chapter 3: social cognition Flashcards
what is social cognition
-How people think about themselves and the social world
-How people select, interpret, remember, and use social information to make judgment and decisions
what are the two kinds of thinking in social cognition
Lots of ways to divide up thought
-We’ll talk about..
-Automatic thinking: The kind of thinking that occurs without any effort
-Controlled thinking
what is automatic thinking
-Quick: No conscious deliberation of thoughts, perceptions, assumptions
-Thinking that is nonconscious, unintentional, involuntary, and effortless
-Not precise – can lead to poor decisions
-But has unlimited capacity – good for lots of data
-Helps us process a lot of things at once, helps us deal with a greater amount of information
-Decision quality does not deteriorate with increasing complexity
what is controlled thinking
-Effortful and deliberate, based on rules, precise
-Thinking about self and environment
-Carefully selecting the right course of action
-Best for simple choices with few factors to consider
-Best to use when dealing with small pieces of information
is controlled thinking good for complex choices
Not good for complex choices – too much to think about
-Logic problems (having more premises for these kinds of problems makes them more difficult)
-Decision quality goes down when decisions are very complex
how do automatic and controlled thinking relate
Often, they work together
what are schemas and what kind of thinking are they
-automatic thinking
-Mental structures that organize our knowledge of the social world
-Influences what people notice, think about, and remember
-Based on information learned in the past
-We have schemas (or scripts) about everything
-Schemas are generally good because we can generalize a lot of information, but they can be hurtful when they are used about people
what are scripts
Scripts are schemas that are used for events, e.g. going to a restaurant
what are schemas used to do
Organize information
-E.g. can drive a car even if you have never driven it before
Interpret new situations quickly
-Especially ambiguous ones
-E.g. laundry video
-Answer some questions…
Fill in blanks of memory
-Remember schema relevant info
-Misremember information consistently with schema
-E.g. person is left in office and recalled things in office that were not actually there; remembered things that were typically in an office
explain the study that shows how schemas affect perception (guest lecturer in class)
Kelly (1950): guest lecturer
-Teaching a class and told both groups there was a guest lecturer for each class, both classes got the same lecture; classes were then asked questions about the lecture
-Condition 1: People who know him consider him a rather cold person, industrious, critical, practical, and determined.
-Told this to one class
-Condition 2: People who know him consider him a very warm person, industrious, critical, practical, and determined.
-Told this to the other class
DV: How did students rate the person’s arrogance and sense of humor?
Results:
-Arrogance: rated the same
-unambiguous trait
-Sense of humor: rated as funnier in warm condition compared to cold condition
-ambiguous trait
when do we use schemas
When they’re accessible (three ways they are accessible)
1) Chronically accessible
-E.g. you study alcoholics so this is something that is constantly on the forefront of your mind
2) Related to current goal
-E.g. you are writing a paper on alcoholism for your current class
3) Temporarily accessible (something in your environment that primes a certain schema)
-Priming: subconsciously exposing people to stimuli that will impact their thinking and behavior later on without them knowing about it
explain the study that shows priming (list of words about Donald)
Memorize words
-Condition 1: Adventurous, self-confident, independent, persistent
-Condition 2: Reckless, conceited, aloof, stubborn
-Told people that they were going to be shown some words and had to remember words
-In the second part of the study which they believed was a part of a different study, they had to read a description of a guy named Donald and then rate him
Donald is a high sensation seeker; people had to rate how positively they rated Donald
Results: people in condition one rated Donald more positively because this condition had words that were positive about an adventurous person
what is a self-fulfilling prophecy (why schemas come true)
-An expectation about what another person is
-That influences how you act toward that person
-This causes that person to behave that way
-This makes your expectation come true.
-Ex. With your significant other, when you think someone is mad at you and they actually start getting mad at you
explain the study about self fulfilling prophecy and IQ scores
-Interested to see if they could influence people’s IQ scores, told teachers in school that the test would identify children who would do really well, gave the test to the children and went back to the teachers and told them a group of students they found would make great improvements the rest of the year, the other students are normal
-No difference between the two groups, it was actually random assignment
-Group 1: academic bloomers; group 2: regular students
-Researchers then left and left the teachers to interact with the students the rest of the year, came back at the end of the year and gave the students another IQ test at the end of the year
-Results: found that that students in the bloomers group actually got smarter to a larger extend than the students in the normal group
why did they find the results they did in the bloomers study
Why did “bloomers” do better?
