Social PsychologySocial Psychology

Social PsychologySocial Psychology The scientific study of the ways in which The scientific study of the ways in which

the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of one individual are influenced by the one individual are influenced by the real, imagined, or inferred behavior or real, imagined, or inferred behavior or characteristics of other peoplecharacteristics of other people

Social CognitionSocial CognitionHow do we explain, interpret How do we explain, interpret

and judge behavior? and judge behavior?

Impression Formation Impression Formation What do we think of othersWhat do we think of others’’ behavior? behavior?

Schema: a set of beliefs or expectations about Schema: a set of beliefs or expectations about something/someone based on past something/someone based on past experiences that we use to understand novel experiences that we use to understand novel eventsevents– Ready-made categoryReady-made category– Allows us to make inferences about othersAllows us to make inferences about others– Also plays a major role in how we interpret and Also plays a major role in how we interpret and

remember informationremember information– E.g. if we witness a mother reprimanding her child E.g. if we witness a mother reprimanding her child

at the supermarket, we might assume she is a bad at the supermarket, we might assume she is a bad or abusive mother because we saw something or abusive mother because we saw something similar in a Lifetime movie, and we may even similar in a Lifetime movie, and we may even assign her other traits that go along with this assign her other traits that go along with this assumption even if she doesnassumption even if she doesn’’t actually t actually demonstrate those traits! demonstrate those traits!

Impression FormationImpression FormationWhat do we think of othersWhat do we think of others’’ behavior? behavior?

Primacy effect: early information is a Primacy effect: early information is a greater determinant of attitudesgreater determinant of attitudes– Early information about someone makes Early information about someone makes

a greater impact than later information a greater impact than later information in forming impressionsin forming impressions

– ““Cognitive MisersCognitive Misers”” Humans donHumans don’’t like to spend too much time t like to spend too much time

figuring people outfiguring people out Go with the initial impression to save timeGo with the initial impression to save time

Impression FormationImpression FormationWhat do we think of othersWhat do we think of others’’ behavior? behavior?

Self-fulfilling prophecySelf-fulfilling prophecy– A personA person’’s expectations about another elicits s expectations about another elicits

behavior from the other person that confirms the behavior from the other person that confirms the expectationsexpectations

– e.g. High school coach is told by middle school e.g. High school coach is told by middle school coach that a player coming up is coach that a player coming up is ““amazing.amazing.”” High High school coach treats this player as though s/he is school coach treats this player as though s/he is talented, and the player responds accordingly, talented, and the player responds accordingly, confirming the initial belief.confirming the initial belief.

StereotypesStereotypes– A set of characteristics believed to be shared by A set of characteristics believed to be shared by

all members of a social categoryall members of a social category– Can become the basis for self-fulfilling propheciesCan become the basis for self-fulfilling prophecies

e.g. e.g. ““Elderly people are cheap!Elderly people are cheap!”” You are a waiter in a You are a waiter in a restaurant and make this assumption, so you donrestaurant and make this assumption, so you don’’t t provide the greatest service. Then your tip is smaller provide the greatest service. Then your tip is smaller and you believe it is because the old people and you believe it is because the old people areare cheap! cheap!

Attribution:Attribution:How do we explain behavior?How do we explain behavior?

Theory that addresses the question of Theory that addresses the question of how people make judgments about the how people make judgments about the causes of behaviorcauses of behavior– e.g. e.g. ““Why did I fail the test?Why did I fail the test?””– e.g. e.g. ““Why did my best friend stop talking to me?Why did my best friend stop talking to me?””

Heider (1958) says we first decide if the Heider (1958) says we first decide if the cause is cause is personal or dispositionalpersonal or dispositional (internal attribution) or (internal attribution) or situationalsituational (external attribution).(external attribution).– Personal/InternalPersonal/Internal: Behavior caused by that : Behavior caused by that

individualindividual’’s characteristicss characteristics– Situational/ExternalSituational/External: Circumstances : Circumstances

prompted the individualprompted the individual’’s behaviors behavior

Attribution:Attribution:How do we explain behavior?How do we explain behavior?

