Social Psych MCQ

What is prejudice?

- Best definition: any attitude, emotion, or behavior towards members of a group, which directly or indirectly implies some negativity or antipathy towards that group - attitude about someone based solely on our stereotypic beliefs - irrational feelings or attitudes which are held against social groups - an unjustifiable negative attitude towards a group and its individual members - directly or indirectly implies some negativity or antipathy towards that group - you are prejudiced if you cannot justify your hatred, although this is a hard way to define because people find a way to justify anything - examples of groups that face prejudice: Jews, Maori, etc.

Crowd behavior from an intergroup perspective

- Crowd behavior not always violent, ex. religious festivals - Although often violent, crowd behavior is usually under control - crowds not always anonymous, ex. police officers - crowd behavior often leads to a sense of pride, ex. "we feel great, it was really joyful". - people gain sense of efficacy and confidence that translates into everyday life from group riots - people take on identity of collective - shift from personal identity to social identity norms and appropriate standards of behavior are determined by the group - police violence often supported, other violence often discouraged

Parental attitudes and children's prejudice

- Davey found little evidence of strong relationship between parental attitude and children's prejudice - Brunch and Newcombe found negative relation between pro-black parental attitudes and children's black doll choice - black Stanford researcher shocked to find her own child held negative attitudes towards black people - non-verbal behavior very influential in affecting children's attitudes - In Italy, parents explicit prejudice predicted children's implicit prejudice

Cohesive vs. non cohesive groups

- Feedback for cohesive group affects self-esteem. When you care about one another, you care about outcome more and it has greater impact on self-esteem. - positive feedback increases self-esteem, negative feedback decreases it.

Social learning theory of authoritarianism

- People learn through observation and through reinforcement from parents and others - perceived threats motivate the child to seek control over the environment - authoritarian ideologies advocate controlling the environment - from Altemeyer, who singlehandedly resurrected research on this topic

problems with personality oriented explanations for prejudice

- RWA and SDO cannot account for: widespread and uniform nature of prejudice, historical specificity of prejudice, why people can like individual outgroup members - ignores context which affects patterns of prejudice - personality explanation more useful in devaluing marginalized groups than in explaining ingroups vs. outgroups

SDO vs. RWA

- RWA: prejudice against norm threatening groups - SDO: prejudice against competing groups - both are a function of a type of threat - both can change with socialization - people become more authoritarian in times of threat, less so when threat is diminished.

Affiliative hypothesis

- When people are stressed they become affiliative, they bond with one another - discomforting ritual makes people become more dependent on one another - harsh initiation results in more liking and more co-dependence -If you reject people and then accept them, they will become unflinchingly loyal

Social Dominance orientation

- a general orientation towards intergroup relations, reflecting whether one generally prefers such relations to be equal versus hierarchical - people high in SDO dehumanize others during war, intractable conflicts and asylum seekers in times of peace - support hate speech in public sphere and oppose any ban and its expression - more likely to oppose BLM, environmentally friendly attitudes

Turner group definition (subjective)

- a group exists when two or more individuals perceive themselves to be members of the same social category - groups must be examined in context - Problem for marginalized or stigmatized groups if individuals are incorrectly identified as part of a group. ex. nonbinary individuals misgendered, justified killing children because nazis determine them jewish. "You're not irish" --> affects self-esteem

Authoritarian personality

- a personality type differential to people in power - see things in black and white. either good or bad. - suck up to people you consider powerful, mean to people you consider less powerful - first advocated by Adorno et. al - 2 types of people according to Adorno: democratic type (tolerant, unprejudiced, democratic, egalitarian) and potential fascist (anti-semitic, rigid, intolerant, hostile to those different from oneself) - Adorno claimed it is derived from childhood - harsh, demanding parents stifle basic instincts. Aggression manifests in child and appears in some other way. - perceived wrongness leads to pain: makes you seek control, clear boundaries/expectations - support ingroup regardless. Blind patriotism

social influence

- all social psychology could be defined by social influence - concerned with processes whereby people's beliefs, opinions, attitudes, values, and behavior are changed or controlled through social interaction as a function of social relationships between the recipients and sources of information - context is key in social influence ex. people more likely to give to charity if they think others do, women rate men as more attractive if other women endorse their views

Why do people conform to influence?

