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

Lecture & Textbook Notes Ch 17

by: Lorelei Wong

Lecture & Textbook Notes Ch 17 PSY 150A1

Marketplace > University of Arizona > Psychlogy > PSY 150A1 > Lecture Textbook Notes Ch 17
Lorelei Wong
GPA 3.43

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

Social Psychology
Structure of Mind & Behavior
Dr. Adam Lazarewicz
Class Notes
structure, Of, mind, and, behavior, social, Psychology
25 ?




Popular in Structure of Mind & Behavior

Popular in Psychlogy

This 9 page Class Notes was uploaded by Lorelei Wong on Thursday May 5, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PSY 150A1 at University of Arizona taught by Dr. Adam Lazarewicz in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 28 views. For similar materials see Structure of Mind & Behavior in Psychlogy at University of Arizona.


Reviews for Lecture & Textbook Notes Ch 17


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: 05/05/16
PSY 150A1 With Prof. Lazarewicz Lecture Notes Chapter 17: Social Psychology  Social psychology – how people react to, influence, think about, and relate to one another o How do we influence actions and how do others influence us?  Attributions & Fundamental Attribution Error o Attribution – explanation for a person’s behaviors  2 types  1. Dispositional – just the way they are, part of who they are  2. Situational – their reaction because of environment or factors contributing to the event or predicament o Fundamental attribution error – tendency to overestimate one’s disposition and underestimate the effect of situational things affecting a person’s behaviors  Jones & Harris (1967): The Castro study  IV: read a pro/anti article on Castro written by someone who either chose/assigned the position  DV: perceptions of author’s attitude towards Castro  Results: even when participants were told that author was assigned a position, people still thought the author was pro Castro  Ross et al. (1977): The Quiz Show study  IV: play role of trivia show host/contestant/audience o Host makes up questions of random knowledge that they personally know  DV: observer/contestant ratings of themselves/host’s general knowledge relative to average Stanford student (study done at Stanford)  Results: o contestants rated themselves lower on knowledge than average, while they thought host had more knowledge than average o observers rated hose much higher than average knowledge while the contestants were just below average o attitude – evaluation of something as positive or negative  we like to think of our attitudes and actions as consistent  consistency critical to social interactions o reliability, predictability  hypocrisy is something we try to avoid in ourselves and others  attitudes guide behaviors when  1. Minimal outside influence  2. Attitude is specific  3. Attitude is strong and salient  Sometimes behaviors guide attitudes though  If we engage in a behavior, consistency demands that our attitudes & cognitions come along for the ride… PSY 150A1 With Prof. Lazarewicz  Food-in-the-door phenomenon – agree to something small then later agree to more because they agreed to a smaller request relative to later request  Starts small and builds  Freedman & Fraser (1966) o Asked people to put large ugly “safe driver” sign in yard, most did not agree to o Asked people to put small sticker on car advocating for “safe driving”  Later ask to put ugly sign in yard and most agree to because they consider themselves as someone who advocates for safe drivers  Social role – norms for how a person should act in certain situations or positions  When we change our behavior to fit a role, do we change the rest of our psychology too?  Zimbardo (1972): The Stanford Prison Experiment o Average college students agree to experiment o Some assigned prison guards on 8hr shifts, others as prisoners 24/7, both for two weeks o Deindividuation – removing elements that make person unique, identifiable o Dehumanization – tendency to view others as less than human o Within a few days’ things went from screwing around and having fun to serious changes in behavior  Guards enforcing and making prisoners do things – guards became cruel, abusive, and violent towards prisoners  Prisoners became withdrawn, passive, and depressed o Some had to be released early because they couldn’t handle it o Study only lasted 6 days (original was planned for 2 weeks) before they had to stop it because it was too damaging – even Zimbardo got caught up in the psychological change  Cognitive dissonance – discomfort due to inconsistencies between thoughts, behaviors, values, attitudes, and beliefs  We are motivated to reduce cognitive dissonance  Dissonance reduction often requires justification or rationalization for thoughts and actions  Dissonance prediction: smaller rewards