Unit 8: Social Psychology (Chapter 13)

More on Social Relations

ATTRACTION, CONFLICT AND PREJUDICE, ALTRUISM, AND PEACEMAKING, AGGRESSION *INTERPERSONAL aggression specifically involves people (although just aggression does not necessarily) *Complex w/ many factors and types FRUSTRATION ***Frustration = block from goal ***But, actually Revised Frustration Aggression Principle 1.) NO absolutes 2.) Social Norms 3.) Learning +Sublimation +tricks 4.) Cogn can override ALTRUISM: unselfish act w/o regard for one's own well being ***Movie --> officer is ex of frustration - aggression principle but also of altruism +Frustrated about medical care +Freud would say displacement, but also this (frustration-aggression principle) +Prejudiced, predisposed, but not perfect prediction of att or beh --> helps later -Lapiere -Many factors AGGRESSION AND TV *Bandura wold say so *Reserach says desensitization and can learn thru social scripts (latent learning) BIOPSYCHOSOCIAL APPROACH TO AGGRESSION ***Not as simple as any one Aggression Bio: genetic, ehcmical Social: situational, media Psychological: learning, thinking CONFLICT = perceived incompatibility of actions, goals, or ideas *Chart --> money; take short term **Prisoner's Dilemma and Social Trap*: see above +I.e.: Dark Night --> did not need to aggress *Robber's Cave Experiment +Oklahoma +Muzafer Sheriff +Realistic Contact Theory or Realistic Group Contact Theory +12 year olds all well adjusted +Rattler's and Eagles (Two Ingroups) -Attachment -Competition (for resources) --> led to aggression (created prejudice and discrimination, what was expected; ties to theories) -Then, cooperative contact ***Can they come together --Superordinate goals: can they come together to solve probs (i.e. water) ***Point is need to interact to break stereotypes ATTRACTION *Usually talking Romantic *Sternberg's triangular theory of love +Equity +Self-disclosure *5 Factors 1.) Proximity --> geographic nearness +Mere exposure effect: repeated exposure breeds liking -Exs: Taiwanese letters, mirror image effect, evolution 2.) Reciprocity/recirpocal liking 3.) Liking through association -CC -I.e. coffee 4.) Similarity 5.) Physical Attractiveness +Appearance ***THERE ARE A LOT OF FACTORS IN EVERYTHING +Aggression --> hot weather, learning (i.e. social learning theory)