Three criteria used to judge behavior as Three criteria used to judge behavior as personal or situational (Kelley, 1967):personal or situational (Kelley, 1967):– DistinctivenessDistinctiveness: How do the person: How do the person’’s responses s responses

vary from situation to situation?vary from situation to situation?– ConsistencyConsistency: Has this person responded in the : Has this person responded in the

same way in this situation?same way in this situation?– ConsensusConsensus: The degree to which person: The degree to which person’’s behavior s behavior

is similar to othersis similar to others’’ behavior behavior Low consensus + low distinctiveness + high consistency = Low consensus + low distinctiveness + high consistency =

Internal (personal) attributionInternal (personal) attribution– e.g. Nobody else failed the psych test. I often fail tests. I e.g. Nobody else failed the psych test. I often fail tests. I

often fail psych tests. Itoften fail psych tests. It’’s ME!s ME! High consensus + high distinctiveness + low consistency = High consensus + high distinctiveness + low consistency =

External (situational) attributionExternal (situational) attribution– e.g. Everyone else also failed this test. I never fail tests! e.g. Everyone else also failed this test. I never fail tests!

I never fail psych tests. ItI never fail psych tests. It’’s the TEST!s the TEST!

Biases in AttributionBiases in Attribution Fundamental Attribution ErrorFundamental Attribution Error

– Tendency to overemphasize personal causes for othersTendency to overemphasize personal causes for others’’ behaviorbehavior

– This works along with This works along with actor-observer bias, actor-observer bias, where we alsowhere we also underemphasize personal causes for our own behaviorunderemphasize personal causes for our own behavior

– e.g. e.g. ““She cut me off because she is a terrible driver!She cut me off because she is a terrible driver!”” – e.g. e.g. ““I cut someone else off because I am late for work.I cut someone else off because I am late for work.””

Defensive attribution and Self-Serving BiasDefensive attribution and Self-Serving Bias– Tendency to attribute our successes to our own efforts and Tendency to attribute our successes to our own efforts and

our failures to external factorsour failures to external factors– e.g. e.g. ““I failed the test because the teacher made it impossible I failed the test because the teacher made it impossible

and clearly she hates me!and clearly she hates me!”” OR OR ““I got an A because II got an A because I’’m a m a genius!genius!””

Just-World HypothesisJust-World Hypothesis– Assumption bad things happen to bad people and good Assumption bad things happen to bad people and good

things happen to good peoplethings happen to good people– e.g. e.g. ““She got herpes because she is a strumpet!She got herpes because she is a strumpet!””– e.g. e.g. ““She will win the election because sheShe will win the election because she’’s sooooo nice.s sooooo nice.””

Attribution across cultures varies dramaticallyAttribution across cultures varies dramatically– E.g. Japanese vs. American students and explaining E.g. Japanese vs. American students and explaining

academic performanceacademic performance

AttitudesAttitudesWhat do we think?What do we think?

AttitudesAttitudesIs a personIs a person’’s behavior a reflection of his/her attitudes?s behavior a reflection of his/her attitudes?

Attitudes are relatively stable beliefs, feelings, and Attitudes are relatively stable beliefs, feelings, and behaviors directed toward something/someonebehaviors directed toward something/someone

Three componentsThree components– CognitiveCognitive: beliefs and ideas held about the object/person: beliefs and ideas held about the object/person– AffectiveAffective: emotions associated with object/person: emotions associated with object/person– BehavioralBehavioral: how we act based on our attitudes: how we act based on our attitudes

Typically, feelings and beliefs about a person/thing Typically, feelings and beliefs about a person/thing correspond with behaviors toward that correspond with behaviors toward that person/thing, but not alwaysperson/thing, but not always– Self-monitoringSelf-monitoring: tendency to observe a situation to : tendency to observe a situation to

determine how best to act.determine how best to act. High self-monitors look for social cues about how they are High self-monitors look for social cues about how they are

expected to behave in a given situation, overriding their expected to behave in a given situation, overriding their attitudes, making it difficult to predict behavior based on attitudes, making it difficult to predict behavior based on attitudes.attitudes.

