Intro To Political Psychology Final

Stereotype:

a set of beliefs about the personal attributes of a group of people.

List Experiment:

a survey experiment that asks all respondents a question like: "how many of the statements in the following list do you agree with?" But varies the statements in the list across the randomly-assigned groups An extra question is added to treatment groups. The number of statements agreed with are averaged. Since the control and treatment should be the same number (excluding the additional question) with the additional question added we can determine what percent of respondents agreed with the additional question.

Status in a group

how power is distributed among its members.

Twins (studies)

By comparing identical twins (same DNA) and fraternal twins (similar DNA), you are able to witness the effects of genetics on development and behavior.

Hindsight Bias:

"I knew it all along"

Assimilation effect:

"Information similar to that which is expected can be perceived as even more similar than it objectively is"

Social Media Messaging and Political Polarization (Brady et al 2019):

"Moral Contagion" When political elites use moral-emotional language, message diffusion is enhanced (as measured by re-tweets on social media) Especially true for messages involving "moral outrage" (e.g., moral anger and disgust) All of this is true both for conservative and for liberal elites, though the effect is stronger among conservatives Moral-emotional language is likely to be more politically polarizing than some other kinds of messaging (e.g., unemotional discussions of policy) This is one way in which social media can contribute to the amplification of political polarization

Personality:

"One's acquired, relatively enduring, yet dynamic, unique, system of predispositions to psychological and social behavior" Personalities tend to be very stable Personalities influence behavior and predispositions on an ongoing, constant basis Personality affects behavior and the thought process non-consciously

Study: List Experiment (Social desirability):

"Social desirability" might affect responses when: (1) a given social norm is salient to respondents (2) reporting a given "true attitude" would clearly violate a social norm These problems could be addressed by a survey that: (1) does not appear to be explicitly about race (2) allows people to answer honestly without it being evident they have violated a social norm.

Schema:

"a cognitive structure that represents knowledge about a concept or type of stimulus, including its attributes and the relations among those attributes"

Childish Games Bias:

"individuals communicate something to another person that is familiar and meaningful to them, but not to the person communicated with"

Study: Musical Ads and political participation:

(Affective intelligence theory)

Realistic Conflict Theory:

(Bobo 1983) Prejudice, discrimination, and stereotyping are a result of competition over scarce resources. As competition increases, competitors view each other in increasingly negative terms. Prejudice is more likely for those more directly involved in competition with out-group members Prejudice is more likely in countries where resources are scarce and competition for resources is organized around ethnic/racial groups.

Study: Faces and Words Implicit Association Test:

(Implicit Attitudes). Black + White face and good + bad words. Reaction time was studied. With familiar faces no difference in reaction time was found. Project Implicit: tracked decreased biases in sex orientation and Black/White race

Social Dominance Theory:

(Sidanius 1993) Claims that human societies tend to be structured as systems of group-based social hierarchies "Dominant" group (or groups) possesses disproportionate share of positive social value (material & symbolic things for which people strive) Individual personalities have impacts on prejudicial attitudes. ex. Some people may desire hierarchical social relations and desire their in-group to dominate out-groups. "Social Dominance Scale" is comprised of 16 questions which are used to calculate a "Social Dominance Orientation"

Nationalistic Symbols:

1. Flags 2. Reference to historic events such as success in great battles 3. The idea of the "motherland/fatherland"

4 Steps of the Scientific Method:

1. Making observations (identifying variables) 2. Formulating tentative explanations or hypotheses 3. Further observations and experimenting to test the hypotheses 4. Refining and retesting explanations - "researchers reformulate their hypothesis on the basis of the observations made in step three."

The Big 5 Personality Traits:

1. Openness to experience 2. Agreeableness 3. Conscientiousness 4. Extroversion 5. Neuroticism

2 Principles of categories:

1. categories must provide the perceiver with a large amount of information with as little mental effort as possible. 2. People need categories that are suited to their own social and physical realities.

2 Theories for aquiring status

1. expectation states theory (Berger, Rosenholtz, & Zelditch, 1980) suggests that the expectations of a person, based on their personal characteristics, contribute to group members' sense of the sorts of accomplishments a person can achieve; 2. ethological theories (Mazur, 1985) maintain that a group member acquires status when other group members assess the person's strength by evaluating their demeanor and appearance.

3 Types of Groups:

1. intimacy groups, consisted of small groups with frequent interactions, high similarity, and importance to their members. Examples of intimacy groups include families, friends, and fraternities. 2. task groups, consists of groups that are fairly small in size, but with high interaction, similarity, and importance. Task groups are groups such as members of a jury, labor unions, and student study groups. 3. social categories, consist of large groups that are usually low in interaction, importance, and similarity of group members. These groups include women, Blacks, and Jews, for example.

Effects of Nationalism:

1. nationalists tend to be more sensitive to (perceived) threats to the nation-state 2. Nationalists are more sensitive to opportunities to advance their country influence 3. Nationalists are more likely to support expanding state influence at the expense of others

Study: "Situational Factors" and Liberalism/Conservatism:

1. primes people with images evoking death and then 2. asks about opinions on issues (taxation, same-sex marriage, stem cell research) Relative to a control group, individuals primed with images evoking death reported more conservative positions across a wide range of issues

Ratio difference principle:

10% unemployed vs 90% employed. The ratio presented was the same, but people responded more strongly to unemployment than employment. 2.5% of black folks have been arrested for crimes and 0.5% of white folks have been arrested. Here, respondents indicated black people were more criminal. Showing the other side of the statistic: 97.5% of black folk have not been arrested for crimes and 99.5% of white folks have not been arrested. This yielded a different result. Respondents said both groups were on-par in terms of criminality.

Study: Social Dominance Scale:

16 questions comprise the "Social Dominance Scale." Answers can be used to calculate a "Social Dominance Orientation," a feature of personality relevant to prejudice and intergroup relations. 2 parts and then calculation for score.

The Breakup of Yugoslavia: A case study in Nationalism

1918-2003 Multinational state that has since broken into 7 pieces Created after world war one with hopes that the groups of people would get along and not cause trouble Political boundaries did not match geographic distribution of different ethnicities Fell apart during world war 2 with different nationalities ending up on different sides of the conflict: Croatia allied with Nazis Serbian formed a military force that fought the Nazis and Croatia Multinational union between parts of the country led by a communist revolutionary named Tito After the war Tito ending up leading yugoslavia, hoping that communism would become a uniting factor and downplay ethnic differences Ugoslavia was divided into 6 "republics" that imperfectly traced the populations of the different nationalities Tito took care not to favor any one nationality and not to allow the largest (Serbs) to dominate Overly nationalist behavior was punished with prison Tito died in 1980 Tito was replaced by a rotating federal presidency A different republic got to pick the president for a year Made it virtually impossible for a unifying figure to emerge Meant that politicians had to appeal only within their own republic to gain power fueled the rise of nationalism among the separate nationalities Serbian Nationalism: Battle of Kosovo - The Serbs heroically but ultimately unsuccessfully tried to hold off Ottoman Turks in the 1300's. It is still a national symbol. Serb intellectuals held out an ideal of a "Greater Serbia" - a geographically expanded ethnically "clean" Serbia A piece of written work became incredibly important in the 1980's. Portrayed Yugoslavia as a Croatian-Slovene hegemony intentionally devised to deny Serbs power. It showed an alternate history. The conclusion of the work was that the lines should be redrawn. Milosevic rigidly controlled the media, organized a propaganda campaign emphasizing the written work

Interahamwe

A Hutu paramilitary organization set up & tacitly encouraged by the government; allowed to attack Tutsis in the population without repercussions Began openly "rehearsing" for genocide, carrying out drills and such Mostly poorly armed - machetes were the most common weapon held by militia members Literally translates to "those who work together" or "those who fight together

