SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE, BUILDING AND DESIGN

FOUNDATION IN NATURAL & BUILT ENVIRONMENT

NAME: DANIEL SONG CHENG HOCK

STUDENT ID NO: 0320155

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY [PSYC0103]

GROUP: MONDAY 4-6pm

FOUNDATION IN NATURAL & BUILT ENVIRONMENT

JOURNAL ASSIGNMENT 1

LECTURER: T. SHANKAR

SUBMISSION DATE: 27/APRIL/2015

February 14th 2015Social PsychologyEntry 01: Social Conditioning

In trying to understand how one interacts with society as an individual, we use tools like

concepts of social conditioning in order to find out how one forms perceptions of others or

oneself, and in turn, how this affects the way in which an individual or groups of individuals

function in given situations. These perceptions are formed by the presence of social influences,

which form the thoughts/perceptions of a person/groups of people which go on to affect the

social interaction which occurs.

The intersection of these three factors, social perception, social influence, and social interaction

form the basis of social conditioning. I see this principle prominently in how in my own life,

seeing that it is such a fundamental aspect of the development of my identity, and how I relate

to others as a social being.

As an example, I draw from my experiences as a student. Beginning as a student, I was, for

lack of better description, a blank slate. Totally new to the entire experience. Didn’t know about

how one acts as a student, the types of obligations that entails this, the ins and outs of being

one, and the like. The process of education as a student, according to my own experiences,

would have been forged in the early days.

Unfortunately, the beginnings of my academic journey in the public school system, was wrought

with much hardship, adjusting to new conformities, new social situations, contexts, and

expectations, which contrasted greatly to my days in kindergarten. I remember being harshly

reprimanded for the most trivial things, such as not bringing an exercise book, for forgetting to

wear a certain uniform, or for not knowing the lyrics to our national anthem. It seemed as though

teachers were a constantly moody bunch, always seeking to find fault in a student, in order to

have that fault rectified.

This poured into my experience as a student obviously, in how I viewed school, education,

fellow students, and consequentially, the social actions I took as a result of these perceptions. I

viewed education as a very linear, mono-directional affair. Listen, keep your head down, and do

what you’re told. You won’t get scolded that way if you’re lucky.

Being a young individual, in the process of maturation, I was not capable of breaking out of

these social perceptions, which formed out of imprints of memory formed because of past

experiences. It involved social influences, like the way I was treated by my friends when grades

were involved, how one was held in esteem before teachers, and the like. Being unpopular,

these social influences, formed the basis of my social interaction with other social entities,

namely, my peers, teachers, and the like.

The social interaction that arose out of it was something very submissive in nature, timid, and

agreeable, not wishing for conflict. While, some of these manners of social interaction have

been salvaged for the better, it is still somewhat unavoidable to remove the imprint from my

mind, about being a student, which was formed in the beginning of my days.

We see here, that the way you react as an individual relies heavily on the types of social

perceptions carried formed on imprints from past experiences, social influences, which affect

one’s thoughts, which finally translates into the social interaction.

What can be gained from this is the fact that the experience, is the heavy deciding factor on

deciding the manner of interaction. How one learns from an experience, good or bad, is

ultimately what decides how he reacts in a similar situation in the future. This shows that the

manner of interaction varies from individual to individual. What then is the standard for a socially

accepted response? Who decided the criteria for analysing this?

Can any response be deemed acceptable?

February 20th 2015

Social Psychology

Entry 02: Confirmation Bias

We have the ability as sentient beings to choose which pieces of information to accept,

and which other pieces of information we filter. This can be seen as both necessary, and as an

inherent fault in the system. On the one hand, it allows us to logically and reasonably decide

which pieces of information are necessary and worth taking in. On the other hand, we have

deliberate/indeliberate act of suppressing or ignoring information we deem unnecessary towards

the goal of making sense of what happens around us. The fault in the latter statement really

becomes evident when preconceived notions/perceptions are present in situations which involve

our judgement and action. This becomes what is known as confirmation bias, which is the affair

of accepting only information which allows us to confirm/justify the notions.

