Social Psychology

Some interesting findings on stereotype threat and maths performance...

(Spencer, Steele & Quinn, 1999) BUT nChildren show sex differences in behaviour before they have stereotypes. -(Campbell et al, 2004)- so if they have these before they are learnt surely they aren't learnt at all? •Stereotypes underestimate some differences People tend to overestimate differences like aggression and verbal tests but underestimate differences such as leader emergence and gazing. Sex differences in impulsivity seem to be declining as we become more egalitarian. -Cross et al. (2011) meta-analysis- women become more sensation seeking as time goes on. - But •Sex differences in some personality traits in egalitarian societies have become larger, not smaller n(Costa, Terracciano, & McCrae, 2001) therefore more egalitarian more free to express gender differences?

Sex differences : Experimental studies

(males > females) Aggression: •Physical aggression d=.40 •Verbal aggression d=.18 •Target of aggression (m>f) d=.13 (Eagly & Steffen 1986) Risk taking •Hypothetical choices d=.15 (Byrnes, Miller & Schafer 1999) •'Balloon' task (BART) d=.36 (Cross, Copping & Campbell, 2011) Group performance §Individual's contribution d=.38 §Task orientation of same-sex groups d=.34 §Autocratic leadership d=.20 (Wood 1987) •Emerge as task leader (frequency) d=.49 •Task leadership (behaviour) d=.41 (Eagly & Karau 1991) Time on active task behaviour d=.58 •Equity of rewards d=.20 (Carli 1982) (females>males) Group performance §Positive social behaviour d= -.58 §Smaller reward for self d= -.28 §Equality of rewards d= -.10 (Carli 1982) § §Social task performance d= -.58 §Social leadership d= -.18 §Democratic leadership d= -.29 (Eagly & Karau 1991) •Influenced by group pressure d= -.32 •Influenced by persuasive messages d= -.16 (Eagly & Carli 1981) Decoding of emotion •Visual d= -.32 •Auditory d= -.18 •Both channels d= -1.02 (Hall 1978) Interpersonal communication •Face recognition d= -.32 •Accuracy of facial expression (sending) d= -.52 •Smiling d= -.63 •Gazing d= -.68 •Bodily expressiveness d= -.58 (Hall 1984, 1987)

B. Comparison Level

-Comparison Level (CL) = what we expect and feel we deserve from our relationships -Standard against which we judge happiness/satisfaction Satisfaction = Outcome ̶ CL

C. Comparison Level

-Each person has his/her own CL -Based on prior experience, learning, personality - -High CL •expect relationships to be rewarding •low rewards unacceptable, disappointing -Low CL •expect relationships to be troublesome •low rewards are acceptable, tolerable • -Relationships that meet / exceed expectations are more satisfying (Michaels et al., 1984)

Sex is not dichotomous

1 in 400 livebirths show sex chromosome atypicalities -X0 (Turner's syndrome) -XXX - present female -XXY (Klinefelter's syndrome) -XYY- •Atypical hormone exposure in utero -Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia- elevated testosterone in women -Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome- body doesn't process any testosterone, the testosterone is at normal levels, however the chromosomes are XY •Many men's T levels are indistinguishable from 'above average' women •Many men's T levels are indistinguishable from 'above average' women Advantage' for highest vs lowest T tertiles in UK sports testosterone in blood samples, lots of overlap between men and women. testosterone levels in saliva are a better measure. as a man gets older his testosterone levels start to look like that of a 20 year old woman. testsoertone frequency, pink represents women, blue men. there are females all across the spectrum of testosterone. testosterone can improve performance for sports like pole volt. Joel et al not many places the brain can be differentiate between female or male. each brain has a mixture of traits correlated with female end and traits correlated with male end. so can look at brain and about 80% of time guess male or female, but for 20% you cannot. ... and nor is gender identity EHRC: 1.3% of UK population identify as gender variant (e.g. trans, non-binary or agender) •Nolan et al (2019) - review of gender diversity and gender-confirming surgery in the USA Mostly based on studies from c. 2015

cooperation

2. cooperation •Trading •Hunting- cooperation is only good for some types of hunting as when you are stalking animals it is beneficial to be solo. •Warfare & intergroup competition -E.g. Sherif et al Robbers cave (1961) Group divisions spontaneous, Cooperation required superordinate goal. boys taken to camp split own to two groups. spontaneous rivalry and competition and identification with in-group, but through shared task and common goals could form superordinate group. There are issues with this study though as they did this with many camps, and this rivalry did not happen in all of them. -Newson et al (2018) •Inter-group violence supports social cohesion in Brazilian football fans? super fans and general fans identified.

cultural transmission

3. cultural transmission cultural transmission is the transmission of skills and information from one person to another, •Gossip -we should spend c.42% of our time grooming. -humans spend 20% waking time in conversation - -Dunbar (1993) Dining hall conversations monitored every 30s Social relationships and personal experiences took up 70% of conversation time. Half of this was devoted to third parties •Gossip •Social learning (spaghetti tower building, if watched a group do it before, found the task much easier) •Informational conformity -(Sherif 1936) image that appeared to be moving (but was not), participants asked to rate how much they thought it was moving by. when asked individually the answers varied a lot, but when asked in a group numbers were about the same, use group to calibrate answers/ perception. shows we conform to group norms when there is ambiguous information.

Inhibitory control

Aggression is associated with poor self control and high impulsivity (Eisenberg et al. 2001; Moffit et al. 2002) • •Testosterone... -Reduces inhibitory control in experimental rats Svensson et al (2003) -Is higher in psychopaths Dolan et al (2001) •Impulsivity as a mediator for sex differences in aggression -Campbell, 2006; Struber, Luck & Roth, 2008 •Sex differences in impulsivity exist (albeit declining) -Cross, Copping, & Campbell, 2010 - BUT sensation-seeking reversed in matrilineal (wealth and property passed through women) Mosou girls, so still cultural effects...

