Social Psychology AP Psych Unit 14

Social psychology The study of how people think, act, and relate to one another in social situations How do we think about one another How do we influence one another How do we relate to one another

Implicit personality theory Quick and automatic assumptions or beliefs that we form about other people and situations Developed through schemas Mental organization of information Formed from repeating behaviors over and over Behaviors that no longer require conscious thought Ex: tying your shoes

Implicit personality theory Schemas also apply to opinions and assumptions If you constantly hear the same thoughts concerning individuals, those thoughts start to become automatic Thought process is no longer required and becomes automatic Like tying your shoes

Attribution theory Describes how people explain other peoples behavior and justify their own Could be compared to rationalization Defense mechanism that provides explanations and excuses to justify behavior

Examples of attribution process Fundamental attribution error Occurs when people explain other people’s behavior and underestimate situational factors Situational attribution And just assume its entirely the person’s fault Dispositional attribution

Examples of attribution process You see a woman yelling hysterically at her boyfriend Situational attribution: You form your opinion based on the situational factor- “I wonder if she just received bad news” Dispositional attribution: You form an opinion based on a personality trait- “she is rude and has no self respect” If you were to describe my personality, you are only describing what you assume based on the classroom situation

Examples of attribution process Blaming the victim The tendency to blame the innocent victim for their misfortune through the belief that he or she deserved the outcome Examples? The just world hypothesis: Good things happen to good people, bad things happen to bad people People believe this rationale and justify behaviors using the blaming the victim attribute Ex: some women choose to not testify in abuse cases because they fear it will be perceived as their fault

Examples of attribution process Actor-observer discrepancy The tendency to attribute one’s own behavior to situational factors While attributing the same exact type of behavior that happens to others to dispositional attribute Its their fault, they deserve it Actor: you fail a test You say: The questions weren’t written clearly Observer: another person fails the same test You say: He/she is not smart enough

Examples of attribution process Self-serving bias The tendency to attribute successful outcomes to internal reasons and attribute unsuccessful outcomes to external reasons (situational factors) You get a good score on a test Because you studied and deserve it You fail a test Because the teacher doesn’t teach right

Examples of attribution process Self-efficacy (modesty) bias The tendency to blame ourselves for our failures and credit our success to external factors or other people Some people have a hard time accepting compliments Or taking credit for accomplishments They want to thank everyone else or say they didn’t deserve it Will own up to failure and accept the consequences

Attitudes Strengthened by beliefs and feelings that then direct the way a person behaves Foot-in-the-door phenomenon The tendency for people who have agreed to do something minor to then do something bigger Ex: get a friend to help you with entire math assignment “I have a few problems left can you help me” Once they agree (thinking it won’t be too much to help with a few problems) it will be easier to convince him/her to help with all the problems Other examples?

Attitudes Door-in-the-face technique When you make a really big request in order to better your chances to get a smaller one A big request makes a smaller one not seem like much Ex: getting money from your dad “Dad can I borrow $50” He says no Then ask for $20 Now $20 doesn’t seem like such a big deal

Attitudes Cognitive dissonance When a person has thoughts that are inconsistent or contradict each other Results in an unpleasant state of psychological tension or arousal Similar to guilt

Attitudes Cognitive dissonance cont. Ex: a person who lies to his or her parents about how he/she is doing in school will at some point experience guilt, or dissonance Because the person has 2 opposing (cognitive) thoughts that are opposite of one another First- he/she knows he/she is not doing well in school Second- everything is going well (the lie) Some people try to reduce the guilt through defense mechanisms Ex: someone who smokes saying everyone does it, or he can quit at anytime

Attitudes Role A set of expectations (norms) about a social position, defining how those in the social position ought to behave When you first get a new role you are acting Overtime the new role becomes you Zimbardo prison study pg 647 Became too real, cancelled after 6 days

Attitudes Elaboration likelihood model Model suggesting that attitudes can change through evaluation of the content of a persuasive message (central route) or by irrelevant persuasion cues (peripheral routes) Central route persuasion The listener focuses on the content of the product Peripheral route The listener focuses on the tone of the person’s voice, become excited about the salesman’s pitch instead of the product

Attitudes Elaboration likelihood model cont. Ex: buying a car- central route S: how can I help you? B: I am interested in this car, what’s the gas mileage? S: great mileage! Let me show you a picture of my family B: nice picture, but I would like more info about the engine of the car Focuses on the content of the product

Attitudes Elaboration likelihood model cont. Ex: buying a car- peripheral route S: how can I help you? B: I am interested in this car S: do you have any kids? B: no S: let me tell you, the women love this car B: really?? S: you are meant for this car! The buyer focused on the salesman’s pitch and excitement, not the product

Conformity Adjusting one’s behavior or thinking to coincide with the group Normative social influence- causes a person to conform for the purpose of approval or disapproval from the group Being part of the norm, or part of the crowd Sharing the same behavior or thought everyone else has Get caught smoking, say “everyone else was doing it”

Conformity Informational social influence Person conforms because the group or person giving the info is seen as an expert of the subject or behavior being performed Some people will accept anything a celebrity says or does, even if it is totally against what they believe He/she will change his/her views to match the celebrities

Conformity Solomon Asch Social psychologist Researched the effects of conformity Would people give the wrong answer, knowing it was wrong, because the rest of the group did?

