New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

Social Pyschology exams 2 3 and 4

by: Jimbo Notetaker

Social Pyschology exams 2 3 and 4 Psy331

Marketplace > University at Buffalo > Psychlogy > Psy331 > Social Pyschology exams 2 3 and 4
Jimbo Notetaker
GPA 3.89
Social Psychology

Almost Ready


These notes were just uploaded, and will be ready to view shortly.

Purchase these notes here, or revisit this page.

Either way, we'll remind you when they're ready :)

Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

Detailed notes on Class material for tests 2, 3 and 4.
Social Psychology
Social Psychology University at Buffalo notes
75 ?




Popular in Social Psychology

Popular in Psychlogy

This 75 page Bundle was uploaded by Jimbo Notetaker on Wednesday February 4, 2015. The Bundle belongs to Psy331 at University at Buffalo taught by Seery in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 129 views. For similar materials see Social Psychology in Psychlogy at University at Buffalo.


Reviews for Social Pyschology exams 2 3 and 4


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 02/04/15
Social Cognition how we think about the social world 0 Two way 0 Explicit processing Conscious effortful Intentional EX Solving a complex math problem have to think details through and engage in conscious attention 0 Implicit processing Nonconscious don t need to walk through steps effortless automatic Ex understanding language cant help when seeing letters as the word it makes up 0 Explicit VS Implicit Both plus and minus Implicit FAST and Easy But INFLEXIBLE works how it works Explicit Takes effort but FLEXIBLE make sense in novels ua ons o EX Learning language you need EXPLICT work you have to work the words threw then after learned its IMPLICIT 0 Driving a car starts explicit then going implicit o Cognitively Busy having something to think about Implicit ok Explicit interrupted Implicit processes can work together ONLY ONE EXPLICIT THING AT ONE TIME INTERPLAY BTW EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT COGNITION If trying not to think about something white bear Thought SuppressionWegner at al Btw subjects one version manipulation With in all levels manipulation everyone is exposed to everything try to think of a white bear Try to NOT think of white bear 0 RESULTS 0 Suppression try not to think white bear Hard brief ashes of white bear as time goes on less thought white bear 0 Expression after Suppression 0 Expression before suppression Get distracted SelfRegulation and the rebound effect 0 Hard to control own thoughts Suppression leads to obsession trying not to do it leads to thinking about it more 0 Important topic more rebound effect MAGNEFIED 0 Ex bad breakup cant stop thinking about them want to stop but cant o EXPLANATION 2 part process 0 any signs thought of white bear alert thought of white bear in conscious Alarm Explicit O concentrate on something else I No rebound effect when asked to think about something else NO EXPLICIT CORRECTION 0 Breakup example if you meet someone new it helps to stop thinking about the other Need BOTH 0 When conscious suppression stopsimplicit search conUnues I More likely to think about it o How to Avoid 0 STOP TRYING Ex staying awake vs falling asleep when you try and fall asleep and think about it your thinking to many wakeful thoughts 0 TRYING TO THINK ABOUT SOMETHING IS EASIR THEN TRYING NOT THING ABOUT SOMETHING How we think 0 We use time and effort saving strategies 0 Ex spend the night 0 Usually works but NOT always leave us open to o Reasoning fallacies Two types 0 1 We see what we expect 0 2 We see what we want to see 0 We think to con rm what we expect 0 We see what we expect expectations can be easy to affect initial impressions Conformation seeking Snyder and Swann 0 Determine if partner is introvert or extrovert with generated questions 0 Questions were biased o EVERYONE WILL SOUND LIKE AN INTROVERTED PERSON WITH INTROVERTED QUESTIONS SOUND LIKE AN EXTROVERT WITH EXTROVERTED QUESTIONS 0 elicit corresponding answers SelfFul lling prophecy in the classroom teachers were told some students would be bloomers those students ended up doing better over the school year but they were really just chosen randomly Teachers expectation affected how they treated the students 0 More attention encouragement which helps learning 0 Our expectations shape our behavior and shapes others behaviors which con rm our behaviors 0 We miss our role in behaving differently EX Rude at a job interview I expect you to be rude so I m rude to you so you are rude back con rming my expectation Expectations 0 Preexisting knowledge 0 SCHEMA organized structure of knowledge that guides info processing Different types people events scripts Things we know that help us shape info we are faced with Included how things t together with in each other interpret info quickly 0 Fill in gaps 0 Example poke in the back schema getting robbed Give me you wallet he doesn t just want the actual wallet he wants what s in it o Disadvantage ll in gaps o Incorrectly 0 Ex Iowa hickrural born on farms l simple living interpreting theme do to Schema 2 We see what we want 0 Remember the self 0 We seek positive Selfview increase selfesteem Well work for it 0 Can we go to far 0 POSTIVE ILLUSION seeing self in objectively overly positive light Mental health class de nition Positive Selfregard Ability to care for others Ability to do productive work Accurate view of reality Illusion and WellBeing 3 types positive illusions o Unrealistic positive view of self Unrealistic optimism Exaggerated perceptions of personal control Overlap amp link to well being 000 Unrealistic Positive views of self 0Better then average 0 Friends too OGives selves credit for success Not BLAME for failure OFail test teachers fault do well your smart OSelf serving bias ORate ourselves higher then observers too Unrealistic Optimism were special 0Tend to be optimistic 0 Present is better then the past 0 Expect future better 0 More for us over other people 0 EXPECT WHAT WE WANT 0 Not objectively likely Exaggerated Perceptions of control 0 Gabling you want to roll die over the other person it gives you ILLUSION OF CONTROL 0 Langer lottery study Illusion of unique invulnerability 0 Bad things wont happen to me because I control my outcomes 0 Ex driving your in control a plane no control people are more nervous to y then drive a car 0We feel like we can get away with bad things 0Young men suffer more LINKS TO WELL BEING Control 0 lnvulnerability illusion dangerous 0 Bad physical health 0 Carinsurance o Critically ill patients pain limited time 0 Focus on controlling symptoms life tasks good adjustment 0 Focus on impossible cure not good Poor physiological adjustment 0 Trying to stop disease over shooting control isn t good Positive viewsoptimism Task persistence and effort 0 Trying to face adversity effort still applied after rejection 0 Feel worth more push limits until satis ed 0 Risk temporary failure but better long term outcomes 0 Physical health 0 If optimism makes stress seem less stressful 0 Can have health BENEFITS o EX seeing events as manageable vs Not not manageablebad for body over weight 0 Implications 0 See what we expect Time and effort saver Maintain inaccurate beliefs Act on them 0 Self ful lling prophecy See what we want Positive illusions can be good in Moderation 0 Ex seeing more control where some exists not none 0 Excessive illusions Hallucinations Attitudes and persuasion What is an Attitude De nition Positive or negative evaluations of an object 0 We have attitude about all kinds of things Ourselves other people abstract concepts bricks Why are attitudes interesting 0 Big reason INFLUENCE BEHAVIOR Effects of attitudes on behavior 0 Conventional wisdom attitude cause behavior 0 30 weak relationship 0 5060 Panic Jump ship 0 More research clearer picture 0 5 factors for strong aptitude behavior relationships Not exhaustive 1 Measure attitude towards behavior a Distinction attitude toward behavior target and behavior itself b Ex Political candidate like candidate but don t like act of giving money c Early attitude research attitudes towards targets i Weak predictor of behavior ii Reason only 1 of many factors into attitudes towards behaviors 2 Get an accurate measurement a Only measure attitudes that someone expresses i Goes through self presentation lter ii Don t want to look bad by revealing objectionable views we hold iii Ex secret Bigot only like people similar to me don t reveal true attitude because people might not like me Bogus Pipeline Fools people into expressing true attitudes Results paper rated blacks more positively relative to Average Americans at the time o Bogus Pipeline Rated more negatively because the machine knows 0 Implications someone might seem friendly attitude but stab you in the back behavior 0 TRUE attitudes can be hard to come by but are better predictors of behavior 3 Measure speci c attitude a Distinction speci c general attitude b EX I don t like cats in general i I like whisker the neighborhood cat c Fishbein and Ajzen i General attitudes did not predict speci c behavior l attitudes about cats as a whole didn t show attitude towards the neighborhood cat ii Speci c attitudes did attitude toward neighborhood cat predicted behavior I like neighborhood cat l pet neighborhood cat 4 Make attitude accessible a Accessibility likelihood the info will become active in cognitive processes b Increase accessibility increase chance attitude will come to mind c Snyder and swann Af rmative action questionnaire i Results decision followed original attitudes more closely when they were accessible 5 Strong attitudes resistant to change a Better predictors of behavior b Stable over time c Many in uences on attitude strength d lntraattitudinal aspects consistent experience i Ex cats always good experience always nice ii Cat bites once and a while inconsistent experience less strong attitude e Interattitudinal aspects linked to values i Ex Jury duty positive attitude because linked to Civic responsibility important value to me Personal experience is BIG 0 Regan and Fazio housing shortage study 0 