Individual differences in the social facilitation effect: A review and meta-analysis

2007 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 579-601 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liad Uziel
Behaviour ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 145 (3) ◽  
pp. 297-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Savage ◽  
Joseph Soltis ◽  
Katherine Leighty ◽  
Kirsten Leong

AbstractFemale African elephants are thought to exchange 'rumble' vocalizations, but such temporally associated calls may not constitute communicative events. Affiliated females are more likely to engage in antiphonal calling, but affiliation is defined according to time spent in proximity. Affiliated partners may vocalize in sequence simply because their proximity causes them to collectively respond to shared external stimuli or due to a social facilitation effect. We used bi-variate and partial correlation analyses to test for the independent effects of the strength of the social relationship and distance between vocal partners on the likelihood of a vocal response. Female African elephants at Disney's Animal Kingdom were video-taped and outfitted with audio-recording collars that allowed for the individual identification of low-frequency rumbles. Affiliation had a strong influence on response likelihood, even after controlling for the effects of the distance between vocalizing partners. Further, the distance between vocalizing partners did not correlate with response likelihood, and factoring out the effects of affiliation did not significantly alter this result. These results suggest that rumble exchanges are communicative events that reflect social bonds, not simply artifacts of increased proximity and, therefore, provide support for functional hypotheses concerning rumble exchanges in wild African elephants.


1978 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 823-829 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P. Lombardo ◽  
John F. Catalano

Social facilitation theory states that an audience functions as a conditioned stimulus for generalized drive and that this drive effect is learned through classical conditioning. In the present study an attempt was made to condition classically an aversive drive to an audience by having a subject fail a task in front of an audience. A sample of 61 subjects took part in a 2 × 2 factorial design. Half of the subjects did not perform a first task but only a complex motor task. Half of these subjects performed in the presence of an audience, half without an audience present. Of those subjects exposed to failure on the first task, half performed a second complex motor task in the presence of the same audience. Results indicated that performance of subjects who failed a first task in the presence of an audience and then performed the second task in the presence of that audience was significantly poorer than all of the other groups. The findings were taken as evidence that the social facilitation effect may be based on an aversive learned drive.


1978 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-133
Author(s):  
Donald P. Corriveau ◽  
Katherine Contildes ◽  
Nelson F. Smith

Baum (1969) found that the presence of a nonfearful rat during response prevention facilitated fear reduction. However, Baum used the problematic “reduction in the conditioned avoidance response” as a measure of fear. The present study re-examined the social facilitation effect by examining approach behavior as an index of fear. 60 male rats either received or did not receive response prevention. These treatments were presented either alone or in the presence of a mobile or immobile nonfearful rat. Although all measures of fear showed significant response prevention, none showed social facilitation. The discrepancy between these results and those of Baum was explained by hypothesizing the conditioning of incompatible responses within the context of avoidance procedures.


2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Radosław Sterna ◽  
Paweł Strojny ◽  
Krzysztof Rębilas

The social facilitation effect describes the change in the performance of the task under the influence of the presence of observers. The effect itself consists of two components: social facilitation in simple tasks and social inhibition in complex tasks. In the context of the dynamic development of new technologies, the question of the possible influence on human behavior by virtual characters gains importance. We attempted to critically describe and summarize current research on social facilitation in order to answer the question of whether it occurs in virtual environments. We found 13 relevant studies, 3 of which demonstrated social facilitation, 4 social inhibition and 1 demonstrated the whole effect. The conclusions drawn from the analysis are ambiguous. Firstly, we identified that 12 out of 13 analyzed studies failed to show the whole effect. Secondly, we encountered several shortcomings of the summarized research that further complicated its interpretation. The shortcomings: presence of the researcher, unclear usage of “agent” and “avatar”, evaluation of activation, no pilot tests of observers and no description of how their characteristics are generated, among others, are discussed. Furthermore, we investigated the effect sizes and their variability. The average effect size for social facilitation was g = 0.18, CI [-0.28; 0.64] and for social inhibition g = -0.18, CI [-0.40; 0.04]. In social facilitation, a substantial level of heterogeneity was detected. Finally, we conclude that it is still too early to provide a definite answer to the question of whether social facilitation exists in Virtual Environments. We recommend limiting evaluation activation to the lowest possible level, conducting pilot tests prior to the experiment, avoiding the presence of the researcher in the experimental room and a clear distinction of “agent” and “avatar”, as measures to achieve a better quality in future research.


2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 332-337
Author(s):  
Emma Halfmann ◽  
Janne Bredehöft ◽  
Jan Alexander Häusser

Fifty years ago, Zajonc, Heingartner, and Herman (1969) conducted a famous experiment on social enhancement and inhibition of performance in cockroaches. A moderating effect of task difficulty on the effect of the presence of an audience, as revealed by impaired performance in complex tasks and enhanced performance in simple tasks, was presented as the major conclusion of this research. However, the researchers did not test this interaction statistically. We conducted a preregistered direct replication using a 2 (audience: present vs. absent) × 2 (task difficulty: runway vs. maze) between-subjects design. Results revealed main effects for task difficulty, with faster running times in the runway than the maze, and for audience, with slower running times when the audience was present than when it was absent. There was no interaction between the presence of an audience and task difficulty. Although we replicated the social-inhibition effect, there was no evidence for a social-facilitation effect.


2019 ◽  
Vol 110 (4) ◽  
pp. 842-861 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen K Ruddock ◽  
Jeffrey M Brunstrom ◽  
Lenny R Vartanian ◽  
Suzanne Higgs

ABSTRACT Background Research suggests that people tend to eat more when eating with other people, compared with when they eat alone, and this is known as the social facilitation of eating. However, little is known about when and why this phenomenon occurs. Objectives This review aimed to quantify the evidence for social facilitation of eating and identify moderating factors and underlying mechanisms. Methods We systematically reviewed studies that used experimental and nonexperimental approaches to examine food intake/food choice as a function of the number of co-eaters. The following databases were searched during April 2019: PsychInfo, Embase, Medline, and Social Sciences Citation Index. Studies that used naturalistic techniques were narratively synthesized, and meta-analyses were conducted to synthesize results from experimental studies. Results We reviewed 42 studies. We found strong evidence that people select and eat more when eating with friends, compared with when they eat alone [Z = 5.32; P < 0.001; standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.48, 1.03]. The meta-analysis revealed no evidence for social facilitation across studies that had examined food intake when participants ate alone or with strangers/acquaintances (Z = 1.32; P = 0.19; SMD = 0.21, 95% CI: −0.10, 0.51). There was some evidence that the social facilitation of eating is moderated by gender, weight status, and food type. However, this evidence was limited by a lack of experimental research examining the moderating effect of these factors on the social facilitation of eating among friends. In 2 studies, there was evidence that the effect of the social context on eating may be partly mediated by longer meal durations and the perceived appropriateness of eating. Conclusions Findings suggest that eating with others increases food intake relative to eating alone, and this is moderated by the familiarity of co-eaters. The review identifies potential mechanisms for the social facilitation of eating and highlights the need for further research to establish mediating factors. Finally, we propose a new theoretical framework in which we suggest that the social facilitation of eating has evolved as an efficient evolutionary adaptation.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter C. Mundy

Abstract The stereotype of people with autism as unresponsive or uninterested in other people was prominent in the 1980s. However, this view of autism has steadily given way to recognition of important individual differences in the social-emotional development of affected people and a more precise understanding of the possible role social motivation has in their early development.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document