Low self-monitors express and act on their attitudes Low self-monitors express and act on their attitudes consistently making prediction easier.consistently making prediction easier.

– LaPiere Study in the 1930s (Chinese couple in LaPiere Study in the 1930s (Chinese couple in restaurants)restaurants)

Attitude DevelopmentAttitude Development

Many factors contribute to the Many factors contribute to the development of attitudesdevelopment of attitudes– ImitationImitation– RewardReward– Role ModelsRole Models– PeersPeers– Mass mediaMass media

Attitude ChangeAttitude ChangeWhat makes us change our mind?What makes us change our mind?

Process of persuasionProcess of persuasion– Must pay attention to the messageMust pay attention to the message– Must comprehend the messageMust comprehend the message– Comprehension leads to acceptanceComprehension leads to acceptance

Central vs. Peripheral Route to persuasionCentral vs. Peripheral Route to persuasion– Central – people focus on the message and the facts to Central – people focus on the message and the facts to

form attitudesform attitudes– Peripheral – people focus on incidental cues, such as Peripheral – people focus on incidental cues, such as

speakerspeaker’’s attractiveness, position, reputation, etc.s attractiveness, position, reputation, etc. Communication modelCommunication model

– Source: credible spokesperson?Source: credible spokesperson?– Message: present both sides!Message: present both sides!– Medium: written for complex messages; video for more Medium: written for complex messages; video for more

simple; face to face is best!simple; face to face is best!– Audience: how committed is audience to their point of Audience: how committed is audience to their point of

view?view? People with low self esteem easier to changePeople with low self esteem easier to change Intelligent people more resistant to changeIntelligent people more resistant to change

Attitude ChangeAttitude Change Role-Playing and AttitudesRole-Playing and Attitudes

– When we adopt a new role, we attempt to conform to When we adopt a new role, we attempt to conform to social expectations of playing that rolesocial expectations of playing that role

– Eventually, we Eventually, we ““becomebecome”” the role the role– e.g. e.g. Z imbardo ’’s Stanford Prison Study (1971)s Stanford Prison Study (1971)

Mere Exposure EffectMere Exposure Effect– Our attitude toward someone/something will become Our attitude toward someone/something will become

more positive with continued exposuremore positive with continued exposure– e.g. We are more likely to like someone we see e.g. We are more likely to like someone we see

frequentlyfrequently Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Leon Festinger)Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Leon Festinger)

– Perceived inconsistency between two cognitions causes Perceived inconsistency between two cognitions causes discomfort (dissonance) discomfort (dissonance) e.g. e.g. ““I am an honest personI am an honest person”” and and ““I cheated on the testI cheated on the test””

– Dissonance can be reduced through attitude changeDissonance can be reduced through attitude change e.g. e.g. ““I am not that honestI am not that honest””

– An alternative is to increase the number thoughts that An alternative is to increase the number thoughts that support one or the other dissonant cognitionssupport one or the other dissonant cognitions e.g. e.g. ““I have never stolen, never gotten arrested, never I have never stolen, never gotten arrested, never

cheated on a FINAL,cheated on a FINAL,”” etc. etc.

Social InfluenceSocial Influence

How do we impact others?How do we impact others?

ComplianceCompliance

Change in behavior in response to an Change in behavior in response to an explicit request from another person or explicit request from another person or groupgroup

Work of Robert Cialdini and the methods of Work of Robert Cialdini and the methods of gaining compliancegaining compliance– Foot-in-the-door effect: Get them to say yes to a Foot-in-the-door effect: Get them to say yes to a

small request firstsmall request first– Lowball procedure: Get compliance then raise Lowball procedure: Get compliance then raise

price of complianceprice of compliance– Door-in-the-face effect: Get them to decline Door-in-the-face effect: Get them to decline

large request then ask something smallerlarge request then ask something smaller

ConformityConformity

Voluntarily yielding to social norms, Voluntarily yielding to social norms, even at the expense of oneeven at the expense of one’’s own s own preferencespreferences

