PSYC 355 Midterm 2

What is a group

-A set of individuals who have at least one of the following characteristics: -Direct interactions -Joint membership in a social category -A shared, common fate, identity, or set of goals. -A group can also consist of people who have joint membership in a social category based on sex, race, or other attributes -What Is a Collective?: An assembly of people engaging in a common activity but having little direct interaction with each other. (ie. people at a concert or the gym) -why join a group? -humans have an innate need to belong to groups stemming from evolutionary pressures that increased people's chances of survival and reproduction if they lived in groups rather than in isolation -Much of what we hope to produce and accomplish can be done only through collective action. -social identity theory, an important part of people's feelings of self-worth comes from their identification with particular groups. Groups often give us meaning and purpose

Obedience

-Behavior change produced by the commands of authority -Taught from birth that it's important to respect legitimate forms of leadership, people think twice before defying parents, teachers, employers, coaches, and government officials. -uniforms signify the power of authority

Milgram's Research: forces of destructive obedience

-Conducted his experiments during the time that Adolph Eichmann was being tried for Nazi war crimes. -His unorthodox methods have been the subject of much ethical debate.--in contrast, some believe the danger that destructive obedience poses for all humankind justified Milgram's unorthodox methods. -Description of Milgram's obedience experiments. -You find out that your job is to test the learner's memory and administer electric shocks of increasing intensity whenever he makes a mistake. -the experimenter straps Mr. Wallace (a confederate) into a chair, rolls up his sleeves, attaches electrodes to his arms, and applies "electrode paste" to pre-vent blisters and burns. -If learner gives incorrect answer, you announce the correct answer and shock him. When you press the appropriate shock switch, a red light flashes above it, relay switches click inside the machine, and you hear a loud buzzing sound go off in the learner's room. After each wrong answer, you're told, the intensity of the shock should be increased by 15 volts. -You aren't aware that the experiment is rigged and that Mr. Wallace—who is actually a confederate—is never really shocked.--learner protests as experiment goes on, but experimenter prods saying "Please continue (or please go on)."; "The experiment requires that you continue."; "It is absolutely essential that you continue."; You have no other choice; you must go on." -participants exhibited an alarming degree of obedience -those in a "control group" who were not prodded along by an experimenter refused to continue early into the shock sequence. -Milgram found that virtu-ally all participants, including those who had administered severe shocks, were tormented by the experience. -Milgram's basic finding has been obtained in several cultures and with children as well as college students and older adults (Blass, 2012). Obedience in the Milgram situation is so UNIVERSAL that it led one author to ask, "Are we all Nazis?" -authoritarian personality: people who get high scores on the F-Scale (F stands for "Fascist") are rigid, dogmatic, sexually repressed, ethnocentric, intolerant of dissent, and punitive. They are submissive toward figures of authority but aggressive toward subordinates -Three f

culture and conformity

-Cultures differ in the extent to which people adhere to social norms -What determines whether a culture becomes individualistic or collectivistic? 1. Complexity of the society: more groups a society has, more conflicting opinions 2. Affluence of the society: affluence promotes more social independence and less conformity 3. Heterogeneity of the society: more heterogeneous, less norm enforcement

group roles

-Roles can be formal or informal -formal roles designated by title (ie. teacher, president) -Two fundamental types of roles: -Instrumental: helps the group achieve its tasks -expressive: provides emotional support and maintains morale -Groups function much better when mem-bers are assigned roles that best match their talents and personalities -Role uncertainty, instability, and conflict are all associated with poorer job performance as well a variety of other problems, including workplace bullying or other interpersonal conflicts, emotional exhaustion and burnout, and high turnover

information sharing

-Small groups received information to make a series of group decisions -Crucial that groups utilize all the information and skills that group members have -But all the information available to individual members may not be brought before the group. (aka biased sampling) -biased sampling: The tendency for groups to spend more time discussing shared information (information already known by all or most group members) than unshared information (information known by only one or a few group members) -Biased sampling less likely when leaders encourage group participation -Groups use heuristics more than individuals -Groups can feel entrapped (ie. we spent a lot of money and effort on this)--comitting to a failed course of action -Groups are more susceptible than individuals to information-sharing biases -Transactive memory: Groups remember more information more efficiently than individuals do, but more extreme--One key advantage of groups is that they can divide a large body of information into smaller portions and delegate different members to remember these more manageable portions. ie) Sticking to a Plan: Exercise and Weight loss study Stuck to a plan more when had a plan and a partner (lost more weight bc held more accountable)--One benefit of groups over individuals is that group members can hold each other accountable and encourage each other to keep trying to achieve a goal. -Making a specific plan can also help groups avoid biased sampling

defiance

-Social influence can also breed rebellion and defiance. -Synchrony of behavior can have a unifying effect on people, increasing their tendency to follow what others are doing -Having allies can give individuals the courage to resist orders they find offensive -Just as social influence processes can breed subservience to authority, social influence processes can also breed rebellion and defiance. -synchrony of behavior—for example, walking in step with oth-ers, clapping, singing, chanting, or raising arms in unison—can have a unifying effect on people, increasing the tendency to follow what others are doing. -Social influence depends on three factors: The strength of the source The immediacy of the source to the target in time and space The number of sources

source

-depends on credibility and likeability -Credibility: Competence and Trustworthiness -Likability: Similarity (ie. same occupation) and Physical attractiveness

how attitudes are measured

-1. self-report! direct and straightforward (just ask) -Limitations: But attitudes are some-times too complex to be measured by a single question. responses to attitude questions can be influenced by their wording, the order and context in which they are asked, and other extraneous factors; people can lie or forget -can use bogus pipeline to get more truthful answers -can also depend on heuristics (shortcuts) people make: Availability heuristics: ie) fear of flying happens every time you see a plane crash or DPS emails makes you think about safety more Priming: seeing certain words influences you to think or act a certain way -2. attitude scale: A multiple-item questionnaire designed to measure a person's attitude toward some object.--Likert Scale -limitation: Wanting to make a good impression, people are often reluctant to admit to their failures, vices, unpopular opinions, and prejudices -3. Covert measures: provides clues but not as direct as self-report: -Videotape -Facial electomyograph (EMG)--measures muscle tension related to emotions/facial expressions that might be too subtle for the eye to see -Brain imaging-like fMRI tests. Can look at activity in brain -4. Implicit Association Test (IAT): A covert measure of unconscious attitudes derived from the speed at which people respond to pairings of concepts—such as black or white with good or bad. -we have implicit attitudes: An attitude, such as prejudice, that one is not aware of having. -IAT measures the sheer speed—in fractions of a second—with which people associate pairs of concepts -people's implicit attitudes are generally less predictive of behavior than explicit attitudes. -IAT measures are better when it comes to socially sensitive topics for which people often conceal or distort their self-reports

