SOP3004 Exam 3 Study Guide
SOP3004 Exam 3 Study Guide SOP3004
Popular in Social Psychology
Popular in Psychlogy
This 5 page Study Guide was uploaded by Krinza Notetaker on Tuesday March 29, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to SOP3004 at University of Florida taught by Colin Smith in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 27 views. For similar materials see Social Psychology in Psychlogy at University of Florida.
Reviews for SOP3004 Exam 3 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: 03/29/16
EXAM 3 Study Guide "Group" Two or more people who interact and are interdependent Why Join a Group? The need to belong/form lasting interpersonal relationships Social Identity Theory o Group are imp. For our sense of identity Help define who we are Partially through feeling distinct from other group Alternative method to maintain self-esteem o Collective self-esteem Self esteem we get thru our group memberships You see your own group as being better than other groups Social Facilitation: when we are in the presence of others and our individual performance can be evaluated we, A Do better on simple tasks B Do worse on complex tasks The presence of others can be one of two things… 1 Performing a task with coworkers doing the same things you are 2 Performing a task in front of an audience that only observes you If task is simple and well-learned The mere presence of others improves performance This act is found in humans as well as other species When working on a more difficult task The presence of others degrades performance It can take longer to solve People and animals do worse in the presence of others Social Loafing The tendency for individuals to exert less effort when they are working together and their individual performance cannot be evaluated Ex. Tug of War The Effect of Crowds Deindividuation o The loosening of normal constraints on behavior when people cannot be differentiated (such as when in a crowd), leading to an increase in impulsive and deviant acts Process Loss Any aspect of group interaction that prevents good processing and/or problem solving Such as 1. Under-reliance on "better" members 2. Common Knowledge effect 3. Group polarization 4. Groupthink Under-Reliance on "Better" Members The reality is that in many cases not all group members are equal Group will do well only if the most talented member can convince the others that she is right If group moves forward with plans/ideas of less qualified members the outcome will be degraded Common Knowledge Effect Groups tend to focus too much on information shared by two or more members and ignore facts related to unique, unshared info Subsequent research has focused on ways to get groups to focus more on unshared info Group Polarization" tendency for groups to make decisions that are more extreame than the initial inclinations of its members Why? 1 Persuasive Arguments- Individuals bring to the group a set of arguments some of which other individuals have not considered 2 Social Comparison- When people discuss an issue, the first notice how everyone else feels..they see that people are more extreme than they are so they move in that direction Groupthink is most likely to occur when a group 1 Isolated from contrary opinions 2 Ruled by directive leader who makes his or her wishes known 3 Under stress 4 Highly cohesive Group Cohesion isnt bad IF a group Stresses PRODUCTIVITY GROUP performance leads to Group Cohesion Four Factors of Interpersonal Attraction 1 Proximity 2 Familiarity 3 Similarity 4 Reciprocity 5 (Attractiveness) Proximity -Propinquity Effect The more we see and interact with people the more likely they are to become our friends -Functional Distance Aspects of architecture that increases the likelihood of coming into contact with others Actual Distance is less important than functional distance Familiarity -Mere Exposure The finding that the more exposure we have to a stimulus, the more apt we are to like it A female confederate went into a class 0, 5, 10 times a semester o The more times she went to class people rates her as higher in attractiveness Similarity -similarity Sharing interests, attitudes, values and background Why Similarity? 1 We think people who are similair to us will like us, so we initiate a relationship 2 People who are similair validate our own characteristics and beliefs 3 We make negative inferences about someone who disagrees with us on important issues 4 Share activities and interest 5 Better communication Reciprocity We like others who like us Related to Self-Fulfillling prophecy- if we believe someone likes us, we behvae in a more likable way Attractiveness Important component of attraction, especially In early stages of a relationship More relevant for dating relationships although in frinedships their does seem to be a significant overlap Assumptions about Attractive People Halo Effect o Attractive people are thought to be more social, extraverted, popular, happy etc Highly Attractive People o Do develop good social interaction skills o Report having more satisfying interactions with others Self-Fulfilling Prophecy o The beautiful receive a great deal of social attention that helps them develop good social skills Three components of Sternberg's Triangle Theory of Love 1 Passion=behavioral, motivational component a Romance, sexual attraction, desire 2 Intimacy-affective, emotional component a Bondedness, warmth, sharing 2 Commitment-cogntive component a Conscious decision for relationship Three of 8 types of Love Passionate Love o An intense longing we feel for a person accompanied by physiological arousal (intimacy +longing) Companionate Love o Feelings of intimacy and affection that we have for someone that are not accompanied by passion or physiological arousal (intimacy + commitment) Consummate Love o The complete form of love that has passion, intimacy, and commitment Three Theories of Relatioships 1 Social Exchange Theory 2 Investment Model 3 Equity Theory Social Exchange Theory: the idea that peoples feelings about a relationship depend on perceptions of rewards, costs, future outcome expectations and chances for having a better rel with someone else. Relationship Satisfaction Depends on: Rewards receieved from the rel. Costs incurred by being in the relationshop Outcomes one expects to get in a relation. Probab. That a better relationship is available Investment Model We need to consider a person lvel of investment in the relationship Commitment to a rel. depends on how much a person has invested in a relationship that would be lost by ending it Investments include tangible things and Intangible things Equity Theory The idea that people are happiest with relationships in which the rewards and costs experienced and both peoples contributions are roughly equal. Equitable rel. are the happiest In-group Bias Major underlying motive is self-esteem o Individuals enhance self-esteem by identifying with specific social groups--self esteem is enhanced only if individual sees their group as superior to others Outgroup Homogeneity The perception of a highly complex in group and a simple outgroup One reason it occurs is because of more experience with in group If asked to memorize face, people are more likely to stay "yes ive seen that face before" to new outgroup faces than new in group faces Personality Scales Associated with Bias Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) o Established authority is important to follow loyally as it helps protect a societies values Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) o Group hierarchies are inevitable in society and help maintain order and provide stability "If certain groups stayed in their place, we would have fewer problems" Stereotype Threat The apprehension experienced by members of a group that their behavior might confirm a cultural stereotype Experiment: One half told game measured natural athletic ability-Black athletes performed better Other half told game measured sport strategic intelligence-black athletes performed worse than whites Contact Hypothesis Initial hypothesis : any contact between groups will reduce prejudice… …but it turns out that contact can increase opportunities for conflict that increase prejudice Contact will reduce prejudice when Both groups are of equal status Both share a common goal
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'