Social, Personality & Abnormal TB6

Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis (Dollard)

* Aggression presupposed frustration and frustration often leads to aggression. The target of aggression is often the perceive agent of frustration - however, most of the time it is impossible to exert frustration onto agent (ie. economy) so scapegoat is found

Evolutionary Reasons for Helping

* Animals: Vampire bats regurgitate blood for others even though if they don't feed again in ext 3 days, they = @ risk of dying. Ground squirrels also do alarm call even though they are providing their own location to predator - Stevens, Cushman & Hauser: 2 reliable explanations * Mutualism: behavior benefits both parties * Kin Selection: + likely to help relatives

Factors required for FRD

(1) Need to identify strongly with the group, (2) feel that their actions will bring about social change, (3) Procedural injustice - feeling as though they have been victim of unjust procedures in society.

Social Identity Model of Deindividuation (SIDE)

* Anonymity changes the relative salience of personal vs social identity * Because person is deindividuated online (not many individuating cues ) the social identity is more salient * If self-disclosing is the norm of the group, then SD will take place. Barak & Gluck-Ofri found more SD in forms with a history of SD than in those who didn't have that history. EVAL: Model does not consider aspects of freq/breadth/depth. Only says that SD is context specific - but is there lack of individuating clues in all context? Ie: facebook (profile picture, posts, pictures)

Burnstein (Kin Selection)

* Asked participants to rate whether they were more likely to help sick or healthy person in 2 situations: everyday life, life or death situation * + likely to help sick person in everyday life, but healthy person in life or death situation (propagation of genes is being threatened in this situation, so help healthy) * Also more likely to help those who they were closer related to in all cases

Reduced Cues Theory

* Central assumption is that absence of social cues in CMC leads to deindividuation - results in more SD * Brunet & Schmidt: found greater SD among shy individuals who communicated online w/out a webcam compared to those with a webcam. * Theory predicts freq/breadth/depth of SD online. Hwvr, do all communicative platforms reduce cues to the same extent? Ie. gaming platforms v social ntwrk sites

Negative Online Behaviors (Cyberbullying)

* Certain characteristics of the internet (anonymity, reduced cues) facilitate negative behaviors (aggression, bullying). * 20-40% of the youth have been cyberbullied at least once in their life. It's linked to higher levels of loneliness/depression and lower academic achievements

Tajfel (Kandinsky v Klee)

* Children simply separated into two groups based on preference for paintings * Then asked to give reward to member of in-group and out-group; consistently gave higher reward to in-group member DESPITE the following - no group goals - no other links b/w group membership and personal self-interest (didn't know if anyone giving them money) - no social interaction within or between groups - group membership is completely anonymous * Conclude that only requirement is categorization of 'self' and 'other' into two distinct groups

Empathy and Arousal

* Common experience before acting prosocially, is becoming aroused which is followed by empathy (normal response to seeing someone in distress) * People often do not help because they are actively trying to avoid feelings of empathy

Stimulation Hypothesis (Online Communication)

* Communicating online results in closeness to others & improves well-being * Valkenburg & Peter: communicating online increased closeness to friends * Quinn & Oldmeadow: Use of social networking sites resulted in increase of feeling of belonging

Walter's Hyperpersonal Communication Theory

* Computer-mediated communication (CMC) typically characterized by lack of visual, auditory and contextual cues. * Due to reduced cues, CMC interacts become less concerned about how others perceive them & thus have fewer inhibitions in disclosing intimate information * Communication becomes hyperpersonal - share very intimate information - Hancock & Dunham * Ppl communicating via CMC had more intense perceptions of partner than couples communicating FTF * EVAL: Considers freq/depth/breadth

Social Identity Theory (SIDE model)

* Crowd situations are intergroup situations: many corwd events involve a direct collective confrontation b/w two groups. * Far from losing identity, people actually assume identity provided by the crowd. * Ppl come together as members of a specific social group for a specific purpose - there is high degree of shared social identity promoting social categorization of self and others in terms of that group membership

Media Richness Theory

* Daft & Lengel ranked the richness of certain communication mediums: ie. CMC can not reproduce social cues = less rich communication medium than FTF which allows all social cues. - Theory predicts greater breadth & depth of SD offline than online. * Frequency: greater online than offline * Breadth - no difference * Depth - depends on receiver * Strangers - more depth online than offline vs friends - more depth offline than online

