Exam 3 Study Guide- PY 372
Dr. Hart- Spring 2016
What are the four factors that bring people together? How do these factors influence attraction? Think of specific examples.
1. Proximity- The physical distance between two people
• Being physically close to people promote friendship formation Festinger, Schacter, & Back (1950)- Friendship formation in college dorms • Randomly assigned to dorm rooms
• 65% said closest friend was in same building
• Of the 65%, 41% said the closest friend lived next door, 22% said closest friend lived two doors away, 10% said closest friend at end of the hall What causes the proximity effect?
• Higher probability of meeting people who are close in physical distance? • We are often close to people that we have things in common with? • Anticipating interacting with someone boosts liking
• Mere exposure effect
Mere Exposure Effect
• The more you see/perceive it, the more you like it
• Zajonc- Chinese ideographs (symbols/letters)- seeing the ideograph more had a higher probability of identifying is as a positive word
2. Physical Attractiveness
Hatfield 1966- Welcome week dance study
• Attractiveness of face predicted whether people wanted to see their partners again We also discuss several other topics like otvu
• “Birds of a feather flock together”
• Newcomb 1961 Housing Study- similar people became friends • Phantom-other technique (more values shared = more liking) • No strong evidence for “opposites attract” idea
Why is similarity important in attraction?
• Less conflict when viewpoints/personalities/hobbies are similar • Validation of our characteristics and beliefs feels good
4. Reciprocal Liking
• A bit more complex than “we (dis)like those who (dis)like us” 5. Minor blunders make you seem human
• We find the person with the mustard stain more attractive than the one without it
• Pratfall effect- tendency for attractiveness to increase or decrease when a person makes a mistake, depending on the individuals perceived confidence or ability to perform well in a general sense.
6. A little uncertainty
• If you’re not sure if somebody likes you, then that person is on your mind a lot Don't forget about the age old question of biol 2050
• We assume then that it’s someone we’re really into
Moreland & Beach (1992) - Confederates in class study
Demonstrates the “mere exposure” effect
4 fake students sent to class, some regularly, some occasionally, and some to very few. They never interacted with students, but students preferred the one who came regularly when asked
Mita et al. (1977) - Photographs vs. mirror images
Photographs vs. mirror image
• People like there mirror image more than their picture in photographs (used to seeing mirror image more frequently)
Darley and Berscheid (1967)
Anticipated interaction enhances liking
• Gave university students vague descriptions of two other people, one of whom they expected to talk to intimately. The women later preferred the person they expected to meet
What is the physical attractiveness stereotype? Is it accurate? The belief that physically attractive people have a wide range of positive characteristics
• Frieze -MBA graduate study (It pays to be physically attractive- 1 scale point of attractiveness increases starting salary.
The stereotype is partially true
• Physically attractive people are not more intelligent, dominant, happier, or mentally healthy
• They are more confident and comfortable in social settings (might actually be the same as others but are give a “free pass” because of how they look) • Why? - Behavior confirmation
What does it mean to have an attractive face? If you want to learn more check out what enzyme breaks down maltose
Physical attractiveness: High Bodily symmetry
• Average (not mediocrity)- no facial extremes
• Faces with typical features tend to be viewed as more attractive Matching hypothesis and UCLA dating study
Matching phenomenon- the tendency to choose as partners those who are a match in attractiveness and other qualities (intelligence, SES, etc.)
UCLA Dating Study:
• Those who were most similar in physical attractiveness were most likely to have fallen in love nine months later We also discuss several other topics like ruread
Possible that people settle based on fear of rejection
Other evidence indicates a real preference for people on your level Aronson and Linder (1965)
We like people who start out disliking us and vice versa
• We really like those we have “won over”
• We really dislike those we have lost
Allowed university women to “overhear” remarks made about them (some positive, some negative, and some that changed from positive to negative or negative to positive)
• Target person was especially well-liked when the individual experienced a “gain” in the others self-esteem
Passionate and Companionate Love
Passionate Love- A state of intense longing for someone that includes intense physiological arousal, psychological interest, and care for his/her needs Companionate Love- Affection people feel for those with whom their lives are deeply connected but do not necessarily experience passion or arousal in their presence
Know each of the theories of relationship change. What are the central tenets of each? What does each explain, have trouble explaining?
1. Investment model (Rusbult, 1983)
• Investment: anything people have put into a relationship that could be lost if they leave it (e.g. financial investments, kids, etc.)
