+

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGYChapter 18

+SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

■The scientific study of how individuals’ thoughts, feelings and behaviors are influenced by others

+ SOCIAL THINKING (Cognition)

■The way we gather, use and interpret information about the social aspects of the world around us

■Amateur scientists trying to figure out why people act the way they do

■Handout-celebrities

+Attribution theory

■How people determine the cause of what they observe■Actor-observer effect-tendency to attribute own behavior (we are the actor) to external causes (situational), but others (people we observe) to internal (dispositional) factors

+

+ 7

+Fundamental Attribution Error■Our tendency to overestimate internal (dispositional) causes of other’s behavior while ignoring external causes (situational)

+

Self Serving Bias

■Tendency to take credit for our success (dispositional) and blame our failures on the situation

+ 13

+Just World Phenomenon

■Blame the victim

+False Consensus Effect

+Compliance Strategies

■Foot in the door■Door in the face■Norms of reciprocity (clip)

+ Why do our actions affect our attitudes?

■Leon Festinger

+Cognitive dissonance

■To reduce tension created by opposing actions and beliefs, a person will modify either the actions or the beliefs to create cognitive consistency

20

+Social Influence

■Self-fulfilling prophecy■Conformity■Obedience

Social Influence

■Self-fulfilling prophecy■Rosenthal’s “Harvard bloomers study”

23

Normative Social Influence v Informational?

+ SOCIAL INFLUENCE

■Solomon Asch-conformity study

+ Reasons for Conformity■ We are made to feel incompetent or insecure

■ The group has at least 3 people

■ The group is unanimous-a single dissident increases social courage

■ We admire the group’s status and attractiveness

■ We have made no prior commitment to any response

■ Others in the group observe our behavior

■ Our culture strongly encourages respect for social standards

+

Role Playing

■Zimbardo’s prison experiment

+Group Dynamics

■Cohesiveness■Pressure■Norms■Roles

+ Group influence on decision making

■Social facilitation■Social inhibition/impairment■Social loafing■Group polarization■Groupthink■Deindividuation

+ Group Influence

■Social Facilitation■Social impairment (inhibition)

+ Social Loafing■The more people there are, the less effort

they exert■Correlation?

+Social Loafing■Happens when people think■ the rest of the group isn’t pulling their weight ■ others are less skilled or less motivated

■Avoid it by making individuals feel responsible for group’s results.

+Snack Preferences

+Group polarization

■ Like minded individuals’ beliefs become more extreme after discussion

■ NOT conformity, peer pressure

+Groupthink

+Groupthink

■ Irving Janis

■The tendency for some groups to make bad decisions■Highly cohesive groups■There is a distinct and directive leader■Group is isolated from other influences■There is time pressure or intense stress■Leader already has mind made up

+

■ How are group polarization and groupthink different?

+Deindividuation■If you could do anything …

+Deindividuation

■Anti-social-36%■Non-normative-19%■Neutral-36%■Prosocial (helping)-9%

+Deindividuation

■(loss of individuality)■The loss of self-awareness and self-restraint occurring in group situations that foster ■anonymity■group size■arousal

+ 46

+Bias-us versus them

■Ingroup■Outgroup

+ Ingroup

+Bias consequences

■Scapegoat theory-blaming an entire outgroup for social or economic frustrations■Ethnocentrism-judging a person’s own ethnic, racial or national group as best and judging outgroups by that standard

Social Learning Theory

■Children learn prejudice and stereotypes by watching their parents■Assumes it can be unlearned by watching other role models

52

+ Intergroup Relations and Prejudice

■Stereotypes■Prejudice■Discrimination

+ Intergroup Relations and Prejudice

■Stereotypes-belief■Prejudice-attitude (-/+)■Discrimination-behavior

■Implicit prejudice (unknown to self)■Harvard implicit prejudice test

+Reducing prejudice

■Contact theory■Contact between hostile groups will

reduce animosity BUT only if the groups are made to work towards a goal that benefits all

+ Sherif-Camp Study

Sherif Study■Create bond-ingroup bias

■Competition/frustration

■Cooperation-superordinate goals

60

+Contact Research■Aronson■Jigsaw classroom

+Prosocial Behavior

■Altruism

+ Kitty Genovese murder

+ Research

■Darley and Latane■Bystander Intervention■Diffusion of responsibility ■ (70% alones, 7% w/ others)

■Pluralistic ignorance

+

+Attraction

■Proximity **■Similarity■Physical attractiveness■Familiarity (mere exposure effect)■Reciprocal Liking

+ Lonely Hearts Club

■ Shy and Single-Long Island, Jewish, professional (32) seeks long term relationship. I enjoy music (folk and rock), the outdoors, reading, and sushi

■ Come Build a Future With Me-Suburban Chicago, carpenter looking for a companion (25-35) for friendship and more. Favorite activities include concerts, dining and athletics.

■ Alone in the City That Never Sleeps-Manhattan business executive ready to settle down. I love pets and children and like to travel, go to movies and read.

■ Life of the Party Seeks Partner-Single secretary in San Francisco looking for life partner. I am ambitious, vivacious, and delicious. I enjoy yoga, jogging and creative pursuits.

+ Persuasion Elaboration Likelihood Model

■Peripheral route

■Central route

■ Create a short sales pitch utilizing one of the above methods. Audience will identify method

+ Persuasion Elaboration Likelihood Model

■Peripheral route-pairs superficial + factors that leads to less stable change in attitude

■Central route-stable change by carefully analyzing facts, stats and other info

+ Aggression

Hostile aggression is ‘hot’, impulsive behavior motivated by a desire to hurt someone

Instrumental aggression is ‘cold’, premeditated behavior used as a means to some other end