Chapter 13 - Behavior in a Social Context Flashcards
attributions
judgements about the causes of our own and other people’s behaviour and outcomes
personal/internal attributions
people’s behaviour is caused by their characteristics
situational/external attributions
behaviour is caused by the aspects of the situation
what type of attribution is the following:
I got an A on the exam because I have a high ability
personal/internal
what type of attribution is the following:
I got an A on the test because it was easy
situational/external
what factors affect what attribution we make?
consistency
Distinctiveness
Consensus
consistency
is the response consistent over time?
ex) if Kim says she hates art class, and two weeks later she still says she hates art class, then consistency is high
distinctiveness
is the response distinctive to that situation, or does the person demonstrate similar responses to all/many situations
ex) if Kim says she hates art class, but she doesn’t hate any other class, then distinctiveness is high
consensus
do other people agree with the behavior?
ex) if Kim hates art class, and other students also hate art class, then consensus is high
what attributional factors lead to personal attribution?
high consistency
Low distinctiveness
Low consensus
what attributional factors lead to situational attribution
high consistency
High distinctiveness
High consensus
fundamental attribution error
when it comes to explaining other people’s behavior, underestimating the impact of the situation and overestimating the role of personal factors
what can reduce the fundamental attribution error?
when people have time to reflect on their judgments
When people are highly motivated to be careful
self serving bias
attributing successes to personal factors and attributing failures to situational factors
what type of attributional pattern do depressed people display?
opposite of self-serving bias
Taking little credit for successes and much credit for failures
how does culture affect attribution of other people’s behaviour
people from individualistic cultures tend to attribute other people’s behaviour to personal factors
People from collectivistic cultures tend to attribute other people’s behaviour to situational factors
how does culture affect attribution of our own behaviour
collectivistic cultures – take less credit for success, more for failures
individualistic cultures – take more credit for successes, less for failures
primacy effect
we tend to attach more importance to the initial information that we learn about a person
T/F because of the primacy effect, we can’t overcome our initial impressions of a person
false
New info can change your opinion, but it has to “work harder “
why does new information have to work harder to overcome initial impression?
we are most alert to information we receive first
Initial info can shape how we perceive subsequent info
in terms of evolutionary psychology, explain why we are most alert to initial information
evaluating stimuli quickly was adaptive for survival
how can primacy effects be reduced
when we are asked to avoid making snap judgments
We are reminded to carefully consider evidence
We are made to feel accountable for our judgements
stereotype
A generalized believe about a group of people
self fulfilling prophecy
when your expectations lead you to act towards others in a way that brings about what you expected
ex: if you expect the host of the party to be cold and aloof, your behaviour towards them may change in subtle ways, that results in “confirming” what you thought
attitude
positive or negative reaction towards a stimulus
what are the three broad factors under which attitudes best predict behaviour
when counteracting situational factors are weak, attitude influences behaviour more strongly
When we are aware of attitude and hold them strongly, it has a greater influence on behavior
General attitudes are good at predicting general behavior. Specific attitudes are good at predicting specific behaviour
Theory of cognitive dissonance
when two or more of a persons cognitions contradict one another, they are uncomfortable and become motivated to reduce the dissonance
counterattitudinal behaviour
behaviour that is inconsistent with our attitude
T/F counter attitudinal behaviour always produces dissonance
false
Produces dissonance only if we perceive that our actions were freely chosen, not coerced
when is dissonance maximized
when the behaviour threatens our sense of self worth or produces negative consequences that were foreseeable
how can dissonance be reduced?