Heritability

Aggression is strongly heritable (40-50%) •Very stable over time -Correlation over 1 year=0.9/0.8 -Correlation over 20 years=0.4 •Suggests a genetic component -As well as environmental/cultural influences -(Moffitt, 2005) -(Caspi et al., 2002)

Human mating patterns

Anisogamy (the idea that there is one sex cell that is much larger than the other sex cell, this is the egg that is larger and the sperm that is smaller) & differential parental investment •Any investment made in a particular offspring which contributes to its survival and fitness which comes at the cost of being able to invest in other offspring. •(Trivers, 1972) woman have the egg which is already a greater parental investment. also take on more risk as pregnancy is more risk. Also by having one offspring means you are unable to invest in other offering. female investment •Gamete (large) •Mating •Gestation •Parturition (labour) •Lactation* •? Extended care beyond weaning* if the gamete survives. male •Gamete (small) •Mating Death rate from parturition: 8.2 per 100,000 live births in UK 16.6 in US 338.3 Bangladesh 1140.1 Malawi 1575.1 Afghanistan

what is attractiveness.

Attraction research pre 1980... "identification of the [actual] physical characteristics considered attractive in Western culture ... seems a hopeless task" Berscheid & Walster (1974

Equity Theory

Basic premise and assumptions -People are motivated by self-interest -But, other people have options too, so we must be fair in order to get along -People feel most comfortable when they get roughly what they deserve, no more and no less -We are concerned with fair distribution of rewards and costs •Three propositions -Partners are concerned with fairness (taking both partners' outcomes into account) -Inequity causes distress -Partners will take steps to restore equity •Equality = partners obtain equal rewards from the relationship P1 rewards = P2 rewards •Equity = ratio of rewards/costs proportional P1 rewards/P1 costs = P2 rewards/P2 costs •Our relative profits should be equal •Partners should only get as much as they give •If you give less, you should get less ** It's the balance that counts ** P1 r/c : P2 r/c Equitable à 80/100 : 40/50 = .80 for both §Partners have equal relative profit §Don't have to have same rewards, just same balance §What you get with respect to what you put in This is all a bit ...Calculating? • •Clark & Mills (1979) suggest that casual/business relationships are based on exchange, while close relationships are more communal •"Emotions, not rational calculation, drive human behaviour." -Campbell, 2002 Summary •Relationships are important •We like: -People we see often -Similar people -People who like us •Love is more than lots of liking •Social theories of relationships use calculation... Surely there is more to it?

Culture and physical attractiveness

Beauty is objective? 1)High level of agreement across cultures (Langlois et al, 2000) 2)Certain features of faces are reliably associated with attractiveness (Cunningham, 1986) - big eyes, high cheekbones in men- however cunningham's study has issues as although taken from all over the world only urban not rural participants. 3)Babies prefer attractive faces (judith lanmor) Beauty is subjective? 1)Different cultures "improve" beauty in different ways (Newman, 2000). 2)Different body types are judged to be more attractive in different parts of the world (Anderson et. al 1992) 3)Body type standards vary over time (Silverstein et al, 1986). Tovee et al (2006) found that zulu south africans in the UK changed their attractiveness rating when they moved from SA to the uK as the BMI they found attractive went down to be in the middle of what black british people voted for and south africans who stayed there voted for. Boothroyd et al (2016) found that cultural things we consume such as media like TV and the internet can shape what we find attractive. more exposed to media, lower BMI found attractive Thornborrow et al (2017) participants were asked to create the ideal body type on computer avatar system. in village A they had tv and internet for 10 years, village B tv for 5 years, C no tv . Thornbrow et al (2020) This approach applies to men as well. men interested in bodybuilding. they showed varying body fat levels in nicaragua, UK and uganda. UK favoured more muscular body than uganda and nicaragua.

Attempts to measure masculinity and femininity

Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) •Bem suggested that masculinity and femininity were two separate dimensions • •List of words were generated •Raters asked to state whether they were more desirable in men or in women •Here they are... they are very outdated and from the 60's. Women score higher than men on the Femininity scale of the BSRI •...while men score higher than women on the Masculinity scale • •BUT -People's ratings of themselves as masculine or feminine don't relate to their self-ratings on the rest of the scales -Masculinity and femininity are not statistically independent •Others have argued that Bem's scales measure something other than Masculinity/Femininity: • •Expressivity (F) vs. Instrumentality (M) (Spence 1974) •Nurturance (F) vs. Dominance (M) (Wiggins 1989) •Communion (F) vs. Agency (M) (Bakan 1966) Joel et al did another study where they looked at masculine and feline traits, found once again that male liked mostly male interests and vice versa but everyone has their own balance.

matching Hypothesis

Berscheid & Walster •computer dating scenario •Similarity of attractiveness more important than attractiveness this was particularly the case for women. this is shown for the balance hypothesis and may have links to self esteem. couples of equal attractiveness tend to be in long term relationships. matching hypothesis is basically social exchange theory.

Bystander intervention

Bickman (1971) - Responsibility not diffused when co-witnesses are clearly not able to help. • Moriarty (1975) - Responsibility not diffused when specifically attached to a bystander.

Biosocial theory

Brenda/David Reimer -The penectomised twin (aka John/Joan) -Money & Ehrhardt (1972) • • • • •Diamond (1982, p183) on the twins' story: -"My view, presented first in 1965, is that nature sets limits to sexual identity [...] and that it is within these limits that social forces interact and gender role are formulated, a biosocial interaction theory"

Moderators of the bystander effect (Fischer et al., 2011)

Bystander effect is reduced when solution requires cooperation). - Participants in cubicles with headphones - Take part in personal discussion—E leaves. - One participant has epileptic fit. Help given within 60 seconds? • Meta-analytic review (105 studies) finds overall effect size of d = -.35 for bystander apathy - There is clear danger (no ambiguity; perpetrator is present; Dangerous emergencies are recognized faster and more clearly as real emergencies, thereby inducing higher levels of arousal and hence more helping Bystander effect is increased- Among females / Strangers- lab > field- increased number of bystanders Joe Delaney: 1983, Chennault Park, Louisiana not a good swimmer attempt to save young boys who were drowning. boys saved, he himself drowned.