Asch ExperimentAsch Experiment Factors That Strengthen ConformityFactors That Strengthen Conformity

– Unfamiliar situationUnfamiliar situation– Larger groupLarger group– Unanimity of groupUnanimity of group– If group is high status/attractiveIf group is high status/attractive– Collectivist cultureCollectivist culture

ObedienceObedience

Change in behavior in response to a Change in behavior in response to a command from another person, typically command from another person, typically an authority figurean authority figure

MilgramMilgram’’s studies on obedience show s studies on obedience show willingness to follow commandswillingness to follow commands– 63% of subjects fully complied!63% of subjects fully complied!– Follow up studies showed women also Follow up studies showed women also

compliedcomplied The Modern MilgramThe Modern Milgram

Group InfluenceGroup Influence Social FacilitationSocial Facilitation

– In the presence of others, performance is stronger on easier tasksIn the presence of others, performance is stronger on easier tasks– Also, performance can be weaker on difficult tasks in the presence Also, performance can be weaker on difficult tasks in the presence

of others – unless we have expertiseof others – unless we have expertise– e.g. Runners who run in a group have faster times than when e.g. Runners who run in a group have faster times than when

running alonerunning alone Helping BehaviorHelping Behavior

– Altruistic behavior: Altruistic behavior: helping behavior that is not linked to personal gainhelping behavior that is not linked to personal gain– Bystander effect and Diffusion of ResponsibilityBystander effect and Diffusion of Responsibility

Helpfulness decreases as bystanders increaseHelpfulness decreases as bystanders increase Kitty Genovese Case and the bystander effect; NPR reports 50 years Kitty Genovese Case and the bystander effect; NPR reports 50 years

later…later… Darley and Latané (1969) and the smoke-filled room (75% to 10%)Darley and Latané (1969) and the smoke-filled room (75% to 10%)

– Mood can affect willingness to helpMood can affect willingness to help– Cultures differ in amount of help offered in response to requests for Cultures differ in amount of help offered in response to requests for

minor help (collective cultures more willing)minor help (collective cultures more willing)– Social Exchange Theory: behavior is dictated by desire to maximize Social Exchange Theory: behavior is dictated by desire to maximize

benefits and minimize costs of helpingbenefits and minimize costs of helping– Reciprocity norm: people will help those who helped themReciprocity norm: people will help those who helped them– Social Responsibility Norm: people will help those dependent on Social Responsibility Norm: people will help those dependent on

themthem

Group Decision MakingGroup Decision Making DeindividuationDeindividuation

– Loss of personal sense of responsibility in a groupLoss of personal sense of responsibility in a group– People more likely to engage in risky behavior when People more likely to engage in risky behavior when

anonymousanonymous– Helps to explain mob behaviorHelps to explain mob behavior– Mob Behavior also facilitated by the Mob Behavior also facilitated by the snowball snowball

effecteffect, when one vocal person convinces a few , when one vocal person convinces a few people, who convince a few more, etc.people, who convince a few more, etc.

Risky ShiftRisky Shift– Increased willingness of individual to take risks when Increased willingness of individual to take risks when

making decisions as a group as opposed to making making decisions as a group as opposed to making decisions as individuals.decisions as individuals.

Group PolarizationGroup Polarization in decision making in decision making – Shift of the group toward a more extreme position Shift of the group toward a more extreme position

following group discussion between like-minded following group discussion between like-minded individualsindividuals

Group Decision Making: Group Decision Making: Effectiveness of GroupsEffectiveness of Groups

The more people in the group…The more people in the group…– The more stable the group isThe more stable the group is– The less cohesive/efficient the group may becomeThe less cohesive/efficient the group may become

Social loafingSocial loafing– Tendency to expend less effort when part of a large groupTendency to expend less effort when part of a large group– Decrease in individual accountabilityDecrease in individual accountability