Cold State:

A baseline state where emotional responses are absent

"Nation without a state:"

A nation that does not have a country attached to them. ie. the Kurds - There are plenty of Kurds all over, if history played out differently there could be a Kurdistan

Representativeness heuristic:

A probability judgment. A person may, for example, evaluate the characteristics of another person and estimate the likelihood that that person belongs to a particular occupation Specific scenarios appear more likely than general ones because they are more representative of how we imagine particular events. "As the amount of detail in a scenario increases, its probability can only decrease steadily, but its representativeness [of some archetype] and hence its apparent likelihood may increase. " Gambler's fallacy - chance is viewed as a self-correcting process in which a deviation in one direction induces a deviation in the opposite direction to restore the equilibrium. Ex. Losing must be followed by winning. Someone is "due" for a hit in baseball. "law of small numbers" - small samples are viewed as representative of an entire whole. ex. An exchange student is perceived as a representation of the country they are from

Social Categorization:

A process wherein we nonconsciously categorize others into groups. This can lead to racialized violence and, when utilized politically, genocides

Bradley Effect (Wilder Effect):

A tendency among some voters to tell pollsters they are undecided or likely to vote for the Black candidate, but actually vote for the White candidate on election day: The effect has diminished with time or even disappeared Likely due to the social desirability effect

Halo Effect:

A tendency to view all dimensions of a "good" thing as "good", and all dimensions of a "bad" thing as "bad." Ex. We hear a politician speak and like his stance on one issue and deem him likable. He becomes encoded in our memory as "good." We are likely to rate the politician more highly on "competence," "experience," "intelligence," and other dimensions that may not have much to do with our original contact with the politician

Motivated Cognition:

An example is the desire to reduce cognitive dissonance People want to maintain consistency, it affects how they process information. They maintain it in 3 ways: 1. They will choose to filter out or avoid info inconsistent with them (selective exposure). 2. They will focus on consistent info while ignoring or minimizing things that cast doubt (selective attention). 3. They will translate ambiguous information to be consistent (selective interpretation)

Reverse Halo Effect:

An object categorized as bad tends to be seen as bad across all dimensions

Variation in Nationalism:

As a general rule the poor are much more nationalistic than the rich Minority groups (ethnically, linguistically, religiously, etc.) tend to be less nationalistic than majority groups

Implicit attitudes:

Automatic responses of which individuals may be partially or fully unaware. They bypass most conscious evaluative judgements Implicit associations are largely influenced by emotions. Brain imaging (functional MRI) studies show that when White subjects are shown a series of unfamiliar White and Black faces, on average, there is extra activation in the amygdala upon viewing an unfamiliar Black face; the amygdala is typically associated with emotional responses related to fear. This may mediate negative association.

Consistency Theories:

Balance Theory: people try to keep the components of the cognitive system in balance. People want to see their environment, the people in it, and their feelings about it as a coherent, consistent picture. Dissonance Theory: When our behavior is inconsistent with our attitudes, a psychological tension is created that people want to avoid through selective attention to information. Typically, people reduce dissonance by changing their attitude. Chocolate cake example. Change attitude: "I don't really need to be on a diet right now" People want to maintain consistency, it affects how they process information. They will choose to filter out or avoid info inconsistent with them (selective exposure). They will focus on consistent info while ignoring or minimizing things that cast doubt (selective attention). They will translate ambiguous information to be consistent (selective interpretation) Bolstering - selective exposure to information as people look for consistent info. Also occurs when people shun the alternative options and praise the option they took. Avoiding value tradeoffs - people decide that the action they want to take will have a litany of other positive effects despite how unlikely this is.

Rwandan Genocide (1994):

Between 800,000 and 1,000,000 people killed in about 3 months (from a population of less than 10 million) Rwanda has two major ethnic groups: Hutu (85% pre-genocide) Tutsi (14% pre-genocide) Small Twa ("pygmy") population (1%) April 6, 1994: Progress was being made on a power-sharing agreement Habyarimana's helicopter was shot out of the sky upon his return from a negotiating session on April 6, 1994 (Unknown who was responsible) A well-organized genocide broke out almost instantly after the assassination RTLM began broadcasting a call to "cut down the tall trees" and roadblocks were set up People who were known to be Tutsi, who records showed were Tutsi, who appeared Tutsi and "moderate Hutus" were killed 100s of thousands of citizens participated in the genocide with the militia Conclusion: About 75% of the Tutsis in Rwanda were killed within a month; killing continued for three months. The genocide ended partly because there were so few Tutsis left; partly because the RPF took the country in July. The RPF leader Paul Kagame is president today. the Hutu/Tutsi mix in the current population is ironically close to what it was pre-genocide It is now a serious crime in Rwanda ("divisionism") to draw any ethnic distinctions whatsoever in speech Some analysts claim that Rwanda was especially fertile ground for genocide because of a "culture of obedience."

Core Community non-nation state:

Community outside of the majority unable to have their own nation state

Study: Confederates in the room

Conformity Experiment with experimenter plants in a group with the subject.

Affect:

Decisions made emotionally [from the heart :)]

Cognition:

Decisions made rationally from the mind

Cognitive Complexity:

Degree of attentiveness to information and detail in making decisions More distinct ideas or thoughts on a subject

Study: Dirty college football survey - Selective Group Perception

Discussion: What you see is affected by where you stand. The students watching a college football game aren't there to observe the game as neutral arbiters. They are there because they are fans and want to be loyal to a side. The perspective from which you watch the game has relevance on the games meaning to you The game exists isolated, purely as a set of rules; but the meaning it has to the audience is not divorced from their own histories and perspectives.

Integrative Complexity:

Extent to which legitimacy of contradictory points of view is recognized, & these points of view "integrated" (synthesized) Point-counterpoint style of thinking

Machiavellianism, Morality and Conspiracy Theorizing: (Douglas and Sutton 2011)

Do some people believe in conspiracy theories because they would be willing to engage in them? (2 Experiments): Experiment 1: 189 British undergraduates... Completed a scale for Machiavellianism (MACH-IV), For a series of historical conspiracy theories (e.g., "The attack on the Twin Towers was not a terrorist action but a governmental conspiracy"), rate "the likelihood that, if they were in the position of the alleged conspirators, they would have participated in the actions" For this series of historical conspiracy theories, also rate degree of belief in each conspiracy theory. Results: Respondents higher on Machiavellianism were more likely to have a higher personal willingness to conspire Respondents with a higher personal willingness to conspire were in turn more likely to endorse conspiracy theories The relationship between Machiavellianism and endorsement of conspiracy theories is accounted for ("fully mediated by") the intervening variable of personal willingness to conspire. Experiment 2: 60 British undergraduates...were randomly assigned either to: a Moral Recall treatment, in which subjects had to think of, and write about, a time when they behaved in a moral and decent manner a Control group, that did not perform the Moral Recall task Each then read the conspiracy theory statements from Experiment 1, rating their willingness to engage in each conspiracy and how much they endorse each conspiracy theory. Experiment 1 included a measure of morality (Machiavellianism); Experiment 2 instead manipulates subject morality directly. Results: Subjects in the experimental (Moral Recall) group were less likely to be willing to participate in conspiracies, and less likely to believe in them The decrease in endorsement of conspiracy theories was due to decreased personal willingness to conspire, when reminded of their own morality.

