False Consensus Effect: A Focused Review of Research
Categorization and social projection are important ways that people can more successfully navigate their social environment. People need to know that there are others in their in-group that share the same attitudes and behaviors as they do. If people are unable to determine how many people in their environment share their attitudes and behaviors, it would be more difficult to engage in social situations without offending or contradicting others. For this reason, false consensus is an interesting offshoot of this important idea. The false consensus effect refers to the fact that people have a tendency to over-estimate the proportion of the population that shares an attitude or behavior with him or her.
Much of the research on false consensus has demonstrated that people tend to over project how many members of their in-group are likely to share their attitudes and behaviors. This effect diminishes when comparing to an out-group. It is thought that this occurs because people feel that people who they do not consider to share a group identity with will likely have different basic attitudes and behaviors than they.
An important aspect of the literature is that the vast majority used college students as the primary subjects. While this is extremely convenient for researchers, it may not give us a clear picture about false consensus, in that it is possible that college students' limited "real-world experience" may be influencing their projections. Also, almost all of the behavior measures were taken by self-report. This is somewhat necessary, as many of the behaviors would be difficult to measure directly (e.g., drug use) without a breach of ethics. This too is a source of potential source of error, it is likely that the self-reports would under-estimate the proportion of the population that engages in a particular behavior.
The astute reader may notice that this review does not include any papers that did not find a false consensus effect. The reason for this is not that this paper is not representative of the literature, but rather, that it is. The uniformity of the literature suggests that the phenomenon is fairly common. Some interesting arguments as to why this is are motivational or cognitive in nature. The motivational premise is based in the idea that people are motivated to believe that they have a place in their social environment. This argument is a based in self-justification, in that if many people share a given belief or behavior, it makes it easier to justify that this attitude or behavior is either right, or not as bad as it might seem.
“Silly Rabbit, Trix are for Kids!” is what you might have heard repeated over continuously from commercials a few years ago for Trix products. In the commercials there would always be kids happily eating Trix’s yogurt or cereal. Then a white rabbit would appear with a fun and goofy voice and would always try to snatch the food away from them without success. But this fun line can be seen in another way, as in, Trix’s advertisements really do tick kids. As do many other fast food and processed food companies across the United States. Numerous people can say they have seen this flowing scene about to be described before. A parent and child are walking down the grocery store aisles and the child
President Andrew Jackson was a very controversial man. At times, he fights for the common man with a clear head and a sharp mouth, but at others, his rage blinds him from what is truly happening around him. Nevertheless, he fought valiantly for keeping the Union together and for the ordinary citizen's rights as an American. The "black mark" of his presidency was the forced relocation of Native American peoples, from lands which they had live for many generations. Andrew Jackson was a living oxymoron. As James Patron wrote in Jackson's biography, Jackson was "the most law-defying, law-obeying citizen. A stickler for discipline, he never hesitated to disobey his superior."
Andrew Jackson has been described as a great hero of his time and a man who was atrocious and would destroy the Union. Andrew Jackson accomplished a great number of things during his life but some of his actions were quite questionable. Looking from the present to the past gives insight into areas where the events can be examined more objectively. However, it is vital when examining past events to keep in mind the mindsets of the past. People had a different point of view and a different perspective than the current one. This must be kept in the forward part of the mind to understand the actions of those in the past. This paper will serve as a guide into the life of Andrew Jackson, his trials and tribulations, decisions and contradictions. From the beginning of his life, he was headstrong and that would lead him straight into the history books.
Shortly after the American Revolution, the United States entered an era of profound economic and social change that was dominated first by the Market Revolution and subsequently by Andrew Jackson’s skillful use of the power of the presidency to crack down on capitalist exploitation. Jackson’s first biographer, James Parton, however, describes the legacy of the seventh President’s administration as one fraught with controversy, “Andrew Jackson was a patriot, and a traitor. He was the greatest of generals, and wholly ignorant of the art of war. He was the most candid of men, and capable of the profoundest dissimulation. He was a democratic autocrat, an urbane savage, an atrocious saint.” Many people argue that Jackson, having turned the federal
Andrew Jackson is one of the most controversial presidents. Many regard him as a war hero, the father of the Democratic Party, an inspiring leader, and a spokesman for the common man. While there is plenty to praise about the seventh president, his legacy is tarnished by his racism, disregard for the law of the land, cruelty towards the Native Americans, and ruthless temper. Jackson was an intriguing man who was multi-faceted. One must not look at a singular dimension, and cast judgment on him as a whole. To accurately evaluate one of the most complex presidents, it is crucial to observe Jackson from all possible angles. Prior lifestyle, hardships in life, political ideology, lifestyle of the time, political developments, and his character
As human beings, we have a strong desire to be accepted by others. We engage in behavior based on what we assume those around us are engaging. We misinterpret the firsthand information we gain from observing other people’s behavior. People’s behavior sometimes spring from a desire to create an impression that is not a true reflection one’s own beliefs, which may lead to errors in judgment. When a majority of group members privately reject a norm but assume that most others accept it, they are engaging in pluralistic ignorance. (Gilovich, Keltner, Chen & Nisbett, 2013, p. 112) Pluralistic ignorance occurs whenever people act in ways that conflict with their private beliefs because of a concern for the social consequences.