Conformity Solomon Asch experiment Chosen a group of confederates They were previously instructed to give the wrong answer The subject did not know this Subject sat at the table with the confederates and was asked the question All the confederates agreed on the wrong answer, so subject did too 76% of subjects responded with the wrong answer

Conformity Conformity increases if: Feel insecure or do not know what you are doing The group is made of 3 or more people Rest of the group is unanimous in their opinion You are impressed by the status of the group Feel other people in the group are watching and judging you One has no prior commitment to any response One’s culture strongly encourages respect for social standards

Obedience The tendency to follow a person’s orders or requests because he or she is seen as an authority figure If a boss told an employee to cheat, the employee might because it is coming from an authority figure We tend to believe authority figures know more than us If we were to get in trouble for this we could simply say the boss said to do it

Obedience Stanley Milgram Social psychologist Studied the effects of obedience on a person’s behavior Wanted to know if a person would administer shocks to another person simply because they were told to do so by an authority figure

Obedience The experiment had 3 roles: The experimenter- worked with Milgram, played the role of the authority figure running the experiment The learner- was working with Milgram, played the role of the person experiencing the shock The teacher- was the subject being studied, unaware of the purpose of the experiment

Obedience The teacher would stay with the experimenter The learner was taken to another room The learner could not be seen, but could be heard and spoken to The experimenter told the teacher he/she would be delivering a shock for each wrong answer the learner gave The teacher was given a sample shock so he/she would know the level of pain that would be felt ***the learner was not actually going to feel the shock Each time the teacher gave the learner a shock, the learner would shout in pain, begging not to receive any more shocks The level of shocked increased with every wrong answer

Obedience The results: 75% of the teachers gave the highest shock, at 450 volts No one stopped before administering the 300 volt level

Obedience Why did this happen??? 1. the teacher was told by the experimenter, who was an authority figure, to administer shocks. Teacher justified the shocks given to the learn on the basis he/she was told to do so 2. the teacher believed and trusted that the experimenter, who was an expert/authority figure, would not allow harm to happen to the learner 3. the teacher could not see the learner receive the shocks, which could have made it easier to administer them

Role of authority Philip Zimbardo Wanted to research the effects of authority in social situations Set up Stanford prison experiment to observe actions of prisoners and prison guards

Role of authority Set up of experiment 24 undergraduate students Randomly assigned to play role of prisoner of prison guard Ended after 6 days (scheduled to go 14) Guards took roles too seriously Treated prisoners with humility and aggression

Role of authority Conclusion of experiment Perceptions of power associated with a role tend to affect the way a person thinks and acts Ex: in elementary school when a student is asked to play the role of a teacher often the student will act very strict Shows the student’s perception of the teacher being strict and having control over the students

Social influence Occurs when a person’s behavior is affected by opinions or actions of other people Social facilitation When the presence of other people watching improves the performance of the person performing the task Ex: slacking off at work when no one is looking, working hard when your boss is around Ex: athletes who perform better at games than at practice Social impairment- people who perform worse when others are watching; they “choke”

Social influence Social loafing The tendency for people to do less when working in a group setting Some students look forward to group work because they know they do not have to do as much compared to when working alone Less likely to happen when people in the group do not know one another or if the task is meaningful

Social influence Deindividuation The loss of a person’s identity or self-restraint that occurs in the presence of other people Some people act differently in the presence of a group Drinking or smoking when others are, but never on their own

Social influence Groupthink When the desire to keep social harmony among the group becomes more important than personal opinion Ex: you are driving with some of your friends and they start talking about another friend. Everybody is in agreement that your absent friend has been rude lately. You don’t think this is true, but don’t want to cause an argument, so you keep your opinion to yourself despite the fact you know they are wrong

Social influence Group polarization When an attitude or thought becomes stronger in the presence of a group of people People hold rallies to strengthen an opinion or idea Political rallies, pep assemblies, student demonstrations Ex: if you dislike someone, then when you are with your friends you tell them. If they agree with you its likely your anger towards that person will become stronger

