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

PSYC 6, Week 1-7

by: Joyce Chae

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

reliable set of notes, and examples of experiments for each concept
General Psychology: Social
Jarryd Wilis
Class Notes
social, Psychology, general
25 ?




Popular in General Psychology: Social

Popular in Psychology (PSYC)

This 22 page Class Notes was uploaded by Joyce Chae on Friday August 26, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PYSC 6 at 1 MDSS-SGSLM-Langley AFB Advanced Education in General Dentistry 12 Months taught by Jarryd Wilis in Summer 2016. Since its upload, it has received 4 views. For similar materials see General Psychology: Social in Psychology (PSYC) at 1 MDSS-SGSLM-Langley AFB Advanced Education in General Dentistry 12 Months.


Reviews for PSYC 6, Week 1-7


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
Monday, January 4, 2016 Lecture 1 What is Social Psychology? - It is the scientific study of the way in which people's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are influenced by other people & social situations • Study of social influences on behavior • can influence be so powerful that people will betray their own senses? Could we be influenced to the point that we would severely hurt someone else if instructed to? for pro-social influences? • does subliminal messages? History - Very first theorist or so (late 1800s); Norman Triplet (1898) and social facilitation. Considered social psychology experiment • noticed that people cycled faster in presence of others than when alone - John Dewey published Human Nature and conduct (1922) argued understanding underpinnings of human behavior would allow sys to • influence what happens to is in future - Floyd Allport published Social Psychology (1924) • integrated behaviorisms and psychoanalysis in arguing that we can apply what we learn about ourselves to promote constrictive individual ad social change - WW2: Henri Tajfel wanted to understand origins of prejudice; French army. Released from Nazis because of French citizenship and didn't look Jewish, but rest of family killed - Civil Rights: Doll studies (first social experiment to involve itself in societal laws in good way), social psychologists began testing theories of status, social identity, group membership and intergroup attitudes • fueled political activism of 60s and 70s - Cognitive Revolutions: 1980s, a cognitive revolution in that most social psycholgoists began to embrace metaphor of human beings as info processors. • social cognitions focuses no how ppl perceive, process - Since 1990s… 1 Monday, January 4, 2016 • Evolutionary Perspective (bio), Cultural (social), Individualist, Collectivist, Social Neuroscience Sociology vs Psychological - Sociology Social Psychology: (Tajfel) emphasizes impact of social roles and intergroup relations on individual identity (group-level analysis) - Psychological Social Psych: emphasizes individual autonomy in struggle against group influence (individual-level analysis) Social Psych today? - Social influence, power of situation • social behavior a response to social situation rather than personality alone. Social circumstances create behavior settings (EX range of behavior in group vs individual settings, Muslims in French prisons considered risk of becoming radicalized)… - Personality • Gordon Allport (1961, father of Personality Psychology) stressed uniqueness of each person and hi/her capacity to adapt to environment - O.C.E.A.N • Kurt Lewin (father of modern social psych) argued that any behavior is determined by interaction of personality and situations - But some situations elicit same behavior from ppl regardless of personality - power of situation is “great lesson of social psych) - EX Food conservation: ordinary meats scarce during Great Depression and WW2, so Lewin persuaded ppl to eat unusual meats (kidneys. beef hearts). He created a lecture (“go buy kidneys”) vs discussion group (created group identity, making ppl more responsible to do their part for their promise to others; ppl more reluctant to deviate from rest of group) - Social scientist manipulate social settings in tiny ways that have a huge impact on behavior (phone booth and dime x helping out others [4% vs 80%]) - Name of the Game Matters: “Community Game” player more likely to behave cooperatively vs “Wall Street Game”. Game’s name conveyed social norms that trumped personality and shaped behavior (Liberman, Samuels, Ross 2004) • expectations based on socially constructed view of reality, diff ppl/ groups are different situations 2 Monday, January 4, 2016 • David Rosenhan 1993, seemingly schizophrenic ppl on how long it took hospital staff to realize that they were normal ppl We Interpret World Through