communication may be done via a range of media. Inner systems are often held as networks of connected beliefs, etc. Persuasion often acts to break and redirect those interconnections. A three part model of persuasion includes the source, message and target:

 Communicator or source of the persuasion

 The actual persuasive appeal

 The target audience of the appeal

Persuasive Arguments Theory

Description

Before meeting in a group, members of the group will develop arguments to support their positions. To sway others, the arguments will tend to be more extreme. In the end, one argument will win and the group will find itself supporting an extreme decision.

Example Company strategists often frame competitors and the general business environment in very alarming terms in order to shock managers into accepting their radical ideas.

So what?

Using it

Before the meeting, meet with others and persuade them to your point of view.

Defending

Before the meeting, meet with others to learn their point of view and encourage moderation. Placebo Effect

Description

The 'placebo effect' occurs where ineffective medical interventions have actual effect. For example where a doctor gives a patient a non-pharmaceutical pill, yet the patient responds as if it was pharmaceutically effective.

The placebo effect for pills increases with:

 Larger pills

 More pills

 Red or orange ('hot') pills

 The brand of the pill

 More expensive pills

The reason the placebo works is because the patient believes it will be effective. There may also be some conditioning effect. The credibility of the person administering the placebo is hence another important factor, as is the manner of administration.

Alternative medicines, from acupuncture to homeopathy have been considered as working primarily (or completely) due to the placebo effect. 'Quack medicines' peddled by charlatans depend for their success on the placebo effect.

Doctors know that this often works, which is why they use it when there is no clear alternative. There is an ethical dilemma with using a placebo, as it necessarily involves deception.

The placebo is by no means a cure-all and there are many diseases where it has no effect. The effect also varies with the individual, their credulity and how convinced other people they meet are that it will work.

More generally, the 'placebo effect' is also used to describe any situation where suggestion is used to some effect or where the principle of 'mind over body' is significant.

'Placebo' is Latin for 'I shall please'.

The 'nocebo effect' (Latin for 'I will harm') is a reverse of the placebo, where interventions have a negative effect.

Example A person complains of regular headaches and normal analgesics do not seem to have an effect. A doctor prescribes a placebo but says it is a new wonder-drug. The headaches magically disappear.

So What?

Using it

Make suggestions that people will be able to do something or something will happen to them because of some intervention you have used.

Defending

If you are unsure that people have good intent for you, beware of them making linked suggestions. It it still always a good idea to believe doctors.

Planning Fallacy

Description

When building plans, we tend to under-estimate how long things will take in practice.

This is often due to an assumption that no risks will occur, no changes will happen to the specification, nobody will be ill or leave, all supplies will arrive on time and so on.

A common rule of thumb for project managers is to do a best-case estimate then multiply by two or more, depending on the project.

Research

Buehler et al asked students to estimate how long a thesis would take to complete. The average response was 33.9 days. In practice, they took an average of 55.5 days.

Example

In planning a business change project I assume that everyone will cooperate and attend all meetings and not object to any of the changes. Of course this does not happen as expected and the subsequent issues make the project drag on for three times as long as I had expected. So What?

Using it

When making plans, multiply your first estimate by at least two. When others make plans, check that they have plenty of contingency in and have planned to manage the risks.

Planning Fallacy

Description

When building plans, we tend to under-estimate how long things will take in practice.

This is often due to an assumption that no risks will occur, no changes will happen to the specification, nobody will be ill or leave, all supplies will arrive on time and so on.

A common rule of thumb for project managers is to do a best-case estimate then multiply by two or more, depending on the project.

Research Buehler et al asked students to estimate how long a thesis would take to complete. The average response was 33.9 days. In practice, they took an average of 55.5 days.

Example

In planning a business change project I assume that everyone will cooperate and attend all meetings and not object to any of the changes. Of course this does not happen as expected and the subsequent issues make the project drag on for three times as long as I had expected.

So What?

Using it

When making plans, multiply your first estimate by at least two. When others make plans, check that they have plenty of contingency in and have planned to manage the risks.

Plasticity

Description Many questions will be answered very differently by the same person according to the context of the questions, including where they are placed amongst other questions.

This happens to some extent because the things which have gone before put us in a particular frame of mind or mental state which has an effect on how we perceive the question.

Plasticity is the degree to which questions may be affected by the context and previous questions. A highly plastic

Research

Schuman and Presser (1981) asked people the following two questions:

1. Do you think a Communist country like Russia should let American newspaper reports come in and send back to America the news as they see it?

2. Do you think the United States should let Communist newspaper reports from other countries come in and send back to their papers the news as they see it?

82% said yes to the first question and 75% said yes to the second question. However, when the questions were reversed, only 55% said yes to letting Communist reporters report from USA and 64% approved of US reports from Communist countries.

They also found differences when they rearranged a question about whether divorce should be easier to obtain, remain the same or be more difficult to obtain.

Example

Police will reconstruct a crime to help witnesses (as well as victims) answer questions accurately. The reconstruction may also shock the perpetrators into mistakes.

So what?

Using it

If you want someone to say yes, then ask questions beforehand which have an obvious ‘yes’ answer. If you want them to reject something, ask them a question before that makes them more fearful.

Defending

When answering a question, pause to let your mind clear and emotions settle. Pluralistic Ignorance

Description

Groups all have norms of attitude and behavior which are shared and which help form the identity of the group. Adopting these norms, even if you do not agree with them, is a part of the individual sacrifice that people accept as a price of group membership.