Cornell freshman either dorm room or cot in dorm lounge 0 All had negative attitudes to shortage Later those with personal experience were more willing to act 0 Join committee not let it happen again Desire for Consistency We like consistency Balance theory one perspective 0 Object other person Person 0 Desire for consistency o I like com I like tommy tommy likes corn Balanced o I like com I like tommy but tommy doesn t like corn unbalanced o I like com I don t like tommy Tommy doesn t like corn Balanced enemy should not like what I like Festinger well do crazy things for consistency Cognitive dissonance theory 1 We seek consistency between thought and actions 2 We feel tension dissonances when inconsistent 3 We are motivated to reduce dissonance a Hard to change you behavior after the fact b WE CAN CHANGE OUR ATTITUDE ABOUT BEHAVIOR i Its ok I ate the cookie because were really great friends Insuf cient justi cation 0 00000 Told to lie about study get paid either a dollar or 20 dollars Results who liked study more 20 suf cient justi cation for lying I lied because of money explains inconsistency no attitude change quotI hated Taskquot 0 1 dollars insuf cient justi cation for lying o Lying not for money still have inconsistency high levels dissonance attitude change 0 CHANGE ATTITUDE TO MATCH BEHAVIOR NO DISSONENCE 0 Rating I liked task Dissonance lessened Practical applications cognitive dissonance o Joining a sorority hazing unpleasant experience 0 Creates inconsistency choosing to put self in bad situation 0 How do we resolve this Create things to make in worth it in the end 0 JUSTIFICATION OF EFFORT o Justifying after the fact why I suffered to be member 0 ROLE OF FREEDOM TO CHOOSE Forced to do it reason for discrepancy Choose to do itD only if it were worth it PERSUASION O O O O O 0 Process of consciously attempting to change attitudes through transmission of a message info to change mind Speci c kind of attitude change EX horrible blizzard not persuasion attitude not changed through message Persuasion ADVERTISING someone s product of service is worth spending money on Important 2011 us expenditures greater then 171 billion Top company proeter and Gamble 295 billion Classic approach 0 o Yale group hovland starting in 40s interested in what is persuasive 0 Source variables who expertise of the source doctor 0 Message variables what Humor 0 Medium and channel variables means speed of speech 0 Target variables to whom current mood Recent advances o valuable ndings 0 List of factors with conditions 0 shift from what is persuasive l process of underlying how it work WHY ELABORTATION LIKLIEHOOD MODEL 0 Framework for integrating list 0 ELABORTION process of assessing central merits of a message Thinking deeply of quality of message 0 Argument quality CONTINUM OF EL 0 High El scrutinize arguments arrive at WELL REASONED and SUPPORT attitude this is my attitude and why STRONG attitude to persuasion Strong change cant change attitude so fast 0 LOW EL Unlikely to think deeply scrutinize less use shortcuts 5 supporting reasons sounds good to me weak change easy to change attitude INCREASE IN MOTIVATION AND ABILITY INCREASE EL INCREASE SCRUTINY o Distractions by TV cause low EL or just don t care low EL 0 Motivated and care HIGH EL Two Hypotheses 1 Trade off hypothesis as impact of central processes increase impact of peripheral decrease more we think deeply the less we use shortcuts a Not necessarily impact of variables source expertise b Not occurrence central and peripheral 2 Multiple roles hypothesis variable can exert in uence using different processes are different points on the continuum a EX beautiful scenery car advertisement i Low el scenery a shortcut no connection btw the beach and the car ii Peripheral processing iii HIGH EL scenery evaluated as an argument 1 Scenery is a poor argument 2 CENRTAL PROCESSING i Vacation same result high and low EL but for different reasons strong attitude change 4 ROLES 1 Treated as argument a When EL ls high b Persuasiveness depends on argument quality high quality argument 2 Bias processing of ambiguous info a When EL is high b Still judging central merits but favor one interpretation over another c EX UB professor VS company researcher 3 Short cuts a EL low b Saving cognitive effort c EX fashion model why physically attractive we think we will look like them when we were the clothes there wearing 4 In uence motivation and ability a Most likely when El is moderate b Unsure if effort is worthwhile c Personal relevance and importance and increase in motivation care about d lncongruity with expectations increase motivation EX expert with surprisingly weak arguments INCONSISTENCY CAPTURES A39ITENTION now fully engaged Tth g Distractions decrease ability i Comfy posture can process message ii Exercise cant think deeply iii Make question right to the point when there not paying attention get better response h No ability to think deeply i Don t care about it lack motivation Effects are no alwaysstraight forwards o Rhetorical questions who do you think you are 0 If motivation is low Rhetorical questions can increase interest and motivation o If motivation is high it can decrease ability thinking something else now Motivation Ability Persuasion o For all effects on persuasion depend on resultant EL 0 Low El function of peripheral cues present ash and dazzle 0 High El function of argument strength of arguments and persuasive No single recipe of persuasion works 0 Low El can both HIDE POOR ARGUMENT and UNDERMINE A GOOD ONE no thinking 0 HIGH EL can both EXPOSE POOR ONE AND CAUSE ACCEPTENCE of good one 0 EX source Variables 0 Source attractiveness and likeability 0 Low El conditions periphera cues MORE A39ITRACTIVE INCREASE PERSUASION 0 Moderate El INCREASE attractiveness INCREASES EL want to hear what they have to say 0 High El Not as much research 0 Bias processing give the bene t of the doubt EX Message Variables o Argument quality 0 Low El more reasons given INCREASE persuasion 0 High El INCREASE in STRONG arguments INCREASE in Persuasion INCREASE IN WEAK arguments DECREASE IN persuasion Adding weak to strong decrease in persuasion then strong alone strong gets less persuasive when adding weak arguments SUBLIMINAL STIMULI Mere exposer effect tendency for repeated exposer to a stimulus to result in greater liking something grows on you 0 The more you see symbols more you like it INCREEASE EXPOSER INCREASE LIKEING Fluency Ease of processing 0 If we have seen it before easier processing 0 Search for reasons of uency o EXPOSURED quotEASYquot reason Liking 0 Reason where is the uency coming from unconscious Weisbunch Manipulations exposed to multiple faces 0 Explicit supraliminal see faces 0 Implicit subliminal ash face for a second unaware exposed to face 0 No exposer target face not shown 0 DV source attractiveness liking 0 Agreement with message measure of persuasion Resuks Attractiveness o Explicit has a greater liking then implicit and no exposer Agreeing message 0 Explicit and implicit greater then no Exposer o Explicit exposer 0 Agreement mediated by attractiveness o Explicit attractiveness agreement 0 Attractive effects persuasion and like person 0 Implicit o Attractiveness not part of it o Implicit agreement 0 Persuaded but don t like more Explanation 0 Prior exposer to source INCREASES uency can make message more convincing o Explicit exposer attributed to attractiveness o Attractiveness INCREASE in persuasiveness o Implicit attributed directly to persuasiveness 101613 Weisbuch Study 2 Similar procedure but asked have you seen this face before Remember uency attribution Results Seen before 0 Explicit is greater then implicit and no exposure 0 Attractiveness no differences 0 Before Explicit was greater then implicit and no exposer 0 Agreement implicit is greater then explicit and no exposer 0 Before explicit implicit Explanation o Explicit quotseen beforequot salient attribution for uency l have seen this person before l sucks up uency and diffuses other attributions o Attractiveness not there after question 0 Implicit Seen before NO effect 0 Still attributed to persuasiveness still like message because it is persuasive 0 Same for study 1 and 2 Implications Real world functionally Subliminal implicit 0 Things we don t consciously notice 0 Bill boards while driving not conscious attention but hits brain can in uence you 0 Advertising want a familiar salesperson but without the audience knowing Voice overs recognize voice creates uency making it easier to process l diffused uency if you know the person behind the voice FAMLAR BUT NOT RECONIZED HELPES CREATE POSTIVE VIEW OF PRODUCT GOOD FIRST MMPRESSON From the Text book Chapter 4 Social Cognition they way in which we interpret analyze remember and use information about the social world Schemas Organized structure of knowledge about a stimulus that is built up fro experience and that contains casual relations it is a theory about how the social world operatesNATRUAL CONNECTIONS MADE LITTLE EFFORT Script schema for events Activating schemas affect behavior PRIMING the process by which recent exposer to certain stimuli or events increases the accessibility of certain memories categories or schemes Heuristics Time saving mental shortcuts that reduce complex judgments to simple rules can be biased 0 Three Types 1 Representativeness tendency to judge the category membership of things based on how closely they match the typical or average member of that category student or teacher 2 Availability tendency to judge the frequency or probability of an event in terms of how easy it is to think of examples of that event car problemshow often 3 Anchoring and adjustment tendency to be biased toward the starting value or anchor in making quantitative judgments population higher then 1000 people Hindsight Bias the tendency once an event has occurred to overestimate out ability to have foreseen the outcome 0 Due to the desire to make sense of things Counterfactual thinking the tendency to evaluate events by imagining alternative versions or outcomes to what actually happened Why emotionally cope with things Help prepare for future Thought