Evolutionary theories 2 - Campbell

Campbell (1999) - focused on costs to women • • •Infant survival most dependant on mothers -E.g. Ache infant mortality (Hill & Hurtado, 1996) if mother dies within one year of child being born child is certain to die. •Physical aggression = very high risk / low gain • •=> aversion to aggression in women •Fear of injury as crucial factor- even though women just as likely to be hurt in woman on woman violence as men are in men vs men violence. -Women have more blood/animal phobias (Marks, 1987) -Women rate situations as more dangerous than men & have greater fear of physical attack (less risk) (Bettencourt & Miller, 1996 •Female aggression = non-violent/indirect (Björkqvist 1994) -achieves ends with safer means - -Violent only when anger spills over fear threshold? •Campbell (1993) -Men viewed their aggression as instrumental -Women viewed their aggression as expressive - a loss of control • •Can evolutionary approaches merge instrumental and expressive? -Men can (potentially) gain status/fitness through aggression -Women only aggressive if worth the risk

•We like people who trust us ... disclosure

Collins & Miller (1994) Meta-analysis effect is stronger in surveys, stronger with friends as oppose to acquaintances, stronger in women than men. stringer for deeper disclosure or more disclosure.

Epigenetics

Combines social and biological approaches -More sophisticated than Biosocial approach - •Genes - environment interaction • •Canalised development -Genes create finite number of options for the environment to 'choose'/refine -Niche creation

Comparison Level for Alternatives

Comparison Level (CLALT) = what we realistically expect we could get elsewhere - -Includes other partners or no partner (being single) -Standard against which we decide to stay or leave Dependence = Outcome ̶ CLALT Dependence* = degree to which we feel psychologically linked to our relationship -Determines whether we are motivated to stay or leave •Low CLALT = more committed to current relationship - even if costly (Simpson, 1987) •High CLALT = less committed to current relationship (Drigotas & Rusbult, 1992) -Dependence (motivation to stay) is not based solely on whether or not we are happy... *Also named commitment dependance is not just in romantic relationships.

Why do differences exist in social behaviour?

Cultural/social approaches ... -Social Role Theory -Learning theory and Gender schema theory - •Biological approaches -Evolutionary arguments -Biological development

Cultural effects

Culture of Honour Nisbett (1993) •Settler mentality culturally transmitted through generations (frontier communities from rieving areas, no CJS, wealth can be easily stolen) • •"Argument-related" (non-felony) homicides 6x times higher in southern than northern US states • •State-wide homicide rate in US is positively correlated with proportion of white population from the south (Blau and Blau 1982) •Southerners endorse violence as legitimate response to insult and for protection (Nisbett, 1993) White males "accidentally" bumped into and insulted by a confederate (Cohen et al. 1996). Southerners more likely to: §Believe their masculine reputation was threatened §Show a rise in cortisol (stress response) §Show a rise in testosterone (dominance challenged) §Engage in dominating behaviour subsequently (chicken game)

Kin Selection

Darwin's puzzle of altruism solved by Hamilton (1963) The unit of selection is the gene not the individual • Our genes exist in relatives (inclusive fitness)• Coefficient of genetic relatedness should be related to altruism Hamilton's rule: c<br Offer help where: • Evidence... • Vignettes RS cost to me < RS benefit to you x our relatedness the auntie problem love your nieces and nephews very fiercely more benefit to save them as oppose to your sibling as they are more likely to pass on genes than your sibling. Kin Selection Hamilton's rule: c<br Offer help where: • Evidence... • Vignettes Fire at vacation complex (Sime 1983) Real life (.5 for parent, .25 for child Live organ donation (kidney, bone marrow) (Borgida et al 1992) do we only aid kin?

Types of aggression (acts)

Direct vs. indirect •Direct aggression -The aggressor is identifiable and can be counterattacked -against another individual eg actually hitting them - •Indirect aggression -The aggressor remains hidden eg spreading rumours about somebody Types of aggression (social representations) Instrumental vs. expressive •Instrumental -Aggression in order to achieve a goal eg revenge, to show you're the dominant one of the group, acquire resources. - - •Expressive -Aggression as anger (Driscoll et al 2006)

Evolutionary vs Social Explanations

EP: Why are we altruistic as a species? What patterns might we therefore expect? • SP:What cognitive mechanisms underlie altruistic behaviour? What social scenarios are most associated with it?

Competitive altruism & reputation

EP: gives ultimate causation, SP gives proximate causation

Cognitive Neo-Associationist Theory (Berkowitz, 1993)

Environmental factors Misattribution of arousal? from the environment discomfort causes confusion and frustration which leads to aggression. Anderson, 1989 honk horn more in hot weather. nBerkowitz (1989) -All unpleasant stimuli increase -ve affect... -Context and higher order cognition adjust chances of aggression Theories of instrumental aggression... -Social learning and media -Cultural factors agression is instrumental can get them things they value.

attractive traits are linked to fertility cues.

Fertility cues: •Waist-hip ratio? (e.g. Singh et al, 1992)- waist thicker during menopause, pre-puberty or during pregnancy. so only small at time when women is fertile. most people when asked preferred thinner waist to larger. 0.7 being ideal ration of waist to hip. •Femininity? (e.g. Law Smith et al 2006)

Evolutionary approaches

Focus on aggression as an outcome of cost/benefit balance • if the Cost of injury is smaller than the Benefit of success = Aggression occurs. •Particular focus on sex differences -Benefits to men -Costs to women D scores for sex differences as aggression gets more direct there are greater sex differences. •Most lethal violence is male-male (Archer, 2014) •Sex differences appear before 2 years... but that doesn't mean its innate and learning has not occurred. -(Potegal & Archer, 2004) •... and before children can apply gender labels •(Campbell, Shirley & Caygill, 2002) •so what are the benefits to men?

