AP Psych Chapter 14
The Influence of Others on Individual's Behavior
A major area of research in social psychology is how an individual's Behavior can be affected by others' actions or even merely by another person's presence. A number of Studies have demonstrated that people perform tasks better in front of an audience than they do when they are alone. This phenomenon, that the presence of others improves task performance, is known as social facilitation. Later studies, however, found that when the task being observed was a difficult task rather than a simple, well practiced skill, being watched by others actually hurt performance, a finding known as social impairment. Conformity has been an area of must research as well. Solomon Asch conducted one of the most interesting conformity experiments. He brought participants into a room of colleagues and asked them to make a series of simple perceptual judgments. He showed the participants three vertical lines of varying sizes and asked them to indicate which one was the same length as a different target line. All members of the group gave their answers aloud, and the participant was always the last person to speak. All the trials had a clear, correct answer. However, on some of them, all the Confederates gave the same, obviously incorrect judgment. Asch found that in approximately one-third of the cases where the colleagues gave incorrect answers, the participants conformed. Furthermore, approximately 70% of the participants conformed on at least one of the trials. In general, studies have suggested that Conformity is most likely to occur when a group opinion is unanimous. Although it would seem that the larger the group, the greater the Conformity that would be expressed, Studies have shown that groups larger than 3 ( in addition to the participant) do not significantly increase the tendency to conform. While Conformity involves following a group without being explicitly told to do so, obedience Studies have focused on participants' willingness to do what another asked them to do. Stanley Milgram conducted the classic obedience study. Participants were told that they were taking part in a study about teaching and learning, and they were assigned to play the part of teacher. The learner was a colleague. As the teacher, it was participants' job to give the Learner an electric shock for every incorrect response. In reality, no shocks were delivered; the colleagues pretended to be shocked. As the level of the shocks increased, the Confederate screamed in pain, said he suffered from a heart condition, and eventually fell silent. Milgram was interested in how far participants would go before refusing to deliver any more shocks. The experimenter watched the participant and, if questioned, gave only a few stock answers, such as " please continue". Contrary to the predictions of psychologists who Milgram polled prior to the experiment, over 60% of the participants obeyed the experimenter and delivered all the possible shocks. Milgram replicated his experiments with a number of interesting twists. He found that he could decrease the participants compliance by bringing them into closer contact with the colleagues. Participants who could see the Learners gave fewer shocks than participants who could only hear the learner. The lowest shock rates of all were administered by participants who had to force the learner's hand onto the shock plate. However, even in the last condition, approximately 30% delivered all of the shocks. When the experimenter left in the middle of the experiment and was replaced by an assistant, obedience also decreased. Finally, when other colleagues were present in the room and they objected to the shocks, the percentage of participants who quit in the middle of the experiment skyrocketed Milgram's experiments have been severely criticized on ethical grounds.
Attributional Biases
Although people are quite good at sifting through all the data that bombards them and then making attributions, errors are not uncommon. Moreover, people tend to make the same kinds of Errors. A few typical biases are the fundamental attribution error, False Consensus Effect, self-serving bias, and the just-World belief. When looking at the behavior of others, people tend to overestimate the importance of dispositional factors and underestimate the role of situational factors. This tendency is known as the fundamental attribution error. The point is that people systematically seem to overestimate the role of dispositional factors in influencing another person's actions. Since people get to view themselves in countless situations, they are more likely to make situational attributions about themselves than about others. The fundamental attribution was named fundamental because it was believed to be so widespread. However, many cross-cultural psychologists have argued that the fundamental attribution error is far less likely to occur in collectivist cultures that in individualistic cultures. In individualistic cultures, like the American culture, the importance and uniqueness of the individual is stressed. However, in more collectivist cultures, like the Japanese culture, a person's link to various groups such as family or company is stressed. Cross-cultural research suggests that people in collectivist cultures are less likely to commit the fundamental attribution error, perhaps because they are more attuned to the ways that different situations influence their own behavior. The tendency for people to overestimate the number of people who agree with them is called The False Consensus Effect. Self-serving bias is the tendency to take more credit for good outcomes than for bad outcomes. Researchers have found that people evidence a bias toward thinking that bad things happen to bad people. This belief in a just World, known simply as the just-World bias, in which Misfortune befalls people who deserve them, can be seen in the tendency to blame the victims. If the world is just in this manner, then, assuming we view ourselves as good people, we need not fear bad things happening to ourselves.