Belief-Tinted Glasses - We’re constantly interpreting, human behavior determined by how they perceive, comprehend, and interpret (construal) rather than objective conditions • cognitive meiser - We go beyond info given by taking objective observations and integrating it with subjective beliefs/experience. Obj + Subj = own (often false) conclusions - Charles Lord (1979): Confirmation bias, polarization Two Basic Human Motives - The need to belong • EX Kurt Lewin’s discussion group, influenced by desire to preserve social ties and avoid ostracism • ppl with more social ties live longer (especially men) • Robin Dunbar: higher primate brain can commodity a social networked, but social bore (stable, meaningful, close friendships) is only about 6 or 7 despite average fb “friends” about 150 • ppl with 1000+ friends don’t actually talk to that many ppl, but broadcasting life through fb can still satisfy the need to belong - Need to feel good about ourselves • most ppl have a strong need to maintain reasonably high self-esteem (ppl’s evaluations of their own self-width and extent tie chi they view themselves • ppl will distort world in order to feel good about themselves instead of rep world accurately 3 Tuesday, January 26, 2016 Attitude and Attitude Changes: Influencing Thoughts and Feelings Attitudes Shape our Behavior - EX advertisments targeting women and shaping women to smoke - Attitudes (evaluations of ppl, objects and ideas)made up of 3 components: • affective—> emotional reaction • behavioral—> actions/observable behavior • cognitive—> thoughts and beliefs - Where do attitudes come from?; genetics (EX identical twins having same attitudes), experiences with others - cognitively-based attitude: based mainly on ppl’s beliefs about properties of an attitude object (EX, attitude toward a type of car based on mileage and quality) - affectively-based attitudes: based on feelings and values more than on beliefs about nature of attitude object • we can feel great about something/someone in spite of having neg beliefs. Not a result of rational examination or logic, but values (EX feeling pos about a political candidate even though you don’t like his platform as much, or even know much about his platform) • Where do affectively-based attitudes come from?; validate and express one’s value system instead of painting an accurate picture of the world. Sensory reaction, aesthetic reactions, conditioning - behaviorally-based attitudes: Self-Perception Theory (Under certain circumstances, ppl don’t know how they feel until they see how they’re behaving. Counterintuitive to nature, cause this case behaviors affect attitudes). We can form our attitudes based on observations of our own behavior When do ppl use their own behavior to infer how they feel?; when initial attitude is weak or • ambitious, where there’s no other plausible explanation for behavior - Explicit attitudes: we consciously endorse and can easily report • EX Sam who believes in equality in races and hate racial bias, conscious evaluation of other races… - Implicit attitudes: involuntary, uncontrollable, at times unconscious • …but grew up in a community of neg stereotypes, so neg ideas have affected him in ways he’s not fully aware of, like sitting unconsciously away from ppl of color - Implicit Association Test (IAT), categorizing words and pictures on comp. 1 Tuesday, January 26, 2016 - Changing attitudes by changing behavior; people experience dissonance when their image is threatened and when they cant explain behavior with external justifications —>leads to finding internal justification and bringing attitudes that weren’t there before • pretending to have an attitude that you don’t actually hold may change attitude • counterattitudinal advocacy: process by which ppl induced to publicly state an opinion/ attitude that’s counter to own attitudes, creating dissonance. Without sufficient external justification, it results in change in ppl’s private attitude • persuasive communication like speeches and ads. How can we change ___ or make more ppl believe that ___? - Hogland, Yale attitude change approach: study of conditions under which ppl are most likely to change attitudes in response to persuasive messages. “who says what to who” - who: source of communication, speakers more persuasive if they’re credible or attractive what: nature of communication, ppl more persuaded if messages don’t obviously target them. whom: nature of audience, distracted and dumber audiences more easily persuaded • Elaboration Likelihood model: explanation of 2 ways in which persuasive communications can cause attitude change.. - central route: when ppl are motivated and have ability to pay attention and when it’s more applicable - peripheral route: when ppl more swayed by images and