Interpersonal Behavior: Attraction and Aggression

ATTRACTION: most influential people in our adult lives are often people to whom closest in long term and or intimate relationships FACTORS *Proximity*: in social psycholgoy, the geographical nearness of one person to another, which is an important factor in interpersonal attraction +Often close relationships with whom we see frequently because near us +Ev --> Leon FEstinger; MIT dorms +Why? -Familiarity causes liking -*Mere Exposure Effect*; phenomenon by which repeated exposure to novel stimuli tends to increase an individual's preference for such stimuli --Explains why don't like self photos *Similarity*: in perceptoin, the principal that we tend to spur elements that ares similar to each other; in social psychology, similarity of beliefs, interests, and values is recognized as a factor attracting people to one another +More likely to attract if similar +Ev --> wanted to keep those similar to them +Why? -Same interests -Communication -Mutual reinf of beh *Reciprocity*: the tendency to respond to others in a way similar to how they respond to or treat us +So, react positively to flattery, etc. +Particulary if low self esteem +TEND; not always -I.e. phony ingratiation *Physical attractiveness*: physical features that persons of the opposite sex find appealing +More likely to be sought as friends, etc. +Men place greater value than women on attractiveness +In contrast, women tend to value somewhat older, finances, depedenable, industrious; attractiveness still imp +Why? --> Buss says evolution -Ev --> Langlois with infants, average AGRESSION *Interpersonal Aggression*: any phyiscial or verbal behavior intendent to hurt another person, harm, destroy, etc; delving an aversive stim to an unwilling recipient +Debated if has to be toward people +Can even be emotinal +I.e. crime, but other less exrreme forms TYPES +Hostile: primary goal is to do harm; may seemingly have no clear purpose -AFFECTIVE -Frustarion, anger, pain -Attempting to strike out against seeming cause of discomfort for hostile -Can also be displacement; unconscious drive/anger on someone else b/c can't ago at source [unless relfect] +Instrumental: intends harm as means to another goal -Higher IQ -lIke sublimation -Predatory +Prosocial: for good of society (following norms) +AntisociL: violates social norms ***Can describe above, especially instrumental +Adaptive: for individual's good and self-interest +Maladaptive aggr: not for protector of individuals ***VIDEO +Aggression and prejudice +*SOCIAL SCRIPT*: ATT/BELIEF/BEH based on what seen in media; mental tapes of how to act provided by our culture (latent learning) +Forms: mental, physical, emotional, psychological WHY? FREUD --> DEATH INSTINCT; not on ourselves b/c if; most disagree GENETIC +Nature vs nurtuer +Twin --> identical twins have highest correlation BIOLOGICAL FACTORS *Ethology*: the scientific study of the evolution of animal behavior including humans; bio of beh ***Adaptive behs AND *Sociobiology*: specialization within biology that seeks to understand the biological factors that underlie social behavior in all animal species, including humans; bio of SOCIAL beh ***EDWARD O. WILSON, KONRAD LORENZ, AND IRENAUS EIBL-EIBESFELDT BIOCHEMICAL +Androgen such as Testosterone --> complex b/c aggression can increase testosterone instead (study with holding) +Hypothalamus and amygdala (no one brain region, but amygdala is best answer) +Serotonin --> depressed linked to aggression; treat with SSRI's +Lorenz --> "Aggressive instinct": aggressive inclidionation maintained toward an animal's own that has great sivurivival value and evolutionary significance -Lorenz says most animals have inhibition from killing own members, but humans never developed this, and social norms cause them to be suprpressed and buildup <-- no ev for this +NEURAL -EXCITE, PRODUCE, OR INHIBT ANGER -NO one spot, but amygdala best answer (Phineas gage so preferantal context too) PSCYOLOGICAL FACTORS *Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis*: theory that aggression is always )a consequence of frustration and that frustration leads to aggression; the principle that frustration—the blocking of an attempt to achieve some goal—creates anger, which can generate aggression +INITIAL = JOHN DOLLARD +Can be delayed or displaced +However, REVISED --> NOT ALWAYS! -Neil Miller --> frustration can lead to many diff responses, just one of which is aggression +Leonard Berkowitz --> 2 conditions act rtogether to instigate aggression -*Readiness*: to act aggressively associated with emotion of anger --Frustration can induce this -So, then, any beh that reduces aversive emotion will be maintained by neg reinf -So, then *Environmental cues*: things in enviorinment that influence aggression --I.e. will others accept it -Anger does not lead to aggression unless env cues 2. SOCAIL RULES MAY INHIBIT 3. FRUSTRAIOTN may lead to other behaviors such as submliatin or stress eating 34. Cogn factors can overheard aggression (such as thinking) *Social Learning Theory Perceptives on Aggression (LEARNING AGGRESSION REWARDING AND OBSERVING MODELS OF AGGRESSION) -Bandura -Observational learning + OC -Even non tangible reinforces -So, parents can instill or counteract aggression *Media (ACQURIIGN SOCIAL SCRIPTS) +Freud thought catahartic +But, now, research suggests it increases odds that viewer will be aggressive +Ev --> Dorothy Singer's longitudinal study; Rowell Husmann longitudianl study; music +But, some such as Jonothan Freeman say aggressive people just tend toward aggressive media +Still, studies have same conclusion +May also lead to desensitization/acceptance and prime +Schechter --> says no more exposure to violence today than before ***All this still controversial and incomplete ; many cultures; survival will depend on adapting and celebrating social influences 2

