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

Psych 360, Aggression Part 2 and Consistency Theory Part 1

by: Winny Lu

Psych 360, Aggression Part 2 and Consistency Theory Part 1 Psych 360

Marketplace > University of Maryland Baltimore > Psychlogy > Psych 360 > Psych 360 Aggression Part 2 and Consistency Theory Part 1
Winny Lu

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

These are notes are continued from aggression part 1 and the introduction of Consistency theory.
Motivational Psychology
Bernard Rabin
Class Notes
25 ?




Popular in Motivational Psychology

Popular in Psychlogy

This 7 page Class Notes was uploaded by Winny Lu on Friday April 22, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to Psych 360 at University of Maryland Baltimore taught by Bernard Rabin in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 15 views. For similar materials see Motivational Psychology in Psychlogy at University of Maryland Baltimore.


Reviews for Psych 360, Aggression Part 2 and Consistency Theory Part 1


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: 04/22/16
1 W. Lu Rabin Aggression Part 2 (Apr.14.2016) I. TV Viewing and Aggression a. Does watching violent TV cause children to become aggressive? b. Direct Effects: i. TV executives say no to aggression however, they would agree to ads c. Indirect effects: i. Watching violence may affect how the individual responds to violence. II. Direct Effect a. Some children directly model violent behavior they have seen TV i. Correlational studies 1. there are low correlations a. but significant correlations between watching violent TV programs and ratings of aggressive behavior b. accounts for 4-10% of the variance III. Indirect Effects a. Social Learning Theory i. TV shows that violence is rewarded 1. Perpetrators go unpunished in 73% of violent scenes 2. 1 in 4 acts of violence involves a gun b. Berkowitz: Frustrative- Aggressive i. Shows aggression as an acceptable response to frustration ii. Shows viewers acceptable targets for aggression IV. Effect on Adults a. Desensitization: undermines feelings of concern, empathy, or sympathy i. Experiment: 1. Men were shown violent films a. Results: i. more desensitized to brutality ii. less empathetic towards victims b. higher fears of victimization V. Factors that predict Aggression a. Aggressive or Type A personalities b. Alcohol use i. Under the influence, one is more likely to do things that one normally wouldn’t do c. Watching violence (movies/ TV) d. Anonymity 2 W. Lu Rabin i. cannot identify as an individual 1. lose moral standards 2. more likely to go with the crowd e. Provocation i. “eye for an eye” f. Presence of weapons i. The presence of weapons leads increased aggression g. Group interaction i. One loses one’s self-identity when one is part of a group Consistency Theories I. Attitudes and Behavior a. Attitudes i. Positive or negative feelings about something 1. Can lead to approach or avoidance b. Acquisition i. Classical Conditioning 1. “guilt by association” a. Example: i. Friend is a communist, therefore you are a communist 2. Celebrity advertising ii. Reinforcement and imitation come from parents and peers II. Attitudes and Behavior a. Factors influencing extent to which attitudes will predict behavior i. Specific behavioral endpoint ii. The degree to which the attitude measure is specific to an object or an issue iii. The degree to which the attitude measure is reliable iv. Non-attitudinal factors may be more important expressed attitudes 1. Non- attitudinal factors can be more predictive 2. Example: a. Attitude: Hates shag roe b. But will eat it if presented because that is what one’s significant other wants III. Consistency as Motivation a. The arousal of goal directed behavior by aversive motivational states i. Conflict ii. Uncertainty 3 W. Lu Rabin iii. Inconsistency b. Incongruity/ incongruency occurs when an event or an outcome is perceived to be different from what we expect i. Dependent on the perception of the individual c. Behavior aroused to eliminate the inconsistencies and uncertainty i. Cognitive homeostasis 1. Inconsistency does not lead to cognitive homeostasis 2. People like to have cognitive homeostasis IV. Heider: Balance Theory a. Concern with perceived relationships between individuals and objects and the arousal of behavior b. Most general case: A, B, X i. A = one person ii. B = another person iii. X = an entity, object or third person c. Relationships can be described asbalancedor unbalanced i. Balanced: when the algebraic products is positive (+) You like your roommate Both you and your roommate hates Motivation 360 (+) x (-) x (-) = (+)balanced ii. Unbalanced:when the algebraic products is negative (-) 1. Aversive 4 W. Lu Rabin 