• Greater investment, less likely to leave If you want to learn more check out ce 341
• Not enough to know satisfaction, must also know about investments 2. Social Exchange Theory
• People make decisions about their relationships like they do about consumer products (“economic model’ of relationships) If you want to learn more check out math 200 drexel
• Ex: Phone is doing its job, but it will be left behind if newer model comes along
• Staying together:
1. Satisfaction (how happy are you in the relationship?)
2. Presence of attractive alternatives (can you do better?)
These factors can be crossed so that relationships fit into 1 of 4 quadrants
“I can do
“I can’t do
unstable: will probably leave
Happy & stable
Very likely to end
Stay in unhappy relationship
3. Behavioral Theory
• People learn from their interaction with their partners whether or not they are in a good relationship
• Positive behaviors (e.g. holding hands) enhance evaluations of a relationship while negative behaviors (e.g. name calling, stone walling) reduce evaluations
• Empowering approach- Read books by John Gottman on this theory 4. Attachment Theory: Bowlby 1960s- psychoanalysis- personality fixed at age 2, In infancy, people develop ideas about close relationships:
• Secure attachment: reliable caregiver (good, dependable bond)- good w/ intimacy
• Avoidant attachment: Unavailable caregiver (apathetic)- not wanting intimacy • Anxious/Ambivalent: Undependable, unpredictable caregiver- needy and uncertain (does he/she love me?)
This theory offers some explanation to why some people have the same relationship over and over again
Influenced by parenting and temperament/genetics
5. Crisis Theory
• Focus on reaction to stressful external events
Hill (1949)- The ABCx Model
A) Negative Event
B) Resources for dealing with the negative event
C) Cognition: interpretation of event
A+B+C=x: You cope successfully, grow closer or poorly, grow apart Explains when pressure might help or hurt a relationship, depending on the presence of psychological and physical coping resources
Exchange and communal relationships
• Communal- One person gives without expectation of return (parent to child), people give because they are concerned for the other person’s welfare
• Exchange- A relationship based on equity concerns (I scratch your back, your scratch mine)
Evolutionary approaches to male and female differences in relationships • Men prefer women with “youthful” features signifying fertility • Women prefer men with features that suggest maturity & dominance (protection in early civilization)
Women look for men who are stable and will be able to provide and protect Men look for women who can bear children- passing on their genes Men tend to be more sexually promiscuous and less choosey than women, perhaps in part due to evolutionary processes, cultural differences, or stereotypes Story of Genovese
• Murdered in 1964
• Witnessed by 38 people
• No one helped during the attack
• Police were called forty minutes after the attack
What are the three reasons people help? Be able to distinguish these reasons and come up with some of your own examples.
1. To gain genetic and material benefits- kin selection (we act to help those who share our genes)
2. To gain social status and approval/ to manage self-image- People should help those who need help
3. To manage our moods and emotions- manage moods through pro-social actions What does an egoistic model of helping imply about helping? Evolutionary approach is what?
Evolutionary Approach: Predisposition to help those who share our DNA, increasing the chances our DNA is passed on
• Kin selection- we act to help those who share our genes (broken wing display in birds, people help family members more in life-threatening situations than strangers)
Egoistic Model: Implies that altruism does not really exist. Rather, the motive underlying all behavior is to increase one’s own welfare
• We try to manage moods/ emotions through pro-social actions • When viewing situations requiring help, we are usually distressed, we want to reduce distress
• Particularly likely to help (& reduce stress) when arousal is strong- babies crying
• This is considered an egotistical model
Know each of the 5 steps that go into helping. Be able to discuss research examples at each stage.
1. Notice the event
2. Interpret event as an emergency- person passed out against a tree sleeping or sick?
3. Take responsibility for helping (Kitty Genovese example)
4. Must know/be able to give help- knowing cpr if someone passes out 5. Must decide to help (weigh rewards and costs)
We assume that when other people appear unconcerned in the situation, it is not an emergency and it could be embarrassing or awkward to intervene in a non emergency situation
Diffusion of responsibility
A person is less likely to take responsibility for action or inaction when others are present
Social exchange theory of helping
People take rewards and costs into account when deciding whether or not to help Darley & Batson (1973)
Good Samaritan Study- Seminary students asked to give a lecture on the Good Samaritan or church finances passed a man slumped over in need of help
• Half had been told they were in a hurry and half were told they had plenty of time
• Story had no real effect
• Being told they had plenty of time made people more likely to help Effects of mood on helping
Good mood tends to increase helping (people who find money help more) • Why? - Think more positively of others and requests when in good mood (think back to persuasion)
Sad mood can increase or decrease helping
• Children help less when in a sad mood
• Adults help more when in a sad mood (not angry mood)
• Adults realize the benefits of connections
Negative-state relief model: help get out of sad mood; indeed
• If you give sad people another way to feel better, not as likely to help • If sad people believe helping won’t make them feel better, not as likely to help
Angry people are less likely to help out
Know the distinctions between basic and applied research.