Attitudes

-A positive, negative, or mixed (ambivalent) reaction to a person, object, or idea.--expressed at some level of intensity -(ie. self esteem, attraction, prejudice) -attitudes cannot simply be represented along a single continuum ranging from wholly positive to wholly negative--our attitudes can vary in strength along both positive and negative dimensions -This attitude formation process is often quick, automatic, and "implicit"—much like a reflex action -people differ in terms of their tendency in general to like or dislike things. -people differ not only in terms of whether they tend to like or dislike things but also in the extent to which how quickly and how strongly they react. -It is possible to hold conflicting attitudes about the same thing at a conscious and an unconscious level -Cognitive reaction based on our beliefs or a behavioral tendency to act in a certain way -Researchers cannot tell if someone has a positive or negative attitude by measuring physiological arousal (heart beat, skin test), only intensity

brainstorming

-A technique that attempts to increase the production of creative ideas by encouraging group members to speak freely without criticizing their own or others' contributions. -People brainstorming as a group come up with a FEWER number of better ideas than the same number of people working individually. -people brainstorming individually produce more and higher-quality ideas than the same number of people brainstorming together -Smaller groups produce a greater number of better ideas than bigger groups; More likely to be heard--Can have people write down their ideas first before coming to group to have better cohesion -better brainstorming: express ALL ideas that come to mind, the more ideas the better, don't criticize anyone's ideas, build on each others work

Line judgment task used in Asch's Conformity Studies

-All confederates except one participant. Had to judge which line is the same as the standard line.--all confederates said obviously wrong answer, and participant followed -Difference between Asch and Sherif: this study is obvious, not ambiguous. -Group pressure to fit in sometimes beats being right Comparing Sherif's vs. Asch's Study: -Sherif: Because of ambiguity, participants turned to each other for guidance.; When faced with ambiguity, other people can serve as a source of valuable information -Asch: Found self in an awkward position.; Obvious that the group was wrong. People conform even when they know the group is wrong

avoiding groupthink

-Avoid isolation: groups should consult widely with outsiders -Reduce group pressures to conform: leaders should explicitly encourage criticism and not take a strong stand early in the discussion -Establish a strong norm of critical review: subgroups should separately discuss the same issue and take steps to challenge all decisions and ideas -To avoid, leaders should remain impartial, invite outside ideas, have a devil's advocate, avoid isolation -Gender differences: in group discussions, men are more likely to be heard than women -These include inserting someone in the group to play the role of a "reminder" who is responsible for informing the group about the dangers of biased decision making, making individual group members believe that they will be held personally responsible for the outcome of their group's decisions, increasing the diversity of group members, and creating a group norm that encourages critical thinking and discourages the search for concur-rence

ethical dissonance

-Behaving in ways that violate our own moral code thus threatens our self-esteem and arouses an inner state of turmoil -Behavioral ethics: The study of how individuals behave when facing temptations to cheat, steal, plagiarize, commit fraud, or otherwise behave unethically -Two types of problems have been addressed: --Unintentional lapses in ethics (we try to distance ourselves from the deed by affirming our ethical standards for the future) --Acts of intentional wrongdoing committed to serve personal interests--individuals are thought to engage in unethical acts when the tangible benefits (monetary and other rewards) exceed the tangible costs (exposure and punishment). -ways to reduce ethical dissonance: citing social norms to suggest that "everyone is doing it"; blaming others or circumstances; rationalizing the good that comes from the misdeed; confessing, apologizing, and offering compensation -moral licensing: a tendency to justify an antici-pated misdeed by citing good things that we have done.

compliance

-Changes in behavior that are elicited by direct requests ie) fast talkers increase compliance because we're caught off guard ie) the word "Because" also increases compliance because disrupts rational thinking ie) Unusual requests also increase compliance because disrupts automatic pilot -Langer et al (1978) Mindlessness study: -How you ask for something is important; We often respond "mindlessly" to words without processing information -People ask to cut the Xerox machine line. If a reason is given or "because", people are more likely to let the person cut. If given an irrelevant reason, also let the person cut. -Langer's research shows that sometimes we process oral requests lazily, with-out critical thought

Continuum of Social Influence

-Conformity → Compliance → Obedience -Conformity: Want to be consistent with group norms -Compliance: elicited by a direct request -Obedience: induced by commands of authority -The chameleon effect: we interpret people's behavior and engage in it. Mimicry is very subtle and unconscious. Confederate mimicked participants. Participants liked confederate partners more when they were being mimicked.--People who had higher empathetic concern were more likely to engage in mimicry -mimicry is a dynamic process, as when two people who are walking together or dancing become more and more coordinated over time.

