Chapter 13 - behaviour in a social context Flashcards
Perceiving the causes of behaviour
Attributions
Attributions
Judgments about causes of our own
and other people’s behaviour and outcomes
• Did this happen because of X or because of Y?
• Affect our subsequent behaviour and emotions
Kelly’s Theory
- Situational attribution = all 3 high
* Personal attribution = consistency high, consensus & distinctiveness low
In Kellys theory, attributional factors
- Consistency
- Distinctiveness
- Consensus
Fundamental Attribution Error
•Explaining others’ behaviour:
- Underestimate impact of situational factors
- Overestimate role of personal factors
- Even when informed role was assigned
- Situational information was ignored
Does fundemtal attribution error apply to ourselves, why or why not
No.
Have more information about ourselves •Others are ‘figure’
•We are ‘background’ - situation stands out
How to explain our own behaviours
Self serving bias
Self-serving bias
- More personal attributions for successes
- More situational attributions for failures
- Strength depends on psychological state & culture
- Depressed people = more personal attributions for failures
Individualistic cultures have more __________ attributions and collective take more ____________
Personal
Responsibility for failures
Primacy effect: First impressions
- Attach more importance to initial information
- Tend to be most alert to information received first
- Initial information may shape how we perceive subsequent info
Decrease primacy effect?
By telling ppl to not make snap judgments and consider evidenced, make them accountable
What are stereotypes
They are schemas
Attitude-behaviour relationship strongest when:
- Situational factors are weak
- Are aware of attitudes & they are strongly held • Think about attitudes before acting
- Attitudes predict general rather than specific classes of behaviour
Theory of Planned Behaviour
• Intention to engage in behaviour
Intention to engage in behaviour is strongest when:
- Positive attitude toward behaviour
- Subjective norms (perceptions) support attitudes
- Belief that behaviour is under personal control
• Cognitive Dissonance Theory
- Strive for consistency in cognitions
- Two inconsistent cognitions = cognitive dissonance
- Dissonance leads to motivation to change one cognition or add new cognitions
Counterattitudinal behaviour
- Inconsistent with one’s attitude
* Produces dissonance if freely chosen
Does dissonance always lead to attitude change, why or why not
- Does not always lead to attitude change
* E.g., Rationalize behaviour - external justifications
Self-perception theory
Make inferences about own attitudes by
observing own behaviour
• Infer how we must feel from how we act
Between self perception and cognitive dissonance, which is more effective
Cognitive dissonance. But if mono phiological arousal (tension) then self perception
Three Aspects of Persuasion Process
- Communicator
- Message
- Audience
Communicator credibility
- How believable the communicator is
* Often is the key to effective persuasion
The Message
- Two-sided refutational approaches most effective
* Perceived as less biased
Extreme or moderate arguments
- If audience disagrees moderate degree of discrepancy with their view is best
- Fear arousal works best when message invokes moderate-strong fear and low-cost ways to reduce threat
Central route to persuasion
• Think carefully (need for cognition) about message and find arguments compelling (relevance)
- last longer
- predict future Behaviour better
Peripheral route to persuasion
• Influenced by other factors than message arguments
Social Facilitation
•Increased tendency to perform one’s dominant response in presence of others
- Typically correct when task is easy
- Typically incorrect when task is hard
Social Norms
• Shared expectations about how people should think, feel, and behave
• Regulate daily behaviour without conscious
awareness (hinder or enhance performance)
Norms & Roles Can cause
uncharacteristic behaviour
Social Roles Consists of a set of norms that characterize how people in a social position ought to
behave
• Role conflict = norms for different roles clash
For norm formation, Have need for common
standards for behaviour & judgment
• Both in cultures & small groups
What’s essential for forms to influence people?
Conformity
Adjustment of:
Will give you conformity
- Individual behaviours
- Attitudes
- Beliefs
Why Do People Conform?
- Informational social influence
* Normative Social Influence
Informational social influence
• Conformity because we believe others have accurate knowledge & are “right”
Normative Social Influence
• Conforming to obtain rewards & avoid rejection
Factors That Affect Conformity •
- Group size
At least 5
• Presence of a dissenter
At least one reduces conformity
• Type of culture
Greater in collectivist cultures
• Gender
No differences in conformity
Minority Influence Strongest When
- Commit to point of view
- Consistent, independent in face pressure
- Open mind
Milgram’s experiment
• Deliver a shock when a
mistake was made
• Mistakes deliberately made - no shocks actually delivered but • Participant did not know this! • How far would they go?
65% obeyed to highest
level of shock value! • No gender differences
Factors That Influence Destructive Obedience
- Remoteness of victim
- Closeness & legitimacy of authority figure
- Cog in a wheel (Someone else doing ‘dirty work’)
• Personal characteristics
(Political orientation, occupation, religious beliefs etc)
Detecting and Resisting Compliance Techniques
• Norm of Reciprocity
• Door-in-the-face-technique
• Foot-in-the-door-technique
- Lowballing
Crowd Behaviour and Deindividuation
Key?
Anonymity to outsider, loss of accountability = deindividuation
Social loafing more common in
all-male than in all-female or mixed
groups
• Occurs more in individualistic cultures
Causes for social loafing:
- Individual performance is not being monitored
- Goal or task has little value / meaning
- Task is simple & person’s effort is redundant
Group Polarization
- ‘going to extremes’
* ‘average’ opinion of group becomes more extreme
Causes of Group Polarization
- Normative social influence: Gain group’s approval
* Informational social influence: Information validates position
Groupthink
• Tendency of group members to suspend critical thinking because they are striving to seek agreement
Groupthink Causes
- High stress to make decision
- Insulation from outside input
- Directive leader who promotes his or her personal agenda
- High group cohesion
Can groupthink be avoided?