Social influence Self-fulfilling prophecies Occurs when a person listens to the opinions of other people and then accepts these opinions Now that person lives up to the beliefs and expectations of the others Ex: if a teacher constantly tells a student he/she is nothing and will not amount to anything, he/she will eventually will start to act more like a terrible student and eventually give up The self (person) if Fulfilling (making true) the other people’s prophecies (thoughts about that person)

Attraction Why do we befriend or fall in love with some people but not others?? Proximity Geographic nearness Friendships most powerful predictor Mere exposure effect Describes how constant exposure to a stimuli will eventually lead to finding that stimuli appealing Even if it was not initially liked

Attraction Mere exposure effect cont. Can be applied to different situations Teachers- seem awful at first, over time begin to like him/her Relationships- most people don’t start dating right away, start as friends, then become attracted to one another

Attraction Physical attractiveness Once proximity puts you together, this most affects your first impressions Predicts frequency of dating and initial impressions of personality Think about your favorite movies What does the hero look like? The villain? Cultural influences Feelings about a person

Attraction Similarity Proximity brings you together Physical attractiveness makes a good first impression How similar you are will decide if you can get along with one another In real life opposites retract Friends and couples often share common attitudes, beliefs, and interests

Attraction Romantic love- Elaine Hatfield Temporary passionate love An aroused state of intense positive absorption in another Typically present at the beginning of a love relationship Enduring companionate love Deep affectionate attachment Based on similar interests Non-western cultures focus more on companionate love Arranged marriages Lower divorce rate

Altruism Helping behavior Unselfish regard or caring for the welfare of others

Altruism The case of Kitty Genovese Why did no one help? New York City 1964- 3:30 am A man stabbed and raped her outside her apartment She screamed for help before and after he left 38 neighbors turned lights on and opened windows, but did nothing 20 minutes later he returned and attacked her again It wasn’t until after he left the second time and she continued screaming that someone finally called the police Why did no one help?

Altruism John Darley and Bibb Latane Social psychologists Kitty Genovese’s case sparked their interest in studying altruism Researched circumstances or factors that when present contribute to people helping other people

Altruism Diffusion of responsibility Bystander effect The tendency for a bystander to be less likely to help if there are other people present Why? They can justify their choice through the excuse no one else helped or did anyhting either

Altruism When are people likely to help? 1. if they are not in a hurry 2. if they are in a good mood 3. they believe the victim has a similar background as them 4. they are feeling guilty about something they did wrong earlier in the day 5. they see someone else is helping

Altruism Social exchange theory The theory that our social behavior is an exchange process Our aim is to maximize benefits and minimize costs Ex: should I donate blood Costs: time, discomfort, anxiety Benefits: reduced guilt, social approval, good feelings

Altruism Reciprocity norm Social-responsibility norm An expectation that people will help, not hurt, those who have helped them Learned through socialization Ex: favors, gifts, social invitations Social-responsibility norm Expectation that people will help those dependent upon them Ex: children, elderly, those who cannot give as much as they can receive

Prejudice An unjustifiable and usually negative attitude towards a group and its members Generally involves stereotyped beliefs Negative feelings are involved

Prejudice Stereotype Discrimination A generalized belief about a group of people Leads to social categorization The thought that a specific group shares certain commonalities or traits Discrimination Taking certain actions against a group of people because of stereotypes

Prejudice In-group Out-group In-group bias The group you are a member of Out-group The group you do not belong to In-group bias The tendency to favor one’s own group High school clique competitions Thinking your opinions are true about other groups, putting other groups down or making fun of them

Prejudice Scapegoat theory Theory that prejudiced behavior provides an outlet for anger and blame Some people need to blame another person when things do not go well These other people provide as an outlet (scapegoat) to blame to take the blame off themselves Can lead to prejudice behavior

Prejudice Muzafer Sherif Social psychologist Studied how to reduce and eliminate prejudice behavior Developed the robber’s cave experiment To determine the best methods for solving differences between groups Marriage counselor’s may have couples work through a similar type of experiment to sole issues they are having

Prejudice Sherif’s experiment Part one: divide a group of boys into 2. each group was isolated and encouraged to interact or bond with the others in the same group. Each group bonded and even developed names for their group: the rattlers and the eagles

Prejudice Sherif’s experiment cont. Part two: develop friction between the group by having them participate in contests and rewarding the winner, while the losing team received nothing and was made to feel inferior Led to fights between the two groups later in social settings

Prejudice Sherif’s experiment cont. First step to solve the differences: have them perform “get-to-know you” activities Did not solve their differences though Next attempt: tamper with camp’s water supply. Boys were told that the water was damaged and in order to fix it they would all have to work together to the camps was over Both groups, not wanting to go home, started to work together- putting their differences aside Focused on fixing the water problem