1) rationalizing that their attitude/behavior wasn’t important
2) find external justification
3) making other excuses
self perception theory
we make inferences about our own attitudes by observing how we behave
according to self perception theory, why does counter attitudinal behaviour produce attitude change?
because you observe how you’ve acted, and infer how you must have felt in order to have behaved that way
persuasion components
communicator Message Channel Audience Context
components of credibility
expertise
Trustworthiness
communicator characteristics that increase persuasiveness
communicator credibility
two-sided approach
when presenting an argument, it is easier to persuade someone if you show them both sides of the issue
message characteristics that increase persuasiveness
two-sided approach
Moderate discrepancy
Moderate fear
moderate discrepancy
it is easier to persuade the audience if you present a position that’s only slightly different from their viewpoint
moderate fear
arousing fear to persuade can be effective when it evokes moderate fear and provides low-cost ways to reduce the threat
two routes to persuasion
central route to persuasion
peripheral route to persuasion
Central route to persuasion
people think carefully about the message, are influenced because they find the arguments compelling
peripheral route to persuasion
people don’t scrutinize the message, are influenced by other factors, such as speakers attractiveness, message’s emotional appeal
which persuasion route leads to longer lasting attitude change?
Central route
under what conditions will someone follow the central route
message is personally relevant
they have high need for cognition
they are uncertainty orientated
characteristics of uncertainty orientated people
look for a new information, particularly in new/unpredictable situations
under what conditions does the mere presence of other people enhance performance?
The task is simple/well learned
under what conditions does the mere presence of other people impair performance?
when the task is difficult/complex
social facilitation
an increased tendency to perform ones dominant response in the mere presence of others
social norms
shared expectations about how people should think, feel, and behave
social role
A set of norms that characterizes how people in a given social position ought to behave
role conflict
The norms accompanying different roles clash
are norms the same across all cultures?
no
Social norms are arbitrary
conformity
The adjustment of individual behaviors, attitudes, and believes to a group standard
informational social influence
we follow the opinion/behavior of others because we believe that they have accurate knowledge and what they’re doing is “right”
normative social influence
we conform to be accepted by others and avoid rejection
factors that affect conformity
Group size
Presence of a dissenter
at what group size are participants likely to conform
four or five
what happens to conformity when the consequences of being incorrect are higher?
conformity decreases
under what conditions is the minority most likely to influence the majority
The minority is:
Highly committed to their point of view
Independent in the face of majority pressure
Consistent over time
Appear to keep an open mind
milgrams experiment
participants controlled the amount of voltage administered to an actor. even if the actor screamed, and the participant was uncomfortable with continuing, they would continue if the experimenter told them to
factors that influence destructive obedience
1) remoteness of the victim
2) closeness/legitimacy of authority figure
3) cog in a wheel
4) personal characteristics
norm of reciprocity
when someone treats us well, we should respond in kind
door in the face technique
making a large request, expecting it to be rejected
Then making a smaller request, which is more likely to be accepted
foot in the door technique
The persuader gets you to comply with the small request first
Later presents a larger request
lowballing
persuader get you to commit some action, but before you actually perform the behavior, they increase the “cost” of that same behaviour
what are the four common compliance techniques
norm of reciprocity
Door in the face technique
Foot in the door technique
Lowballing
deindividuation
Loss of individuality that leads to disinhibited behaviour
social loafing
The tendency for people to expend less effort when working in a group than when working alone
collective effort model
on a collective task, people put forth effort only to the extent that they expect their effort to contribute to obtaining a valued goal
factors that increase likeliness of social loafing
1) people believe that individual performance isn’t being monitored
2) The task/goal has less value/meaning to the person
3) The group is less important to the person
4) The task is simple, the person’s input is redundant
does social loafing occur more in all male groups or all female grips?
all male groups
does social loafing occur more strongly in individualistic cultures or collectivistic cultures
individualistic
Group polarization
when a group of like-minded people discuss an issue, the “average” opinion of the members tends to become more extreme
causes of group polarization
normative social influence
Informational social influence
normative social influence
individuals are motivated to adopt a more extreme position to gain the groups approval
informational social influence
during discussions, people hear arguments that support their position, that they had not previously considered, further cementing their beliefs
groupthink
The tendency for group members to suspend critical thinking because they are striving to seek agreement
causes of groupthink
1) high stress to reach a decision
2) Insulated from outside input
3) directive leader who promotes their personal agenda
4) high cohesion
symptoms of groupthink
1) illusion of invulnerability
2) pressure on dissenters
3) self censorship
4) illusion of unanimity
5) self appointed mind guards
consequences of groupthink
1) incomplete survey of alternatives
2) incomplete survey of objectives
3) failure to examine risks of preferred choice
4) Poor information search
5) failure to reappraise alternatives
according to evolutionary viewpoints, why are humans such social creatures?
