Chapter 18 – Social Psych
Chapter 13 – Social Psych – ’16 (with spaces)
Fritz Heider, attribution theory, dispositional and situational, the fundamental attribution error (Williams College experiment)
-effects of attribution:
Attitudes on Actions: 1960s studies, WILL, if:
peripheral route persuasion, central route persuasion
Action on Attitudes: the foot-in-the-door phenomenon; role-playing: ZIMBARDO, the Stanford Prison experiment, Abu-Ghraib;
-WHY: cognitive dissonance theory
Social Influence: “Social Psych’s greatest lesson…”
Conformity: automatic mimicry -- the chameleon effect, mood linkage / empathy;
group pressure and conformity: ASCH experiment – details, conditions that strengthen conformity, reasons for: normative social influence, informational social influence, when most powerful
***versus SHERIF – “autokinetic effect”; behavior versus social suggestion – the most powerful when norms are invisible!!
Obedience: MILGRAM (“obedience to authority”) details, lessons from: (foot-in-the-door / don’t go there!);
Jozefow vs. Le Chambon, Birkenhead
Individual Behavior In the Presence of Others: social facilitation, social loafing (individualistic men), deindividuation (Zimbardo again), group polarization, groupthink
-the power of individuals / minority influence
Anti-Social Relations:
prejudice, stereotypes, discrimination, explicit versus implicit racial associations, unconscious patronage, race-influenced perceptions, reflexive bodily responses
-gender prejudice, sex-orientation prejudice -social roots of prejudice: inequalities / the just world phenomenon / blame-the-victim, us versus them AKA ingroup / outgroup (with ingroup bias), scapegoat theory
-cognitive root: categories, outgroup homogeneity, other race effect, vivid cases, (the just-world phenomenon) (hindsight bias)
Aggression: specific definition
-biology of – Freud, genetics (Y chromosome, MAOA gene), neural, biochemical
(deindividuation + competition + alcohol = aggression…)
-psych of: aversives; frustration-aggression principle, learning principles, social scripts – pornography and video games -- sexual aggression and the media, the rape myth
Attraction:
proximity (you in the mirror); the mere-exposure effect, physical attractiveness (and the universal: symmetry!, U of Minnesota Welcome week…), similarity; reward theory
-romantic love: arousal / passionate love ((Capilano Bridge) -- “adrenaline makes the heart grow fonder!”), companionate love, equity, intimacy / self-disclosure
Altruism:
Kitty Genovese…, bystander intervention, the bystander effect (Darley and Latane), norms for helping: social exchange theory, the reciprocity norm, the social responsibility norm
Conflict:
social traps, non-zero-sum game; enemy perceptions: mirror-image perceptions ( self-fulfilling prophecy
Peacemaking:
Contact:
cooperation: superordinate goals -- SHERIF (again), 1970s bussing / vs. team sports, new identity of WE
communication: mediator, win-win situation
conciliation: GRIT: it’s foot-in-the door again…
Chapter 13 – Social Psych – ’16 (no spaces)
Fritz Heider, attribution theory, dispositional and situational, the fundamental attribution error (Williams College experiment)
-effects of attribution:
Attitudes on Actions: 1960s studies, WILL, if:
peripheral route persuasion, central route persuasion
Action on Attitudes: the foot-in-the-door phenomenon; role-playing: ZIMBARDO, the Stanford Prison experiment, Abu-Ghraib;
-WHY: cognitive dissonance theory
Social Influence: “Social Psych’s greatest lesson…”
Conformity: automatic mimicry -- the chameleon effect, mood linkage / empathy;
group pressure and conformity: ASCH experiment – details, conditions that strengthen conformity, reasons for: normative social influence, informational social influence, when most powerful
***versus SHERIF – “autokinetic effect”; behavior versus social suggestion – the most powerful when norms are invisible!!
