1. Ap psychology: Unit Iii
Social Psychology
The scientific study of how we think about, influence and relate to one another…
Ap psychology: Unit Iii

2. Introduction: Fact or Falsehood?
Most people refuse to obey an authority figure who has told them to hurt an innocent person
False
In order to change people’s racist behaviors, we first need to change their racist attitudes
We are less likely to offer help to a stranger if other bystanders are present
True

3. Introduction: Fact or Falsehood?
Individuals pull harder in a team tug-of-war than when they pull in a one-on-one tug-of-war
False
The higher the morale & harmony of a social group, the more likely its members are to make a good decision
From research on liking & loving, it is clear that opposites do attract
Studies of college & professional athletic events indicate that home teams win about 60% of the time
True

4. Social Psychology: Social Thinking, Attribution
Explaining Behavior

5. Social Thinking: Attribution
Attribution Theory (Fritz Heider)
The theory that suggests the way in which we explain the behavior of others…
We attribute behavior to internal dispositions or external situations
Example
Was my friend a jerk because he had a bad day or is he simply a bad person?

6. Social Thinking: Attribution

7. Social Thinking: Attribution
3 Factors:
Internal vs. External causes
Dispositional factors vs. Situational factors
Distinctive or Consistent behavior
Is this an isolated incident or does it occur often?
Consensus
Are other people acting the same way?

8. Social Thinking: Attribution
Fundamental Attribution Error
The tendency for observers, when analyzing another’s behavior, to overestimate the impact of personal disposition and underestimate the impact of the situation
Example
How do students typically view a teacher’s cranky behavior?
Most probably attribute it to their personality, as opposed to their profession…

9. Social Thinking: Attribution
Your teacher was mean; in that class it was okay…
You believe that cheating is bad/wrong...
But you cheat on your math test…

10. Social Thinking: Attribution
What is the function of the fundamental attribution error?
To protect our self-esteem
If we do something wrong, it makes us feel better to blame outside factors, as opposed to blaming ourselves

11. Social Thinking: Attribution
Defensive Attribution
Tendency to blame victims for their misfortune
One feels less likely to be victimized in a similar way
Also know as “Just-World Bias”
“What terrible criminals these prisoners must have been to receive such treatment…”

12. Social Psychology: Social Thinking, Attitudes
Making Social Judgments

13. Social Thinking: Attitudes
Feelings, based on our beliefs, that predispose our reactions to objects, people, and events

14. Social Thinking: Attitudes
Components of Attitude
Attitudes may include up to different components
Affective Component
Feelings stimulated by an object of thought
Cognitive Component
Beliefs about the object of an attitude
Behavioral Component
Predispositions to act in certain ways toward an attitude object

15. Social Thinking: Attitudes
Dimensions of Attitude
Attitudes may vary along several crucial dimensions
Strength
How firmly held? Durable over time? Impact on behavior?
Accessibility
How often & how quickly does it come to mind?
Ambivalence (mixed feelings)
Conflicted evaluations that include both positive and negative feelings
The higher the level of ambivalence the less predictive of behavior

16. Social Thinking: Attitudes
Methods of Attitude Persuasion
Central Route Persuasion
Occurs when interested/analytical people focus on the arguments & respond with favorable thoughts
Example: Followers of world religions
Peripheral Route Persuasion
Occurs when people are influenced by incidental cues, such as a speaker’s attractiveness or endorsements by respected people
Example: Kennedy v. Nixon (1960)

17. Social Thinking: Attitudes
#1) Source (WHO)
#2) Message (WHAT)
Credibility
Expertise
Trustworthiness
Likability
Attractiveness
Similarity
Fear appeal v. logic
One-sided v. two-sided argument
Number of strong or weak arguments
Repetition
#3) Channel (DELIVERY)
#4) Receiver (TO WHOM)
In person
On TV or radio
Via audiotape
Via internet
Via telephone
Personality
Expectations
Initial attitude on issue
Strength of preexisting attitude
Factors in Attitude Persuasion

18. Social Thinking: Attitudes
Leon
Festinger
Cognitive Dissonance Theory
The theory that we act to reduce the dissonance (discomfort) we feel when two of our thoughts are inconsistent
Attitudes vs. Actions
Example
A person who smokes, yet knows the health risks will either…
Stop smoking, or
Rationalize that nothing bad will happen to them