individuals who were predisposed to affiliate were more likely to survive and reproduce than those who are reclusive
four basic reasons that we affiliate
1) obtain positive stimulation
2) receive emotional support
3) gain attention
4) permit social comparison
social comparison
comparing our beliefs, feelings, and behaviours with those of other people in order to determine whether our responses are “normal”
how does fear influence affiliation
fear inducing situations increase our desire to be with others
how and why does proximity influence affiliation and attraction?
proximity increases chance of encounters, contributing to mere exposure effect
we interact more with people who are physically closer
mere exposure effect
repeated exposure to a stimulus tends to increase our liking for it
support for “birds of a feather flock together”
people are most often attracted to others who are similar to themselves
do “opposites attract”?
not really
These relationships don’t last as long
Increased risk of “fatal attractions”
fatal attractions
we initially find some characteristic of another person appealing, but over time we come to dislike it
does physical attractiveness have an affect on affiliation
yes
In an experiment, people’s desire to date the partners they met depended more on the partners physical attractiveness than on any other characteristic
what are two factors that may underlie the desire to affiliate more with attractive people
1) “What’s beautiful is good”; we often assume that attract people have more positive characteristics
2) we are often judged by the company we keep, so we may prefer to associate with attractive people to boost self-esteem
matching effect
we are more likely to date someone of equal attractiveness
social exchange theory
course of our relationship is governed by rewards and costs
outcome of relationship
words - costs
what standards are outcomes evaluated against
comparison level
Comparison level for alternatives
comparison level
The outcome that a person has grown to expect in relationships
comparison level for alternatives
focusses on potential alternatives to the relationship
what do males prefer in a mate
physical attractiveness
Domestic skills
Younger mates
More likely to pursue more short term romantic encounters
what do females prefer in a mate
earning potential
Status
Ambitiousness
older mate
passionate love
intense emotion, arousal, and yearning for the partner
companionate love
affection, deep caring about partners well-being, commitment to being there for each other
triangular theory of love
intimacy, commitment, passion
consummate love
Love that occurs when intimacy, passion, and commitment are all present
cognitive arousal model of love
when we experience high arousal in the presence of someone we perceive as attractive, we may conclude that we are “falling in love”
transfer of excitation
arousal due to one source is misattributed as being due to another source
prejudice
negative attitude towards people in a certain group
discrimination
treating people unfairly based on the group to which they belong
cognitive processes that foster prejudice
categorization
stereotypes
how does categorization foster prejudice
leads to the perception of in groups and out groups
what types of biases do we display because of in groups and out groups
in group favoritism
out Group derogation
Outgroup homogeneity
in group favouritism
A tendency to favour in group members and attribute more positive qualities to “us”
Outgroup derogation
tendency to attribute more negative qualities to “them”
outgroup homogeneity
we tend to see members of outgroups as all being the same
what are the motivational roots of prejudice
competition and conflict
enhancing self-esteem
realistic conflict theory
competition for limited resources fosters prejudice
T/F a threat to one’s personal welfare is the prime motivator for prejudice
false
research says prejudice is triggered a perceived threat to ones ingroup
social identity theory
prejudice stems from a need to enhance our self esteem
stereotype threat
stereotypes make stereotyped group members fear that they will “live up” to the stereotype
ex: the stereotype of “all asians are good at math” can make an asian person afraid to get interested in math, in fear that they’re living up to the stereotype
how do self fulfilling prophecies and stereotype threat perpetuate prejudice
if someone believes a stereotype/has a prejudice about another group, they will act in such a way that confirms their beliefs about the people in that group
ex: a racist interviewer treats black applicants differently; sits further back, shorter interviews. this can make the black person perform more poorly bc of stereotype threat
equal status contract
prejudice between ppl is most likely to be reduced when they
1) have sustained close contact
2) have equal status
3) work to achieve a common goal
4) are supported by broad social norms
did de-segregation of american schools reduce prejudice against black people? why or why not?