Processes contributing to bystanderism (Latané & Darley)

* Diffusion of responsibility: tendency to assume that someone else will help * Audience Inhibition: People are afraid to make 'social blunder'. People do not want to appear foolish by over-reacting and behaving incorrectly to the situation. * Social Influence: if no one else is responding in anxious/worried manner, than will assume situation is not that serious

Latané & Darley

* Experiment where participant was either alone, with two other participants, or with three confederates. * Smoke began filling room and in alone, 71% decided to take action, 2 other participants = 38% and with three confederates 10%. * Key Conclusion: presence of others results in us being less likely to react to emergency * If others present don't react than we persuade ourselves there is no danger

Competence

* Feeling competent to deal with an emergency makes it more likely that help will be given * Pantin & Carver: parti's watch films on first aid & emergencies; 3 wks later they were provided with the opportunity to help a confederate who was choking and found that the bystander effect reduced in this context.

Effects of Ostracism

* Had healthy patients (in terms of SE) and socially anxious individuals * 45 minutes after the experiment, health participants had recovered while socially anxious individuals still suffering from social exclusion * Ostracism can also lead to people attempting to regain control through forceful means. * Leary et al. 13/15 school shooting, perpetrators had history of chronic or acute rejection

Why do people loaf?

* In large groups, individual performance cannot be identified and assessed (+ likely to loaf) * The impact of adding 1 person to a group of 3 is much more significant than adding 1 person to a group of 20.

Relative Deprivation

* Individuals have perception of reality as well as expectations. People construct expectations on previous and current attainments however sometimes attainment comes short of expectation -> relative deprivation * Relative deprivation can lead to aggression. Why individuals in low-status groups are rarely aggressive because their perception of reality is on equal level with expectations (no discrepancies)

Reduction Hypothesis (Online Communication)

* Internet motivates adolescents to form relationships with stranger = takes time away from existing relationships. * Results in adolescents social connectedness & well-being reducing * Kraut: showed that internet use reduced adolescents' social connectedness & well-being within a period of 1yr

Mood states (Positive)

* More likely to help others when in a positive mood (often sustains the mood) * However, Clark & Schwartz found that positive mood wore off after 5 mins - participants received FREE stationary set and then called by confederate asking them to pass message.

SIT of online prosocial behavior

* More likely to help ppl who are ingroup members. - - - Online, may be sub-groups (people who regularly use/maintain the online group) * 'Core' group members were more likely to help each other * Kittur: found that volunteers who joined Wikipedia subgroups showed more prosocial behavior than volunteers who did not join subgroups

Hedge & Yousif

* More likely to help those related to us (close proximity) * Also, reciprocity is more likely to happen in smaller groups. People in cities = less likely to help a lost child, re-post someone's mail, less willing to do favors for others, less likely to relay phone messages. Levin et al. Experiment where had Man Utd fan witnessing a jogger fall (either wearing Man UTd/different sweater). Participants + likely to help jogger wearing Man Utd sweater.

Reputation Management (Engelmann et al)

* Participants were 48 5 year olds and had them watch children share resources with an anonymous recipient. Children were then told that they could also share their stickers with other participants. * Found that children were more likely to share their stickers with in-group members, and when they thought their behavior might be reciprocated

Social Compensation Hypothesis

* People who are shy, socially anxious, use the internet to help their relationships * Due to reduced social cues & increased controllability, they prefer to SD online (use FB more frequently)

Zajonc's Drive Theory

* Presence of others causes arousal which drives a dominant response. If the dominant response is correct (task is easy) then person will perform better. If the dominant response is incorrect (task is hard) then person will perform worse.

Mood states (Negative)

* Regan et al. Participants who were led to believe that they had broke a camera were + likely to be helpful to relieve feelings of guilt * Cialdini et al. Children of all ages asked to reminisce about neutral or sad experience, then given chance to donate coupons. Kids in sad condition = + likely to donate more coupons. - When does negative mood reduce likelihood: Angry, profound grief (often self-involved) * Thompson et al: participants told close friend to them died of cancer. 1/2 told to focus on self, others on their friend. 83% of those focusing on friend, willing to help stranger vs 25% of those focusing on self.