This kind of logic clouds our judgement, and nullifies our rationality. Moving along this

line, we shall examine the circumstances which surrounded the prosecution and eventual

incarceration of one of this nation’s most influential political figures, Anwar Ibrahim. The

circumstances behind this lawsuit were very charged and tensed. Clear battle lines were drawn

out. Stakes were called. A man had been accused of rape and sodomy towards another man in

a very conservative, religiously saturated nation. He also so happened to be the figurehead of

Malaysia’s political opposition coalition.

Throughout the entire proceeding, I have had friends and relatives taking up sides.

Hearing opinions was a very interesting pastime. Inadvertently, both sides laid out their

arguments with much passion and vigour, with one side demonising the person in question, and

the other claiming to fight for justice in the man’s innocence. Although I too have an opinion

pertaining to this case, for the sake of understanding the phenomenon of confirmation bias, we

shall not hear it.

I recall clearly, an incident in which I had been listening to a supporter of Anwar’s

incarceration and a supporter of Anwar’s innocence discuss the matter, albeit rather heatedly.

The former was stating that if the court of law found Anwar to be guilty, it was to be credited to

due diligence, evidence, and cold hard facts. The latter, pointed out the many holes in this

argument, laying out his suspicions in the evidence, the manner in which it was collected, the

manner in which the defendant had been treated in past incarcerations, and many more. He

brought out newspaper clippings, data on the rate of decay of seminal deposit, holes in data,

and the like. The supporter of the prosecution, would go to great lengths to rebut, to deny, to

disprove to little efficacy. At the end, worn and tired, both sat in quiet frustration. I asked the

“prosecution”, why he was so adamant, despite all the evidence thrown out. In fact, the burden

of proof lay on him. Instead, the only one who had thrown out cold hard proof was the one on

the side of the accused. The aggressor said that he would not change his mind, no matter what

proof was displayed. He cited a conspiracy to cover everything up, to win public opinion over to

Anwar. I asked him, how he drew that conclusion up. He could not give a single, well developed

answer. It should be noted that he is also a supporter of the incumbent party currently holding

power, who stand to benefit from Anwar’s incarceration.

The gist of the matter, was that in trying to hold on to a preconceived conclusion, borne

out of personal political inclinations, instead of properly gathered data, and study, an individual

had thrown out information deemed sound. We all practice confirmation bias to some extent,

daily if I might add. Be it, to support your notion that your parents are perfect, or that your

friends will remain friends forever, or that God does or does not exist. It permeates every single

person, who has the ability to decide for himself.

February 22nd 2015The SelfEntry 01: Self Efficacy

When I learnt of this concept, I managed to align it and fit it into a lot of situations and

circumstances in how one develops his concept of self. Personally, I was jarred by this, and

from it, came many quandaries. Basically, the link between self efficacy, the ability or imagined

ability within oneself to complete a task; and the formation of the concept of self becomes clear

when the degree of self efficacy in individuals is examined. One who doesn’t believe he has the

ability to complete tasks, has a very defeatist, negative outlook on himself, and consequentially,

life. One who has a high degree of self efficacy, sees life as something to “be accomplished”.

How does this concept come into realisation for the person? Is there any disposition within

certain individuals to attain the varying degrees of self efficacy? How do we diminish the

negative effects of self efficacy concepts in people? Isn’t the concept all in the individuals head?

What do these answers mean for the realisation of how we operate as humans, seeing that a lot

of what can and cannot be done may be in one’s head.