statues, likability, quickly processed things • Motivation to pay attention to arguments: personal relevance of topic (central route). • Need for cognition: A personality variable reflecting the extent to which ppl engage in and enjoy effortful cog activities. SO more likely to form attitudes through central route than peripheral cues • when ppl are unable to pay close attention, more swayed by peripheral—>someone with a weak argument can still be persuasive if they distract their audience - in high relevance argument, it doesn’t matter as much in expertise of source. But in low personal relevance, the high/low expertise makes a bigger difference - Ppl who base attitudes on careful analysis of arguments (central route) will be… • more likely to maintain attitude, behave consistently with this attitude, and more resistant to counter-persuasion Emotion and Attitude Change - Fear-arousing communications: persuasive messages through arousing fear. It works best in moderate amounts of fear, and info provided in balance - risk: strong amounts of fear with no outlet fail if they overwhelm ppl bc they become defensive, deny importance of threat and cannot rationally think about issue 2 Tuesday, January 26, 2016 - Emotions as heuristic, heuristic-systematic model of persuasion: explanation of 2 ways in which persuasive communications can cause attitudinal change systematically processing merits OR heuristics (mental shortcuts) (“experts are always • right”) - emotions as heuristic like gut feelings, checking emotions about situations/attitudes. Risk is that there might be misattribution and make bad decisions (EX: in ads, pairing product with feel good mood through music, images…) - If attitude is cognitively based, try to change it with rational arguments - if affectively based, try to change it with emotional appeals - Predicting spontaneous behaviors; attitudes will predict spontaneous behaviors only when they highly accessible to ppl • attitude accessibility: how quickly can you access that attitude - predicting deliberate behaviors: attitude more predictive, depending on subj norms and perceived behavioral control (can they achieve the outcome that they want)—>behavioral intention—>behavior • specific attitudes: only these can be expected to predict behavior. Specificity! • subj norms: we tend to conform with the group • perceived behavioral control: intentions are influenced by ease with which they believe they can perform behavior - Resistance • attitude inoculation: make ppl immune to attempts to change their attunes by initially exposing them to sell does of arguments against position • being alert to product placement to avoid attitude change • resisting peer pressure (by using same attitude inoculation) • reactance theory: ppl just really don’t like their freedom to be threatened, which can cause aroused resistance - ads more effective for new products bc ppl don’t know much about product beforehand - Subliminal messages: words/pictures not consciously perceived buy nevertheless influence attitudes. So ads transmit cultural stereotypes in words/images to subtly link products with desired image • propels stereotypes because EX gender and necessities are linked 3 Thursday, January 14, 2016 Attributions and Schemas - Causal Schema: Preconceptions or theories build up from experience about how certain kinds of causes interact to produce certain effects. Our expectations influence what we process - Fundamental Attribution Theory: Tendency to overestimate the importance of personality factors and underestimate situational factors. It’s all about personality, and discounting situation • The reason we link behaviors & events to stable/internal factors is because it makes the world easier to understand & the future more predictable. If the attribution is always guided by the details of the situation then the world becomes less predictable - Correspondence Inference: where there’s more effect of personality - Fritz Heider; Gestalt Psychology. Interest in how we perceive other people and infer the causes of behavior. The whole is more important (Maslow, etc). how perceive things holistically • anthropomorphizing • Heider’s explanation; our lives are fundamentally social lives and creating a coherent narrative increases our sense of predictability of what’s to happen in future and our sense of control over our lives. Linking behaviors/events to stable factors increases simplicity of prediction—>overestimate personality and underestimate situation - 2 kinds of attributions • observe a behavior—>how/why—>make an attributions • behavior causes situation, situation caused her to behave that way. It’s not that a person is solely based on either situation or personality • EX thinking a person in a relationship has certain pos