• Knowledge as an end in itself
• Looking for causal relationships between variables (concern for internal validity- ability to assert causal relationships)
• Experiments- manipulative factors, careful control
• Solving social problems (e.g. aids obesity, education, group conflict) • Concerned with finding variables that produce beneficial changes • External validity is key- findings from a study apply clearly to the outside world
• Ex: The “jigsaw classroom” research- addressed issues of discrimination through equal, positive contact
Are eyewitnesses generally accurate? As accurate as they think? Accuracy can be impaired by a variety of factors involving the way people form judgments and memories
• Misinformation: False information Is believed by a witness to be true • As the sequence of events in a crime is told repeatedly, errors may creep in and become embraced by the witness as part of the true account • Assertive eyewitnesses are more likely to be believed, even though assertiveness does not reflect the accuracy of the information • People are generally inattentive and can encounter several problems with encoding
• Confident eyewitnesses are no more likely to be correct and eyewitnesses are sometimes more confident than correct
What are possible problems that can happen at encoding, storage and retrieval that can interfere with accuracy?
Encoding: Process by which people notice and attend to information in the environment. Affects what enters memory
• Exposure doesn’t mean it’s in memory- can’t identify correct penny in a line up
• Most crimes are committed under poor encoding conditions- conceal face, body, etc.
• Focus primarily on a weapon if one is present (weapon focus) Storage: The process by which people store and organize information from the environment in their memory
• We can struggle with putting information in “good” spots- finding keys after leaving them somewhere unusual
• Hints/reminders can jog our memory- returning to the scene of the crime Retrieval: The process by which people recall the information stored in memory not simply “recalling” what happened
• Study watching videos of a car crash- Participants estimated the speed of a car (same in all studies) to be different after being asked differently phrased questions
Do eye witnesses affect verdicts?
Yes, eyewitnesses can have a significant impact on a jury’s decision Circumstantial evidence plus:
No eyewitnesses = 18% conviction
1 eyewitness = 72% conviction
1 discredited eyewitness = 68%
Does the death penalty seem to be a good deterrent of violent crime? Probably not
• States with death penalty do not have lower murder rates
• When the death penalty is enacted in a state, murder stays the same or increases
Is there a difference between people for or against the death penalty? People for the death penalty:
• Favor the prosecution
• Feels the system coddles criminals
• More concerned with crime control
• More likely to vote guilty
Do clinicians predict outcomes better than statistics? Yet, they tend to show more confidence in their intuitive assessments than in statistical models. • Computer-based (statistical) diagnosis & prognosis- often performs better than individual clinicians
• Combination of clinician and computer sometimes does better than either individually
What are some biases that clinicians show? How do they work to affect diagnoses?
• Inaccurate assumptions (illusory correlations)- eyes on Draw-a-Person test • Confirmation bias- Looking for traumatic events usually leads to them being found
• Cognitive Overload- Too much information has been given, leaving the recipient unable to process it
• Overconfidence (most confident clinicians are typically least accurate) What is the self-presentation approach to therapy? How does it differ from traditional approaches?
Traditional Approach- “tell me about the bad stuff”- unnatural and awkward- more openness, over-sharing of details is often associated with worse outcomes Self-presentation approach- clients should present an image of themselves they desire
• Clients should be truthful, general in behavioral description of negative things (avoid the approach in the old school scene)
• Therapists need to encourage client to make positive statements about themselves and beneficial change and explain how self-concept change works, and encourage clients to play the role of the ideal self
Stress, stress coping, microstressors
Microstressors (the little things):
• Overcrowding, car problems, bad work/school days
• Seem to contribute more to illness and burn-out than major life stressors Coping- trying to reduce the stress threat and its effects
Productive and non-productive coping
Emotion focused- cleaning instead of studying
Problem focused- studying to get ready for the test
Stressor- any physical/psychological event perceived as being able to cause harm/emotional distress
• Major Life Event- death, marriage, divorce, kid, job loss
The tendency of mildly depressed people to make accurate rather than self-serving judgments, attributions, and predictions- “sadder but wiser ‘effect What are the effects and causes of chronic loneliness?
