PSYCH 7A CHAPTER 14: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Psychology of Attraction 3: Similarity

1. Birds of a feather flock together! - Friends and couples far more likely to share attitudes, beliefs, and interests - The more alike people are, the more their liking endures 2. Attraction-similarity hypothesis - People tend to develop romantic relationships with people who are similar to themselves in physical attractiveness and other traits. (Ethnicity, age, level of education, religion)

Obedience to Authority (Milgram 1963)

1. Subjects believed they were involved in a study on the effects of punishment on learning. 2. One selected as learner, the other selected as teacher. (Subjects were always the teacher) 3. Teacher reads word pairs for learner to memorize. 4. Every time learner makes mistakes, teacher instructed to administer shocks that increased in intensity. (from 15-450 volts) with every mistake. 5. Teacher sat in one room in front of shock machine and learner isolated in another room (communicate via intercom) 6. During testing, learner makes many errors and teacher delivers shocks 7. As the level of shock increases, the learner's reactions become increasingly dramatic: Yelling, pounding the table, begging, refusing to go on with study. 8. Through everything, the experimenter (in same room as teacher) calmly urges the teacher to continue.

Attraction and Love

Factors that influence attraction: 1. Proximity (propinquity) 2. Physical attractiveness 3. Similarity

Psychology of Attraction 2: Physical Attractiveness

First impressions of a person is most affected by their physical appearance. - Walster et al (1966) 1. Students randomly matched to be blind dates at a dance 2. Before dance, students took personality and aptitude tests 3. After dance, students rated their dates 4. The only thing that correlated with ratings of how well they liked their date was physical attractiveness Attractive people are perceived to be happier, healthier, more successful and more socially skilled.

Fundamental Attribution Error

Judging the behavior of other people: Our tendency to overestimate the role of internal factors (e.g. traits of attributes of person) and underestimate the role of situational factors in explaining someone else's behavior. E.g. Poor grades - We tend to attribute another person's poor grades to something internal ( they are unintelligent or lazy), rather than situational (family problems at home keeping them from studying...)

Bystander Intervention

Kitty Genovese - Repeatedly stabbed and raped while calling for help - Newspaper reported that 38 neighbors had heard her, but no one helped. - Psychologists began studying how people react in emergencies - Whether or not we help others is largely dependent o the presence of others.

Conformity (Asch 1955)

Social pressure; adjusting one's behavior or thinking toward the group standard. Asch (1955) 1. Subjects asked to match lengths of lines 2. 6 Subjects answered aloud in the order in which they were seated 3. On the first 2 trials, there were no disagreements 4. On third trial, first 5 subjects gave same obviously wrong answer 5. Question: Would the 6th subject go along with the others even though their answer was clearly wrong? 6. Result: The 6th subject gave the wrong answer about 35% of the time 7. The 6th subject (only actual subject in the study) would many times give the wrong answer rather than "go against the group" and disagree with the others 8. It was not uncertainty about the correct choice = The correct answer was clear, but they simply conformed to the group even though they knew the correct answer.

Attribution Theory

Suggests how we explain someone's behavior - we either attribute it to the person's disposition or to the situation 1. Dispositional attribution - behavior is attributed to factors INTERNAL to the person (intelligence, personality, etc) 2. Situational attribution - behavior is attributed to factors EXTERNAL to the person (the situation, environment, etc)

Bystander Effect

The tendency for any given bystander to be less likely to give aid if other bystanders are present Why might people withhold aid in an emergency? - Diffusion of responsibility: Why is it MY job to help? - Fear of social blunders: If the situation is ambiguous, one might feel foolish helping someone when no help is actually needed - Anonymity: People are less likely to help if they are anonymous and can stay that way - Harm or risk in helping: What will it cost me to help?

Actor-Observer Effect

The tendency for the actor (person performing the behavior) to attribute the behavior to the situation and for the observer (the person watching the actor behave) to attribute the same behavior to the actor's disposition. Observer emphasize internal things about the actor, but actor emphasizes more on the situational things about themselves. E.g. Tripping (Not that he is a clumsy person, but because he was looking at us while talking so he didn't pay attention to the floor...

Psychology of Attraction 1: Proximity (propinquity)

- Proximity: How close we are to another person geographically - Mere exposure effect: Repeated exposure to novel stimuli tends to increase our linking for them - Moreland and Beach (1992) 1. Four equally attractive women (determined by prestest) 2. Woman silently attended a class for 1, 5, 10, or 15 class sessions 3. At the end of the course, students are shown slides of women 4. RESULTS: The women they had seen more often were rated as more attractive and likable.

What is Physically Attractive?

1. Many aspects of physical attractiveness depend on time / culture - In some cultures, pierced noses, long necks, and painted skin are considered attractive. - Ideal of female beauty in North America - 1920s: Very slim body - 1950s: More full-figured, voluptuous body - 2000s: Lean, busty body 2. Some aspects of attractiveness DO seem more universal - Youthful appearance - Symmetric features - Features that are neither unusually large or small - However, certain features can be slightly larger than average and still be considered attractive. (E.g. eyes, lips)

Reasons for Conforming

1. Normative social influence - Certain expectations about what we should do - Desire to gain social approval and avoid social disapproval - Based on our sensitivity to social norms: Rules for accepted behavior - E.g. We clap when everyone else claps 2. Informational social influence - When we're not sure how to act, we look to other people and use them as a source of information about how to behave - We assume other people DO know how to behave in this situation and we welcome the information - E.g. First day at new job and fire alarm goes off = What should I do??

Milgram Experiment Results

1. Pre-experiment survey - Most people (including 40 psychiatrists) believed the subjects would stop shocking learner as soon as the learner first indicated pain. 2. Milgram's Results - All 40 subjects delivered the 300-volt shock - 65% continued all the way to the final 450-volt level, even though the learner screamed for mercy, refused to continue, and ultimately stopped responding - Along with these surprising results, Milgram's use of deception and stress on his subjects also caused a debate over the ethics of his research. - Later findings found obedience is highest when: - Person giving orders is nearly and perceived to be a legitimate authority figure - Authority figure is supported by a prestigious institution - The victim is depersonalized or at a distance - There were no role models for defiance --> No other participants were seen disobeying the experimenter

Arousal Effects

1. Robert Zajonc (1965) - Proposed that the presence of other people causes arousal in us - This arousal strengthens the most likely reponse on a particular task - For things that are easy and well-learned (where the likely response is that we will do it WELL), arousal causes us to perform these tasks more quickly and accurately - For tasks that are difficult and less well-learned (where we are likely to do poorly), arousal causes us to perform the task even LESS quickly and accurately 2. E.g. Michaels et al (1982) - Expert pool players made 71% of their shots when alone, but 80% when they were being watched by 4 people - Poor pool players made 36% of shots when alone, but only 25% when watched. * For something SIMPLE, EASY, or WELL-LEARNED, performance will probably be better when doing it in front of others * For something DIFFICULT, or NOT WELL-LEARNED, performance will likely be worse when doing it in front of others.

Social Facilitation

How does the presence of others affect our performance of a task? - Triplett (1898) found that the presence of others seems to boost our performance (investigated cyclists' racing times, adolescents winding fishing reel) - He later found that it wasn't just an effect of "competition" --> subjects' performance improved simply by having someone "oversee" their attempts - Social facilitation = Tendency for people to perform better when in presence of other people - However, the presence of others can, in some situations, cause people to perform more POORLY on certain tasks!