Pluralistic ignorance occurs where the majority of individuals in a group assume that most of their others are different in some way, whilst the truth is that they are more similar than they realize. They thus will conform with supposed norms. When most people do this, the supposed norm becomes the norm.

These situations typically occur when the norms are older than all members of the group or when one member or a small group is dominant and can force their attitudes on the rest of the group.

Research

Prentice and Miller knew that there was abnormally high levels of student alcohol consumption at Princeton, through various eating clubs, rituals and parties that had led to a number of deaths and injuries. When they questioned students, they found many who assumed that others wanted to partake whilst they did not. Their were worried about possible consequences but still joined in the celebrations for fear of rejection.

Example

When a lecturer asks a class 'Any questions?' there will often be a deafening silence, even if nobody understands.

So what?

Using it

Set up norms within a group and act as if everyone believes in them. Defending

If you disagree with a group norm, quietly ask other members of the group whether they really believe in the norm.

Polarization

Description

When people are enthused by a particular idea they may gradually acquire a more extreme viewpoint.

When looking at evidence, they will amplify confirming evidence and downplay disconfirming evidence. This contributes to their viewpoint becoming more entrenched and extreme.

This is partly due to a desire for distinctness from alternative views, leading to the person moving their position away from views that have some similarity. To agree with an opponent on a small point may seem to be a slippery slope and confuse one's clarity.

In arguing, many people like clear positions, where they are 'good' and the other person is 'bad'. This means that any agreement at all is hazardous as it makes oneself bad in any area of overlap. It may also seem as if the other person is trying to 'seduce me to the dark side' (so causing further retreat).

The easiest approach in such cases is to take an extreme position and/or push your opponent to the opposite extreme. When the two opponents are in the same place together, the effect can be exacerbated as each seeks to avoid losing face and is constantly reminded of their differences by the presence of the other. (On the other hand, when a person is present it is difficult to objectify them).

Research

Lord, Ross and Lepper showed how people who supported or opposed capital punishment selectively used the same body of evidence to support their own viewpoint.

Example

A person believes in right wing politics and seeks failures in a left-wing government to prove the correctness of right-wing views. In doing so, they become even more convinced they are right.

So What?

Using it

Get a person to take an extreme position by setting someone else up in opposition to them.

One way to prevent a person polarizing away from you is simply not to be there. Use a third party to present your case or an asynchronous method such as email or promotions.

Defending

Consider how you got to the viewpoints you have, particularly if it is relatively extreme.

Positive Psychology

Description Positive psychology is the study of the positive approaches and experiences of life and how and why they happen.

 Subjectively, it is about such as well-being, contentment, optimism, happiness.

 Individually, it is about such as the capacity for love, courage, interpersonal skill, aesthetic, determination, forgiveness, creativity and wisdom.

 Collectively it is about such as civilization, citizenship, social responsibility, society and tolerance.

Psychology grew up as a science that was related to medicine and was consequently largely about sickness and dysfunction. After writing about such as Learned Helplessness, Martin Seligman made the brilliant observation that the positive experience was an almost completely unexplored field. Positive psychology is about our strengths rather than our weaknesses. It is about:

 A pleasant life: seeking success and positive emotions of past, present and future.

 A good life: building major life themes such as in work, love, and family living.

 A meaningful life: serving a greater cause or belief beyond our immediate needs.

Interestingly, positive emotions all feel pretty similar, yet negative emotions such as fear, anger, disgust and sadness each have quite unique feelings. This is possibly due to their evolutionary purpose of driving different behaviors, whilst positive feelings just mean 'Stay as you are and keep doing what you're doing'.

Example

A person gives a significant amount to a charity.

Some people just seem happier and upbeat.

So What?

Using it

Understand what makes people happy and offer them happiness as a reward for compliance in some way with your needs.

Defending

When people are being nice to you, wonder why. Maybe they are just being prosocial. Maybe they want something from you. Positive Test Strategy/Confirmation Bias

Description

When we have made a decision or build a hypothesis, we will actively seek things which will confirm our decision or hypothesis. We will also avoid things which will disconfirm this. The alternative is to face the dissonance of being wrong.

We use this approach both for searching our memory and looking for things in the external world. This has also been called the Positive Test Strategy.

Confirmation bias has also been calledConfirmatory Bias, Myside Bias andVerification Bias.

Research

Snyder and Cantor (1979) gave participants a description of a person called Jane that included mixed items such as sometimes showing her as introverted and sometimes as extraverted. A couple of days later, half were asked to assess her for an extraverted job (real estate agent) and the rest asked to assess her for a librarian's job. Each group were better at remembering the attributes that supported the job for which they were assessing. This implied they were using a positive-test strategy when trying to remember things about Jane.

Example

After having bought a piece of clothing, we will look for the same clothing in a more expensive store to confirm that we have bought a bargain.

This is caused by the post-decisional dissonance between the decision made and the possibility of being wrong.

So what? Using it

After having persuaded a person of something, help them feel good by letting them find examples that confirm their good example.

Defending

After a decision is made, consider whatever evidence you can find, even if it disconfirms the decision—at least you will make a better decision next time. Also beware of people feeding you confirming evidence.

Positivity Effect

Description

When considering people we like (including ourselves), we tend to make situational attributions about negative their behaviors and dispositional attributions about their positive behaviors. We probably do the reverse for people we do not like.

This may well be because of the dissonance between liking a person and seeing them behave negatively.

Research

Taylor and Koivumaki gave people a list of positive and negative behaviors done by themselves, their partners and friends and asked them to rate the degree to which these were due to situational or behavioral factors. Positive behaviors were attributed largely to dispositional factors, whilst negative behaviors were attributed to situational factors. Example

If my friend hits someone, I will tell him that the other guy deserved it or that he had to defend himself.