With all these questions in my mind, I examined self efficacy within myself. How often,

do I achieve something which I set out to achieve? How often do I finish something I start? In

answering these questions, I realised that self efficacy is not definite in all aspects of a person’s

life. I like to think that self efficacy and willpower are interchangeable at times. My self efficacy,

or willpower, can be strong in areas I hold dear, for example, in family. I am self efficous in

developing lasting relationships with my family, come what may. However, my self efficacy, can

be so contrastingly weak, in areas of less importance, realised or unrealised. By this, I speak of

areas which are important, but of no realisation to me, for whatever reason. For example, in how

I build relationships outside of my familial circle. I am very weak at maintaining friendships. I

lack the ability to intentionally meet up, to rekindle old fires, and the like, even though I intend

every relationship I begin, to be meaningful. These points of self efficacy in their separate areas,

has formed who I am, as seen to be a closed off person, who can be distant to people I do not

know/have not begun to know in depth.

The question evident from this reflection then, is, what causes this self efficacy, to be

differing in the different areas of one’s life? It is definitely linked to something preceding it, which

forms areas of importance, and areas of less importance to individuals. Are there more angles

to it? Definitely so. The only thing that can be done for now, is to understand self efficacy, to

maximise its positive potential in developing the self, and to minimise the negative in the same

process.

February 22nd 2015The SelfEntry 02: Social Comparison

I enjoy sitcoms at times, and one of the ones I more regularly follow, is “Everybody

Loves Raymond”. One the character dynamic evident, is the one between Raymond, the main

character, and his brother, Robert. In this sitcom, Raymond is favoured by his mother, leaving

Robert very much in jealousy, struggling to compete for recognition and his mother’s love,

amongst many other things throughout most of the series. Robert lives with his mother, does not

have a girlfriend, does not seek to advance his career, and is clearly envious most of the time

towards Raymond.

While both Ray and Robert are very pessimistic characters, Robert is a character I pay

attention to more. This is because, I ask myself, why does his character seem so unsatisfied

with life? Why is he seemingly so, “handicapped” and stagnant, when he could clearly achieve

more in life? Then it dawned upon me, that largely, his concept of self which was negative,

stopped him from advancing. Why? Because he compared himself so often with his more

popular, favoured, independant brother. He was stuck every corner of the path, comparing

himself to his brother, anchoring himself on his brother’s image, from which he compared

himself. He was too busy comparing himself with his brother, that he neglected to carve his own

path.

Such a stunted view, is detrimental to the development of one’s self, but this behaviour

indicates the negative concept of self a lot of us have. Unavoidable, but, diminishable. While a

healthy amount of comparison with others is, somewhat necessary, imagine the comparison like

this, to see it in a more accurate light. Throughout various stations of life, you assume roles as

social beings, be it as a student, a musician, a leader, etc. You have peers, sharing similar

roles, as well. However, everyone, being given their own stages of development, their own

capabilities, personalities, is vastly different. Comparing oneself to another would be so erratic,

errorful, and widely unhelpful to healthy self development. If a ruler were to be used to draw a

straight line, and other human beings to be juxtaposed in this analogy as rulers, we would draw

ourselves as such crooked lines. From this, we fall into the trap of negative self discrepancy,

where the conditions we seek to satisfy are so damned unachievable/unrealistic.

Social comparison, probably has very limited use. It does give us a glance into how a

person sees himself/herself. What would be more effective, and positive towards healthy self

development, would be a state in which one realises where his identity is rooted in, and what

that means moving forward.

March 5thSocial CognitionEntry 01-Automatic & Controlled Processing

A DDOS attack is a cyber weapon designed to cripple an enemy’s computer networks

and digital infrastructure in order to render these services incapable. DDOS stands for

Distributed Denial Of Service, and much like what its name suggests, it denies users the ability

to use digital infrastructure. The methodology of the attack simply put, involves overloading a

system or network with endless amounts of useless information, like files terrabytes in size,

causing its ability to process information to become useless as memory capacity is required to

receive and read this information. The overwhelming amount of data received causes systems

to crash, and can physically damage servers and computers.

