PSYC 2012 Midterm Study Guide
PSYC 2012 Midterm Study Guide PSYC 2012
Popular in Social Psychology
Popular in Psychlogy
This 17 page Study Guide was uploaded by Leslie Ogu on Friday March 4, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to PSYC 2012 at George Washington University taught by Stock, M in Fall 2015. Since its upload, it has received 43 views. For similar materials see Social Psychology in Psychlogy at George Washington University.
Reviews for PSYC 2012 Midterm Study Guide
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: 03/04/16
Leslie Ogu PSYC 2012 Midterm Date: 03/09/2016 *Note: These include only notes from class lectures and slides* Definitions ➔ Physical SelfDescriptions refers to physical qualities that do not imply social interaction; “identity card” information ➔ Social SelfDescriptions refers to the relationships, group memberships, social roles, and attitudes which are socially defined and validated ➔ Psychological SelfDescriptions refers to the psychological traits and states and to attitudes which do not refer to particular social referents ➔ Holistic SelfDescriptions refers to characteristics so comprehensive or vague that they don’t really distinguish a person from other people ➔ SelfConcept our knowledge about who we are ➔ Individualistic Orientation refer to trait descriptions about the self ➔ Connectivist Orientation refer to trait descriptions with group affiliations ➔ SelfAwareness Theory selfawareness can lead us to compare our internal values with our outward behavior ➔ SelfReference tendency for people to remember information better if they relate it to themselves ➔ SelfEsteem how much value a person places on themselves ◆ High SelfEsteem a highly positive, global, selfevaluation ◆ Low SelfEsteem a highly negative, global, selfevaluation ➔ Bask in Reflected Glory (BIRG) when people increase their selfesteem by associating themselves with others who are successful ◆ Ex: how people will win their sports team once they win and says how it was a great victory for “them” ➔ Cut Off Reflected Failure (CORF) when people distance themselves from those who have failed ➔ Narcissism large sense of selfimportance (selfcentered, selfadmired, high selfconfidence) ➔ Intrinsic Motivation pursuing a goal / engaging in an activity because you enjoy it, are passionate about it, or find it interesting ➔ Extrinsic Motivation pursuing a goal / engaging in an activity because of the external rewards or pressures ➔ Overjustification Effect the tendency for intrinsic motivation to diminish for activities that have become associated with extrinsic rewards ➔ TaskContingent Rewards rewards given for performing a task, regardless of how well the task is performed ➔ PerformanceContingent Rewards rewards based on how well the task is performed ➔ Misattribution of Arous the process in which people mistake inferences about what is causing them to feel the way they do ➔ Social Comparison Theory people tend to always want accurate feedback about their abilities and attitudes; they prefer objective, nonsocial standards and if these are unavailable, people will compare themselves to others ◆ Lateral Target target doing about the same as the person ◆ Downward Target target is doing worse than the person ◆ Upward Target target is doing better than the person ◆ Temporal Target self at other points in time ➔ Selfevaluation find out how well one is doing ➔ Selfimprovement learn to do/be better ➔ Selfenhancement feel better about oneself ➔ SelfPresentation people are biased to see themselves in a favorable light ➔ SelfHandicapping behaviors designed (on purpose) to create obstacles and excuses for people so that if they do poorly on a task, they can avoid selfblame ➔ Discounting eliminate internal cause if external causes are available ➔ Augmentation succeed despite the odds (make internal attribution) ➔ The Spotlight Effec people tend to believe the social spotlight shines more brightly on them than it actually does ➔ SelfRegulation Selfcontrol is a limited resources and controlling it takes effort ➔ Conformity a change in one’s behavior due to the real or imagined influence of others ◆ Informational Influence/Conformit conforming because we believe that others’ interpretation of an ambiguous is more accurate than ours and will help us choose how to act ◆ Normative Influence/Conformity the influence of other people that leads us to conform to be liked and accepted ➔ Chameleon Effect unconsciously mimicking or adapting to the behaviors, mannerisms, and actions of the people that one is interacting with ➔ Private acceptance conforming to other people’s behavior, but not expressing it in a public way such as speaking publicly or doing public deeds ➔ Public acceptance conforming publicly without necessarily behaving in what we are doing or saying ➔ Descriptive Norms perceptions of how others are behaving and what is typical ➔ Injunctive Norms perceptions of approval or disapproval of behaviors ➔ Obedience a change in behavior due to the commands of authority ➔ Informative social influence influence