Literature Review Part 3 Sample Submission

Name: Rolando Carol

Research Topic: Power Dynamics and Conformity

Caveman Outline

Paragraph 1: Topic Introduction

Gabbert, Memon, & Wright (2006)

Meade & Roediger (2006)

Paragraph 2: Why conform?

Define informational and normative influence

Campbell & Fairey (1989)

Gabbert, Memon, & Wright (2007)

Asch (1955)

Paragraph 3: Power

Define types of power

Keltner, Gruenfeld, & Anderson (2003)

Galinsky, Magee, Gruenfeld, Whitson, & Liljenquist (2008)

Paragraph 4: Power affects conformity

Brinol, Petty, Valle, Rucker, & Becerra (2007)

Eaton, Visser, Krosnick, & Anand (2009)

Morrison, Rothman, & Soll (2011)

Paragraph 5: Knowledge Gap

Skagerberg & Wright (2008)

Paragraph 6 (Final paragraph): Purpose, Design, and Hypothesis

Restate research purpose/goal

Design

Hypothesis

Middle Paragraph (Paragraph 4)

Most research on social power and conformity suggests that those in powerful positions should be more resistant to social influence than those in less powerful positions. Research on social power and persuasion, for example, has shown that power can validate an individual’s existing views (Brinol, Petty, Valle, Rucker, & Becerra, 2007) and is associated with endorsing resoluteness and resisting attitude change (Eaton, Visser, Krosnick, & Anand, 2009). Power may be an impediment to experiencing empathy (Galinsky,Magee, Inesi, & Gruenfeld, 2006) and increases the psychological distance that one feels from others (Smith & Trope,2006) while motivating one to act in accordance with one’s own disposition or attitudes (e.g., Chen, Lee-Chai, & Bargh,2001; Galinsky, Gruenfeld, & Magee, 2003; Galinsky et al.,2008). Finally, powerful individuals have been shown to perceive less need for input from others, even when advice could help them perform better (See, Morrison, Rothman, & Soll, 2011). For these reasons, one would expect powerful individuals to exhibit less memory conformity than less powerful individuals.

Last Paragraph

The purpose of the present study is to investigate the effects of work place social power on memory conformity between dyads. Participant-actor pairs will first see 50 images on a computer screen. Next, they will be randomly assigned to one of three social power combinations: Manager-Subordinate, Subordinate-Manager, or Collaborator-Collaborator. After these role assignments, pairs will be tested on whether each of 100 images (50 old and 50 new) had or had not been shown previously. Actors will always respond before participants so we can measure participants’ memory conformity toward their partners. In line with prior findings on social power and memory conformity, I predict that subordinates will display significantly more memory conformity than both managers and collaborators.