Be honest: Do you ever text while driving? Statistics indicate that many people (especially young drivers) do. And if you text while driving, do you believe that it’s safe—that you can handle it without any risk? If you think texting behind the wheel is safe, please think again: Evidence indicates that it is not. For instance, almost 25 percent of all traffic accidents in the United States involve texting while driving (or other forms of distraction) and more than 300,000 people are injured—many seriously—in these accidents. And consider this: Texting while driving is six times more likely to cause an accident than driving drunk! Recognizing the seriousness of this problem, many public service organizations have launched campaigns to increase awareness of the dangers of driving while texting, and it appears that these campaigns have been successful: Not only have they raised awareness of this problem, they have also encouraged state governments to adopt laws making it illegal to text while driving. And in those states, the number of accidents involving texting has in fact decreased. Ads emphasizing the dangers of texting behind the wheel have been very creative—and persuasive. For example, see the ad in Figure 8.1 .

And now, a different story. In 2008, Bernie Madoff—a man who is perhaps the biggest swindler of all time—was arrested by federal authorities. Perhaps you have

Figure 8.1 Text While You Drive—If You Want to Die Young!

In recent years, campaigns have been launched to make drivers (especially young ones) aware of the dangers of texting while driving. Here is one ad that has been used for this purpose.

heard of him because he cheated hundreds of individuals, and even large charitable organizations, out of more than $65 billion. He did this by running a giant Ponzi scheme—a swindle in which investors are lured into pouring their money into a company that offers high rates of return—for example, 15 percent a year when government bonds are paying 2 percent. What happens then is this: The first investors do indeed receive these returns, but notbecause the person running the Ponzi scheme has made outstanding investments; rather, early investors are paid with money from later investors! In short, the people who invest initially do well, but those who invest later on—especially near the end of the swindle—lose everything as the scheme collapses. But how, you might wonder, could Bernie Madoff convince hundreds of people—many of whom were highly sophisticated about financial matters—to invest their money in his phony company? The answer is complex, but involves the fact that he used techniques that, together, made individuals almost desperate to invest! For instance, he made every new investor feel as though he was doing them a favor by taking their money. Also, he hinted that soon, no more funds would be accepted. And he relied on word of mouth—investors who received large profits told their friends and family about this “opportunity”—which led a growing number of people to want a piece of this financial “pie.” The final result was the same as for all Ponzi schemes: Ultimately, there was not enough money from new investors to pay the previous ones, and the whole structure collapsed. Bernie Madoff was convicted of numerous crimes and sentenced to many years in prison. But he was not sorry for what he did; in fact he blamed investors for being stupid enough to fall for his swindle!

Why do we begin with these two seemingly unrelated stories? Simply to call your attention to the central role of social influence —efforts by one or more people to change the behavior, attitudes, or feelings of one or more others ( Cialdini, 2000 , 2006 ). As you’ll see in this chapter, social influence is indeed a very powerful force—it often succeeds in changing the behavior of the people toward whom it is directed. The examples discussed earlier, however, call attention to another important point: Social influence, itself, is neither good nor bad. It can be used to manipulate others for selfish outcomes, as illustrated by Bernie Madoff, or to produce positive social effects, as in “don’t text while driving” campaigns. Regardless of the goal of social influence, the methods used can vary greatly, ranging from convincing the target people that doing what the influencer wants is the “right” thing to do, to a wide range of tactics for convincing them to say “yes” to personal requests. Whatever the goals or methods used, though, social influence always involves efforts by one or more people to induce some kind of change in others. Efforts to change others’ attitudes through persuasion was discussed in detail in Chapter 5 , so here we will focus on social influence focused on changing others’ behavior.

Specifically, we’ll examine what social psychologists have learned about three major forms of influence. The first is conformity , which involves efforts to change others’ behavior through norms about how to behave in a given situation. These norms —can be formal, as in speed limits, rules for playing games or informal, as in the general rule “Don’t stare at people on an elevator.”

A second kind of social influence involves efforts to change others’ behavior through direct requests—a process known as compliance (or seeking compliance). Many techniques for getting the target people to say “Yes” exist, and we examine several of these ( Cialdini, 2006 ; Sparrowe, Soetjipto, & Kraimer, 2006 ). Yet another form of social influence involves following direct orders or commands from others, a process known as obedience .

We’ll also discuss what is, in some ways, the most intriguing form of social influence—influence that occurs when other people change our behavior without intending to do so (e.g., Fitzsimons & Bargh, 2003 ). We’ll refer to such effects as unintentional social influence , and will describe several different forms in which it can occur.