Week 1
Defining social influence and persuasion:
- Social influence: processes through which people's behavior, attitudes, or beliefs are
influenced by others.
- Persuasion: purposeful social influence, using communication to obtain consent.
- Cialdini focuses on universal principles that make consent more likely.
Heuristics: mental rules of thumb that people use to make quick decisions without extensive
cognitive processing.
- Cialdini describes his principles (such as social proof and scarcity) as heuristic
shortcuts that are particularly effective under time pressure or uncertainty.
Week 2
Social proof introduction: the tendency to imitate the behavior of others, especially when:
- The situation is ambiguous;
- Others are seen as equal or expert → "if many people are doing it, it must
be correct."
(Using) social norms: behavior is guided by two types of perceived norms:
1. Descriptive norms → what others are doing.
2. Injunctive norms → what is socially approved.
- Cialdini shows that interventions are more effective when these norms are made
explicitly visible.
1. Being able to explain the various processes and theoretical background of social
proof and social norms
Social proof is the process by which people use the behavior of others as information about
what is correct, especially when there is uncertainty. The theoretical basis lies in normative
and informative social behavior. Social norms guide behavior through:
- Descriptive norms → what others are doing.
- Injunctive norms → what is socially approved.
Cialdini shows that social proof primarily functions as a heuristic.
2. Being able to use social proof and social norms as an intervention tool
Effective interventions:
- Make desired behavior visible;
- Emphasize that others are already doing it;
- Combine descriptive and injunctive norms.
For example, "90% of visitors throw their trash in the trash can" → visual
confirmation of a clean environment.
Week 3
Social proof moderators: social proof is stronger when:
- The situation is uncertain;
- The source is similar to the recipient (= similarity);
- Several others exhibit the same behavior.
- The more and the more similar, the stronger the effect.
Spreading effects: behavior can spread because people observe and imitate each other.
- Cialdini describes this as a cascade effect of social proof: a single, visible behavior
can elicit many imitations.
"Conflicting" theories:
, - Cialdini acknowledges that behavior can sometimes be explained by multiple
theories simultaneously (e.g., rational choice versus heuristics).
- He emphasizes that these are not true conflicts, but rather different levels of
explanation.
1. Being able to name and explain the various moderators
Social proof is stronger when:
- The situation is ambiguous;
- The group is similar to the recipient (= similarity);
- Several people exhibit the same behavior;
- The behavior is publicly visible.
2. Being able to explain the goal-framing-spreading effect and how it differs from the
theory of normative conduct
The goal-framing-spreading (GFT) effect describes how visible behavior activates goals in
others (e.g., adhering to norms versus violating them), causing behavior to spread. For
example:
- Clean environment → norm is "don't pollute" → less litter.
- Polluted environment → norm is "ignoring rules" → more violations.
This effect differs from the Theory of Normative Conduct (TNC), which focuses on the
influence of perceived social norms (descriptive and injunctive) on behavior. While the TNC
explains which norms guide behavior, the GFT explains how contextual cues activate and
spread these norms by activating underlying goals. Therefore, the GFT effect emphasizes
the importance of visible context and behavior as catalysts for normative behavior, beyond
mere norm perception.
3. Being able to explain a behavior (such as littering) in a specific setting from various
theoretical perspectives
Littering can be explained by:
- Social proof → "others do it";
- Norms → descriptive versus injunctive conflict;
- Goal framing → active violation goal;
- Heuristics → rapid context interpretation;
- Emotions → indifference/frustration.
Multiple explanations are complementary, not contradictory.
4. Being able to use the social proof moderators and the GFT-spreading effects as
interventions.
Effective strategies are:
- Provide clean starting situations;
- Use similar role models;
- Make desired behavior visible and repeated;
- Avoid signals of norm violations.
Weeks 4 & 5
Self-persuasion: people convince themselves by interpreting their own behavior.
- According to Cialdini, external coercion or reward are not always necessary; when
someone voluntarily adopts a position or behavior, internal pressure arises to justify
and maintain that behavior.
Self-perception: originating from Bherm's self-perception theory, used by Cialdini.