19. Cognitive Dissonance Example
Rationalize Behavior:
I deserve it
I’ll hit the gym tomorrow
The cheesecake calls out to Coach King causing feelings of guilt
Change behavior:
Head over to the fruit aisle

20. Social Psychology: Social Influence, Conformity
Adjusting one’s behavior or thinking to coincide with a group standard; yielding to real or imagined social pressure

21. Consider various settings:
Normative Behavior
What are some of the socially accepted norms that exist within our society?
Consider various settings:
Public settings, bathroom, Elevator, classroom, Dining, phone conversations

22. Social Influence: Conformity
Influential Studies
Asch’s Conformity Study (Solomon Asch, 1955)
50 subjects; young, undergraduate men
Found that participants conformed on 37% of all trials
75% conformed at least once
Of the 50 participants…
13 never caved
14 conformed on more than half of the trials

23. Social Influence: Conformity
Conditions that Strengthen Conformity
Feelings of incompetence or insecurity
Group size; at least 3 people
Group is unanimous
Admiration of the group’s status/attractiveness
No prior commitment to any other response
Strong cultural “respect” for social standards
Sex?

24. Social Influence: Conformity
Reasons for Conforming
Normative Social Influence
Conformity to social norms for fear of negative social consequences
Informational Social Influence
Conformity to social norms when one looks to others for guidance about how to behave in ambiguous situations

25. Normative
Social Influence or
Informational
Social Influence?

26. Social Psychology: Social Influence, Compliance
A change in behavior prompted by a direct request, as opposed to social norm pressure

27. Social Influence: Compliance
Foot-in-the-Door Phenomenon
The tendency for people who have first agreed to a small request to comply later with a large request
Considerations
The original small agreement creates a bond between the requestor and the requestee
Pro-social requests are especially effective with this technique

28. Social Influence: Compliance
Door-in-the-Face Phenomenon
The tendency for people who have first disagreed to a large request, to accept a more reasonable request
Considerations
The individual feels guilty for turning down the first request; fears rejection if they continue to decline
The second request looks good compared to the first

29. Social Influence: Compliance
Low-Ball Technique
The tendency for people to accept an unattractive detail if it is introduced after the deal is made, but not the other way around
Considerations
People will behave consistently to their beliefs in order to sustain their commitment
Many may believe that they can’t back out after the initial agreement

30. Social Influence: Compliance
Ingratiation
Involves getting someone to like you in order to obtain compliance with a request
Considerations
Flattery: Focus on positive elements in order to let the “target” know that you think highly of them
Opinion Conformity: Agree with the beliefs & values of the “target;” allow them to “convince” you of their opinion
Self-Presentation: Present yourself in a manner that the “target” would like

31. Social Psychology: Social Influence, Obedience
A form of compliance that occurs when people follow direct commands, usually from someone in a position of authority

32. Social Influence: Obedience
Influential Studies
The Milgram Experiment (Stanley Milgram, 1974)
“I was only following orders…”
Adolf Eichmann
Administration of electrical shocks (varying levels)
Findings?

33. “The most fundamental lesson of our study is that ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process…” – Stanley Milgram

34. Milgram’s Experiment How can cognitive dissonance theory be applied?
What factors impacting level of obedience were identified?
What ethical issues emerged?
How does gender impact obedience?

35. Social Influence: Which One?
Influential Studies
Stanford-Prison Experiment (Philip Zimbardo, 1972)
Goal: See how role of guard or prisoner impacted behavior
Demonstrated the power of “roles,” as well as deindividuation
Abu Ghraib Prison (Iraq, 2004)
The power of social roles and the situation
Conformity? Compliance? Obedience?

36. “Prisoner” and “Guard Behaviors and Reactions
The “Guards”
The “Prisoners”
Used demeaning, degrading language; harassed and intimidated
Became docile, subservient
Shot a fire extinguisher at prisoners
Uncontrollable crying and rage
Made visiting bathroom a privilege
Planned and staged “rebellion”
Removed stocking caps, tearing off uniforms, barricading cells
Stripped prisoners naked; removed beds/blankets
Gave up all attempts at rebellion
Allowed privileges (food, teeth brushing)
Assumed “every-man-for-himself” attitude
Sought to break prisoners’ spirit
Became completely passive and dehumanized – “robot-like” (after 6 days)

37. Social Psychology: Social Influence, Groups
Consists of two or more individuals who interact and are interdependent…

38. CLASS ACTIVITY
Take out a scrap piece of paper and prepare to respond to the following prompt
If you could do anything humanly possible with complete assurance that you would not be detected or held responsible, what would you do?