Effect of Narrative News Format on Empathy for Stigmatized Groups (Oliver et al 2012):

Does the way in which news stories are written affect reader interest and attitudes? Study compares narrative vs non-narrative descriptions of health-care-related dilemmas for three different groups (immigrants, prisoners, and the elderly). Transportation: "an integrative melding of attention, imagery, and feelings, focused on story events." Basically, getting involved in / swept away in a story. Measured using a narrative transportation survey scale. Attitudes measured using survey measures of importance of helping stigmatized group, etc. Behavioral intentions were measured with survey questions about willingness to donate money, sign a petition, discuss the stigmatized group's situation with friends and family. Interest in further information was measured via rates of clicking a link to further information that was provided. Results: Result 1: News stories about stigmatized groups were more effective at inducing transportation when the story was presented in a narrative as opposed to non- narrative format. Result 2: News stories about members of stigmatized groups were more effective at inducing compassion toward the stigmatized group when the story was presented in a narrative as opposed to non-narrative format. Result 3: The intensity of compassionate feelings for members of stigmatized groups showed a positive association with attitudes toward the stigmatized group. Result 4: Attitude toward stigmatized groups was positively associated with intentions to perform behaviors that are beneficial to the group. Result 5: Attitude toward stigmatized groups was positively associated with increased interest in more information about the stigmatized group.

Factors that make someone more prone to conspiracy theories:

Emotional state (e.g., "hot state" may make conspiracy thinking more attractive) - especially anger or anxiety Cues from elites (e.g., President Trump) Cues from / conformity pressures from family or social networks Shifting economic or cultural conditions that undermine your expectations or desires Exposure to more extreme media Situational perception of powerlessness, or social isolation

Affective Intelligence Theory:

Emotions are responses to the significance that circumstances hold for an individual. These responses can aid rational decision making by guiding an individual's attention where it is needed. Politicians attempt to capitalize on this (ie. capitalizing on tragic events) Emotional Responses comprise 2 different systems 1. Disposition System: Allows individuals to learn from experience and form predispositions When things are "going well," feelings of enthusiasm motivate individuals to stick with allegiances and familiarity 2. Surveillance system: Prepares to respond to threatening conditions When a fear or negative situation arises feelings of anxiety motivate individuals to be attentive, search for new information, and be open-minded to changing allegiances Fear or anxiety can "break a person out of their routine."

Labeling Something a Conspiracy Theory (Wood 2015):

Experiment 1: General and Historical Conspiracies 150 online participants rated the likelihood of a list of speculative and historical conspiracy theories. Measure of speculative theories from the "Generic Conspiracist Beliefs scale" (GCB) Respondents randomly assigned to one of these: Idea treatment: referred to these conspiracy theories as "ideas." Conspiracy theory treatment: referred to these conspiracy theories as "conspiracy theories." Experiment 2: Fictitious Conspiracy 802 online participants read a mock news article about a fictitious political scandal in Canada, asked to endorse (or not) the credibility of the accusations. Respondents randomly assigned to one of these: Corruption treatment: headline was "Corruption Allegations Emerge in Wake of Canadian Election Result" Conspiracy treatment: headline was "Conspiracy Theories Emerge in Wake of Canadian Election Result" Also measured subjects' GCB responses, after the fact Results: Labeling something a "conspiracy theory" had no significant effect in either experiment. Experiment 2: the "conspiracy theory" label had no effect, regardless of respondents' GCB responses (i.e., no effect whether or not people are more or less conspiratorially inclined)

Intolerance/Tolerance of Ambiguity

Extent to which individuals are motivated to resolve ambiguity versus happy to tolerate it "Black and white" versus "gray scale" thinking

Social Learning Theory:

Focuses on the role of political socialization in the maintenance of prejudice/stereotypes Children and taught and rewarded for discriminatory behavior by prejudiced parents Prejudice can be sustained by in-group norms Attitudes are a result of both socialization and experience; socialization of prejudice matters more for individuals with limited or negative contact with members of minority groups

Policy polarization among the general public

For the general public: In 1994 people tended to agree with the conservative position 50% of the time and the liberal position 50% of the time. The graph looks like a hershey's kiss. In 2017 the graph looks like someone stomped on a hershey's kiss. People who are more politically engaged are more politically polarized. People who are more engaged have a stronger emotional tie to their political views. The most politically engaged members of the public are the ones motivating politicians. They are the ones who make the most donations. The people who turn out and vote (especially in primaries) are the most engaged and thus the most polarized. The country has become more geographically polarized. More americans live in places where there are fewer members of the out-party.

The "Hot-Cold Empathy Gap":

Hard to imagine being in a hot state when in a cold state hard to imagine being in a cold state when in a hot state Generally people are bad at determining the state they are in and how it may be influencing their decisions

Cognitive Dissonance:

Having multiple coexisting incompatible/inconsistent thoughts or beliefs Reducing cognitive dissonance: Change behavior Change attitude Engage in "cognitive strategies": Trivialization Distortion of Information

Reactance Interferes with Persuasion (Responsible Drinking): (Dillard and Shen 2005)

High threat: Responsible drinking: You have to do it Participants who read this experienced more anger Communicated more negative thoughts in subsequent free response task about what is on their mind Low threat: Consider responsible drinking

Political Polarization:

How might we define it: Affective polarization: partisans may dislike each other more than they used to (negative out-group feeling) (Dems may hate Republicans more now than they used to). Policy polarization: the idea that different parties may have moved apart in some sort of policy space. Social Network polarization: People's social networks may have become more politically homogeneous Epistemic Polarization: Media consumption may come from more polarized sources or a person may only look at left wing or right wing media Degree to which partisanship can be predicted from policy views More previously non politicized issues may have become politicized

Ownership of Biases: (cooley, lei, Ellerkamp PSPB 2018):

IMS of subjects was measured used a black/white face implicit association test Then the results were described in a randomized way Some subjects were led to think of their implicit bias as stemming from external factors Other subjects were led to think of their implicit bias as being their "own" (e.g. more as a dispositional phenomenon) Results: Among people with high IMS "owning" implicit bias (that is being told their bias was dispositional) increase warmth toward blacks and donations to a black charity Among people with low IMS "owning '' implicit bias decreased warmth toward black Americans and donations to black charities. "ownership" rather than attributing bias to external factors improved out-group attitudes among some people, but backfired among others.

Mendelberg's Theory of Implicit Racial Appeals:

Implicit (unstated) racial cues are likely to be more effective than explicit ones. If cues were stated explicitly, they would be rejected because people don't want to violate the norm of equality. By making them implicit, they bypass cognitive awareness and directly trigger schemas.

"Fairness" and "Bargaining":

In a hot state, individuals form different fairness judgments, and behave more aggressively in bargaining

"Risk Behavior":

In a hot state, individuals make different tradeoffs between risks and rewards than in cold states.

Intertemporal choice:

In a hot state, individuals weigh the immediate present more strongly, and the future less

Recipient & Sender: Affective Polarization Studies (Iyengar and Westwood 2015):

In both studies, individuals were told the political party of the subjects they have to work with: Dictator Game Trust game An individual ("sender") is given an amount of money (here, $10), to split between themself and another person The amount sent to the other person ("recipient") is then tripled The "recipient" can then choose to "send back" whatever amount they wish to the "sender" If the sender trusts the recipient completely, should send all $10, which is then tripled to $30; both can profit handsomely if the recipient returns a "fair" amount ($15, or another amount >$10, might be considered "fair") Results: In-group partisan preference was evident both in the Dictator Game and in the Trust Game

Hot State:

In the middle of experiencing an emotional response (craving, anger, sadness, etc.)

Behavioral Prescriptions:

In-group members have certain norms they are expected to live by within their social identity

Social competition:

In-group members might directly compete with the out-group to attain positive distinctiveness or positive social identity, or at least with the intention of attaining a positive social identity.

Self Serving Bias:

Individuals are more likely to take responsibility for their successes rather than their failures.