The human mind, is akin to a computer. If it is forced to process too much information in

an instant, it can “crash”, and become incapacitated. That is why, our brains have been built to

distribute the burden of perceiving the world into much more manageable parts that don’t take

up massive amounts of our brain’s limited processing capacity. This is where automatic and

controlled processing comes in. Automatic processing occurs on the fly, and eases the burden

of making sense of the world we live in. Automatic processing proliferates every area of our

lives, from how we decide what to eat for breakfast, to how we treat strangers and familiars

alike. Controlled processing, is inferior to automatic processing, in the sense that it occurs far

less often, it is often preceded by automatic processing, and that requires more effort to carry

out. It entails properly thinking through things, weighing in all kinds of factors, and coming up

with more accurate perceptions and conceptions. An example of this processing is in how we

study, form arguments, and think objectively, to make sense of subjectivity. As stated, our

brains cannot process every single thing in a controlled manner, lest it becomes overloaded.

That’s why we unconsciously relay a lot of tasks to automatic processing.

For me, I see these processes so often in daily life. Especially in high stake situations. I

wish to see this principle as it is applied in a game of paintball. When you put on a mask you

can barely breathe in, in environments you’re not used to, with a gun in your hand, your brain

kind of shuts off the side of it that controls your conscious, more careful thoughts. You work

solely on adrenaline as a beginner. I can remember my first game vividly. I was so bloody

excited, and my thinking was all fuzzy. Trying to calm down was out of the question. Running

from bunker to bunker, I avoided bullets, and put shots in the direction of shooters on impulse.

Trying to think was just going to slow me down, so I shot first, and thought later. One particular

instance, I heard shots hit the bunker I was taking cover behind. Once the shooting stopped, I

moved out, and opened fire at the first person I saw. Unfortunately, it was the game marshall.

Her body was covered in paint. Shoot first, think later. Of course, as I grew more accustomed to

the game, I learned to incorporate controlled processing into my playstyle

Balancing automatic processing and controlled processing in such situations is crucial in

life. Too much of one or the other means missing out on a lot of what life is meant to be.

March 15thSocial CognitionEntry 02- The Availability Heuristic

When I think of heuristics, I think of wormholes. Both are “cheat” methods, cutting short

distances between location and destination, through the use of short cuts. While wormholes

deal with bending space theoretically, to shorten the distance between point A and B, heuristics

deal with circumventing a myriad of mental process to get from a problem to a solution, through

the use of similar shortcuts. For example, when considering a situation where you are in a

burning building, you don’t cease all action, to consider what is happening, whether fire is bad,

what fire could do to the building you’re in, how bad it is, what potential actions to take, etc. You

simply see fire, and your mind skips all these processes, and orders your body to move to get

out of the building. You decide to evade all danger because a heuristic was formed in your

mind, probably from learned experiences. Heuristics helps us to make decisions faster in allows

the processing power of our minds to be more distributed.

The availability heuristic is basically a shortcut the mind takes based on the most

available imprint, or information the mind can come up with in response to stimuli. For example,

if I say a cup of cocoa, you think Milo. If I say instant noodles, you say Maggi Mee. These brand

names were the most available examples your mind could think of to make sense of what was

required. The availability heuristic is something you come across more often than you realise in

life.

One of the instances in which the availability heuristic pops up is during periods of

arguments or falling outs with other people. Imagine you had a falling out with your closest

friend. It was bitter, very tense, and did not resolve itself. You go your separate ways embittered

towards each other. From then on, whenever this friend of yours appears, physically, in

conversation, or the like, you will respond negatively. This is because, the availability heuristic is

at play. The most available heuristic you have of your friend, is the most recent, most intense

memory you can recall of him. Since it was negative, you will respond negatively. All the

previous qualities, attributions, traits you had of this friend, are overwhelmed by the most

available heuristic you have of this person. Nevermind the fact that you both helped each other

out of sticky situations, that he attended the funeral of your mother, that you once helped him

get a girl he liked. You respond automatically negatively towards this person, because of the

availability heuristic.