39. Common Responses Pro-social, Anti-social, Non-normative
Aggression
Charity
Academic dishonesty
Crime
Escapism
Political activities
Spying
Eavesdropping
Travel
Social disruption
Sexual behavior

40. Social Influence: Group Influence
Group Influence on Decision-Making
Deindividuation
People lose their sense of self and follow group behavior
Abandonment of normal restraints
Act without thinking; going along with group
Examples:
Food fight
Yelling at referee or umpire

41. CLASS ACTIVITY
TASK:
AS A GROUP, YOU WILL HAVE 3 MINUTES TO CREATE PAPER AIRPLANES THAT ARE IDENTICAL
Points awarded:
1 point - each identical airplane created
1 point – every foot it flies

42. Social Influence: Group Influence
Group Influence on Decision-Making
Groupthink
When members of a cohesive group emphasize concurrence at the expense of critical thinking in arriving at a decision
Typically considered a “diseased” group process
Bay of Pigs Invasion
Challenger Explosion

43. CLASS ACTIVITY
Consider the question I gave you yesterday as you entered class
You have been grouped together with those that share your viewpoint
As a group, defend your viewpoint by creating a list of reasons as to why Donald Trump will or will not be our next president

44. Social Influence: Group Influence
Group Influence on Decision-Making
Group Polarization
The enhancement of a group’s prevailing inclinations through discussions within the group
May produce a shift towards a more extreme decision
Typically considered a “normal” group process
Initial Response
After Group Discussion
Agree 5
5.4
Disagree 4
3.25
Initial Response
After Group Discussion
Agree 6
8.8
Disagree
4.6 4
Trump for President!

45. Social Influence: Group Influence
Group Influence on Performance
Social Facilitation
An individual’s performance is impacted by the presence of others
Pool players who made 71% of their shots when alone, made 80% when they had spectators
Things you do well…
will like improve with an audience
Things you find difficult…
may become more difficult with an audience
Sport
Games Studied
Home Team Winning %
Baseball
23,034
53.5
Football
2,592
57.3
Ice Hockey
4,322
61.1
Basketball
13,596
64.4
Soccer
37,202
69.0

46. Social Influence: Group Influence
Group Influence on Productivity
Reasons for reduced individual productivity in groups?
Social loafing
A reduction in effort by individuals when they work in groups as compared to when they work by themselves
Tug-of-War
Group projects

47. Consider the Following
How might the following impact behavior/performance?
Group size (larger or smaller)
Friendship groups
Prize/Reward
Groupthink, Social loafing, Group polarization

48. Social Influence: Group Influence
Group Influence on Helping Behaviors
Bystander Effect
A social phenomenon in which people are less likely to provide needed assistance when they are in groups, as opposed to when they are alone
Summarizing many different studies, psychologists estimate that…
People who are by themselves provide help 75% of the time
People who are surrounded by others help 53% of the time
WHY?
What does inaction by other people suggest?
When We Avoid Becoming the Bystander
Social exchange theory
Social behavior is an exchange process aimed at maximizing benefits and minimizing costs
Weighing the consequences of getting involved
Reciprocity norm
Expectation that people will help, not hurt, those that have helped them
Need to give as much as we receive
Diffusion of responsibility

49. Kitty Genovese
Murdered outside her Queens, N.Y. apartment on March 13, 1964
38 witnesses saw assailant stab Genovese
“I didn’t want to get involved”
“We thought it was a lover’s quarrel”
“Frankly, we were afraid”
“For more than half an hour 38 respectable, law-abiding citizens in Queens watched a killer stalk and stab a woman in three separate attacks in Kew Gardens Not one person telephoned the police during the assault; one witness called after the woman was dead.”
- Martin Gansberg, New York Times

50. Social Psychology: Social Relations, Prejudice

51. Social Relations: Prejudice
Unjustifiable positive or negative attitude toward a group; often based on stereotypes
Generally involves beliefs, emotions & behavioral dispositions
Age, sex, height, income, disability, race, etc.
Discrimination
Unjustifiable & negative behavior toward the members of a group
Do prejudice and discrimination always go hand-in-hand?