Attitudinal Inoculation:

Inoculation to a disease: Exposure to a weakened form of a virus that prepares your body should it encounter the virus in full. Attitudinal: Forewarn people that they may be exposed to information that challenges their existing beliefs or behaviors One or more (weakend) examples of that information are presented and directly refuted That is, highlighting false claims and refuting potential counterarguments.

Priming:

It is hard to keep all relevant political considerations in mind all of the time. When a given consideration is brought to mind by a news report or advertisement, this is referred to as priming.

Culture of Honor:

Lab experiment and Field Experiment Lab experiment: Southern and non-southern US subjects Treatment: Just outside the lab, a confederate bumps into the subject and says: "a** hole" Control: no confederate, no bumping, no "a**hole" All subjects then complete a lexical task: fill in words with blanks, e.g. -UN Treatment group: southerners more likely to fill in blanks to form words evoking violence (e.g., GUN, instead of FUN) Control group: no difference between southerners and northerners Insulted southerners also had higher levels of cortisol (stress/arousal), testosterone Field experiment: Employers across the US were sent letters from job applicants who had allegedly killed someone in an honor-related conflict. Southern and western companies were more likely than their northern counterparts to respond in an understanding and cooperative way.

Prospect Theory:

Losses loom larger than the corresponding gains. People will take greater risks to avoid losses but less risks to incur gains. Risk aversion for gains, risk seeking for losses Political incumbents are seen as less risky choices. When economic conditions are good, the less risky incumbent will fare better than when they are bad. When current conditions are bad (ie. it feels as if there is less to lose) people will take the gamble on the more risky challenger.

Internal Motivation To Respond Without Prejudice Scale (Plant and Davine 1998):

Measurement of IMS Some people have a high internal motivation to avoid prejudice. Some people are okay with using stereotypes.

Diaspora:

Members of a national community who live outside the territory of a nation-state

Heuristics:

Mental shortcuts

Study: Minimal Groups Paradigm:

Minimal groups paradigm: assign individuals to different groups, either randomly or according to some irrelevant characteristic Experiment 1: Subjects took a series of tests, where they observed dots flashing on a screen and had to guess how many dots there had been Subjects were then categorized as either "overestimators" or"underestimators" After categorization, subjects had to engage in a series of tasks. In dividing money between an "in-group" and an "out-group" member, subjects systematically favored the "in-group" member and "discriminated against" the "out-group" member Experiment 2: Subjects viewed a series of paintings by Wassily Kandinsky and Paul Klee, and reported their preferences. Subjects were then assigned to the "Kandinsky group" or the "Klee group." Individual subjects then had to choose "allocations" of profit across people from both groups. Subjects prioritized maximizing profit for their own group over maximizing "overall profit" (for all subjects) Subjects seemed to be concerned with creating as large a difference as possible between the amounts allocated to each group

Milgram Obedience Experiment: (1961 et seq)

Motivation: To what extent do individuals obey an authority figure, even when they are instructed to carry out acts conflicting with their conscience? Setup: Participants were told they were involved in a "learning experiment" Each participant was told that they would be a "teacher" Each participant was told that another participant would be a "learner", but the "learner" was in fact a confederate of the experimenter (an actor) Participants were told that learners had to perform memory tasks, and that the teacher's role was to deliver electric shocks to the learner whenever he made a mistake, as a way of improving the learner's memory Participants were told to increase the voltage after each mistake Participants were told that the "learner" was connected via audio link so they could be heard (in actuality the learner was an actor hooked up to nothing and was not being shocked. Audio was pre -recorded) As voltages increased, audio was played of the "learner" acting as if they were in pain begging for the experiment to stop. Eventually the audio went silent. If participants refused to deliver a shock they were ordered to. (They were able to leave at anytime). The experiment stopped if participants refused 4 times or if the max voltage was delivered 3 times in succession. Results: 63% of participants continued all the way through to the end (to the highest possible voltage) past all the screaming and begging Most everyone questioned the experiment at some point, but most continued when prodded Participants who refused to administer the final shocks did not demand that the experiment be halted and did not go to check on the health of the victim Even when conducted in different contexts and setting, a significant portion of participants delivered shocks all the way to the end.

Huge Disruption Can Inspire Motivated Cognition (Pandemic):

Need for closure / uncertainty avoidance Pandemic Induces deeply unpleasant uncertainty over an extended period of time Minimizing or wishing it away may reduce perceived uncertainty Dissonance reduction: Arrival of pandemic may induce dissonance between goals and the present reality Minimizing or wishing it away may reduce dissonance among goals, self image of success, and current circumstances.

Political Prognosis, examples of how its a positive feedback loops vs negative feedback loop:

No need to memorize all of these. Just keep a couple positive and a couple negative in mind: Negative: conflict is unpleasant, and eventually calmness or moderation will become more attractive Positive, until you hit a wall or have a disaster, and then it'll turn around Positive: pandemic has reinforced polarizing trends Negative: some kind of crisis may make polarization less salient, bring people together (though Covid wasn't like this, something like 9/11 could maybe [or maybe not...]) Positive: more epistemic divergence (more divergent understandings of the world) -> harder to debate or acknowledge validity of other viewpoints Positive: politicians perceive an incentive to be highly partisan -> cues that citizens take from elites will be more polarized -> voters to elect more partisan politicians Positive: desire to have someone to blame -> worse view of out-group members -> blame them more Positive: in a world where almost everything is polarized, harder and harder to find things to unify around Positive, because polarization is profitable (people attracted to moral outrage, drawn to sensationalist content)

Political Psychology Factors influencing how seriously people perceive Covid:

No need to memorize all of these. Just keep some in mind in case he asks on the exam: Conspiracy theories about Covid-19; virus origins as well as vaccine People taking cues from in-group party leaders, thereby politicizing things that wouldn't necessarily be echo chambers involving different in-group conversations and norms Selective interpretation of scientific data -> biased perception of vaccine safety Overconfidence bias Knowledge of disease/epidemiology I'll survive Covid because I'm "healthy" Consequences of decreased/decreasing levels of social trust Vaccine hesitancy among African Americans due to historical abuses by govt/health care system Demonstrates that even potentially unifying events can actually exacerbate polarization Polarization -> lack of accountability for government performance Individualism and attitudes toward authority Risk attitudes - overweighting immediate possibility of vaccine side effects vs long-term risks of infection Attitudes toward partisanship / authority affect success of messaging campaigns Framing effects in terms of name of virus / disease Anchoring and Adjustment and Expectation Management Stereotyping / Violence against Asian Americans Failures of Persuasion / Incentives for Vaccination Individual Rights vs Collective Safety / "Liberty" Availability Heuristics - hard to imagine dying of Covid

Negative Advertising:

No universally accepted definition and no bright line between drawing contrasts on issues versus being purely negative There are some instances where ads are clearly "attack" or negative. Ex. LBJ's Daisy ad: Girl picking flower is nuked. Ex. Nixon's "Convention" ad against Humprey. Humphreys' face interrupts disturbing images and sounds. His face becomes distorted. Negative ads tend to have more facts in them

Q-Anon and Trump (A brief history)

On October 28, 2017, an anonymous individual now referred to as "Q" posted for the first time on the message board 4chan. This individual has claimed to have "Q" level security clearance and to be a patriot embedded within the deep state, spilling its secrets. Q has provided "details" of "deep state" complicity in a global child trafficking ring that also involves members of the global elite in finance, entertainment, etc. Children were said to be kept in underground prisons to extract life-extending compounds from their blood. Q has made numerous predictions that have proven false - for instance, providing a specific date on which Hillary Clinton would be arrested - but this has not detracted from Q's appeal. In the evolving Q mythology, President Trump came to be seen as a hero who would destroy the deep state and save the world's children from the international conspiracy. The QAnon conspiracy is adaptable to different environments; in Germany, for instance, it has merged to varying degrees with protests against coronavirus safety measures, general anti-government sentiment, anti-Semitic tropes (e.g., "globalist" child trafficking -> recycled medieval propaganda about Jews drinking the blood of Christian babies), etc. It is estimated that QAnon has around 200,000 followers in Germany. Trump refused to denounce QAnon and repeatedly retweeted provocative Q messaging (while acting as if he didn't understand he was doing it). QAnon believers sometimes dehumanize liberals (the same is sometimes done to them).