Rich get Richer Hypothesis

* Says that people who are already 'rich' (socially competent) offline use the internet to add to their already social world. * Zywica & Danowski: Ppl who were popular offline tended to have more FB friends * Kraut et al. internet use related to social support * More support for this hypothesis than for Social Compensation

When will people behave more prosocially?

* Seems that people might be more helpful to 1. improve their reputation - especially when being watched by important others 2. more likely to show prosocial behavior in presence of in-group members 3. degree to which we are prosocial may be linked to whether we expect behavior to be reciprocated.

Sherif (Boys Camp) 1

* Stage 1: develop friendships * Stage 2: split boys up into 2 teams (own leader, norms, flag, living in separate quarters) * Stage 3: Intergroup Competitions (intergroup hostility developed quickly, ethnocentric attitudes and behavior = amplified * Stage 4: Intergroup Cooperation & Conflict Resolution: Presented with goal that would benefit both groups - have to work together to achieve it.

Belonging

* The feeling of belonging is a fundamental human need. It can be achieved by spending time with people in other groups -> leads to feelings of happiness, more engaged in school, affects how we think (in-group bias) * For evolutionary reasons: provides protection, support, sharing resources. In the ape kingdom, if you are excluded from your group you will most likely die. * Ppl with low/no feelings of behavior have behavioral problems; mental illnesses.

Criticisms of Deindividuation Theories

* They suppose that rationality/morality reside in individual minds only - group behavior is INHERENTLY irrational and immoral.

Bryan & Test (Exposure to models)

* Two conditions; experimental and control. * Exp. condition, parti's pass by women with motor problems receiving help, and then pass by 2nd woman with motor problems. * Control condition only passes by 2nd woman with motor problems * Found ppl in exp conditions = + likely to help out 2nd woman with motor problems than control.

Ostracism

- Any behavior where you are being excluded by an individual/group - Cyberball * Virtual game where you are throwing a ball with two other people. Eventually, two people only pass to each other. After, parti's report having lower SE, lower sense of belonging.

Motives

- Batson that there are 4 motives that determine helping behaviors * Egoism: act prosocially b/c we will benefit * Altruism: act prosocially to help others * Collectivism: help others for the benefit of 'the group' (ie. family) * Principlism: help others b/c it's morally right

Intergroup Behavior

- Behavior among individual that is regulated by inviduals' awareness of and identification with different social groups

Prosocial behavior

- Broad category of acts that are valued positively by society * Helping behavior: Subcategory of prosocial behavior: helping is intentional * Altruistic behavior: Refers to an act that is meant to benefit another rather than oneself (sometimes even done at harm to oneself). It is a truly selfless act that is also sometimes done for people we are not related to

Crowd Behavior

- Collective behavior: Large group of people behaving in uniform manner that is in violation of social norms. - Le Bon: Believes crowds produce b/c people involved lose their identity, thus losing personal responsibility for action - Freud: Crowds 'unlock the unconscious' - McDougal: Crowds lack self-consciousness

Zimbardo

- Conducted a study with Belgian soldiers and found that they gave electric shocks of SHORTER duration when they were disguised in hoods/masks. * Deindividuation does NOT always lead to aggressive behavior

Types of relative deprivation

- Egoistic relative deprivation: Feel deprived relative to similar other in group -> leads to internal personal stress - Fraternalistic relative deprivation: Feel deprived relative to dissimilar others in different groups -> leads to aggressive behavior such as protesting, breaking law and damaging property.

Virtual Social Facilitation (Park & Catrambone)

- Examined social facilitation in virtual human presence. * Participants had to carry out easy and hard task in three conditions; alone; human present; virtual human presence. * Easy task: participants performed better in presence of both real/virtual human * Hard task: participants performed worse in presence of both real/virtual human

Zimbardo (Stanford Prison Experiment)

- Found that students who had been deindividuated by being dressed as guards were suddenly very brutal/cruel towards other students who had been deindividuated by being dressed as prisoners * However, what if ppl = naturally aggressive and being disguised had nothign to do with it?

Gaming and Aggression

- Games, player becomes the aggressor (1) Reinforcement of violence - player benefits from being aggressive, (2) frequent violent scenes (become accustomed to violence -> desensitization), (3) perceive realism - games are increasingly becoming more realistic. * Much more interactive than TV. Researchers have found that people = + likely to show aggressive behavior after actively playing a violent game than when watching violent TV.