attributions to internal characteristics, or thinking someone’s cheap just because he didn’t get you flowers - Nature of attribution process • we don’t have to make attributions about everything in the world. The same stimulus can lead to difference perceptions • unexpected and neg events undermine our sense of predictions and control, and attributions help restore it 1 Thursday, January 14, 2016 • we often make corresponding inferences, when we act certain ways, it’s cause of the personality - Inference Theory: theory of how we use other’s behavior as basis for inferring internal/stable traits. Why do we do it? • social desirability - if actually desirable—>external. If undesirable—>internal • role congruent behavior. Situations carry role expectations which influence attributions - Jones and Harris (1967); people assumed that the essay people wrote corresponds to their internal attitudes. They failed to take into account the situation - Group effect of FAE: Jewish subjects “German’s personality with Holocaust”. Germans say “it’s more about the situation” - Cognitive Miser: making an automatic personality attribution, assuming behavior is solely from personality making controlled situational adjustment • • Gilber, Pelham, and Krull (1988); asked to do different tasks at same time, so if we do have cognitive load, we should make that judgement than not having the cognitive load, but we still make the error - Culture and FAE: Members of individualistic culture (prefer personality attribution, individual autonomy, personality psych preferred) collectivist futures (prefer situation, group autonomy, social psychology preferred) • Morris and Peng (1994); murder case. Group-serving bias with Americans - Defensive Attribution: Whenever something unexplained happens, people attribute more responsibility to actions that produce the consequences, especially when actor is different from ourselves “Bad things happen to bad people” • belief in a just world, critical towards victims, people get what they deserve • males: more similarly to rapist = more victim blame. Females: more similarity to victim = less victim blame - Actor-Observer effect: tendency to see our own behavior as a product of situation, and other’s as product of internal states • reasons why we do this: we focus on people and overlook situation, hard to see other person’s perspective (focalism; tendency to overestimate causal impact of whatever we’re focusing on this is why we attribute move of shapes to personality) - Self-Serving Bias; tendency to take credit of our success (internal cause) and deny responsibility when we do poorly (external) 2 Thursday, January 14, 2016 • Group serving Bias. Why? to maintain self-esteem, we want other people to think well of us 3 Thursday, January 21, 2016 Cognitive Dissonance The Costs and Benefits of Dissonance Reduction - Alien communication, Earth is gonna end—> Leon pretended to join the Seekers cult, observing and playing the role—> Leon asking “are they gonna admit they were wrong?”—> NOPE. Dissonant realities…”We saved the Earth because of our conviction” • despite the failure, they held onto the reality so much to create a new cognition - Intrapersonal conflict: As human, we want a favorable view of ourselves, that we’re reasonable, decent, and wise - We experience cognitive discomfort when we hold 2 inconsistent thoughts about world, and perform action that’s discrepant with our self-concept. This dissonance drives us to reduce it • Disregard cognition, justify behavior by changing one of dissonant cognitions, distort a cognition to bring them both in line (self-affirmation), justify behavior by adding new cognitions • Jones and Kohler (1959); looking for things that maximize your beliefs. Recalled plausible arguments agreeing with position and implausible arguments agreeing with opposing sides • The important and permanent a decision, the more we try to justify it Paradigms - Free Choice Paradigm; Jack Brehm (1956). Recruited stay at home moms for marketing study, rated appliances and were told that they could take home for free. How much would you like if you chose between #4 and #5? Pick one • previous rating btw subsequent one you chose you rated higher, one you didn’t choose rated lower because you • made a choice to reduce cog dissonance (choose something you don’t love and reject something you don’t hate). Ones with no-choice, there was no big rating diff • DV: please rate products one more time before rating • spreading the alternatives - External Justification: external reason for dissonant behavior (I did this because of something outside myself—>temporary change; reward, punishment) - Internal Justification: reduction of dissonance by changing something about oneself. If there’s insufficient external