更改

Social influence is not necessarily negative. For example, doctors can try to [[persuade]] patients to change unhealthy habits. Social influence is generally perceived to be harmless when it respects the right of the influenced to accept or reject it, and is not unduly coercive. Depending on the context and motivations, social influence may constitute underhanded manipulation.

Social influence is not necessarily negative. For example, doctors can try to [[persuade]] patients to change unhealthy habits. Social influence is generally perceived to be harmless when it respects the right of the influenced to accept or reject it, and is not unduly coercive. Depending on the context and motivations, social influence may constitute underhanded manipulation.

 

===Abusive power and control===

===Abusive power and control===

Controlling abusers use various tactics to exert power and control over their victims. The goal of the abuser is to control and [[intimidate]] the victim or to influence them to feel that they do not have an equal voice in the relationship.<ref name="Cory p. 30">Jill Cory; Karen McAndless-Davis. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=qBFdlUnxmkkC&pg=PA30 When Love Hurts: A Woman's Guide to Understanding Abuse in Relationships]''. WomanKind Press; 1 January 2000. {{ISBN|978-0-9686016-0-0}}. p. 30.</ref>

Controlling abusers use various tactics to exert power and control over their victims. The goal of the abuser is to control and [[intimidate]] the victim or to influence them to feel that they do not have an equal voice in the relationship.<ref name="Cory p. 30">Jill Cory; Karen McAndless-Davis. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=qBFdlUnxmkkC&pg=PA30 When Love Hurts: A Woman's Guide to Understanding Abuse in Relationships]''. WomanKind Press; 1 January 2000. {{ISBN|978-0-9686016-0-0}}. p. 30.</ref>

===Propaganda===

===Propaganda===

Propaganda is information that is not [[Objectivity (journalism)|objective]] and is used primarily to influence an audience and further an agenda, often by presenting facts selectively to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using [[loaded language]] to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is presented.<ref name="brit_BLS">{{cite web | last = Smith | first = Bruce L. | author-link = Bruce Lannes Smith | title = Propaganda | website = britannica.com | publisher = [[Encyclopædia Britannica|Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.]] | date = 17 February 2016 | url = http://www.britannica.com/topic/propaganda | access-date = 23 April 2016 }}</ref>

Propaganda is information that is not [[Objectivity (journalism)|objective]] and is used primarily to influence an audience and further an agenda, often by presenting facts selectively to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using [[loaded language]] to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is presented.<ref name="brit_BLS">{{cite web | last = Smith | first = Bruce L. | author-link = Bruce Lannes Smith | title = Propaganda | website = britannica.com | publisher = [[Encyclopædia Britannica|Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.]] | date = 17 February 2016 | url = http://www.britannica.com/topic/propaganda | access-date = 23 April 2016 }}</ref>

===Hard power===

===Hard power===

Hard power is the use of [[military]] and [[economics|economic]] means to influence the behavior or interests of other political bodies. This form of [[political power]] is often aggressive ([[coercion]]), and is most effective when imposed by one political body upon another of lesser military and/or [[economic power]].<ref name=hard>{{cite web|title=Hard Power Vs. Soft Power|url=http://www.themarknews.com/articles/895-hard-power-vs-soft-power|publisher=The Mark|accessdate=26 April 2012|author=Daryl Copeland|date=Feb 2, 2010|url-status=dead|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120501050956/http://www.themarknews.com/articles/895-hard-power-vs-soft-power|archivedate=1 May 2012}}</ref>  Hard power contrasts with [[soft power]], which comes from [[diplomacy]], [[culture]] and [[history]].<ref name=hard/>

Hard power is the use of [[military]] and [[economics|economic]] means to influence the behavior or interests of other political bodies. This form of [[political power]] is often aggressive ([[coercion]]), and is most effective when imposed by one political body upon another of lesser military and/or [[economic power]].<ref name=hard>{{cite web|title=Hard Power Vs. Soft Power|url=http://www.themarknews.com/articles/895-hard-power-vs-soft-power|publisher=The Mark|accessdate=26 April 2012|author=Daryl Copeland|date=Feb 2, 2010|url-status=dead|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120501050956/http://www.themarknews.com/articles/895-hard-power-vs-soft-power|archivedate=1 May 2012}}</ref>  Hard power contrasts with [[soft power]], which comes from [[diplomacy]], [[culture]] and [[history]].<ref name=hard/>