Aggression and Antisocial Behavior
Another major area of study for social psychologists is aggression and antisocial Behavior. Psychologists distinguish between two types of aggression: instrumental aggression and hostile aggression. Instrumental aggression is when the aggressive act attempts to secure a particular end. Hostile aggression has no such clear purpose. Many theories exist about the cause of human aggression. Freud linked aggression to Thanatos, the death Instinct. Sociobiologists suggest that the expression of aggression is adaptive under certain circumstances. One of the most influential theories, however, is known as the frustration-aggression hypothesis. This hypothesis holds that the feeling of frustration makes aggression more likely. Considerable experimental evidence supports it. Another common theory is that the exposure to aggressive models makes people aggressive as illustrated by Bandura, Ross, and Ross's classic Bobo Doll Experiment.
Attribution Theory
Attribution theory is another area of study within the field of social cognition. Attribution theory try to explain how people determine the cause of what they observe. Ex: Charley does well on a math test. -Dispositional or Person Attribution: Charley is good at math. -Situation Attribution: The test was easy Attributions can be stable or unstable: - Stable Attribution/Person-Stable Attribution: You infer that Charley has always been a math whiz - Person-Unstable Condition: Charley studied a lot for this one test - Situation-Stable Attribution: Charley's math teacher is an easy teacher - Situation-Unstable Attribution: The math teacher is a hard teacher who gave one easy test Harold Kelly put for the theory that explains the kinds of attributions people make based on three kinds of information: consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus. Consistency refers to how similarly the individual acts in the same situation over time. Distinctiveness refers to how similar the situation is to the other situations in which we watch the individual. Consensus is a particularly important piece of information to use when determining whether to make a person or situation attribution. Consistency, on the other hand, is extremely useful in determining whether to make a stable or unstable attribution. People often have certain ideas or prejudices about other people before they even meet them. Even more interesting is the idea that the expectations we have about others can influence the way that others behave. This phenomenon is called a self-fulfilling prophecy. A classic study involving self-fulfilling prophecies was Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson's "Pygmalion in the Classroom" experiment. They administered a test to elementary school children that supposedly would identify those children who were on the verge of significant academic growth. In reality, the test was a standard IQ test. These researchers then randomly selected a group of children from the population who took the test, and they informed their teachers that these students were right on the verge of intellectual progress. At the end of the year, the researchers returned to take another measure of the students' IQs and found the scores of the identified children have increased more than the scores of their classmates. In some way, the teacher's expectations that these students would Bloom intellectually over the year actually caused the students to outperform their peers
Origin of Stereotypes and Prejudice
Many different theories attempt to explain how people become prejudiced. Psychologists have suggested that people naturally and inevitably magnify differences between their own group and others as a function Of the cognitive process of categorisation. This idea suggests that people cannot avoid forming stereotypes. Social learning theorists stress that stereotypes and Prejudice are often learned through modeling. Children raised by parents expressed prejudices may be more likely to embrace such prejudices themselves. Conversely, this Theory suggests that prejudice could be unlearned by exposure to different models.
Compliance Strategies
Often people use certain strategies to get others to comply with their wishes. Such compliance strategies I've also been the focus of much psychological research. The foot-in-the-door phenomenon suggests that if you can get people to agree to a small request, they will become more likely to agree to a follow up request that is larger. The door-in-the-face strategy argues that after people refuse a large request they will look more favorably upon a follow-up request that seems, in comparison, much more reasonable. Another common strategy involves using norms of reciprocity. People tend to think that when someone does something nice for them, they ought to do something nice in return.
Attitude Formation and Change
One main focus is social psychology is attitude formation and change. An attitude is a set of beliefs and feelings. Attitudes are evaluative, meaning that our feelings towards such things are necessarily positive or negative. A great deal of research focuses on ways to affect people's attitudes. In fact, the entire field of advertising is devoted just for this purpose. The mere exposure effect states that the more one is exposed to something, the more one will come to like it. Therefore, in the world advertising, more is better. Persuasive messages can be processed through the central route or the peripheral route. The central route to persuasion involves deeply processing the content of the message. The peripheral route, on the other hand, involves other aspects of the message including the characteristics of the person imparting a message (the communicator) Certain characteristics of the communicator have been found to influence the effectiveness of a message. Attractive people, famous people, and experts are among the most persuasive communicators. Certain characteristics of the audience also affect how effective a message will be. Some research suggests that more educated people are less likely to be persuaded by advertisements. Finally, the way the message is presented can also influence how persuasive it is. Research has shown that when dealing with a relatively uninformed audience, presenting a one-sided message is best. However, when attempting to influence a more sophisticated audience, a communication that acknowledges and then refutes an opposing argument will be more effective. Some research suggests that messages that arouse fear are effective. However, too much fear can cause people to react negatively to the message itself.