Johnson & Downing

- Had women administers shock confederates and had deindividuated them by dressing them as nurses or members of the KKK. 1/2 of each also wore badges, thus individuating them * Found that deindividuated failed to increase aggression in both cases. However, those dressed as nurses were significantly less aggressive (especially those who were deindividuated) * Displays that anonymity does not automatically lead ppl to be more aggressive

Internet-attribution-perception model (Schouten)

- Hypothesized model for adolescent online self-disclosure * Personalized characteristics affect the perception of reduced cues & controllability * Perceptions of reduced cues & controllability affect the level of disinhibition * Level of disinhibition affects lvl of online SD

Why the different findings?

- In the 1990s it was difficult to maintain existing social network on internet because a greater part did not have access to it. Currently, internet is widely accessible making it easier for adolescents to maintain their existing social network online - Also, in the 1990s the internet was more used for meeting strangers rather than talking to already existing friends. Currently, social networking sites encourage adolescents to communicate with their existing friends online

Social Facilitation

- Influence of mere presence of others on performance * Normal Triplett: found that children's performance at winding fishing reels improved when in competition with other then when alone. However, some did not improve.

Different types of groups

- Interactive group * Behavior is governed by interpersonal attraction, personality, communication (teams, friends, family) - Social categories * Behavior is governed by roles, norms and status (gender, race, occupation)

Learning to be Prosocial

- It is a learned behavior. Zahn-Waxler say three main strategies 1. Giving instructions: Simply telling kids to be helpful to others improves prosocial behavior 2. Rewarding Behaviors: Behaviors that are rewarded are those that are more likely to be repeated 3. Exposure to models: Seeing someone behave helpfully is a strong form of learning -> Vicarious Learning: observing outcomes for model (if desirable, then behavior is more likely to be mimicked)

Sherif (Boys Camp)

- Key feature of intergroup behavior = ethnocentrism (evaluating other people's cultures based on standards of one's own culture) - Fighting for scarce resources is all that is necessary for inter-group conflict/competition to develop

Latané & Darley's Cognitive Model

- Model proposes that whether a person helps depends on the outcomes of a series of decisions. At any point along this path, decision could be made that would terminate behavior * Emergency -> Notice the Event -> Interpret event as emergency -> Assume responsibility -> Know appropriate form of assistance -> Provide Help.

SLT of Aggression and Internet

- Motivational Aspects: (1) Internet is always 'on' meaning that you can access it at any time. Extensive exposure to scripts potentially motivating aggressions (2) No governance of appropriateness (no one to tell you what is wrong/right), (3) web can possibly be teaching tool (games?) (See Games and Aggression) - Disinhibitory Aspects: Unregulated content, behavior is unmonitored by others (no external social disapproval), anonymity - Opportunity Aspects: Targets are readily available (stalked more easily), perpetrators can be unknown, targets are unseen (dissociation from consequences)

Norms

- Norm is a standard of action that specifies what is expected of individuals to be a global citizen * Reciprocity norm: We feel we should help someone who has helped us * Social Responsibility Norm: We should give help freely to those in need without regard to future exchanges

Deindividuation Theory

- Normally, people have to refrain from exercising their more aggressive, socially inappropriate behaviors. - People lose their sense of individual identity in crowds and thus engage in unsocialized behaviors. - (1) Submergence in crowd (anonymity), (2) Deindividuation (lose of individual identity), (3) Lowered self observation, (4) Impulsive, irrational behavior.

Attributes

- Overall, insufficient evidence to show that personality predicts helpful behavior * However, Mikulincer reported that ppl with more secure attachment style are more likely to be compassionate and altruistic

Bystander Effect

- People are less likely to help in an emergency when they are with others than when they are alone

Online Prosocial Behaviors

- People are more likely to help when (1) reciprocity is likely, (2) one being helped is an ingroup member. - Wang & Wang: Gamers are more likely to act prosocially the more they believed that other gamers would reciprocate.

