Ten Tiny True Stories (727 hits)
Category: NoneRating: -0.72 on 23 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by simple_catalyst (View user info) at 2008-01-07 17:57:01 EST
The bandwagon effect, also known as social proof and closely related to opportunism, is the observation that people often do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same. The effect is often pejoratively referred to as herding instinct, particularly as applied to adolescents. Without examining the merits of the particular thing, people tend to "follow the crowd". The bandwagon effect is the reason for the bandwagon fallacy's success.
In Psychology, the bandwagon effect refers to well-documented behavioral patterns among people and has potentially infinite applications. The general rule is that conduct or beliefs spread among people, as fads clearly do, with "the probability of any individual adopting it increasing with the proportion who have already done so." [1] Thus, as more people come to believe in something, we can expect others to hop on the bandwagon, regardless of whether the underlying evidence is conclusive or not.
Literally, a bandwagon is a wagon which carries the band in a parade, circus or other entertainment.[2] The phrase 'jump on the bandwagon' was first used in American Politics in 1848 as a result of Dan Rice, 'President Lincoln's Court Jester.[3] Campaigning for Zachary Taylor, Dan Rice, a professional circus clown, used his bandwagon for Taylor's appearances, gaining attention by way of the music. As Taylor's campaign became more successful, more politicians strove for a seat on the bandwagon, hoping to be associated with the success. Later, during the time of William Jennings Bryan's 1900 presidential campaign, bandwagons had become a standard fixture of campaigns,[4] and 'jump on the bandwagon' was used as a derogatory term, implying that people were associating themselves with the success without considering what they associated themselves with.
The bandwagon effect can be observed in voting: some people vote for those candidates or parties who are likely to succeed (or are proclaimed as such by the media), thus increasing their chances of being on the 'winner's side' in the end.[5]
Bandwagon effect has been labeled to situations involving majority opinion, such as political outcomes, where people alter their opinions to the majority view (McAllister and Studlar 721).
During elections, poll results are broadcasted in the eastern parts of the United States while polls are still open in the west. Due to this trend, behavior of voters in western United States has been previously investigated. In 1980, NBC News declared Ronald Reagan to be the winner of the presidential race on the basis of the exit polls several hours before the voting booths closed in the west, which led Reagan to defeat his Democratic opponent Jimmy Carter (McAllister and Studlar 721, 722).
Several studies have been done in order to test this theory of how the bandwagon effect and politics tie together. In 1994, a study was done by Robert K. Goidel and Todd G. Shields, which was published in The Journal of Politics. At the University of Kentucky, 180 students were randomly assigned to nine groups where they were asked questions about certain election scenarios. The scenarios presented to each group were identical, although about 70% of subjects received knowledge concerning the expected winner (Goidel and Shields 807). Independents, which are those who do not vote based on the endorsement of any party and are ultimately neutral, were extremely influenced and tended to lean towards the person expected to win (Goidel and Shields 807-808). Expectations played a significant role throughout the study. It was found that independents are twice as likely to vote for the Republican candidate when the Republican is expected to win. From the results, it was also found that when the Democrat was expected to win, independent Republicans and weak Republicans were more likely to vote for the Democratic candidate (Goidel and Shields 808).
A study by Albert Mehrabian, Ph.D., reported in The Journal of Applied Social Psychology (1998), tested the relative importance of the bandwagon (rally around the winner) effect versus the underdog (empathic support for those trailing) effect. Bogus poll results presented to voters prior to the 1996 Republican primary clearly showed the bandwagon effect to predominate on balance. Indeed, approximately 6% of the variance in the vote was explained in terms of the bogus polls, showing that poll results (whether accurate or inaccurate) can significantly influence election results in closely-contested elections. In particular, assuming that one candidate "is an initial favorite by a slim margin, reports of polls showing that candidate as the leader in the race will increase his or her favorable margin" (Mehrabian, 1998, p. 2128). Thus, as poll results are repeatedly reported, the bandwagon effect will tend to snowball and become a powerful aid to leading candidates.
During the 1992 U.S. presidential election, Vicki G. Morwitz and Carol Pluzinski conducted a study, which was published in The Journal of Consumer Research. At a large northeastern university, 214 volunteered business students were given actual student poll results that had been done from the previous week. Of the 214 volunteers, 188 were U.S. citizens. Comparable results were also given to them from a large-scale national poll. Both the student and the national polls indicated that Clinton was in the lead for the majority of the study. Ninety-six subjects were randomly assigned to the poll-exposure condition, which meant they were given a summary of the results from both the student polls and the recently published national poll. The remaining 92 subjects were assigned to the no-exposure condition, meaning none of the polls were revealed to these subjects. The analysis of the study was limited to Bush and Clinton supporters, due to the lack of Perot supporters. It was found that several of those exposed to the polls changed their preference. Since the polls indicated that Clinton was ahead in the election, many Bush intenders ended up changing their preferences after reviewing the polls. The proportion of Bush intenders who expected Clinton to win was lower with exposure to polls (78.6 percent) compared to those not exposed to the polls (93.8 percent). This means that the number of subjects who were planning on voting for Bush actually changed their minds,compared to the 93.8 percent that actually voted for him without being shown the student and national polls. It proves that those who had intended on voting for Bush had altered opinions of the election due to exposure of the polls (Morwitz and Pluzinski 58-64).