Attitudes

*Attitude*: any learned, relatively denduring predisposiotn to respond in consistently favorable or unfavorable ways to people, groups, ideas, or situations; feelings, often based on our beliefs, which predispose us to respond in a particular way to objects, people, and events; belief; (L.L. Thrusting) "intensity of acquired positive or negative affect for or against a psychological objet";positive or negative evaluations of *objects of thought* +KEYS: LEARNED, CHANGEABLE, AND MAY (BUT DON'T ALWAYS) PREDICT BEH +*Attitude objects*: the people, groups, or things about which we hold attitudes +Attitude object and object of thought same thing? +Objects of thought -Social issues -Groups -Instituions -Consumer Products -people +Sprots good example ***Meet a persona and make evals --> b/c we store memories in groups, clustinger, conceptual hierarchies, semantic network theory (or Gestalt --> similarity)_ INTERNAL ATTITUDES + EXTERNAL INFLUENCES --> BEHAVIOR +All inleucne complexly +No aboslutes -TENDENCY --> primary att error -Beh patterns NOT always WHERE FROM? Social perception *Problems w/ direct experiences --> one situation not always; may ignore situational factors Social inlfuence such as compliance stategies -Social requests w/ bit of coercion can infl/change att Past experience +Behavioral Observation -Observational learning and social learning theory (Bandura) -Observing Others -Observing ourselves --Leon Festinger and Daryl Bem --> when unsure, infer attitudes from own behavior (so, not always attitude causes beh but rather vice versa; see later and cogn diss) -Parents (i.e. religion and politics) and peers especially -Esp social adjustment function +Learning Attitudes -Classical Learning theories --Pavlovian ---Advertising --Operant ---Punishment (or no social approval)/reinf decreases/increases attitudes +Direct exps -***More ingrained and confident Social Perceptions Attribution theory? COGN MODEL OF ATTITUDE Stim: inds, social issus, social groups, objects | Attitude |Affect: symp nervous response; verbal | statements of affect | |Beh; overt actions, verbal statements about beh | Congition: perceptual responses, verbal statements of bleief 3 COMPONENTS 1. *Cognitive*: BELIEF people hold about an object of thought 2. *Affective*: feeling stimulated by an abject of though 3. *Behavioral*: predisposition to act in a certain way towards an object of thought +Ex: gun control 3 DIMENSIONS (also for personality) ***ON line of denoting and how attitudes do not always prerfectly predict behavior 1. Strength: how firmly held is the attitude -Firmly held beliefs resistant to change and tend to guide beh more 2. Accessability: how quickly does it come to one's mind, how often does on e think about it -MOre accessible, more likely will do it -I.e. donate 3. Ambivalence: heave both positive and negative feelings, so on the fence; means ratio of + and - feelings closer to = ***+ corr btw strength and access and - core btw strength and am ***But no perfect core +I.e. college choices ***note: humaniscitc --> conditons of worth FUNCTION OF ATTITUDES *Understanding Function*: attitudes provide a; frame of reference that helps us structure and make sense ofut of th world and our experiences +i.e. dating/with people +We also rely on others' attitudes +FRAME OF REFERENCE FOR THE WORLD *Social identificaiotn function*: attitudes of others provide us with important information about what they are like, just as the attitudes we express tell others about us +Assessment of other infl by what we perceive to be their likes and dislikes +Who do I identify with? *Social Adjustment function*: attitudes we express sometimes allow us to identify with or gain apporval form our peers; +*Impression Management*: tendency of individuals to select carefully what information they reveal about their attitudes, depending on how they think such information will affect their image in the eyes of others +Diff effect in diff env, so adjust +Peak into what other are like +adpat and change to situations (based on ident, etc +Can change att/beh based on sit/DS MR. AGELSON'S 3 FUNCTIONS 1. Predispose - guide or infl my beh 2. Interpret - how do I see it 3. Evaluative - is it important to me? +i.e. donate ***Storng attitudes will often lead people to stand up and endure hardships ***Compliance --> beh can change attitude, more likely if person ambivanelnt HOW MUCH DO ATTITUDES PREDICT/INFLUENCE BEHAVIOR? *LAPIERE --> hotels and restaurants; almost none turned away, but 90% of 51% that responded said would; ATTITUDES DO NOT PERECTLY PREDICT BEHAVIOR *Other ev --> survey than measure beh showed little to no relationship *But, when considered collectively, attitudes and beh closely linked *So, what determines how influencial attitudes are on beh? +*Social Expectation*: what society expects us to do (which makes us want to conform to it)? -Imp b/c it is degree to which other social factors influence beh -Diff in diff situations? +*Stereotype threat*: tendency to conform to negative stereotypes +*Attitude specifity*: relevance of attitude to behavior being considered -Less likely if broader attitude -Closer association, more likely +ATTITUDES MAY BE AFFECTED BY BEH ***SO, DO ATTITUDES INFLUENCE BEH OR VICE VERSA --> BOTH CHANGING ATTITUDES Role-laying *Cognitive Dissonance Theory*: theory that people experience psychological discomfort or dissonance whenever cognition and behaviors are in conflict; For example, when our awareness of our attitudes and of our actions clash, we can reduce the resulting dissonance by changing our attitudes +Need for consistency +For attitudes, applies to attitudes and beh +Only if become aware, which you may not +IT IS MOTIVATION +Most often change attitude, but can change beh (can't change past beh tho) +Ev --> letter; ex --> brainwashing, cheating +*Cognition: metnal activiety/preocess of acuqing knowledge and understanding through though, experience, and senses +Dissoancne: psychologcial inconsistency +Either conflicintg attunes or attitudes do not mathch actions (so, either cognitions or both) **Principele of psych/cogn consistency +RESPONSE -Chagne beh, but hard ***Most likely change attitude 1. Change att or beh to bring them into consisentcy 2. Seek out new info to stop discrpenacy 3. Trivilization ***Under these 3... +Rationalization: nmore likely to keep doing beh unless reflection; justify by external; in addition to /after below +Selective exposure: aovid/igrone info that would create difssionsnace +MInimal justificaiont: if less punishment and or more of a reward if they change their attitude or account, they are more likely o change and feel less dissonance in the change ***2nd part is rationlizaiotn ***I.e. somiking +Post decisions dissonacne: regret that ensues after designs is made, revealing around concert that person did not make correct decision -When convictions strong and stakes/awareness high *Effort Justifcaoitn effect: tendency to find something more attractive if work hard to achieve it -I.e. college; misery likes company OR SELF-PERCEPTION THEORY = BEH CAUSES ATTITUDES +CD says reduce tension and attitudes can lead to beh *How? +people infer attitudes from beh +NOT reduce them +So, people do/observe beh j+Then attribute to internal or external *Fidnigns +Explains for some +Well-dfeind vs weak /ambigous attitudes BOTH THEORIES COREECT/APPLY! *Persuausion*: convincing others to change our attitudes? ***Factors that set effectivity: +Is person friendly, respected, trusted +*Credibiilty*: how believable a person is? -*Perceived expertise*: assessment of the communicators' knowledge about a topic and of his or her experience,e education, and competence to speak authoritatively -*Trustworthiness* +*Power*: ability to administer reinforces or punishers to the subject -I.e. children and employees +*Attractiveness*: not only physical looks but also liability, pleasantness, and perceived similarity to the audience Other factors +Source: who +Reciever: to whom +Channel: by what means -Central --> receiver is educated; substance; enduring -Peripheral --> less educated; not very good argument but go for emotion (attractiveness, expertise, etc works in eimmediate -I.e. selling car