• Critical thinking, outsiders, subgroups
Affiliation – Four Psychological Reasons
- Obtain positive stimulation
- Receive emotional support
- Gain attention
- Social comparison:
• Comparison of beliefs, feelings, & behaviour to others
•Determine if our responses are “normal”
What effects our need for affiliations?
- high need for affiliation = friends
- sense of community
- fear : increase desire to be with others. (In tragedies ppl get along and support each to her)
Initial attraction
- physical proximity
- mere exposure effect
- similarities: birds of a feather
(opposites attract also tho?)
Attraction
Matching affect
Similarity-attraction
Similarity-attraction
• Attracted to people who are similar to us
Moderately feminized faces perceived as the
most attractive
How do relationships becomes deeper and broader
Self disclosure
• Importance of Self-Disclosure
- Key role in fostering close relationships
- Sharing of innermost thoughts and feelings
- Fosters intimacy & trust, which in turn foster more self disclosure
Social exchange theory
• Course of a relationship is governed by rewards and costs that the partners experience
Comparison level for alternatives
- Focus is on potential alternatives
* Influences commitment
Comparison level leads to
Satisfaction with relationship
Comparison level for alternatives
Commitment to relationship
Triangular theory of love
- Intimacy: Closeness, sharing, valuing one’s partner
- Passion: Feelings of romance, physical attraction, sexual desire
- Commitment: Decision to remain in relationship
7 Types of Love
• Consummate love (middle of triangle) = Intimacy, Passion & Commitment
- liking (intimacy alone)
- romantic (intimacy+passion)
- compassionate (intimacy+commitment)
- infatuation (passion alone)
- fatuous (passion+commitment)
- empty (commitment alone)
The Cognitive-Arousal Model: Why Does My Heart Pound?
Transfer of excitation
- Arousal due to one source is misattributed to another
- Misinterpreted as ‘love’
Amount of anger expressed in lab interactions predict stability or happiness?
No
Making Close Relationships Work
Need more than passion!
• Intimacy, self-disclosure, commitment
Cognitive roots of prejudice
Categorization - “us-them” thinking
More negative qualities to out-group
• Out-group homogeneity bias
•‘They’ are more similar; all alike
When individuals contradict our stereotypes, we can:
- Change the stereotype
- Explain person as an exceptional case
- Explain behavior using situational causes
Motivational Roots of Prejudice
- Realistic Conflict Theory
* Social Identity Theory
• Social Identity Theory
Prejudice stems from a need to enhance self-esteem
Realistic Conflict Theory
Competition for limited resources fosters prejudice
How Prejudice Confirms Itself
- Self-fulfilling prophecies
* Stereotype threat
• Stereotype threat
• Stereotypes create self consciousness and a fear that they will live up to others’ stereotypes
Self-fulfilling prophecies
• Discriminatory behaviour causes others to behave in a way that confirms our stereotypes
Reducing Discrimination
- Equal status contact
- Sustained close contact
- Equal status of both groups
- Work to achieve a common goal that requires cooperation
- Supported by broader social norms
Social Learning & Cultural Influences
- Norm of Reciprocity
* Norm of Social Responsibility
Socialization
• Children act more pro-socially if taught empathy
Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis
- Empathy = ability to share another’s experience
* Empathy produces altruism
Negative state relief model
- Self-focused goal not altruistic one
- High empathy causes distress when others suffer
- Reduced personal feelings of distress
Bystander intervention: Issues in the 5 step process
Decide if it’s an emergency
- Use of social comparison
- Do others think this is an emergency
Assume responsibility to intervene
- Multiple bystanders may inhibit tendency to help
- Diffusion of responsibility
Act or not - depends on self-efficacy
- Confidence in dealing with situation
Just-world hypothesis
- Want to perceive world as fair
* Can lead us to perceive that some people ‘get what they deserve’
Who do we help
We help ppl similar to us.
- or just-world hypothesis
Increasing Pro-Social Behaviour
• Exposing people to pro-social models
• Encouraging feelings of empathy & connectedness to others
• Learning about factors that hinder bystander
intervention
Hypothalamus and aggression
- Stimulating hypothalamus = aggressive behaviours
* Destruction = decrease in aggression
Amagdala linked to aggreesive behaviour?
Yes
Murderers have
- lower activity in the Frontal lobes
- low serotonin
- high testosterone
Frustration-aggression hypothesis
- Frustration leads to aggression
- Aggression is result of frustration
- No longer accepted cuz frustration doesn’t always cause aggression
Learning to Aggress:
Reinforcement and Modelling
Psychological Factors in Aggression
Self-justification:
• Blame victim
• Minimize seriousness
• Dehumanize victim
Attribution of intentionality (seen as more hostile)
Degree of empathy (regulate emotion)
Principle of Catharsis
- Aggressive behaviour discharges aggressive energy
- Behaviour temporarily reduces impulses to aggress
- Channel aggressive impulses into socially acceptable behaviours
Psychodynamic processes
- principle of catharsis
- over controlled hostility
Overcontrolled Hostility
- Little immediate reaction
* After provocations accumulate, can suddenly erupt into violence
Media Violence: Catharsis versus Social Learning
- Social Learning
• Exposure to movie & TV
violence is related to tendency to behave aggressively
Effects of Media Violence
- Learn behaviours through modelling
- Believe aggression is usually rewarded
- Desensitized to sight & sound of violence & to victim
Do violent video games promote aggression?
• Weak positive relation between play and aggressive behaviour
Is catharsis supported
No
Strongest relationship for games that involve
violent fantasy action