Frustration-aggression theory (Dollard et al. 1939)

Frustration is interference with a goal response that leads to reward •Aggression always results from frustration • •(Frustration does not always lead to aggression) •Level of aggression depends on: -Whether aggression will end the frustration i.e. is instrumental (Buss 1966) -Whether some subsequent account of the frustration is offered, e.g. apology •(Obuchi et al. 1989) n'Common sense' argument §Frustrations produce aggression because they are unpleasant not because its anything to do with goal interference. (Berkowitz, 1989)

Evolutionary approaches •Assume...

Genetic inheritance -Biological mechanism -Environmental triggers? - •Biological proximate mechanisms... -Testosterone -Inhibitory control

health

Health In a study by the BBC they asked 55,000 people about loneliness and health and found that lonlier people reposted worse physical health. may be issues with cause and effect here as chronically ill people physically may not be able to socialise. Berkman & Breslow (1983) 20 year longitudinal study Time 1 measures: -Social contact: friends, relatives, clubs -Control measures: Health: smoking, alcohol, exercise, weight, SES (socio-economic status) , use of medical services Time 2: controlling for health factors, those with fewest relationships are twice as likely to die. •Social support protects against major depression -Particularly for women Kendler et al, 2005 •Camaraderie protects against emotional burnout in fire-fighters -(Tuckey and Hayward, 2010) •Synchronised training creates higher pain tolerance in rowers -(Cohen, Ejsmond-Frey, Knight, & Dunbar, 2010) •However, providing social support may be more important than receiving it Brown et al, 2003

Evolution and helping

Helping is typically more costly than non-helping. - Non-helping more 'fit' and so should become increasingly prevalent in subsequent generations. because we should want to pass on our own genes • How then can evolutionary theory explain helping? - Kinship selection.- Reciprocal altruism.

More recent approaches...

Hines et al (2016) -Pre-natal T affects response to information on toy 'gender-typicality' Emerging thinking: e.g. Fine et al (2017); Hyde et al (2018); Cross and Boothroyd (submitted)

Cultural/Social •Standard Social Science Model'

How strong is division of labour? this leads to conformity to gender roles, and sex typed beliefs and behaviours which leads to sex differences in behaviour •Ember (1981) - are certain tasks exclusively gendered in all cultures? (Standard Cross Cultural Sample) •Haas et al (2020) -Burial evidence for female hunter in the Andes 9K YBP -Other evidence across the Americas in similar time range Marlow - foraging activities vary in gender divisions whale hunting is only thing exclusively masculine. Does division of labour affect stereotypes? nStereotypes have remained consistent over last 50 years n(Lewin & Tragos, 1987, Lueptow, Garovich-Szabo, & Lueptow, 2001) Do stereotypes/DoL affect behaviour? (within individuals) •Some interesting findings on stereotype threat and maths performance... -(Spencer, Steele & Quinn, 1999) BUT nChildren show sex differences in behaviour before they have stereotypes. -(Campbell et al, 2004) •Stereotypes underestimate some differences

Freud: Psychoanalytic theory

Id, ego and superego -Weak ego - nLater theory by sabina spielrein: Thanatos is a 'death' drive or destruction drive that is part of the id. -Drive requires discharge through catharsis (purging) Does catharsis work? •Shock giving (after 'attack') leads to increases -not decreases - in subsequent punitiveness (point deduction) (Berkowitz 1965) •Aggression increases in US football players over the course of the season (Patterson 1974) •Spectator hostility increases during match (Russell 1983) •Catharsis beliefs may be harmful -(see later...)

Sternberg (1986) Triarchic Model of Love

Intimacy: Closeness & understanding. -Passion: physical/sexual attraction/romance. Commitment: The cognitive factors such as the decision to maintain the relationship Passion •arousal + attribution - Arousal undifferentiated

A. Simple Standard

Is my relationship profitable? Outcome (Profit) = Rewards ̶ Costs •i.e. an absolute measure •But, people don't just want profit, they want the best possible outcome. •How do we know if we are getting the best possible?

•How do people evaluate their outcomes?

Is my relationship profitable? •1. Keep track of rewards and costs (accounting) -Seldom done explicitly or systematically •2. Determine profit -Simple standard -Comparison Level (CL) -Comparison Level for Alternative (CLALT)

Cultural/Social Developmental approaches

Learning theory (Mischel 1966): Boys and girls are encouraged and rewarded for different behaviours. eg boys rewarded for bing aggressive more than girls are. -Baby X studies- ppt put in a room with baby and told to react to it- when baby dressed as girl say how pretty she is, when boy say how strong he is. •But -meta-analysis found no support for different treatment of babies, except for sex-typed toys and chores (Lytton & Romney 1991) •Social learning theory (Bandura 1973): emphasized importance of modelling. •But -sex of model by sex of child interaction not found over 80 studies (Maccoby & Jacklin 1974) - -Imitation is found when model engages in sex-typical behaviour (Perry & Bussey 1979)- when model behaviours in a way that is associated with gender they will copy the model of their gender. when high, associated with gender so children copy model of the same gender. •Leading to ... gender schema theory: attend to gender-typed information as schema develops •But -No correlation between •gender stereotype knowledge sex-typed •sophistication of gender knowledge behaviours Ruble & Martin (1998) - •Liben et al (2002) -Perceiving self as more sex typed predicts later gender stereotyping in children when you perceive yourself as more masculine or feminine stereotype is stronger.