Introduction

*Diffusion of Responsibility or Bystander Apathy/Effect*: tendency for an individual to feel a diminished sense of responsibility to assist in an emergency when other bystanders are present *Social Psychology*: field of psychology concerned with how social influences affect our behaviors; study of how we think about, influence and relate to one another *About interpersonal, but learning errors can help w/ intra *Actions are greatly influenced by social processes and perceptions of social env *Can't cover all of social psych, so limit to certain topics

Attribution Theories

*ATTRIBUTIONS*: things that we point to as the causes of events, other people's aehvaiors, and our own beahvior *IMP to everything, including social perceptions *Impact our own behaviors *Attribution Theory*: theory that we attempt to make sense out of tother people's behavior by attributing it to either dispositional (internal) causes or external (situational) causes +FRITZ HEIDER -As we judge, schemas **********UMBRELLA TERM +Internal exs: motivational states or personality traits +External ex: environmental, external factors +IMpacts relationships +Influenced by gender -Men: tend to attribute failures to situation and successes to disposition -Women: opposite +*Correspondent Inference Theory*: theory that the attributions we make about other people's behavior are influenced by a variety of conditions, such as the social desirability of that behavior or whether the behavior results from free choice -EDWARD E. JONES -*Correspondent inference*: cases in which we attribute a person's behavior to an underlying disposition -***Why do we make dispositional some instances but not others? --*Social desirability*: "expectedness" of behaviors we observe; how social acceptable a behavior is ---We tend to think socially desirable behaviors reveal nothing about person's dispositions, so do not draw correspondent infs from them ---In contrast, more likely to make corr infs from norm-deviant beh ---Ev --> interview --*Noncommon effects*: unique outcomes which would be unlikely to occur as a result of some other behavior ---HIgher degree to which beh is focused on noncom effects, more likely to attribute it to situational? (i.e. quantum physics course) -*Free choice*: freedom to choose how to behave? ---Free, think disposition; pressed, think situation *Social desirability +Desirable --> external +Undesirable -_> internal *Unique outcomes/noncommon effects +Required --> external +NOt required --> internal *Free will +Yes --> internal +No --> External **********Attributions influenced by these conditions! +*Covariation Principle*: theory that our attributions about people's behavior are influenced by the situations in which the behavior occurs, the persons involved, and the stimuli or objects toward with the behavior is directed -HOWARD KELLEY -Causes and effects (beh) covary b/c if cause altered, effect changes with it -**********Causes: SITUATION, PERSONS INVOLVED, AND STIMULI OR OBJECTS TO WHICH BEH DIRECTED?????????? -Kelley says we take in and analyzed data based on... -*Distinctiveness*: degree to which other stimuli are capable of electing the same behavior -*Consistency*: degree to which one exhibits the same behavior in response to the same stimulus on other occasions -*Consensus*: degree to which other people exhibit the same response to the stimulus -High consistency, low consensus and distinctivieness --> disposition -High all three --> situation ***But, don't have time for Kelley's model, so *COGNITIVE MISER MODEL*: states that in making attributions, people feel they must conserve time and energy by taking cognitive shortcuts ***Schemas and stereotypes ***Attriubtions cotntive shortcuts ***We do this, not Kelley b/c don't have time ***Simple and time efficient strategeies +Stereotyeps: categorizing -Gender typing andr oles +Heuristics: metnal shortcults ***Necessary, but prone to error