So what?

Using it

Make friends by making situational attributions about their problems and dispositional attributions about their positive behaviors.

Defending

Beware of people who overlook your mistakes and praise too fully. Especially when they start asking you for things.

Post-Decision Dissonance

Description

After we have made a decision, we will feel dissonance regarding the possibility of it being wrong. We will often change our perceptions to reduce this dissonance and make the decision seem more attractive. This is the basis of the foot-in-the-door technique where people who are asked to make a small commitment (such as signing a petition) will later change their views to align with the action and consequently be more amenable to a more significant request. It is also the basis of brainwashing.

Research

Brehm (1956) asked shoppers to rate the attractiveness of household appliances. They were then allowed to choose, as a gift, between two appliances they had rated equally attractive. Twenty minutes later, they were asked to re-evaluate the appliances. Guess what? They now rated their gift somewhat more highly.

Knox and Inkster (1968) found that after placing a $2 bet, race-goers increased their estimation as to the likelihood of their horse winning the race.

Example

How often have you bought something then worried about whether you have got a bargain or otherwise. Seeing the item for more money in another shop is always comforting (and the reverse, of course, is also true).

So what?

Using it

When you want people to do something of which they do not approve, start small. Get them to do something similar in a very small way, downplaying it. Then let them know of what they have really done.

Defending

Beware of people asking you for small favors in areas where you do not particularly agree. Stick to your principles, no matter how small the request. Power

Description

Power is the ability to get others to change their behavior even if they do not wish to do so.

There are five bases of power defined by French and Raven (1960):

 Reward power: control over valued resources.

 Coercive power: ability to inflict punishment, possibly physical.

 Expert power: superior knowledge.

 Legitimate power: formal rank or position.

 Referent power: when people want to be like you.

Power is much written about and other typologies include:

 Jeffery Pfeffer: Personal attributes, organization structure and the fit between situational requirements and personal traits

 Charles Handy: Power resources (physical, financial, position, expert, personal), methods of influence (force, rules/procedures, exchange, persuasion, ecology, magnetism)

 Henry Mintzberg: Resources, technical skill, knowledge, formal power and access to others

Simplifying, power comes from:

 Being able to do something that the other person does not want.

 Having something that the other person wants (or at least controlling access to it).

 Being able to change the beliefs or understanding of the other person ( through rational logic or irrational charisma).

Example

I have all forms of power over my children. They have reward power over me, by withholding their affections. So what?

Using it

Understand your situation of power. Seek to build it over time. Use it sparingly: abuse of power often has unintended negative effects, such as reactance.

Defending

Recognize the power that you always have. At minimum you always have power over your own actions, as workers have known for centuries.

The Pratfall Effect

Description

When a person makes a mistake or acts in a clumsy way that might even make people laugh, they are found to be more likeable, including in comparison with people who are more intelligent and clever.

When you make a mistake, you appear more human, more like others and so more likeable. People who are perfect can seem threatening, but people who are imperfect are safe and hence easier to truly like.

Research

Elliot Aronson played recordings of people answering a quiz, but with some you could hear the person knocking over a cup of coffee. People listening to the recordings rated the people who knocked over the coffee as being more likeable.

Example

A participant on a TV game show gets a big round of applause and many cheers for having a go and making a big mess of their task, whilst the person who wins just gets polite applause. So What?

Using it

If you want to be liked, make mistakes sometimes (or just admit to error), though do be careful to make it in an area which is unimportant and which will not make people think you are incapable in areas where they need your ability.

Defending

When others make mistakes watch for them immediately seeking your sympathy. It may be genuine, but just beware of them using it as a lever.

Sometimes also others will try to appear helpless in order to get you to help them. In this sense, they are playing as 'child' and want you to be the 'nurturing parent'.

Primacy Effect

Description

Given a list of items to remember, we will tend to remember the first few things more than those things in the middle. We also tend to assume that items at the beginning of the list are of greater importance or significance.

The primacy effect has most effect during repeated message when there is little or no delay between the messages. One reason that the Primacy effect works is that the listener is more likely to start off paying attention, then drifting off when the subject gets boring or the listener is internally processing data you have given them. The limitations of memory also have an effect, and we can miss middle items as we continue to rehearse and process the initial items.

Research

Solomon Asch (1946) asked some people about a person described as envious, stubborn, critical, impulsive, industrious and intelligent. He then asked other people about a person described as intelligent, industrious, impulsive, critical, stubborn and envious. The second group rated the person more highly than the first group. He also found that the second and third items on the list had reduced primacy effects.

Example

On TV game shows where people can win everything in a list of items they see, they usually at least remember the first few items.

So what?

Usage

If you want something to stand out in a person’s mind, use it at the beginning of a conversation, a written list, etc. Don’t let it get lost in the middle. Repeat the message consecutively several times to embed it in their minds.

Defending

When you choose something, do not just choose it because you remember it most clearly. Priming

Description

Priming is providing a stimulus that influences their near-term future thoughts and actions, even though they may not seem to be connected.

Priming also increases the speed at which the second, related item is recognized.

In effect, priming either introduces new things or brings old thoughts close to the surface of the subconscious, thus making them more accessible and more likely to be used over less accessible (and possibly more relevant) thoughts.

Priming has a limited effect as the thoughts fade back to the deeper subconscious. Typically, primed ideas are effective for around 24 hours.

