Attributions Flashcards
1
Q
Three Ways we make sense of the world
A
- We rely on (imperfect) memory
- We make causal attributions
- We form impressions of others
2
Q
Short-term memory
A
- Information and input that is currently activated and maintained
- 7 plus or minus 2 (or maybe 4 plus or minus 1); hold 7 bits of info active and maintained w/o decay or loss
- Info cannot be manipulated
- Rehearsal maintains info internally and externally
- Involves the PFC
3
Q
Working Memory
A
Manipulation and attention to activated information (amenable to manipulation); involves PFC
4
Q
Long-term Memory
A
Information from past experience that may or may not be currently activated (stored/encoded to be retrieved); involves hippocampus
5
Q
Process of forming memories
A
- Encode -> Rehearse -> Consolidate -> Retrieve
- Sensory information is taken in and kept in STM, which is associated with front areas of brain
- With consolidation it gets stored in the LTM through a process involving the hippocampus
- It can be recalled later, helped by the process of rehearsal
6
Q
HM
A
- Henry Molaison (1926-2008)
- Resected/Removed Medial Temporal Lobe (Hippocampus) bilaterally in surgery
- Post surgery was unable to form new memories
- Could rehearse and repeat information to maintain it but as soon as it was no longer active (after rehearsal), would lose info completely
- Could learn new skills through practice (procedural memory), like the mirror task which he would get better at every time even though he believed it was the first time each time
7
Q
How do we remember
A
- Memory is a reconstructive process (rebuilding info we are reusing)
- Information retrieval is influenced by biases, schemas, motives, and goals which change and shape it as it is recalled, like with perceptions (the context we are in affects it)
- It is easier to remember schema-consistent information, as schemas guide reconstruction
- Information that is highly inconsistent with schemas may be processed more thoroughly (engage more depth of processing consequently makes it easier to recall)
8
Q
Mood-congruent memory
A
People are more likely to remember positive information when in a positive mood and negative information when in a negative mood (general rosy recollection bias, w bias for (self-relevant) positive things especially); to remember best you need to put yourself in same schema and mood to remember schema best
9
Q
The misinformation effect
A
- The process by which cues that are given after an event can plant false information into memory and change it so much it becomes false/made up
- Loftus and her colleagues (1978) illustrated how the phrasing of a question can lead someone to remember seeing smth like broken glass even if it was not present or alter the intensity of an event like a car crash; changing phrases or cues alters how someone recalls
10
Q
Application of Misinformation Effect
A
- The use of eyewitness testimony is often the most influential piece of trial evidence (false confessions from ppl saying they’re guilty when they’re not)
- Recollection of events can be influenced by how questioning is conducted
- False confessions can be coerced and fully believed by the ‘confessor’
11
Q
Availability Heuristic
A
- Judging the frequency of an event based on the ease w which it is brought to mind (how often does smth happen impacted by how easy it comes to mind)
- Tversky & Kahneman (1973) asked Ps whether there are more words that start with R or words with R as the third letter and Ps voted more for the former which is wrong
- It is easier to recall R-words than words w “r” as the third letter
- Seen also with medical student syndrom when learning about symptoms and diseases/disorders
12
Q
Ease of Retrieval
A
- Judge how frequently an event occurs on the basis of how easily they can retrieve a certain number of instances of that event (difficulty level in recalling # of events)
- Schwarz et al. 1991 asking Ps to come up w either 6 or 12 examples when they were assertive
13
Q
Perceptions of Others
A
- Go beyond what and how and understand why ppl act and feel and think the way they do
- It helps us understand others, know what to expect and how to navigate the social world
- To understand, we look for causes (compassionate/thug/crazy or situational?)
