Chapter 16Social Behavior

Person perception Attribution processes Interpersonal attraction Attitudes Conformity and obedience Behavior in groups

Social Psychology

Effects of physical appearance Cognitive schemas Stereotypes Prejudice and Discrimination Subjectivity in person perception Evolutionary perspectives

Person Perception: Forming Impressions of Others

Figure 16.2Examples of social schemas. Everyone has social schemas for various “types” of people, such as sophisticated professionals or working-class stiffs. Social schemas are clusters of beliefs that guide information processing.

Figure 16.24The three potential components of prejudice as an attitude. Attitudes can consist of up to three components. The tricomponent model of attitudes, applied to prejudice against women, would view sexism as negative beliefs about women (cognitive component) that lead to a feeling of dislike (affective component), which in turn leads to a readiness to discriminate against women (behavioral component).

Figure 16.25Relationship between prejudice and discrimination. As these examples show, prejudice can exist without discrimination and discrimination without prejudice. In the green cells, there is a disparity between attitude and behavior.

Attributions Internal vs. External

Kelley’s covariation model Biases in attributions

Fundamental attribution error Defensive attribution Self-serving bias

Cultural influences

Attribution Processes: Explaining Behavior

Figure 16.3Examples of attributional analyses using Kelly’s model. In Kelley’s model, high consistency, low distinctiveness, and low consensus should lead to an internal attribution, whereas high consistency, high distinctiveness, and high consensus should lead to an external attribution. These principles are applied here to the example in the text about Bruce’s arguing in class.

Figure 16.4Weiner’s model of attributions for success and failure. Weiner’s model assumes that people’s explanations for success and failure emphasize internal versus external causes and stable versus unstable causes. Examples of causal factors that fit into each of the four cells in Weiner’s model are shown in the diagram.

Figure 16.5An alternative view of the fundamental attribution error. According to Gilbert (1989) and others, the nature of attribution processes favor the fundamental attribution error. Traditional models of attribution assume that internal and external attributions are an either-or proposition requiring equal amounts of effort. In contrast, Gilbert posits that people tend to automatically make internal attributions with little effort and then may expend additional effort to adjust for the influence of situational factors, which can lead to an external attribution. Thus, external attributions for others’ behavior require more thought and effort, which makes them less common than personal attributions.

Key factors in attraction Physical attractiveness

Matching hypothesisSimilarityReciprocity

Perspectives on love Hatfield & Berscheid – Passionate vs. Companionate love

Sternberg - Intimacy and commitment Hazen & Shaver – love as attachment Evolutionary perspectives

Mating priorities

Close Relationships: Liking and Loving

Figure 16.7Sternberg’s view of love over time. In his theory of love, Robert Sternberg (1988a) hypothesizes that the various elements of love progress in different ways over the course of time. According to Sternberg, passion peaks early in a relationship, whereas intimacy and commitment continue to build gradually.

3 components cognitive, affective, and behavioral

Factors in changing attitudes Source, message, and receiver

Theories of attitude change Learning theory Dissonance theory Self-perception theory Elaboration likelihood model

Attitudes and Attitude Change

Figure 16.10The possible components of attitudes. Attitudes may include cognitive, affective, and behavioral components, as illustrated here for a hypothetical person’s attitude about gun control.

Figure 16.14Design of the Festinger and Carlsmith (1959) study. The sequence of events in this landmark study of counterattitudinal behavior and attitude change is outlined here. The diagram omits a third condition (no dissonance), in which subjects were not induced to lie. The results in the nondissonance condition were similar to those found in the low-dissonance condition.

Figure 16.15Bem’s self-perception theory. The traditional view is that attitudes determine behavior. However, Bem stood conventional logic on its head when he proposed that behavior often determines (or causes people to draw inferences about) their attitudes. Subsequent research on attribution has shown that sometimes people do infer their attitudes from their behavior.

Figure 16.16The elaboration likelihood model. According to the elaboration likelihood model (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986), the central route to persuasion leads to more elaboration of message content and more enduring attitude change than the peripheral route to persuasion.

Conformity – Solomon Asch (1950s) Classic experiment

Group size and group unanimity

Yielding to Others: Conformity

Obedience – Stanley Milgram (1960s) Controversial landmark experiment

“I was just following orders” presence of a dissenter

Yielding to Others: Obedience

The bystander effect - Darley and Latane (1968) Diffusion of responsibility

Group productivity and social loafing Decision making in groups Polarization Groupthink

Behavior in Groups: The Influence of Other People

Figure 16.22Group polarization. Two examples of group polarization are diagrammed here. In the first example (top) a group starts out mildly opposed to an idea, but after discussion sentiment against the idea is stronger. In the second example (bottom), a group starts out with a favorable disposition toward an idea, and this disposition is strengthened by group discussion.

Figure 16.23Overview of Janis’s model of groupthink. The antecedent conditions, symptoms, and resultant effects of groupthink postulated by Janis (1972) are outlined here. His model of groupthink has been very influential, but practical difficulties have limited research on the theory. (Adapted from Janis & Mann, 1977)