from the experimenter ➔ Normative social influence believed it was common for others to give high shocks (or whatever action asked of a person) ➔ Deindividuation the loosening of normal constraints on behavior when in a crowd, leading to an increase in impulsive and deviant acts ➔ Social Roles shared expectations in a group about how particular people are supposed to behave ➔ Social Facilitation the tendency for people to do better on simple tasks and worse on complex tasks when they are in the presence of others and individual performance can be evaluated ➔ Mere Presence Theory the presence of others causes us to be slightly aroused ➔ Evolution Comprehension Theory the presence of others causes arousal when those others are evaluating us ➔ Distraction Theory the presence of others causes arousal when others distract us and create attentional conflict ➔ Social Loafing tendency for people to do worse on simple tasks, but better on complex tasks when in the presence of others and their individual performance isn’t evaluated ◆ (Old Definition the tendency for people to produce less when their output is combined with the output of others) Doesn’t need to be known for exam NOTES ** if something has stars next to it, it’s best to understand it very clearly or pay close attention to it ** Background ➢ What influences how do we feel about ourselves? ○ How others judge and interact with us ○ This in turn influences the way we judge and interact with others Describing Oneself ➢ Physical SelfDescriptions ○ Examples include height, hair color, gender, etc ➢ Social SelfDescriptions ○ Examples include being apart of a sports team, a family role, a general role like a college student, etc ➢ Psychological SelfDescriptions ○ Examples include being an outgoing person, feeling angry, certain likes and dislikes, and more ➢ Holistic SelfDescriptions ○ Ex: “I am a child of God” or “I am a person” ➢ SelfConcept ○ cognitive component of the self ○ consists primarily of personal attributes ■ we think of ourselves in terms of our characteristics that separate us from others ■ depends on situation and ulture ○ Cultural Variation ■ people with an individualistic orientation tend to answer with trait descriptions such as “I am talkative” or “I am responsible” ■ people with connectivist orientation tend to answer with group affiliations such as “I am a team member of the Eagles” or “I am a college graduate” How Our Orientation Affects the Self ➢ View of the Self ○ individualistic people see themselves as more unique than collectivist people ➢ Expression of Emotion ○ individualistic people express more “egofocused” emotions, such as jealousy and pride, than collectivist people ➢ Striving ○ individualistic people gain status from personal achievement ○ collectivist people gain status from group achievement ➢ Gender Differences ○ Women have more relational dependence ■ Focus is on closer relationships ○ Men have collective interdependence ■ Focus on larger social groups Traits That Describe Us ➢ SelfAwareness & Discrepancies ○ SelfAwareness Theory ■ If there are inconsistencies, we may experience discomfort ■ In order to deal with the discomfort, we can: ● Behave in a manner that reduces the inconsistency ● Withdraw from selfawareness ○ Negative Ways ■ Smoking, Drinking, Risky Behavior ■ Avoidance ○ Positive Ways ■ Focus on faith and/or religion ■ Our acts are more aligned with standards and/or morals ■ More socially desirable behavior ■ Selffocus is not always damaging or aversive: ● Ex: If you experienced a major success ● It can also possibly remind you of your sense of right and wrong ■ People are less likely to stereotype others or perform wrong acts if they can see themselves (in a mirror or TV), or even when their name flashes on a screen ○ SelfReference ■ the self generates a rich set of cues ■ selfreference instructions encourage people to think about how their personal traits are related to one another ■ you rehearse material more frequently if it’s associated with yourself ○ SelfEsteem ■ this can fluctuate in response to life experiences ■ High SelfEsteem ● people see themselves as good, decent, and usually have a feeling of pride ● Good or Bad? ○ High SelfEsteem ■ less stress ■ more ingroup favoritism ■ more likely to take risks ■ fewer psychosomatic symptoms ■ greater perceived control ■ intrinsic motivation ■ optimism and hope ■ defensiveness ○ Research suggests that high selfesteem is more of a problem for people who have high explicit selfesteem, and low implicit selfesteem ● Maintaining high selfesteem is one of the basic motives of the self ■ Low SelfEsteem ● feeling of shame ● this is seen a lot in college students and adolescent youth ■ SelfEsteem comes from evaluations of oneself after successes and failures (selfevaluation) ● Successes in valued domains (e.g., social skills, appearance) ● It also comes from societal values ● In America, men typically have higher levels of selfesteem ● Women base esteem more on their appearance and what the media portrays as acceptable ● Measuring SelfEsteem: ○ Explicit measures ■ Ex: “Overall, I am happy with myself” ○ Implicit measures ■ Ex: nameletter preference (our action of picking letters that we can find in our own name) ■ Enhancing SelfEsteem ● Bask in Reflected Glory (BIRG) ○ Ex: how people will win their sports team once they win and says how it was a great victory for “them” ● Cut Off Reflected Failure (CORF) ○ Narcissism ■ the person believes they are “special” and unique, and should associate with others like them ■ takes advantage of others to achieve their own goals ■ require admiration ■ has a sense of entitlement ■ lacks empathy ■ often envious of others or believe others are envious of them ■ Positives: ● less depressed, sad, anxious, and less reactive to stress ○ this is especially common among reality TV stars and celebrities ○ has increased over the past 30 years ○ Intrinsic Motivation ■ highly individualized ■ selfregulatory ■ absence of an external reward or pressure ■ Studies have shown that intrinsically motivated people are more likely to enjoy the activity and are more likely to continue it ○ Extrinsic Motivation ■ less individualized ○ Overjustification Effect ■ This means the person probably views the extrinsic reward as more of a motivation for doing the activity and begins to underestimate their intrinsic interest ○ Types of Rewards ■ TaskContingent Rewards ● Ex: Receiving a certificate for helping at a retirement home ■ PerformanceContingent Rewards ● Ex: NBA AllStar Weekend Dunk Contest Trophy to the best dunker; promotion at work Concise Summary ➢ SelfConcept “Who am I?” ➢ SelfAwareness “How do I know who I am?” ➢ SelfEsteem “Do I value myself?” ➢ Motivation “What is my motivation for my behavior?” ➢ Emotions “How do I know what I am feeling?” ➢ Social Comparison “How do I know what I am feeling?” ➢ SelfPresentation “How do I present myself to you?” ➢ SelfControl “How do I control myself?” Understanding Our Emotions Notes ➢ Twofactor theory of emotion (from Schachter & Singer (1960s)) ○ Factor 1 Experience physiological arousal ○ Factor 2 Seek explanation via cognitive label ○ Label = result of experience and environmental cues (e.g. the situation and others) ○ Ex : Physiological Arousal Running and heart is pounding; Cognitive Label I’m afraid and in danger ○ Perception and thought about a stimulus influence the type of emotion you feel ○ The degree of bodily arousal influences the intensity of the emotion you feel ○ The labeling of an arousal depends on the situation if there is no other explanation ■ If the reason for the arousal is known, people won’t look for another reason Misattribution of Arousal ➢ One explanation could be physiological arousal from one source (such as exercise, medication, or caffeine) enhancing the intensity of how a person interprets other feelings (like how attractive they find someone, or their emotion towards certain people) ○ Ex: Your heart is pounding when you are drinking coffee, and then a new, attractive student walks into the class, so you assume you must be attracted to them when it could just be the caffeine Social Comparison Theory ➢ They prefer objective, nonsocial standards ○ If these are unavailable, people will compare themselves to others ➢ Comparison Targets ○ Lateral ○ Downward ■ Negatives ● If it implies a negative shift in the future ● Lower selfesteem or low control over behavior ● Contact with downward target can be depressing, scary, etc ● Leads to shift in lower personal standards ○ Upward ■ Advantages ● Affiliation with others doing or coping well can lead to an increase in hope, motivation, inspiration, and information ● Higher standards ■ Disadvantages ● If standards are too high, leads to lower selfesteem ● Threatening ○ Temporal ➢ People are pretty good about selecting targets to meet certain motives ○ If we don’t like the comparison, we can reduce closeness, make postcomparisons, and be selective ➢ Self Comparison Motives ○ Selfevaluation ■ lateral target ○ Selfimprovement ■ upward target ○ Selfenhancement ■ downward target ➢ Social Comparison Orientation Tendencies ○ High Comparers ■ More strongly influenced by SC targets (especially downward/negative targets) ■ Constant activation of and awareness in the self ■ Strong interests in the thoughts and feelings of others ■ More strongly influenced and affected by social norms ➢ SelfPresentation ○ Do they always want others to see them in a favorable light? ■ Ex: Students in elementary school may not want to be seen as the “goodytwoshoes” and be ostracized by classmates ○ SelfHandicapping ■ Ex: Not going to practices before a championship game ■ Avoid painful attribution for failure by: ● creating or taking advantage of ambiguity ● raises questions about why the failure occurred ■ Protects ego and selfesteem ■ Variations ● Acquired (obstacles that actually lower the likelihood of success) ○ Ex: Behaviors: substance use, alcohol use ● Claimed (obstacles people claim to have) ○ Ex: stress ● Acquired is more believable, but also more costly ■ Why selfhandicap in the noncontingent success condition? ● Discounting ○ Create an external