suppression attempt to prevent certain thoughts from entering consciousness 0 Automatic monitoring process implicit Operating process explicit consciously distracting attention away from unwanted thoughts Rebound effect unwanted thoughts come ooding back into consciousness Person perception The process by which we try to detect other peoples temporary states and enduring dispositions social perception Conclusions about others Nonverbal communication communicating feelings and intentions without words Nonconscious mimicry tendency to adopt the behaviors postures or mannerisms of interaction partners without conscious awareness or intention COPY OTHERS WITHOUT KNOWING NA39I39VE Scientists why people do what they do search for explanations of social events Internal attribution attribution that locates the cause of an event to factors internal to the person such as personality traits moods attitudes abilities or effort External attribution an attribution that locates the cause of an event to factors external to the person such as luck or other people or the situation Correspondent inference theory An inference that the action of an actor corresponds to or is indicative of a stable personal characteristic ACTIONS OF ACTOR CORRESPOND TO PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS 1 Social desirability more likely to make dispositional attributions about behavior that is socially undesirable then behaviors that are socially desirable 2 Choice actions freely chosen are considered to be more inductive of actor s true personal characteristics then those that are coerced 3 Noncommon effect outcome that can not be produced by any other action Covariation principle principle of attribution theory that states that for something to be the cause of a particular behavior it must be present when the behavior occurs and absent when it does not occur Discounting principle whenever there are several possible casual explanations for a particular event people tend to be much less likely to attribute the effect to any particular cause Assessing Covariation Three kinds of info 1 Consensus others act the same way to stimulus as the person who was explaining 2 Consistency reacts to stimulus the same way on other occasions 3 Distinctiveness extent to which a person reacts the same way to OTHER stimuli Fundamental Attribution error tendency to over estimate the impact of dispositional causes and underestimate the impact of situational causes on other peoples behavior More in individualistic cultures Actorobserver effect tendency for people to attribute their own behavior to external causes but that of others to internal causes 0 They do poorly on test there not smart internal 0 We do poorly on test I didn t feel well that day situational factor Chapter 5 Dualprocess models of attribution theories of attribution that proposes that people initially engage in relatively automatic and simple attributional assessment but then later consciously correct this attribution with more deliberate and effortful thinking Say I like dog but deep down it once bit me and I don t really like it Attitude positive or negative evaluation of an object o Implicit attitude activated without knowing it o Explicit Consciously held attitude Dual attitudes simultaneous possession of contradictory implicit and explicit attitudes toward the same object contradiction of implicit and explicit attitude What else shapes attitudes Automatic processing shapes attitude Reference groups group to which people orient themselves using its standards to judge themselves and the world religion family and feminist Mere exposure effect tendency to develop more positive feelings toward objects and individuals the more we are exposed to them Facial feedback hypothesis Classical conditioning learning through association when a neutral stimulus conditioned stimulus is paired with a stimulus unconditioned stimulus that naturally produces an emotional response Operant conditioning learning in which behavior is strengthened if followed by reinforcement and weakened if followed by punishment Cognitive dissonance a feeling of discomfort caused by performing an action that is inconsistent with ones attitudes o Attitude Perception Reasons to justify behavior are weak Selfperception theory we often infer our internal states such as out attitudes by observing out behavior BEHAVIORS CAUSE A39ITITUDES Theory planned behavior People s conscious decisions to engage in speci c actions are determined by their attitudes toward the behavior in question the relevant subjective norms and their perceived behavioral control PEOPLE THINK ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES OF THERE ACTIONS BEFORE ACTING Source credibility Sleeper effect Delayed effectiveness of a persuasive message from a noncredible source Delayed effect that the low credible source has on attitude change Attractiveness Physical Likeability Similarity Persuasive message Fast speech Fear create anxiety Humor positive emotions Two sided messages say opposing argument then refute it Counter argument resist strong VS weak argument Look at notes on movie quot A Class Dividedquot Stereotypes a set of beliefs and explanations about members of a social group GENERALIZATION about a group but can be applied to one person 0 lgnores the possibility of individual variation Stereotypes Schema Can be both Negative and Positive Prejudice Attitude towards members of a speci c social group that suggests they deserve inferior social status 0 Racism sexism 0 Typically directly NEGETIVE can be mixed 0 EX ambivalent sexism need protection lweak If my wife steps out of line I can hit her 0 Old fashion racism hate people who have dark skin FLAT OUT 0 People can have prejudice but know its bad so don t say it Stereotypes Vs Prejudice Stereotypes can contain multiple beliefs 0 Some positive some negative some neutral 0 EX lonians honest corn loving Hicks Prejudice Overall evaluation of these 0 Individual components l overall evaluation more negative 0 Like to dislike good to bad Discrimination Behavior Negative action toward members of a speci c social group 0 Disadvantage to one group advantage to another group 0 Attitudes vs behavior 0 Can have stereotypes and prejudice without discrimination 0 When do attitudes predict behavior 0 Ex lonians in my corporation get sued l might change my behavior about hiring lonians Possible functions of stereotypes 0 Provide info about others 0 Schema ll in the gaps might be inaccurate Simplify complex world 0 lnundated with often contradictory info already know about you as individual because I know about your group 0 When stereotypes are consensual shared by many people you can have the knowledge about the stereotype but reject it o Simpli es communication label conveys much info He s an lonian message communicated quickly 0 System Justi cation high status groups justify being on top stereotypes why it s ok reason why group A has more money then group B quotMight makes right 0 EX European colonization l Europeans went and took what they wanted from African and Asians know this is wrong but JUSTIFIED there reason because they felt Asians and Africans are barbarians and salvages and cant be trusted there not capable so it is OK 0 Greater implication opens door for how we de ne reality once beliefs are shaped by others Formation of Stereotypes Categorization we tend to categorize others into groups 0 Safe Vs Dangerous 0 Maximize Relevant info minimize irrelevant o Ef ciency make sense of things 0 good to know US from them Rock to my head or rock to Rabbit 0 US vs THEM is direct consequence 0 ln group group observer belongs to US 0 Out group Group observer doesn t belong to THEM 0 Multiple categories can apply depends on circumstances Consequences of categorization Within group assimilation members of group perceived as more similar the when viewed as aggregate of individuals more similar to leftsiders gt all people who sit on the left side of the room Between groups assimilation members of different groups perceived as more different then when viewed as individuals 0 Perceived with group assimilation stronger for outgroup Outgroup homogeneity effect out group is seen as more homogeneous then ingroup o EX Everyone in alpha phi believes there more unique as individuals but believe that the girls in SDT are all the SAME lngroup is better Even in minimal group paradigmgt Video gt eye color blue vs brown ARBITARTY LABELS GET IN GROUP PREFERENCE Minimal Group Paradigm STUDY 0 0 Procedure decision making experiment on painting preference Identi ed by a number oThen told either Klee person or Ken person 0 0 0 O O Rewards money or points DV pattern of reward allocation Reward matrices Want high rewards for in group Want in group to be higher then outgroupgt I want to give my group the most possible but not at expense giving the other group more gt even if groups are arbitrary Why ingroup preference happens 0 Social Identity theory 0 O O o O O O O O 0 Main idea Self Selfesteem affected by group membership BlRGing WE WANT TO BE IN SUPERIOR GROUP Members in superior group can increase selfesteem Minimal group Only way to make sure my group is bettergtGREATER lNGROUP REWARDS ASSERTS SUPERIORITY We determine outgroup Members disadvantage group we tops in virtue worse in general but better were it better off better at violin and I value violin lngroup preference Discrimination based on minimal groups Categorization leads to group preference System justi cation Starting with group preference Stereo type formation stereo leads to mistreating which reinforces stereotypes Fein and spencer Study Not just bringing ingroup up putting out group down 0 Procedure 0 Manipulation o 1 Positive vs negative test feedback Raise lower self esteem Rate job applicant Resume Photo dark haired women Interview video 2 Name and ethnicity of applicant 0 Italian Maria Augustine wore cross 0 Jewish Julie Goldberg star of David Hair clip stereotype SAME WOMEN FOR BOTH name pendent and hair different Participants identi ed more closely with Italian Ingroup Maria Augustine Italian Outgroup Julie Goldberg Jewish Resuks Rating Job applicant