The Social Proof on Causes of Death and Uncertainty – Outline Example

Download free paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "The Social Proof on Causes of Death and Uncertainty " is a delightful example of an outline on psychology. Specific purpose: to inform the audience about the social proof on causes of death and uncertaintyCentral idea: social proof help understand the cause of death and uncertainty using the perspective of the theory. It is fatal to always follow the inferences of the majority. Social proof theory illustrates the essence of people adapting to the behavior of the majority of the fat to get acceptance. Introduction. Social proof has detrimental and dangerous effects.

Perspective created by individuals or influenced by peers may display negative undertaking based on the individual assumption of making the right choice. Appealing to people should be positive. However, discrediting the other thoughts may cause harm to others. For example, people may steal artifacts in the forests will influence guests to adopt the same as it is assumed it is the norm. The cause of death refers to the determination of measures that may have led to the trend of a human being. It may also be because of the inactions of the people witnessing murder failing to act (Echterhoff & Hirst, 2009).

The effect of social proof is due to the normative social influence that shows how people conform to get acceptable based on the influence of society. Determining why do others follow a given pattern despite the repercussions. The reasoning is because of seeing others doing it hence complying lest feeling like an outcast or rebellious. Transition: One may die because of the uncertainty of their reasoning. Inactions of the majority to save lives are inconsequential. Body. The danger of social proof as illustrated by Cialdini concern his example of people witnessing a woman being stabbed.

This caused her death because of the inaction of the people around. People’ s inactions showed the uncertainty and those who were willing to act assumed that the situation does not warrant any action hence stood by and watched her die. Inferring by the bystanders showed the demerits of social proof. People cite that because no one was acting, they would be deemed wrong for acting when everybody was not acting (Cialdini, 2016).

Pluralistic ignorance state people show in such a situation often occurs when a large group lack of interpretation of the fatal situation led to wrong choices of not acting. Given the danger of uncertainty and social proof, it is apparent that people ought to distinguish the moral actions and immoral actions that may lead to a disconnect from the human social norms. The adaptation of the “ herd” thinking is dangerous when it comes to saving lives or preventing crime. Perhaps people ought to know the power of social proof that is positive and act unconditionally displaying unity and resilience in promoting good interaction.

I have been in such a situation of copying what others are doing to feel included. For example, in school, we watch certain movies because most students have watched it. Equally, it is significant to emphasize that we are social beings hence the need to connect with others. Americans often use certain products upon seeing reviews from the internet and their ratings, those rated over 4/5 often receive positive purchases unlike the products that have no rating or below bar even if the products have just been introduced into the market.

The essence of social proof explains why the uncertainty in human action is difficult to interpret. The uncertainty often occurs when one is not sure of what to do and work pursuing others by referring to them to get guidance (Landau, Rothschild, & Sullivan, 2011). Transition:   The uncertainty feeds activates the social proof mechanisms that prompt people to approach other ways to deal with an issue. Arguably, this can be an explanation of the lack of personal independence of thought.

Notably, this explains the causes of death because of uncertainty. As illustrated by Robert Cialdini, we are often vulnerable to the influence of others. Our susceptibility is often high depending on the strength of the norms adopted by the majority in the society. Interestingly, many people will adopt their behaviors even if it is fatal or may cost their lives (Mann et al. , 2014). The notion of “ it is OK, everyone is doing it is fatal” , for example, the power of social proof took center stage during Nazi Germany, medieval hunts or the fashion of body piercing was popular.

People argue that they have acted based on reasoning logically and following what others have done. Currently, people understand that eating chunk food causes cancer. This illustrates the social proof impact in explaining the causes of death and uncertainty because of the reasoning of the majority. Transition: One feels out of place if they do not follow the options of others (Cialdini, 2016). Conclusion. The uncertainty and cause of death syndrome can be evaded if people hold on the notion of the “ people are social in nature” .

In this way, death can be prevented and uncertainty is brainstormed at least to know why was the woman being stabbed and prompt action to save her life to take place.

Download free paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us