Psych Ch12

social psychology
behavior and mental processes but includes as well the social world in which we exist, as we are surrounded by others to whom wwe are connected and by whom we are influenced in so many ways.
scientific study of how a person’s behavior, thoughts, and feelings influence and are influenced by social groups.
social influence
interactions that provide opportunity to influence behavior, thoughts, or feelings.
conformity
changing one’s behavior to more closely match the actions of others. moving light effect. judgements ambiguous.
asch’s classic study
Asch 7 participatns study. visual judgement. white card. all confederates. 1/3 confederation conformity. conformity greatly decreased if there was just one confederate who gave the wrong answer. US less conformity.
gender
gender differences nonexistant unless something that is not private. women tend to be more conform if a public response is required. quite small though.
normative social influence, need toa ct in ways to feel liked and accepted. use others as a measuring sticl.
informational social influence – take our cues for how to behave from other people when we are in a siutation that is not clear.
group think
people within a group feel it is more important to maintain chohesiveness than to consider the facts realistlcally. Titanic, 9/11. Janis, think ppl can do no wrong, morally correct, always succeed, creates the illusion of invulnerability. members tend to hold sterotyped views of those who disagree. exert pressire. mind guards
leaders SHOULd remain impartial and seek opinions of ppl outside the group. secret ballots make responsible for decisions taken
group polarization
risky shift. tendency for members involved to take some extremem positions and suggest riskier actions. jury trial decisions. low amount of damage results in even less. stiffer results in even stiffer. due to both normative and informational
social facilitiation and social loafing
success/failure of an individual’s task performance within a group. perceieved difficulty of the task seems to determine particular effect of the presence of others as well. easy, presence of others improves performance. p influence social facilitation n influence social impairment. presence of others increases arousal. social facilitation occurs because there is just enough to increase. too high arousal can result in less performance for the impairement. lazy do better on their own, social loafing, easier for lazy person to hide when owkring in a group. chinese less likely to do social loafing
deindividualization
each individual, lessening of their sense of personal id and responsibility. lack of self control when in the group that would not be as likely to occur if acting alone. crowd feeling of anonyminity, more likely to act impulsively. one only has to think about behavior of riots.
consumer psychology
figuring out how to getppl to buy things. compliance – ppl change their behavior as a result of another person or group asking. doesnt really have any authority, if they do it is called obediance
foot-in-the-door technqiue
compliance with a smaller request followed by a larger request, ppl likely to comply because already agreed to smaller one. first one acts as an opener. US ppl more likely to comply with 2nd request than collectivist.
door-in-the-face technique
larger first, usually refused, then smaller and more reasonable.
lowball technqiue
once a commitment is made, cost increased.buying a car. cultural differences.
obedience
changing one’s behavior at the direct order of an authority figure.
milgram’s shocking research
simple memory test, shocks. 65% of teachers went all the way, none quit before 300. no traits found. obey/disobey authority situation. foot in the door. unethical self esteem loss. exact study cant be done today. results today show that participants only slightly less likely to obey. outcomes may be more about social identity.
social cognition
ways in which people think about other people and how those cognitions influence behavior on other people
ATTITUDE
tendency to respond p or n to a certain idea, person, etc. can affect they behave, and can include opinions, beliefts, etc. attitudes influence the way before they exposed to them. not something born with. learned.
ABC model
3 parts, components. think, feel, act.
affective component – feel toward object. affect, emotions, feelings. emotional component. country music is fun and uplifting
behavior – attitude person takes in regard to the person. fun music = buy stuff
cognitive – thinks, ideas, believe it is superior
attitudes
turn out to be pretty poor predictors of actual behavior. what people say and do two different things. behavior predicted only under certain conditions.
how speicific is the attitude
people may hold a general attitude without reflecting it
some stronger than others. strong more likely to predict behavior. importance/salience, more important the more likely there is a match.
attitude formation
forms of learning
direct contact – direct contact, dislikes burssel sprouts form a neg attitude about them
direct instruction – partents, tell kids something
interaction – other people with the attitude.
vicarious conditioning/observational learning – observation. child whose mom or father shows a + attitude toward classical music may grow up too
influenced by large educational system as well, mass media, etc.
persuassion
change belief, etc, of another person through argument, pleading, explanation.
