Cited by 181Psychology of Social InfluenceLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesSocial Power and Status Dynamics

Threats: Power, family mealtimes, and social influence

Open access
Hepburn, Alexa, Potter, Jonathan·2011·British Journal of Social Psychology

Abstract

One of the most basic topics in social psychology is the way one agent influences the behaviour of another. This paper will focus on threats, which are an intensified form of attempted behavioural influence. Despite the centrality to the project of social psychology, little attention has been paid to threats. This paper will start to rectify this oversight. It reviews early examples of the way social psychology handles threats and highlights key limitations and presuppositions about the nature and role of threats. By contrast, we subject them to a programme of empirical research. Data comprise video records of a collection of family mealtimes that include preschool children. Threats are recurrent in this material. A preliminary conceptualization of features of candidate threats from this corpus will be used as an analytic start point. A series of examples are used to explicate basic features and dimensions that build the action of threatening. The basic structure of the threats uses a conditional logic: if the recipient continues problem action/does not initiate required action then negative consequences will be produced by the speaker. Further analysis clarifies how threats differ from warnings and admonishments. Sequential analysis suggests threats set up basic response options of compliance or defiance. However, recipients of threats can evade these options by, for example, reworking the unpleasant upshot specified in the threat, or producing barely minimal compliance. The…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1348/014466610x500791

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 41 · Cited by 181

Authors
Hepburn, A., & Potter, J.
Affiliations
Loughborough University (GB)
Corresponding author
Hepburn, Alexa
Venue
British Journal of Social Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-03
Volume
50
Issue
1
Pages
99-120
ISSN
  • 0144-6665 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8309
OpenAlex
W1904140922
Cited by
181
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 12
FWCI
21.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Loughborough University Institutional Repository (Loughborough University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Loughborough University Research Repository (Loughborough University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Psychology of Social Influence
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
Keywords
threats, social influence, family meals, preschool children, power, compliance, defiance, resistance, asymmetry, conditional logic
MeSH terms
Adult, Behavior Therapy, Child Rearing, Child, Preschool, Coercion, Cooperative Behavior, Defense Mechanisms, Eating, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Power, Psychological, Semantics, Social Environment, Socialization, Verbal Behavior, Video Recording, Intention, Family Conflict

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review