no
conditions of equal status contact were not met
cooperative learning programs
children are put into multiracial learning groups where close contact is sustained and they all have to work together
results of “shooter bias” study
participants (black and white) were more likely to shoot unarmed suspects who were black
norm of social responsibility
people should help others and contribute to the welfare of society
pro social behaviour
helping others
how does social learning influence prosocial behaviour
norm of reciprocity and social responsibility
we are reinforced when we adhere, met with disapproval when we don’t
so we internalize these norms as own own values, and they enable self reinforcers
self reinforcers
pride, self praise, feelings of satisfaction
empathy altruism hypothesis
altruism does exist, and it is produced by empathy
empathy
putting yourself in someone else’s shoes
negative state relief model
high empathy makes us feel distressed over others’ suffering, so to reduce our own distress, we help them
five step process of bystander intervention
1) notice an event
2) interpret the event as an emergency
3) assume responsibility for helping
4) know how to help
5) decide to help
how do we decide if an event is an emergency?
engaging in social comparison
social comparison
we look around to see how others are responding, and act the same way as them
diffusion of responsibility
if others are present, you can feel like someone else will help, so you don’t have to
why might someone decide not to help?
because of the perceived costs of helping
ex: physical danger, appearing foolish
bystander effect
the presence of multiple bystanders inhibits a persons tendency to help
what factors increase our likeliness to help
1) good mood
2) pre-existing guilt
3) observing helpful role model
4) lack of time pressure
what factors increase a persons likeliness to receive our help
1) similarity - if they’re like us, we’re more likely to help them
2) gender - women more likely to receive help than males from male bystanders
3) perceived responsibility - ppl who are perceived as not responsible for their situation are more likely to be helped (ppl who are homeless from natural disaster vs. ppl who are homeless from not working)
like
just world hypothesis
the belief that the world is fair, and ppl get what they deserve
so, “rape victims deserved to get raped”
T/F mandatory volunteerism increases prosocial behaviour
~
no definitive results, we don’t quite know
what is the evolutionary basis of aggression?
aggression at appropriate times helped our ancestors compete successfully for mates, resources, and fighting back
what brain regions play a role in agression?
hypothalamus
amygdala
frontal lobes
what body chemicals play a role in aggression
serotonin
do highly aggressive people have higher or lower frontal lobe activity?
lower
what body chemicals and levels play a role in aggression
low serotonin
high testosterone
frustration – aggression hypothesis
frustration leads to aggression
All aggression is the result of frustration
is the frustration – aggression hypothesis correct?
no, these assertions have been disproved
people don’t always respond to frustration with aggression, they can exhibit despair, resignation, etc.
aggression can be increased by a wide range of aversive stimuli
identify some major types of environmental stimuli that increase the risk of aggression
painful stimuli
Provocation
Crowding
Heat
discuss how reinforcement contributes to aggression
children whose aggressive behaviour produced positive outcomes were more likely to be aggressive in the future
Children whose aggressive behaviour produced negative outcomes were less likely to be aggressive in the future
how does modelling contribute to aggression
in the Bobo doll experiment, children learned how to be aggressive
what cognitive factors determine whether we will respond to a stimulus aggressively
1) we perceive their behaviour as intentional
2) Low empathy
3) inability to regulate our emotions
principle of catharsis
performing an act of aggression discharges aggressive energy and temporarily reduces our impulse to aggress
support for the principle of catharsis
people with overcontrolled hostility, show little immediate reaction to provocation, but then after time, they can erupt into violence after a trivial provocation
according to the social learning viewpoint, what role does media violence play in regulating human aggression
media violence increases the tendency of people to behave aggressively
based on research, how does media violence affects people’s behaviour and attitude’s?
viewers learn new aggressive behaviours through modeling
Viewers come to believe that aggression is rewarded/rarely punished
Viewers become desensitized to violence and suffering
Viewers have an increased fear of becoming a target of crime/violence
