Popular in Social Psychology
Popular in Liberal Arts
This 7 page Study Guide was uploaded by Erika leon on Tuesday November 3, 2015. The Study Guide belongs to PSY 350 at Arizona State University taught by Dr. Robert Short in Fall 2015. Since its upload, it has received 384 views. For similar materials see Social Psychology in Liberal Arts at Arizona State University.
Reviews for Exam 3
-Taylor Simone Woods
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: 11/03/15
Exam 3 Study Guide Chapter 6-10 1. Conformity – going along with a group in actions or beliefs The study was designed to pit individuals against a unanimous group, to see whether people would go along with the group or stick with what their eyes were telling them was right. One third of judgements made by participants went along with the majority opinion. A quarter of the participants never went along with the majority. Old The Line Test – confederates would say a different line matched the original given line and this would influence the actual participant to change their answer New Six people looking at shapes to see if they match. Most of the time people were influenced by the confederates wrong answers, even if they got them right on the test before this. 2. Experimenter asked to test “the effects of punishment on memory” and asked the participants to deliver painful electric shocks to fellow participants who knew they weren’t getting shocked. Tested to see how far people would go if an authoritative figure kept giving them the okay. 3. Peripheral Route to Persuasion – when people are less motivated or do not have the time/energy to process a message, they use this route. Individuals use other cues to process the message such as number of arguments, credibility, how many others seem persuaded, ect. E.g. deciding which toothpaste to buy Central Route to Persuasion – they are high on the spectrum of being willing and able to process a message. They process the message deeply and evaluate the strength of the persuasive arguments. E.g. deciding which college you should attend 4. Cognitive Dissonance Theory - unpleasant state of psychological arousal resulting from an inconsistency within one’s important attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors E.g. When there are two groups in study and the group getting paid a dollar, try to find a reason in why they are doing the study and those who are getting paid 20 dollars, don’t need a reason since they are getting paid 20 dollars. Heider’s Balance Theory – we want to agree with people we like disagree with people we don’t like, associate good things with good people and ad things with bad people; if cognitive system is out of balance it, then it creates an uncomfortable tension, to remove this tension, we will have to change something in the system. E.g. Rhoda considers Mary her best friend. Rhoda is pro- choice and Mary is pro-life. Rhoda can restore balance by changing her feelings about abortion, she could change her feelings about her friend, or change Mary’s feelings about abortion. 5. Prejudice – generalized attitude toward members of a social category, it can be either positive or negative. People with low self-esteem affect prejudice; when people are feeling bad about themselves, they are more likely to show bias against people who are different in order to make themselves feel better and heighten their self-perception. People with high-esteem prejudice; when an individual with high self-esteem is threatened with failure, they may become prejudice towards someone. 6. Student first performed a boring task (turning pegs in holes). They were then asked to tell another student it was interesting and they were either paid a dollar or twenty dollars. Then they were asked about their attitudes toward the boring task; those who got paid a dollar had come to realize it was enjoyable since the dollar was insufficient justification, thus arousing dissonance and those paid twenty dollars didn’t change their attitudes at all because the twenty dollars provide adequate justification for misleading another student. By changing beliefs about the task it reduced the cognitive discomfort. 7. 8. You would be more likely to obey an authority figure. 9. When we are distracted, we don’t have the focus needed to evaluate the message so we might ignore the message and the persuasion will not get through to us. 10. Sub-grouping under a main group. Maintaining your views on a group even when you meet someone outside of those views who belongs to the group, making them a subtype and outside the norm. E.g. A sexist ale thinks that all females are stupid, but when he meets a well-educated female, he subtypes her as an abnormal academic female so he is able to maintain his sexist values, thinking and believing she is an exception. 11. Is connected to minimizing factors that interfere with group experiments; the minimal conditions required for discrimination to occur between groups. Experimental procedure in which short- term, arbitrary, and artificial groups are created to explore foundations of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination. 12. 13. It is a way to make someone essentially feel committed on action or a behavior. E.g. If you label someone as being a generous giver or an altruistic person, they feel a need to execute behaviors associated with generous or altruistic. 14. Prejudice- generalized attitude toward members of a social category, can be positive or negative. (Attitude that judges a person on his or her group’s real or imagined characteristic) Discrimination – behaviors directed toward people on basis of their group membership, can be positive or negative. (Unfair treatment of people because of their group membership) 15. Dr. Short’s was about the relationship between racial prejudice and perception of justice toward immigration. Justice Hypothesis – participants will voice stronger immigration attitudes toward a legal immigrant irrespective of national/ethnic background Prejudice Hypothesis – participants will voice stronger anti- immigration attitudes toward a legal outgroup immigrant than a legal in-group immigrant especially when the immigrant is representative to an ethnic group Findings- both issues of justice and prejudice influence attitudes toward immigration & individuals are more likely to voice anti- immigration sentiments when the principle of immigration is violated. Findings when it came to all ethnicities – based in legal-illegal distinction participants voiced anti-immigration sentiments regardless of ethnic/national background Findings when it came to white participants – if an individual was already more prejudice, their views and immigration attitudes were much harsher 16. Categorization happens naturally and is a helpful tool. Sorting people into categories has long been related to stereotyping and prejudice. Categories are helpful to human beings; they allow us to deal with large amounts of information and allow us to reduce mental efforts. 