justification, attempt to reduce dissonance may result in 1 Thursday, January 21, 2016 attitude change (I do/think this bc I have convinced myself that its right—> lasting change) • when insufficient external justification for resisting desired activity, usually results in us devaluing forbidden activity via self-persuasion, which is long-lasting form of attitude change that results from internal justification - EX behaving immorally in relationship, justification and changing attitude about cheating—> less loyal - Judson Mills (1958) dissonance reduction and personal values; Gave opportunity to cheat in game when they believed they couldn’t be detected vs could be detected. Insufficient external just. NOT to cheat —> became more resistant to cheating (leading to actual attitude change) AKA you let your personal values take over even when you didn’t have to cheat, so when you don’t cheat, long lasting attitude change - Aronson and Carlsmith (1963); children rated attractiveness of toys, then forbidden to play with what they chose. • IV=severity of threatened punishment , DV=rating of toy attractiveness • mild threat isn’t sufficient to not play with it, so they had a personal value. Severe threat was sufficient but kids wanted to play with it more because it remained highly attractive=no change because you it doesn’t depend on you but external reasons - Festinger and Carlsmith (1959); first induced compliance study. Turning pegs vs placing spools on/off tray. Tell the next subject that it’s gonna be exciting, I’ll pay you $1 vs $20 • DV=rating of enjoyment after greeting next subject • $1 ppl said they enjoyed it more, told to lie. Being payed a dollar is insufficient justification to lie to someone (“Is my integrity so cheap?”). So to resolve dissonance is to fool yourself that you actually liked it. Attitude-Discrepant Behavior - Aronson and Mills; College women volunteered to join a group that would be meeting regularly to discuss various aspects of psych of sex • IV: severity of group initiation, DV: linking of group after admitted • 1/3—>extremely demand and unpleasant initiation • 1/3—> mildly unpleasant • 1/3—>admitted to group wo initiation Severe invitation liked it more; the more effort we put into becoming members of • group, tougher the initiation, more we will like group we have joined, even if it’s bad - Hypocrisy Paradigm; make person aware of conflict btw attitudes and behavior. Hypocrisy creates dissonance, reduced by changing behavior 2 Thursday, January 21, 2016 • EX smoking, kid. IV: measured self esteem, random assignment DV: intentions to quit smoking 3 Thursday, January 7, 2016 Research Methods - Kristin: 3509 Mandler. Rob: 2312 McGill - quizzes every Thursday, 5 from Tuesday, 5 Thursday - In Layman’s terms, if theories specify factors that lead to good and bad things, we can design ways to alter those macros to reduce bad outcomes and increase occurrence of good outcomes - Theory: organized set of beliefs, knowledge, assumptions that relate to understanding of phenomenon • general claims about how stuff happens, and you test them in empirical settings and gain higher/lower confidence in theories Variable: any characteristic or attribute that varies (gender, income; empathy, • satisfaction stress with operational definition) Scientific Method - Observe - Hypothesize: Formulate predictions derived from observations that are testable - Test: through empirical research, operationalize your constructs (analyze data to reach conclusions) - Conclusions: how reliable and valid? How generalized? replication of results - Evaluate theory: change/update theory? peer review and publication, communicate findings - Scientific Method: approach used by psychologists to systematically acquire knowledge and understanding about behavior and other phenomena of interest - For any construct, there’s an infinite number of operationalizations • EX aggression; through physical? social? verbal? media? Surveys - investigates relations between variables difficult to observe and things that are unethical or unrealistic for true experiments - Social Desirability Bias: people sometimes lie. There’a social desirability bias to look good to the person asking the question 1 Thursday, January 7, 2016 - Memory issues/errors - participants may define terms differently • the key to separating accurate from inaccurate information is a focus on methodology. How was the info gathered? Representative sample? How were the conclusions made? What sources cited? Observations, Correlational, Experimental - Observational: goal=description • Mary Ainsworth observed infants • Artificially controlled environments, and natural events • inter-judge reliability: The level of agreement btw 2 or more ppl who independently observe and code a