What das it mean Social influence?

Социальное влияние относится к способу, которым люди изменяют свое поведение, чтобы удовлетворить требования социальной среды. Она принимает различные формы и проявляется в конформизме, социализации, давлении со стороны сверстников, послушании, лидерстве, убеждении, продажах и маркетинге. Как правило, социальное влияние является результатом определенного действия, команды или просьбы, но люди также изменяют свое отношение и поведение в ответ на то, что, по их мнению, другие могут сделать или подумать. [1] в 1958 году Гарвардский психолог Герберт Кельман выделил три широкие разновидности социального влияния.[2]

Уступчивость -это когда люди кажутся согласными с другими, но на самом деле держат свое особое мнение в секрете.

Идентификация - это когда люди находятся под влиянием кого-то, кого любят и уважают, например, известной знаменитости.

Интернализация -это когда люди принимают убеждения или поведение и соглашаются как публично, так и в частном порядке.

Мортон Дойч и Гарольд Джерард описали две психологические потребности, которые заставляют человека соответствовать ожиданиям других. К ним относятся наша потребность быть правым (информационное социальное влияние) и наша потребность нравиться (нормативное социальное влияние).[3] информационное влияние (или социальное доказательство) - это влияние на принятие информации от другого в качестве доказательства реальности. Информационное влияние вступает в игру, когда люди неуверенны, либо потому, что стимулы внутренне неоднозначны, либо потому, что существуют социальные разногласия. Нормативное влияние-это влияние, направленное на то, чтобы соответствовать позитивным ожиданиям других. С точки зрения типологии Кельмана, нормативное влияние ведет к публичному согласию, а информационное-к частному принятию.[2]

Social influence refers to the way in which individuals change their behavior to meet the demands of a social environment. It takes many forms and can be seen in conformity, socialization, peer pressure, obedience, leadership, persuasion, sales, and marketing. Typically social influence results from a specific action, command, or request, but people also alter their attitudes and behaviors in response to what they perceive others might do or think. [1] In 1958, Harvard psychologist Herbert Kelman identified three broad varieties of social influence.[2]

Compliance is when people appear to agree with others but actually keep their dissenting opinions private.

Identification is when people are influenced by someone who is liked and respected, such as a famous celebrity.

Internalization is when people accept a belief or behavior and agree both publicly and privately.

Morton Deutsch and Harold Gerard described two psychological needs that lead humans to conform to the expectations of others. These include our need to be right (informational social influence) and our need to be liked (normative social influence).[3] Informational influence (or social proof) is an influence to accept information from another as evidence about reality. Informational influence comes into play when people are uncertain, either because stimuli are intrinsically ambiguous or because there is social disagreement. Normative influence is an influence to conform to the positive expectations of others. In terms of Kelman's typology, normative influence leads to public compliance, whereas informational influence leads to private acceptance.[2]

 

 

Организационное изменение рассматривает как процесс, в котором компания или любая организация изменяет свои операционные методы, технологии, организационную структуру, всю структуру или стратегии, так и то, какое влияние эти изменения оказывают на нее. Организационные изменения обычно происходят в ответ на внешнее или внутреннее давление или в результате него. Речь идет о пересмотре и изменении структур-в частности, структур управления-и бизнес-процессов. Малые коммерческие предприятия должны адаптироваться, чтобы выжить против более крупных конкурентов. Они также должны научиться процветать в этой среде. Крупные конкуренты должны быстро адаптироваться, когда на сцену выходит более мелкий, инновационный конкурент. Чтобы не отстать или оставаться на шаг впереди своих конкурентов, бизнес должен искать способы более эффективной работы. Он также должен стремиться работать более эффективно с точки зрения затрат.

 

Tell about Social Groups

A social group is a collection of people who interact with each other and share similar characteristics and a sense of unity. A social category is a collection of people who do not interact but who share similar characteristics. For example, women, men, the elderly, and high school students all constitute social categories. A social category can become a social group when the members in the category interact with each other and identify themselves as members of the group. In contrast, a social aggregate is a collection of people who are in the same place, but who do not interact or share characteristics.