Combatting Prejudice
One theory about how to reduce Prejudice is known as the contact Theory. The contact Theory states that contact between hostile groups will reduce animosity, but only if the groups are made to work toward a goal that benefits all and necessitates the participation of all. Such a goal is called a superordinate goal. Muzafer Sherif's Camp study ( aka the robbers cave study) illustrates how easily out-group bias can be created and how superordinate goals can be used to unite formerly antagonistic groups. He conducted a series of studies at a summer camp. He first divided the campers into two groups and arranged for them to compete in a series of activities. This competition was sufficient to create negative feelings between the groups. Once such prejudice had been established, Sherif staged several Camp emergencies that required the groups to cooperate. The superordinate goal of solving the crises effectively improved relations between the groups. A number of educational researchers have attempted to use the contact Theory to reduce prejudices between members of different groups in school. One goal of most Cooperative learning activities is to bring the different social groups into contact with one another as they work towards a superordinate goal, the assigned task
The Relationship Between Attitudes and Behaviors
Research has found that the relationship between attitudes and behaviors is far from perfect. In 1934, Richard LaPiere conducted an early study that Illustrated this difference. In the u.s. in the 1930s, prejudice and discrimination against Asians was pervasive. He traveled throughout the West Coast visiting many hotels and restaurants with an Asian couple to see how they would be treated. On only one occasion were they treated poorly due to their race. A short time later, he contacted all of these establishments they had visited and asked about their attitudes towards Asian patrons. Over 90% of the respondents said they would not serve Asians. This finding illustrates that attitudes do not perfectly predict behaviors. Sometimes if you can change people's behavior, you can change their attitudes. Cognitive dissonance theory is based on the idea that people are motivated to have consistent attitudes and behaviors. When they do not, they experience unpleasant mental tension or dissonance. Note that this change the attitude happens without conscious awareness. Leon Festinger and James Carlsmith conducted the classic experiment about cognitive dissonance in the late 1950s. Their participants performed a boring task and were asked to tell the next subject that they had enjoyed the task. In one condition, subjects were paid $1 to lie, and in the other condition they were paid $20. Afterwards the participants' attitudes toward the task were measured. According to festinger and carlsmith, having already said that the boring task was interesting, the subjects were experiencing dissonance. However those subjects we paid $20 experienced relatively little dissonance; they had lied because they had been paid $20. On the other hand, those subjects who were paid only $1 lacked sufficient external motivation to lie. Therefore to reduce the dissonance, they changed their attitudes and said that they actually did enjoy the activity.
Attraction
Social psychologists also study what factors increase the chance of people will like one another. A significant body of Research indicates that we like others who are similar to us, others who we come into direct contact with, and those who return our positive feelings. These three factors are often referred to as similarity, proximity, and reciprocal liking. Although conventional wisdom holds that Opposites Attract, psychological Research indicates that we are drawn to people who are similar to us, those who share our attitudes, backgrounds, and interests. As is suggested by the mere exposure effect, the greater the exposure one has to a person, the more one generally comes to like that person. In addition, only by talking to someone can one identify the similarities that will draw the pair closer together. Finally, liking someone who scorns you is not enjoyable. Thus, the more someone likes you the more you'll probably like that person. Not surprisingly, people are also attracted to others who are physically attractive. Research has demonstrated that good-looking people are perceived as having all sorts of positive attributes including better personalities and greater job competence. Psychologists have devoted tremendous time and attention to the concept of Love. While we understand that the emotion of Love qualitatively differs from liking and a number of theories about love have been proposed, love has proven difficult to explain adequately A term often employed as part of liking and loving studies is self disclosure. One self discloses when one shares a piece of personal information with another. Relationships with friends and lovers are often built through a process of self-disclosure. On the path to intimacy, one person shares the details of their life and the other reciprocates by exposing a facet of Their Own.