for a behavior yield a higher likelihood of that behavior o Principle of insufficient justification  3 ways to reduce cognitive dissonance o 1. Change behavior to be consistent with attitudes/beliefs  Ex: quit smoking o 2. Change attitudes/beliefs to be consistent with behavior  Ex: dismiss research on cancer related to smoking PSY 150A1 With Prof. Lazarewicz o 3. Add new cognitions that are consistent with behavior/attitudes/beliefs  Ex: all my friends smoke  Ex: I’ll gain weight if I quit smoking  Principle of insufficient justification – when there is little/no external justification for behavior, we need to find internal justification o Festinger & Carlsmith (1959): Dollar Bill study  IV: paid participants $1/$20 to say boring task was interesting (control group: no lie request)  DV: enjoyment of study, willingness to participate in similar study in future  Results: the group that was paid only $1 was much more likely to say they enjoyed the study and would participate again, as opposed to the group that was not asked to lie or was given $20 to lie  People had to convince themselves more if only paid $1 because they needed internal justification therefore convincing themselves  People who were paid $20 had external justification to lie were not as convinced themselves o Aronson & Carlsmith (1963): Forbidden Toy study  IV: children given mild/severe threat of punishment for playing with a forbidden toy  DV: attractiveness of top before and after threat  Results:  Sever threat group – much increased intrigue of forbidden toy  Mild threat group – decreased interest in forbidden toy, decent number of same attractiveness  Larger rewards/punishment  compliance  Smaller rewards/punishment  internalization  Group Processes o Social facilitation – if others are around there is an interference with difficult and unfamiliar behaviors, but helps us do better when we know the material if others are around  Others make us concerned about our performance and evaluation  Zajonc et al. (1969)  IV: cockroach in a simple/complex maze with/without other cockroaches watching  DV: time to complete the maze PSY 150A1 With Prof. Lazarewicz  Results: increased performance in simple maze with other cockroaches watching, but decreased performance in complex maze when others watch o Conformity – matching thoughts and behaviors to group norms  1. Informational social influence – when we don’t know what to do, we look to others for guidance and examples of how we should act  2. Normative social influence – desire to fit in, so we mold to be something acceptable  Asch (1950): the Line study  Participants asked to report in group setting what line matched the correct length given  Groups of 6 but only 1 is an actual participant the rest are plants tasked with unanimously choosing the wrong option after the first few rounds o All but 40% of students give into the pressure to conform with the rest of the group  When there is no conformity pressure (aka asked privately): 1 in 35 gave 1 wrong answer  Conformity pressure: wrong answers given on 32% of the question o 75% gave wrong answer at least once….  When do we choose to conform?  Group of at least 3 people  Group choice unanimous  Public responses o Obedience  Milgram (1965): recruit participants for a “learning study”  (Shock obedience study)  “learner” – always the plant (works for the psychology study)  “teacher” – always the participant  Teacher to deliver shocks to learner for wrong answers  Wrong answers  increase shocks  Hears grunts, screams, eventually silence o Teacher protests  experimenter gives orders to continue  Study ends if teacher still refuses, or uses last switch 3x PSY 150A1 With Prof. Lazarewicz  Power of authority proven to be high source contributing to peoples’ obedience  Brought up questions of ethical implications while doing studies  Helping behavior o Bystander effect – the more people present at an emergency, the less likely someone is to help out unless specifically called out and asked to  Diffusion of responsibility – belief in that situation that someone else will help or has already taken the initiative to help person in need o Latane & Rodin (1969):  IV: participants hear accident in another room alone/in a group of 3 (other 2 are plants from the study)  DV: % who investigate the noise  Results:  Alone – 80% of people get up & leave to check on person  Group (plants don’t do anything) – 40% of people get up & leave to check on person o Darley & Latane (1968): Seizure Study  IV: overhear an emergency while alone/with 1-4 witnesses in a group  DV: % attempting to help person having the seizure  Results: the more people involved the less likely someone is to help  thinking someone else is helping them (diffusion of responsibility)  Stereotypes, prejudice, & discrimination o Stereotype – beliefs about a group & its members  Cognitive component o Prejudice – negative attitude toward a group & its members  Emotional component o Discrimination – negative behavior toward a group & its members  Behavioral component o 2 types of prejudice:  1. Explicit: conscious evaluation  Questionnaires, observable behavior, etc.  