A social network is a social structure made up of nodes (representing individuals or organizations) which are connected (through ties, also called edges, connections, or links) by one or more types of interdependency (such as friendship, common interests or beliefs, sexual relations, or kinship). Social network analysis uses the lens of network theory to examine social relationships. Social network analysis as a field has become more prominent since the mid-20th century in determining the channels and effects of social influence. For example, Christakis and Fowler found that social networks transmit states and behaviors such as obesity, smoking, drinking and happiness.

A social network is a social structure made up of nodes (representing individuals or organizations) which are connected (through ties, also called edges, connections, or links) by one or more types of interdependency (such as friendship, common interests or beliefs, sexual relations, or kinship). Social network analysis uses the lens of network theory to examine social relationships. Social network analysis as a field has become more prominent since the mid-20th century in determining the channels and effects of social influence. For example, Christakis and Fowler found that social networks transmit states and behaviors such as obesity, smoking, drinking and happiness.

Many factors can affect the impact of social influence.

Many factors can affect the impact of social influence.

 

However, important flaws have been identified in the contagion model for social influence which is assumed and used in many of the above studies. In order to address these flaws, causal inference methods have been proposed instead, to systematically disentangle social influence from other possible confounding causes when using observational data.

However, important flaws have been identified in the contagion model for social influence which is assumed and used in many of the above studies. In order to address these flaws, causal inference methods have been proposed instead, to systematically disentangle social influence from other possible confounding causes when using observational data.

Social impact theory was developed by [[Bibb Latané]] in 1981. This theory asserts that there are three factors which increase a person's likelihood to respond to social influence:<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Latané | first1 = B | year = 1981 | title = The psychology of social impact | doi = 10.1037/0003-066x.36.4.343 | journal = American Psychologist | volume = 36 | issue = 4| pages = 343–356 }}</ref>

Social impact theory was developed by [[Bibb Latané]] in 1981. This theory asserts that there are three factors which increase a person's likelihood to respond to social influence:<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Latané | first1 = B | year = 1981 | title = The psychology of social impact | doi = 10.1037/0003-066x.36.4.343 | journal = American Psychologist | volume = 36 | issue = 4| pages = 343–356 }}</ref>

*''Strength'': The importance of the influencing group to the individual

*''Strength'': The importance of the influencing group to the individual

*''Immediacy'': Physical (and temporal) proximity of the influencing group to the individual at the time of the influence attempt

*''Immediacy'': Physical (and temporal) proximity of the influencing group to the individual at the time of the influence attempt

As described above, theoretical approaches are in the form of knowledge clusters. A global theory of Influence is missing  for an easy understanding and an education to protect from manipulators.

 

*''Number'': The number of people in the group

*''Number'': The number of people in the group

As described above, theoretical approaches are in the form of knowledge clusters. A global theory of Influence is missing  for an easy understanding and an education to protect from manipulators.

[[Robert Cialdini]] defines six "weapons of influence" that can contribute to an individual's propensity to be influenced by a persuader:<ref name="Cialdini" /><ref>{{cite web |url=https://conceptually.org/concepts/6-principles-of-influence/ |title=What are the 6 principles of influence? |website=conceptually.org |access-date= October 25, 2017}}</ref>

[[Robert Cialdini]] defines six "weapons of influence" that can contribute to an individual's propensity to be influenced by a persuader:<ref name="Cialdini" /><ref>{{cite web |url=https://conceptually.org/concepts/6-principles-of-influence/ |title=What are the 6 principles of influence? |website=conceptually.org |access-date= October 25, 2017}}</ref>

*[[norm of reciprocity|Reciprocity]]: People tend to return a favor.

*[[norm of reciprocity|Reciprocity]]: People tend to return a favor.

*[[Promise|Commitment]] and [[consistency]]: People do not like to be self-contradictory. Once they commit to an idea or behavior, they are averse to changing their minds without good reason.