Testosterone and Aggression

Male T > Female T • •Male T is highest -When young -When single -When childless (Peter Grey & colleagues) • •T levels inversely relate to (unconscious) fear... (e.g. van Honk et al, 2005) Testosterone and aggression T -> Aggression? Rat pregnancy studies Human 2D:4D as uterine T indicator (Bailey et al, 2005)- finger length as indicator Trans individuals (van Goozen et al. 1995)- FTM aggression up with testosterone, MTF aggression down with androgen blocker. •T -> Dominance behaviours -Rat injection studies -Human competition •E.g. Tennis, dominoes contests •T rises in anticipation of male-male competition •Aggression -> T? -NB winning vs losing is very important -Tennis players - (Booth et al, 2003) -Football spectators -Randomly assigned Sumo-betting - (Pound et al, 2009) - •Adaptive feedback loop? -Schaal et al (1996) - Adolescent boys- boys in top of hierarchy font need to be as aggressive. •High T - High D - low Agg

Humans •Mildly polygynous/'monogamish', flexible mating

Maternally biased PI •Females = 'limiting factor' - males can only produce as much offspring as there are females around to impregnate, women can only produce as much as their birth rate allows. • •So who has the most to lose...? •women •Buss & Schmitt (1993) •Sexual strategies theory- under polygeny females have more to loose by making poor mating choices. Both sexes minimum acceptable criterion (Buss & Schmitt, 1993) preceptive means that they actually want to have sex. This study was taken from many countries but mostly urban educated samples.

proximity

Mere exposure effect -Familiar fictitious foreign words rated more positive in meaning (Zajonc 1968) -Students rate classroom visitors they see more often more positively (Moreland & Beach 1992) -Sitting in neighbouring seats predicts friendship intensity 1 year later (Back, Schmukle, & Egloff, 2008) •Propinquity and opportunity for interaction (Festinger, Schachter & Back 1950) -adjacency -functional distance those who make live on the staircase make more friends from other floors. •Expectation of close interaction (Darley & Berscheid) -Subjects given two folders with ambiguous personality information (A and B) -Told they would meet one woman, not the other said they would like the woman they would meet more

Methods of study

Observation -Mainly done with children - children engage in more acts of violence than adults. -Ecologically valid -Time consuming -Ethics of observing aggression? •Laboratory -Electric shocks or 'negative ratings'- proxy for aggression in labs, press button, electric shock someone else, unpleasant noise, negative ratings, point deducting etc. -Point subtraction paradigm -Ecological validity? •Self-report questionnaire -Relies on memory/honesty -Large samples possible -Validity? •Trait' aggressiveness vs actual aggression -Buss & Perry Aggression Questionnaire • "Given enough provocation, I may hit another person" "I often find myself disagreeing with people" "When people are especially nice, I wonder what they want" -Conflict Tactics Scale Report incidents of: -Shouting -Hitting -Striking with a blunt implement etc... measures anger, physical, verbal and hostility.

dependance

Outcome (Profit) = Rewards - Costs Satisfaction = Outcome - CL Dependence = Outcome - CLALT

Psychometric tests

Paper-and-pencil tests of beliefs, preferences, behaviours. • •They must be: -Reliable •consistent in their measurement over time and measuring a single underlying construct -Valid •test scores correlate with behavioural external criterion (concurrent or predictive). Sex differences: Psychometric tests •Psychoticism d=.28 •Loneliness d=.16 •Self-esteem d=.12 •Dominance d=.12 •Achievement d=.10 motivation women higher than men Liberal sex role attitudes d= -.52 Closeness to others d= -.45 Self-disclosure d= -.36 Anxiety d= -.32 Depression d= -.16 External locus of control d= -.24 Costa et al. (2001) Personality factor Feingold (1994) US Japan Black SA Neuroticism, Anxiety −0.27 −0.40 −0.09 −0.08 Extraversion, Gregariousness −0.14 −0.21 Openness to Ideas 0.13 0.32 Agreeableness, Tender-mindedness −1.07 −0.31 −0.39 −0.05 Conscientiousness, Order −0.07 −0.05 so certain traits that were considered gendered in the US were not so much in south farina or japan and vice versa. •Do these results generate coherent patterns of male vs female?

bystander intervention Latane&Darley(1968)

Participants in cubicles with headphones - Take part in personal discussion—E leaves. - One participant has epileptic fit. Help given within 60 seconds? - Victim + participant = 85% - Victim + participant + 2 = 62% - Victim + participant + 4 = 31% • Diffusion of responsibility. Responsibility divisible by number present.

Prisoner's dilemma

Prisoner's DilemmaWhat should I do (given that I don't know what my partner will do?) "If you confess and your partner does not, then you are free and I will use your testimony to put your partner away for 10 years. But if you confess and your partner does too, then you will both get 3 years. If neither of you confesses, we will put both of you away for a year on a lesser charge.

how do we measure differences in 'male' and 'female' behaviour? These experiments are quasi as you cannot manipulate gender. or you ca do pen and paper tests such as IQ

Quantifying differences: d scores Group distributions always show overlap •d scores summarise overlap/difference • Male average - female average Cohen's d = ----------------------------------------- Pooled standard deviation a positive (+) value means men are higher, a negative (-) value means women are higher Quantifying differences: d scores Small effect d = 0.2 85% overlap Medium effect d= 0.5 67% overlap Large effect d = 0.8 52% overlap Measuring' sex differences •Experiments -Or more often 'lab-based behavioural tests'? •Psychometric tests -Pencil-and-paper tests - - •Meta-analysis -Combines findings from multiple studies

Biology and Gender

Selection acts through genes • •sex-linked gene -located on the X or Y chromosome (allosomes) •sex limited gene -located on a different chromosome (autosomes) -"turned on" by the presence of sex hormone. - -Most sex differences are sex-limited. •Y chromosome -small (30ish genes vs several thousand). -principally carries the SRY gene - manufacture of testes and inhibition of female reproductive organs •Testosterone (T) -An androgen -Released by testes - •Organising effects: Foetal production of T 6 wks (gest) - 3 mo. (post-partum) •Activating effects: T rises again at puberty. • NB - Impact depends upon T levels & # of receptors Organising effects of testosterone Congenital adrenal hyperplasia / Adrenogenital syndrome (CAH) •Surge of adrenal testosterone in utero -caused by metabolic error & cortisol deficiency •1 in 15,000 births • •CAH boys -enlarged genitals. -higher on aggression (Berenbaum & Resnick 1997) •CAH females -external organs masculinised. -Corrected with surgery and cortisol • -aged 4-19: energy expenditure, sex of playmates, interest in marriage, motherhood and child care, doll play, "tomboys", visiospatial ability (Erhardt 1975) - Most have female gender identity NB - limited evidence for sex differences in infancy behaviour •Else-Quest et al (2006) d scores <12mo typically c. +/- .1, n0n-significant - •Pasterski et al (2015) Early T exposure may predict later play typicality ( play with boys more if girls have higher T) Organising effects of testosterone •Hines et al (2016) -Literature shows limited evidence for early T affecting other aspects of childhood development Activational affects of testosterone •The Batista boys (Imperato-McGinley, 1974) - -Family with rare genetic disorder -XY foetuses under-exposed to T in utero -18 'boys' "raised unambiguously as girls" - -At puberty, they all experienced a release of T. •grew beards, clitoris became penises, voices broke. -17/18 had male identity; 16/18 had male gender role