52. Social Relations: Prejudice
Examples
In one study, most white participants perceived a white man shoving a black man as “horsing around”; however, when they saw a black man shoving a white man, they interpreted it as “violence”
A black New Jersey dentist who drove a gold BMW was stopped more than 75 times within a year

53. Social Relations: Prejudice
Example
In Los Angeles, landlords received identically worded s from a would-be tenant (actually a researcher) expressing interest in vacant apartments advertised online
Encouraging replies came back to:
56% of s signed “Tyrell Jackson”
66% signed “Said Al-Rahman”
89% of those signed “Patrick McDougall”

54. Social Relations: Prejudice
Roots of Prejudice
In-Group
People with whom one shares a common identity; “us”
In-group bias
The tendency to favor one’s own group
Out-Group
Perceived as different or apart from one’s in-group; “them”
Significance?
Once an in-group is established, prejudice and discriminatory treatment of the out-group soon follows…

55. Social Relations: Prejudice
Realistic Conflict Theory
Prejudice & discrimination will be increased between groups that are in conflict over a limited resource
Examples
Native population of (name a country) & the colonists who wanted the land
Scapegoating
Prejudice provides outlet for anger/aggression by providing someone to blame
When does this phenomenon become most prevalent?
High Prejudice

56. Social Relations: Prejudice
How do people learn prejudice?
Social Identity Theory
Formation of person's identity within a particular group is explained by social categorization, social identity & social comparison
Helps explain why people feel need to categorize, or stereotype, others producing in-group sense of “us versus them” that people adopt toward out-groups
Stereotype Vulnerability
The effect that people’s awareness of the stereotypes associated with their social group has on their behavior
Self-fulfilling prophecy

57. Social Psychology: Social Relations, Attraction

58. “Hey good-looking” Florida State University (1989)
Young (moderately attractive) women approached male students at random
50% agreed to go out sometime
70% agreed to visit apartment
75% accepted sexual proposition

59. Social Relations: Attraction
The Rules of Attraction (Key Factors)
Proximity/Physical Closeness
Availability depends heavily on proximity
Mere Exposure Effect
The phenomenon that repeated exposure to novel stimuli increases our liking of them
“He grew on me…”
Applies to our perception of our self as well
We tend to favor those who are similar to ourselves

60. Looks are the most important thing to me
Agree or Disagree
Looks are the most important thing to me

61. Social Relations: Attraction
The Rules of Attraction
(Key Factors)
Physical Attractiveness
Research indicates that attractive people of both sexes enjoy greater mating success
We also consider our OWN LEVEL of attractiveness when pursuing partners
The “Matching” Hypothesis

62. I would be willing to go on a blind date
Agree or Disagree
I would be willing to go on a blind date

63. I would be willing to use online resources to find a mate
Agree or Disagree
I would be willing to use online resources to find a mate

64. Social Relations: Attraction
The Rules of Attraction (Key Factors)
Similarity Effects
Birds of a feather flock together…
Age, race, religion, social class, education, intelligence, physical attractiveness, values and attitudes…
Serves to validate us
Similarity causes attraction; however, attraction can also foster similarity…
Reciprocity of Liking
The tendency of people to like people who like them

65. Agree or Disagree
I think it is important that I live with my partner before we are married

66. Social Relations: Attraction
Components of Love (Robert Sternberg, 1997)
Intimacy
Feelings of closeness; emotional ties
Passion
The physical aspect of love; characterized by large swings in positive & negative emotions
Commitment
The decisions that one makes regarding a relationship
May coexist, but don’t necessarily go hand-in-hand…

67. Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love

68. Social Relations: Attraction
Secure Attachment (56% of adult subjects)
I find it relatively easy to get close to others…
I am comfortable depending on others and having them depend on me…
I don’t often worry about being abandoned or about someone getting too close to me…

69. Social Relations: Attraction
Avoidant Attachment (24% of adult subjects)
I am somewhat uncomfortable being close to others…
I find it difficult to trust them & difficult to allow myself to depend on them…
I am nervous when anyone gets too close…
I often feel that partners want me to be more intimate than I feel comfortable being…

70. Social Relations: Attraction
Anxious-Ambivalent Attachment
(20% of adult subject)
I find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like…
I often worry that my partner doesn’t really love me or won’t want to stay with me…
I want to merge completely with another person, and this desire sometimes scares people away…