Positive feedback equal ratings for both women Negative feedback outgroup was rated LOWER Increased in selfesteem Put in power full situation and INCREASE In SELF ESTEEM l positive feedback PEOPLE FEEL BETTER WHEN THEY GOT NEGETIVE FEEDBACK THEN PUT DOWN THE OUTGROUP AND REATED THEM LOWER Implications Example of existing prejudice beyond stereotype formation Minimal Forced choice to favor in group over out group Fein and Spencer NO forced choice only rated 1 women no reason to build in group up PUNISH OUTGROUP MEMBER ONLY AFTER PERSONAL FAILURE DISCRIMINATION TO AIDSELF MAINTENCE DISCRIMATE TO MAKE YOUSELF FEEL BETTER SOCIAL INFLUENCE Social in uence how peoples behavior is affected by pressure from others focus is on behavior not attitude of persuasion Behavior Vs Attitudes Pressure ranges from Implicit to Explicit l everyone in the classroom is looking up at the ceiling D you re going to look up at ceiling c From noticing what others are doing to direct order Conformity Yielding to perceive group pressure by copying the behavior and beliefs of others Compliance Acting in accord with request can say no please pick that up if you don t want to you don t have to Obedience performing in action in response to direct order being told what to do Conformity is extremely common 0 The wave sporting events no one asking you to do it or orders you to do it pressure to do the same as everyone else 0 Junior high Pegged pantslj everyone does it no reason for it just pressure to do the same Candid camera video elevator video conform even when uncomfortable MUST KNOW NAMES AND DIFFERENCES IN NEXT 2 STUDIES SHERIF AND ASCH Sherif 1936 Auto kinetic effect Illusion spot of light in a dark room seems to move Method dark room Spot on the wall for 2 seconds Participants judge how far the light moved the rst day alone The next few days with 2 other people Day one the judgments were all over the place wide range More exposure to other peoples judgments jUDGEMENTS BECOME MORE SIMILARD CONFORMITY OF PERCEPTUAL jUDGMENTS ASCH 1951 0 Line length study 0 Method 0 Study of visual discrimination 6 members in study All sit around the table Judge line Which of the lines on the right are equal in length to the standard line 0 O O O o Twists o 6 others in session all confederates part of the research team 0 5 or 6 participants go before participant 0 First 2 trials Everyone got it correct 0 12 of the next 16 unanimously wrong all other confederates got the incorrect answer 0 Everyone says B when its clearly C 0 Results 0 75 conformed on at least one trial 0 50 conformed on half the trials or more 0 25 Never conformed ASCH VS SHERIF Similarities 0 High level of conformity Show power others have on out perceptions Differences o Sherif task was DIFFICULT reality was UNCLEAR Asch Physical Reality was very CLEAREASY Why do we conform o NORMATIVE INFLUENCE we fear that consequences of being deviant not doing the popular thing makes us less likeable o easy everyone know right answer uncomfortable standing out o INFORMATIONAL INFLUENENCE we want to be correct in out judgment 0 When we doubt out judgment we look to others for help 0 SHERIF STUDY People didn t know the correct judgments ompliance Compliance techniques focus on getting people to agree on a request Cialdini FOUR rules of compliance 1 Reciprocity a Idea we feel obligated to return favors b Social Norm an expected standard of behavior and belief in a group c EX Kunx amp Woolcot Christmas card to random peoplelj people felt obligated to send them back inundated with cards for total strangers d Bene t REINFORCES THE EXCHANGE FOR GOODS AND SERVICES i Easier to take the rst step ii Ex house sitting neighbor asks you to house sit you don t want to really have better things to do but if you do house sit they will be there for you when you need them e Research Ex Regan Art appreciation study i Manipulation Bring 2 cokes or None during a break ii Unsolicited favor or NO favor iii After study Confederate sells Raf e tickets iv RESULTS if participant has Unsolicited favor l they want to repay the person back because they feel obligated v 2x as many raf e tickets were sold after favor was done over no favor vi Liking for confederate 1 No coke condition INCREASE liking INCREASE IN RAFFEL TICKETS SOLD 2 Coke condition LIKEING DIDN T MATTER JUST AS MANY REFFEL TICKETS BOUGHT IF YOU DON T LIKE THE PERSON BUT THEY DID U A FAVOR STILL FEEL OBLIGATED TO RETURN A FAVOR Exploiting reciprocity 0 Implications well do things for people if they have done something for us even if we DON T LIKE THEM o EX Hare Krishing O O O O Chanting for donations People typical reaction weird Giving gifts in airports little gifts when people are in a hurry Flower then ask for donation increase in donations FUNDNG EXPLOSION Norm or reciprocity here s how you can pay me back repay favor no longer feel OBLIGATION NOW Hard timesj we have caught on now we are less trusting of strangers less likely to comply to requests Role of surprise 0 Can increase compliance but it isn t necessary 0 Ex Return address stickers in the mail done to create feeling of reciprocity include check 20 More Exploitation 0 Not necessary to want the gift into order to feel obligated free samples at supermarketlj reason to increase sales buy cake 0 EASIEST WAY TO RESIST DON T ACCEPT GIFT OR FAVOR 0 STUDY women who accepts free drinks Judged more sexually available both men and womenlj person gets wrong idea think they want to have sex Reciprocal concessions Not just with gifts ifl give ground you give ground Door in the face Technique 0 EX Contract negotiations 0 Over shoot offer In uencer makes extreme offer know its going to be denied demand 10 with intentions of getting FIVE o COUNTER OFFER WITH MORE RESONABLE ONE 0 10D 5 give up 5 of Raise MORE LIKELEY TO BE ACCEPTED 0 IF rst offer is too extreme 0 Not barging in good faith 0 No genuine concessions 0 Feel the need to repay favor You give up a lot well give up some too Cialdini STUDY 0 Condition 1 Chaperone delinquents to the zoo for free 0 17 said yes 0 Condition 2 how can we increase the number 0 First request counsel delinquent s 2hrweek for years 0 All refused 0 Second chaperone request 0 50 said yes Other ndings 0 After reciprocal Concessions People feel more responsible for agreement good bargain Feel more responsible for agreement MORE STAISFIED Combo More likely to follow through more likely to agree to future favors 0 First to make move as the upper hand Additional advantage 0 Ex lone me 20 rst ask 100 makes 20 seem a lot smaller after Perceptual contrast anchor big vs small ANCHORING AND ADJUSTMENT base off starting number given 0 IF WE ANCHOR AT AN EXTREME REQUEST ANCHORING SEEMS MORE APPEALING 2 Consistency and Commitment Act consistent with decision we made Follow through if we rst get to commit 0 After we make a commitment we want to act consistently o EX Toy company post Holiday slump hype up toy around holiday 0 Kids want it 0 Parents promise it commitment o Undersupply stores Not everyone who made commitment to get it 0 Parents cant get it replace it for holidays give different toy o Hype up original toy after the holidays kids still want it Parents already committed 0 Buy toy to honor commitment O Low ball Technique 0 Offer low price on car reason to buy 0 Get decision commitment to buy 0 quot Let me check with manager to nalize quot o quot Cant do it Reguar pricequot manipulated o What happens 0 Still buy 0 Made commitment to buy something 0 Original reason low price is gone 0 Self generated reasons commitment remains Bait and Switch 0 New TV low price no more but here s another Great TV more expensive 0 Decision to buy a TV was already made end up buying more EXPENSIVE TV More on lowball Cialdini study Called for a 7am PSY study 0 Participants told it was at 7am upfront 24 yes 0 Didn t tell time 56 yes Then told 7am given option to back out NO ONE DID 95 showed up to study Many people feel please with POOR CHOICE this WASN T so bad CONGNETIVE DISSONENCE CHANGE ATTITUDE to MATCH BEHAVIOR CONSITENCY FOOT IN THE DOOR Opposite of door in the face but still work 0 First Small request target complies Second larger real requestlj more likely to agree after 1St request 0 EX Rummage through house study 0 First take phone survey 0 Days later second request 2 hr inventory of your house o AGREE TO SIMPLE THINGS WERE MORE LIKELY TO AGREE TO BIGGER REQUESTS 0 WHY o BASED ON BEHAVIOR GENERATE EXPLANATIONS LIKE quotIM AM A GOOD PERSONquot IM HELPFUL FOR DOING THE SURVEY WHY NOT REMAIN HELPFUL AND FOLLOW THE SECOND REQUEST 0 Same results as dissonance but NO TENSION no large pervious attitude behavior discrepancy FACE VS FOOT Time Face Norm of reciprocity short interval between request oFoot want to be consistent can be longer oRequestor Face Same person for both oFoot can be different people Do it for your self not for others how you see yourself 0OVERALL FACE IS MORE EFFECTIVE NORM OF RECIPROCITY IS VERY STRONG 3 Scarcity 0 Opportunities seem more valuable when they are less available quotFor limited time onlyquot 0 Study West Student rated cafeteria food twice 0 1 Bad 0 2 good 0 Before the second time there was a re and 2 week period were they did not have food 0 Why do we care 0 LOSING IS MORE MOTIVATING THEN WINNING EQUAL VALUE 0 REACTANCE threat of loosing freedoms makes us want it more 0 React against the loss of freedom o Twinkies went out of business people went crazy buying Twinkies even though never eat Twinkies 0 We don t like the idea of losing the opportunity 0 Ex realestate someone else is interested goosing buys of the fence 0 Research ex Phosphate laundry detergent Ads for novel with restriction vs without Speech has been banned from other campuses we agree with the speech more even though we haven t heard it Supermarket petition told government didn t want it released 0 Implications 0 Censorship 0 Prohibition 0 Government restrictions 0 Parents approval of a dating partner Variaths of Scarcity Cookies want more and would pay more where there are 2 cookies vs 10 cookies oEven more there used to be 10 cookies then the jar was switched to 2 cookies vs 2 cookies all along oMOST OF ALL remove