Inoculation against Misinformation:

Online study of public opinion Pre- and post-measures are taken Consensus treatment The majority of a specific group of people believe a particular thing. Ie. 97% of scientists have concluded that human-caused climate change is occurring Counter message: General inoculation: Says that there is misinformation out there and that people are attempting to deceive Detailed inoculation: Describes the misinformation and where it originated from. It points out real life examples and debunks them.

Outcome Variable:

Outcome variable or the dependent variable is the ultimate outcome we are interested in). Ex. desire to participate after watching an enthusiastic-music political ad.

Conspiracy Theories and Mass Opinion Survey (Oliver and Wood 2014)

Participants were shown a list of conspiracy theories and were asked whether they've heard them before and to rate their belief in them. Part 1 Results: Public agreement with each of these conspiracy theories is a minority position, but some of the minorities are considerable (up to around 25%). However, over 55% of respondents agreed with at least one of the conspiracy theory items. Response patterns suggest that some conspiracy items are highly correlated with ideology ("ideological conspiracies"). Others are not connected to ideology. Part 2: Participants were measured on their belief in a "secret cabal" and a measure called "Manichean." They also were asked whether they believed in unseen phenomena: Paranormal phenomena (ghosts and ESP) and supernatural phenomena (the Devil and angels). They were also asked the degree to which they agreed with the statement: "We are currently living in End Times as foretold by Biblical Prophecy." Part 2 Results: Biggest predictors, by far, are high scores on the Manichean, End Times, Secret Cabal, and Paranormal belief scales. The End Times variable is the strongest; despite the correlation between conservatism and religiosity, people high on the End Times scale often believe many or all of the conspiracies, even the "liberal" ones. Members of disempowered groups have somewhat higher propensities toward conspiracy theory beliefs (low education individuals, African Americans) Some variables are surprisingly unrelated to belief in conspiracy theories (interpersonal trust, political efficacy, authoritarianism)

Egocentric Bias:

People accept more responsibility for joint successes than others would actually attribute to them

Fundamental Attribution Error:

People are more likely to attribute others' behavior to their general dispositions (personality traits or attitudes) than to the situation they are in. ex. The man honking is a mean person. It's not that he's just late to work.

Actor-Observer Distinction:

People attribute their own personal behavior through a situational lens I turned in my homework late not because I'm low in conscientiousness, but because I had 3 midterms this week and I got overwhelmed. Individuals tend to attribute others' actions more to dispositional factors He turned in his homework late because he is low in conscientiousness. More likely to make a dispositional attribution if the person is an outgroup member rather than if they're an ingroup member

Availability heuristic:

People determine likeness by how easily they can think of an example of something occurring. Imaginability - the tendency to retrieve information that is plausible without any regard for actual probabilities. ex. If you have just finished watching a news program about a local house fire, you will believe your chances of your own house catching fire will be greater.

Social Desirability effect:

People have a private viewpoint about something that could conflict with a social norm so rather than revealing their true thoughts, they keep quiet or lie.

Attribution Theory:

People process information as though they are "naïve scientists," that is, they search for cause in the behavior of others, just as scientists search for the cause of a disease. People tend to make a number of errors in this quest for the cause of others' behavior. Individuals use heuristics in processing information about others.

Overconfidence Biases:

People tend to be overconfident in their judgment and abilities.

The Political Being:

Personality - Core of the political being; center of its brain. Effects behavior non-consciously. Unique to each individual. Relatively stable. Values & Identity - Carry emotions. Attitudes - "Units of thought composed of some cognitive component (that is, knowledge) and an emotional response to it (like, dislike, etc.)." "Many important political attitudes are acquired through socialization" Emotions - Interact with every aspect of the political beings decision making Cognitive Processes - "they facilitate the individual's ability to process information, interpret his or her environment, and decide how to act towards it. Cognitive processes help us organize that environment into understandable and recognizable units and to filter information so that we do not have to consciously assess the utility of every piece of information available to us in the environment. Ex. "You know, without thinking, what you are supposed to do as a student. If a student walked up to the podium in your classroom and began to lecture, you would think it very odd, disregard the lecture, and not take notes." In-groups and out-groups also weigh on the political being's decision making.

The Fake News Game:

Players are divided into groups of 2-4 people These groups are assigned one of four key characters: denier alarmist clickbait monger conspiracy theorist The goal of each group is to create a news article that reflects their character's unique goals and motivations. This way, each group approaches the same issue from a different angle. Afterwards, students were checked to see if their mastery of writing fake news made them better at detecting fake news in articles They were able to make better reliability arguments about new fake news articles Things deemed to be fake news also reduced the persuasiveness of its article

Policy polarization among elected officials:

Policy polarization has rapidly increased among liberals and conservatives in America. Now there is practically no overlap in voting; people don't vote across the political aisle as much as they used to.

Positive Feedback Loops vs. Negative Feedback Loop

Political Polarization example: "positive feedback loop" (the further it goes, the further it is likely to go) "negative feedback loop" (a self-correcting process, where some force causes political polarization to start declining again after reaching some maximum level

Positivity & Negativity effects:

Positivity - for people we like, positive actions are attributed to their nature and negative actions are attributed to the situation they are in. Negativity - for people we dislike, positive actions are attributed to the situation, but negative actions are attributed to their nature.

Rwanda Brief History:

Pre-Colonial Period: In pre-colonial times, Hutus and Tutsis lived in relative harmony: same language, same religion, economic interdependence Non-rigid caste system, by which Tutsis were usually herders and Hutus were usually farmers Tutsi came to mean "rich".Hutu came to mean "servant" Under certain circumstances, a Hutu could become a Tutsi Tutsi (mixed with a few Hutus) became the economic & political elite Colonial Period: German colony, then Belgian after WWI Belgians chose to administer power through the Tutsi (partly because of who the pre-existing elite was, partly because Tutsis are stereotyped as having closer-to-"European" appearance) Belgians issued identity cards with individual ethnicities recorded Hutus came to view Tutsis as an elitist class and an arm of the colonial state Rwanda won independence in 1959; Hutus overthrew the colonizers and many Tutsis went into exile in neighboring countries Under Hutu Rule: Many Tutsis lived in refugee camps for decades Relations between Hutus and the Tutsis were bad-tempered, with intermittent violence, but not catastrophic By the late 1980s, exiled Tutsis pressed for return to Rwanda & permanent resettlement The Hutu government said that Rwanda was already overpopulated & couldn't take the refugees back Negotiations stalled. Tutsis in Uganda formed the RPF (Rwandan Patriotic Front) and began incursions into Rwanda in 1990 with an eye towards overthrowing the regime (or forcing concessions) Early 1990's: Habyarimana (who came to power in 1973) had been losing popularity Rwanda was desperately poor; genuinely overpopulated; hunger was rampant; average woman had 9 children; one of the poorest countries in the world Habyarimana developed a strategy of playing on ethnic loyalties, emphasizing the Tutsi threat, and dividing Hutus who supported him from Tutsis and "collaborationist" Hutus ("moderate Hutus") As part of this, anti-Tutsi sentiment and anti-Tutsi behavior was encouraged Propaganda and militias began to take shape

Pizza Gate:

Q-anon conspiracy that top democratic officials were running a child trafficking ring through pizza parlors in Washington. People who believed this conspiracy genuinely believed that children were being harmed Some people showed up to pizza parlors to investigate. One man showed up with a weapon and peacefully gave himself up to police once seeing for himself that there were no children being held at the pizza parlor.