obedience in 21st century

-Despite all that has changed in 45 years, the obedience rate was not appreciably lower -In the version of the experiment that Burger modeled, 83% of Milgram's original participants continued past 150 volts. Forty-five years later, Burger saw a slight drop to 70%. Note too that the obedience rate dropped only slightly, to 63%, among participants who saw a defiant confederate refuse to continue. These results show that obedience to authority may have declined a bit over the years, but it has by no means extinguished. -Milgram's findings transcend time and space, other researchers using Burger's method also went on to replicate the basic effect

majority influence

-Group size: we're influenced to an extent. Magic number is a group of 3-4 people. Adding more doesn't impact. (conformity increases with group size but to a certain point)--When faced with a majority opinion, we do more than just count the number of warm bodies—we try to assess the number of independent minds -Awareness of group norms: social norms give rise to conformity when we know what they are.--"social mobilization"-defined as any effort to marshal large groups to sacrifice time, effort, and money to achieve a social purpose—requires that individuals believe that the behavior is normative -Having an ally in dissent: a single confederate who agrees with dissenter can decrease conformity (it's harder to stand alone) -Effect of age: conformity peeks in teens. Teens choose peers similar to them so they are more likely to conform. Older people do what they want. The older one gets, the more likely they are to be comfortable with their own dissent. -Gender differences: not a lot of gender differences. Women may conform more in face to face situations, but it really depends on the task. More about status in the group than gender. -Even in the supreme court, the lone dissenter is rare. -Unanimous decisions are most common, 8 to 1 is least common.

group norms

-Groups establish norms or rules of conduct for members -also may be either formal or informal -ie) what do I wear? who pays? who laughs? -Groups often exert strong conformity pressures on individuals who deviate from group norms -How tolerant groups are to violations of norms can be, itself, a kind of norm--Some groups, for example, pride themselves on how heterogeneous and free-thinking its members are. Others strongly value uniformity

assertiveness: when people say no

-How can we resist the trap of compliance techniques? -To resist the trap of compliance techniques: Be vigilant Do not feel indebted by the norm of reciprocity Recognize when these tactics are being used and respond accordingly

social facilitation: when others arouse us

-How does the presence of others affect our behavior? -Triplett's (1897-1898) fishing reel studies.: Triplett noticed that cyclists who competed against others performed better than those who cycled alone -Later research found conflicting findings. -the Zajonc solution: The presence of others increases arousal, which can affect performance in different ways, depending on the task at hand. -Zajonc three step process: 1. The presence of conspecifics (member of same species) creates general physiological arousal, which energizes behavior. 2. Increased arousal enhances an individual's tendency to perform the dominant response. 3. The quality of an individual's performance varies according to the type of task. (easy task --> dominant response successful; difficult task --> dominant response is unsuccessful and performance impairment) ie) if good at playing violin and surrounded by people, will be aroused and dominant response will kick in and you will do better because already good at it; if not good at violin, when people come will be aroused and dominant response will kick in which is not playing good -social facilitation: A process whereby the presence of others enhances performance on easy tasks but impairs performance on difficult tasks. -ie) firefighters, police officers, military personnel practice scenarios repeatedly to the point of seeming to overtrain, but it is only through such repetition that their dominant response in a highly arousing situation is likely to be the correct one.

cultural influence on cognitive dissonance

-In Western cultures, individuals are expected to make decisions that are consistent with their personal attitudes and to make those decisions free from outside influences. (decisions consistent with personal attitudes) -in asian cultures, individuals are also expected to make decisions that benefit their in-group members and to take the well-being of others into account in making those decisions. (decisions to benefit group)

why do people conform?

-Informational influence: others are a source of information. People conform because they believe others might be more correct in their judgment. (Sherif's study) -Normative influence: people conform because they fear the consequences of appearing deviant. Going along with the group because it's more important to be part of the group than to seem deviant. (Asch's study) --fear of being Ostracized (being neglected, ignored, and excluded in a live or online chatroom conversation) -fMRI studies indicate changes in the brain when pain is felt

the message

-Most effective strategy depends on whether the audience uses central or peripheral route -informational strategy: When people process a message lazily, with their eyes and ears half closed, they often fall back on a simple heuristic: The longer a message, the more valid it must be. In this case, a large number of words gives the superficial appearance of factual support regardless of the quality of the arguments -But if the added arguments are weak or if the new sources are redundant, then an alert audience will not be fooled by length alone. When adding to the length of a message dilutes its quality, an appeal might well lose impact [Central process: quality of the argument is more important than length Peripheral processing often uses the heuristic (shortcut). "the longer the message, the more valid it must be"] -order of presentation: If you believe that the information presented first has more impact, you'd predict a primacy effect. If you believe that the information presented last has the edge, you'd predict a recency effect. (first impressions are important but sometimes people remember the last thing they heard) -When participants read the second message right after the first and then waited a whole week before reporting their opinion, a primacy effect prevailed, and the side that came first was favored. Both messages faded equally from memory, so only the greater impact of first impressions was left. When participants made a decision immediately after the second message but a full week after the first, however, there was a recency effect. The second argument was fresher in memory, [primacy effect occurs when time spent between messages and decision Recency effect occurs when decision made immediately after second message, but time between first and second message] -Message Discrepancy: One approach is to take an extreme position in the hope that the more change you advocate, the more you will get. Another approach is to not push for too much change so that the audience will not reject the message outright. -Research shows that communicators should adopt the second, more cau-tious approach. To be sure, some discrepancy is needed to produce a change in attitude. (Have to be cautious so you don't risk

the audience

-No particular type of person that's always difficult or always easy to persuade, but some trait differences that may affect: -the impact of a message is influenced by two additional factors: the recipient's personality and his or her expectations. -Need for Cognition (NC): A personality variable that distinguishes people on the basis of how much they enjoy effortful cognitive activities.--People who are high rather than low in their need for cognition like to work on hard problems, search for clues, make fine distinctions, and analyze situations -the high-NC audience should receive information-oriented appeals, and the low-NC audience should be treated to appeals that rely on the use of peripheral cues.--people who are low in the need for cognition are persuaded by cues found along the peripheral route, such as a speaker's reputation and physical appearance, the overt reactions of others in the audience, and a positive mood state -Self Monitoring: High self monitors adapt from situation to situation and are more persuaded by messages that promise improvement or a desired image they may want (low self monitors stay consistent) -high self-monitors may be particularly responsive to messages that promise desirable social images; high self-monitors were willing to pay more for products after reading imagery ads; low self-monitors were influenced more by information-oriented appeals. -Regulatory Fit: people are more likely to be influenced by messages that fit their frame of mind and "feel right."(can depend on culture) -Promotion-oriented versus prevention-oriented: Promote: Advancing children's education and helping them succeed; Prevention: Preventing children from failing -Forewarning and Resistance: knowing someone is going to persuade you--When people know that someone is trying to change their attitude, they become resistant. All they need is some time to collect their thoughts and come up with a good defense. ---Inoculation Hypothesis: The idea that exposure to weak versions of a persuasive argument increases later resistance to that argument ---Psychological Reactance: The theory that people react against threats to their freedom by asserting themselves and perceiving the threatened freedom as more attra