GroupthinkGroupthink– Pressure to conform to group makes everyone in the group Pressure to conform to group makes everyone in the group

have same beliefs and attitudeshave same beliefs and attitudes– Realistic and logical decision making gives way to the desire Realistic and logical decision making gives way to the desire

to have consensusto have consensus Hawthorne EffectHawthorne Effect

– Behavior improves when one is being studied by othersBehavior improves when one is being studied by others– Based on studies of Hawthorne Works Electric Factory (1924-Based on studies of Hawthorne Works Electric Factory (1924-

1932)1932)

Cultural InfluenceCultural Influence

Culture greatly influences attitudes and Culture greatly influences attitudes and behaviorsbehaviors

Cultural truismCultural truism– Beliefs that most members of a society accept Beliefs that most members of a society accept

as self-evidently trueas self-evidently true– People in the culture do not question thesePeople in the culture do not question these– e.g. e.g. ““Eating dog is unacceptable.Eating dog is unacceptable.””

Truisms are the backbone of Truisms are the backbone of normsnorms, , shared expectations about how to behave shared expectations about how to behave in a given culture.in a given culture.

Cultural AssimilatorsCultural Assimilators Not all cultures are the same, and not all cultures Not all cultures are the same, and not all cultures

have the same norms. have the same norms. People in a given culture may feel their way is the People in a given culture may feel their way is the

““rightright”” way, and other cultures are way, and other cultures are ““backwards.backwards.”” This is the basis of This is the basis of ethnocentrismethnocentrism, or the belief , or the belief

that onethat one’’s own culture superior.s own culture superior. Examining Examining cultural assimilatorscultural assimilators helps to reduce helps to reduce

these assumptions.these assumptions.– Cultural assimilatorsCultural assimilators are the explanations for why are the explanations for why

members of a culture have a particular behavior.members of a culture have a particular behavior.– Understanding cultural assimilators helps people to Understanding cultural assimilators helps people to

maintain an open mind about other culturesmaintain an open mind about other cultures’’ norms and norms and values.values.

Social RelationsSocial Relations

How do we relate to others?How do we relate to others?

Prejudice and DiscriminationPrejudice and Discrimination PrejudicePrejudice

– An intolerant, unfavorable, and rigid attitude An intolerant, unfavorable, and rigid attitude toward a group of people; negative stereotypes.toward a group of people; negative stereotypes.

– Ultimate Attribution ErrorUltimate Attribution Error: tendency to use : tendency to use stereotyped beliefs about a group to make stereotyped beliefs about a group to make internal attributions about shortcomings and internal attributions about shortcomings and external attributions about successes.external attributions about successes.

DiscriminationDiscrimination– An act or series of acts that denies opportunities An act or series of acts that denies opportunities

and social esteem to an entire group of people and social esteem to an entire group of people or individual members of that groupor individual members of that group

Sources of Prejudice:Sources of Prejudice:Where does it come from?Where does it come from?

Social InequalitiesSocial Inequalities– ““HavesHaves”” vs. vs. ““Have NotsHave Nots”” – those who have feel – those who have feel

justified and often use negative stereotypes of justified and often use negative stereotypes of ““have have notsnots”” to justify inequalities. to justify inequalities.

– ““Blame-the-victimBlame-the-victim”” dynamic dynamic Us vs. Them: Ingroup and OutgroupUs vs. Them: Ingroup and Outgroup

– We have the need to belong (Maslow) for feelings of We have the need to belong (Maslow) for feelings of identity, solidarity and safetyidentity, solidarity and safety

– Those who are outside our group are threateningThose who are outside our group are threatening– We reserve greatest hatred for those most like us We reserve greatest hatred for those most like us

(Yankees vs. Mets fans)(Yankees vs. Mets fans)– Ingroup Bias – Belief that those with whom you Ingroup Bias – Belief that those with whom you

identify are not only different, but BETTER than those identify are not only different, but BETTER than those outside the group.outside the group.

Sources of Prejudice:Sources of Prejudice:Where does it come from?Where does it come from?

