Social Psychology Week 2 Notes
Social Psychology Week 2 Notes PSY 270-001
Popular in psy orientation soc psy
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Psychology
verified elite notetaker
This 5 page Class Notes was uploaded by Bailey Anderson on Saturday September 3, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PSY 270-001 at Indiana State University taught by Dr. Sheets in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 27 views. For similar materials see psy orientation soc psy in Psychology at Indiana State University.
Reviews for Social Psychology Week 2 Notes
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: 09/03/16
Social Psychology Week 2 Chapter 2 Who are you? Physical body?, personality traits?, social roles?, decision making part of mind? What is the self? o Myers: selfconcept= everything we know and believe about selves “Unified” array of conscious knowledge about self Does this exist? Not “one” self, but many H. Markus: current self + possible selves D. Kenrick: “selves”= motives (mate, parent) as many selves as motives W. James: as many selves as those who know you (act differently in front of different people) “True” self the self that you feel you have that you don’t feel able to express in your social group (that no one knows) Some study global info in self; others aspects/functions Selfschemas=(cognitive) beliefs we have that we use to organize all of the info about the self (key personality traits) Self esteem= (affect) value we place on the self o Where do beliefs/schemas come from? Knowledge of behavior (selfperception/experience) Social roles Accept behavior with roles we hold & alter beliefs Culture (individualistic vs collectivistic) Individualistic: people define themselves as individuals first Collectivistic: define people in terms of social connections and less in terms of individual people Western (object) vs Asian (environment): aquarium People from west would describe individual fish and people from Asia would describe the aquarium environment Shown objects against different backgrounds: Asians did worse because they were taking in the whole picture not just the one object Social comparison with others Absent objective evidence of performance, compare with others (our “reference” group) Upward= comparing with people “better off”. Usually happens in a novel situation, life transition= inspiring Other people’s judgements (reflected appraisals) Study (2 or 5 ) Group1:“You are neat and clean”, or Group 2: “You should be neat and clean” Teachers told their students one of these phrases or said nothing (group 3). Candy was given to students and researchers saw how many wrappers actually got into the trash. Group 1 and 2 both went up in cleanliness. After the teachers stopped saying those phrases, group 1 kept going up but group 2 went down. This is because it changed their sense of self making them believe that they were neat and clean people. o Selfreferent effect we process information about self more efficiently and remember it better (word memory game we played in class) Perhaps constant “selfaccess” = spotlight effect (people notice us) Klek & Strenta (1980): react to facial scars Women given scar+ shown mirror, then wiped off (w/o knowing) believed partners were “distant and patronizing” but no evidence Views of self (selfschema) affect processing new info Relates to fundamental theme of course: we share social reality Honest: Lake Wobegon Prairie Home Companion = books US News & World report survey: how likely is it that ___is going to heaven? OJ Simpson, 19% Bill Clinton, 52% Oprah Winfrey, 60% Mother Teresa, 79% Self, 87% Selfesteem= sense of selfworth or value o Most view self positively even inflated We’re going to heaven even is Mother Theresa isn’t o Overconfidence (knowledge/ability) o Study: men made to feel good or bad (IQ test) grade a test and give positive feedback and say “we should give you a break!” vs grade a test and make a lot of marks on page and say “maybe we should take a break…” during break went down to lounge and a woman came in either looking above average or average. Research assistant introduces them and then leaves. Measure romantic behavior from male to female. Guy w/ high selfesteem more romantic behavior when woman was above average and less behavior when unattractive. Guy with low selfesteem had the opposite behavior o Feelings about selfmatter even in virtual reality People given attractive avatar moved closer to others and shared more into in game And effect carried over to real life Where chose more attractive partners (Yee) o Much attention made to improving SE Low SE= depression and drug use High SE= increased aggression when threatened o Baumeister, major researcher Forget SE, focus on selfcontrol and discipline o Probably right in no need to foster (in most people) o How do we maintain (overly) positive view? Selective attentional focus Focus attention on positive aspects of self Baseball video couldn’t hit the ball but could throw it Selfserving bias (attributions) Attribution= explanation for behavior 2 types external (situational): explaining as being something in the situation; internal (dispositional): it’s because of who you are Internal for success; external for failure (when you ace an exam it’s because you’re smart, if you fail it’s because you were up late because of some circumstance) Selective (downward) social comparisons We can choose our comparisons If self is threatened, may choose “downward” Selfpresentation strategies (to get + appraise) o Selfhandicapping: doing things that make you perform badly but give you an excuse o False modesty: downplaying what you believe is your inner goodness so that other people will be more impressed “I think I’m good but I’m not going to present myself that way” o Basking in reflected glory (BIRGing) We identify with winners even when not responsible o Cutting off reflected failure (CORFing) Removing self from losers who you are connected to – “we won” or “they lost” o Boosting Students would come into lab and read an article about Rasputin (devious, negative monk) and rating him on personality qualities. Two groups of students: 1biography read would be accurate, 2 biography read would have same birthday as the students did. Group 2 rated him higher than students in group 1. o Self monitor: monitor others to adjust behavior Hi=use cues from others to modify presentation different in different situations (what do I need to be?)tend to have diff friends for diff activities influence able or adaptive Lo= use cues from self to behave consistent across situations (how can I be me?) tend to have same friendsrigid or honest How accurate is our selfknowledge? o Turns out, not very, don’t know why we do the things we do; factors that influence us explanations often wrong (e.g., “righthand bias”) o Not very good predictors of behavioroften, close others do better Impact bias= overestimate duration/intensity of emotions Planning fallacy=underestimate time for tasks How to fight?: Break it down into sub pieces; more realistic estimates Chapter 3: Social Beliefs and Judgments Forming impressions o Hal Kelly (based on earlier work by S Asch) invited a guest speaker to class: before half class “warm”, half class “cold” speaker presented a lecture and answered questions. Impressions of presentation changed due to being told he was “warm” or “cold”. Also less participation in Q&A session when told speaker was “cold” o Related study: SS saw tests of 1 of 3 people scoring 15/30. #1: 10 of 1 15 right. #2: 5 of 1 15 right. #3: 7 of 1 15 right Who was the most competent/knowledgeable? #1 Primacy effect 1 information has > impact How do first impressions have such impact? o Basically, first impressions create “schema” with which to understand later information Impt of “belief/expectations” on perception: stairway to heaven video Once we have belief (see pattern), can’t get away from it. o To understand why, we have to understand aspects of cognition Confirmation bias o Once impression /belief, look for confirmation(support impress), may support overconfidencetendency to believe right o A “real world” study (Rosenhan): RAs checked into mental hospital for “hearing voices” started reading, taking notesno symptoms Staff interpreted behavior (&accurate life history) as evidence of disorder of paranoia Moreover, with rationale, we even ignore disconfirming evidence Logic of argument withstands loss of evidence Belief Perseverance Phenomenon o Do risky people make good or poor firemen? o Study: falsehoods (study shows risky makes good/poor firemen) Students had to make an explanation pertaining to the firemen and then told original data was wrong. Students still stood by their original belief o Houdini & Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (history channel) Believed he had supernatural powers and then Houdini told them they were just tricks and not real and they still believed the same
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'