A classic case of Suggestibility-by Muzafer Sherif. Sherif's autokinetic effect

-Our eyes bounce around constantly to stay lubricated. Our brain focuses by focusing on background information. In a dark room, light stays still but we think it vibrates. -Wanted to demonstrate how this ambiguous stimuli (the moving light) could be seen differently -Had participants estimate apparent movement individually, then Divided participants into groups to estimate inches of perceived movement. By the third group, they came to a compromise and understanding and they all agreed at the same number.

that's not all folks! technique

-Person begins with a somewhat inflated request; then immediately decreases the apparent size of the request by offering a discount or bonus. -Burger et al: (price of cupcakes) When customers were led to believe that the final price represented a reduction, sales increased from 44% to 73%. -reducing price before they respond. people think it sounds better, but sales person was going to reduce it anyways from the start -All of the request techniques are based on a two-step process that involves a shift from a request of one size to another. What differs is whether the small or large request comes first and how the transition between steps is made -all these strategies work in subtle ways by manipu-lating a target person's self-image, commitment to the product, feelings of obligation to the seller, or perceptions of the real request (see chart and slide 33/4 examples in slides)

door in the face technique (compliance)

-Person begins with a very large request that will be rejected; then follows that up with a more moderate request. -Cialdini et al (1975): those who initially declined the first request of working at juvy with no pay, 50% said yes to the zoo trip -perceptual contrast: To the person exposed to a very large initial request, the second request "seems smaller." -another reason, reciprocal concession: the pressure to respond to changes in a bargaining position. When an individual backs down from a large request to a smaller one, we view that move as a concession that we should match by our own compliance -the door-in-the-face technique does not work if the second request is made by a different person

Sequential Request Strategies: Foot in the Door technique

-Person begins with a very small request; secures agreement; then makes a separate larger request. -starting small -break the ice with a small initial request that the customer can't easily refuse (without compensation). Once that first commitment is elicited, the chances are increased that another, larger request will succeed -Fredman and Frasier (1966): experimenter calling housewives about cleaning products, then 3 days later asked if they would let men in their home to look for 2 hours: When the participants were confronted with only the very intrusive request, 22% consented. Yet the rate of agreement among those who had been surveyed earlier more than doubled, to 53%. -explanation: self-perception theory—that people infer their attitudes by observing their own behavior. This explanation suggests that a two-step process is at work. First, by observing your own behavior in the initial situation, you come to see yourself as the kind of person who is generally cooperative when approached with a request. Second, when confronted with the more burdensome request, you seek to respond in ways that maintain this new self-image. -By this logic, the foot-in-the-door technique should succeed only when you attribute an initial act of compliance to your own personal characteristics. (so if the request is trivial or paid for first act, then technique does not work) -the effect occurs only when people are motivated to be consistent with their self-images. If participants are unhappy with what the initial behavior implies about them, if they are too young to appreciate the implications, or if they don't care about behaving in ways that are personally consistent, then again the technique does not work.

Low balling

-Person secures agreement with a request and then increases the size of that request by revealing hidden costs. -also a start small strategy -Salespeople who use this tactic are betting that you'll make the purchase despite the added cost. -Cialdini et al. (1978): Researcher told intro psyc students If they participate in study they'll get extra credit. Not until after they agreed, told students it would be at 7am. Signup rate was much higher when students were told about the 7am after than if were told before signups. -commitment: Once people make a particular decision, they justify it to themselves by thinking of all its positive aspects. As they get increasingly committed to a course of action, they grow more resistant to changing their mind, even if the initial reasons have been changed or withdrawn entirely -When people do not suspect duplicity, they feel a nagging sense of unfulfilled obligation to the person with whom they negotiated. (more commitment)

types of conformity

-Private conformity: true acceptance/conversion. You actually believe others are correct - (informational influence) -Public conformity: Change in behavior due to normative influence, but only superficial-doesn't correspond to any private belief. - (normative influence) -How to know? Can have people write down their decisions, then the level of conformity drops--The difference is that compared with someone who merely acquiesces in public, the individual who is truly persuaded maintains that change long after the group is out of the picture. -With low motivation, there's low levels of conformity -With high motivation, people conformed more when the task was difficult (Sherif like) than an easy task (Asch like) -Conformity effects on perception: With shapes. fMRI tests show that the brain conformed spatial reasoning to see the same shape. (groups can alter perception, not just behavior)

Process Loss and Types of Group Tasks

-Process loss: The reduction in group performance due to obstacles created by group processes, such as problems of coordination and motivation. (group performs worse than its potential) -additive task: tasks where group product is a sum of member contributions (group outperforms single contributions) (ie. raising money or making noise at a rally) -people often indulge in social loafing during additive tasks, which creates process loss. In other words, each member's contribution may be less than it would be if that person worked alone. As a result, the group performs less than its potential. -Conjunctive tasks: group performance tends to be worse than the performance of a single average individual. Determined by member with POOREST performance (ie. crossing a finish line)--weakest link determines success or failure -Disjunctive task: product determined by member with BEST performance; ie. one right answer, coming up with a plan (just need one person)--Groups have an edge over individuals in the performance of disjunctive tasks; The more people involved, the more likely it is that someone will make a breakthrough. -Better if the group sets goals. Groups with goals tend to be less ambitious, but still more motivated than groups with no goals -process gain: The increase in group performance so that the group outperforms the individuals who make up the group. (synergy)

