Q.A student forms her/his impression about a new teacher in school. The teacher about whom the impression is formed is called a target and the student who forms the impression is called a perceiver. (True/False)

Social Influence – From Intuition to Precision

Imagine you are in a lift with a group of strangers. Everyone is facing the back wall. Do you face the front, as you normally would, or do you turn and face the back with them? Most people, even without being told, will turn around. That is social influence at work: your thoughts, feelings, or behaviours are changed by the real or imagined presence of others.

The core intuition is simple: we are social creatures, and other people shape what we do. This happens constantly, from the clothes we choose to the opinions we hold. Sometimes we are aware of it (you laugh at a joke because everyone else is laughing, even if you didn't quite hear it). Sometimes it is automatic (you slow down when you see a crowd ahead, without thinking).

The Precise Statement

In psychology, social influence is defined as:

The process by which an individual's attitudes, beliefs, or behaviours are modified by the presence or actions of others.

This is not just about being told what to do. The "presence" can be real (people in the room), imagined (thinking about what your parents would say), or implied (following a social norm you have internalised). The "modification" can be temporary (you agree in public but disagree privately) or lasting (you genuinely change your mind).

The Three Main Types (The Framework You Need)

Social influence is not one single thing. Psychologists break it into three distinct forms, each with a different mechanism and outcome.

Why This Matters for Exams …

Attitude–Behavior Consistency: The Gap Between What We Say and What We Do

Think about the last time you told yourself, "I will wake up early tomorrow and study," only to hit snooze three times. Or the friend who swears they love the environment but never carries a cloth bag. That gap between what people say they believe and what they actually do is the puzzle at the heart of attitude–behavior consistency.

The intuition is simple: we expect that if someone holds a strong attitude — say, "I believe honesty is important" — they will behave honestly. But real life is messier. People can hold a positive attitude toward exercise and still sit on the couch. They can dislike a political party and still vote for its candidate under pressure. The question psychologists ask is: when do attitudes actually predict behavior, and why do they so often fail to?

The Precise Statement

Attitude–behavior consistency refers to the degree to which a person's actions correspond to their expressed attitudes. High consistency means the behavior matches the attitude; low consistency means they diverge.

The classic finding, from LaPiere's 1934 study, is sobering. He traveled across the US with a Chinese couple, visiting over 250 hotels and restaurants. Only one establishment refused them service. Yet when he later wrote to the same places asking, "Will you accept Chinese guests?" over 90% said no. The attitude (prejudice) did not match the behavior (service). This launched decades of research into when attitudes predict behavior.

Key Factors That Determine Consistency

Not all attitudes are equal. Consistency is higher when:

• The attitude is strong — formed through direct experience, not hearsay. If you've actually tasted a dish and loved it, your "I like this food" attitude will predict ordering it far better than if you only heard it was good.
• The attitude is specific — a general attitude ("I care about health") predicts a specific behavior ("I will run today") poorly. A specific attitude ("I believe running every morning is good for me") does better. This is the principle of compatibility: to predict a behavior, measure the attitude at the same level of specificity.
• Social pressure is low — when others are watching or when norms push the opposite direction, people often act against their private attitude. This is why someone might privately dislike a custom but follow it in public.
• The person has high self-monitoring — some people (high self-monitors) are chameleons, adjusting behavior to fit the situation. Their attitudes predict behavior poorly. Low self-monitors act from their internal beliefs, so consistency is higher.

The Theory of Planned Behavior (A Useful Framework)

The most widely accepted model that explains consistency is Ajzen's Theory of Planned Behavior. It says that behavior is directly predicted by intention, and intention itself is shaped by three things: …