Obedience: MILGRAM (“obedience to authority”) details, lessons from: (foot-in-the-door / don’t go there!);
Jozefow vs. Le Chambon, Birkenhead
Individual Behavior In the Presence of Others: social facilitation, social loafing (individualistic men), deindividuation (Zimbardo again), group polarization, groupthink
-the power of individuals / minority influence
Anti-Social Relations:
prejudice, stereotypes, discrimination, explicit versus implicit racial associations, unconscious patronage, race-influenced perceptions, reflexive bodily responses
-gender prejudice, sex-orientation prejudice -social roots of prejudice: inequalities / the just world phenomenon / blame-the-victim, us versus them AKA ingroup / outgroup (with ingroup bias), scapegoat theory
-cognitive root: categories, outgroup homogeneity, other race effect, vivid cases, (the just-world phenomenon) (hindsight bias)
Aggression: specific definition
-biology of – Freud, genetics (Y chromosome, MAOA gene), neural, biochemical
(deindividuation + competition + alcohol = aggression…)
-psych of: aversives; frustration-aggression principle, learning principles, social scripts – pornography and video games -- sexual aggression and the media, the rape myth
Attraction:
proximity (you in the mirror); the mere-exposure effect, physical attractiveness (and the universal: symmetry!, U of Minnesota Welcome week…), similarity; reward theory
-romantic love: arousal / passionate love ((Capilano Bridge) -- “adrenaline makes the heart grow fonder!”), companionate love, equity, intimacy / self-disclosure
Altruism:
Kitty Genovese…, bystander intervention, the bystander effect (Darley and Latane), norms for helping: social exchange theory, the reciprocity norm, the social responsibility norm
Conflict:
social traps, non-zero-sum game; enemy perceptions: mirror-image perceptions ( self-fulfilling prophecy
Peacemaking:
Contact:
cooperation: superordinate goals -- SHERIF (again), 1970s bussing / vs. team sports, new identity of WE
communication: mediator, win-win situation
conciliation: GRIT: it’s foot-in-the door again…
Chapter 16 – Social Psych – ’06
Fritz Heider, attribution theory – He proposed the attribution theory; it is the tendency to give a casual explanation for someone’s behavior, often by crediting either the situation or the person’s disposition.
Two categories of the attribution theory are:
-dispositional and situational,
dispositional attribution relates to someone’s behavior reflecting their personality, while situational attribution relates someone’s behavior to a particular situation.
-the fundamental attribution error – the tendency for observers, when analyzing another’s behavior, to underestimate the impact of the situation
-effects of attribution: Our attributions to individuals’ dispositions and their situations have consequences. Some types of attributions include political, personal, and economic; they have also be used to recognize inadequate supplies, poor working conditions, difficult co-workers and impossible demands.
Attitudes on Actions: 1960s studies- attitudes and behaviors regarding cheating, religion, racial minorities shared one similarity: most people will talk one way and act another on these issues. [ie: preach honesty, but then cheat]
Attitudes- a belief and feeling that predispositions one to respond in a certain way to objects, people and events.
-WILL, if:
- outside influences on what we do and say are minimal.
- Someone’s attitude is specifically relevant to their behavior.
- We are keenly aware of our attitudes.
Action on Attitudes: attitudes follow behavior. People come to believe what they have stood up for.
the foot-in-the-door phenomenon; the tendency for people who have first agreed to a small request feel the need to later comply later with a larger request [technique used in sales, especially telemarketing]
role-playing: ZIMBARDO, the Stanford Prison experiment; role-playing behavior may feel false at first because
you ACT and role when you first adopt it. {IE: being a mother, teacher, etc) Zimbardo developed this experiment; college students from Stanford, who tested as both mentally & physically stable, volunteered to role-play guards and prisoners – they were fitted with clubs and whistles for the guards and uniforms and bars on some of the windows. The role-playing became too real after only six days of a two-week experiment.
-WHY: cognitive dissonance theory – the theory that we act to reduce the discomfort we feel when two of our thoughts are inconsistent. For example, when our awareness of our attitudes and of our actions clash, we can reduce the resulting dissonance by changing our attitudes.
Social Influence: “Social Psych’s greatest lesson…” Social influence has enormous power on attitudes, beliefs, decisions and actions. Behavior is contagious. Suggestibility is a subtype of conformity {IE: following a celebrity’s suicide)
Conformity: the chameleon effect; conformity is adjusting one’s behavior or thinking to coincide within a group standard. (IE; Group Suicide) the chameleon effect is human nature’s “natural mimics” – unconsciously mimicking other’s expressions, postures and voice tones to help feel what others are feeling.
group pressure and conformity: (ASCH related) More likely to do something whether you believe it or not if you’re in a group, just not to stick out.
ASCH experiment – detail: ASCH devised an experiment that made one person stick out against 5 others, by sitting down at a table and looking at obvious sized/shaped graphs and charts to see if the person chose to conform or stand out.
conditions that strengthen conformity, reasons for: normative social influence, informational social influence, when most powerful. Conditions that strengthen conformity are those that make people feel insecure, in a group of at least three members, unanimous, admires status and attractiveness, made no prior commitment to any response, observe behavior and strong culture. Normative social influence is influence resulting from a person’s desire to gain approval or avoid disapproval. Informational social influence is influence resulting from one’s willingness to accept other’s opinions about reality.