factors that reduce the effectiveness of group brainstorming

-Production blocking: larger a group → the more distraction, slows down (have to wait your turn and might forget), might lose interest -Free riding: let other people contribute ideas and you become less motivated to contribute -Evaluation apprehension: we fear being judged so are apprehensive to share ideas -Performance matching: individuals want to be seen as similar to other people, so they work only as hard as they are. Want to match performance rather than be different -how computerized group support systems help avoid groupthink: -Production blocking reduced because members can type ideas whenever comes to mind (don't need to wait for turn) -Free riding reduced by having the computer keep track of who participates -Evaluation apprehension reduced because contribute ideas anonymously -performance matching reduced because people spend less time evaluating others by focusing on their own ideas

training and teams

-Research supports the value of training in improving group performance -Group support systems: programs help remove communication barriers and provide structure and incentives for group discussions and decisions. -Specialized interactive computer programs that are used to guide group meetings, collaborative work, and decision-making processes -Often improves sampling information, communicating, avoiding groupthink, and arriving at good decisions -conditions for team effectiveness: -Teams work more effectively than groups because they're more interdependent and work together towards a common purpose ie) sports team where each person has a role/position, need one another, and cohesive. Surgical team -Teams should be interdependent for some common purpose and have some stability of membership -Team's purpose should be challenging and clear -computerized group support systems help groups avoid groupthink -Allow group members to raise their concerns anonymously without fear of direct attacks -Reduce the directive role of the leader -Enable group members to provide input simultaneously so they dont have to wait for a chance to share their ideas -virtual teams: Kirkman et al (2002): "Groups of people who work interdependently with shared purpose across space, time, and organizational boundaries using technology to communicate and collaborate"; Their goals are threatened if they fail--Very structured roles, interdependent, clear duration of the team -Groups are becoming increasingly diverse -Evidence on effects of diversity on group performance is mixed -Diversity often associated with negative group dynamics. -Increase in miscommunication and understanding → causes tension and resentment → damages group performance -With large groups, cliques can form -multi-cultural groups perform better if their members or leaders have relatively high awareness of their own and others' cultural assumptions—what is sometimes called cultural metacognition -But diversity can have positive effects.--can draw from a greater pool of information, perspectives, and skills than less diverse groups.

social loafing: when others relax us

-Ringelmann (1880s): Individual output declines on pooled tasks. -Social Loafing: A group-produced reduction in individual output on tasks where contributions are pooled. -when performing collectively, students tended to loaf—they exerted less effort. (ie. sound of clapping lower when in a group)--Increasing group size reduces how much effort we put into things (ie. clapping) [When others are there to pick up the slack, people slack off.] -3 strategies to reduce social loafing: (1) limit the scope of the project—projects that are very large and complex should be broken into smaller components; (2) keep the groups small; and (3) use peer evaluations. -Collective Effort Model: The theory that individuals will exert effort on a collective task to the degree that they think their individual efforts will be important, relevant, and meaningful for achieving outcomes that they value.--individuals will try hard on a collective task when they think their efforts will help them achieve outcomes they personally value. If the outcome is important to individual members of the group and if they believe they can help achieve the desired outcome, they are less likely to socially loaf. -social compensation: increasing their efforts on collective tasks to try to compensate for the anticipated social loafing or poor performance of other group members -culture and social loafing: There are some group and cultural differences in tendencies (but overall universal) - social loafing Less prevalent among women than men -Less prevalent in collectivist cultures than in individualist cultures -Has to do with group norm--In collectivist cultures, if one person is not working as hard, everyone does the same

social dilemmas (conflict)

-Situations in which a self-interested choice by everyone creates the worst outcome for everyone. -What is good for one is bad for all. -the prisoner's dilemma: party must make either cooperative or competitive moves in relation to another party. The dilemma is typically designed so that the competitive move appears to be in one's self-interest, but if both sides make this move, both suffer more than if both had cooperated -How cooperation and competition work when faced with a conflict -One party must make either a cooperative or competitive move in relation to the other party -Competitive move is in one's self interest -If neither confess, they get 1 year (minimal sentence) -If both confess, they get a moderate sentence (both get 5 years) -If one confesses, confessing criminal goes free and other gets 10 years -resource dilemmas: Social dilemmas involving how two or more people will share a limited resource. -Two types of resource dilemmas: -Commons dilemma-if we take as much as we want of an unreplenished resource, there would be nothing left for anyone (ie. deforestation or air pollution) -Public goods dilemma-contribute resources to a common pool (volunteering, donating money, giving blood) ie) how to encourage people to give more blood: give incentives like free parking, food -solving social dilemmas: -Fear and greed are two critically important factors in determining reactions to these dilemmas—the fear of being exploited by others and the greedy desire to maximize one's own outcomes -Psychological factors: individual and cultural differences, being in a good mood, being in a small group (group dynamics) -Structural arrangements: Reward cooperative behavior, Remove resources from public into private domain, Establish authority to control resources -collectivists tend to cooperate more when dealing with friends or ingroup members but compete more aggressively when dealing with strangers or outgroup members -People with a prosocial, cooperative orientation seek to maximize joint gains or achieve equal outcomes. Those with an individ-ualist orientation seek to maximize their own gain. And people with a competi-tive orientation seek to maximize their own gain relative to that of others.

Conformity

-Tendency to change perceptions, opinions, or behavior in ways that are consistent with group norms. -People will defensively deny conformity in an individualistic culture

group polarization

-The exaggeration through group discussion of initial tendencies in the thinking of group members. -what creates group polarization?: -Persuasive arguments theory: the greater the number and persuasiveness of the arguments to which group members are exposed, the more extreme their attitudes become.; attitudes become more extreme because hear them over and over (becomes more persuasive)--we SHOULD spend more time in debates with people with different opinions than us (ie. the students' opposition to Trump became stronger after the group discussion compared to before.) -Social comparison: being supported makes a new norm; we develop a view of social reality by comparing ourselves to others (we find that other people support our opinion which sets up a norm that becomes more extreme) -Social categorization: establish group identity by distancing our ingroup from outgroups

group cohesiveness

-The forces exerted on a group that push its members closer together. -Members of cohesive groups tend to feel commitment to the group task, feel positively toward the other group members, feel group pride, and engage in many interactions in the group. -The causal relationship works both ways: On the one hand, when a group is cohesive, group performance often improves; on the other hand, when a group performs well, it often becomes more cohesive. -tight cultures have strong norms and little tolerance for behavior that deviates from the norm, while loose cultures have relatively weaker norms and greater tolerance for deviant behavior -Participants from tighter countries showed stron-ger support for the norm followers than did the participants from looser countries -The researchers also found that countries with a greater degree of collectivism rather than individualism reacted to norm-violating behavior with stronger moral outrage. -collectivist culture associated with tighter

collective intelligence: are some groups smarter than others?