- helps validate beliefs - we turn to others to have beliefs validated. it is important to us that our beliefs are correct, which is why we turn to others for validation - achieve approval, avoid ridicule - achieve group goals - social identity - ex. respondents turning to one another to validate their guesses in Sherif light experiment. People adhering to primitive norm. Known as "informational influence" - conformity increases when confederates deemed to be ingroup members, decreases when deemed to be outgroup members. People more likely to go along with their own group.

Group mind fallacy

- idea that when individuals come together and form a group, "group mind" behavior becomes more violent, aggressive, etc. Minds coalesce to form group mind - When people see themselves as members of groups, they react differently/follow group norms

Crowd behavior

- ideas inspired by LeBon - Crowds make people feel powerful - anonymity in crowds unleashes collective unconscious which is inherently barbaric - people lose sense of self and become irrational - Examples: meowing nuns, dancing plagues. women dressed in KKK outfits gave twice as many electric shocks in learning experiments. - fits with Zambardo theories (stanford prison experiment) - gives reputation of groups being very dangerous - typically involve 2 groups: us vs them, ex. police vs. protestors

Bias in the education system

- increasing perceptual experience with other-race faces can significantly reduce implicit racial bias in children - less racial bias in schools that are racially mixed - less prejudice in catholic and protestant school children who attended integrated schools - implicit biases of child's favorite teacher predicted Italian children's anti-immigrant bias - exposure to others expressing nonverbal biases (ex. disapproval or uneasiness when interacting with outgroup members) can create intergroup biases among young children

What makes effective leadership from a social psychology approach?

- leaders effective if they can create a sense of "us" - successful leaders use collective pronouns every 79 words, losers 136 words - seen to represent us, prototypical of "good" group member - ex. NZ government during COVID did a great job uniting country and getting everyone to follow/agree on covid policies

Impact of large groups

- more impactful than we may realize - stereotypes can have huge impact - ex. police more likely to shoot black individuals

Results of group experiencing disaster?

- myth of panic and chaos - survivors often talk of solidarity and numerous acts of civility, kindness, and practical assistance - strangers become the closest and most important people in your life - 90% of people recover after disasters

Effects of socialization on prejudice

- not straightforward - children as young as 2-3 show differentiation - process of prejudice is non-linear - studies suggest that prejudice increases around the age of 5 and then decreases again as children get older - although there have marked decreases in prejudice in adults over the past 40 years, children still tend to manifest various kinds of biases - generally low correlations are found between parental attitudes and children's prejudice

Minority influence

-minorities sometimes stand up to majorities - Freud, Jesus, Scientists - ex. At one point no one believing in climate change, now it's turned into a much larger movement - blue circle test: people go along with it if shout-out is consistent. Shows that minority can have an impact if consistent - minority influence is a pervasive phenomenon. Has a different impact to that of the majority. - People comply privately with minorities - if people are changed due to minority influence, they become resistant to further change. ex. Anti-maskers - Not all minorities successful: Esperanto, peace movements, Jehova witnesses

Why should we study groups? (2 reasons)

1. Scientific: people are social animals. we are dependent upon others and need acceptance. Socialization/belonging is crucial for physical health, without friends you are more likely to die earlier (similar effect to smoking). Rejection leads to aggression and lower self-esteem. 2. Political: many social problems involve groups: environmental pollution, racism, control of COVID-19

Do people help one another on their own accord?

Yes. people will help each other during crisis/violence/disaster. in 90% of cases, someone will step in to stop someone else from getting beat up on the street. People generally help one another. Men in groups more likely to intervene Bystander effect doesn't happen in violent emergencies. -However, lab evidence contradicts this, with evidence showing opposite results.

