Chapter 11 Ppp
- 1. Social Psychology The branch of psychology that studies how people think, feel, and behave in social situations
- 2. Two Main Areas of Study Social Cognition--making sense of the social environment Social influence--how behavior is affected by situation and other people
- 3. Social Cognition The mental processes that people use to make sense out of their social environment Person perception Social categorization Implicit personality theory Attribution Attitudes Stereotypes
- 4. Person Perception Your reactions are determined by your perceptions of others Your goals determine the amount and kind of information you collect You evaluate people partly in terms of how you expect them to behave (social norms) Your self-perception influences how you perceive others
- 5. Social Categorization Process of categorizing people into groups based on shared characteristics
- 6. Implicit Personality Theory Network of assumptions or beliefs about the relationships among types of people, traits, and behaviors
- 7. Physical Attractiveness Implicit cultural message is “beautiful is good” Attractive people are perceived as more intelligent, happier, and better adjusted Really no difference between attractive and less attractive people having these characteristics Attractive people are more likely to attribute other people’s approval of their accomplishments to looks rather than effort or talent.
- 8. Attribution Process of inferring the causes of people’s behavior, including one’s own The explanation given for a particular behavior
- 9. Attribution Bias Fundamental attribution error Actor-observer discrepancy Blaming the victim (just-world hypothesis) Self-serving bias Self-effacing bias
- 11. Using Attitudes as Ways to “Justify” Injustice Just-world bias a tendency to believe that life is fair, e.g., it would seem horrible to think that you can be a really good person and bad things could happen to you anyway Just-world bias leads to “blaming the victim” we explain others’ misfortunes as being their fault: e.g., she deserved to be raped, what was she doing in that neighborhood anyway?
- 12. Cross-Cultural Differences Western culture people are in charge of own destinies more attributions to personality Some Eastern cultures fate in charge of destiny more attributions to situation Age (years) Attributions to internal disposition 8 11 15 Adult 0.70 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0 United States India
- 13. Attitudes What is an attitude? predisposition to evaluate some people, groups, or issues in a particular way can be negative or positive Has three components Cognitive—thoughts about given topic or situation Affective—feelings or emotions about topic Behavioral—your actions regarding the topic or situation
- 14. Cognitive Dissonance Unpleasant state of psychological tension or arousal that occurs when two thoughts or perceptions are inconsistent Attitudes and behaviors are in conflict it is uncomfortable for us we seek ways to decrease discomfort caused by the inconsistency
- 15. Dissonance-Reducing Mechanisms Avoiding dissonant information – we attend to information in support of our existing views, rather than information that doesn’t support them Firming up an attitude to be consistent with an action – once we’ve made a choice to do something, lingering doubts about our actions would cause dissonance, so we are motivated to set them aside
- 16. Prejudice A negative attitude toward people who belong to a specific social group
- 17. Stereotypes What is a stereotype? A cluster of characteristics associated with all members of a specific group of people a belief held by members of one group about members of another group
- 19. Social Categories In-group—the social group to which we belong In-group bias—tendency to make favorable attributions for members of our in-group Ethnocentrism is one type of in-group bias Out-group—the social group to which you do not belong Out group homogeneity effect—tendency to see members of the out-group as more similar to each other
- 20. Social Identity and Cooperation Social identity theory states that when you’re assigned to a group, you automatically think of that group as an in-group for you Sherif’s Robbers Cave study 11–12 year-old boys at camp boys were divided into 2 groups and kept separate from one another each group took on characteristics of distinct social group, with leaders, rules, norms of behavior, and names
- 21. Robbers Cave (Sherif) Leaders proposed series of competitive interactions which led to 3 changes between groups and within groups within-group solidarity negative stereotyping of other group hostile between-group interactions
- 22. Robbers Cave Overcoming the strong we/they effect establishment of common goals--groups had to cooperate to solve a common problem e.g., breakdown in camp water supply
- 23. Jigsaw Classroom Elliot Aronson--research on newly integrated schools Ethnically diverse groups had to work together on a mutual problem Each student had an important “piece of the puzzle” Reduced tension and prejudices
- 24. Social Influence How behavior is influenced by the social environment and the presence of other people Conformity Obedience Helping behaviors