• Loneliness is the painful awareness that our social relationships are less numerous or meaningful than we want them to be. Modern emphasis on individual fulfillment and the depreciation of marriage and family may be loneliness provoking, as well as depression provoking. Job-related mobility also makes for fewer long-term family and social ties, and increased loneliness. Loneliness is also genetically influenced; identical twins are much more likely than fraternal twins to share moderate to extreme loneliness.
• Lacking social connections, many people compensate by seeing humanlike qualities in things, animals, and supernatural beings.
• Loneliness tends to run in social clusters, as its negative thoughts and behaviors spread.
• Loneliness affects stress hormones and immune activity and puts people at greater risk for depression, suicide, high blood pressure, heart disease, cognitive decline, and sleep impairment. Social isolation also increased the risk of death as much as smoking, and more than obesity and inactivity. • Adolescents experience loneliness more than adults.
• Males experience loneliness when deprived of group interaction and females feel loneliness when deprived of close one-to-one relationships. • Can be adaptive- loneliness signals people to seek social connections • Chronically lonely people are often caught in a cycle of self-defeating social thinking and social behavior, similar to that of depressed people. They perceive their interactions as making a poor impression, blame themselves for their poor social relationships, and see most things as beyond their control. (Negative explanatory style)
• Lonely people’s belief in their social unworthiness and feeling pessimistic about others prevent them from acting to reduce their loneliness- find it hard to introduce themselves, make phone calls, and participate in groups
• Are attuned to others and skilled at recognizing emotional expression (like mildly depressed people)
What are the effects and causes of Social anxiety?
The implications for social anxiety are straightforward: We feel anxious when we are motivated to impress others but have self-doubts
We may feel more anxious when we are
• With powerful, high-status people, people whose impressions of us matter • In an evaluative context, such as when making a first impression on the parent’s of ones fiancé
• Self-conscious (as shy people often are), with our attention focused on ourselves and how we are coming across
• Focused on something central to our self-image, as when a professor presents ideas before peers at a professional convention
• In novel or unstructured situations, such as a first school dance, or first formal dinner, where we are unsure of the social rules
The tendency for most shy people in theses situations is to be cautiously self protective; to talk less, to avoid topics that reveal ones ignorance, to be guarded about oneself, to be unassertive, agreeable, and smiling
• Such anxious concerns about making a good impression often create a bad one
Additionally, shy people see incidental events as somehow relevant to themselves over personalize situations, a tendency that breeds anxious concerns, and in extreme cases, paranoia.
• Overestimate the extent to which other people are observing them- believe everyone notices if they have a facial blemish
• Also self-conscious about their self-consciousness- Often wish they could stop blushing, worrying about what others are thinking, or what to say next Shy people may turn to alcohol to reduce social anxiety
• Can become self-handicapping- labeling oneself as anxious, shy, depressed or under the influence of alcohol may provide an excuse for failure Materialism and relation to mental health
Materialism relates to:
• Reduced life satisfaction/happiness
• Symptoms of major depression and anxiety disorders
• Less happiness with friends and family
• Headaches/physical ailments
Bottom Line: People often pursue happiness through materialism and materialism leaves people sick and unhappy.
Does money buy happiness? When does money raise happiness? In poor countries, where low income threatens basic needs, being relatively well off does predict greater well-being. In affluent countries, where most can afford life’s necessities, affluence still matters, partly because people with more money perceive more control over their lives. But after a comfortable income level is reached, more and more money produces diminishing long-term returns. Close relationships, and feeling empowered and confident better predicts subjective well being.
• Wealth is related to happiness across nations but not happiness within nations
• Income is related to happiness across individuals but not happiness within individuals
What are the four reasons materialism fails to produce happiness? 1. The more people strive for wealth, the less satisfied they tend to be with it 2. Adaption-level phenomenon- Tendency to adapt to a given level of stimulation (sound, temperature, income) and thus to notice and react to changes from that level. We adjust neutral points based on experiences
3. Parkinson’s second law- Expenditures rise to meet income (the more money poor people earn, the more obligations they take on. The rich earn more and let their savings compound)
4. Upward social comparison- there is always someone richer than you What does make people happy? How can you implement these things in your life?
• Close supportive relationships- need to belong is satisfied by close, supportive relationships
• Faith communities and voluntary organizations- source of close connections as well as meaning and hope
• Positive thinking habits- Optimism, self-esteem, perceived control and extraversion mark happy experiences and happy lives
• Experiencing nature- potentially lowers stress hormones and blood pressure • Flow- Optimal state of being absorbed in an activity, but not overwhelmed or stressed by it
• Engaging leisure activities
• Spending on family and friends