cookies sorry these cookies are for other people demand I made a mistake l would pay the MOST FOR COOKIES Conformity Compliance technique engineers situation to make people feel pressure to conform 0Fuzzy overlap with compliance EX quotSalting the tip jarquot Put money in tip Jar to start off the day D people feel they should follow others and leave tip as well oLine in the club Long line place must be really busylj empty inside owners leave line one outside so people feel that the place to go oLaugh tracks on TV Cued when you supposed to laugh views on TV don t see audience Laugh longer Rate as funnier Conformity starts you laughing consistency keeps you laughing OBEDIENCE Obedience Command vs request no chance to say no 0 We often blindly OBEY authorities Guy on the street study Gave random orders to passersby 13 obeyed his orders Puts on Security guard uniform give orders having nothing to do with security 9 out of 10 Obeyed commands with uniform on Mailgrams Classic obedience studies 0 You must continue learner stops responding People obeyed authority gave shock without thinking about the person being shocked just continued to listen to experimenters order Strip searches in fast food LISTENED TO quotPOLICE ORDERSquot HOW FAR WOULD WE GO TO OBEY ATHORITY 2007 repeated Mailgrams study a little different but PRESSURES TO OBEY HAVNT CHANGED FROM BACK THEN TlLL NOW GROUP EHAVIQR 1 Jury Deliberation 0 Example of a group 0 Important real world implications 0 Problem Cant observe real jury 0 Solutions interview real jurors afterward o Analyze court record askjudge things 0 Study mock juries l they know its not the real trial do they behave the same Foreperson leader in the jury o Liaison between judge and jury 0 Calls for votes takes polls say guilty vs not guilty 0 Announces verdict o Foreperson selection who gets picked High occupational status Dr Professor Pastjury Experience Table position Head Vs side 1St person to speak up Men over women Kerr et al 50 female jurors 10 forepersons Speak rst and sat in dominant seat 0 Foreperson In uence More time talking about procedure Less time expression opinion Moderator Not leader 0 o o o No extra in uence Dynamics of Deliberation Three stages 1 Orientation aSetagenda b Raise questions c Explore facts d GENERAL SENSE OF WHAT IS GOING ON 3 Reconciliation Once e What the charges are what does that mean 2 Open con ict disagreements Begins with differences in opinions First vote 84 quality vs not quality Not argumentative Scrutinize evidence construct stories e No arguments in uence holds out Unanimous verdict is achieved 096m everyone agrees a Af rm satisfaction with verdict b Everyone agrees he s guilty c Think again Any Doubts Outcomes O O O O 225 juries 215 initial majority 209 97 percent same nal verdict deliberation clari es details but outcome mostly determined most of the time ONE EXECPTION Tendency for deliberation to produce a tilt toward acquittal individuals convict more when alone more lenient when your in a group Leniency bias servers as a function of Deliberation INFLUENCE how are disagreements resolved 0 2 types in uence based on fear what they believe is culturally appropriate based on facts and logic Combo of both 0 INCREASE NORMATIVE when 0 Public vote l we need to change you opinion its you that is disagreeing 0 Dead lock urged byjudge ury Size Us 12 jurors now some states adopted 6 Advantage cheaper oUpheld by the supreme court in 1970 oARGUMENT resistance depends on proportional size or majority o51 is not the same as 102 oDoes this matter 6 person mock juries representation LESS MINORITY REPRESENTATION Less discussion 6 vs 12 Fewer hung juries cant agree on verdict What worse convict and innocent or free a guilty 0 0 N NUNANIMOUS VERDICTS oUpheld 54 by supreme court in 1972 oLogic even when majority reached discussion continues oHASTIE Mockjuries Same murder trial oVideo Ambiguous More bully style just switch over so we can leave End discussion when majority is reached 102 lets go Rates peers more CLOSE MINDED Reported LESS con dent with VERDICT If you were a defendant Today a few allow criminal many civil who s more at fault O FROM THE CHAPTER Stereotypes about the personalities abilities and motives of a social group that Cognitive Prejudice S towards a speci c group that directly or indirectly suggest they deserve an inferior social status Affective Discrimination A NEGETIVE toward members of a speci c group Behavioral Out group homogeneity effect Perception of as being to one another than members of ones lngroup in group more UNIQUE lngroup bias INCREASE evaluations of ingroup member then outgroup members Illusory correlation the belief that two variables are associated with each other when in fact there is little of no actual association Three types of Prejudice Paternalistic prejudice low social status 0 Negative emotions Disrespect condescension 0 Positive emotions Patronizing affection 0 Behavior Personal intimacy but role of segregation o Targets Elderly disabled women young adults Envious Prejudice High social status 0 Negative Envy fear resentment hostility 0 Positive Admiration of abilities 0 Behavior Avoid exclude segregate o Targets Jews Asians rich Contemptuous Prejudice low social status 0 Negative Disrespect resentment hostility 0 Positive None 0 Behavior avoid exclude segregate o Targets poor whites poor black homeless Stigma An attribute that serves to discredit a person in the eyes of others 1 Tribal identities race sex ethnicity religion and national origin 2 Blemishes of individual character mental disorders addictions homosexuality and criminality 3 Abominations of the body physical deformities physical disabilities diseases and obesity Courtesy stigma tendency for individuals who are associated with stigmatized people to face Sexism Any attitude action or institutional structure that subordinates a person because of his or her sex Ambivalent sexism Sexism directed against women based on both positive and negative attitudes rather then uniform dislike 0 Men think women should be cherished but are also weak Stereotype treat The when performing a task in which their group is if I act poorly they are more likely to agree with the stereotype Social Identity theory A theory suggested that people seek to enhance their selfesteem by identifying with speci c social groups and perceiving these groups as better then other groups Realistic group con ict theory The theory that intergroup con ict develops from competition for LIMITED RESOURCES Ethnocentrism A pattern of Increased Hostility toward out groups accompanied by increased loyalty to ones ingroup Robbers Cave study sheriff 0 Installing Intergroup competition 0 Encouraging intergroup cooperation 0 Example of how ethnocentrism can develop Social dominance theory Societal groups can be organized in a power hierarchy in which the dominant groups enjoy a disproportionate share of the societies assets and the subordinate groups receive most of its liabilities ONE group dominates all the others Authoritarian personality Personality trait characterized by submissive to authority rigid adherence to conventional values and prejudice toward outgroups intolerant to those who are weak 0 Harsh upbringings o Conform to cultural values Contact hypothesis WW between opposing groups with FOUR conditions 1 Equal social status 2 Sustained close contact Interactions should be one to one and maintained over time 3 Intergroup cooperation Members in different groups should engage in joint activities to achieve superordinate goals 4 Social norms favoring equality Prejudice and discrimination are NOT CONDONDED 5 Friendship potential 5th factor Chapter 7 Social in uence a person s social power to change the attitudes or behavior of others in a particular direction Conformity Yielding to perceived group pressure by copying the behavior and beliefs of others Compliance Publicly acting in accord with direct request Obedience Action in Response to a DIRECT order What happens to Nonconformists o Jonny Rocco 0 People rst try to persuade them 0 If unsuccessful they REJECT THEM o DEVIENT CONFEDERATE IS EXCLUDED Conformity o Situational factors 0 Personal factors 0 Cultural differences HIGHER CONFORMITY IN COLLECTIVIST CU LTU RES 0 Minority in uence 0 Nonconscious mimicry Laugh when others laugh Compliance 0 Foot in the door Secures compliance by starting with a small request then ending with a larger less desirable request 0 Door in the face having a large request refused the in uencer counter offers with a smaller request Norm or reciprocity stronger 0 That s not all technique In uencer makes are large request then immediately offers a discount or bonus before the initial request is refused o Lowball technique In uencer secures agreement with a request by understating its true cost Obedience o Mailgrams study 23 Obey authorities 0 Social support helps people follow own beliefs when confronted by powerful others 0 Seeing others disobey makes it easier for you to Disobey o In uences power setting Chapter 8 Group Several interdependent people who have emotional ties and interact on a regular basis In uences on group behavior 0 Size 0 Similarity and diversity 0 Perceived supervision of group identity members emotional identi cation with the group Main functions of group 0 Accomplish instrumental tasks 0 Satisfy socioemotional needs Temporal model of group membership A theory of group membership describing the changes that occur over time in members and in the group due to their mutual in uence and interdependence 5 phases Investigation phaseprospective member seek member who seems likely to attain group goals and provide the opportunity to stratify personal needs Socialization phase new member shape new member so they can make maximum contribution Maintenance phase full member de ne specialized roles Resocialization phase marginal member full member but is moving backwards Remembrance phase exmember the ex member thinks about the bene ts and costs of being in the group Social facilitation The enhancement of dominant responses due to the presence of others Mere presence explanation the presence of others will enhance