Defining social influence and persuasion:
- Social influence: processes through which people's behavior, attitudes, or beliefs are
influenced by others.
- Persuasion: purposeful social influence, using communication to obtain consent.
- Cialdini focuses on universal principles that make consent more likely.
Heuristics: mental rules of thumb that people use to make quick decisions without extensive
cognitive processing.
- Cialdini describes his principles (such as social proof and scarcity) as heuristic
shortcuts that are particularly effective under time pressure or uncertainty.
Week 2
Social proof introduction: the tendency to imitate the behavior of others, especially when:
- The situation is ambiguous;
- Others are seen as equal or expert → "if many people are doing it, it must
be correct."
(Using) social norms: behavior is guided by two types of perceived norms:
1. Descriptive norms → what others are doing.
2. Injunctive norms → what is socially approved.
- Cialdini shows that interventions are more effective when these norms are made
explicitly visible.
1. Being able to explain the various processes and theoretical background of social
proof and social norms
Social proof is the process by which people use the behavior of others as information about
what is correct, especially when there is uncertainty. The theoretical basis lies in normative
and informative social behavior. Social norms guide behavior through:
- Descriptive norms → what others are doing.
- Injunctive norms → what is socially approved.
Cialdini shows that social proof primarily functions as a heuristic.
2. Being able to use social proof and social norms as an intervention tool
Effective interventions:
- Make desired behavior visible;
- Emphasize that others are already doing it;
- Combine descriptive and injunctive norms.
For example, "90% of visitors throw their trash in the trash can" → visual
confirmation of a clean environment.
Week 3
Social proof moderators: social proof is stronger when:
- The situation is uncertain;
- The source is similar to the recipient (= similarity);
- Several others exhibit the same behavior.
- The more and the more similar, the stronger the effect.
Spreading effects: behavior can spread because people observe and imitate each other.
- Cialdini describes this as a cascade effect of social proof: a single, visible behavior
can elicit many imitations.
"Conflicting" theories:
, - Cialdini acknowledges that behavior can sometimes be explained by multiple
theories simultaneously (e.g., rational choice versus heuristics).
- He emphasizes that these are not true conflicts, but rather different levels of
explanation.
1. Being able to name and explain the various moderators
Social proof is stronger when:
- The situation is ambiguous;
- The group is similar to the recipient (= similarity);
- Several people exhibit the same behavior;
- The behavior is publicly visible.
2. Being able to explain the goal-framing-spreading effect and how it differs from the
theory of normative conduct
The goal-framing-spreading (GFT) effect describes how visible behavior activates goals in
others (e.g., adhering to norms versus violating them), causing behavior to spread. For
example:
- Clean environment → norm is "don't pollute" → less litter.
- Polluted environment → norm is "ignoring rules" → more violations.
This effect differs from the Theory of Normative Conduct (TNC), which focuses on the
influence of perceived social norms (descriptive and injunctive) on behavior. While the TNC
explains which norms guide behavior, the GFT explains how contextual cues activate and
spread these norms by activating underlying goals. Therefore, the GFT effect emphasizes
the importance of visible context and behavior as catalysts for normative behavior, beyond
mere norm perception.
3. Being able to explain a behavior (such as littering) in a specific setting from various
theoretical perspectives
Littering can be explained by:
- Social proof → "others do it";
- Norms → descriptive versus injunctive conflict;
- Goal framing → active violation goal;
- Heuristics → rapid context interpretation;
- Emotions → indifference/frustration.
Multiple explanations are complementary, not contradictory.
4. Being able to use the social proof moderators and the GFT-spreading effects as
interventions.
Effective strategies are:
- Provide clean starting situations;
- Use similar role models;
- Make desired behavior visible and repeated;
- Avoid signals of norm violations.
Weeks 4 & 5
Self-persuasion: people convince themselves by interpreting their own behavior.
- According to Cialdini, external coercion or reward are not always necessary; when
someone voluntarily adopts a position or behavior, internal pressure arises to justify
and maintain that behavior.
Self-perception: originating from Bherm's self-perception theory, used by Cialdini.