Parental characteristics

Sexual imprinting' •Parents influence mate preferences in many birds and mammals. traits of parents shape preferences in offspring. • •Assortative mating? •helps keep good gene-complexes together? •increases parents' relatedness to their own children? children will look more like them. we learn what people look like based on our parents, cognitive explanation as it fits better with our facial prototype. errett et al (2002) women have younger parents refer younger men, more dislike for older men. • Mechanism? •cognitive •Is imprinting definitely adaptive? no solid evidence on this yet

Evolutionary Approach to Attraction

Sexual selection •Differential mating/reproduction •Inter-sexual selection: Opposite sex prefers some traits more than others increasing the frequency of those genes in the next generation. • 'attractive'/successful traits passed on... •'attractive' traits benefit the chooser • •E.g. Averageness is associated with health...? •Rhodes et al •Mating system underlies advantages... Human mating patterns •Monogamy: one male, one female. monogamy has a pair bond •Polygyny: several females, one male. •Polyandry: several males, one female. •Promiscuity: no bonded relationships • •Humans •"A history of mild polygyny"? •"A monogamous species plagued by polygyny"? •Serially monogamous? there are more women in the genetic line than men , suggests a lining towards polygyny. most cultures accept polygyny. • •Modest size dimorphism and intermediate testicular volume •Sperm competition means some polyandry too... Morphology suggests humans are less conventionally polygynous than gorillas, and have more sperm competition too (i.e. more polyandry). Less sperm competition than the more promiscuous chimps and bonobos. . This is shown in gorillas as having a larger body size but smaller testes. So they compete physically but there is less sperm competition. Whereas, chimps have about the same body size but larger testes as there is more sperm competition. Humans may form pair bonds but may consider partners in other contexts

evolutionary theory

Sexual selection = main focus -Differential mating/reproduction -Inter-sexual selection: Opposite sex prefers some traits more than others increasing the frequency of those genes in the next generation. -Intra-sexual competition: Some traits make an individual a better competitor against members of their own sex. construction of stereotype based on how you feel about gender? Parental investment (PI) •The sex which has lower PI tends to compete for mating access (x species) •The sex which has the higher PI tends to be 'choosy' •In most species, this leads to competitive males and choosy females Female parental investment > Male PI so... 1.Males compete for females 2.Male RS depends on # sexual partners => Polygyny can benefit males 3.Polygyny -> competition for dominance/resources so either have competitive males or choosy females. We see the legacy in men's greater competitiveness, dominance striving, sensitivity to slight and aggression..... Female parental investment > Male PI so... 1.Females more important to offspring survival 2.Females who avoid physical danger have higher reproductive success 3.Intra-female tensions need diverting safely and women need safety in numbers 4.We see the legacy in women's aversion to physical risk, low aggression and greater use of democratic leadership..... •Key assumptions -Genetic inheritance -Biological (ish) causation

what lead to all the reserach on bystander effects

Social science perspective Kitty Genovese: 1964, Queens attacked in streets and nobody intervened

Summary of the approaches

Sociocultural approaches -Developmentally focus on learning and modelling -Via parents, media and wider society (patriarchy) -Children observe and adopt gender-behaviour patterns - •Evolutionary approaches -Focus on consequences of anisogamy for selection -Assume (some) biological causation, particularly wrt T - •Interactionist perspective -T/genes influence gender identity; behaviour unclear -T interacts with social factors to influence behaviour

Felson's (1992) symbolic interactionist framework

Symbolic interactionist / impression management approach •'Face' as critical social currency •Rules of conversation require cooperation: "mutual facework" (Goffman 1959) Slight interpreted as intentional attack Negative alter-casting creates unfavourable social identity. Retaliation ndeters further attack and saves face nbut threatens the face of the other party •Gives rise to escalating "conflict spiral" men protect their manly appearance in order to appear masculine. and thus they respond in an aggressive way

Reciprocal altruism

Trivers (1971) • Delayed "payback" of altruistic acts where- Benefit to recipient high (e.g. parasites removed) - Cost to donor low (e.g. grooming)- Likelihood that positions will be reversed in future necessary conditions of RA Stable groups Social species • Good face recognition • Good long term memory • Non-cooperation with or punishment of defectors

Classifying aggression

Verbal vs. physical • •Direct vs. indirect • •Instrumental vs. expressive

Classic social psychology of attractiveness •Focus on significance of attractiveness in social behaviour...

Walster et al (1966): Computer Dating paradigm- computer dating paradigm is where you look at the outcome of the pairing, sometimes the pairing is random, sometimes they are matched •Measured: personality, SES (socio-economic status), interests, physical attractiveness (did this by asking other people to rate them) •Randomly paired couples •Only one factor predicted liking and intention to ask out again and this was attractiveness. attractiveness acts as a first pass filter. •How about after the fifth date? •(Mathes, 1975) more based on similarities and attitudes. •Attractiveness associated with huge halo effect •Greater overall liking •More desirable character traits (e.g., sensitive, warm, intelligent) •Higher evaluation of work performance •More lenient treatment in the legal system (Downs & Lyons, 1991) • •Positive life-time outcomes... •Higher income (Hamermesh & Biddle, 1994) •Better mental health •More social influence (Chaiken, 1979)

reciprocity

We like people who like us. • •Dittes & Kelley (1956) - experiment -Group discussion, followed by fake 'approval ratings' they were told what the other group had supposedly rated them as and were then asked to rate the group, those who were liked the least rated group the lowest unethical??? • •Reciprocity can make up for absence of similarity (Gold, Ryckman,& Mosley, 1984)

Capitalism and Gender

What is the role of media? nOn average, each day a 4yo watches 2 hrs of television and a 12yo watches 4 hrs (Comstock and Scharrer, 2001) n n n n nChildren's characters are nMostly male - c. 5:1 (Signorielli, 1985, 2008) nStill gender stereotyped (Thompson & Zerbinos, 1995) Watching rap videos associated with negative views of women and the sexes' relationship (Bryant, 2008) NB - do stereotyped attitudes predict behaviour...?