set of data. Do you see what I see? Ensures that observations aren’t the subj, distorted impressions of one individual • Dyadic Observations: hidden cameras, coding diff behavioral things, even observing electronic communication (ethical concerns, how much info are we willing to give up?) - Concerns: time, cost, reactivity, even though it is more realistic with great detail and reliability. Meaning problem: we also don’t know what a behavior means to the people engaging in the behavior • Ethnograpy: observing a group actually inside the group, “insider’s point of view” with no preconceived notions. undercover and more dangerous • Archival: using already existing data to see if they’re related - Correlational: goal=identify relationship btw 2 variables and predict outcomes • finding relationship without being able to infer causal relationships • What is the magnitude (-1 ~ +1)? and direction? - Pearsons’s r, Spearman’s who, phi coefficient • pos correlation: high scores x high scores. They’re going on the same direction. Neg correlation: different directions • variance account r^2 • confounds - Experimental: goal=determine causation - Cause; manipulated; independent variable —> Effect; measured; dependent variable 2 Thursday, January 7, 2016 • manipulate IV at various levels to see effects on DV while controlling all extraneous variables with random assignment • Stroop effect • Issues: maturation (changes in internal condition of subjects in long-term test), attrition (subjects move, died), demand characteristic effect (ppl figure out what you’re trying to test and try to satisfy/throw off results), experimenter effect, reactivity (Hawethorne effect) Developmental Designs - study the manner in which relationships change over time - Cross-sectional compares diff gourd of ppl who are at diff stages or ages in developmental process - longitudinal design studies same gourd of ppl with repeated measurements over period of time 3 Tuesday, January 12, 2016 Schemas & Attributions Social Cognition - Automatic thinking: no conscious deliberation of thoughts, perceptions, assumptions - Controlled thinking: effortful and deliberate thoughts about self and enviro; carefully selecting the right course of action - System 1—automatic, system ii — controlled (analytical, slower) - Auto-pilot: Low-effort thinking • we form impressions of ppl quickly and effortlessly based on past experiences (confirmatory bias) • we use automatic processes called schemas (mental net) in many situations - schemas are advantageous because you’re able to quickly categorize people. The mental structures people use to organize knowledge about social world around themes or subjects - influence what we notice, attend to, think about, remember; helps us interpret new info - schemas encompasses our impressions of other people and situations. Some more elaborate than others (parents vs. co-workers) • schemas may differ between and within individuals 4 Functions of Schemas - schemas influence what info we attend to and remember • more likely to attend to relevant stimuli and consistent info. People with schema in office room won’t recall things that usually don’t h=belong in an office room • Claudia Cohen (1981), people don’t recall things that contradict their preconceived ideas of a librarian/waitress - very useful for helping organize and make sense of world to fill in gaps of knowledge and make inferences • Warm-Cold experiment (Solomon Asch 1946); adj given to the same picture, one cold and one warm. Warm adj picture was considered more generous than those who got the word cold - help shape interpretations of ambiguous stimuli 1 Tuesday, January 12, 2016 • novel info gets high priority, same stimuli can be interpreted differently based on schema • Public Affairs Act 1975 experiment. Fake law schemas allow us to process relevant info faster, bu applying in-group bias - schemas allow faster processing Hazel Markus Experiment (1977); independent, dependent, aschematic self- • schemas. Used response times on differences in trait (me vs not me judgements) • independent (speak faster) faster to respond to independent adj. Dependent people saying longer in dependent and independent. Aschematic didn’t differ across, they really know themselves Schemas and Stereotypes - When applied to member of social group, schemas commonly referred to as stereotypes (group schemas) • can be applied rapidly and automatically. They reinforce social position (employee- boss, customer-cashier, male-female gender role - Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: when expectations change the nature of the social world and interfere with perceiving it accurately • people have expectation about what another person is like. Influences how they act toward that person, which