-The general ability of a group to perform well across a wide range of different tasks. -Predictors of collective intelligence: -Average social sensitivity of the group members -Tendency to allow the various group members to take turns participating in the discussion -A higher proportion of women (who tend to be higher than men in social sensitivity) -NOT average or maximum level of intelligence of individual members -Have to establish critical thinking ahead of time, set challenging but achievable goals

Deindividuation

-The loss of a person's sense of individuality and the reduction of normal constraints against deviant behavior. -When presence of others becomes problematic and destructive -The loss of a person's sense of individuality and the reduction of normal constraints against deviant behavior.--When with a crowd, becomes arousing; Mob violence, hate crimes, violent crowds -aroused, anonymity, and reduced personal responsibility -What can lead to deindividuation?: -Environmental Cues: --Accountability cues-not really held accountable in a group because less likely to be identified (produces anonymity); affect the individual's cost-reward calculations. When accountability is low, those who commit deviant acts are less likely to be caught and punished, and people may deliberately choose to engage in gratifying but usually inhibited behaviors. (ie. wearing a mask or being in large crowd) --Attentional cues: the individual attends less to internal standards of conduct, reacts more to the immediate situation, and is less sensitive to long-term consequences of behavior (people act on impulse and attention diverted from the self) -Trick or treat study: Anonymous kids in a group took the most candy; Not anonymous kids who were alone took the least candy -social identity model of deindividuation (SIDE): A model of group behavior that explains deindividuation effects as the result of a shift from personal identity to social identity.--whether deindividuation affects people for better or for worse reflects the characteristics and norms of the group immediately surrounding the individual as well as the group's power to act according to these norms. (ie. if group is violent or prosocial)

the norm of reciprocity

-The powerful norm of reciprocity dictates that we treat others as they have treated us. -Could be hardwired; culturally universal and cross-species -Acts done for us by others have to be repaid (sense of obligation) -The norm of reciprocity contributes to the predictability and fairness of social interaction. But it can also be used to exploit us. -individuals who use reciprocity to elicit compliance are called "creditors" because they always try to keep others in their debt so they can cash in when necessary. -On a questionnaire that measures reciprocation ideology, people are identified as creditors if they endorse such statements as "If someone does you a favor, it's good to repay that person with a greater favor." -On a scale that measures reciprocation wariness, people are said to be wary if they express the suspicion, for example, that "asking for another's help gives them power over your life" -cultures: In the United States, reciprocity grants immunity from future obligations. Yet in India, the obligation to help others continues despite prior reciprocation.

social impact theory

-The theory that social influence depends on the strength, immediacy, and number of source persons relative to target persons. -According to Latané, social forces act on individuals in the same way that physical forces act on objects. -The strength of a source is determined by his or her status, ability, or relationship to a target. The stronger the source, the greater the influence. -Immediacy refers to a source's proximity in time and space to the target. The closer the source, the greater its impact. (in milligram's experiment Obedience rates were higher when the experimenter issued commands in person rather than from a remote location) -as the number of sources increases, so does their influence—at least up to a point. -social impact theory also predicts that people sometimes resist social pressure--resistance is most likely to occur when social impact is divided among many strong and distant targets -there should be less impact on a target who is accompanied by other target persons than on one who stands alone -some cultures value autonomy and independence; others place greater emphasis on conformity. -Even within a given culture, values may change over time. (old americans were more conformist than they are now)

Cognitive Dissonance Theory: the Classic Version (Festinger)

-Theory holding that inconsistent cognitions arouses psychological tension that people become motivated to reduce. (We are motivated to reduce dissonance) -You've committed yourself to a course of action, yet you realize that the action is inconsistent with your attitude. (ie. diet but eat chocolate)--discrepancies such as these can evoke an unpleas-ant state of tension known as cognitive dissonance. -What hurts is the knowledge that you committed yourself to an attitude-discrepant behavior freely and with some knowledge of the consequences. When that happens, dissonance is aroused, and you become motivated to reduce it -Cognitive dissonance and attitude change are more likely to occur when there is insufficient justification or insufficient deterrence for an attitude-discrepant behavior -Insufficient Justification: A condition in which people freely perform an attitude-discrepant behavior without receiving a large reward -When people behave in ways that contradict their attitudes, they sometimes go on to change those attitudes without exposure to a persuasive communication. -Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)--Classic experiment on dissonance: Peg board experiment--Children who were paid $1 to study--needed a way to cope with dissonance and no compensation so said is enjoyable --[Having engaged in an attitude-discrepant act without sufficient justification, these participants reduced cognitive dissonance by changing their attitude.] -the more money participants were offered for their inconsistent behavior, the more justified they felt and the less likely they were to change their attitudes (big reward did not produce bigger change) -Insufficient Detterence: A condition in which people refrain from engaging in a desirable activity, even when only mild punishment is threatened.--The less severe the threatened punishment, the greater the attitude change produced.

Justifying Effort: coming to like what we suffer for

-We alter our attitudes to justify our suffering. -dissonance theory predicts that The more time, money, or effort you choose to invest in something, the more anxious you will feel if the outcome disappoints. One way to cope with this inconsistency is to alter your attitude -Ie) Aronson and Mills (1959) experiment: Sex study: Participants who had endured a severe initiation rated the discussion group more favorably than did those who had endured little or no initiation.--Women who were most embarrassed thought the data was extremely interesting (had to justify what they went through) -After making a difficult decision, people rationalize the decision by exaggerating the positive features of the chosen alternative and the negative features of the unchosen alternative -the more you pay for something—whether you pay in physical exertion, pain, time, or money—the more you will come to like it. -Whenever we make difficult decisions—whether to marry, what school to attend, where to live, or what job to take—we feel dissonance. -a decision is difficult when alternative courses of action are about equally desir-able.