Dutton & Aron (1974)

a high suspension bridge vs low sturdy bridge -Misattribution of Arousal when in dangerous position you rate people as more attractive problems with replication.

What is love?

arousal is neurological and includes things like increasing heart rate. •Love is not simply lots of liking...Rubin 1970)

Latane&Darley(1970)

articipants complete questionnaire alone / with 2 others. - Smoke begins to pout through ventilator- How long till someone reacts? - Alone: 50% leave after 2 minutes. 75% by 6 minutes - Together: 12% after 2 minutes. 38% by 6 minutes • Pluralistic ignorance. Look to others to define ambiguous events

ornamentation

eg men have scarification or tattoos in areas of muscle has like arms, also facial tattoos emphasis on male bone structure. corset waist to hip ratio etc. makeup bigger eyes, sexually dimporhic traits. Ornamentation often serves to emphasise secondary sexual characteristics (e.g. muscle mass, facial structure, breasts, waist-hip ratio) Singh & Bronstad (1997 ornamentation more important in high pathogen environment. Wohlraub et al (2009) Tattoos, dominance and attractiveness. more tats higher dominance.

Essentialist vs conditionalist

essentialists say that some traits are essentially male or essentially female conditionalists say that you experience gender differently depending on circumstance Or, with a Y = male, without a Y = female... XO = Turner's syndrome, defined as female, infertile. XXY = Klinefelter's syndrome (male, infertile), XYY = male, may have learning difficulties, etc. etc....

Sex vs Gender

ex is biological •gender is just expression, how you adhere to social norms, and your psychological identity which can be subject to social or cultural change females have larger gametes males have smaller gametes In humans XX sex chromosomes signify a woman, whereas XY signify male. • Gender Roles -behaviors considered appropriate for males and females •Gender Identity -perception of oneself as male or female

Evolutionary theories 1 - Daly & Wilson

homicide is a good measure of population bias as as gets rid of reporting bias. not perfect tho as bias in the judicial system. •Daly & Wilson (1988) -mate competition=key - - •High rank -> access to more mates •Physical aggression = high risk / high gain • •=> high willingness to be aggressive in men •Adaptive aggression -securing scarce resources. • •Male primate rank is associated with Reproductive success (RS) -E.g. Gelada Baboons (no female choice) -Humans - Perusse (1986) (female choice) - RHP (resource holding potential). • • •Humans typically establish status by RHP (jobs, wealth, hunting prowess). •Where RHP is low, males use other means to establish status e.g. physical dominance. •Aggression highest in the late teens and twenties over all known cultures and time periods. Why? •Controlling for age, same-sex violence/violent crime are more frequent among: -non-married men and the unemployed (Daly & Wilson 1988). -non-fathers than fathers (Boothroyd and Cross, 2016). •Why? •testosterone also highest when this is the case. •Offers explanation of male sensitivity to status which other approaches do not explain. • •Men are very focused on status/face/honour... ... especially in low SES groups... e.g. those Cultural effects... •Nisbett (1993) 'backing down' = 'unmanly' •Felson (1992) Conflict arises from loss of face - •Aggression as response to inequality/resource shortage? -Violent crime rates are sensitive to poverty -Wolfgang & Ferracuti (1967) argued for a "subculture of violence" in inner-city Philadelphia (potentially racist study as mainly black area). -Schacter et al: US vs Canada (both have equal gun owning, but US much more crime and homocide- why? canada has health system and more equality? • •Offers explanation of male sensitivity to status which other approaches do not explain. • •Men are very focused on status/face/honour... • •Felson and Nisbett are describing the phenomenon ... •Daly & Wilson explain why it's so important...

What is aggression?

intention- need to have intended to harm someone harm- physical or emotional.

Affiliation

is close social relationships. Humans are inherently social

role of media

james bulger case murder apparently inspired by horror film one of boys had watched with his dad. Media and behaviour TV •Joy et al (1986) -Introduction of TV in British Colombian (canada) towns -3 communities: none, some, limited TV •Johnston et al (2002) -Long term longitudinal correlations between 14 and 18/22 years all became more violent with more TV but this affect was strongest for those with history of violence and stronger in males than females. Computer games •Anderson & Bushman (2001) -Meta-analysis: games... Increase aggressive behaviour Decrease prosocial behaviour Increases arousal But ... •Angry people (who believe in catharsis) are drawn to violent video games (Bushman & Whitaker, 2010) Computer games •Anderson et al (2010) -Clear effect across longitudinal studies - •Bushman and Gibson (2011) -Experiment with 126 students -Aggression 24hrs later tested by giving 'losers' in task a noise blast played violent or non violent video game either did nothing or then rumination track. those that did violent video game and had rumination were more aggressive.