RTLM (Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines):

Radio/ television for Rwanda Much of the population illiterate, so radio propaganda was a crucial part of the regime's plans Constant sensationalized stories about the threat posed by the Tutsi RTLM repeatedly stressed the need to be alert to Tutsi plots and possible attacks and called upon Hutu to prepare to 'defend' themselves against the Tutsi Constant warnings about how RPF combatants dressed in civilian clothes were mingling among displaced people fleeing combat zones. Gave the impression that all Tutsi were supporters of the RPF force fighting against the government.

Twitter bot study of social media and political polarization (Bail et al 2018):

Recent study of self-identified Republicans and Democrats who regularly use Twitter Measures of attitudes on policy issues both at "baseline" (beginning of study) and "endline" (end of study) Subjects in a treatment condition were assigned to follow a political Twitter bot that retweeted messages from the opposite political party Subjects in the control condition were not assigned to any such Twitter bot Subjects in the treatment condition received 24 retweets per day for one month, completed weekly quizzes to check for "compliance" (make sure they were reading the content) Subjects were checked for compliance (Fully complaint, partially compliant, minimally compliant) Results: Republicans following a liberal bot became more conservative Democrats following a conservative bot exhibited no significant difference

Study: "Asian and female math questionnaire"

Regarding social identity

Causes of political polarization:

Remember some of these just in case: Much larger volume of unmoderated political content via social media Ability to tailor news consumption in very specific ways (social media & other forms) "24 hour" news cycle & constant barrage of things on social media Cable News - creation of many "niches" for different audiences Collapse of Local Newspapers/Journalism High levels of wealth inequality End of the Cold War (USSR no longer a unifying external enemy) Different styles of political discourse, changing norms of interaction among politicians and public Perceived "capture" of institutions by one side or the other (e.g., media and academia as liberal enclaves) Changing demographics & relationship between political and other identities Media environment means that more extreme behavior may be required to get attention Globalization Relative decline of religion -> politics is becoming a "religion" for many people Money in politics (funds tend to come not from centrist sources) Re-sorting of Racial/Regional Coalitions in Parties Backlash to Obama Presidency Gerrymandering

Bystander Effect Study: (Darley and Latane 1968)

Setup: Subjects were invited to a lab under the pretext of taking part in a discussion of "personal problems" Subjects were strangers to one another; either 2, 3, 4, or 5 subjects took part in any given session Communication took place over an intercom, allegedly to ensure privacy, and subjects couldn't physically see the others they were talking to At some point, a confederate subject started faking an epileptic seizure Result: Experimenters measured the time it took for somebody to come to the aid of the seizure victim The more people that were involved in the group, the longer it took for somebody to come to the victim's aid Similar bystander effects have been found in a wide variety of different settings Other studies of diffusion of responsibility show that, in many settings, individual people put less effort into a common task when there are more people carrying out that task (e.g., how hard each person pulls on a rope in a simulated tug-of-war) Political implications: Nobody does anything about climate change Some people may not turn out to vote because they think other co-partisans will take care of it Voter engagement may decrease with electorate size Voter effectiveness in holding elected officials accountable may be reduced Parties may inadequately discipline in-party politicians who misbehave Nobody may stand up adequately to threats against institutions Inadequate individual efforts to confronting social problems

Multinational State:

Several groups of people who think of themselves as separate nations who have the ability to establish viable independent states

Hutu 10 Commandments:

Significance in terms of what we've learned in class: Defining behavioral prescriptions for (Hutu) group membership Systematically dehumanizing the Tutsi (calling them inyenzi, or cockroaches) 1. Every Hutu should know that a Tutsi woman, whoever she is, works for the interest of her Tutsi ethnic group. 2. Every Hutu should know that our Hutu daughters are more suitable and conscientious in their role as woman, wife and mother of the family. Are they not beautiful, good secretaries and more honest? 3. Hutu women, be vigilant and try to bring your husbands, brothers and sons back to reason. 4. Every Hutu should know that every Tutsi is dishonest in business. 5. All strategic positions, political, administrative, economic, military and security should be entrusted only to Hutu. 6. The education sector (school pupils, students, teachers) must be majority Hutu. 7. The Rwandan Armed Forces should be exclusively Hutu. No member of the military shall marry a Tutsi. 8. The Hutu should stop having mercy on the Tutsi. 9. The Hutu, wherever they are, must have unity and solidarity and be concerned with the fate of their Hutu brothers. 10. The Social Revolution of 1959, the Referendum of 1961, and the Hutu Ideology, must be taught to every Hutu at every level. Every Hutu must spread this ideology widely. Any Hutu who persecutes his brother Hutu for having read, spread, and taught this ideology is a traitor.

3 ways individuals react to threatened or negative social identity:

Social Mobility, Social Creativity, Social Competition

"Kangura":

State-owned newspaper that launched an anti-RPF and anti-Tutsi campaign in October 1990 Became infamous for anti-Tutsi propaganda and propagating "Hutu Power" ideology Perhaps most famous for the "Hutu Ten Commandments" Constant tales of Tutsi plotting to "re-enslave" the Hutu upon their return

IAT & Job Applications Affective Polarization study: (Iyengar and Westwood 2015):

Strong democrats and strong republicans have substantial differences in reaction times on the political party IAT (primed by being shown political party symbols, etc,) Researchers made people do the republican, democrat IAT and a black, white IAT. Results: The party IAT showed worse scores than the race IAT. Part 2: Researchers randomly generated job applications for hypothetical recent college graduates and slipped partisan information into the application (ie, president of the Young Republicans Club). Researchers also added race via stereotypical names to see how race was discriminated against in applications. Results: Republicans and Democrats exhibited a strong preference for hiring their in-group co-partisan. Race component: White Americans had a slight preference for hiring black candidates. The bias they sought to measure about race in hiring wasn't visible in this sample. People picked the person who aligned more with their political views regardless of whether an out-group party member was more qualified on their resume.

Cognitive Roots of Extreme Suspicion Study: (Radnitz and Underwood 2017)

Study based on 3 hypothesis: 1.anxiety drives people to perceive a conspiracy 2a. When the potential conspirator is the government, conspiracy perceptions should be higher the more conservative a person is. 2b. When the potential conspirator is a corporation, conspiracy perceptions should be higher the more liberal a person is. 2c. African Americans are more likely to see a conspiracy when it involves the government. 3. Perceptions of a conspiracy are more likely when victims are multiple and anonymous than when a victim is named. Process: Subjects were given a story to read (detached from real life details) about a mysterious illness affecting a small town. A biochemical plant in town is identified as being potentially responsible, but its spokesman denies this. Details are left intentionally vague so subjects can "fill in the blanks" themselves (as people do in conspiracy theories). In some groups, subjects had anxiety induced upon them (primed with a reading/ writing task) In some groups, the chemical plant is run by the government, in others its run by a corporation Some groups were presented with a differing number of victims and whether or not they were identifiable. Measures: whether the company did something wrong; whether there is a cover-up; whether there is a connection between the company/government and the victims Results: Anxiety increased a belief in a conspiracy The corporate hypothesis was right for liberals, but there was no difference between liberals and conservatives on government conspiracies, and no difference between blacks and whites. Multiple and unidentified victims led to higher belief in a conspiracy.