correct evaluation of well learned tasks are the same time that it will interfere with or inhibit correct performance of novel unlearned tasks Social Loa ng Group induced when performers and thus cannot be individually judged Deindividuation The loss of sense of individual identity and a loosening of normal inhibitions against engaging in behavior that is inconsistent with internal standards engage in behaviors we normally avoid o Crowds and Riots 0 Loss of individual identity triggered by anonymity and reduced self awareness Group think deterioration of mental ef ciency reality testing and moral judgments in a group that results from an maintaining a pleasant social atmosphere is more important then making the best decision Leader A person who exerts the most in uence and provided direction and energy to the group Female leaders are as task oriented as male leaders women tend to have more DEMOCRATIC leadership style Social dilemmas Any situation in which the as a whole Sharing limited resources Deforestation Interpersonal Attraction Four factors L Familiar people 0 We tend to like them 0 Moms meatloaf My moms meatloaf is the best 0 We like what we are used too 0 MrMs Right l I want to spend the rest of my life with this person 0 7 billion people in the world 0 What are the chances that your quotMR Right goes to school work with you 0 Obvious but easy to overlook How does familiarity develop A Proximity Being physically around someone makes them more similar increasing our Liking of them a Your friends Single best predictor of attraction b Most social interaction with people in the same place interact with people were mean which creates friendships c Festinger et al 0 Friendship patterns in married student housing 0 How are friendships connected by location of apartments 0 Results 0 Friends with neighbors 0 Residents in busy areas were more often listed as close friends with more people more people have to pass them to get to areas of building laundry room gym d Ex classroom the alphabet sit with kids with k last names i More proximal to kids that we sit next too which INCREASES the our liking of these children ii Self reported reasons for friendship Many reasons not because of last name e Ex stages of life friends in Roslyn and buffalo the further I am from my Roslyn friends and the longer the time in separated from them the LESS CLOSE WE BECOME iExposure a Mere exposure effect and uency 0 Works for people too 0 Usually attributed to liking 1 Not always Ebbesen and Enemies 0 Mirror images Two pictures mirror vs photograph 0 Which do you your friends prefer 0 Results YOU prefer your mirror image because it is the image you see most often 0 YOUR FRIENDS Actual image Moreland and Beach 0 Real college classroom 0 4 typical female students confederates took pictures 0 1 never came to class 2 5 times 3 10 times 4 15 times 0 End of the semester showed photos to class Dv rate liking of person 0 Results the more times the women was in class the more liked the women waslj all exposure just seeing them around INCREASES rating of liking O FACTOR 2 PHYSICALLY ATTRACTIVE PEOPLE We tend to like them Is beauty on skin deep We don t act that way Texas judges lower bail and smaller nes for more attractive people Across occupations men and women who are more physically attractive earn more money Mothers more attentive affectionate and playful with CUTE babies What is Beauty oEvidence for universal agreement on face oDifferent ethnic group faces were all rated similarly by different people oArray of faces from African people still agree who s the most beautiful o2 month old infant LOOKS LONGER at attractive face cant learn cultural beauty standards Unaware of standards Young or old faces Male female Blackwhite They can DIFFERENCIATE btw Beauty Average face MORE A39ITRACIVE INCREASE THE NUMBER OF FACES INCREASE IN attractiveness TEND TO PREFER SYMMETRICAL AND COMPUTER GENERATED quot AVERAGE FACESquot oLanglois et al year book photos ol vs 2468 oMore faces have a higher rating oAVERAGE IS FAMILIAR the core human face sign of good genes oNot average genetic abnormalities disease Role of the situation Personal connections Com Tend to rate someone more physically attractive after we grow to like them pansons o Kendrick et al Men perused playboy and penthouse 0 Rated quotregular womenquot 0 After looking at playboy magazine rated AVERAGE WOMEN LESS ATTRACTIVE INCLUDING THERE WIVES Thornton and Moore Same idea with selfratings oMen and women participants sat in front of poster board oManipulation 24 samesex model photos VS None oPhotos just there in the background oDV selfrated attractiveness oResults Matters more for women In front of models signi cantly lower ratings of attractiveness with pictures of models in background for both men and women AFTER VIEWING MODELS WE RATE OURSELVES AND OTHERS SIGNIFCANTLY LESS ATTRACTIVE Country music quot The girls get prettier at closing timequot Beer goggles o Pennerbaker eld study in Texas bar 0 Rated attractiveness of opposite sex patrons 3 times 9pm 1030 pm 12 am 0 Results 0 Attractiveness increases over time 0 Why Alcohol FEWER POTENTIAL PARTNERS AS TIME GOES ON been looking for someone all night closing time soon need to nd someone quick before everyone goes home FACTOR 3 People who are Similar to us 0 We tend to like them oBirds of a feather flock together 0 Research oCoege dorm INCREASE liking for those with similar BACKGROUNDS oOpinion survey INCEASE liking for confederate with similar attitudes like apples the notebook tness oMarriage The more similar values leisure preference LONGER THE MARRIAGE LASTS Matching Hypothesis we are attracted to one another on the basis of similar attributes 0 Physical attractiveness too 0 Research examples 0 We match on attractiveness in dating and marriage 0 We don t like miss matched couples rate them Less ability Less likeable Less satisfactory We believe the relationship is not going to work if we are different in physical attractiveness 0 We want highly attractive partners but we stay in our league to AVOID REJECTION we do as well as we can 0 Attractiveness matching also in same sex FRIENDSHIPS 0 Men and women 0 College roommates more satis ed when similar attractiveness Factor 4 PEOPLE WHO LIKE US 0 We tend to like oCurtis and Miller 0 Pairs in a lab oTalked then separated friendly interactions oManipulation quotreveled quot to one either liked or disliked oREUNTED oResults this person like me vs this person does like me You LIKE me after were reunited ill be MORE FRIENDLY You DISLIKE ME D NOT FRIENDLY TO YOU Selfful lling prophecy Expectations effect out behavior oAronson and linder oPairs of confederates oOverheard discussion evaluation of selves after each oManipulation change vs none over time oPositivenegative Negative Positive Always positive always negative oResults Not Iiked not liked back Most liking change NEGETIVE TO POSITIVE Increase liking over time ol won them over its something about me that they really like ATTRIBUTION olts not just they like everyone 0 THERE IS SOMETHING SPECIAL ABOUT ME THEY ACTULLY LIKE Attachment oStarts in infancy oDe nition strong Bond formed with primary caregiver oUsually mother does not have to be oWhy Human infants are helpless Keeping close facilitates survival Desiring closeness is adaptive Babies need physical attention to survive which makes the baby DESIRE the closeness Crying is a built in system to let the caregiver know we need them oBONDS DON T ALWAYS FORM IN THE SAME WAY 0 0 O 0 0 Assessment oMom and baby together oMom leaves oObserves baby reactions oMom returns oObserve babies reactions Three class types Not all in all 1 Cry when mom leaves Happy upon return cling and cry when mom leaves anger and apathy upon return still upset with you when you come back 3 AvoidantNot much a reaction 2 Where does styles come from One idea working model of Self and Others Learned from interaction Self How I view my self Other how much I can trust others Two underlying dimensions 0 Attachment anxiety Self High in attachment anxiety negative view of self Low positive view of self o Avoidance working model of others High avoidant negative view of others Low positive view of others 0 Secure Positive view of selves and caregivers Sensitive and responsive care giver Feel valued trust others I m a high priority I cry they come and attend to me Feeling valued creates trust in others can trust me my care giver and othersDPOSTIVE VIEW OF OTHERS 0 Anxiety and avoidance LOW for both positive view of self and caregiver o Anxious Ambivalent NEGETIVE view of self 0 High anxiety 0 Inconsistent caregiver 0 Feel unworthy unvalued o On the phone doesn t come to me if doing nothing comes right over 0 Avoidant Negative view of caregiver 0 High avoidance o Standof sh caregiver 0 Don t trust others 0 Feed me on there schedule not when I m hungry cant trust others to be there for me I have to be there for myself Attachment styles Why does this matter Carry models of self and others into ADULT RELATIONSHIPS Consistency BOOK HAS FCLJR TYP 0 Hazen and shaver questionnaire 0 50 SECURE attachment o20 high ANXIETY they don t really want to be with me o2025 HIGH AVODIENCE have relationships but want distance so they don t get to close so they cant be hurt when let down Effects in adults 0 Secure oSatisfying happy relationships 0 Based on trust oBelieve romantic love is possible you can nd someone you love and they love you a High anxiem oLove life lled with highs and lows oObsessive preoccupation oHigh willingness for longterm commitments oExtreme sexual attraction and JELOUSY oJump into relationships quickly with out really knowing the person calling a million times stop looking at her a High avoidance oFear intimacy oDon t want to be dependent on others oBelieve romantic love doomed to fade oDiscomfort of getting to close cant trust others don t want to be hurt so keep my distance cant be hurt if I don t let you in Who gravitates to whom 0 High anxiety and high avoidance Find others who t expectations Secure end up with secure Anxious women with Avoidant man o Expect rejecting and clingy o Chasing l avoidant person who is trying to