Challenges to group mind fallacy

- Although rejected, still important to study group processes - group processes are real and have distinctive properties from individual properties: people act differently in groups than when alone - H20 analogy: same substance when frozen, solid, liquid, but behaves differently under each condition. individual minds do not change, but behavior does when under certain social situations. - group behavior is qualitatively different from individual behavior - Allport's critique is accepted, yet disagree with his conclusion that the concept of group has no place in rigorous social psych. Context impacts how you act even if it doesn't align with beliefs. - Behavioral changes in group evident even when other group members not immediately present

Authoritarianism

- an orientation which is overly deferential to those in authority whilst simultaneously adopting an overbearing and hostile attitude towards those perceived as inferior. - associated with conventional value system in which right and wrong and clearly and ambiguously distinct - deviant or minority groups are openly derogated. Not shy to share negative opinions about other groups - authoritarians less likely to condemn governments; those who commit war crimes or beat prisoners - authoritarianism affects prejudice: RWA show prejudice against gays, native americans, feminists, jews, vegans, etc. - leaders who show cruelty can be explained by them viewing the world as a ruthlessly competitive jungle in which the strong win and the weak lose, rendering motivational goals or values of power, dominance, and intergroup superiority salient

What are the different theories which locate prejudice within the person?

- authoritarian personality - social dominance orientation - if individuals display prejudice towards more than one out-group, it makes sense to start looking for explanation within the individual. In other words, If you hate lots of groups, it has something to do with your personality

What did Allport (1926) believe about groups?

- believed there is no psychology of groups which is not essentially and entirely a psychology of individuals - argued that groups do not exist, that groups can be broken down into individuals - targeting Le Bon and McDougall's concept of "group mind" - focus on individuals is wrong. People influence others, even if not face-to-face basis. How do you mobilize large numbers of people to do things/believe things?

Why do minority children sometimes reject the ingroup?

- black children sometimes say they choose the white doll/photo because the black one looks bad, dirty, shoots people, etc. - sometimes black children try to wash their skin "clean" - children with exclusive experience of ingroup faces learn quickly to associate ingroup with positive emotions - preschoolers categorize positive faces as ingroup, negative as outgroup - children in blue or yellow shirts: showed consistent biases in favor of their own group. Those with highest self-esteem showed the most ingroup bias

How does group identification impact behavior?

- bond with group mates gives mental and physical strength to complete tasks/challenges that an individual cannot - trolley problem: push stranger off train to save your six group members on the tracks? - online groups can be a source of validation for thoughts/feelings. ex. Q. Tarrant, Christchurch killer

What causes switch between intergroup and interpersonal behavior towards others?

- change in the functioning of of the self-concept - sometimes we view treat people as individuals, sometimes as group members

Groups of different status?

- children put into groups: either fast or slow for egg and spoon race. Asked to evaluate likely performance of the group in an up and coming egg and spoon race. - those in fast group were rated more positively by members of both groups, indicating ingroup favoritism for faster group and outgroup favoritism for slower group - some evidence to shower that low status groups show bias in favor of outgroup - children from disadvantaged minorities do not show the same biases as majority children - minority and majority group prejudice increases with age

Understanding the development of prejudice in children

- direct socialization: parents, peer influence, media, society - in experiments, prejudice increases when children are given explicit messages that express negativity about outgroup, exclusionary norms, and importance of group memberships - Parents' SDO and RWA are associated with greater intergroup bias among children - toddlers bias to look away from obese figures related to mothers anti-fat prejudice - parental attitude accounts for 37% of variance for political attitudes among many factors. But links between attitudes and children's prejudice not always apparent

If identifying with a group doesn't help your self-esteem, why identify with it?

- ex. supporting a football team that loses every game - groups provide other things to gain besides just self-esteem. - sense of community, acceptance, sense of control and belonging, acceptance. Promote overall well-being - high status groups tend to succeed, sense of belonging

When are leader effects not positive?

- example: Donald Trump - people who see themselves as one with Trump are more willing to challenge election results, personally protect the border, and perpetuate violence against marginalized groups - 226% increase in hate crimes in counties where Trump rallies were held - increase in acceptability of prejudice towards groups targeted in Trump campaign following 2016 election

How do group norms affect behavior/emotions?