Psychologists Muzafer and Carolyn Sherif, in a classic experiment in the 1950s, divided a group of 12‐year‐old white, middle‐class boys at a summer camp into the “Eagles” and the “Rattlers.” At first, when the boys did not know one another, they formed a common social category as summer campers. But as time passed and they began to consider themselves to be either Eagles or Rattlers, these 12‐year‐old boys formed two distinct social groups.

In-groups, out-groups, and reference groups

In the Sherifs' experiment, the youngsters also erected artificial boundaries between themselves. They formed in‐groups (to which loyalty is expressed) and out‐groups (to which antagonism is expressed).

To some extent every social group creates boundaries between itself and other groups, but a cohesive in‐group typically has three characteristics:

· Members use titles, external symbols, and dress to distinguish themselves from the out‐group.

 

· Members tend to clash or compete with members of the out‐group. This competition with the other group can also strengthen the unity within each group.

 

· Members apply positive stereotypes to their in‐group and negative stereotypes to the out‐group.

In the beginning, the Eagles and Rattlers were friendly, but soon their games evolved into intense competitions. The two groups began to call each other names, and they raided each other's cabins, hazed one another, and started fights. In other words, loyalty to the in‐group led to antagonism and aggression toward the out‐group, including fierce competitions for the same resources. Later in the same experiment, though, Sherif had the boys work together to solve mutual problems. When they cooperated with one another, the Eagles and Rattlers became less divided, hostile, and competitive.

People may form opinions or judge their own behaviors against those of a reference group (a group used as a standard for self‐appraisals). Parishioners at a particular church, for instance, may evaluate themselves by the standards of a denomination, and then feel good about adhering to those standards. Such positive self‐evaluation reflects the normative effect that a reference group has on its own members, as well as those who compare themselves to the group. Still, reference groups can have a comparison effect on self‐evaluations. If most parishioners shine in their spiritual accomplishments, then the others will probably compare themselves to them. Consequently, the “not‐so‐spiritual” parishioners may form a negative self‐appraisal for not feeling “up to par.” Thus, reference groups can exert a powerful influence on behavior and attitudes.

Primary and secondary groups

Groups play a basic role in the development of the social nature and ideals of people. Primary groups are those in which individuals intimately interact and cooperate over a long period of time. Examples of primary groups are families, friends, peers, neighbors, classmates, sororities, fraternities, and church members. These groups are marked by primary relationships in which communication is informal. Members of primary groups have strong emotional ties. They also relate to one another as whole and unique individuals.

In contrast, secondary groups are those in which individuals do not interact much. Members of secondary groups are less personal or emotional than those of primary groups. These groups are marked by secondary relationships in which communication is formal. Members of secondary groups may not know each other or have much face‐to‐face interaction. They tend to relate to others only in particular roles and for practical reasons. An example of a secondary relationship is that of a stockbroker and her clients. The stockbroker likely relates to her clients in terms of business only. She probably will not socialize with her clients or hug them.

Primary relationships are most common in small and traditional societies, while secondary relationships are the norm in large and industrial societies. Because secondary relationships often result in loneliness and isolation, some members of society may attempt to create primary relationships through singles' groups, dating services, church groups, and communes, to name a few. This does not mean, however, that secondary relationships are bad. For most Americans, time and other commitments limit the number of possible primary relationships. Further, acquaintances and friendships can easily spring forth from secondary relationships.

Small groups

A group's size can also determine how its members behave and relate. A small group is small enough to allow all of its members to directly interact. Examples of small groups include families, friends, discussion groups, seminar classes, dinner parties, and athletic teams. People are more likely to experience primary relationships in small group settings than in large settings.

The smallest of small groups is a dyad consisting of two people. A dyad is perhaps the most cohesive of all groups because of its potential for very close and intense interactions. It also runs the risk, though, of splitting up. A triad is a group consisting of three persons. A triad does not tend to be as cohesive and personal as a dyad.

The more people who join a group, the less personal and intimate that group becomes. In other words, as a group increases in size, its members participate and cooperate less, and are more likely to be dissatisfied. A larger group's members may even be inhibited, for example, from publicly helping out victims in an emergency. In this case, people may feel that because so many others are available to help, responsibility to help is shifted to others. Similarly, as a group increases in size, its members are more likely to engage in social loafing, in which people work less because they expect others to take over their tasks.