Social Facilitation Studies[1]

SOCIAL FACILITATION STUDIES Social facilitaion • Triplett (1898)- cycle -

•

based on an oberservation that competing cyclists produced faster times when racing with other cyclists rather than simply competing on their own he found that cyclists were slowest when racing alone and fasestest when racing with a pacemaker or in a racing group.

*Triplett (1898)

social facilitaion

Aim:

whether or not performance would be enhanced in the presence of other people performing the same task. Method

-

Instructed

to wind in a line on a fishing reel as quickly as they could. In a practice period, participants performed the task both alone and in pairs, alternating between the two conditions. In each trial, participants were timed to determine how long it took to make about 150 winds of the reel.

Results

-

Performance faster in the presence of another person than when the task was done alone. Participants were 1% faster when working in pairs than alone.

Conclusion

•

Participants performance at the task was facilitated (enhanced) by the presence of another person -performing the same task The mere presence of another person performing the same task = social facilitation Allport (1924) social facilitaion

Method

-

Participants worked alone in cubicles or sitting together round a table

Results

-

with simple tasks such as crossing out certain letters in words-performance was better in front of other people with complicated tasks such as solving complex problems-performance was better when participants worked alone.

Dashiell (1930) social facilitaion Results

-number of arithmetic problems performed by participants increased in the presence of others - and so did the number of errors made Schmitt et al 1986- social facilitation Results

-

participant typed name faster in front of an audience to type name backwards = performance better when alone.

*Michael et al (1982)

dominant response

Aim

-

Test the prediction that the presence o an audience would facilitate dominate responses and inhibit poorly learned behaviours.

Method

-

first part of study: student pool players were observed in a students union building from a distant 12 players were selected: 6 identified as above average , 6 below average

- Second part of study: 4 observers stood round a pool table and observed players, made their presence known over a number of games. Results

•

above average = potted 80% of their shots when observed, compared to 71% when not observed- social facilitation

•

below average = potted 25% of their shots when observed compared to 36% accuracy when not observed- social inhibitation

Conclusion -audience facilitates (enhances) dominant response - audience inhibit non-dominant responses

Zajonc et al 1965- dominant responses -performance of a well-learned or well-practised task is facilitated/enhanced by the presence of other people - complex tasks is inhibited by presence of other people -Simple mazes are learned faster in the presence of other like animals -complex mazes are learned faster alone -Zajonc et al 1969. Zajonc 1965-social facilitation and arousal -put forward the drive theory of social facilitation -presence of other people increase a person’s general level of arousal- become more energised/alert- this increases performance of dominate responses -

When arousal is low e.g. sleepy = poor task performance Arousal moderate = optimum performance o Zajonc’s drive theory of social facilitation suggests the presence of others when performing dominant responses increases arousal to an optimum level.

Presence of others

Increase arousal

Better performance of a dominant response

Cottrell 1972- evaluation apprehension -In presence of others we are concerned that they are evaluating our performance (judging) -effect of evaluation apprehension on a simple task/ well-learned = arousal = performance facilitated -

on new tasks/complicated tasks , it is done better when done alone than when there is an audience – due to evaluation apprehension

*Bartis et al 1988 – ELAVUATION APPREHENSION Aim -

to investigate whether or not evaluation apprehension would lead to improvement in performance on a simple task and inhabitation of performance on a complex task.

Method -participants presented with same basic task, which involved thinking of many different uses of a knife. -one group asked to list all different uses of a knife that they could think of -another group had to think of creative uses of the knives -

some participants in each condition were told that their performance would be identified ( the evaluation apprehension condition)

-

other participants in each condition were told that their ideas would be collected together as a group- but that no individual would be identified.

Results 

Simple tasks: the evaluation apprehension condition:- produced more uses for a knife than participants in the the condition.



Complex task: the evaluation apprehension condition:-produced fewer creative uses for a knife

Conclusion -Evaluation apprehension increases performance on simple tasks -Decreases performance on complex tasks

Saunders et al 1978- distraction Aim To test the effect of distraction conflict on performance of a task Method - Participants presented with either a difficult or simple task t- to perform in the presence of others -performing either the same or different task -

hypothesised that a co-actor performing same task as participant would produce more distraction

-

since they would be a source of comparison for the participant’s performance

Results -

high distraction condition: participant performed at a higher level on the simple tasks but produced more errors on complex task

Conclusion -Evidence in support of the distraction- conflict theory of social facilitation. Mac Cracken and Stadulis 1985- evaluation apprehension Result Presence of audience had no effect on children under 8. Conclusion Evaluation apprehension may be something that develops with age.

Evaluation • •

recent studies have shown that it is arousal alone which explains social facilitation now thought that both arousal and cognitive processes e.g. attention are involved.

•

May be arousal results from cognitive demands e.g. paying attention to both task and audience -results in – reduced or narrowed attention to the task

•

Wicklund 1975 – self-awareness - proposed that, when in front of other people- immediate response is to focus on oneself. – this causes the person to compare how he or she would like to perform ideally with how they actually perform.

•

If there is a significant difference between the ideal and the reality – the person tries to perform to their ideal.- this works on dominant responses not non-dominant responses.

•

After more than 100 years of study, no psychologist have agreed on one explanation for social facilitation

•

Criticisms of the research:

-

audiences in experiments- tend to be passive and simply observe real audiences are noisy and judge e.g. theatre, sports stadium

- research has largely ignored personality differences between individuals e.g Triplett 1898 = found 25% PPs showed worse, not better performance in front of audience. - tasks given lack ecological validity