be distant Offering and receiving support oCollin and Fenny oldea Under stress how well do couples olnform partner of need for support oOffer support oUndergraduate couples oCompleted questionnaires oPlay game in front of camera oFiller just to get comfortable oPartner 1 quot talk about personal concernworryquot oNot about relationship con ict oSUPPORT SEEKER 0 Partner 2 Care giver video taped discussion Dependent Variable how do they respond How do well do they seek or give support 0 HIGH AVOIDENCE Not ask for help 0 Ineffective support seekers o Hesitate to depend on someone else 0 INDIRECT strategies to ask for help Hinting complain without making clear they want help I hate work but don t say why they hate it and they is a way that they can help Sulking Subtle negative emotions sighing dgeUng TURN AWAY FROM PARTNER UNDERSTRESSDEPENDING MAKES VOLUNERABLE 0 HIGH ANXIETY 0 Doesn t matter for seeking support 0 POOR CAREGIVERS did not offer support 0 Less instrumental support problem solving lets solve this problem together 0 Less responsive to partner Listening attempts to understand effort 0 More negative support behaviors o Minimizing avoiding partners problems changing the subject 0 Acting distracted by partners emotions your getting angry your making me upset o 0 Why HIGH ANXIETY o Dif cult to set aside own attachment needs 0 Too centered on own INSECURITES to help cant set aside own concerns to really listen to what your partner has to say 0 Attachment set in stone 0 No 0 Style can change from relationship to relationship 0 4 year period 30 percent style change 0 Why do some relationships end 0 Gottman et al 0 Asses tons of variables keeps what works 0 Goal predict divorce 0 Biggest predictor Con ict resolution Ratio of positive and negative behaviors is key Stable happy marriages 5 to 1 in favor of positive 0 Some negativity is ok IMPORTANT Complaint shows what isn t working Head for divorce 8 to 1 0 Start off con ict is critical 0 96 lst minute enough to predict divorce and stability quot4 Horseman of APOCALYPSEquot 1 Criticism You always or you never 0 Global fault in partner OVERALL FLAW you NEVER take the dog out o Blaming Speci c complain is OK 0 feel like 2 Defensiveness Defend self from perceived attack 0 Often innocent victim WHINNING 0 Message quot why pick on me I m innocent 0 Problem assigns guilt why don t you understand I had a long day 0 lmplies quot its your fault that this is bothering you D you too sensitive 0 IN reality Both have a problem NOT JUST ONE the con ict is because of both of you 3 Contempt o Disrespect Putdown Mockery Almost humor but only one person laughing o Correcting partners grammar when they are angry with you grammar is more important then what you have to say Facial expressions 0 Active hastiness just being mean 4 Stonewalling Withdrawal from interaction Simply leave Can do this while still in interaction Uninterested NONVerbal behavior Look away tap foot Ineffective way to reduce con ict intensity Single predictor of divorce 0 CONTEMPT active hastiness Happy stable marriages have some one the other three 0 O O O 0 Usually repaired afterwards Decreases tension negativity Increases humor affection EX saying something nice friendlyjoke NOT BLAMING NOT trying to win THERE IS NO CONTEMPT IN STABLE MARRIAGES CANT UNDUE CONTEMPT Aggression 0 Lack on consensus 1983 there were over 250 de nitions in psych literature oAggression Behavior INTENDED to cause unwelcome injury or harm to some being object or oneself l doesn t have to be a living thing 0 NEEDS INTENT What is aggression 0 Complication INTENT IS KEY How can we be certain it is intent o Aggression in SUBJECTIVE 0 Eye of the beholder 0 Instrumental vs hostile aggression 0 Instrumental aggression In icting harm to obtain something else Means to an end COLD aggression No feeling Aggression because I want something EX Loan shark loan money don t give it back get money with aggression I don t want to hurt you but if that the only way 0 Hostile aggression In icting harm with the explicit goal of hurting a victim Comes from anger HOT aggression Impulsive so angry I just want to hurt you NO real reason EX cut off in traffic honk horn I m angry and going to take it out on you 0 Not black and white can be both at one time 0 Ex School shootingslj I m going to get back at you Dget famous and angry at people in shooting Violence on TV oBy the end of 6th grade oWitnessed 8000 murders on TV does it make it Less of a big deal when it happens in real life 0 Two general types 0 Lab 0 Field longitudinal following people in real lives for a long period of time 0 Lab evidence Typical methodology Participant provoked Electric shock noise bursts Insults your doing it wrong your stupid try to make the participant angry Shown Violent vs control video clip Dopportunity to retaliate 0 Number of bursts shocks 0 Intensity of bursts and shocks 0 Rate others NEGETIVELY 0 Findings 0 Participants aggression INCREASE when 0 TV violence perceived as morally JUSTIFIDED 0 Violence described as revenge vs others 0 They were bad guys they got what was coming for them 0 Conclusions 0 CONTEXT of observed TV aggression gives it meaning 0 EX Permissible desirable in western o MEANING INFLUENCES viewers behavior 0 Field evidence 0 Criticism Real world 0 Saw violent movie a week ago is it going to affect we 10 years later 0 0 Response NATURALISTIC STUDIES o Eron Longitudinal study over 20 years long 8 years old Measured aggression 0 Measured amount of and preference for violent TV my likes it its not my preference Age 18 same Age 30 same 0 Idea does TV at 8 Lead to violence at 18 and 30 0 RESULTS Girls no relationship Boys 0 No relationship between aggression 8 and TV at 18 o INCREASE violent TV at 8 INCREASE aggression at 18 o INCREASE violent TV at 8 INCREASE seriousness of crime at30 o CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSEATION o Suggests CAUSAL relationship 0 Stability of aggressiveness 0 Its is STABLE o 3 years old Stable over 1218 months 0 89 years old relationship stable over 1014 years later 0 1213 stable 13 years later 0 00 What causes these effects Aggressive event schemas scripts Exposure to or use of aggression formation of aggressive scripts becomes a behavioral option 0 Ex Boy want to use the slide on playground have aggressive script l push kid on the slide 0 Having script makes aggression more likely l once use aggression have the script will always choose aggression 0 Self perpetuating Intelligence and aggressive scripts 0 Low IQ more frustration in school 0 Aggression more likely 0 Low IQ less able to think of alternatives 0 Cant understand it is inappropriate 0 Cant see there are other options other then aggression and don t see the consequences 0 Aggression strains relationships with peers and teachers 0 Harder for children to learn gt no help from peers and teacher spends more time disciplining child rather then teaching child 0 Lower IQ DISADVANTAGE FROM START STAY AT DISADVANTAGE Evidence INCREASE IN AGRESSION AT 8 LOWER IQ at 30 more run in with the law Violence in the American south 0 Overall there are higher homicide rates in south then the North 0 But by CATERGORY south higher only in ARGUMENT HOMICIDES Surveys southerners more approving of certain violence then northerners 0 NOT OVERALL many people only learn through violence 0 Used to PROTECT man can kill to defend house ANSWER TO AND INSULT southerners believe violence is ok CULTURE of HQNQR oBelief system in which even small disputes become important contests for reputation and social status Small dispute honor ls extremely important insult met with violence olf it is critically important to me I can use violence oEX White southern male subculture oComes from the history of old south oOld south economy Initial based on herding animals Honor typically important in herding cultures source of money 1 Wealth is easy to steal 0Highly mobile and hard to identify 2 People lived far apart oLaw enforcement far away people has to protect themselves 0 MY RESPONSIBILTY Responsibility to retaliate 0Reputation is very important oEither the kind of man that o Pushover oPushed back olf people know you don t take any crap they will stay away from your herd EASY TRIGGER TO UNLEASH oHEARDING ECONOMY DISAPPEARD Cultural NORMS did not 1930 oArgued impossible to convict someone of murder if Killer has been insulted He has warned victim of his intent to kill if the insult were not retracted or compensated W 0 Cohen 0 Compare students north and south 0 Idea North and south differences in response to PROVOCATION 0 Drop off questionnaire at the end of the hallway o Confederate must close le cabinet drawer 0 Participant must pass again in a few seconds 0 Confederate slams cabinet bumps participant and calls him an asshole Dependent variable 0 Chicken game 0 Further down the small hallway no room for 2 people 0 Large confederate walking towards participant 0 DV HOW CLOSE THE PARTICIPANT GETS BEFORE YEILDING 0 Results Control southerners increased distance polite lnsult southern less space before Yielding after insults Got VERY close to confederate before YELIDING SUBCULTURE DIFFERENCES IN AGRESSION Southern 0 Male 0 Only in response to lnsult Prosocial Behavicm When do we help Kitty Genovese story look in text book 0 She did not receive help in time people waited to help until it was to late 0 Why don t people help o INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE AROUND DECREASES THE LIKLEIYHOOD TO HELP 0 Three processes 1 Pluralistic ignorance Mistakenly believing that others thoughts and feelings are different from ones own a Everyone else seems calm no one is acting as there is an emergency there must not be one b INFORMATIVE INFLUENCE Not sure what the right thing to do is look at others to see what they think c EVERYONE can be thinking the same thing well no one else seems to think its a problem Lidience Inhibition effect a NORMATIVE In uence b Lack of helping out of fear of negative evaluations from others if mistaken Embarrassing to get excited about nothing Call police into house for no reason l socially hated now e If I m wrong I m going to be embarrassed and get