Conceptual priming occurs where related ideas are used to prime the response, for example 'hat' may prime for 'head'.

Semantic priming occurs where the meaning created influences later thoughts. Semantic and conceptual priming are very similar and the terms may be used interchangeably.

Non-associative semantic priming refers to related concepts but where one is less likely to trigger thoughts of the other, for example 'Sun' and 'Venus'.

Perceptual priming, is based on the form of the stimulus, for example where a part-picture is completed based on a picture seen earlier.

Associative priming happens when a linked idea is primed, for example when 'bread' primes the thought of 'butter'. This particularly applies to 'free association' word pairs.

Masked priming occurs where a word or image is presented for a very short time but is not consciously recognized.

Repetitive priming occurs where the repetition of something leads to it influencing later thoughts.

Reverse priming occurs where people realize they are being primed and, feeling they have been biased, over-respond in their choices which are now biased in the reverse direction.

Research Bargh and Pietromonaco showed some people neutral words whilst others were shown hostile words, very briefly flashed up on a computer screen. Both groups then read about a character with ambiguous behavior. Those who had been primed with hostile words interpreted the behavior as being more hostile.

Example

I take one bite from a chocolate bar. I now desire another bite even more than before I took the first bite.

A stage magician says 'try' and 'cycle' in separate sentences in priming a person to think later of the word 'tricycle'.

I start noticing other cars just like the one I bought.

So What?

Using it

Use a prime subtly so the person does not realize they are being primed, thus influencing them towards a desired outcome.

Be careful of obvious priming which can cause a reverse-priming reaction.

Defending

When you seem to think of something in conversation with someone else, think back to what may have triggered that thought. Informational Social Influence

Description

When we do not know how to behave, we copy other people. They thus act as information sources for how to behave as we assume they know what they are doing. Also because we care a great deal about what others think about us, this provides a safe course of action—at the very least, they cannot criticize us for our actions.

We are more likely to use this principle when the task in question is important to us.

This leads to such effects as people ignoring public muggings and cult members being led into bizarre and even suicidal acts.

Private acceptance occurs when we genuinely believe the other person is right. This can lead to permanent changes in beliefs, values and behaviors.

Public compliance occurs when we copy others because we fear ridicule or rejection if we behave otherwise.

Informational social influence (also calledsocial proof) occurs most often when:

 The situation is ambiguous. We have choices but do not know which to select.

 There is a crisis. We have no time to think and experiment. A decision is required now!

 Others are experts. If we accept the authority of others, they must know better than us.

In other words, when we are not sure of our own ability to know what to do, we will look to others to tell us.

Example

Police often find themselves in situations of ambiguity and crisis. People will naturally turn to the police for advice in such situations.

So what?

Using it

Get the other person into a state of relative confusion where they are uncertain about what to do next, then lead them to where you want them to be. It works best if you go first, doing it. Telling them what to do can also be effective, but requires them to accept you as an authority.

For permanent change, precede this by sufficient work that they trust you completely and view you as an authority with enviable values and beliefs.

Defending

When the situation is ambiguous or in crisis, do not just look to other people (who may well be looking to you). In particular, beware of people who set themselves up as an authority without adequate proof (and a white coat or commanding attitude is not proof).

Know that you always have individual choice, just as you have individual responsibility for your own actions. In any situation, you always have common sense available to you. Do not abandon it. Propinquity Effect

Description

The more we meet and interact with people, the more likely we are to become friends with them.

As we meet people we become familiar and find things we like about them.

It is not so much 'birds of a feather flock together' as 'birds who just happen to be near each other grow similar feathers'.

Research

Festinger, Schachter and Back (1950) followed friendships in a small two-floor apartment building. Neighbors were mostly likely to be friends. Least likely were people on separate floors. Those near ground-floor staircases and mailboxes had friends on both floors.

Example

Friendships appear in neighborhoods, workplaces, college classes and other places where people get together.

So what?

Using it

To build trust, make friends. To make friends, ensure you meet up with the target people often. To ensure you meet up, arrange your life so you repeatedly ‘bump into’ them.

Resisting

When you keep bumping into a friendly person, be aware of the potential for them to have ulterior motives. Prosocial Behavior

Description

Prosocial behavior occurs when someone acts to help another person, particularly when they have no goal other than to help a fellow human.

So why does this altruistic behavior appear? One thought, of Kin Selection, is that it is a genetic response to supporting the broader gene pool. Social conditioning can also have be a cause and prosocial parents lead to prosocial children.

The Reciprocity Norm may also have an effect, where people help others, knowing that one day they may want someone else to help them in the same unselfish way. Demonstrating such social norms is likely to get you admiration from other people around you.

Prosocial behavior varies with context as much as between people. Men will tend to be chivalrous for short periods, whilst women will work quietly for longer periods. People who are in a good mood are more likely to do good, as are people who are feeling guilty. People in small towns are more likely to help than those squashed together in cities.

Example

Evidence abounds of people helping others without asking for anything in return. This is the whole principle of charity. Their rationale for helping others is often Intrinsic Motivation.

So what?

Using it

Ask for help. It is surprising how often people will give it, without thought of asking for something in return. Defending

When you are helping other people out of the goodness of your heart, beware of people taking advantage of you. This does not mean you should not be altruistic; just beware of vampires.

Prospect Theory

Description

We tend to value a gain that is certain more than a gain that is less than certain, even when the expected value of each is the same. The opposite is even more true for losses: we will clutch at straws to avoid a certain loss, even if it means taking even greater risks.