***Versus SHERIF – “auto kinetic effect”; behavior versus social suggestion – the most powerful when norms are invisible!! Auto kinetic effect/Sherif in 1930s – an experiment composed of a light bulb inside of a coffee can with a hole in it to produce a light dot that appeared to be moving, with a switch on the outside so the can would not move at all. Social suggestion caused people looking at the light dot to agree that the light moved by a certain measurement when there was a second person in the room. They will also often come to a compromise averaging together the two distances they estimated. Invisible norms support “submissive conformity when influence supports what we disapprove.”
Obedience: MILGRAM (“obedience to authority”) details, lessons from: (foot-in-the-door / don’t go there!)
Milgram – Obedience to Authority – Volunteers were paired with an older actor who was the “learner” while they were the “teacher.” They would teach the learner word pairs through an intercom in different rooms and pull a lever to shock the other person ranging from a mild shock to XXX [near fatal] when he answers incorrectly. Most said they would stop when there was pain, but 63% went to the last switch in the experiment. Most said they continued because the professor told them to.
Foot in the Door is a technique where people give their pitch in hopes of a positive response or continued listening. The first few seconds are crucial, after that, the more willing you are to listen. Salesmen in the past would put their foot in the doorway so you had to listen to them, thus where the name comes from.
Group Influence: How do groups affect our behavior? Various influences operate our social systems.
social facilitation – Triplett discovered that contestants would reel fishing lines faster in competition with someone else, rather than against them self. The stronger performance is due to this social facilitation.
social loafing – The tendency for people in a group to exert less individual effort when putting their efforts together towards attaining a common goal than when individually accountable.
deindividuation (Zimbardo again), The loss of self-awareness and self restraint occurring in-group situations that foster arousal and anonymity.
group polarization, the enhancement of a group’s prevailing attitudes through discussion within the group.
Groupthink - the mode of thinking that occurs when the desire for harmony in a decision-making group overrides a realistic appraisal of alternatives.
-the power of the individual: social control the power of the situation versus personal control [power of the individual]. Influence on groups can be great, an example is the one man who blocked a line of tanks at Tienemen Square.
Social Relations: Everyone thinks and influences one another.
Prejudice, unjustifiable attitude toward a group and its members; generally involves stereotyped beliefs, negative feelings and predisposition discriminatory action.
Stereotypes are generalized beliefs about a group of people.
Discrimination – is having certain predispositions to certain actions.
-social roots of prejudice: inequalities / social inequalities are at the root of prejudice; conditions such as poverty, they way people look, their jobs, level of education, etc.
Blame-the-victim, occurs when one can abuse the victim for something that is not their fault, i.e.: rape is justified because a woman dressed provocatively. Circumstances breed higher crime rate and someone can use the crime rate to justify discrimination.
us versus them AKA in-group / out group (with in-group bias), in-group refers to “us”, people with a common identity (i.e.: a gang). The out-group is “them” perceived as different or apart from those in the in-group (i.e.: cops). People tend to favor their group due to an in-group bias.
Scapegoating – the theory that prejudice is an outlet of anger with some [one/group] to blame.
-cognitive root: categorization, this is a stereotype that may have truth, but it’s only based on our perceptions.
Vivid cases, are violent cases readily available to memory and influence judgment.
The just-world phenomenon (blame-the-victim again) this is the tendency of people to believe the world is just and that people therefore get what they deserve. [karma]
Aggression: specific definition – any physical or verbal behavior that is intended to hurt or destroy.
-biology of – Freud, genetics, neural, biochemical;
(deindividuation + competition + alcohol = aggression…) Freud believed that our species has volcanic potential…to erupt in aggression; we have self-destructive “death instinct”, usually displaced towards others as an aggress ional release in socially approved activities that control aggression. [i.e.: football]
Genetics - genes engineer individual nervous systems that are identical.
Neural - The brain has several “violent centers” that facilitate feelings of anger – if an identical twin is tempered, the chances are the same is true for the other.
Biochemical – The substances in blood influence neural systems whose testosterone levels are high.
-psych of: aversives; frustration-aggression principle, learning principles, sexual aggression and the media. Frustration-aggression principle is the principle that frustration blocking of an attempt to reach some goal causes people to become aggressive.
Learning principles lead us to believe experience teaches us – and we imitate each other, if a cultural model or if you’re being re-influenced. (i.e.: one who intimidates others may continue to intimidate if they get what they want)
As for sexual aggression and the media, 20% of women say men forced them to do something; this is being attributed partially to R rated movies, where casual sex is provoked and in some rape scenes, victims are portrayed as a victim fleeing at first, but then driven to ecstasy.
social scripts – pornography and video games… / the rape myth
TV violence, porn, and video games provoke anger; however these emotions have many determinants, making any single explanation an oversimplification. Social psychologists attitude the media’s influence partly to the social scripts they provide. When we find ourselves in new situations, uncertain how to act, we rely on social scripts provided by our culture.