factors
source – communicator. experts given more weight, trustworthy, attractive, similar
message – actual message clear and wellorganized. more effective to present both sides of argument. producing fear arguments more effective if they produce only a moderate amount of fear and dont provide avoidance fear provoking info
target audience – age, young adult more suceptble
medium – seeing and hearing vs reading.
elaboration likelihood model
how easily influenced a person is will also be related. people either elaborate based on what they hear or they don’t, preferring to pay attention to surface chars of message – length, who delivered it, attractiveness.
central-route processing – ppl attend to content
peripheral-route-content – cues outside of message content. causes ppl to not pay attnetion to message.
cognitive dissonance
emotional discomfort associated when ppl find themselves doing things that dont match their ideas of smart, nice, moral. inconsitency in emotions when confronted with knolwedge they have said something dumb.
resulting tension and arousal unpleasant, and motivation to change something so that unpleasant feelings and tension are reduced or eliminated.
reduce by
– chnage conflicting behavior to make match with attitude
-change current conflicting cognition to justify behavior
-form new cognitions to justify behavior
Stanford, Festinger/Carlsmith. 1hr long tasks. Less paid more convincing lie, because they convinced themselves. cognitive dissonance. 1 paid 1 dol experienced discomfort at thinking they would lie. therefore they must not be lying, task was interesting, and fun. more paid no dissonance, because they knew why they were lying, and the money was sufficient. paid 1d had to change their attitude to the task so they could not be really lying
self-perception theory
Bem. instead of experiencing neg tension, ppl look at their own actions and infer their attitudes from those actions. new focus on finding area of brain – left frontal cortex-lang, decision making, area active when people have made a decision that reduces dissonance and acted. reducing is a function of ppl talking themselves into or out of it.
impression formation
forming of the first kb a person has about anohter. assigning the other person to a number of categories and drawing conclusions. kind of social cognition
primacy effect, 1st impressions do count
social categorization
assignment of that person to some kind of category. assignment to previous ppl. mostly automatic, no conscious awareness. can cause problems, improper attachment. can result in sterotype. allows people to access a lot of info. helps people remember info. be aware of existing sterotypes and apply critical thinking
implicit personality theories
sets of assumptions that people have about different types of people, traits, and actions, all related anf form in childhood. happy people are friendly. not neccesarily true but serve as schemas. can become sterotypes. IAT test, measures degree of association between certain pairs of concepts, pleasant vs unpleasant. differ from culture. americans persoanlity is fixed.
attribution
ppl seem to have to explain others behavior. human nature tow ant to know why people do the things they do so that they know how to behave. if no obvi answer avail people tend to come up with own reasons. need exp for own behavior. need so great that if not obious it causes cog dissonance. process of explaining one’s own behavior and to other people.
attribution theory
Heider, not only explaining why things happen but why people chose the explanations they do. internal and external.
external – dispositional internal personality chars that are seen as the cause of behavir. late person bc his personality
emotional component. spouses behavior has a positive effect, if couple is happy, internal cause. wanted to make me feel good. negative it is external, not their fault. if unhappy the opposite.
fundamental attribution error
tendency for ppl observing actions of soemone else to overestimate influence of that person’s internal chars on behavior and underestimate influence of situation. explaining own behavior tendency to use situational attributions instead of personal is called actor-observer bias. we are the avtor. ppl tend to explain based on what kind of person theya are rather than look for outside causes.
when people are the actors they are very aware of the situational influences. others cheat its they are not honest, if they are cheating it is the situation.
mitigation – notice how many people are doing the same thing. lot of ppl doing it – not personality.
thinka bout what you would do. situational if you behave the same. not a universal error
people tend to assume external situational factors more in inderdependent cultures. older adults show stronger bias to attributing to internal than younger
social interationcs
relationships between people.
prejudice
unsupported and negatve sterotyped attitude. when treated different discrimination – the behavir. not possible to have laws against having attitudes. attitude can’t be easily reoved.
in-groups out-groups
us versus then. in is the people with whom a particular person identifies. begins in choldhood. prejudice and treatment of outgroups then follows. outgroups suually going to become steotyped.
scrapegoating
conflicts between groups are usually greater when pressures or stresses. need to find a scrapegoat, who serves as a target. group of people with the least power.
social cognitive theory
using cog processes n relation to understanding the social world. prejudice seen as an attitude that is formed as others are formed.