Prejudice

*Prejudice*: negative, unjustifiable, and inflexible attitude toward a group and its members; Prejudice generally involves stereotypes beliefs, negative feelings, and a predisposition to discriminatory action; Allport "feeling favorable or unfavorable toward a person or thing prior to or not based on actual experience" from the Nature of Prejudice +Like LAD, needs to be activated +Some ingrou//outgroup survival, but today say its about what we are prejudiced to +*Racism*: the belief that races exist and that physical characteristics determine cultural traits and that racial cahracteristics make some groups superior +*Other race effect (or own race bias): tender to recall faces of one's own race more accurately than faces of other races; research found that emerges during infancy btw 8 and 9 months; thus, tend to view people of same race as more sim in appearance,personality, etc ***not good at discerning (b/c stereotypes) ***Conscerin is stereotypes linked with phenotypes ***Heterogeniuty of society affects it (more likely when more homogenous) +TENDENCY TYPES +Overt +Subtle: person with prejudice hides it form whom they are prejudice against [+Implictiy: person is unaware of their prejudice *Very neg impact on world *Three imp elements: NEGATIVE, OFTEN MINORITY, WITHOUT ATTENTION TO DIFFS; INACCURATE OR INCOMPLETE INFO; RESISTANCE TO CHANGE *The negative attitude *Arises from *Stereotypes/sterotyped bleiefs*: preconceived and oversimplified beliefs and expectants about the traits of members of a particular grope that do not account for individual differences; a generalized (sometimes accurate but often overgeneralized) belief about a group of people -The beliefs on which the attitude is based -Along with hostile feelings, predispose... *Leads to *Discrimination*: in social psychology, the behavioral consequence of prejudice in which one group is treated differently from another group; unjustifiable negative behavior toward a group of its members *WHY PREJUDICE? +We tend to group and deine ourselves in groups based on many factors; ultimately, we categorize others as "different" -*Ingroup*: in social psychology, the group in which people include themselves when they divide the world into "us" and "them"; "Us"—people with whom one shares a common identity --*Ingroup Bias*: tendency to see one's own group in a favorable light; the tendency to favor one's own group ---May be to enhance self esteem -*Outgroup*: the "them" group when individuals divid the world into "us" and "them"; "Them"—those perceived as different or apart from one's in-group. --*Outgroup bias*: tendency to see outgrip in unfavorable light; attribute to disposition (se homework!) -Even on trivial matters +Competition -More dominant group may discriminate against les powerful group -Increase during economic struggles +Frustration and Scapegoating -Scapegoats often are those one percieves as less powerful -*Scapegoat theory*: the theory that prejudice offers an outlet for anger by providing someone to blame *Categorization *Vicid cases (availability heuristcs/meory bias) *Just-wrold phenomenon' defesnive attributions *Social inequalities (main) -INgroup and outgrip and biases -Social inqeuqalitieis leaing to prejudice 1. Categorization 2. Have's attribution --> more likely to say I deserve it 3. Have not's response 1. blame themselves 2. Frutration 3. Giving up 4. Both frustrate or angry? May go to scapegoat theory Movie --> Crash +Exs of all ***Prejudice over time --> apparent decrease but could be b/c social desirability

Diffusion of Responsibility or Bystander Apathy/Effect/Etc.