causes that person to behave consistently with ppl’s original expectation —> making expectations come true • Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968); teachers who expected certain students to do well may cause those students to do better Thomas Theorem: events that are perceived to be real may become real in their • consequences - Telephone study (Snyder, Tanke, Berscheid, 1977); men received ‘background’ info about a woman that were about to talk with on a phone, info included photos (attractive, unattractive). Woman was the same. • IV: Photo of woman attractive/unattractive, DV: observer’s ratings of woman’s behavior • Men talking to women on phone elicit warmer friend responses when led to believe they were attractive Which Schemas are Applied? - Accessibility: extent to which schemas and concepts are at forefront of ppl’s minds and are therefore likely to be used when making judgements about social world 2 Tuesday, January 12, 2016 - Something can become accessible for 3 reasons • chronically accessible due to past experience • accessible bc its related to a current goal • temporarily accessible because of out recent experience (priming) - what’s recently primed comes from first impressions like physical appearance (gender, race,age, attractiveness, clothing) - This is also why first impressions are hard to change —> it would involve modifying firmly held schemas • Primacy Effect, Confirmatory Hypothesis Testing, Confirmation Bias Mental Shortcuts; usually lead to good decisions quickly, efficient for some schemas, but not all… - Heuristics; They’re guidelines for solving problems and narrowing down the problem - Availability Heuristics, when people base a judgement on how quickly they can bring something to mind, how easily specific events are recalled • sometimes what’s easiest to remember isn’t typical of overall picture, lead-in to fault conclusions • Markus, Schwarz experiment - Representative Heuristic; a probability judgment where people classify something according to how similar it is to a typical case (how relevant A is to B) • drawing conclusions about a group based on a single case/ making inferences about a single case based on knowledge of group • rests on assumptions that categories apply to all • Base rate neglect; tendency to ignore general info about population (base rate) in favor of anecdotal info (diagnostic) - CounterFactual Reasoning; mentally changing some aspect of the past and imagine what might have been • can have a big influence on emotional reaction to events. The easier it is to mentally undo an outcome, the stronger the emotional reaction to it (greater sense of control —> more responsibility —>feel more at fault) - Automatic vs. Controlled, we tend to overestimate the amount of control another individ has. Overestimate control others have —> more like to blame victim and make personality attributions about behavior of others rather than making situational attributions 3 Tuesday, January 19, 2016 The Self & Self-Regulation - The self isn’t developed immediately from the beginning—>blank slate • Thomas Aquinas (1250): bank slate etched by social influence and experience - but slate is never blank. It comes from biological makeup and environment of mother. Mothers who experience stress secrete more cortisol which predisposes baby for anxiety and neurotic temperament • John Locke (1690): who we are can extend as far back as we remember • Charles Cooley (1902): key people in our life inform us of who we are by how they behave towards us - Sense of self from nature and nurture. We can also begin to internalize other ppl’s perspectives; If we realize someone thinks something about us and we value that person’ value, we’ll begin to internalize - Self-Discrepancy theory: we want to be in line with who we want to be and what others want to be, which creates conflict with ideal self(want to be), ought self (should be), and actual self (actually are) • Tory Higgins (1987); feeling more depression in the different ways we fall short • More anxiety and depression - Working Self-Concept Structure; bundle of self knowledge that’s accessible in a given moment at a certain context creating a general self concept (friend-self concept, psychology self-concept, job self-concept). - certain aspects of self may be chronically accessible (ex. being a parent) Self Esteem - overall self evaluation, a subj marker of the degree to which others value you (social thermostat) • depression, feeling of ineffectiveness, not in control of our lives (fixed) <—> protective of self-values and motivated, tying harder amidst obstacles (growth) • Social group membership: aspects of our self-concept derived from group memberships (sense of belonging to particular social groups) - more likely to