realistic concept theory
increasing prejudice and discrimination closely tied to increase degree of conflict between in-group and out-group when seeking common resource.
social id theory
3 processes are responsible.
social cat – alight to others and identify
identification, formation of id. part of self concept that considers one as the ingroup
social comparison – compare to others to improve self-esteem.
helps to explain why ppl feel the need to categorize or stereotypes.
stereotype vulnerability
can affect the way ppl see themselves. effect that a persons knowledge can have on own behavior. anxious about behaving ways in support of that. anxiety and self-fulfilling prohecy, effect that xpectations can have on outcomes
sterotype threat, members are made anxious. decrease in scores to AA when made aware of minority status. same as women, athletes in academic settings. ppl can overcome it by going with a different id only held for women with high self esteem
overcoming prejudice
education. direct contact. integroup contact – common in college.
equal status contact
contact between groups can backfire. Robber’s cave. pit groups of ppl against each other, hostility emerged. more hostile when opportunities made to be more pleasnt. work together to resolve crisis, several weeks, did they work on friendships. equal status contact, all the same.
jigsaw classroom
make success dependent on everyone in a group. if each person has info ppl depend on everyone. classrooms not organized this way, cause conflict.
work on piececes of puzzle instead. college and lower level.
interpersonal attraction
desire for a relationship.
physical attractiveness
people think about what attracts them to others, usually their attrativeness of the other people arrises. physical beauty main factor for choosing who to know better.
proximity-close to you
more close, more likely, physically near. mere exposure, more tend to like it.
birds of a feather – similiarity
similar to other. terms of validation. persons own concepts seem more correct and valid
complementary qualities
chars that fill other need. research does not support this. similarity that draws people together
reciprocity
like those who are like you.
Sternbergs components
intimacy, passion, commitment
intimacy – feelings of closness, sense of close emotional ties. not physical but psych. friends.
passion – phys aspect of love, not just sex
commitment – involves deicisons.
love triangles
romantic ove and compassionate
intimacy and passion combined romantic – called passionate. basis for long. liking -> romantic as passion added -> enduring when commitment made
compassionate
intimacy and commitment. emotionally close, understand motives, marriage. binding tie. seen as more sensible in non western. choices for a mate made by parents. when 3 components of love consummate love. ultimate goal.
aggression
hurts or tries to destroy another person. frustration, prevention from reaching goal. frustration-agression hypothesis. pain, loud noises, etc.
frustration not the only source. Frued believed that agression was basic, part of deah instinct. Lorenz saw it as promoting survival.
explain modern as biological phenomenon or learned behavior.
aggression and biology
genetic basis. twin studies. identical twins more closely related. some gene makes certain people more susceptible. frontal lobes, amygdala, imbic system.
testosterone. low serotonin.
alcohol
acts to release inhibitions. making people less likely to control own behavior even if not intoxicated. affects neurotransmitters, less serotonin.
power of social roles
learning. social learning theory. watching agressive models.
taking on a particular social role such as soildier can increase aggressive behavior.
social role
pattern expected when in a position. doctor, white coat, rx, etc. Zimbardo. prison guard. get positive feedback from tortue. 1/3 of children abused do not become bausers. get help, overcome, others isolate themselves.
violence in media and aggression
Bandura. impact of TV. high level of violence are more aggressibe. several cotributing factors. such as age. parenting issues. violent video games.
prosocial behavior
socially desirable behavior that benefits others than bringing harm
alturism
feel good about other people, helping someone in trouble. preserving own genetic material. structure of brain explains risk to own life. temporopariental junction TPJ larger in individuals wo make alturisitc choices r HEMI. more active during decision making
bystander effect
likelyhood of reporting. increases as ppl increases.
diffusion of resp
fail to take resp for action or inaction bc ppl seem to share. attribution in which ppl say they were following others.
Darley/Latane.
noticing
defining an emergencing
taking resp
planning a course of action
taking action
mood and information available. good mood more likely to help, but not as likely to help if helping will destroy good mood. victim gender. women more help from men. physically attractive people.
the power of the situation
social psych, broader social context. people’s influence by other people.
leadership style not the personality of the individual. social situations control human behavior.
fundamental attribution error – difficulty admititng ourselves how easily we can be manipulated