As seen, the potential this heuristic has to be detrimental is present. However, this is not

always the case. Always, be sure to engage the cognitive, more controlled processes in

situations that call for it, lest you be blinded by the availability heuristic.

Mar 21stSocial PerceptionEntry 01-Correspondence Bias

We interact with people daily and we rarely notice the huge role perceptions play in how

we do so. How we perceive people, makes the difference between how we interact with a floor

cleaner, a professor, and a friend. Perception itself, as crucial as it is to the human experience is

not fully understood, and many theories exist pertaining to it. However, the attribution theory is

one of the largest areas in the field of perception. Very simply, most attribution theories involve

two important aspects, which are dispositional attributes, and situational attributes. Dispositional

attributes are attributes which arise out of the person/group in question, as a result of their

individuality. Situational attributes are attributes which arise out of the person/group in question

as a result of the circumstance or situation at hand, and not necessarily is the result of the

person’s individuality.

Within this field of understanding, lies the correspondence bias. The correspondence

bias states that people are more willing/able to infer that dispositional attributes are responsible

for the choices and actions other people make. This means that a person’s actions are more

likely to be said to be caused by his personality, etc. In converse, it means that we are less able

to make a correspondence to the action to the situation. This opens up a lot of possibilities. It

could be interpreted to the negative, and the positive. Simply put, if someone does something

negative, people automatically assume he did something bad because he is by nature bad. If

someone does something good, he is by nature, good.

I’ve seen this far too often in life. I knew this friend in secondary school. Quiet guy, who

often spoke of video girls more than he did of the opposite gender. A little socially awkward, and

not quick to anger. However, there happened to be a day, when he was enjoying a drink along

the corridor of the school, and accidentally bumped into another boy. Luck had it that the other

boy had to be rather hot blooded. My friend also, rather unwisely pulled of a smart remark

before apologising. The boy shoved him hard, and things escalated quickly. Thing’s ended with

my friend smashing the glass bottle into the other person’s head, causing him to bleed from the

wound. The discipline master managed to stop things before it went any further. However, the

consequences were heavy upon my friend. The authorities really went at it on my friend. He was

almost expelled, because they deemed him too dangerous to be around other students. The

remarks they gave, was that he was a violent person and prone to violent actions. This was all

based on their observation of the other person’s wounds and his story. It was more visually easy

to understand that my friend was the aggressor. Not to downplay my friend’s actions, but he

was not the initiator of the events, and the heat of the moment caused him to have to defend

himself with whatever he had.

What happened here, was that everyone immediately assumed that his actions were

credited to his disposition to violence. However, like I said, he is not disposed to such actions

and had never hit another person before.

The authorities had not seen enough information, and could not make proper attributions

or judgement to the situation. It does require more effort to consider the situation more carefully,

but it should have been done to ensure proper justice was meted out.

It should be noted that collectivistic cultures are more likely to make dispositional

attributions,

Mar 23rd Social PerceptionEntry 02- The Halo Effect

Dealing with perceptions, very often, and unfortunately, we also deal with the area of

biases. That should tell you a lot about how humans perceive other humans. It is often with a lot

of error. The halo effect, is just another cognitive bias which occurs in our perception of other

people, or other groups of people. In simple terms, if one sees a good attribute/quality in a

person, he is quick to see many others, imagined or real in the subject of observation.

It appears in a lot of situations. Take for example, the fact that good looking people are

often perceived as more likely to succeed. This can be explained by the halo effect. Our

perceptions of people are very contingent upon our first impressions of others, and often, the

visual aspects of a person stand out. We tend to like people who do look more aesthetically

bestowed, and it goes to become a positive attribution towards the person. This escalates fast

to assuming and “seeing” or actually seeing other manifold positive attributes in the person.