-Due to teachers’ automatic thinking; they applied a schema to one group of students and acted on that schema
-Teachers treated “bloomers” differently (replicated the study to see what the teachers were doing differently to the bloomers, to find out why they got the results they did)
Created warmer emotional climate for bloomers
-more personal attention
-encouragement
-support
Gave them more challenging material
Gave them more and better feedback
Gave them more and longer opportunities to respond in class
what is another self fulfilling prophecy study about expectations and standardized test scores
-Low teacher expectations during first grade
-Predict poor standardized test performance 10 years later
-Particularly if students are from poor families
-Difference was only a few points, but still measurable
Happens outside of school, too!
-workplace
what is automatic goal pursuit
a type of automatic thinking
-Prime goals in subtle way to see if it influences behavior
explain the study about automatic goal pursuit (priming words about religion)
Gave people words that made a sentence, had people unscramble words to make sentences
Example: Shariff & Norenzayan (2007)
-Task 1: Primed goals via a sentence unscrambling task
-Condition 1: Words related to God (spirit, God, sacred, prophet)
-Condition 2: Neutral words
-Condition 3: Nonreligious words related to fairness (civic, contract)
Task 2: Economics game—given $1 coins ($10 total) to divide up between themselves and partner (thought task unrelated to first)
How much money would you allocate to yourself or to other people?
Results: Gave more money in the God ($4.56) and fairness ($4.44) than in the neutral ($2.56) condition
what is automatic decision making
-Sometimes we decide without thinking
-Distraction improves decision making: (when we make decisions automatically)
-When we consciously want to make a good choice
-When decision requires integration of complex information
-Many moving pieces to make decision, people might tell you to focus on your feelings (e.g. deciding on a grad school)
explain the study about automatic decision making with cars
Dijksterhuis et al
-Gave people information about different cars and people had to decide which car is a better car, there was a right and wrong answer to this question (not an opinion question, one car was objectively better)
-In one condition given 4 attributes about both cars, in another group given 12 attributes about both cars
-Another IV: told to either think about the decision or solve it using anagrams
Results: looking at what people made the right decision
-Found an interaction: when people were making a simple decision (4 attributes) people did best when they made a conscious decision; when people were making a complicated decision (12 attributes) people did best when they made an automatic decision by solving anagrams
explain the other study about automatic decision making about Ikea
Dijksterhuis et al another study, this time in an Ikea store
-Done in Europe on people who were shopping in an Ikea for furniture (complex store) or a department store for simple day to day items like shampoo (simple)
-Asked people how much they thought about their decision to purchase what they did (a lot/conscious or a little/unconscious)
Results: people who thought about making a decision the most were the most satisfied in a department store; people who thought about making a decision the least were the most satisfied in Ikea
what are heuristics
-Make judgments quickly and efficiently
Why use them?
-Often we don’t have time to fully search all options
-Usually lead to good decisions quickly
-Adaptive
-But occasionally lead us to make the wrong decision
what is the availability heuristic
-basing a judgment on the ease with which something can be brought to mind
-The good: things that come to mind easily are usually more common or important
-If you can think of lots of instances of your friend tripping that person is probably clumsy
-The bad: sometimes what is easiest to remember is not typical of the overall picture, leading to faulty conclusions
explain the schwartz et al study with the availability heuristic (listing assertive traits)
-Showed that we fall to the availability heuristic even when we are thinking about ourselves
-Ask people to list either assertive or unassertive things they have done in the past year (first IV)
-List 6 things in one of these categories or 12 things (second IV)
-Then asked people to rank how assertive they are
-Found an interaction: people listing assertive acts- those who listed 6 ranked themselves as more assertive; people listing unassertive acts- those who listed 12 ranked themselves as more assertive (people who had to list 12 assertive acts could not think of that many)