Traditional racism = explicit prejudice PSY 150A1 With Prof. Lazarewicz  2. Implicit: automatic, unconscious evaluation  Indirect behaviors (body language, speech patterns)  Not always the same o Roots:  1. Cognitive:  Categorization – grouping & labeling objects (largely automatic) o Ex: dog, chair, dishwasher o Ex: Asian, male, elderly  Allows us to understand and make predictions about the world we live in  “defining” characteristics about a group = stereotypes  2. Social:  Self-concept defined partly by the groups we belong to o Often leads to favoritism among those groups (preference for own group)  Ex: minority groups  3. Emotional:  Prejudice = result of self-esteem striving? o Ex: Fein & Spencer (1997): the “Jewish-American Princess” study  IV: participants receive positive/negative feedback  Evaluate job applicant who was Jewish/Italian  DV: evaluation of applicant, self-esteem after evaluation  Results:  Evaluation of applicant o When given positive feedback – both Italian and Jewish names ranked high o When given negative feedback – Italian name ranked high, Jewish ranked severely low  Self-esteem increase PSY 150A1 With Prof. Lazarewicz o Positive feedback – low rank for Italian and Jewish names o Negative feedback – higher ranking for Jewish name and low rank for Italian  Attraction & Relationships o 3 factors that influence attraction:  1. Proximity  People we become friends with and have relationships with are within our city, neighborhoods, jobs, classes, etc. o 1. Greater auditability o 2. Mere exposure effect – the more you’re exposed to something the more likely you are to like it  2. Physical attractiveness  Women more attracted to brain than body, men self-reportedly about even with body leading brain  Halo effect – physically attractive people usually have more positive attitudes reflected about them or believed that they possess o Usually treated differently or more positively which may be why many may have better lives  Symmetry is a common factor of attractiveness  3. Perceived similarity  Normally attracted to others who are similar to us o Hobbies, beliefs, religion, residence, education, intelligence, age, etc.  Implicit egotism – self=good therefore anyone similar to self must also be good o Ex: letters in name (esp. initials), birthdate, etc. o Sternberg (1988): triangle theory of love  3 components of love relationship:  1. Passion  2. Intimacy  3. Commitment PSY 150A1 With Prof. Lazarewicz  3 stages to love relationships:  1. Romantic love – intense longing for other person  passion & intimacy o Passion – emotional intense longing for and absorption in, another person o Intimacy – self-disclosure  2. Compassionate love – intimacy & commitment o Commitment – long-term determination to sustain relationship o Reduced passion, which can be problematic  But more intimate, committed, trusting, & tolerant (many successful relationships)  3. Consummate love – passion, intimacy, & commitment o Requires consistent effort to reintroduce passion and excitement PSY 150A1 With Prof. Lazarewicz Textbook Notes  Central route processing – thoughtful consideration of a persuasive argument  Peripheral route processing – consideration of an argument based off of external, irrelevant factors  Social cognition – making sense of others and oneself  Central traits – major characteristics considered when forming opinions of others  Status – social standing  Social supporter – dissenting views of a member make non-conformity easier  Group think – loss of ability to critically evaluate situation because need for group consensus  Compliance – occurs when pressured by social situation  Industrial-organizational psychology – work and job related issues  Obedience – doing what someone else commands  Social neuroscience – seeks to identify neurological basis of behaviors  Reciprocity-of-liking effect – liking someone just because they like you  Aggression – purposeful injuring of someone else  Catharsis – release of built-up aggressive energy  Prosocial behavior – helping behavior  Altruism – helping someone just because


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

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."

Allison Fischer University of Alabama

"I signed up to be an Elite Notetaker with 2 of my sorority sisters this semester. We just posted our notes weekly and were each making over $600 per month. I LOVE StudySoup!"

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."


"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.