Groupthink

-excessive tendency to seek concurrence among group members -very smart people collectively making very dumb decisions (ie. The space shuttle or Kennedy invasion in Cuba) -A highly cohesive group make very faulty decisions-seek unanimous agreement despite individual thoughts -Group polarization sets the stage for more bias groupthink -A need for agreement emerges over a need to obtain more accurate/realistic information. We start to make poor decisions because only looking at one side of the information -3 characteristics: highly cohesive group, group structure (direct leader, homogenous members, unsystematic procedures, isolated from other people), stressful situations -Symptoms of groupthink: Overestimation of the group and close-mindedness, Illusion of invulnerability, Direct pressure towards uniformity, Illusion of unanimity, defective decision making, Self-censorship -Homogenous membership with strong directive leadership and unsystematic procedures; if leader gives their opinion early on, people are going to self-censor and not share their opinion -Mindguards are there to protect the group and leader from dissent (opposite of devil's advocate); Usually a stressful situation

what's more important? the source or the message?

-it depends on how personally relevant the message is to the recipient -recipient's level of involvement plays a role--if message has personal relevance to your life, you pay attention to the source and think critically about the message, the arguments, and the implications. When a message does not have personal relevance, however, you may take the source at face value and spend little time scrutinizing the information. -Ex) Among participants who would not be affected by the proposed change, attitudes were based largely on the speaker's credibility: The professor was persuasive; the high school student was not. Among participants who thought that the proposed change would affect them directly, attitudes were based on the quality of the speaker's proposal. Strong arguments were persuasive; weak arguments were not. -people followed the source rather than the message under low levels of involvement, illustrating the peripheral route to persuasion. -message factors did outweigh source characteristics under high levels of involvement, when participants cared enough to take the central route to persuasion. -time also plays a role -sleeper effect: A delayed increase in the persuasive impact of a non-credible source.--the attitude change produced by the high-credibility source had decreased, and the change caused by the low-credibility source had increased. -discounting cue hypothesis: people immediately discount the arguments made by noncredible communicators, but over time, they dissociate what was said from who said it. (we tend to remember the message but forget the source, unless reminded of the source)

Two routes to persuasion

-persuasion: the process by which attitudes are changed -1. Central Route: The process by which a person thinks carefully about a communication and is influenced by the strength of its arguments (more rational but it does not guarantee objectivity or that it is truth-seeking) -Have to listen, understand, and remember (reception of message and acceptance of content)** -3rd step: Elaboration: a process of thinking about and scrutinizing the argument--When a message is personally significant, we think about it more and can favor it -Major assumption: people actually listen and think about what's being communicated -for a persuasive message to have influence, the recipients of that message must learn its contents and be motivated to accept it. -People who are smart or high in self-esteem are better able to learn a message but are less likely to accept its call for a change in attitude. (neither group is generally more vulnerable to persuasion than the other--Neither intelligence nor self-esteem affects vulnerability to persuasive communications) -2. Peripheral Route: The process by which a person does not think carefully about a communication and is influenced instead by superficial cues. -We focus on cues, heuristics, or superficial images -If a communicator has a good reputation, speaks flu-ently, or writes well, we tend to assume that his or her message is correct. And when speakers have a reputation for being honest, people think less critically about the contents of their communication -we assume that a message must be correct if it contains a long litany of statistics or an impressive list of supporting experts, if it's familiar, if it elicits cheers from an audience, or if the speaker seems to argue against his or her own interests. -people also influenced by attitude embodiment effects, like nodding their head -The route taken depends on whether the recipient of the persuasive message has the ability and the motivation to take the central route--In the absence of either, they will rely on peripheral cues--a lot less work -Key determinant is individual's level of involvement (how relevant message is to you) High motivation and ability → central Low motivation and ability → peripheral -The way a recipien

Persuading ourselves

-self generated persuasion: attitude change would persist more when it is inspired by our own behavior than when it stems from passive exposure to a persuasive communication. -When we see ourselves doing something, then more likely to believe it's something we should do (ie. free samples)--Some researchers believe we learn our attitudes by observing our behaviors

how attitudes are formed

-strong likes and dislikes are rooted in our genetic makeup. (Tesser) (twin studies indicate people may be predisposed to hold certain attitudes.) -our most cherished attitudes often form as a result of our EXPOSURE to attitude objects; our history of rewards and punishments; the attitudes that our parents, friends, and enemies express; the social and cultural context in which we live; and other types of experiences. -attitudes are formed through basic processes of learning--can be conditioned to associate a once neutral stimulus with an inherently positive or negative response (Pavlov and dog salivates with bell) -when an attitude is changed toward one object, attitudes toward similar and related objects are often changed as well -evaluative conditioning: The process by which we form an attitude toward a neutral stimulus because of its association with a positive or negative person, place, or thing (ie. humorous insurance commercials)

negotiating

-successful negotiation can reduce conflict -Integrative agreement: A negotiated resolution to a conflict in which all parties obtain outcomes that are superior to what they would have obtained from an equal division of the contested resources -Need a lot of flexibility and strength -Not straightforward because of cultural differences ie) individualistic negotiators are more direct and share information (very rational and businesslike); written contracts are the end (don't mix business and friendship) -Collectivistic cultures negotiate based on trust and relationships; more indirect and have greater tolerance for emotionality; written contracts could be the beginning of a negotiation -Emotions during negotiations: cross-cultural differences study: faced with a Take it or leave it proposal; Hong kong (collectivist) less likely to accept proposal if made with negative emotions; Israeli students (individualists) didn't matter, was more of a business deal -The more that words reflecting a rational model were used, the better the negotiation outcomes were in the U.S. but the worse the outcomes were in Egypt. the more that words reflecting honor were used, the better the negotiation outcomes were in Egypt -finding common ground: Recognize a superordinate identity (and superordinate goals); -Shared identity across group boundaries increases attractiveness of outgroup members and often results in more peaceful interactions

