Social proof can save your life

Back when I read Robert Cialdini's book Influence, he discussed a paper which showed how two drivers who happen to change lanes at the same time can cause many drivers to follow suit. These other drivers think there is a special reason why the first cars changed lanes, such as spotting a driving hazard or seeing the other lane is free. That potentially also endangers others on the road, aside to leading them on.

This of course was given as an example of when social proof goes wrong. A theme through his book is that these "tools of influence", such as social proof, are very useful outside of the potential for their abuse.

In today's busy world, surrounded by clatter and numerous micro decisions, a concept such as social proof can be very useful. "Everyone buys these shoes, they must be better. Or at least well liked."

This of course leads to "If that guy can go through that red light, maybe he knows something I don't and it's not working. Or.. maybe they don't ticket you here. I should follow."

And finally to "Oh! You mean everyone else jumps off the roof? I must do that too!" :)

While driving a few days ago I noticed that the other cars at the intersection were not advancing. I slowed down and a police car buzzed by at incredible speed. I would have seen it a couple of seconds later, but social proof did potentially save my life.

This happened to me before. I would notice people driving strange, or changing lanes. Sometimes I'd follow. Other times I'd deduce it is pointless, silly or dangerous. But ever since this police car incident I watch the cars around me far more closely.

Rather than look at individual cars and the psychology of their drivers to try and figure out when a car is going to cut me, I now also consciously and regularly watch for car group psychology.

As a general rule, when group psychology comes into play on the road, keep your distance.

If I spot nothing wrong other than a snowball effect of people stopping/acting stange, I can always just pass them, leading the way. Letting them eat my dust. :)

Anyone has any idea what that paper on driving psychology and social proof was? Any other pointers?

Pinky.

Hobgoblins of the mind: Social proof and commitments in email

Yesterday I recieved a request by some whats-their-name publication to write a 700 words column for them. They introduced a time constraint to make the request seem more important (but not too urgent, to avoid seeming desperate).

Being with a full schedule, I cordially responded and asked for a time-frame, as I don't necessarily have the time to commit. They responded with two weeks, a good time frame although from past experience two weeks usually means six to eight available (time) for the editors.

Payment was not mentioned, so this is a pro-bono thang. I never heard of them before so wasn't in much of a hurry to commit time I don't have out of my "lazy time" allocation.

They mentioned others who write for them on the subject, and that they want to publish these, now blogs, together. I looked at the names and recognized a couple. One worked for the Whitehouse and the other for a known entity.

I wasn't too impressed, but that bit is what tipped the scale and caused me to say yes. Once I said yes I am committed.. You know how silly humans are about holding up to their commitments and staying consistent? I am worse. Usually that is a good thing, but it is also a compliance tool to get a yes out of people.

The names at the footer of the email message made me accept the publication as worthy, social proof 101.

I am committed. Or am I?

Emailing the guy back I luckily asked for the subjects on which these others are writing on, so we can avoid over-lap and "get some ideas". I haven't heard back yet.

I may have been had, but at least I wasn't automatic in my response. These names writing there means little to me. I have something I am unsure on where to publish and like to help smaller publications, so their what's their name publication is as good as any--if they show me they are serious rather than avoid the subject of subjects.

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Suggested reading is once again Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion.

Pinky.

Update:
They got back to me, two weeks later. They asked for when I will be able to submit my text.

I asked them about my question.. what these other authors are writing about, so I can avoid duplication and get ideas.

Their reply was that it was confidential, and that it is their job as editors to avoid such problems.

Logical flaws aside, and my willingness to write for a small publication ignored... If I write for these people they will just use my name when talking to others, to get them to write for them. Heck, they probably did already.