In general, when we perceive higher risk we focus on loss, whilst when risk is seen to be lower, we switch to gains.

Research

Tversky and Kahneman told people to assume there was disease affecting 600 people and they had two choices:

 Program A, where 200 of the 600 people will be saved .  Program B, where there is 33% chance that all 600 people will be saved, and 66% chance that nobody will be saved.

The majority of people selected A, showing a preference for certainty. They then offered them another choice:

 Program C, where 400 people will die.

 Program D, where there is a 33% chance that nobody will die, and 66% chance that all 600 people will die.

Most people now selected D, seeking to avoid the loss of 400 people.

Notice how the framing makes the difference. A and C are the same, and B and D are the same.

So what?

Using it

To get people to adopt something, focus on the gain. To get them to reject something, focus on what they might lose.

If they perceive high risk, focus on loss. If they perceive low risk, focus on gain. If you want them to focus on loss or gain, then set up the perceived risk accordingly.

Defending

In your choices, beware of words leading you astray. Think in a balanced way about potential gains and losses. Pseudo Certainty Effect/Certainty Effect

Description

When an outcome is certain and it becomes less probable, this has a greater impact than when the outcome was merely probable before the probability was reduced by the same amount. Thus 100% - 10% = 90% has more psychological impact than 50% - 10% = 40%.

There is also a pseudo-certainty effect, where the certainty is only perceived.

Overall, this works because of our preference for absolutes and our inability to really understand the meaning of the difference between different probabilities. To most people, 70%, 80% and 90% all mean the same: not certain, but fairly likely. Thus we would rather eliminate risk rather than reduce it.

Research

Kahneman and Tversky (1979) asked students to evaluate insurance costing only 50% of normal, but which would only pay out in 50% of cases (though their premium would be refunded if they did not get the payout). 80% of students chose to refuse the insurance.

Example

Most people would pay more to remove the only bullet in the gun in a game of Russian Roulette than they would to remove one bullet when there were four in the gun.

So what?

Using it

Instead of offering four for the price of three, offer one free with three purchased. The zero price has greater certainty.

Defending

Beware of making decisions based on absolutes. Distinguish the real difference between 80% and 90%. Psychological Accounting

Description

When people make decisions, they tend to frame the outcomes of their choices in terms of the direct consequences of the choice.

They also compare things in terms of ratios rather than absolute amounts. For example a gain of $15 vs. a gain of $10 will be viewed more positively than a gain of $150 vs. a gain of $140.

Research

Kahneman and Tversky asked people whether, if they lost a $10 bill when going to see a $10 play, they would still see the play. 88% said they would. However, if they lost the $10 ticket, only 46% would be prepared fork out $10 for another ticket.

Example

When I choose a meal at a restaurant, I am more concerned with how it will taste now than the calories that will attach themselves to my waistline.

So what?

Using it

Frame choices in terms of consequences.

Defending

Think beyond the immediate consequences of a decision. Public Compliance/Informational Social Influence

Description

When we do not know how to behave, we copy other people. They thus act as information sources for how to behave as we assume they know what they are doing. Also because we care a great deal about what others think about us, this provides a safe course of action—at the very least, they cannot criticize us for our actions.

We are more likely to use this principle when the task in question is important to us.

This leads to such effects as people ignoring public muggings and cult members being led into bizarre and even suicidal acts.

Private acceptance occurs when we genuinely believe the other person is right. This can lead to permanent changes in beliefs, values and behaviors.

Public compliance occurs when we copy others because we fear ridicule or rejection if we behave otherwise.

Informational social influence (also calledsocial proof) occurs most often when:

 The situation is ambiguous. We have choices but do not know which to select.

 There is a crisis. We have no time to think and experiment. A decision is required now!

 Others are experts. If we accept the authority of others, they must know better than us.

In other words, when we are not sure of our own ability to know what to do, we will look to others to tell us.

Example

Police often find themselves in situations of ambiguity and crisis. People will naturally turn to the police for advice in such situations.

So what?

Using it

Get the other person into a state of relative confusion where they are uncertain about what to do next, then lead them to where you want them to be. It works best if you go first, doing it. Telling them what to do can also be effective, but requires them to accept you as an authority.

For permanent change, precede this by sufficient work that they trust you completely and view you as an authority with enviable values and beliefs.

Defending

When the situation is ambiguous or in crisis, do not just look to other people (who may well be looking to you). In particular, beware of people who set themselves up as an authority without adequate proof (and a white coat or commanding attitude is not proof).

Know that you always have individual choice, just as you have individual responsibility for your own actions. In any situation, you always have common sense available to you. Do not abandon it. Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

Description

If a person thinks we are clever or stupid or whatever, they will treat us that way. If we are treated as if we are clever, stupid or whatever, we will act, and even become, this way. The person has thus had their prophecy about us fulfilled!

This is also known as the Pygmalion Effect.

Research

Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson, in 1968, gave all the children in an elementary class a test and told teachers that some of children were unusually clever (though they were actually average). They came back at the end of the school year and tested the same class again. Guess what? The children singled out had improved their scores far more than other children. (Rosenthal 1995).

Example

A management consultant starts off an engagement constantly agreeing with a senior manager in an attempt to build trust. Before long, the senior manager is expecting agreement every time. The consultant soon becomes a confirmed yes-man.

So what?

Using it

To make a person act in a certain way, all you have to do is believe this when you interact with them. If you find it hard to make this jump, persuade others that the target person has desired attributes.