Internationally, British polls have shown an increase to public exposure. Sixty-eight percent of voters had heard of the general election campaign results of the opinion poll in 1979. In 1987, this number of voters aware of the results increased to 74% (McAllister and Studlar 725). According to British studies, there is a consistent pattern of apparent bandwagon effects for the leading party.
In microeconomics, bandwagon effect is a term for an interaction of demand and preference.[6] The bandwagon effect arises when people's preference for a commodity increases as the number of people buying it increases. This interaction potentially disturbs the normal results of the theory of supply and demand, which assumes that consumers make buying decisions solely based on price and their own personal preference. See network effect and Veblen good.
In music, bandwagon effect is a term for people who are fond of a musical group based on how popular the artist is at the time. For instance, certain people appreciate a song only once it is well-known.
n sports, bandwagon effect is a term for people who begin flocking to a team after they have achieved success.
User Reviews
Submitted by woolfe (user info) at 2008-04-08 08:28:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
moron
Submitted by ghola (user info) at 2008-01-13 13:05:10 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Fungah (user info) at 2008-01-06 22:53:14 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Band wagons mostly come out at night. Mostly.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2008-01-08 20:41:25 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
eh
Submitted by Stagger_Lee (user info) at 2008-01-08 19:27:26 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by His_Infernal_Majesty (user info) at 2008-01-08 19:15:54 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Word.
Submitted by Brdn_Nkd (user info) at 2008-01-08 13:38:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
what he said
Submitted by DeadToast (user info) at 2008-01-08 10:31:17 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2008-01-07 20:42:53 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
This is worse than the fucking bandwagon, which in itself, is fucking brutal.
Submitted by monkeyswithguns (user info) at 2008-01-07 19:53:21 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Yeah, that's alot about bandwagons alright.
Doesn't really go anywhere, but it's definately assorted facts about bandwagons.
While what I really desire to do at the moment is rate this a -2, and be on my way, to do so would put me on the -2 bandwagon that you started by posting this.
Unfortunately, by not -2ing this, I'm keeping it on the front page, which increases the chances that other people will in fact give it a rating of +2 based on the same principle as the bandwagon as seen in music which you mentioned at the end.
So here's a 0.
Submitted by Falafel (user info) at 2008-01-07 18:51:31 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
You're missing 9 stories. Start writing.
Submitted by no1hasdis (user info) at 2008-01-07 18:36:38 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
No Comment
Submitted by redskieslookfake (user info) at 2008-01-07 18:34:54 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by i_can_get_you_a_toe (user info) at 2008-01-07 18:24:21 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
I get the feeling this was just cut and paste.
well done you!!
Submitted by orphelia (user info) at 2008-01-07 18:13:52 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I like these posts, I certainly do not 'lik' them.
Submitted by Leonore (user info) at 2008-01-07 18:12:26 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I won't -2 you again. I don't think you deserve it, and I already regret doing so once.
What follows is in no way an insult or ad hominem attack. It is an honest question:
Was the purpose of this post to be iconoclastic regarding the other TTTS posts today? If so, you may want to consider reading some of them; many are interesting, despite the short length and bandwagonism.
Submitted by orphelia (user info) at 2008-01-07 18:09:13 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Retal -2s? I didn't think that was your style. Leonore is a cool chick.
I lik these posts but you took away my smile :(
Submitted by Leonore (user info) at 2008-01-07 18:06:12 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
I'll drop this, if only to prove a point.
I'm done now, thanks.
Submitted by TheUniter (user info) at 2008-01-07 18:03:49 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by rob_berg (user info) at 2008-01-07 18:03:46 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
CHEATER.
Submitted by AsshOly (user info) at 2008-01-07 18:02:29 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
WHAT JEANNEEEEE SAID.
Submitted by Leonore (user info) at 2008-01-07 18:01:31 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Nice retal. Very mature.
Will this salve your chapped ego?
Take care!
Submitted by Jeanneee (user info) at 2008-01-07 17:59:08 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
MY MY, YOU DON'T SAY
Submitted by Leonore (user info) at 2008-01-07 17:58:09 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
And you spent time on this?