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

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

Increase arousal

Better performance of a dominant

response

*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.Eval pg 152