Prosocial Behavior
Social psychologists have also studied the factors that make people more likely to help one another. Such helping behavior is termed prosocial Behavior. Much of the research in this area has focused on bystander intervention, the conditions under which people nearby are more and less likely to help someone in trouble. John Darley and Bibb Latane conducted studies to explore when people decided whether or not to help others in distress The larger the number of people who witnessed an emergency situation, the less likely anyone is to intervene. This finding is known as the bystander effect. One explanation for this phenomenon is called diffusion of responsibility. The larger the group of people who witnessed a problem, the less responsible any one individual feels to help. People tend to assume that someone else will take action, so they need not do so. Another factor contributing to the bystander effect is known as pluralistic ignorance. People seem to decide what constitutes appropriate behavior in a situation by looking to others.
Overview
Social psychology is a broad field devoted to studying the way that people relate to others. A major influence on attitude formation and attribution theory is social cognition. The basic idea behind social cognition is that, as people go through their daily lives, they act like scientists, constantly Gathering data and making predictions about what will happen next so they can act accordingly.
Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination
Stereotypes: Ideas about what members of different groups are like. Stereotypes may be either negative or positive and can be applied to virtually any group of people. Some cognitive psychologists have suggested the stereotypes are basically schemata about groups. People who distinguish between stereotypes and group schemata agree that the former are more rigid and more difficult to change in the ladder. Prejudice is an undeserved, usually negative, attitude toward a group of people. Stereotyping can lead to prejudice when negative stereotypes are applied uncritically to all members of a group and a negative attitude results. Ethnocentrism, the belief that one's culture is superior to others, is a specific kind of prejudice. People become so used to their own culture that they see them as the norm and use them as the standard by which to judge other cultures. While Prejudice is an attitude, discrimination involves an action. When one discriminates, one acts on one's prejudices. Unfortunately, stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination all reinforce one another. People's beliefs and attitudes influence each other and guide people's behavior. In addition, when people act in discriminatory ways, they're motivated to strengthen their prejudices and stereotypes to justify their behavior. People tend to see members of their own group, The in-group, as more diverse than members of other groups, out-groups. This phenomenon is often referred to as out-group homogeneity. While we all have extensive experience with the members of our own groups, we lack that degree of familiarity with other groups and therefore tend to see them as more similar. In addition, researchers have documented a preference for members of one's own group, a kind of in-group bias. In-group bias is thought to stem from people's belief that they themselves are good people. Therefore, the people with whom they share group membership are thought to be good as well.
Group Dynamics
We are all members of many different groups. Some groups are more cohesive than others and exert more pressure on their members. All groups have Norms, rules about how group members should ask. Within groups is often a set of roles. Sometimes people take advantage of being part of a group by social loafing. Social loafing is the phenomenon when individuals do not put in as much effort when acting as part of a group as they do alone. One explanation for this effect is that when one is alone, An individual's efforts are more easily discernible than when in a group. Thus, as part of a group, a person may be less motivated to put in an impressive performance. In addition, being part of a group may encourage members to take advantage of the opportunity to reap the rewards of the group effort without taxing themselves unnecessarily. Group polarization is a tendency of a group to make more extreme decisions than the group members would make individually. Studies about group polarization usually have participants give their opinions individually, then the groups discuss their decisions, and then have the group make a decision. Explanations for group polarization include the idea that in a group, individuals may be exposed to new, persuasive arguments they had not thought of themselves, and a responsibility for extreme decisions in a group is diffused across the group's many members. Groupthink, a term coined Irving Janis, describes the tendency for some groups to make bad decisions. Groupthink occurs when group members suppress their reservations about the ideas supported by the group. As a result, a kind of false unanimity is encouraged, and flaws in the group's decisions may be overlooked. Highly cohesive groups involved in making risky decisions seem to be at particular risk for groupthink. One famous experiment that showed not only how such conditions can cause people to deindividuate but also the effect of roles and the situation in general, is Philip Zimbardo's Prison Experiment. Zimbardo assigned a group of Stanford students to play the role of prison guard or prisoner. All were dressed in uniforms and prisoners were assigned numbers. The prisoners were locked up in the basement of the psychology building, and the guards were put in charge of their treatment. The students took to their assigned roles perhaps too well, and the experiment had to be ended early because of the cruel treatment that the guards were inflicting on the prisoners.