Social Psych Week 12
Social Psych Week 12 Psych 360
Popular in Social Psych
Popular in Psychology (PSYC)
This 6 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 12
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
Prejudice Cont. III. Aversive Racism (Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986) Bigoted “redneck” racism replaced by more subtle anti-black sentiment and discrimination Aversive racism: believe in equity and equality, opposed to racism, yet are socialized in a society where there is racism (implicitly learned) A. Two Sources of Negative Aﬀect and Beliefs about Blacks 1. Learned (media, interactions, etc.) 2. Basic processes of group membership B. Two Factors Aﬀecting Subtle Expression of Racism (Situations) 1. No clear normal standards 2. Non racial factors where discriminatory factors can be attributed to (I’m not racist, it’s ____) C. Empirical Evidence of Aversive Racist Normative Structure E.g., Gaertner (1973): Ralph’s Garage Study Comparison between liberals and conservatives and their levels of racism Pretended to call wrong number, person calling sounded black or white, asked person to call auto garage for them Liberals didn’t diﬀerentiate between black or white callers BUT Liberals hearing black people hung up more often, discriminated more Non-Racial Factors E.g., Gaertner & Dovidio (1977): ESP Emergency Assistance Study Participant told one person was sender, other receiver White participant told they would be receiving from black or white sender, told either they would be alone or with 2 other white receivers Sender says they ﬁx chairs, hear crash and help, then silence Measured who helps, how long it takes, and change in heart rate before and after chairs Alone: don’t discriminan te Group: discrimination occurs Non-Racial Factors #2 change over a 10-year period 1989-1999? Dovidio and Gaertner, 2000 Told participants that they needed to read through applications for people to work at counseling center Pilot tested 3 types of applications: clearly strong, clearly weak, and moderate Strong=hired, weak=not hired, moderate= discrimination Showed same amount of discrimination between germinations IV. Stereotype Threat (Claude Steele) Stereotype threat is being at risk of conﬁrming, as self-characteristic, a negative stereotype about ones’s group Short term can cause detriments in threatening domain Long term can cause dis-identiﬁcation from the domain Steele & Aronson, 1995: Two studies demonstrating stereotype threat on intellectual performance of Blacks Randomly assigned “diagnostic of intellectual ability” or “a laboratory tool for studying problem solving.” When told intellectual ability, black students did worse When told laboratory tool, no diﬀerence between races Same with priming Took black and white participants, told laboratory test of problem solving Half students had demographics questions before, half had after test Race priming changed performance of black students Stone, Lynch, Sjomeling, & Darley (1999) Demonstrates stereotype threat in both Blacks and Whites Participants told studying sports psychology, black and white Framed either to test natural athletic ability or sports intelligence Task was mini golf, measured how many strokes to complete course (lower score=better) Intelligence was worse for blacks, ability was worse for whites Aggression I. Deﬁning Aggression: Intention to harm Instrumental aggression: an act that harms others but serves a purpose in addition to the harm Hostile/Retaliatory aggression: an act intended for the sole purpose of harming others. II. Social-Psychological Approaches A. Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis (Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer & Sears, 1939) Frustration: any interference with a goal directed response Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis: Aggression is consequence of frustration, can be misplaced E.g., Barker, Dembo, & Lewin (1941) Hey kids look at these neat toys! No frustrater: play with toys Frustrater: had to sit and look at toys but can’t play, then allowed to play Kids that had to sit and wait played more destructively than others But, frustration does not always result in aggression and aggression arises from factors other than frustration B. Negative Aﬀect & Cognitive Processing 1. Negative Aﬀect Any factor that fosters negative aﬀect has the potential to produce aggression (frustration, extreme temperatures, pain, social rejection) E.g., Newcomb, Bukowski, & Pattee (1993) meta-analysis E.g., Twenge, Baumeister, Tice, & Stucke (2001) manipulated social rejection Negative aﬀect does not always result in aggression 2. Cognitive Processing Attributions of Intention E.g., Dodge & Coie (1987) Showed kids video of kid getting hit with ball, asked what happened Chronically aggressive kids tend to make intentional hostility attributions to others E.g., Kulik & Brown (1979) charity drive for the mentally ill Told to call people for donations to mentally ill charity Responded with either “I can’t, I got laid oﬀ of work” or “No, charities are ripoﬀs”, recorded participants response Blind judges listened to responses, more verbal and physical violence with second answer (slam phone) Priming Aggressive Cognitions – The Weapons Eﬀect Environmental stimuli serve as cues that activate aggressive-schemas E.g., Berkowitz & Lepage (1967) Told everyone to write an essay, confederate evaluates participants essay and can shock them based on essay Participant given 3 electric shocks, then switches Either on desk is badminton racket and birdie, or shotgun and pistol Person who saw gun gave more shocks Excitation Transfer (i.e. , Misattribution of Arousal) Residual arousal from a previous event can escalate aggression if attributed to current event Eg., Zillman, Katcher, & Milavsky (1972) 2(provocation: lo, hi) x 2(arousal: lo, hi) Participant (teacher) answered questions, confederate (learner) agrees and sends green light, disagrees shocks participant High provocation=9 shocks, low provocation=3 shocks Shown series of pictures and asked to remember details, had to thread string through washers or ride stationary bike (arousal) High provocation and high exercise produce most aggression C. Social Learning (Albert Bandura) Persons learn vicariously by observing the actions of others and the consequences that befall others E.g., Bandura, Ross, & Ross (1963) Kids walked into room with adult Adult was aggressive with BoBo doll (“sock it in the nose” and was violent) or played with tinker toys or didn’t play Non imitative aggression: aggressive but in diﬀerent way than adult Kids who saw adult play aggressively were more likely to imitate exact aggressive words Not just seeing aggression makes us aggressive, but how we express it is learned E.g., Bandura (1965) Kids watched adult play aggressively Adult experienced consequences of no reaction, another adult rewards aggression, or gets punished Kids learn vicariously and model behavior unless negative consequences
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'