14
Q
Attribution Theories
A
- Describe how ppl explain the causes of their own and others’ behaviours
- We make causal attributions about many aspects of our own lives and others’, using often automatic and rapid (experiential) processes
- Example of attributing stories or characteristics to geometric shapes
15
Q
Automatic Processes in Causal Attribution
A
- Causal schema comes from two primary sources: personal experiences and general cultural knowledge (gained from socialization)
- When events don’t readily fit a causal schema we rely on what is salient or highly accessible to fill in the gaps, using “top of the head phenomenon”
16
Q
Internal Attribution (disposition)
A
- A person’s behaviour was caused by smth internal, such as their attitudes, character or personality (thug, weird, compassionate)
17
Q
External attributions (situation)
A
A person’s behaviour was caused by smth external, such as the situation; assume that most other ppl in that same situation would behave similarly due to the power of the situation
18
Q
Stability of Cause
A
- Stable (a person’s behaviour is reliably caused by the same thing and likely to repeat in similar situations in the future)
- Unstable (a person’s behaviour is not reliably caused by the same thing or likely to repeat in similar situations in the future
19
Q
Why are these dimensions important
A
These dimensions can combine in different ways to lead to treating ppl differently; they determine our own behaviour
20
Q
Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE)
A
- Also known as Correspondence Bias
- We overestimate the extent to which others’ behaviour is due to internal, dispositional factors and we underestimate the role of situational factors
- Behaviour we often believe corresponds to disposition
21
Q
Jones and Harris (1967) on FAE
A
- Participants watch a debater whose arguments are either pro-Castro or anti-Castro; they are told that the debater was either given a choice on which side to debate or he had no choice; then asked what is the debater’s real attitude
- No matter whether the author had chosen or not their position, they were voted as believing what they wrote or being pro-Castro; while that makes sense for the choice condition, there is little information that could determine such an answer in the lack of choice condition and yet participants still voted
22
Q
Three Stages Model of Attribution
A
- Identification of behaviour
- Automatic dispositional inference (based on attributions)
- (IF possible) Effortful situational correction
23
Q
Gilbert, Pelham & Krull (1988) study for 3 Stage Model of Attribution
A
- Same videos of woman seeming anxious w/o sound but different subtitles (one on vacation the other on personal topics)
- Half of the participants were cognitively busy while watching the video
- Those w/o distractions rated her high for (internal) dispositional anxiety when discussing vacation but low when discussing personal topics
- Those with distractions were not able to account for discussion topics and rated her as high for dispositional anxiety
24
Q
Observer Attributions
A
- Perceptions of others’ behaviour
- We tend to attribute other ppl’s behaviour to internal reasons and assume their behaviour is caused by their disposition
25
Q
Actor Attributions
A
- Perceptions of own behaviour
- We tend to attribute our own behaviour to external reasons and assume that our behaviour is caused by the situation
26
Q
Causes of Actor/Observer Attribution Differences
A
- We want to see ourselves as flexible and that we can change according to the demands of the situation
- We also use our estimate of the personality in a self-serving way (self-serving attributions boost the self, w success its all me and with failure it is external excuses) - We understand situations better
- We realize that situations can constrain our own behaviour; we know our behaviours differ in different situations and are not due only to our disposition; there is a role of perceptual salience (see someone they’re your pov, but see environment and surroundings when looking through I self) - We fail to use info
- The situation is the first automatic attribution and then only after do we consider disposition
27
Q
Bottom-up factors
A
We watch their actions, gestures, facial expressions, and we listen to them
28
Q
How accurate are we at understanding others?
A
- Attribution Theory and Research suggest that we are often not accurate because of FAE biases (actor/observer difference and defensive, self-serving attributions)
- Impression Formation Research suggests that we can be surprisingly accurate in our assessment of personalities from the slices of information
29
Q
Top down factors
A
We use our schemas (prior knowledge/expectations)
30
Q
Dual Process Models in Impression Formation
A
- Our impressions of others are influenced by both bottom-up and top-down factors
- Recent research uses diverse methods to better understand how we form impression of others and the impact of both bottom-up and top-down factors
31
Q
Impression from bottom up
A
- Gathering individual observations of a person in order to form an overall impression, based on negativity bias, thin slices, and theory of mind
32
Q
Negativity Bias
A
- Evolutionary advantage to weighting negative behaviour more strongly
- Norm adherence failure with person-level or internal attribution or with labelling the bhvr as bad or sometimes as unique, cool, genuine, mogger (Nash’s jerk confederate study)
33
Q
Thin slices
A
- Impression formation based on ‘quick peeks’ at behaviour or physical attributes (face, 30 second video, personal space, website/social media) that is surprisingly accurate
- Can predict narcissism traits based on very little info
- Using physiognomy idea, showed cropped B&W pictures of faces and ppl could accurately predict who was more powerful, democrat or republican, mormon or non-mormon (at least 100% mormons)
34
Q
Physiognomy
A
- Body/face reflect personal characteristics; judgement on ppl’s body and face reflect personal characteristics
- Old idea based on pseudoscience and phrenology (bumps on head/skull shape demonstrate intelligence/personality)
35
Q
Why do Mormons have a 6th Mormon Sense?
