Hello everyone and welcome to improve your thinking. I’m your host Kevin Browne and today I want to talk a little bit more about influence. Specifically, the invisible influences that shape many of our beliefs and behaviors.
Let me paint you a picture of how you think about any given issue. You search for information, do research, look at all the facts, examine your own values, and in light of all that decide your position on the issue. You don’t allow irrelevant factors to influence your position. What you think about an issue depends on the evidence. You’re an independent thinker and you’re not easily swayed by the opinions of others. You certainly don’t let the fact that people you like or dislike express their views differently have any sway over your own deliberations. And, of course, whether you think about these things in the morning or the evening has no impact on your thinking. Neither does the fact that you haven’t had lunch yet or dinner or recently had a fight with your partner. Those things are clearly irrelevant to the issue at hand and you recognize that. Therefore, they have no influence on your deliberations. Does that sound about right? It sounds right for how I think about things! If you’ve been listening to my podcasts for a while you know what I’m about to say, don’t you? This view is almost entirely wrong. In reality, those quote-unquote irrelevant factors have more influence on your than you know. As Jonah Berger points out in his book Invisible Influence, “without our realizing it, others have a huge influence on almost every aspect of life. People vote because others are voting, eat more when others are eating, and buy a new car because their neighbors have recently done the same.” In fact, he points out that “99.9% of all decisions are shaped by others. In fact, looking across all domains of our lives, there is only one place we don’t seem to see social influence. Ourselves.” I want to examine this idea by discussing three examples of influence that he addresses in the book. Let’s start with one of the most famous studies of influence conducted in 1952 by Solomon Asch. In the study, he brought a group of students together and told them he was doing a vision test. In reality, he was testing the power of social influence and conformity. Only one student was actually a true subject. The others in the small group of 5-7 met with Asch beforehand and were instructed to give wrong answers. Students were shown a card with 3 lines of clearly different lengths labeled A, B, and C. They were then shown a second card with a line and asked to identify which of the three lines matched this one. The clear answer was that line C matched. As each student was asked for their answer the ones instructed to give the wrong answer did so. Finally, the test subject was asked for their answer. To Asch’s surprise he found a large portion of test subjects conformed to the others in the group who have the wrong answer. In fact, around 75% conformed. Let’s be very clear here. In a case where the correct answer was crystal clear, 75% voiced the wrong answer due to the fact that others had answered that way. The need to conform overcame the evidence of their own eyes. Of course, this raises a number of questions. If conformity in a case like this is so high what about in cases where the correct answer is not as clear? Is there anything that can be done to break this spell of conformity? Before addressing the first question, let me say something reassuring about the second one. In further trials of this experiment, one of the students was coached to dissent from the group and give a different wrong answer. In such cases, conformity from the test subject dropped dramatically. In some cases, the conformity rate dropped to zero. This demonstrates the positive power of influence which I’ll come back to. What about cases where the answer is less clear. In his book, Berger examines such cases. Consider this example: “Suppose you were asked to vote on a new welfare policy. It offers $800 a month for families with one child and an extra $200 a month for each additional child. In addition, it provides full medical insurance, a job training program, $2,000 in food stamps, extra subsidies for housing and daycare, and two years of paid tuition at a community college. Benefits are limited to 8 years, but the program would guarantee a job after benefits ended and would reinstate aid if a family had another child. Would you be in favor or opposed to such a policy?” Not surprisingly when researchers posed this question, most people who identified as liberals favored the policy, and most who identified as conservatives were against it. But, here’s the twist. When Stanford professor Geoffrey Cohen asked this question he presented some conservatives with one additional piece of information: he told them that the policy was supported by 95% of House Republicans and that Republican lawmakers felt that the policy provides sufficient coverage without undermining a basic work ethic and sense of personal responsibility.” What happened when they were asked about their support? The conservatives loved the policy idea. Simply being told that other like-minded people supported it was enough to influence their view. Now, don’t think this influence just affected the conservatives! When the liberals were given a stringent welfare policy and told that other Democrats endorsed it, they favored it as well. And, when people were asked about whether the fact that other Democrats or Republicans favored the policy in question they said that barely mattered at all. And, as Berger points out, they were wrong. People’s attitudes weren’t just slightly nudged as a result of being told what other like-minded people thought about the policy, they were completely flipped! And, if you’re like most people who find out about these studies you are now saying to yourself something like this: Sure those other people were influenced. But, that doesn’t happen to me! And, just like those other people, you are wrong about that. You are being influenced. So am I. But, is this necessarily a bad thing? Perhaps not. Let’s look at some of the benefits of such influence. In his book Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, Bernard Williams points out the importance of setting priorities when addressing ethical values. I think this makes an important point about our implicit ability to recognize right and wrong. Some actions are immediately recognized as right and wrong before any moral deliberation. This turns out to be a good thing. As Williams puts it "an effective way for actions to be ruled out is that they never come into thought at all, and this is often the best way. One does not feel easy with the man who in the course of a discussion of how to deal with political or business rivals says, 'Of course, we could have them killed, but we should lay that aside right from the beginning.' It should never have come into his hands to be laid aside. It is characteristic of morality that it tends to overlook the possibility that some concerns are best embodied in this way, in deliberative silence." In many cases, that deliberative silence is the result of social influence. There are a number of other examples of potentially positive influence as well. In fact, every example of invisible influence which seems negative can be turned into something positive. We are influenced by any number of factors in our environment including our neighbors, friends, and acquaintances. So, it makes sense to choose wisely where possible. We are not only influenced by the opinions of others but their actions as well. So, if you want to improve your health, hang out with people who are already healthy and practice good health habits. Let those positive habits influence you. Another good example of the potential for positive influence is discussed by Victoria Harrison in her book Happy by Design. The homes we live in and the way we decorate them can have an influence on our health, happiness, and well-being. This influence can be positive or negative so learning how to shape our environment to realize the positive benefits makes sense. Another good resource for more information on this is Ingrid Fetell Lee’s book titled Joyful The Surprising Power of Ordinary Things to Create Extraordinary Happiness. It’s funny how we all feel as if we are independent in our choices and beliefs. We believe that we arrive at our preferences, tastes, friends, partners, and opinions through the conscious deliberate choices that we make. But, we don’t. We are influenced in ways we can barely recognize. So, it makes sense to learn about those and shape them when we can to be more positive. If you’ve enjoyed this episode I’d like to influence you to subscribe and visit me online at kevinjbrowne.com. Thanks for listening and I’ll see you on the next episode.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
kevin j. brownePhilosopher | Educator Archives
July 2022
improve your thinking: The course |