attribution ○ Create an unstable attribution ● Augmentation ○ Why do we selfpresent? The Spotlight Effect ■ Our tendency to think that other people are watching us more closely than they actually are ● Ex: bad hair days, wearing worn out shoes, not wearing your best outfit ○ SelfRegulation ■ Draws on a limited resource (it’s like a muscle). Thus, one act of volition, or selfcontrol, will have a detrimental effect on a subsequent act of volition or selfcontrol ● even if the two acts are in unrelated domains (due to “ego depletion”) ■ Limits: ● Dieters give into high temptation quicker (even those restricted on doctor’s orders) ○ those who don’t give in are quicker to give up on the following tasks ● Former smokers are more likely to take up smoking again when stressed ○ dealing with stress depletes the “self resource,” such that there is less to spend in other areas Summary of Conformity ➢ People usually conform for two main reasons accuracy and acceptance ➢ Conformity isn’t really good or bad, but it can definitely lead to negative outcomes ➢ Conformity involves public compliance (through public pressures) but not necessarily private acceptance ➢ People don’t always conform, but when they do, they may be punished by the majority ○ seen a lot in early school years (elementary and middle school) ➢ To fight against mindless conformity: ○ recognize the power of the social situation ○ take action it often takes only one person to end other people’s conformity Conformity Notes ➢ Ex: Social norms we conform to in order to not stand out, break the pattern, and/or because they have become unwritten rules society follows ○ When driving, we all drive around the same speed when on the highway because we see others are driving a certain speed and don’t want to get honked at or cause traffic ➢ Chameleon Effect ○ Ex: When we are in an elevator, we may stand a certain way, or move to the back so more people can enter, etc ➢ Types of Conformity: ○ Informational Influence/Conformity ■ The desire/need to know the correct response in a given situation ■ Occurs when: ● The situation is ambiguous ○ Most important criterion ○ If we are not sure how to act, we look to others ● The situation is a crisis ○ When there is no time to think; must act now! ■ They probably know what they are doing ■ When it has gone wrong: ● Mass psychogenic illness similar symptoms with no known cause among a group of people ○ Ex: Tennessee high school ○ Salem witch trials ● Crisis ○ War of the Worlds ○ Normative Influence/Conformity ■ fear of social rejection; expected behavior ■ desire to gain approval or avoid disapproval ➢ Two Types of Acceptance: ○ Private acceptance ○ Public acceptance ➢ It is a response to group pressure ○ Example Experiment: Asch Line Judgement Studies (1940s) ○ Conformity can be reduced when one has an ally ○ Also depends on the importance of accuracy ➢ What factors determine whether or not we conform? ○ Group importance ■ Stronger with people we respect, care about, or identify with ○ Group cohesion (agreement as a whole) ○ Status ■ High Status = more impact on us (more conformity) ○ Public response ■ Conform more in public ○ Prior commitment ■ Less likely to conform ○ Culture ■ Collectivist cultures conform more Social Norms ➢ Descriptive Norms (e.g., how frequently they think) ○ Young adults overestimate risky health behaviors ➢ Injunctive Norms ➢ Depend on exposure (e.g., peers, media) and experiences (whether positive or negative) ➢ Perception of norms predicts behavior Crafting Normative Messages ➢ Issue: messages that focus on negative behaviors as being normative (e.g., littering, alcohol use) ➢ Impact of injunctive norm against the behavior may be undermined by descriptive (behavioral) norms of the behavior ➢ Best practice: messages that include both types of norms in same directions (pro or anti) Resisting Normative Social Influence ➢ Minority influence ➢ Where a minority of group members influence the behavior or beliefs of the majority ○ consistency is key! ○ informational social influence ➢ Idiosyncrasy (a way of thought particular to an individual) credits ○ conform most of the time ○ allowed to deviate sometimes Obedience ➢ Indicators of authority: ○ Title ○ Position ○ Wealth ○ Power ➢ Why do we obey? ○ to keep order ○ learning ○ safety ○ avoid conflict ➢ It’s a social norm ○ universally valued ➢ Without it, there would be chaos ○ society follows certain unwritten/unspoken rules because we don’t want to disrupt the flow of how things have always been ➢ We are socialized to obey legitimate authority figures ○ internalize social norm of obedience ■ obey even if authority figure isn’t present ● Ex: traffic lights We all obey even though no one is there to tell us we have to ➢ Milgram’s Obedience Studies ○ illustrated the power of the situation ○ experimenter had participant administer volts of increasing amounts to the learner depending on their number of incorrect answers in a memorization exercise ○ found that most people would continue to give large amounts of shock because the experimenter urged them to