Subliminal exposure to national flags (Hassin et al 2007):

Subject pool: Israeli citizens Subjects in treatment group were exposed to subliminal images of an Israeli flag before answering a questionnaire Subjects in control group answered the same questionnaire but were not exposed to subliminal images of the Israeli flag A measure of all subjects' extent of "Identification With Israeli Nationalism" (IWIN) was obtained before they took part in the experiment Results: Exposure to the flag reduced polarization among subjects Voting Intentions: In the control group, high IWIN expressed preference for right-wing parties, low IWIN expressed preference for left-wing parties. In the treatment group, all subjects expressed more moderate preferences (for more centrist parties) compared to people with similar levels of IWIN in the control group Issue positions: Similar moderating effects were observed for attitudes regarding the Israeli pull-out from the Gaza strip

"Blap" and Political Trials. Study of Political Polarization and Perceptions of Expertise (Marks et al 2018):

Subjects engaged in 2 different types of trials: "Blaps" Trials: Participants are shown around 200 different shapes and asked to classify them as "blaps" or not "blaps" based on their characteristics They learn these characterizations by trial and error as they progress through the process Unbeknownst to them, there is no real rule for classifying the shapes. Whether it was considered a blap or not was randomly generated by the computer before it was shown to the participant. As such participants had a success rate of about 50% Political Trials Participants indicated whether they agreed or disagreed with one of 84 social/political cause-and-effect statements (e.g. "Lowering the minimum voting age would help get young people interested in politics" "Sources" Participants were told that on each trial, they would be able to see the response of a participant ('source') who performed the task earlier. Unbeknownst to the participants, these sources were not in fact other people but algorithms designed to respond in the following pattern. There were four different sources: (i) One source agreed with the subject on 80% of the political trials and was correct on 80% of blap trials (Similar-Accurate). (ii) One source agreed with the subject on 80% of the political trials and was correct on only 50% of blap trials (Similar-Random). (iii) One source agreed with the subject on 20% of the political trials and was correct on 80% of blap trials (Dissimilar-Accurate). (iv) One source agreed with the subject on 20% of the political trials and was correct on 50% of blap trials (Dissimilar-Random). "Choice stage" Goal: assess who the participant wanted to hear from about blaps and how they used the information they received. On each of 120 trials, participants were presented with a novel shape and asked to indicate with a button press whether they thought the shape was a blap ("yes" or "no") They subsequently rated their confidence in this decision (self-paced) on a scale from 0 (not at all confident) to 100 (extremely confident). They were then presented with a (random) pair of sources and asked whose response they wanted to see Thereafter the shape was presented again and participants were asked again to indicate with a button press whether they believed the shape was a blap ("yes" or "no") Lastly, participants rated their confidence (self-paced) in their final decision. Results: Participants prefer to receive information about "blaps" from politically like-minded sources. Political like-mindedness matters more than performance on the "blap" task: Participants' judgments are also more influenced by sources that are politically like-minded, when chosen People may rely more on the judgments of co-partisans, or others deemed "close" to them, even when "experts" are available whose judgments would be more reliable.

The Security Dilemma:

Suppose a state begins building up its military National leaders may perceive this as if that country is getting ready to attack and begin building up their military The initial country sees this and is glad they decided to bolster their military in the first place This can quickly lead to an arms case

Homophily:

Tendency for people to form social or other views with others who are similar to themselves. Homophily In social networks: People tending to have friends/contacts who agree with them politically Residential homophily: people tending to live near others who agree with them politically By 2014, about ⅓ of the public viewed the opposite political party as "a threat to the nation's wellbeing." This is likely much higher now.

Contact measures:

The amount of exposure and time a subject has had around a stereotyped group. This is scored.

Irredentism:

The desire to join together all parts of a national community within a single territorial state

Extremists:

The influence of ideology is such that it excludes or attenuates other social, political beliefs. May be lacking empathy and tend to dehumanize victims. Extremism is not akin to mental illness or insanity. There is no "extremist personality." Tend to have more of an "external locus of control" (believe external world determines what happens to them) as opposed to an "internal locus of control" (believe they have considerable control over their own fate

Explicit attitudes:

The kinds of attitudes that people report in surveys, of which they are consciously aware

Order Effects:

The order in which options are presented can change their likelihood of selection Ballot Order Effects: a candidate who appears at (toward) the top of a list of alternatives is mildly advantaged compared to one who appears lower down the list.

Depersonalization:

The process whereby the self cognitively integrates into the group

Affective Polarization:

The tendency to view out-group party members negatively and ingroup party members positively Can be tested through: Implicit association test Explicit association test

Psychoanalytic Theories:

The unconscious plays an important role in human behavior Personality as an "energy system" motivating people to satisfy basic drives (the "pleasure principle") Behavior is the product of these drives and individual attempts to suppress or channel basic drives Three Elements of Personality: Id - instincts and responses to bodily functions; follows pleasure principle Ego - moderates between the id and the realities of the social world; follows "reality principle" Superego - conscience or moral arm. The arbitrator. People feel anxiety when the ego is threatened. People use defense mechanisms to defend the ego: Unconscious techniques used to distort reality and avoid anxiety Repression (e.g., eliminating an unpleasant memory) Projection (attributing one's own objectionable impulses to others) Rationalization (reinterpret own objectionable behavior in a more favorable way) Denial (of reality, of an impulse)

Framing Effect:

The way problems and numbers are framed can drastically alter outcomes. Two options that are exactly the same can be chosen at wildly different rates based on how they're presented. Ex. If program A is adopted, 200 people will be saved. If program B is adopted, there is a 1/3 probability that 600 people will be saved and a 2/3 probability that no people will be saved. Which program would you favor, A or B? 72% chose A If program X is adopted, 400 people will die. If program Y is adopted, there is a 1/3 probability that nobody will die and a 2/3 probability that 600 will die. Which program would you favor, X or Y? 22% chose X However, A is exactly the same as X, and B is exactly the same as Y!

Study: Shooter's Dilemma - Racial Bias study about police shootings:

There was significant racial bias in reaction times, but for cops, no or little racial bias in shoot/ don't shoot decisions. Racial Bias appeared when cops experienced: Fatigue Stress Mental Load

Goals of Political Psychology:

To establish general laws of behavior (via the scientific method) that can help explain and predict events that occur in a number of different situations Poli Psych started in the US in the 1920's via psychoanalytic descriptions of political leaders. It has evolved since then. "If psychologists tell us that under certain conditions attitudes affect behavior, and we wish to know how this applies to deciding how to vote, then the political question becomes: which attitudes about politics, under what circumstances, affect how we vote?" "To put it most simply, people are driven to act by internal factors such as personality, attitudes, and self-identity; they evaluate their environment and others through cognitive processes that produce images of others; and they decide how to act when these factors are combined. In politics, people often act as part of a group, and their behavior as part of a group can be very different from their behavior when they are alone." (pg. 18)

Traditional authority, Charismatic authority, Rational bureaucratic authority

Traditional authority - based upon deference to customs and values Charismatic authority - base upon devotion to the actions or character of an authority Rational bureaucratic authority - linked to the process of rule creation and interpretation

Traits Theory:

Traits are stable unchanging characteristics Traits make us predisposed to think, feel. or act in particular patterns towards stimuli

"Diffusion of Responsibility:"

Two kinds: 1. In hierarchical organizations, underlings claim that they were following orders, superiors claim they were just issuing directives and not doing anything per se 2. In a group of peers, individuals engage in activity they otherwise would never engage in alone ("groupthink"), or fail to act when they would never fail to act alone ("bystander effect")

"Genocide:"

UN Definition: Acts committed with the intent to destroy in part or in whole a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such. Historically, tends to result from an intense feeling of frustration and threat, usually operating in the context of difficult social economic and political circumstances

Culture Affects Perception (eye tracking):

Using eye-tracking software, compare what people from different parts of the world "look at" when they are studying a photograph or movie Results: People from western countries tend to focus more on individuals; people from eastern countries tend to spread their attention more evenly between people in the foreground and background scene elements

"Validation:"

Validation is the recognition and acceptance of another person's thoughts, feelings, sensations, and behaviors as understandable. Validation of an opinion does not imply agreement. Validation is thought to reduce defensiveness and perceived threat, increase attentiveness to and openness to counterarguments. Werner et al (Basic & Applied Soc Psych 2002): Validation of the inconvenience of recycling, coupled with a persuasive message ("validate-persuade"), increased cognitive elaboration and increased recycling behavior. In general, validation of a respondent's concerns may improve evaluation of the person providing pushback, encourage open-mindedness, and make opinion change more likely.