*[[Promise|Commitment]] and [[consistency]]: People do not like to be self-contradictory. Once they commit to an idea or behavior, they are averse to changing their minds without good reason.

*[[Social proof]]: People will be more open to things that they see others doing. For example, seeing others compost their organic waste after finishing a meal may influence the subject to do so as well.<ref>{{cite journal|author=Sussman, R.|author2=Gifford, R.|name-list-style=amp|year=2013|title=Be the Change You Want to See: Modeling Food Composting in Public Places|journal=Environment & Behavior|volume=45|issue=3|pages=323–343|doi=10.1177/0013916511431274|url=https://semanticscholar.org/paper/0de18b4adf6b128027a3f4c0bc8d757426f20421}}</ref>

*[[Social proof]]: People will be more open to things that they see others doing. For example, seeing others compost their organic waste after finishing a meal may influence the subject to do so as well.<ref>{{cite journal|author=Sussman, R.|author2=Gifford, R.|name-list-style=amp|year=2013|title=Be the Change You Want to See: Modeling Food Composting in Public Places|journal=Environment & Behavior|volume=45|issue=3|pages=323–343|doi=10.1177/0013916511431274|url=https://semanticscholar.org/paper/0de18b4adf6b128027a3f4c0bc8d757426f20421}}</ref>

*[[Authority]]: People will tend to obey authority figures.

*[[Authority]]: People will tend to obey authority figures.

}}

}}

*Liking: People are more easily swayed by people they like.

*Liking: People are more easily swayed by people they like.

*[[Scarcity]]: A perceived limitation of resources will generate demand.

*[[Scarcity]]: A perceived limitation of resources will generate demand.

===Unanimity===

===Unanimity===

Social Influence is strongest when the group perpetrating it is consistent and committed. Even a single instance of dissent can greatly wane the strength of an influence. For example, in Milgram's first set of [[Milgram experiment|obedience experiments]], 65% of participants complied with fake authority figures to administer "maximum shocks" to a confederate. In iterations of the Milgram experiment where three people administered shocks (two of whom were confederates), once one confederate disobeyed, only ten percent of subjects administered the maximum shocks.<ref name=ObedStudy>{{cite journal|last=Milgram |first=Stanley |year=1963 |title=Behavioral Study of Obedience |journal=Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology |volume=67 |issue=4 |pages=371–378 |pmid=14049516 |url=http://content.apa.org/journals/abn/67/4/371 |archive-url=https://archive.is/20120717013242/http://content.apa.org/journals/abn/67/4/371 |url-status=dead |archive-date=2012-07-17 |doi=10.1037/h0040525 |citeseerx=10.1.1.599.92 }} [http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1981/A1981LC33300001.pdf Full-text PDF.] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110611105753/http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1981/A1981LC33300001.pdf |date=June 11, 2011 }}</ref>

Social Influence is strongest when the group perpetrating it is consistent and committed. Even a single instance of dissent can greatly wane the strength of an influence. For example, in Milgram's first set of [[Milgram experiment|obedience experiments]], 65% of participants complied with fake authority figures to administer "maximum shocks" to a confederate. In iterations of the Milgram experiment where three people administered shocks (two of whom were confederates), once one confederate disobeyed, only ten percent of subjects administered the maximum shocks.<ref name=ObedStudy>{{cite journal|last=Milgram |first=Stanley |year=1963 |title=Behavioral Study of Obedience |journal=Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology |volume=67 |issue=4 |pages=371–378 |pmid=14049516 |url=http://content.apa.org/journals/abn/67/4/371 |archive-url=https://archive.is/20120717013242/http://content.apa.org/journals/abn/67/4/371 |url-status=dead |archive-date=2012-07-17 |doi=10.1037/h0040525 |citeseerx=10.1.1.599.92 }} [http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1981/A1981LC33300001.pdf Full-text PDF.] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110611105753/http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1981/A1981LC33300001.pdf |date=June 11, 2011 }}</ref>

=== Status ===

=== Status ===

==编者推荐==

==编者推荐==