A
- Generally healthier with a strict no-substance diet
- Skin is ‘shinier’
- Early leaders explained this as gift of Holy Ghost for beauty of person, form and features, and tends to health, vigor, animation and social feeling
36
Q
Theory of Mind
A
- A set of ideas about other people’s thoughts, desires, feelings, and intentions, given what we know about them and the situation they are in; using what we understand and why
- Kids can also understand that ppl have a mind of their own and do what they do based on what they know; developed around 4 or 5 y/o
- Makes us face experts too; we can read another’s mental state based on very little info (eyes)
37
Q
Mind in the Eyes
A
- Reveals a mental ability of using minute facial cues to read another’s cognitive/emotional mental state
- Useful for quickly ‘sizing-up’ others (friend or enemy, information based on environment and social situation, romantic interest)
- Ability to do this predicts emotional intelligence and belief in God
38
Q
Theory of Mind in the Brain
A
- There will be differences in brain activation when using TofM vs not
- For the social brain, there is activity in the:
- dMPFC
- The right Temporal Parietal Junction
- Precuneus/Posterior cingulate
- Anterior temporal pole
- Inferior frontal gyrus
- Posterior Superior Temporal Sulcus
- For self-referential, there is activity in the MPFC and the PCC
- There are overlaps between those two
39
Q
Mirror Neurons
A
- Certain neurons that are activated both when one performs an actions oneself and when one observes another person perform that action, helping the brain understand why a person is doing smth by replicating neuron firing to assess why you would do the same
- A perception-action link in the brain (motor response and observation)
40
Q
What are mirror neurons activated by?
A
- Activated by intention (like grasping an object) not just action
- Not just encoding of an action, but encoding another person’s goal
- Very useful for social judgements and impressions, as you see what one is doing and deduce what they want
41
Q
Mirror Neurons and ToM Simulation Theory
A
- ToM arises from mental rehearsals of behaviours and states
- Mirror neurons support this
- So does overlap between self-related and ToM-related brain regions
- Mirror neuron activity correlates with emotional empathy scales
42
Q
Impression from top down
A
- Using preconceived ideas and schemas as (part of) the basis for impression formation, like transference, false consensus and implicit personality theories
43
Q
Transference
A
- Freudian idea based on his observations in therapy for how patients would start treating him like someone else in their life (key to therapy)
- Non-psychodynamic version is moreso how we apply attributes to unfamiliar ppl from similar others, whether positive or negative
44
Q
False Consensus
A
- Another idea with Freudian associations, similar to projection
- We assume other ppl are like ourselves, perhaps based on self-related mental stimulations (we use what we know about the self to understand others)
- However, it is multi-determined by salience and accessibility (prominent schema, like self-concept), self-serving biases (consensus supports a positive view of self), and close others who are actually similar (we are attracted to similarity, as friends are actually more genetically similar than strangers (to a 4th-cousin level of similairity)
45
Q
Implicit Personality Theories
A
- Some traits are more central/influential than others to overall impressions (warm vs cold)
- Assumptions of cross-situation consistency
- Halo effect
46
Q
Halo Effect
A
The tendency of social perceivers’ assessments of an individual on a given trait to be biased by the perceivers’ more general impression of the individual (take specific trait & generalize it to the person as a whole)
47
Q
Top Down Influence Example of Eye-tracking and similarity
A
- A study on the impact of perceived similarity on face processing
- First asked participants to answer 20 items from an ambiguous personality test, then based on survey, told how their scores compared to other students whose faces they viewed (using a Likert Scale)
- While viewing the faces they wore an eye tracker to determine where they looked depending on differences and similarities
- They found a positive linear effect when looking at the eyes, a negative effect when looking at the nose and no effect for looking at the mouth
48
Q
Why is attention to the eyes related to perceived similarity?
A
- They eyes provide critical info about others (intentions, emotions, and identities)
- A greater focus on the eyes may indicate our willingness to “know” others (and see them as individuals); ie. the more we perceive similarity, the more we want to know someone better