****SEE DEFN ABOVE!**** *John Darley and Bibb Latané +Only one - 85% +2 bystanders - 62% +5 others - 31% ***NUMBER OF PEOPLE IS NOT ONLY FACTOR IN BYSTANDER INTERVENTION!!!!!!!!!! ***DIFFUSION OF RESPONSIBILITY --> assume that others have just as much responsibility, so less likely to act ***Exs *A MODEL OF BYSTANDER INTERVENTION* 2 KEY ASPECTS OF THIS AND OTHER SOCIAL PHENOMENA REPOSNISIBLITY +for bystander apathly --> diffusion of responsibility -One feels less -Alos in social loafing and deindividuation +High in social facilitation AROUSAL ***Yerkes dodson law +General --> Moderate (i.e. sports) +Easy --> high ***Social faciliation ***In dein, arousal higih MANY FACTORS MATTER MODEL OF WHETHER WE HELP OR NOT --> BYSTANDER APATH IS JUST ONE FACTOR AS IS GORUP SIZE *Based on altruism: unselfish regard for welfare of others *STEPS Notices --> INterp as emergency (May not; reps on person; SITUAIOTNL AMIBGUITY: WHEN IN novel situations; based on norms and schemas; when we don't know norms, we back off) -then other factors-> Assume responsibility --> attempt to help FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE HELIPING: all tendency *Situational interpretation +Situational ambiguity *Percieved cost: what is cost to me? +Socail exchange thoery: we weigh +Kinship: whether they are kin or not +Other *Sense of responsibility +Diffusion of it (bystander effect) *MOod --> better, help *Gender --> women are more likely to be held by both women dn men ***Diff than similarity -Men more likely to help women regardless of similarity -But, men help mel b/c of similarity ***So, factors can override (men more likely help women) *The cause of need +Person perception +Attributions ***JUst world +Social responsibility: more likelty to help epeople younger or older *Social norms +Siliarty -Reciprocity +Conformity -Normative -Infromation NURTURE -Social ambiguity ***VIDEO**

Attribution Errors

*Fundamental Attirubiton Error*: Tenendy to overestimate disposiotn (internal) cuases and to udnerstimate sitional (external) causes of behavior [for people we do not know very well?] +I.e. great; SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY -May dislike friend too b/c like to categrozie ***ONLY FOR OTHER S WE DO NOT KNOW WELL ***COLLECTIVLES TLESS LIKELY TO COMMIT ***MAY JUST BE DOING JOBS +Deps on male vs female (see above) +I.e. athletes (training is situation according to text) +Related are... *Actor-observer effect*: the tendency to attribute your own behavior (acting) to situational factosrs. However, when observing you attribute another's behavior to dispositions -Ev for primary attrition effect -Deps on which actor and which observer and switching them -Ev --> attributed their choices to situation but friend's to disposition *Self-serving bias*: tendency to explain our scenes by attributing them to other dispositions and explain our failures by attributing them to the situations -Gender -B/c this is defense mech -Corr btw low self-esteem, dispositional attributions, and depression -But, don't grow if constantly attribute failure to situation --Parenting, tet +WHY? -Know little about others situation, so easier to draw conclusions from beh we observe than from hidden reasons +As we get to know person, tend to attribute more to situation +Affects quality of relationships; more distressed relationship, overestimate internal for negative and external for positive *Defensive Attributions*: tend to attribute in such a way to defind our ego *JUST WORLD EFFECT *False Consensus Bias*: attribution bias caused by the assumption that most people share our own attitudes and behaviors +So, tend to judge devotions from own standards as abnormal *Illusion of Control*: attributional bias caused by the belief that we control events in our own lives that are really beyond our control (i.e. even those primary or solely influenced by external) +B/c less stressful +I.e. gamblers +So blame others or themselves for events outside control +Linked to fundamental attribution error?

Implicit Attitudes

*Implicit Attitude*: attitudes that may be socially undesirable and may influence one's behavior without one's knowledge +All behaviors up to this are EXPLICIT b/c we are aware of these attitudes that we have +Not in our conscious awareness *So', not all attitudes in awareness or answered honestly So, used the research method known as *Implicit Association Test (IAT)*: test that attempts to measure the strength of associations between groups of people, specific individuals, policies, and products and the concepts of "good" and "bad." -Stronger association, stronger implicit attiude -**********I.e. with terms and icons????????? -Discrepancy btw implicit and explicit attidues (especially when more sensitive) -Need further research for if this effective and influence of implicit attitudes

Attitude Formation about Self

*People think of what people think about them and form self/attitude/belief about self based on imagined evaluation of other people +Don't ask +Don't have to be accurate --> this is prob **LOOKING GLASS EFFECT*: people's self attitudes of themselves based on own beliefs and evaluations and what one imagines other people think of them is taken into account as a factor ***Not at all us or all others; both and others are factors/piece of it (but not all) *Infleunce actions /beh/interperson relationsihps and beahvior