Defending

When people treat you as if you had certain attributes, decide whether this is desirable or not. Question their behavior if you do not wish to be pushed in this direction. R Rationalization Trap

Description

When we act to reduce dissonance it can end up as a whole set of justifications and rationalizations that lead to ridiculous or even immoral actions. Like Pinocchio's nose, one defense leads to another until we are all out of shape.

The trick is to avoid unthinking reaction, tolerating dissonance for long enough to be able to decide on a more appropriate action.

Example

When President Richard Nixon got caught up in the Watergate scandal, his arguments and denials led to his eventual demise. Bill Clinton also fell down the slippery slope but managed to survive only through some embarrassing and very public confessions.

So what?

Using it

When people are seeking justification they are usually desperate. Give them straws to clutch at that lead them in the right direction or give them rope with which they hang themselves. You can even tip them into the need for rationalization in the first place.

Defending

Do you really need to go down that spiral of justification? For whom? Did you get there through the trickery of someone else? Reactance Theory

Description

When people feel that their freedom to choose an action is threatened, they get an unpleasant feeling called ‘reactance’. This also motivates them to perform the threatened behavior, thus proving that their free will has not been compromised.

Research

Pennebaker and Sanders (1976) put one of two signs on college bathroom walls. One read ‘Do not write on these walls under any circumstances’ whilst the other read ‘Please don’t write on these walls.’ A couple of weeks later, the walls with the ‘Do not write on these walls under any circumstances’ notice had far more graffiti on them.

Example

When persuading my children, I have to be careful because I know that if I push too hard they will do what I have told them not to do, just to show me who is really in charge! So what?

Using it

Beware of persuading too overtly or too much. If people get wind that they are being railroaded, they will leap right off the tracks.

Realistic Conflict Theory

Description

When there are limited resources, then this leads to conflict, prejudice and discrimination between groups who seek that common resource. Once hostility has been aroused, it is very difficult to return to normal relations and an ongoing feud can arise.

Research Muzafer Sherif divided a Boy Scout camp into two groups, the Eagles and the Rattlers. After helping the groups to each become cohesive, he introduced competitive games and other conflicts. Before long, a full-scale riot was in progress and the researchers had to work hard at mediation to defuse the situation.

Example

A common situation is where jobs are scarce and an established group blames immigrants for ‘taking the food out of our childrens’ mouths’.

So what?

Using it

Gain control over a resource required by many. Where you cannot, point to others who use the resource as causes of your own ills.

Defending

When resources are limited, pre-empt conflict by setting up joint councils, etc. to decide fairly on allocation. Recency Effect

Description

Given a list of items to remember, we will tend to remember the last few things more than those things in the middle. We also tend to assume that items at the end of the list are of greater importance or significance.

The recency effect has most effect in repeated persuasion messages when there is a delay between the messages.

Research

Miller and Campbell recorded proceedings from a trial with a combination of sequences of arguments for and against the plaintiff, sometimes with delays of a week between parts and the judgment that they sought from experimental participants.

The results in the table below show that when there was no delay between the first and second message, but then a week's delay before the judgment, a primacy effect occurred. When there was a delay between the first and second message, but no gap between the second message and the judgment, then a recency effect occurred.

Delay after Delay after Second First message first second Judgment message message? message?

Against For plaintiff No No Balanced plaintiff

Against No For plaintiff No Balanced plaintiff

Against For plaintiff No Yes For plaintiff

Against No For plaintiff Yes Against plaintiff

Against For plaintiff Yes No Against plaintiff Against Yes For plaintiff No For plaintiff

Against For plaintiff Yes Yes Balanced plaintiff

Against Yes For plaintiff Yes Balanced plaintiff

Example

What did you do in the last hour? What about the last day? Last week? Year?

So what?

Using it

If you want something to stand out in a person’s mind, use it at the end of a conversation, a written list, etc. Don’t let it get lost in the middle. Repeat the message after a while, still with the key items at the end.

Defending

Do not just pay attention to what other people have most recently said. Reciprocity Norm

Description

This is a very common social norm which says that if I give something to you or help you in any way, then you are obliged to return the favor.

This norm is so powerful, it allows the initial giver to:

 Ask for something in return, rather than having to wait for a voluntary reciprocal act.

 Ask for more than was given. You can even exchange a smile for money.

Reciprocity also works at the level of liking. We like people who like us, and dislike those who dislike us. This can create a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Research

Kunz and Woolcott sent Christmas cards to a number of people he did not know. Most sent a card back (and they got onto the permanent Christmas list of some).

Example

Hari Krishna people have used this by giving passers-by a small plastic flower and then asking for a donation in return.

So what? Using it

Give people things, whether it is your time or money. It helps if you give them something they truly appreciate. Do not give them too much, lest they feel oppressed by their obligation. Ask for something in return.

Defending

If people give you something, say thank you (which is giving them something back in return!). When they ask for something in return, say no. Be polite (giving them something else). Or turn the tables, giving them something you don’t want, then ask them for something.

Always be aware of trickery when people you hardly know offer you something, especially if they ask for something from you in return.

Regret Theory

Description

People know that when they make a decision they will feel regret if they make the wrong decision. They thus take this anticipated regret into account when they decide.

This is probably what makes them loss-averse.

When thinking ahead, they may experienceanticipatory regret, as they realize that they may regret in the future. This can be a powerful dissuader or create a specific motivation to do one thing in order to avoid something else. Example

When I go to buy a car, I am so terrified of buying a heap of junk, I read many magazines and ask lots of knowledgeable friends first. And I listen to their advice rather than buying the car that I think looks the nicest.

So what?

Using it

Remind the other person of what they may lose if they do not agree with you. Show what they may regret.