Frustration-aggression theoryFrustration-aggression theory– People who are frustrated in their goals may turn their anger People who are frustrated in their goals may turn their anger

away from the proper target toward another, less powerful targetaway from the proper target toward another, less powerful target Authoritarian personalityAuthoritarian personality

– Personality pattern characterized by rigid conventionality, Personality pattern characterized by rigid conventionality, exaggerated respect for authority, and hostility toward those who exaggerated respect for authority, and hostility toward those who defy social normsdefy social norms

RacismRacism– Prejudice and discrimination directed at particular racial group Prejudice and discrimination directed at particular racial group

based on the belief that certain groups are innately inferiorbased on the belief that certain groups are innately inferior– Institutionalized RacismInstitutionalized Racism– What Would You Do part 1What Would You Do part 1– What Would You Do part 2What Would You Do part 2

Scapegoat TheoryScapegoat Theory– Blame others for when things go wrong for usBlame others for when things go wrong for us– Tendency is to blame a Tendency is to blame a ““weakerweaker”” group/group in minority group/group in minority– e.g. antisemitism during the plague or during the economic e.g. antisemitism during the plague or during the economic

depression of the 1920s and 1930s in Europedepression of the 1920s and 1930s in Europe

Inducing Prejudice: Jane Inducing Prejudice: Jane ElliotElliot

Elementary education teacher Jane Elementary education teacher Jane Elliot wanted to teach her class about Elliot wanted to teach her class about discrimination after the assassination discrimination after the assassination of Martin Luther King.of Martin Luther King.

She designed an experiment to show She designed an experiment to show how easily children could be how easily children could be transformed into prejudiced monsters.transformed into prejudiced monsters.

A Class Divided: video on ElliotA Class Divided: video on Elliot’’s works work (the video we watched in class)(the video we watched in class)

Reducing PrejudiceReducing Prejudice RecategorizationRecategorization

– Assumes prejudice can be linked to Assumes prejudice can be linked to categorizationcategorization, or how we group - , or how we group - usually based on stereotypesusually based on stereotypes

– Try to expand our schema for a particular groupTry to expand our schema for a particular group– What qualities are What qualities are sharedshared between between groups?groups?

Controlled processingControlled processing– Train ourselves to be more mindful of people who differ from usTrain ourselves to be more mindful of people who differ from us– Think about examples that fall outside the stereotypesThink about examples that fall outside the stereotypes

Improving contact between groupsImproving contact between groups– Group members must have equal statusGroup members must have equal status– Need one-on-one contact with other groupNeed one-on-one contact with other group– Relations are improved when groups come together to cooperateRelations are improved when groups come together to cooperate– Social norms should encourage contactSocial norms should encourage contact

Superordinate GoalsSuperordinate Goals– Goals that override differences and require Goals that override differences and require cooperativecooperative contact contact

between groupsbetween groups– First used by Muzafer Sherif (1966) in a study on two groups of boys in First used by Muzafer Sherif (1966) in a study on two groups of boys in

boy scout camp initially encouraged to be competitive with one boy scout camp initially encouraged to be competitive with one anotheranother

Interpersonal Attraction:Interpersonal Attraction:What determines whether we want to befriend someone?What determines whether we want to befriend someone?

Proximity/propinquityProximity/propinquity– We are attracted to people who are in the same space as we areWe are attracted to people who are in the same space as we are– Has the internet changed this at all?Has the internet changed this at all?

Physical attractivenessPhysical attractiveness– We like physically attractive people because being with hot We like physically attractive people because being with hot

people makes us feel like we are hot, too!people makes us feel like we are hot, too!– Berscheid and Walster (1972) Berscheid and Walster (1972)

Beauty and the Best Psychology TodayBeauty and the Best Psychology Today People believe that physically attractive individuals are smarter, friendlier, People believe that physically attractive individuals are smarter, friendlier,

and generally and generally ““betterbetter”” based solely on their physical attributes! based solely on their physical attributes!