•Dichotomous vs continuous

males and females are distinct separate categories continuous sees gender as a spectrum

Market Value' & Mate Preference

market value is the idea that individuals in a species trade goods, their own characteristics, actions. mate choice is about what you bing to the market. •Biological markets in non-humans • •Sticklebacks: Kraak & Bakker (1998) - stickleback males have more red when more attractive, stickleback females more attractive when larger as more eggs, redder males go for bigger females. • •Zebra finches: Burley et al (1996) - when you artificially add a red tag to male leg becomes more attractive. will spend less time nest building and more time hopping around and mating. nAlso seen in humans nGangestad & Thornhill (1999) -Relationship-Specific Investment Inventory men engage less in relationship behaviours when more attractive. -Body fluctuating asymmetry nPawlowski & Dunbar (1999) -explicit mate advertisements (lonely hearts ads). men say what they have and women say what they want. -Older women make fewer requests and also don't reveal age. this links to equity theory and matching hypothesis. •Little et al (2001) •More attractive females prefer more symmetric men

Social learning Operant conditioning Modelling

ocial learning •Bandura & MacDonald (1963) -Group 1 - observe adult model making moral judgments -Group 2 - child's own responses reinforced -Group 3 - no feedback (control) •cartoon most impact? what does this say about the media. •Group 1 make more mature judgments at post-test than Groups 2 and 3 •Modelling more effective than Reinforcement •Bandura, Ross & Ross (1963) -Bobo doll study with variation in type of model

Good genes:

onest advertising. - baboons have red noses and to maintain so good depiction of health. redder nose more healthy and thus more attractive •The handicap principle (Zahavi 1975) - •Parasite infestation (Hamilton & Zuk 1982) - parasite infestation can't keep features red. •Immunocompetence (Folstad & Karter, 1996) in humans this could be seen as large amounts of muscle mass on men. •E.g. Averageness represents genetic quality? Attraction 'universals' •Averageness •Femininity in women •Symmetry and health indicators of health are muscle mass, skin, facial structure. found that the population average has more diverse genes more resistant to illnesses. universals of attractiveness have a link to health. found that looked at symmetry people rated them as more attractive. but also looked at skin of symmetrical people, they had skin that looked healthier. Jones et al 2001 over 50% of people prefer symetrical faces. •Cue to health? •Jones et al (2001) - measured symmetry of 60 faces ... •Symmetry predicted 'apparent health' & 'skin patch' health • •Benefits •Offspring inherit immunity to current pathogens •Avoid infection •Can evolution explain variation between individuals? •'Market value' •Ornamentation •Parental characteristics

Which is more effective: Sharing a positive opinion or sharing a negative opinion?

when you both dislike or like something you are balance, when you are different, nit balanced, may associate that feeling with that person. It was found that sharing negative opinions was more powerful than sharing positive ones. Bosson et al (2006) Balance Theory Heider (1958); Newcomb (1961) - •Social comparison theory. Festinger (1954) -Similar others provide validation of ones beliefs.

Similarity in romantic attraction

•Byrne et al (1970) -Paired blind dates as either very similar or dissimilar •found that similarity was a good predator of how they got on but his was also the same as attractiveness • •The role of similarity depends on how much commitment is desired -Amodio & Showers, 2005 if more commitment is desired, then similarity matters more. for flings some dissimilarity is good because it can create excitement.

Cognitive Approach to Attraction

•Facial prototype formation & attraction to 'averageness' we create this prototype from all the people we have ever seen before. and we compare all future people to this. we take 2D data and cluster faces in to average. average is considered more attractive across adults. we adjust this by experince of new faces. •Preference robust across adults •E.g. Rhodes et al, Langlois et al •Visual adaptation: Rhodes et al (2003); Little, Jones et al- prefer faces that match prototype when exposed to one particular distortion prefer that kind. •And infants don't have average prototype. born with some innate but define later. •Rubenstein et al (1999): (32) average vs unattractive face •Rhodes et al (2002): distinctiveness preference?- prefer races that are different •Giffrey & Little (2013): distinctiveness preference • •NB: Slater et al's (1998; 2007) neonates... •Innate facial representation? infants look longer at faces adults find attractive. •Visual adaptation effects also present in children •Story book experiments (Anzures et al., 2008)- found that either pinched in or expanded faces preferred which ever one they were shown in story book •Mixed vs single sex schools (Saxton et al., 2010)- prefer opposite partners to look more like sex they went to school with.

Lust, attraction, attachment (a slightly more evolutionary view)

•Fisher (1998, 2001) identified three independent systems •Lust/sex drive: -Androgen (testosterone) mediated •Attraction (romantic love) -Dopamine mediated •Attachment (long-term bonding) -Oxytocin-mediated

Why are people so important?

•Health •Cooperation •Cultural transmission

similarity

•Newcomb (1961) -Classic student accommodation study -Students randomly assigned to dorms -Similarity of attitudes predicted friendship - •Similarity in attitudes directly relates to liking/attraction (Byrne & Clore 1974) • •Also we dislike those whose beliefs/actions differ from ours (e.g. Tan & Singh, 1995)

Who are we friends with?

•Proximity •Similarity •Reciprocity

Who do we love?

•Proximity •Similarity •Reciprocity •Physical Attraction (which we'll come back to...)?

Modelling social relationships

•Social exchange theory •Equity theory Social Exchange Theory Based on the principles of rewards and costs in interactions. Examples: Rewards = love, laughter, companionship, respect, support,sexual gratification, assistance w/household tasks,status, financial and other tangible resources Costs = Time, loss of opportunities, conflict, stress,loss of esteem, disapproval, effort, compromises,uncertainty, frustration over partner's imperfections,financial or other tangible resources

Minimal group paradigm (Tajfel, 1970)

•people split in to two groups based on what artist they liked then given a points awarding task gave more points to their own group than other group. What they did wasn't just to give themselves more points it was in fact maximising the distinction between the groups. •so how you identify your in group determines your behaviour towards other people. • •Dunbar (1992) -Living socially was a major driving force in the evolution of the human brain. eg why it increase in size so dramatically. Dunbar said we need to live socially and understand social relationships. •Dunbar's number... 150 -Average size of hunter-gatherer society -Average number of Christmas cards -Average number of facebook friends ...and so on... Support clique/intimates - 5ish Sympathy group - 15ish Close network (or 'overnight camp group/band') - 50ish Social network (or 'clan') - 150ish Supernetwork (or 'tribe') - 500ish Language community or regional network its beneficial for humans to live together evolutionarily, protect from predators, etc. The bigger the group the more social relationships. more info more frontal cortex.