Reactance:

When something threatens or eliminates peoples freedom of behavior, they experience psychological reactance, a motivational state that drives freedom restoration. Sample items (Dillar and Shen 2005): "I become frustrated when I am unable to make free and independent decisions" "Advice and recommendations usually induce me to do just the opposite." Some people are high in reactance; others are low.

Image Theory:

We organize the international environment in terms of types of states, such as the enemy or the ally. These cognitive categories are called images, and images function very much like stereotypes. draws connections between policymakers' images of other countries and their resulting behavior

Empathy and Political Polarization (Simas, Clifford, and Kirkland 2019):

What is the relationship between empathy and political polarization in American society? Study 1: Empathy Measure: * Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) * Dispositional measure of empathy * Scale measures such as: - "When I see someone being taken advantage of, I feel kind of protective toward them" - "Sometimes I don't feel very sorry for other people when they are having problems" (reverse coded) Polarization Measure: * for R's: Favorability Toward R Party - Favorability Toward D Party * for D's: Favorability Toward D Party - Favorability Toward R Party Social Distance Measure: * How upset would you be if a family member married a member of the opposite party * How upset would you be if a neighbor placed a sign for the opposite party's presidential candidate in his or her yard Results: Higher empathy means greater in party favoritism and higher likelihood of rating opposite party as "very unfavorable." However, empathy also leads to lower social distance (being less upset by e.g. opposite party marriages). Dispositional empathy leads to more negative feelings towards partisan opponents. But the approach-oriented aspect of empathic concern seems to encourage contact with outparty members. Perhaps this suggests a goal of altering behavior that is seen as harmful (opposite party support). Study 2: Subjects were randomly assigned to receive one of two versions of a short article describing a recent protest on a college campus. In both versions: * Campus police had to shut down a group of partisan students who were protesting a speech to be given by an individual known for making inflammatory comments about that party. * A bystander who was attempting to hear the speech was struck by a protestor. * The protestors succeeded in getting the speech canceled. The partisan implications were randomly varied: * Either the speaker criticized Democrats and was protested by the College Democrats; * Or the speaker criticized Republicans and was protested by the College Republicans. Censorship measure Level of support for punishing protestors Reactions to the student struck by a protestor Results: Higher empathy means greater interest in censoring opposite party views and higher likelihood of experiencing schadenfreude when injured student is from the opposite party. (Empathy had no effect on desire to punish or ability to sympathize based on party.) empathy can potentially exacerbate polarization rather than diminish it.

Anchoring and adjustment:

When facing problems of uncertain judgment, individuals tend to anchor on some value (potentially an irrelevant value) and then adjust their judgment away from the anchor. The extent of adjustment is often inadequate, so that the anchor has enduring effects"

Groupthink:

When groups are cohesive and insulated, group loyalty and conformity pressures can lead to bad collective decisions.

Attribution theory:

When people try to explain the behavior of others, they make attributions. That is, they attribute the behavior of others to some particular case. To simplify, there are 2 main kinds of attributions: Situational attributions - contextual factors outside of a persons control that impacted how they behaved Dispositional attributions - someone behaved in a certain way because they are that kind of person.

Decision Frame:

a decision maker's conception of the acts, outcomes, and contingencies associated with a particular choice. When a decision maker's choice is affected by the details of the decision frame, this is a framing effect.

"Hot Cognition Hypothesis":

all socio-political concepts are affect-laden political events and figures from the past are affect laden which is stored in long term memory This is a running tally is triggered when reminded of the past This effects political judgments and makes it unlikely that people will generally process new political information in an evenhanded way.

Motives and its big 3:

aspects of personality concerned with goals and goal-directed actions Big Three motivations: 1. Need For Power 2. Need for Affiliation Intimacy (Concern for close relations with others) 3. Need for Achievement

Ultimatum Game:

experimental subjects are randomly paired In each pair, one subject is assigned the role of "prosper" the other is assigned the role of "responder" In the game: The proposer makes a proposal as to how to divide a fixed amount of money If the responder rejects the division, they both go home with nothing Proposers tend to offer nearly equal amounts to responders Responders tend to accept offers which are fairish (ie, if offered 4 dollars they will accept; if offered 2 dollars they tend to reject) The average amount responders were offered was $5 This may be because people were afraid that they would walk away with nothing if they offered an unfair amount. The dictator game (Ultimatum Game Continuation): Same as the ultimatum game, except responders have no opportunity to accept or deny. They are just given the money. Under these circumstances, the average amount they were offered was $2

Procedural fairness:

fairness and transparency of the processes by which decisions are made

Outcome fairness:

fairness of the ultimate outcomes of a decision making process

5 Stages of Group Development

forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning

Social Creativity:

includes three strategies: (1) comparing the in-group to the out-group on a different dimension; (2) reevaluating the comparison dimension, so that previously negative dimensions are perceived as positive; and (3) comparing one's in-group to a different or lower status out-group.

Confirmation Bias:

individuals tend to favor information that confirms already-existing beliefs. When testing a hypothesis people search for evidence that proves the hypothesis rather than disproves. Therefore, people can tend to cling to false hypotheses which can be easily disproved.

Motivated Reasoning:

leads people to see arguments in favor of their prior judgment as inherently stronger than those which are opposed

Positive Social Value:

material & symbolic things for which people strive

Legitimacy:

psychological property of authority, institution, or social arrangement that leads those connected to view it as appropriate, proper and just. a ruler seen as legitimate will not be facing protests to their power (likely) The reason why when the Court decided that Al Gore lost to George Bush, Al Gore didn't attempt to create a militia to remove George Bush from power. He disagreed with the decision of the court, but he saw it, as an institution, and its process as legitimate. Webers sources: Traditional authority - based upon deference to customs and values Charismatic authority - base upon devotion to the actions or character of an authority Rational bureaucratic authority - linked to the process of rule creation and interpretation

Survey Experiment:

respondents are randomly assigned into different groups; each group is given a different survey (one survey only)

Social Identity:

that part of an individual's self-concept which derives from his [her] knowledge of his [her] membership in a social group (groups) together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership" People innately put others in social categories Once categories are formed, people want a positive sense of social identity. Biases and discrimination are caused by this motivation.

Social Mobility:

the enhancement of positive social identity by advancement to a group of higher status

Cohesion (groups)

the factors that cause a group member to remain in the group

Political efficacy:

the feeling that your vote has any power or meaning

Cognition vs Affect

the two are inseparable in decision making A "reward center" in the brain motivates decision making and mediates learning process Judgments are formed by our emotional state Some argue we can sometimes make better decisions because of the role emotions play

Self categorization theory:

when the self and others are categorized into in-groups and out-groups, the self and other become prototypical group members.

"Agentic state theory:"

when a person comes to view himself as the instrument for carrying out another person's wishes, he no longer sees himself as responsible for his actions Proved by Milgram's "electric shock" experiment