Social Identity

- People strive for positive/good social-identity. However, some people have membership of low status, devalued or stigmatized group - how do they cope? 1. Social Mobility: believe that intergroup boundaries are permeable and strive to change to more valued group (more likely if person isn't highly attached to group) 2. Social Creativity: Belief that boundaries are impermeable SO, person engages in intergroup comparisons that favor the subordinate group or compare own group to those of lower-status (don't want to leave group) 3. Social Competition: Perceive status-quo to be illegitimate, unstable and insecure. This results in direct inter-group conflict (protest, revolution, war)

Realistic Conflict Theory (Sherif)

- Prejudice and discrimination arose solely from fighting over resources - In-group identity was solidified by conflict - Prejudice arose regardless of personality - Prejudice and discrimination were reduced by working towards shared goals * HOWEVER, some researchers have found that competitive inter-group behavior arises spontaneously even when relations b/w groups are not interdependent and under conditions of explicitly non-competitive intergrop relations

Emergent Norm Theory

- Rather than treating collective behavior as an instinctual behaviors, focuses on collective action as norm-governed behavior * In crowd, there are no clear norms to indicate how to behave. SO, attention is attracted by distinctive behavior which will imply a norm * Inaction on the part of the majority = interpreted as a tacit confirmation of the norm Criticism: Crowds normally congregate with common goal/already have preset norms for behavior.

SLT of online prosocial behavior

- SLT proposes that prosocial behavior is learned through (1) observing others, (2) reinforcement * Online groups: (1) newcomers observe others being helpful, (2) help given not only gives private reward but social recognition from other group members, (3) many online groups will use pnts system

Social Loafing

- Tendency for people to work less hard because believe that other members in the group will work hard * Ringelmann: rope-pulling task (2-8 people) and found that force exerted by people decreased as a function of group size (larger the group, less effort). HOWEVER, may be due to coordination? + ppl, makes it more difficult? * Ingham: Real group vs a pseudo group (1st person was truly pulling while others = confederates and not doing much). Still found participant exerted less force larger the group became. Concluded: not due to coordination

Social Identity Theory

- Theory of group membership and intergroup relations based on (1) self-categorization, (2) self-comparison, (3) construction of self in terms of in-group defining properties. * Social identity: part of the self-concept derived on membership of social groups. It's associated with inter-group behaviors such as (1) ethnocentrism, (2) in-group favoritism, (3) out-group differentiation, (4) conformity to in-group norms

Bystander Calculus Model (Piliavin)

- When someone is in trouble, go through 3 stages (1) Feel sense of arousal, (2) label arousal as an emotion, (3) analyze costs and benefits of helping person * Empathy costs: Can feel anxious in response to someone in distress & Personal costs: feel guilty/shame if don't help someone in distress. * People actively try to reduce these feelings, so the more prominent they are, more likely person will help individual. * However, Kitty Genovese murder = exception.

Factors that Reduce Loafing

1. If one's individual performance can be identified and evaluated 2. If it is a small group 3. If the task is important to the group 4. If the group is cohesive (participants value each other) 5. If group will be punished if performance is poor

Criticism of Evolutionary Theory

1. Lack of convincing human evidence 2. Cannot explain behavior which is aimed at helping those one is not related to (altruism) 3. Does not consider environmental factors (e.g. learning prosocial behavior)

Self disclosure

Aspects that are involves in online SD: Breadth: + of topics discussed Depth: How intimate is the information being shared * Both correlate positively with frequency of online chat. * only depth is related to closeness of friends

Importance of Authority

Blue vs Brown Eyes: Teacher seprates children into two groups based on eye color and clearly favored blue eyed children. Simply because characteristic was favored by authority, intergroup behaviors developed. * Authority creates a BELIEF system that supports and legitimizes the value difference

Effectiveness of social facilitation

Bond & Titus: 0.3-3.0% of behaving differently in the presence of others could be accounted for by social facilitation. 97% due to other factors (ie. relationship to others, situation, subjective norms)

What is a group?

Group: * 2 or more people share a common definition or evaluation of themselves and behave according to this definition. * Group of people who interact with each other; share a common goal; interdependent; behavior structured by set of roles and norms; influence each other

Minimal Groups

What are the minimal conditions required for a number of people to be ethnocentric and engage in intergroup competition?

Why sensitive to ostracism?

Williams: Social exclusion undermines 4 fundamental needs (1) need for SE, need for belonging, (3) need to regain control, (4) need for meaningful existence * Why we have 'early detection system' for potential ostracism * Eisenberger: appears that people experience physical and social pain similarly (same neural pathways are activated)