minority influence: the power of style

-the process by which dissenters produce change within a group -Twelve Angry Men, a classic film, illustrates how a lone dissenter can resist the pressure to conform and convince others to follow. -Moscovici: Nonconformists derive power from the style of their behavior. (not just what we say but how we say it) The social context and disagreement from others creates discomfort. We want to avoid discomfort so we conform. Believes minorities derive power by style. -He placed 2 confederates with the rest of the participants. They influenced the majority. Majority has power from size, nonconformists derive power from style of behavior: --Minorities must be forceful, persistent, and unwavering in support of their position (but it's difficult) --Must also appear flexible and open-minded -Research shows that dissenters have more influence when people iden-tify with them and perceive them to be similar in ways that are relevant and desirable -Hollander: Minorities influence by first accumulating idiosyncrasy credits. (brownie points--have to be liked first) --Holland's alternative strategy: First conform, then dissent (first be accepted and liked then can dissent) -Minorities can change majority dissension if they are consistent (unwillingness to yield) --More likely to produce private conformity -Majorities, because they have power and control, elicit public conformity by bringing stressful normative pressures to bear on the individual. But minorities, because they are seen as seriously committed to their views, produce a deeper and more lasting form of private conformity, or conversion, by leading others to become curious and rethink their original positions. -majorities have greater influence on factual questions, for which only one answer is correct -minorities exert equal impact on opinion questions, for which there is a range of acceptable responses

link between attitudes and behavior

1. LaPiere (1934): first to notice that attitudes and behavior don't always go hand in hand--Attitudes don't predict behaviors Asked restaurants if they'd refuse a chinese couple at their restaurants and 90% said yes (self-proclaimed prejudice) When he actually took the couple to the restaurants, only two refused service Flaw: might have been better if showed restaurants a picture of the couple and asked if they'd refuse service to them; time passed; also don't know if same people who answered are same people couple met 2. Wicker (1969): We rely heavily on situational cues to influence our attitudes--attitudes and behavior are correlated only weakly if at all. 3. Kraus (1995): Attitudes significantly predict future behavior Level of correlation between attitude measure and behavior--The more specific the question is regarding the attitude, the more likely there will be a correspondence with behavior -attitudes correlate with behavior only when attitude measures closely match the behavior in question. -theory of planned behavior: the theory that attitudes toward a specific behavior combine with subjective norms and perceived control to influence a person's actions. -behavior is influenced less by general attitudes than by attitudes toward a specific behavior. -behavior is influenced not only by attitudes but also by subjective norms—our beliefs about what others think we should do -attitudes give rise to behavior only when we perceive the behavior to be within our control. (when we lack confidence in ability to do behavior, we lose intention to do so) -3 psychological factors that create strong attitudes: Directly affects personal outcomes (self-interest), Deeply held philosophical, political, or religious values, Concern for family, friends, or social groups, Also can attack someone's attitude

Why does social facilitation occur?

1. Mere Presence Theory: The proposition that the mere presence of others is sufficient to produce social facilitation effects. 2. Evaluation Apprehension Theory: A theory that the presence of others will produce social facilitation effects only when those others are seen as potential evaluators. (not simply that others are around; worry that others are watching and judging 3. Distraction-Conflict Theory: A theory that the presence of others will produce social facilitation effects only when those others distract from the task and create attentional conflict. -all three theories attribute to impact others have on our performance

alternative routes to self persuasion

1. Self-perception theory: We infer how we feel by observing ourselves and the circumstances of our own behavior (ie. i ate that whole pizza, i must've liked it-that's an attitude change) -Bem's observer studies show that dissonance-like results can be obtained without arousal. On the other hand, the participants of dissonance studies do experience arousal, which seems necessary for attitude change to take place.--In short, highly discrepant behavior produces attitude change through dissonance, whereas slightly discrepant behav-ior produces change through self-perception. 2. Impression management theory: What matters is not a motive to be consistent but a motive to appear consistent (if a behavior supports our image, then we may act to look good, but not necessarily changing our attitudes-appear consistent, but privately hold onto our own attitudes)--we calibrate our attitudes and behaviors publicly in order to present ourselves to others in a particular light -studies have shown that although self-persuasion can be motivated by impression management, it can also occur in situations that do not clearly arouse self-presentation concerns 3. Self-affirmation theory: Acts that arouse dissonance do so because they threaten the self-concept (might make us feel guilty or dishonest or hypocritical)--those who had high self-esteem changed their attitude to meet their behavior, as dissonance theory would predict -If the active ingredient in dissonance situations is a threat to the self, then people who have an opportunity to affirm the self in other ways will not suffer from the effects of dissonance

Cognitive Dissonance Theory: A New Look

Four steps are required to arouse or reduce cognitive dissonance (Cooper & Fazio, 1984) - An attitude-discrepant behavior must produce unwanted negative consequences (ie. in festinger study: Not only did participants say something they knew to be false but they also deceived a fellow student into taking part in a painfully boring experiment. Had these participants lied without causing hardship, they would not have changed their attitudes to justify the action) -There must be a feeling of personal responsibility for the unpleasant outcomes of behavior (must be freedom of choice and see that the negative consequences were foreseeable) -There must be physiological arousal that produces a state of discomfort and tension that the person seeks to reduce (participants who write attitude-discrepant essays in a "free-choice" situation report feeling high levels of discomfort—which subside once they change their attitudes) -The person must attribute the arousal to the attitude-discrepant behavior -research has shown that attitude-discrepant actions do not always produce dissonance, in part because not everyone cares about being cognitively consistent -Others have found that inconsistency can trigger cognitive dissonance even without negative consequences. -Compared with participants who lied in the no-choice situation, those in the high-choice situation rated its taste (kool aid vinegar) as more pleasant. The lie was harmless, but the feeling of inconsistency still forced a change in attitude