Defending

Remember to anticipate the joy of gain. Be realistic about gains and losses.

Reinforcement-Affect Theory

Description Classical Conditioning (learning by association) leads us to like people who are nearby when we feel good. Even if they were not involved in making us feel good, after a while we will associate them with the good feeling such that whenever we see them we feel good.

Operant Conditioning (learning by consequences) leads us to like people who reward us. Rewards can include being friendly towards us, smiling and generally acting positively towards us.

Example

Notice how politicians and other would-be leaders always turn up at rah-rah events, parties and award ceremonies, pressing the flesh and smiling like mad.

So what?

Using it

Find out where the other person gets to feel good (eg. at racetrack, dances etc.) and just be there. Tell them what a great time they are having. Use other liking-related stimuli such as similarity.

Defending

Just because people are around when you are having a good time does not mean they are your friends. Even being nice to you does not make them your friend. The best test of friendship is when they have everything to lose and nothing to gain. Relative Deprivation Theory

Description

We tend to decide how well-off or deprived we are not from any absolute standard or how hungry are, but by comparing ourselves with other people.

In particular, we decide on what we deserve and what we should expect from looking at other people. We then compare ourselves with this standard.

Research

Vanneman and Pettigrew (1972) asked white Americans how well off they were when compared with other whites and also with black Americans. Those who felt not well off when compared with other whites were more prejudiced against the black people.

Example

Even rich people can feel poor as the even richer parade in front of them.

So what?

Using it

Build up expectations of the other person, perhaps by showing what you have got. They will get to feel deprived. Then show them the way to alleviate that deprivation.

Defending

When you feel deprived, consider how you got that way. When you are drowning, beware of people who offer you straws to clutch. Relationship Dissolution/Terminating relationships

Description

There are several ways to break up a relationship. The results of some research are given here.

Cody’s survey of experience showed alternative strategies:

 Positive tone: ‘I still like you, but…’

 Verbal de-escalation: ‘I’m don’t love you any more.’

 Behavioral de-escalation: Avoiding contact. Seeing them less often.

 Negative identity management: ‘We each should see other people…’

 Justification: ‘This relationship is not giving me what I want.’

Duck shows a four phase model:

1. Relationship phase. The relationship is fairly healthy, but dissatisfaction builds up with feelings of ‘there’s something wrong.’ Eventually The ‘I can’t stand it any more’ feelings build up to a point which catapults you into the breakdown stages.

2. Intrapsychic phase. Nothing much is said, but now the focus is on the faults of the other partner. Evidence is sought by which they can be blamed for any problems. When enough evidence is accumulated, the person feels justified in withdrawing. 3. Dyadic phase. The breakdown now comes out into the open, either with one person saying ‘I’m leaving’ or ‘I’m thinking of leaving’. Reality must now be faced by both partners and intensive discussions may ensue. The focus here is on the partnership. Eventually the pressure of ‘I really mean it’ breaks out and it becomes a public issue.

4. Social phase. Now the focus turns outwards to the perceptions of other people. Friends may be recruited to either camp and entire social groups may break into open battles of who is to blame and what should be done. Eventually, it becomes inevitable that the split will happen and things move on to the next phase.

There can also be a fifth phase:

1 Grave-dressing phase. The relationship now gets its official burying, with explanations all in place (true or otherwise).

Example

Have you had long drawn out ending of a relationship? Many marriages go through long phases of argument and recrimination rather than sudden endings.

So what?

Using it

To end a relationship, pick the most suitable from the above methods.

Defending

It takes two to tango. If the other person is pulling the plugs, just get out with your dignity.

Representativeness Heuristic

Description

People tend to judge the probability of an event by finding a ‘comparable known’ event and assuming that the probabilities will be similar.

As a part of creating meaning from what we experience, we need to classify things. If something does not fit exactly into a known category, we will approximate with the nearest class available. Overall, the primary fallacy is in assuming that similarity in one aspect leads to similarity in other aspects.

The gambler’s fallacy, the belief in runs of good and bad luck can be explained by the representativeness heuristic.

People will also ‘force’ statistical arrangements to represent their beliefs about them, for example a set of random numbers will be carefully mixed up so no similar numbers are near one another.

We will also tend to ignore base rates (the relative frequency with which an event occurs) as well as regression towards the mean (where an extreme value is likely to be followed by one which is much closer to the mean).

The law of small numbers is the assumption people make that a small sample is representative of a much larger population.

Example

If I meet someone with a laid back attitude and long hair, I might assume they are Californian, whereas someone who is very polite but rigid may be assumed to be English.

People will often assume that a random sequence in a lottery is more likely than a arithmetic sequence of numbers.

If I meet three people from a company and they are all aggressive, I will assume that the company has an aggressive culture and that most other people from that firm will also be aggressive.

So what?

Using it

To make something attractive, take something that the other person finds attractive and then find a way in which they are both similar. Even putting them together in time or space can do the trick.

Defending

Watch out for seemingly irrelevant things that the other person brings up, and how these might affect your decision on more significant items. Also learn more about statistics. Repulsion Hypothesis

Description

We prefer people who have similar attitudes to us. We can get on with people whose attitudes are moderately different, but we will be repulsed by people whose attitudes are particularly different from us.

When looking for friends, we will first exclude people whose attitudes are outside of an acceptable range, before looking more positively for closer friends.

Example

This is one of the reasons why people from different cultures and countries are repulsed by behaviors such as public executions and eating different foods.

So what?