define yourself in terms of attributes associated with group (how stereotype threats work) - immediate social context: a major source of how we see ourselves 1 Tuesday, January 19, 2016 • we focus on aspects of our self that make us distinctive and relevant in a given context Identity Regulation - We want to maintain our pos self-evaluations and there are several strategies we use to protect our self-esteem - Self-handicapping • creating excuses and obstacles for ourselves, setting ourselves up for failures • Tice (1991); low SE handicap, and high SE claim extra credit if they succeed • males do this more - Social comparison (temporal comparisons) • idea that we learn about our abilities and attitudes by comparing ourselves to other ppl (Leon Festinger) • when do we engage in comparison? who whom do you choose to compare yourself to? • Goal—striving for success. upward, comparing to ppl who are better on a particular ability • Goal—feel better about yourself. downward, comparing to ppl who are worse on certain ability/trait - Basking in reflected glory (BIRG)/Cut off reflected failure (CORF) • if team wins, then you’ll where a badge. If lose, prob won’t. Distancing after group success and failure Self Awareness Theory - idea that when ppl focus their attention on themselves, they evaluate and compare behavior to internal standards and values • certain situation force ppl to focus on themselves • if there’s discrepancy btw behavior and standards it may lead to attempts to escape self-awareness • when you evaluate morals, and see that you don’t fit so you feel really bad EX mirror vs no mirror experiment on trick-or-treaters taking candy; If in groups and • anonymous (no mirror) took the most candy, while who were alone with a mirror stole less candy 2 Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - sometimes ppl go far to attempt to escape self through binging, alcohol abuse, etc - Milgram’s Paradigm and self-awareness; when we’re self-aware, we’re more sensitive to what other people say in the right things to do. With mirrors, when told shocks were good, they shocked more - Self-presentation: desired view of self as expressed in social behavior high vs low self-monitors; ppl differ in sensitivity to how others see them and how • motivated they are to put effort into strategic self-presentation - is there something about your public image, or the image you want to portray, that guides the behaviors you engage in? - self-regulation: process by which we seek to control/alter our feelings, thoughts. We control/guide ongoing behaviors in pursuit of goal - both self-presentation and self-awareness related to self-regulation; requires over- riding automatic impulses and having behaving in ways consistent with our ideal self- concept - Executive control, self regulating behaviors, delayed ratification • useful for survival bc the ability to control eating, to store and preserve food for the future gives advantage. Useful for group life bc imdivid changes self to adapt to group most virtues involve good self-control, strongly associated with success in life • • Marshmallows (Mischle, 1968); kids who waited full 15 min scored 210 points higher than kids who lasted 30 sec. Self control at 5 was better predictor of SAT than IQ - Ego-depletion; how much energy you have after depleting all that self-regulation. Self regulation is limited like a muscle. Requires growth and effort though difficult (cognitive load) • if under heavy load (stress, impulse control, controlling emotions and thoughts), that can lead to less effort to self regulation • glucose=‘brain fuel’, providing energy for brain activity. Eating can help you become more yourself, but decreases throughout the day—>more ego depletion at night • 0% chance of convicts who come before board before lunch getting freed. - Persistence on difficult task. Exercising self-restraint lowers ability to control subsequent impulses • ppl persisted less with not eating radishes than cookies - Intrinsic motivation; desire to engage in activity bc of internal pressure, and not bc of external rewards 3 Tuesday, January 19, 2016 • orgasmic needs and enjoyability - Extrinsic motivation; desire to engage in activity for external reasons, and not bc of internal reasons • incentives (rewards, punishments) 4


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

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!"

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!"

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."

Parker Thompson 500 Startups

"It's a great way for students to improve their educational experience and it seemed like a product that everybody wants, so all the people participating are winning."

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.