Social Inlufneces on Behavior

*SOCIAL INFLUENCE*: efforts by others to alter our feelings, beliefs, and behaviors +Persuasion? +Beyond changing how we feel about something Thoughts, feelings perceptoins and behaviors are infleuncey by presence of others and interaction with others *Conformity*: tendency to change or modify behaviors so that they are consistent with those of other people; adjusting one's behavior or thinking to coincide with a group standard +With perceived social pressure to conform +Morton Deutsch and Harold Gerard --> INformatioal and Normative +*Informational Social Influence*: one basis of conformity, in which we accept a group's beliefs or behaviors as providing accurate information about reality; influence resulting from one's willingness to accept others' opinions about reality +*Normative Social Influence*: social influence in which we conform not because of an actual change in our beliefs, but because we think we will benefit in some way (such as gaining approval); to gain reinforcement or reward/approval or avoid punishment/rejection +Ev --> light; INFORMATIONAL WITH AMBIGUOUS SITUATION +ASCH ev --> 1 subject with 6 people in on experiment; subject always sixth -Strain -1/3 changed to match -NORMATIVE WHEN CORRECT OBVIOUS -However, some said majority was probably accurate, so information can still occur even in unambiguous -Also studied other vars? CONDITIONS INFLUENCING CONFORMITY 1. Unanimity of the majority group = less dissent, more likely to conform 2. Perception that the majority of group members are acting independently = independent, more likely to conform 3. Majority group size = optimal 3 or 4; further increases do not increase likelihood and may even decrease 4. Familiarity with the attitude object = no preconceived notions, more likely to conform 5. Low self-esteem = more likely to conform 6. Perceptions about other group members = higher status/regard/power or can observe us, more likely to conform *Compliance*: form of social influence in which people alter their behavior in response to direct requests form others, which usually involve a degree of coercion +Common +*Door-in-the-Face Technique*: method for encouraging compliance in which an unreasonable request is followed by a more minor reasonable request (which is the requester's goal in the first place) -Then, more likely to comply +*Foot-in-the-Door Technique*: technique for encouraging compliance in which a person is first asked to agree to a relatively minor request that serves as a setup for a more major request; the tendency for people who have first agreed to a small request to comply later with a larger request. -B/c when comply with small request, perceive self as that kind of person, so continue to comply to be consistent with this perception +Norms of reciprocity: common courtesy; when someone does something nice for you, it is your duty do do something nice in return ***2 factors --> PERCEIVED RELATIONSHIP AND DOLLAR VALUE (i.e. gift) *Obedience*: social influence in which we alter our behavior in response to commands or orders from people perceived as having power or authority +Less common +STANLEY MILGRAM --> tried many vars (location, lab coats, etc); 65% +Why? -Diffusion of responsibility; think own responsibility less -Sybmobsl of power or status -Graduated orders ***Along with Asch and ZIMBARDO --> ordinary people can do shocking things as a result of many things *Groupthink*: a psychological drive for consensus at any cost that suppresses dissent and consideration of alternatives in group decision making; the mode of thinking that occurs when the desire for harmony in a decision-making group overrides a realistic appraisal of alternatives. +IRVING JANIS +**********Always negative?????????? +Explains why well-meaning groups can make disssterous decisions +Pressures to confrom in group decision making +I.e. political fiascos +Janis's 7 Ways to Prevent IT 1. Critical Evaluator 2. Supervisors should avoid expressing opinions in group task 3. Indep gropus on same prob 4. All alternatives 5. Discuss ideas out of group 6. Outside experts 7. Devil's advocate

Social Perception

*Social (Person) Perception*: way in which we perceive, evaluate, categorize, and form judgments about the qualities of other people; person perception; seeing someone, forming impression,s and making judgments about that person; seeing someone, forming impressions, and making judgements about that person ***KEY TO FORMING ATTITUDES *Key to interactions; more imp than att and beh of others *How We Form Them: FIRST IMPRESSIONS: initial judgements about people +More likely to judge quickly than wait for more info +Quickly formed and hard to overcome +Initial strongly influence later interationcs +*First Impression aka Primacy Effect*: term used to describe the phenomenon that the first information we receive about a person often has the greatest influence on our perceptions of that person +Sometime refer to this as *first impression*: initial judgements that we make about people *Many influences on judgement +Visual cature +Physical appearance +Need to explain +Should ask, but usually don't (b/c lazy so schemas sand afraid to be aembarrasssed) see beh and attribute to internal or external SCHEMAS: conceptual frameworks we use to make sense out of our world; mental rep or category that contain knowledge about people, event,s, and concepts +Heuristics in essence are schemas +*Person schemas*: generalized assumptions about certain groups or classes of people; forming impression (I am sure that you have experienced instances where first impressions were quite inaccurate); how we perceive another person; judgement about traits has; idea bout people we meet -Tend to pick up info that fits and discard rest -Efficeint but potentially in accurate -Use as organizing principle for interpreting future info (i.e. may dismiss what doesn't fit) +*Event Schemas*: guidlenes on how to beavhine in events and situations +STEREOTYPES -Some fine, but some bad/racist, etc. -i.e. Bellarmine -save time +SCHEMAS NOT BAD --> recall, buide beh, organize, predict likelness, make sense +ADS 1. Qucik and easy... --Guidelines --Rules +DISADS 1 and 2. Resturcts, biases, distores, and therefore acan interfere with restrict our interpersonal relationships 3. Resistant to change PERSONALITY: distinctive patterns of behavior, emotions, and thoughts that characterize an INDIVIDUAL'S adaptations to his or her life +Emphasis on individual +tendenzy +3 Dimensions +Trait Theories of Personality*: believe that we can describe personalities by specify gin their main characteristics/traits AND +*Implicit Personality Theories*: assumptions people make about how traits usually occur together in other people's personalities -Can explain stereotypes -Implicit = below surface, not aware -GORDON ALLPORT --*Cardinal trait*: in Gordon Allport's trait theory of personality, a powerful, dominating behavioral predispoitns and an organizing principle in a small number of people's lives --*Central Trait*: in Gordon Allport's trait theory of personality, a major characteristic such as honesty or sensitivity --*Secondary Trait*: in Gordon allport's trait theory of personality, any of a variety of less generalized and often short-term traits that affect people's behavior in specific circumstances -Research from SOLOMON ASCH +*Halo Effect*: tendency to infer other positive or negative traits form our perception of one trait in another person -I.e. men and weight