Using it

Beware of holding extreme attitudes as you may fall the first hurdle of friendship. If you cannot get to be a good friend with a person, by being moderate, you can at least get to talk with them. Restraint Bias

Description

We believe we can control natural urges more than we can in practice. Furthermore, his belief is strengthened by:

 Weak 'evidence' that we can overcome urges.

 Not feeling the urge at the moment.

 Not remembering how powerful the urge can be.

Urges are enhanced by the availability of stimulants, such as the urge to eat being increased by the availability of food. People who are exhibiting restraint bias and believe they can withstand urges are more likely to allow temptation to be put in their way. Optimism about our ability to control urges is ill-founded, it seems.

The underlying problem is in the different mental state between thinking about being in an urge state and actually being in the urge state. This has been called the 'cold-to-hot empathy gap' and indicates how different emotional thinking really is and how it can easily override rational thought.

Research

Loran Nordgren et al (2009) investigated this inner battle. They first gave one group of students an easy memory task and another a hard one. Those on the easy task subsequently rated their ability to overcome mental fatigue more highly. A serious impact of this effect was that the also thought they could leave more of their coursework until the last week of term.

In a second study, students arriving or leaving the college cafeteria ranked seven snack bars from least favourite to favourite and then chose one to take away. If they brought it back uneaten the next week, they could keep the bar and also win $4. The leavers, who had already eaten and whose self-perception of restraint ability was therefore higher, were more likely to choose their first or second favourite snack bar, and were more likely to eat it during the following week.

In a third experiment some were given a fake self-control test then asked to watch the movie "Coffee and Cigarettes" whilst not smoking. They were promised a greater cash reward the more difficult they made the challenge for themselves. Those given good results on the test chose more tempting challenges, such as holding the cigarette in their hand rather than having it on the desk. They were also more likely to give in to that temptation.

In a further study with people in a 'quit smoking' programme, those who claimed more impulse control were found to be more like to relapse.

Example

I make a new year's resolution to eat less. Later that same day, I'm really hungry think 'Just one won't make much difference and will make me feel so much better.' Later, I find myself in the kitchen with my hand in the cookie jar without really realizing how I got there.

So What?

Using it

If you want to help someone to stop doing something, work on them when they have the urge to do it, not when they can make easy commitments.

To persuade people of something, you can put temptation in their way -- they will be less able to defend against it than they think they can.

Defending

If you want to give up something, do not put temptation in your way.

Risk Preference

Description

People will tend to be risk-seeking when it comes to losses. Thus they would rather risk a big loss in preference to suffering a certain moderate loss. This is how gamblers get hooked. Once they have made a loss, they keep gambling (sometimes in ever larger stakes) in trying to avoid the loss.

On the other hand, people tend to be risk-avoiding when it comes to gains, preferring to hold onto the bird in the hand. This is the mentality of the miser. Once they have something they are loathe to risk losing it. There are three common perceived dimensions of risk. ‘risk dread’ which is about lack of control and potential serious harm, ‘unknown risks’ which are perceived but which we have little information on probability or impact (such as from new drugs). The third dimension is about how many people are exposed to risk.

Research

Tversky and Kahneman (1981) gave people the following choice:

A: A sure gain of $240

B: A 25% chance of gaining $1000 and a 75% chance of gaining nothing.

84% of people chose A, as a certain gain was preferred over a possible loss. They then offered the following:

C: A sure loss of $750

D: A 75% chance of losing $1000 and a 25% chance of losing nothing.

Now 87% chose D, preferring to avoid the certain loss, even though C (as B in the first test) has the better probable returns.

Example

We tend to accept greater levels of risk if we are in control, such as smoking and skiing as compared with external risks such as passive smoking and rail accidents.

So what?

Using it

To get someone to do something risky, frame the alternative as a certain loss. This can include non-financial loss such as a loss of social standing.

If they already have something and are asking for more, offer something higher value but risky, and in exchange for what they already have. Defending

Recognize risks for what they are! Decide rationally, not by comparing with other losses. Keep accurate records. Beware of wishful thinking. Break compound decisions down into simple decisions.

Risky Shift Phenomenon

Description

When people are in groups, they make decision about risk differently from when they are alone. In the group, they are likely to make riskier decisions, as the shared risk makes the individual risk less.

They also may not want to let their compatriots down, and hence be risk-averse (this is sometimes called cautious shift). The overall tendency towards a shift in risk perception is also sometimes calledchoice shift.

There are a number of reasons as to why this might happen. Theories have included:

 Wallach, Kogan, and Bem (1964) proposed that greater risks are chosen due to a diffusion of responsibility, where emotional bonds decrease anxieties and risk is perceived as shared.

 Collins and Guetzkow (1964) suggested that high risk-takers are more confident and hence may persuade others to take greater risks.

 Brown (1965) indicates that social status in groups is often associated with risk- taking, leading people to avoid a low risk position.

 Bateson (1966) suggests that as people pay attention to a possible action, they become more familiar and comfortable with it and hence perceive less risk.

Research

Myers and Bishop (1970) put highly prejudiced students together to discuss racial issues. They became even more prejudiced. The reverse happened with unprejudiced students, who became even more unprejudiced.

Example Entire football teams sometime get into aggressive or defensive moods as they either throw caution to the winds trying to score or desperately try to avoid being caught out.

Juries given weak evidence will become very lenient after discussion, whilst when given strong evidence they are likely to give harsh judgment.

So what?

Using it

Show the other person how other people are making the same decision. Frame the risk as individually less.

Defending

Make decisions on your own. Shared risk is still the same risk.