The Rape Myth – 35% + college men have a rising level of arousal and feelings of hostility.
Conflict: to a social psychologist, a conflict is a seeming incompatibility of actions, goals, or ideals.
social traps: a situation in which the conflicting parties, by each rationally pursuing their self-interest, become caught in mutually destructive behavior.
non-zero-sum game; under certain conditions, one can cooperate more often, whether it be in playing a laboratory game or the game of life.
enemy perceptions: mirror-image perceptions ( self-fulfilling prophecy: mirror-image perceptions – as we see “them” as untrustworthy and evil intentioned so “they” see us. Self-fulfilling prophecy – perceptions confirm themselves by influencing the other country to react in ways that seem to justify them.
Attraction: Friends vs. lovers – what is it that attracts or repels us from others? Being similar vs. being different, familiarity vs. something new, absent vs. clingy, What leads to friendship and romance? What keeps these relationships lasting?
proximity / “I’ve Grown Accustomed to Your Face…” (you in the mirror), geographic nearness is the most powerful predictor of friendship. It provides opportunity for aggression, but more often, for liking. Repeated expose to novel stimuli increase our liking for them this phenomenon is the
mere-exposure effect, physical attractiveness (and the universal: symmetry!), Within limits, familiarity breeds fondness. Moreland and Beach prove this by having 4 equally attractive women silently attend a 200 student
class for 0, 5, 10 or 15 class sessions; the women most seen was considered the most attractive. Hatfeild and her coworkers held a welcome week dance where they set up students on a blind date and had an opportunity to talk and dance; however, the most common thing used to determine how much they liked their date was by how good looking they were. Symmetry is cross culturally attractive –everything proportionate and nothing to large or small and “averaged” face is most attractive.
Similarity – most often, people are attracted to what is similar; people share religious beliefs, age, race, education, intelligence, and economic status, etc.
reward theory: reward theory of attraction – we will like those whose behavior is rewarding to us and that we will continue relationships that offer more rewards than costs – can explain all the findings we have considered so far. Those with similar views reward us by validating our own.
-romantic love: arousal / passionate love (“adrenaline makes the heart grow fonder!”), - an aroused state of intense positive absorption in another, usually present at the beginning of a love relationship.
companionate love, - the deep affectionate attachment we feel for those with whom our lives are intertwined.
equity, - a condition in which people receive from a relationship in proportion to what the give to it.
intimacy / self-disclosure – revealing intimate aspects of oneself to others.
Altruism: unselfish regard for the welfare of others.
Kitty Genovese…, a stalker raped and stabbed her to death outside for her New York City apartment being watched by several of her neighbors, none of them doing anything to stop it, exemplifying the bystander effect.
bystander intervention, the bystander effect – bystanders are not apathetic or indifferent, but rather misguided by the presence of others. The bystander effect is the tendency for any given bystander to be less likely to give aid if other bystanders are present.
-the psych of helping: social exchange theory, the reciprocity norm, the social responsibility norm
social exchange theory is the theory that our social behavior is an exchange process, the aim of which is to maximize benefits and minimize costs. Through socialization, we learn the reciprocity norm, which is an expectation that we should return help (not harm) to those who have helped us. The social responsibility norm is a belief that we should help those who need our help, even if the costs outweigh the benefits.
Peacemaking: Research indicates cooperation, communication, and conciliation can in some cases transform the antagonisms fed by prejudice, aggression and various conflicts into attitudes that promote peace.
cooperation: SHERIF (again), - contact helps in conflict sometimes; however, sheriff found it does not in a study of 22 Oklahoma City boys in two separate areas of a boy scout camp and had them compete – which pulled them apart from each other.
1970s bussing / vs. team sports: superordinate goals, new identity of WE
communication: mediator, win-win situation; However when people are given superordinate goals, shared goals that override differences among people and require their cooperation, peace is made.
In subordinate goals, we found ourselves referring to one another as “we”, for example, Americans united as “we” after 9/11, the president’s approval rating shooting from 51% to 90% just 10 days after. Social identities change and change is most prevalent in the immediate aftermath.
conciliation: GRIT: it’s foot-in-the door again…Graduated and Reciprocated Initiatives in Tension-Reduction, a strategy designed to decrease international tensions. A technique used as “foot-in-the-door” because it allows countries to get their foot in the door to express an opportunity for peace.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.