- gain a sense of self-esteem if you align with group norms - Shame and embarrassment if you do not - group norms form the basis of mutual expectations - when a norm is internalized, it becomes a part of a persons value system. People follow norms because it becomes personally satisfying to do so - violation of norms that are personally accepted can bring guilt, shame, and embarrassment ex. college students become more liberal, army officers become less accepting of outgroups

How is group membership important to our sense of self?

- groups become important part of who we are, how we see ourselves as a part of self-identity - sense of pride regarding group - becomes embedded in yourself - also can be seen as danger to identity: can't walk away / leave it behind

Groups are bad and people are frail? What are the negative views on groups?

- groups can be seen as a threat to morality, social order, and civilization - create anonymity, physiological arousal and enable anti-social behavior - immersion in groups leads to disinhibition, unleashes libidinous and selfish impulses - myth that people are frail, but people don't bounce back on their own. Everyone needs support, it is false that some people are more resilient than others

Functions of norms

- help regulate social existence and reduce uncertainty - function to attain goals - can function to help maintain or enhance identity, ex. clothing - without norms we wouldn't know how to survive, treat each other, behave, etc.

Category awareness

- of primary interest to those interested in children and prejudice - prejudiced perception, attitude, or behavior implies the prior application of a categorical distinction - one cannot show racist or sexist attitudes without first having been aware of the categories involved - over 75% of 2 year olds could correctly identify photographs as male or female, by 3 years old 90% - children a few months old can make categorical distinctions - by 3 months old, infants prefer to look at intergroup faces - findings suggest that category awareness is learned - awareness does not necessarily imply a preference or identification with some categories rather than others - evidence shows that infants and children can identify with categories and express preference for some categories over others. ex. children able to identify with correct ethnic group using dolls - minority children identify less. White children prefer the ingroup, minority children more ambivalent - despite outgroup favoritism among minority children, all children had similar levels of self-esteem - Internalized stigma for TGNC leads to low self-esteem

Peer group influence

- older infants exhibit increased toy acceptance, prosocial action, and imitative behavior towards individuals who share similar characteristics with the infant - group members more fair when others see the behavior of the group - when it comes to sharing toys, 5 year olds care more about fairness when ingroup members see behavior - especially true when ingroup has a norm of fairness

Asch line study

- participants showed four lines and asked to determine which two are the same length - only one person actually participating in the study, the others are confederates - confederates responded consistently - 75% went along with majority - 1 in 4 refused to go along with majority - factors affecting majority influence: size of majority, consensus, culture, population, source, priming, task importance - with just one confederate there is negligible conformity - conformity rapidly increases with inclusion of 2 or 3 other confederates - when one confederate always gives correct answer, conformity drops to about 5%. Conformity also drops when giving extreme wrong answers, providing break in consensus

Priming

- people can be influenced by the types of word, images, and stories they encounter. Provides context/first impression - we are primed by things around us without even realizing it - Ex. people more likely to show conformity in Asch type study when presented with certain types of photos (accountants vs. punk rockers)

Autokinetic effect

- pinprick of light in dark room appears to move erratically - responders estimate how much the light moves. when listening to one another's responses, the answers eventually converge until estimates were indistinguishable - Why? developed primitive norm, which helped guide behavioral judgements

Interpersonal behavior

- presence of one category: talking about people as individuals, not groups - high variability in attitudes and behaviors of aggregate - high variation in one person's attitudes towards collection of other individuals

Intergroup behavior

- presence of two distinct groups - low variability in attitudes and behavior of group members - low variability in one persons attitudes toward group members

Group membership and self-efficacy

- self-efficacy increases as a result of powerful bonds from groups. Ex. Spirit of NZ boat - efficacy increases and remains high after the voyage - If you identify strongly and productively with group, you will become more personally confident and capable of dealing with mental health + anxiety issues

Purpose of group initiation ceremonies?

- serve a symbolic function, for both group and individual - Transition for group member: I am not what I was. I have changed. - new group distinctiveness for new member if now allowed to wear new clothes/acquire markings - can elicit sympathy and loyalty, feel more warmly towards group - making initiate undergo difficult experience could make them come to value the group more. The more difficult it is to join a group, the more we end up supporting it. - wearing an academic gown makes you feel smarter, empowered. Evidence of academics in gowns doing better in quiz games.