SimilaritySimilarity– In attitudes, interests, values, and backgroundIn attitudes, interests, values, and background– Opposites only attract for the short term…Opposites only attract for the short term…

Exchange: how do we reward each other?Exchange: how do we reward each other?– We like people who appreciate usWe like people who appreciate us– Should be even (reciprocity)Should be even (reciprocity)

Intimacy: how much trust and closeness is there?Intimacy: how much trust and closeness is there?– Self disclosureSelf disclosure– Should be equalShould be equal

LoveLove Similar to friendship, similarity, Similar to friendship, similarity,

proximity, attractiveness, and exchange proximity, attractiveness, and exchange all play a role.all play a role.

However, love also includes However, love also includes physiological arousal, all-encompassing physiological arousal, all-encompassing interest in each other, fantasizing about interest in each other, fantasizing about each other, and a relatively rapid swing each other, and a relatively rapid swing of emotions.of emotions.

Love also includes passion, closeness, Love also includes passion, closeness, fascination, exclusiveness, sexual fascination, exclusiveness, sexual desire, and intense caring. desire, and intense caring.

Theories of LoveTheories of Love Two main types of loveTwo main types of love

– Passionate or Romantic LovePassionate or Romantic Love Intense physiological arousal, psychological interest, Intense physiological arousal, psychological interest,

sexual desire, being sexual desire, being ““in lovein love”” Predominates in the early part of a romantic relationshipPredominates in the early part of a romantic relationship

– Companionate or Affectionate LoveCompanionate or Affectionate Love Deep, caring affection for a personDeep, caring affection for a person Necessary for relationships to succeed in the long termNecessary for relationships to succeed in the long term

SternbergSternberg’’s Triangular Theory of loves Triangular Theory of love– Complete or consummate love occurs when all 3 of Complete or consummate love occurs when all 3 of

the following are presentthe following are present Intimacy: closeness/connectednessIntimacy: closeness/connectedness Passion: physical and sexual attractionPassion: physical and sexual attraction Commitment: cognition of loving someone/long-term Commitment: cognition of loving someone/long-term

maintenance of relationshipmaintenance of relationship

AggressionAggression Aggression is behavior intended to hurt or Aggression is behavior intended to hurt or

destroydestroy Biological InfluencesBiological Influences

– Genetic InfluencesGenetic Influences Animals bred for aggressionAnimals bred for aggression Identical twin correlationIdentical twin correlation

– Neural InfluencesNeural Influences Amygdala in limbic system triggers itAmygdala in limbic system triggers it Frontal cortex inhibits itFrontal cortex inhibits it Damage to or immaturity of frontal cortex?Damage to or immaturity of frontal cortex?

– Biochemical InfluencesBiochemical Influences Testosterone levels and behavior – a 2-way Testosterone levels and behavior – a 2-way

streetstreet AlcoholAlcohol

AggressionAggression

Psychosocial Causes of AggressionPsychosocial Causes of Aggression– Frustration-Aggression PrincipleFrustration-Aggression Principle– ReinforcementReinforcement– OstracismOstracism– Exposure to violent television or Exposure to violent television or

video games (disproving catharsis video games (disproving catharsis hypothesis)hypothesis)

LeadershipLeadership Great person theoryGreat person theory

– Personal qualities qualify one to leadPersonal qualities qualify one to lead Right place-right time theoryRight place-right time theory

– Circumstances are optimal for individual with Circumstances are optimal for individual with particular characteristicsparticular characteristics

FielderFielder’’s Contingency Theorys Contingency Theory– Depends on the traits of the leader, the Depends on the traits of the leader, the

circumstances, and the interaction of the group circumstances, and the interaction of the group itself.itself.

– Task-Oriented vs. Relationship Oriented Task-Oriented vs. Relationship Oriented LeadersLeaders

– In extreme circumstances – very good or very In extreme circumstances – very good or very bad – best to be task oriented. bad – best to be task oriented.

– In moderate circumstances, best to be In moderate circumstances, best to be relationship oriented.relationship oriented.