One practical way this is manifested is in the fact that teachers do tend to expect better

looking students to succeed. Like mentioned in the previous paragraph, this is attributed to

what is the strongest initial positive attribution teachers can make of the student. However, this

factoid should be qualified by the fact that this impression usually does not last for long, if

controlled cognitive processing is employed by the observer, which is in this case, the teacher.

The thing about the halo effect is that it often blinds people, and makes reality blend with

their imagination, because we so want to believe subconsciously that the person in question is

an angel. Hence, the name the halo effect.

I personally experience this effect often, and am also subject to the effect of this

phenomena. This often, is the reason of our disillusionment upon others. We place high

expectations upon others unconsciously when the halo effect is affected upon us. We wish to

see only good in people, and in converse, wish to believe that nothing bad exists in the person,

despite what our mental faculties believe of human nature.

When something wrong does occur, and the person in question is seen as imperfect,

often, we become disillusioned, and the consequences upon the person is often to their

negative. All this, because the halo effect forced us to see only the good, or to make up the

good in the other person.

Controlled cognition of people should be constantly engaged in our interactions with

others as social beings. The effect of this will be a much more matured interaction between

members of society.

April 10th Attitudes Entry 01- Classical Conditioning

The brain, often is paired with many analogous objects, in order to aid our understanding

of how it functions. One analogy that often appears is that of the computer. Many argue that in

some ways, the brain is like a computer, which stores information, and can be made to act on

certain information, depending on how it is programmed. Classical conditioning can be likened

to programming the human brain. However, instead of lengths of code being programmed into

the brain, exposure is the element which programs the brain to operate/behave differently.

Basically, classical conditioning examines the area of responses and stimuli, conditioned

and unconditioned. Unconditioned responses are responses which are natural and innate to

natural stimuli, such as the shielding of one’s eyes in extreme sunlight. Unconditioned

responses are responses which do not arise naturally as a result of neutral stimuli. Once

conditioned responses respond to what was formerly neutral stimuli, the stimuli becomes

conditioned stimuli. An example of a conditioned response and its conditioned stimuli is seen in

how a driver slows down his car when traffic lights turn orange. The conditioned stimuli is the

orange light, and the conditioned response is the slowing down of the car.

Classical conditioning is an area of social psychology which is linked to behaviour

modification, and although it may seem rather dubious to be able to modify a human’s

behaviour by means of “programming”, it actually perforates many areas of everyday life,

without our awareness of it doing so. In specific towards attitudes, classical conditioning can be

seen in how a one’s attitudes towards a brand name or business is influenced and formed over

time as a result of classical conditioning.

Car shows and magazines actually employ this a lot. Did you notice how automotives

and automobiles are often linked to girls? In particular, physically attractive girls? This is a result

of marketing, and classical conditioning. As a business, there is a need to engage customers in

a positive manner, to ensure they have positive attributions towards your company and brand.

Often, in car shows, or advertisements, a model is pictured posing with the car. The more

attractive, the better. Operationally, you see the car and the girl paired together, closely

associated. As you perceive the model as attractive, and desirable, you link these emotions to

the car brand, and the company, thereby increasing the chances of your expenditure into that

company. Your attitude towards the company has thereby been engineered.

In this example, the conditioned response and stimuli was actually to do with the the

car/brand name being the conditioned stimuli and your openness towards buying in on that

company’s products being the conditioned response. The unconditioned stimuli was actually the

attractive girl you paired with the car, and your attraction towards the girl the unconditioned

response.

Conversely, unconditioned responses and stimuli are seen in the lives of war veterans in

the negative. Seeing certain things, and hearing certain sounds can actually trigger responses

which were not present before, which usually ends in panic attacks, and severe anxiety. This all,

as a result of the experiences gained in battle.

Clearly, this area is a huge component of attitude formation, as are many others. Much

can be learned, if one as a layman recognises its place in formation of attitudes, and takes

action to engage cognitive processing, when and where needed.