How is social pain similar to physical pain?

- social pain impacts you in similar ways as physical pain - A study shows that taking a painkiller can also help with social pain... this is controversial however - rejection leads to many negative effects - when people led to believe that they disagreed with others, self-esteem drops

How does task importance affect conformity?

- when importance of task is emphasized, conformity increased (on moderately difficult tasks)

Different types of group initiation

- you can be born into groups. ex. Irish, Jewish, etc. - some group entry often marked by some form of ritual or ceremony - pleasant: Bat mitzvah, irish catholic confirmation - unpleasant: mafia hitman, hazing in fraternities - 80% of college athletes in the U.S. hazed - policemen and soldiers sexually abused

3 criteria to help us distinguish between interpersonal and intergroup behavior

1. Presence or absence of 2 categories 2. high or low variability between persons within each category 3. high or low variability in one persons attitudes towards those in each category

Conformity in collectivist vs. individualistic cultures

COLLECTIVIST: - tend to make around 50% more errors in Asch type study - why? sense of self bound up with other people, more concerned with how other people feel - women tend to be more collectivist than men - NZ ranked 3rd for collectivist countries INDIVIDUALIST: - people who are white, educated, industralized, rich, etc. tend to be less collectivist - make less errors in Asch type study - feel less pressure to conform

Definitions of group

Cambridge Dictionary: A number of people or things that are put together or form a unit Lewin: a collection of individuals who are interdependent in forming a dynamic system (30s-40s) Sherif and Sherif: an interaction among individuals, individuals whose function it is to stabilize the role of status relations and norms (50s - 60s). Myers: two or more individuals who for more than a few moments interact and influence one another (much more recent def) *most definitions refer to smaller groups

Factors affecting minority influence

Consistency - diachronic and synchronic Diachronic: consistency over time Synchronic: consistency within the majority - Minority consistently confident, certain, and committed, then majority will begin to think that the position has merits - If minority is seen to have invested in its cause then it is taken more seriously - acting out of principle much more effective than ulterior motives. Ex. hunger strike vs. Mcdonalds ad - Rigidity: if minority is not flexible, willing to discuss, respectful --> beliefs won't be taken seriously - Although it often is difficult and time consuming to change people's minds - have to work to gain people's trust: use technique rebuttal, charts when talking to science deniers - censorship backfires - people become curious about what is being left out - ingroup changing ingroup more effective than outgroup changing ingroup. Ex. gay minority supporting gay rights less influence on heterosexual majority than a heterosexual minority which supported gay rights

What do different definitions (Lewin, Sherif and Sherif, Myers) emphasize as the most important aspect of groups?

Lewin - common fate ex. what happens to you happens to everyone else, like sports team fans, social psych class Sherif and Sherif - social structure ex. family: teaching manners Paulus and Myers - face to face interaction ex. smaller types of groups

Tajfel - social behavior on continuum

Scale from interpersonal to intergroup. - Interpersonal: acting as the unique individual that you are. Your likes, dislikes, traits, etc. Intergroup: defining yourself as a member of a group. Seeing yourself and others as interchangeable members of group.

Aspects of authoritarian personality

conventionalism, authoritarian aggression, superstition and stereotypy ("magical thinking"), authoritarian submission (very diligent in following rules), power and toughness, destructiveness and cynicism, projectivity (project internal fears onto world around them

What causes development in prejudice in children?

number of theoretical models: - development of prejudice can be linked to more cognitive, social, and affective changes which occur in children in the first ten years of life - child plays a more active role in the developmental process - primary importance to cognitive capacity for categorization. Categorization assists the child in making sense of the world and provides them with identities - Aboud's 3 stage model suggests that prejudices are dominated by categorization processes - the young child is inflexible, but as the child gets older they are able to use cognitive processes more flexibly - prejudice is not inevitable, only occurs when supported - much remains to be understood about prejudice in children. It is unlikely that children are empty vessels in which societal prejudices are poured, evidence points to a more dynamic view. - Interaction between the child's cognitive processes, their society, and the groups they belong to.

Two distinct facets of self-concept

personal identity and social identity