Chapter 3 Social Cognition Flashcards
What is social cognition?
A social psychological process on how people select, interpret, remember and use social information to make judgements and decisions.
What are the 2 types of social cognition and how are they different?
Automatic thinking: Quick and automatic thoughts
- Involuntary, nonconscious, unintentional, effortless.
Controlled thinking: More effortful and deliberate.
- Voluntary, Intentional, Effortful, Conscious
What are the advantages of using automatic thinking?
OR Why do people use automatic thinking?
- processing overload if everything is done consciously
- more suitable for some situations as automatic thinking occurs quickly and efficiently.
- frees up resources for more important stuff (attention is a limited resource)
What are schemas? Give an example of a type of schema.
Mental structures people use to
- organise and make sense of social information around them (organize by themes/subjects)
- influence people’s thoughts and actions and feelings when they think automatically.
Event schema: teaches u what to expect in a situation/setting.
What does the “warm vs cold” study say about our frequency of using schemas?
What was the hypothesis?
The more ambiguous information presented to us is, the more likely we are to use schemas.
The students will rely on their schemas to fill in the blanks of their survey.
How did the experimenter create a sense of ambiguity in the situation?
Highly ambiguous traits were included in the brief description of the speaker.
- Warm vs cold: very subjective.
- don’t forget that everyone listened to the same speaker.
Made the speaker deliver the same content to everyone in 20 minutes –> relatively short period of time, difficult to actually decide for yourself accurately if the lecturer is indeed warm or cold.
What was the difference in reaction between the people with warm schemas and cold schemas?
Warm schema
- rated speaker as significantly more friendly, more willing to ask him questions
Would students be more or less inclined to rely on their schemas if an unambiguous situation was presented to them?
Less inclined
Example: tell them that the speaker is arrogant, and he is indeed arrogant –> not difficult to decipher, and very little room for debate on what “arrogance” is
Don’t need to rely on a schema to come up with an impression of him for the survey. All agreed that he was arrogant.
What is accessibility?
The extent to which schemas and concepts are at the forefront of people’s minds and are therefore likely to be used when making judgments about the social world.
- Rmb: forefront, likely to be used.
How do you increase the accessibility of a schema? OR What causes the accessibility of a schema to increase?
1) Past experience
Eg: You see a person behaving erratically. Growing up with a drunkard father meant that you would think that this person is drunk, as such traits will be chronically accessible to you.
2) Relation to current goals
Eg: You see the person behaving erratically. Since you are currently taking PL3236 (and have to pass it), you are inclined to think this person has a mental illness. Traits related to mental illness will be temporarily accessible.
3) Priming - recent experience
Eg: Prior to seeing this man, you were reading a memoir of a sufferer of mental illness. This primes certain traits, such as those describing people with mental illness, thus making it more likely that these traits will be used to interpret a new event.
What conditions must be met before thoughts can act as primes?
Accessible and applicable.
Why were the participants in the control condition in the Donald experiment not influenced by the words given to them?
- were given neutral words –> not related to the description given
- does not serve any purpose in increasing the accessibility of a schema when it comes to forming an impression of him.
What is the self-fulfilling prophecy?
- You have an expectation/social theory about what another person is like.
- Thus, when interacting with the person, you behave in a way that reflects your expectation of that person.
- The person will react in a manner that is congruent with your expectations of him.
- Expectation comes true as a result!
Illustrate the self-fulfilling prophecy using the bloomers vs non-bloomers experiment.
Background: Asked students to do a test and told teachers that some students are likely to bloom and excel academically later. “Bloomers” were actually randomly selected.
- Teachers would expect that these bloomers will excel academically later, so they find it worthwhile to treat them favourably. (subconsciously? but which teacher doesn’t like good students?)
- Thus, when teaching their students, these teachers will behave in a way that reflects their expectation of these bloomers.
- provide warmer emotional climate for them
- provide them more opportunities to answer, gave them more time to think
- gave them more and better feedback
- more personal attention
- more material, and can also be more challenging. - The students, upon going through all these, will be inclined to think that they are good at this subject/they have potential –> interest and motivation increase –> work harder –> get better scores
- Get better scores –> expectation comes true!
- one year later, the students who were labelled as bloomers showed significant increases in IQ scores.
On the flip side, how can self-fulfilling prophecies in the classroom be detrimental to students?
When teachers decide that their student isn’t capable based on their gender, age, race, SES etc.
- Eg: poor student from broken family –> teacher thinks that he doesn’t have what it takes to do well –> has overly low expectations of him, doesn’t pay him much attention in class/apathetic towards him
- student might think that he really doesn’t have what it takes.
But do take note that this effect is actually quite small, and a self-fulfilling prophecy doesn’t doom one to constant academic failure.
Can you remedy it by getting them to write self-affirming essays about their personal strengths and what makes them special as a person? –> writing good things about themselves induces discomfort because it’s not congruent with how they see themselves –> will strive to work harder to reduce this cognitive dissonance.