viewed negatively f ALONE no one is there to witness the embarrassment no 3 Diffusion on responsibility Believing that others will 0 should take responsibility for helping a Someone else will call 911 The Good Samaritan Good Samaritan Story person gets mugged needs help 2 higher religious gures walk by and don t help Lonely person helps social status does not effect virtue of a person 0 Study Barley and Batson o Seminary students asked to give a talk o Manipulation 1 Good Samaritan story vs jobs seminary students like 0 Manipulation 2 Ahead of schedule on time late 0 Pass person slumped in doorway coughing and groaning 0 DV who stops 0 The More time they had the more likely they stopped If late Very few stopped From the chapter 912 Chapter 9 Interpersonal Attraction Interpersonal attraction The desire to approach other people Two reasons for Af liation Social comparison theory the theory that proposes that we evaluate our thoughts and actions by comparing them with those of others Social exchange theory the theory that proposes that we seek out and maintain those relationships in which the REWARDS and GREATER then the costs end relationship when costs are greater then rewards Situational factors that foster af liation Proximity bonds with people who are physically CLOSE to you Anxiety Desire for social comparison attract us to similar anxious others anxious people like waiting with other anxious people misery loves company Physically attractiveness stereotype the belief that physically attractive individuals possess socially desirable personality traits that lead happier lives than less attractive people 0 Make more money 0 Female body type 7 wait to hip ratio 0 Food supply heavy women are considered attractive in societies with highly unreliable food suppHes o RELIABLE food supply men prefer there women SKINNY lower wait to hip ratio Universal standards for Facial attractiveness No relationship 0 Prefer symmetrical faces 0 No symmetrical defects 0 Men prefer younger looking faces and women prefer men with other looking faces Matching Hypothesis the proposition that people are attracted to others who are similar to them in particular characteristics 0 Demographics attitudes physical attractiveness We like those who like US Problems of social interaction Social anxiety the unpleasant emotion people experience die to their concern with interpersonal evolution and loss of social status Loneliness having a smaller or less satisfactory network of social and intimate relationships than one desire o No connection with other people Can be lonely in a CROWD Just to Shy Adolescents and young adults are the LONELINEST age groups 0 As people mature loneliness decreases o Loneliness clusters in social networks and spreads through them Chapter 10 Intimate relationships Intimacy is an inclusion of others in ones own selfconcept Exchange relationships Tally costs and balance those against our rewards to determine if we should maintain the relationship Communal relationships according to the principle that people should be given what they need for little concern of what they are given in return responsive to others needs Attachment strong emotional bond between and infant and a caregiver o Continues into adulthood 1 Secure attachment social relationship with trust lack of concern with being abandoned and a feeling of value and well liked a High self esteem and high trustworthiness 2 Preoccupied trust combined with feeling of being unworthy of others love and fear of abandonment a Low self esteem and high trustworthiness 3 Dismissing avoidant low trust and avoidance of intimacy combined with high selfesteem and compulsive selfreliance a High selfesteem and low trustworthiness 4 Fearfulavoidant low trust and avoidance of intimacy with feeling of unworthy of others love and fear or rejection a Low selfesteem and low trustworthiness Social penetration theory describes the development of close relationships in terms of increasing selfdisclosure Greater selfdisclosure for INDIVUALISTIC CULTERS OVER COLLECIVIST CULTURES o WOMEN self disclose MORE then men Excitation transfer a psychological process in which arousal caused by one stimulus is transferred and added to arousal elicited by a second stimulus Increased anxiousness on Scary bridge Increased feelings of physical attractiveness to women More likely to call the women when on scary bridge Compassionate love affection we feel for those with whom out lives are deeply entwined sense of certainty of love and respect Passionate love relatively short lived type of romantic love more typical in early stages of romance when ones partners love is less certain Equity theory people are most satis ed in a relationship when the ratio between rewards and costs is similar for both partners 6 factors determine whether love will endure or fade l 2 3 Social disapproval of romantic relationships lowers partners commitment Romantic relationships are happiest the ratio between the rewards and costs is similar for both partners The positive self esteem typical of securely attached individuals fosters romantic satisfaction Couple who s idealize each other tend to have happier relationships the whose who have more accurate views but accuracy is important when it provides a partner with information on how she is being perceived by others positive illusion are good but need to see the truth Receiving social support from ones partner increases satisfaction and commitment to the relationship Troubled couples often are unable or unwilling to terminate the expression of negative emotions towards othersCONTEMPT Aggression chapter 11 Aggression any form of behavior intended to harm or injure some person oneself or an object Instrumental aggression intentional use of harmful behavior so that one can achieve some other goal Hostile aggression the intentional use of harmful behavior in which the goal is simply to cause injury or death to the victim Gender differences 0 Men more physically aggressive 0 Women lndirect aggression 0 Indirect aggression a form of indirect manipulation involving attempts to harm another person without a face to face encounter Frustration aggression hypothesis Frustration causes aggression Catharsis the reduction in the aggressive drive following an aggressive act Ll39lTLE EMPERICAL SUPPORT Cognitive neoassociationist model a theory of impulsive aggression that aversive events produce negative affect which stimulates the inclination to aggress o Frustration stimulates negative event 0 Negative effect stimulates in inclination to aggress Aggression tendencies are modi ed by high levels of thinking 0 Hostile aggression sparked by 0 Heat l aggression weak restraints o Excitation transfer 0 Alcohol Self regulation control NEGETIVE feelings Aggressive scripts guides for behavior and problem solving that are developed and stored in memory and are characterized by aggression Violence in media 0 Promotes antisocial conduct 0 Create an aggressive script 0 Longitudinal studies Culture of Honor is a belief system that prepares men to protect their reputation by resorting to violence 0 Developed through the herding economy 0 Us south Rape Myth the false belief that deep down women enjoy forcible sex and nd it forcibly exciting INCREASES MEN belief through PORNOGRAPHY Reducing aggression o Punishment reduces aggression must be applied prompt and strong Incompatible responses cant have 2 emotions that are incompatible with each other angry then laugh 0 Empathy humor and sexual arousal can inhibit aggressive behavior 0 PROCSOCIAL MUSIC quotHeal the worldquot Beatles Can also inhibit aggressive behavior Nonaggressive responding can occur through the following 1 Social modeling 2 lnternalizing antiaggression beliefs 3 Offering apologies 4 Social skills training 5 Reducing exposure to violence Chapter 12 Prosocial behavior Prosocial behavior Voluntary behavior that is carried out to bene t another person Social Norms Reciprocal helping an evolutionary principle stating that people expect that anyone helping another will have the favor return a some future time 0 Norm of Social responsibility a social norm stating that we should help when others are in need are dependent on us 0 Norm of Social justice a social norm stating that we should help only when we believe that others deserve out assistance Audience Inhibition effect people are inhibited from helping for fear that others bystanders will evaluate them negatively if they intervene and the situation is not an emergency 0 Produced by information dependencegroup of people witness possible emergency each person basis his or her interpretation of the event on the reaction of others 0 Outcome dependence excited during crisis we run the risk of getting negatively evaluated Diffusion of responsibility Bystanders make people feel less personally responsible for helping Moods and helping Good moods more attendant to others GREATER helping Bad moods helping others to seek relief 0 Adults and only mildly bad mood Whom do we help 0 We help Similar others 0 We help the deserving others lust world belief the belief that the world is a fair and equitable place with people getting what they deserve in life 0 We tend to blame people for their misfortunes Hidden cost to help recipients Threattoself esteem model a theory stating that if receiving help contains negative selfmessages recipients are likely to feel threatened and respond negatively 0 Help recipients may resent helpgivers if they are not given the opportunity to return the favor in someway


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

75 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."

Anthony Lee UC Santa Barbara

"I bought an awesome study guide, which helped me get an A in my Math 34B class this quarter!"

Bentley McCaw University of Florida

"I was shooting for a perfect 4.0 GPA this semester. Having StudySoup as a study aid was critical to helping me achieve my goal...and I nailed it!"


"Their 'Elite Notetakers' are making over $1,200/month in sales by creating high quality content that helps their classmates in a time of need."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.