The chapter "Social Influence" by Stephen Gibson and Cordet Smart explores the traditional definitions and forms of social influence, including compliance, conformity, and obedience. It reviews influential studies on these topics, such as the foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face techniques for eliciting compliance, Sherif's studies on group norm formation and Asch's experiments on conformity, and Milgram's controversial obedience experiments. The chapter also discusses critical reactions to these studies, focusing on conformity bias, individualistic bias, and the limitations of experimentation. It highlights the work of Serge Moscovici, who challenged the bias towards studying how individuals conform to social norms rather than how social change occurs. The chapter further examines the individualistic bias in early social psychology, which often assumed that individual behavior is rational and moral, while groups are irrational and immoral. It critiques the over-reliance on experimental methods and the lack of attention to broader social contexts, emphasizing the importance of discourse and rhetoric in understanding social influence. The chapter concludes by suggesting that future research should adopt the term "joint action" to better capture the shared and context-dependent nature of social practices, moving away from individualistic assumptions.The chapter "Social Influence" by Stephen Gibson and Cordet Smart explores the traditional definitions and forms of social influence, including compliance, conformity, and obedience. It reviews influential studies on these topics, such as the foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face techniques for eliciting compliance, Sherif's studies on group norm formation and Asch's experiments on conformity, and Milgram's controversial obedience experiments. The chapter also discusses critical reactions to these studies, focusing on conformity bias, individualistic bias, and the limitations of experimentation. It highlights the work of Serge Moscovici, who challenged the bias towards studying how individuals conform to social norms rather than how social change occurs. The chapter further examines the individualistic bias in early social psychology, which often assumed that individual behavior is rational and moral, while groups are irrational and immoral. It critiques the over-reliance on experimental methods and the lack of attention to broader social contexts, emphasizing the importance of discourse and rhetoric in understanding social influence. The chapter concludes by suggesting that future research should adopt the term "joint action" to better capture the shared and context-dependent nature of social practices, moving away from individualistic assumptions.