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

Social Psych Week 10

by: Katie Truppo

Social Psych Week 10 Psych 360

Katie Truppo
GPA 3.4

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 Psych
Dr. Lowell Gaertner
Class Notes
social, Psychology
25 ?




Popular in Social Psych

Popular in Psychology (PSYC)

This 4 page Class Notes was uploaded by Katie Truppo on Friday August 26, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to Psych 360 at University of Tennessee - Knoxville taught by Dr. Lowell Gaertner in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 4 views. For similar materials see Social Psych in Psychology (PSYC) at University of Tennessee - Knoxville.


Reviews for Social Psych Week 10


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: 08/26/16
Groups I. Performance in the Presence of Others Social facilitation: tendency to performance when working in the presence of others. Social loafing: tendency to decrease effort when working with others. A. Social Facilitation (increase performance when working in the presence of others) E.g., Norman Triplett (1897) Noticed people would bike faster/longer when in presence of others Subsequent research indicated that presence of others facilitated the performance of easy or well-practiced behaviors but inhibited the performance of difficult or novel behaviors. Explanations for Facilitation/Inhibition Mere Presence (Zajonc, 1965) Presence of others increases arousal & arousal increases tendency to perform dominant (i.e., well-learned) responses and decreases tendency to perform non- dominant (i.e., novel or poorly learned) responses. Evaluation Apprehension (Cottrell, 1972) Presence of others who evaluate us Distraction and Conflict (Sanders, 1981; Baron, 1986) Presence of an audience is distracting and promotes cognitive conflict in which person divides attention between the task and the audience. Such conflict forces the person to restrict attention only to essential task cues. Such focused attention facilitates performance of simple tasks but inhibits performance on complex tasks (which require attention to multiple details). II. Experimental Evidence E.g., Zajonc & Sales (1966) – manipulated dominant vs. non-dominant response Showed students fake words that he said was foreign, told to say word when showed it Manipulated frequency of words, practiced those more Presence of others caused students to say more familiar words E.g., Zajonc, Heingartner, & Herman (1969) cockroaches Put cockroaches in simple maze and complex maze, turned on light to make them run away Cockroaches in simple maze did it faster when in presence of others E.g., Schmitt, Gilovich, Goore, & Joseph (1989) Participants had to type name (easy task), and then type backwards with increasing numbers in between letters (hard task) Participants were either alone, with another person blindfolded with headphones, or with experimenter watching over shoulder Both blindfolded person and experimenter caused participant to be slower for hard task, and faster for easy task A. Social Loafing (decrease effort when working with others, even on simple tasks) Max Ringleman (1913) pull a rope either alone or in a group. Latane and colleagues demonstrated that a psychological component (i.e., decreased effort – motivation loss) contributes to decreased performance in groups in addition to the coordination issue. E.g., Latane, Williams, & Harkins (1979) 6 students wearing blindfolds and headphones screamed alone, in group of 2 or 6, or in pseudo-group of 2 or 6 (alone but think they’re doing it with others) Subsequent research demonstrated that Social Loafing occurs when individual productivity is not identifiable. People who are alone but think they are screaming with others causes motivation loss (quieter/less effort) E.g., Williams, Harkins, & Latane (1981) Time 1: screamed 1-at-a-time, in group of 2 or 6, pseudo-group of 2 or 6 Time 2: wore individual microphones and screamed 1-at-a-time, in group of 2 or 6, pseudo-group of 2 or 6 Loafing disappeared when working with others & individual productivity was identifiable. Persons do not always loaf when working with others. Persons evidence a social compensation effect and exert more effort when (a) the outcome is important and (b) they expect other members of the group to slack-off. B. Bridging Facilitation and Loafing with Social Impact Theory 1. Structure of Facilitation and Loafing Paradigms (Jackson & Williams, 1985) Facilitation compares working ALONE vs. working in the PRESENCE of others Loafing compares working in the PRESENCE of others vs. working WITH others Social Impact Theory can explain why working in the presence of others increases arousal but working with others decreases arousal (i.e., effort) Impact: any change that can be exerted (attitudes, behavior, cognition, etc.) 2. Social Impact Theory (Bibb Latane, 1981) Strength, Immediacy, Numbers Source: Impact exertedà Function of SIN: Source, Immediacy, Number E.g., 10 security guards have more impact on an unruly crowd than does 1 guard. President has more impact than does a high school student (i.e., strength) Target: Impact experiencedà How we create impact E.g., each member of a crowd experiences less impact from a security guard as the size of the crowd increases. 3. Facilitation & Loafing: Who is the Source & Who is the Target? In the Presence of Others the individual might feel distinct from the others and those others are perceived as multiple sources of impact. That is, working in the presence of others increases the SOURCES’ NUMBER, which increases impact (i.e., arousal or motivation). Working with others in a situation in which individual productivity is anonymous might increase the extent to which self and others feel like a group. That is, self might assimilate with other, which increases the TARGET’S NUMBER and, consequently, decreases felt impact (i.e., arousal or motivation).


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."

Jennifer McGill UCSF Med School

"Selling my MCAT study guides and notes has been a great source of side revenue while I'm in school. Some months I'm making over $500! Plus, it makes me happy knowing that I'm helping future med students with their MCAT."

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.