continue, despite the learner being in pain ■ showed that when a person perceived to be power gives commands, people unconsciously are more likely to listen despite what they may ask one to do Factors Affecting Obedience ➢ Informative social influence ➢ Normative social influence ➢ The Authority ○ physical presence ■ the closer the authority figure is, the more obedience there is ○ legitimacy ■ if the authority figure and the institutio are perceived as legitimate, there will be more obedience ➢ The Learner / Victim ○ physical proximity ■ the farther away the victim is, the more obedience there is ➢ The Procedure ○ gradual escalation of shocks in the experiment ■ similar to the “footinthedoor” technique ○ peer modeling ○ dissenters (when “peers” disobeyed, people were less likely to obey) ➢ It’s not about aggression ➢ Ethical Issues Summary of Social Influence Studies Topic Researcher Method RealLife Example Informational Sherif Autokinetic effect Watching others in a Influence new place to learn Normative Asch Line Judgements Fashion / Hair Fads Influence Obedience Milgram Commands to give Employees following shocks questionable order Group Processes Characteristics of Groups ➢ 2 or more people ➢ Interactions are interdependent and influence each other ➢ Help basic human needs to belong, get information, establish our identity, and social norms ➢ Members tend to be similar to one another ○ This is usually due to the group one belongs to having an impact on who you are if you spend enough time with them ○ Adapting to the culture Deindividuation ➢ Why do people behave differently in crowds? ➢ When we are around large numbers of people, we tend to get a little crazier because we are less wary of the consequences (since the group is so large) ➢ When people become deindividuated, normal constraints against deviant behavior is lessened ○ Feel less accountable for actions (more excuses) ○ ** Deindividuation does not require facetoface contact ** ■ Ex: internet, social media ➢ Factors affecting deindividuation ○ Group Size ■ The larger the group, the more deindividuated people become ● they feel less accountable because it’s harder to single one person out ○ Anonymity ■ The more anonymous a person is, the more deindividuated they become ■ ** This does not always lead to negative behavior, just more groupconscious ● increase obedience to group norms ■ Ex: If you are apart of a protest, you are less likely to be singled out ■ Ex: Kids going out in groups on Halloween, wearing costumes more likely to take more candy because the person or people around them don’t know who they are ● If the person knew them, or the kids were made selfaware (name is called out), deindividuation decreases and they would take less ○ Distraction ■ Environmental cues that take the focus away from the self increase deindividuation ■ People in highly stimulating environments (lights, loud music, etc) are more uninhibited than people in a more sterile environment ● Ex: In a club, if you push someone, or yell an insult at a performer, you are less likely to be caught or pointed out Social Roles ➢ Ex: Boss v. Employees in the workplace, Professors v. Students in a classroom, etc ➢ Major example of this was done through Zimbardo and his Stanford Prison Study ○ There are potential costs to social roles ■ People can get so far into a role that their personal identities and personalities get lost ● Probably a major contributing factor to why many exconvicts find it hard to integrate into society or why many of them don’t change for the better after their sentence ○ Major factors that enabled brutality in the study: ■ Obedience to Authority ● Experimenter gave orders to guards and encouraged tough behavior ■ Deindividuation ● Guards wore uniforms, mirrored sunglasses ● Anonymity ■ Dehumanization ● Prisoners stripped, wore prisoners clothes, given numbers as names Social Facilitation ➢ Ex: People solve math problems, or other problems in class quicker because they are in the presence of others ➢ The Zajonc Solution ○ How can we reconcile these opposite findings? ○ 3 steps to the presence of others: ■ Presence of others creates a rousal ■ Increased arousal enhances the dominant response ■ For easy tasks, the dominant response is usually correct. For difficu tasks, the dominant response is usually incorrect ■ Ex: athletes and home court advantage ➢ Why do others lead to arousal? ○ 3 Theories ■ Mere Presence Theory ● Explains animal studies ■ Evolution Comprehension Theory ● Social facilitation disappears when others are blindfolded ■ Distraction Theory ● Nonhuman sources can produce social facilitation effects Social Loafing ➢ What factors decrease social loafing? ○ Performance is personally identified ■ Ex: Doing group work but being graded on how you contributed ○ Task is important to the performers ○ Group is cohesive ○ People believe that their own efforts are necessary for success ○ Collectivist cultures and females show less social loafing
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
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'