Solomon Asch developed and ran an experiment regarding the power of conformity that affects most populations. Psychologists have been attempting to fully understand the mental workings behind why people are so easily pressured into following others for the longest time. The main focus of psychologists, is to figure and understand what the causes are behind social conformity. Numerous terms are brought up when studying conformity. The “unspoken rules or guidelines for behavior in a group” (Hock 293) are labeled as social norms. When individuals are placed in large groups, the tendency is to lean with whatever the majority of the group thinks. The regular behavior of the individual tends to readjust to appease the superior crowd.
Andrew Jackson was often seen throughout his time as president as a common man, with his best interests lying with the people of the United States. From 1829 to 1837, Jackson allowed for changes in the government that he believed would help the common man’s daily agenda and financial stability. With a strong federal government, the Indian Removal Acts, and the Spoils System built during his presidency, the Jacksonian era was proven to be the era of the “common man.”
Any agency that uses children for marketing schemes spend hundreds of billions dollars each year world wide persuading and manipulating consumer’s lifestyles that lead to overindulgence and squandering. Three articles uncover a social problem that advertising companies need to report about. In his research piece “Kid Kustomers” Eric Schlosser considers the reasons for the number of parents that allow their children to consume such harmful foods such as ‘McDonalds’. McDonalds is food that is meant to be fast and not meant to be a regular diet. Advertising exploits children’s needs for the wealth of their enterprise, creating false solutions, covering facts about their food and deceiving children’s insecurities. It contains dissatisfaction that leads to over consumption. Children are particularly vulnerable to this sort of manipulation, American Psychological Association article, “Youth Oriented Advertising” reveals the facts upon the statics on consumers in the food industries. The relationship that encourages young children to adapt towards food marketing schemes, make them more vulnerable to other schemes, such as, advertising towards clothing, toys and cars. Article writer of “The relationship between cartoon trade character recognition and attitude toward product category in young children”, Richard Mizerski, discusses a sample that was given to children ages three to six years old, about how advertising incurs young children that are attracted too certain objects or products on the market.
"American President: Andrew Jackson: A Life in Brief." Miller Center of Public Affairs. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 2011. Web. 03 Apr. 2011.
Commercials make the viewer think about the product being advertised. Because of the amount of television children watch throughout the week, it allows the children to be exposed to the information over and over again. Per year, children are known to view thousands of fast food commercials. On a daily basis, a teen will usually view five advertisements and a child aged six to eleven will see around four advertisements (Burger Battles 4). Businesses use this strategy to “speak directly to children” (Ruskin 3). Although the big businesses in the fast ...
By comparing ourselves with other people we categorize and label those who are similar to us as the in-group and people who differ from our-self are categorized as the out-group (Duff & Peace, 2012). We act in ways to favor our in-group rather than out group, this is called in-group favoritism. In-groups and out-groups are evident in many social environments, for example, children form groups with those who like playing similar games to them. In a study that explains in-group favoritism, an experiment was conducted by allocating individuals into groups based on the result of a coin flip (Billing & Tajfel, 1973). After having been told their group members, the participants then had to allocate points to members of their own group (‘in-group’) and to the members of the other group (‘out-group’). These members of the in-group ...
It is one of the most difficult challenges anyone can face, and one that for some cultures could result in very harsh consequences. Stating an opinion that does not relate to the majority’s opinion can be a very frightening experience, yet at the same time be a very refreshing, calming experience. The Spiral of Silence theory, created by Elizabeth Noelle-Neumann, explains why people fear to express their opinions when their opinion does not match that of the majority’s. Her research and discoveries will be discussed as well as those that did not feel that her theory was adequate to explain such phenomena as the Spiral of Silence Theory consists of.
Several factors affect conformity. The larger the group, the more likely people are to conform, although this effect levels off at around seven group members. If there is even one dissenter in a group other than the participant, conformity drops dramatically. If the participant is in face-to-face contact with the group, he or she is more likely to conform. And finally, the more ambiguous the solution to the problem, the more likely the participant is to conform to others’ opinions (McLeod,
Cognitive psychology on the categorization process highlights the explanation for why stereotyping occurs. According to Michigan State University, "People like to, want to, need to categorize the world, both the social and physical world, into preferably neat little groups." [slide 3] This means that people stereotype not because they a rude, but because it is a natural need. By applying all of the group information to all of its members, categorization eventually saves processing time. Stereotyping also satisfies the need to understand and predict the social world. A stereotype contains a general glance at what someone is going to do. By applying a stereotype to a person, a guess can be made on what that person is like. This can lead to either the befriending or dismissing of an individual. As a society that has a constant need to belong, stereotyping can make one feel better about himself. Grouping oneself into a stereotype can make one feel like a part of a whole, a necessary example of a group. Ingroup favorability bias is brought on by this concept. No matter how good or bad someone 's ideas are, there will always be someone who shares them. This extends to always thinking that the idea you hold true is better than someone else 's, which is the definition of ingroup favorability