2. Behavior will be aroused to restore balance You like your roommate You are on the diet Your roommate is not on diet, does not need to diet 3. (+) x (+) x (-) = (-)unbalancedbehavior aroused Change behavior to make it balanced: This would make the i. Hate your roommate (-) or algebraic product to be ii. Your roommate gets on the diet (+) positive  (+) iii. You don’t diet iii. Ambiguous Relationships 1. No changes in behavior despite unbalanced relationship 2. Content with the unbalanced relationship You hate the enemy. You hate the IRS. Enemy hates the IRS 5 W. Lu Rabin (-) x (-) x (-) = (-)unbalanced does not alter behavior V. Balance Theory: Evaluation a. Support: i. Jordan (1953) 1. Judged that unbalanced relationships are more aversive ii. Zajonc and Bernstein (1965) 1. Balanced relationships learned faster than the unbalanced relationships a. Only when the balanced relationship is relevant b. Against i. How much imbalance is needed to initiate behavior? ii. Lack of the definition for balance 1. There is no solid definition of balance iii. All of the bonds are treated as if they are of equal importance 1. Example: you and your significant other on where to squeeze the toothpaste a. You like your spouse (+) b. You squeeze from bottom ( +) c. Spouse squeezes from the middle (-) 2. Unbalanced but you are more likely to change your own behavior than to change your relationship to (-) c. Important conclusion from Heider: i. Help lead to the Festinger Theory of cognitive theory VI. Festinger (1957): Cognitive Dissonance a. Concerned with relationships between cognitions b. Cognitions i. Things a person knows about him/herself about his/her behavior and about his surroundings 1. Includes opinions, attitudes, beliefs and values ii. May not be accurate reflections of reality 1. Important: despite the inaccuracy in the reflection of reality the individual believes that they are accurate 6 W. Lu Rabin VII. Relationships between Cognition a. Consonant i. Agreement between belief and reality b. Irrelevant i. One cognition does not impact on another 1. Example: most scientists believe that evolution and genesis are irrelevant a. Evolution how humans are b. Genesis the human spirit i. One does not affect the other c. Dissonant i. Discrepancy between belief and reality ii. Discrepancy between expectations and actual outcome VIII. Motivation a. Dissonance is aversive b. Dissonance is an antecedent condition i. Arouses behavior designed to reduce dissonance c. Individuals attempt to maintain consistency of beliefs i. As long as consistency is maintain ii. No motivation exist behavior is not triggered IX. Dissonance a. Cause of dissonance i. Expected events turns out differently than was anticipated 1. Inconsistency between behavior and attitudes b. Magnitude of dissonance i. Importance of elements 1. Values of the situations ii. Effort evolved 1. High effort high dissonance iii. Relative number of dissonant cognition iv. Intensity of reward X. Dissonance a. Reduce dissonance by i. Changing one of the dissonant cognition ii. Changing the behavior iii. Introducing new cognition 1. Example: smoking a. Smoking is bad but… you are more likely to be in a car accident than from smoking 7 W. Lu Rabin i. Justification from new thoughts to make reality and attitude match b. Many not act to reduce dissonance because: i. change may be painful or involve a loss ii. Present behavior may be otherwise satisfying iii. Making the change may not be possible 1. Example: boss is causing the dissonance a. You cannot really do it because you might lose your job iv. May not recognize that cognitions are discrepant XI. Research on Cognitive Dissonance a. When prophecy fails b. Post decisional dissonance c. Effort d. Forced compliance i. Paired with insufficient justification e. Partial reinforcement extinction effect XII. When prophecy fails a. How believers respond when a prediction fails to materialize? i. Intuitive hypothesis: 1. Believer completely reject prediction ii. Dissonance theory: 1. Lower dissonance by strengthening their beliefs b. Festinger, Riecken and Schacter (1956) i. Group predict “end of the world” and they would be saved by alien space ship ii. Prediction was not validated iii. Response: new message received that groups effort had saved the world iv. Reduce cognitive dissonance without abandoning original belief


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

25 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

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."

Janice Dongeun University of Washington

"I used the money I made selling my notes & study guides to pay for spring break in Olympia, Washington...which was Sweet!"

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.