- 25. Conformity Adopting attitudes or behaviors of others because of pressure to do so; the pressure can be real or imagined 2 general reasons for conformity Informational social influence—other people can provide useful and crucial information Normative social influence—desire to be accepted as part of a group leads to that group having an influence
- 26. Asch’s Experiments on Conformity Previous research had shown people will conform to others’ judgments more often when the evidence is ambiguous
- 27. Asch’s Experiments on Conformity All but 1 in group was confederate Seating was rigged Asked to rate which line matched a “standard” line Confederates were instructed to pick the wrong line 12/18 times Comparison lines Standard lines 1 2 3
- 28. Asch’s Experiments on Conformity Results Asch found that 75% participants conformed to at least one wrong choice subjects gave wrong answer (conformed) on 37% of the critical trials Why did they conform to clearly wrong choices? informational influence? subjects reported having doubted their own perceptual abilities which led to their conformance – didn’t report seeing the lines the way the confederates had
- 29. Obedience Obedience compliance of person is due to perceived authority of asker request is perceived as a command Milgram interested in unquestioning obedience to orders
- 30. Stanley Milgram’s Studies Basic study procedure teacher and learner (learner always confederate) watch learner being strapped into chair learner expresses concern over his “heart condition ”
- 31. Stanley Milgram’s Studies Teacher goes to another room with experimenter Shock generator panel – 15 to 450 volts, labels “slight shock” to “XXX” Asked to give higher shocks for every mistake learner makes
- 32. Stanley Milgram’s Studies Learner protests more and more as shock increases Experimenter continues to request obedience even if teacher balks 120 150 300 330 “ Ugh! Hey this really hurts.” “ Ugh! Experimenter! That’s all. Get me out of here. I told you I had heart trouble. My heart’s starting to bother me now.” (agonized scream) “I absolutely refuse to answer any more. Get me out of here. You can’t hold me here. Get me out.” (intense & prolonged agonized scream) “Let me out of here. Let me out of here. My heart’s bothering me. Let me out, I tell you…”
- 33. Obedience How many people would go to the highest shock level? 65% of the subjects went to the end, even those that protested
- 34. Obedience
- 35. Explanations for Milgram’s Results Abnormal group of subjects? numerous replications with variety of groups shows no support People in general are sadistic? videotapes of Milgram’s subjects show extreme distress
- 36. Explanations for Milgram’s Results Obedience framework--subjects volunteered and accepted payment Context--prestige and “advancement of science” Experimenter self-assurance and acceptance of responsibility Separation of learner and experimenter New situation and no model of how to behave
- 37. Follow-Up Studies to Milgram Original study Different building Teacher with learner Put hand on shock Orders by phone Ordinary man orders 2 teachers rebel Teacher chooses shock level Percentage of subjects administering the maximum shock (450 volts)
- 38. Critiques of Milgram Although 84% later said they were glad to have participated and fewer than 2% said they were sorry, there are still ethical issues Do these experiments really help us understand real-world atrocities?
- 39. Why Don’t People Always Help Others in Need? Latané studies several scenarios designed to measure the help response found that if you think you’re the only one that can hear or help, you are more likely to do so if there are others around, you will diffuse the responsibility onto others Kitty Genovese incident
- 40. Why Don’t People Always Help Others in Need? Diffusion of responsibility presence of others leads to decreased help response we all think someone else will help, so we don’t Bystander effect--the greater the number of people present, the less likely each person is to help
- 41. Factors that Increase Likelihood of Helping Feel good do good effect Feeling guilty Seeing others willing to help Perceiving person as deserving of help Knowing how to help Personalized relationship with person
- 42. Factors that Decrease Likelihood of Helping Presence of other people Being in a big city or small town Vague or ambiguous situation When personal costs or helping outweigh the benefits
- 43. Prosocial behavior--any behavior that helps another person regardless of underlying motive Altruistic behavior--helping another person without expectation of personal reward or benefit
- 44. Persuasion Foot-in-the-door technique ask for something small at first, then hit customer with larger request later small request has paved the way to compliance with the larger request cognitive dissonance results if person has already granted a request for one thing, then refuses to give the larger item
- 45. The Reciprocity Norm and Compliance We feel obliged to return favors, even those we did not want in the first place opposite of foot-in-the-door salesperson gives something to customer with idea that customer will feel compelled to give something back (buying the product) even if person did not wish for favor in the first place
- 46. Defense against Persuasion Techniques Sleep on it—don’t act on something right away Play devil’s advocate—think of all the reasons you shouldn’t buy the product or comply with the request Pay attention to your gut feelings—if you feel pressured, you probably are being pressured