17. Revealing only a small piece of information initially and then large piece of information later. E.g. A good deal ($200) for a computer is given to you for a new laptop. You purchase the computer, but with the software, a mouse, and charging cable, warranty, insurance, and screen protector the price ends up being about $600. 18. States that whenever there are two or more groups that are seeking the same limited resources, this will lead to conflict, negative stereotypes and beliefs and discrimination between the groups. The conflict ca lead to increasing animosity toward the groups and can cause an ongoing feud to develop. 19. Members of outgroups, groups an individual is not a part of, are viewed as more similar, or homogeneous. Individuals tend to view members of their own group as more varied. E.g. all football players are tall and big. People might use the Out-group Homogeneity Effect, when asked to describe an out-group, we’re likely to access information at the group level and what we know about the primary tendencies about the group. When asking to describe our in-groups, we believe that we’re more diverse because we know more people from the in-group, therefore, we know more information. 20. Refers to the risk of confirming a negative stereotype about one’s group. The stereotype predicts poor performance, so the person has to deal with possibility of confirming that stereotype. The anxiety distracts people from doing as well as the have the potential to do. E.g. Researchers told a group of African American and White participants that a test was going to be a diagnostic of the intellectual ability, tapping into the African American stereotype that African Americans weren’t as intellectual as those from other racial groups. African Americans didn’t do well as they were placed under pressure from the stereotype. 21. People may be prejudice toward a group in order to vent their anger. In essence, they use the group they dislike as their target for all the anger. E.g. The Germans used the Jew as scapegoats for all of their country’s problems and focused their anger on them. 22. The Hidden Bias Test (Implicit Association Test) which is a measure of unconscious, or automatic biases. Measures unconscious attitudes associations, which could reflect cultural stereotypes or social reality and can lead to different attitudes. (Sympathy, indifference hostility) In-group favoritism – tendency to show preferential treatment toward members of one’s own group Outgroup homogeneity – beyond viewing one’s own group as deserving more positive things than another group, individuals with a group tend to view their own group as more varied than someone outside the group views the group Superordinate goals – goals held by both groups in a conflict that transcend the conflict and provide a common aim Credibility – has two aspects: expertise and trustworthiness Expertise – one who appears to have knowledge and is able to communicate it. Trustworthy – communicator is one we believe is giving us accurate information. Gain framed – message that focuses on benefits E.g. If you were buying a vehicle, the message that buying this car, with all of its safety features, will keep you safe in a crash emphasizes the things you would gain. Transportation – joining of feelings, attention, and thoughts in the context of a story, involves getting lost in a story Elaboration likelihood model – one model that brings together persuader message, and audience variable. Need for cognition – term researchers use to describe an individual difference in how much people enjoy thinking. Foot- in – the- door technique – a small request is made and agreed to, followed by a larger request. E.g. People say yes to the first request (test drive), they are more likely to say yes to the second request (buying the car), and the second request is really the main target for the salesperson. Legitimization-of-paltry-favors technique – catches us by making a very small contribution acceptable. It is difficult to not give when even a very small amount is described as legitimate. Reciprocity – a request is made after a gift has been given. E.g. After receiving a cookie you are asked if you would be willing to donate blood. That’s-not-all – a large request is made, but before the individual can refuse additional offers are added. E.g. you are asked to donate blood, but before you say no you are told you will get a cookie and a sticker and your name will published in the paper. Scarcity – potential customer is told an item will be at a certain price for limited time or that there is a limited supply. Injunctive norms – norms for what is approved or dis-approved Descriptive norms- norms describing what most people do Information influence – we conform because we believe the crowd knows something. E.g. crowd knows something you do not know; where the lion is and by following the crowd you are more likely to see the lion. Normative influence - we conform because we want to be liked and accepted by the crowd. E.g. In high school, you might have worn a certain style of clothing or acted in a particular way and not because you believed it was the right thing to do but because you wanted to be liked and accepted. Transactional leadership – leader that lead by offering an exchange of rewards for effort from followers. Transformation leadership – leadership where the leader offers followers a common purpose and asks that individual interests b put aside so the group can work together toward that goal. Laissez-faire leadership – the leader simply allowing the followers to do what they would like without substantial input from the leader.
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'