More Terms from Sheet

*Social facilitation*: stronger responses on simple or well-learned tasks in the presence of others *Social Inhibition*: is a decrease in performance in the presence of others *Social loafing*: the tendency for people in a group to exert less effort when pooling their efforts toward attaining a common goal than when individually accountable. *Deindividuation*: the loss of self-awareness and self-restraint occurring in group situations that foster arousal and anonymity. *Group polarization*: the enhancement of a group's prevailing inclinations through discussion within the group. *Just-world phenomenon/effect/fallacy/hypothesis/theory*: the tendency of people to believe the world is just and that people therefore get what they deserve and deserve what they get; the world is just; good things happened to good people and bad things happened to bad people -B/C DON't want to say could happen to us -Tied to prejudice *Conflict*: a perceived incompatibility of actions, goals, or ideas. *Social trap*: a situation in which the conflicting parties, by each rationally pursuing their self-interest, become caught in mutually destructive behavior; act to attain short term goals that are loss in long term for group +I.e. when chance for greater gain long term [choos shirt term, and loss]) *Passionate love*: an aroused state of intense positive absorption in another, usually present at the beginning of a love relationship. *Companionate love*: the deep affectionate attachment we feel for those with whom our lives are intertwined. *Equity*: a condition in which people receive from a relationship in proportion to what they give to it. Self-disclosure: revealing intimate aspects of oneself to others. *Altruism*: unselfish regard for the welfare of others. *Bystander effect*: the tendency for any given bystander to be less likely to give aid if other bystanders are present. *Social exchange theory*: the theory that our social behavior is an exchange process, the aim of which is to maximize benefits and minimize costs. *Reciprocity norm*: an expectation that people will help, not hurt, those who have helped them; common courtesy = when someone does something nice for you, it is your duty to do something nice in return +Perceived relationship +Dollar value *Social-responsibility norm*: an expectation that people will help those dependent upon them. *Superordinate goals*: shared goals that override differences among people and require their cooperation. *Role-playing *Self fulfilling prophecies*: occurs when one person's belief about others leads one to act in ways that lead otehjrs to appear to confim the belief

The Effects of Attribution

LOCUS OOF CONTROL: HOW WE ACCOUNT FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURES: LOCATION WHERE CONTROL IS/COMES FROM locus = place; CONTROL = ?????? ability to determine/exert; FROM WIKIPEDIA "Perceived control in psychology is a 'person's belief that he or she is capable of obtaining desired outcomes, avoiding undesired outcomes, and achieving goals.' " *External locus of control: successes and failures to oustide factors +LEARNED HELPLESSNESS: even though can change/alter situiaotns, leearned it is hopeless b/c of past; commentto accept one's fate and have no effect ton work darend us +Do focus on/praise +"lUck"; "your fault" *Internal locus of control: " " " " inside " +"MY hard work"; "I am a failure +Take responsiblity/blame +Hard on themselves ***Impact on organanzaiotnal +Goals: fucnitongoin, achieivng, diversity ***People have a dominant one, but continuum What do we control? Perspecive --> we do not control SNS but can control response once in prefrontal; implicit attitudes, but one aware, have control ***I think I can has role, but not all