CHP 12 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Flashcards
Social psychology
the study of how people influence other people’s thoughts, feelings, and actions
Social brain hypothesis
humans aren’t physically strong so we solve our problems by thinking, so our brains got bigger
Ingroup
group to which one belongs
Outgroup
group to which one doesn’t belong
2 conditions of group formation
reciprocity: people will do back what you do to them
transitivity: people generally share their friends’ opinions about other people
Outgroup homogeneity effect
tendency to view outgroup members as less varied than ingroup members
Ingroup favoritism
tendency to favor and privilege ingroup members more than outgroup
Minimal group paradigm
regardless of the way the group was formed, ingroup/outgroup effect will still be present
Dehumanization
tendency to see outgroup members as less human than ingroup members
Group influence
people want to be good group members and so are easily influenced by others, conform easily, and obey commands by authority figures
Mere presence effect
the presence of others generally enhances arousal and affects performance
Social facilitation
an easy and practiced task will see improved performance in the presence of others
a difficult talk will see impaired performance in the presence of others
Deindividuation
individual in a group has a weakened sense of personality identity and self-awareness
facilitated by anonymity and having an assigned role
Group polarization
process by which intial attitudes of groups becomes more extreme over time
Groupthink
extreme form of group polarization wherein the group values consensus/cohesiveness more than making a good decision, so they make a bad decision
Social loafing
the tendency for people to work less hard in a group than when working alone
Conformity
altering behaviors and opinions to match group members/expectations
Normative influence
tendency for people to conform to fit in with a group (elevator experiment)
Informational influence
tendency for people to conform when they assume other’s behavior is correct (we duck when others around us duck)
Factors that reduce conformity
small group size
other group members dissenting from the majority
(consensus INCREASES conformity)
Compliance
agreeing to requests from others
Factors that increase compliance
being in a good mood
not paying attention
not fully considering options (time crunch)
3 ways to induce compliance
foot in the door
door in the face
low-balling
Foot in the door
agreeing to a small request inc likelihood of compliance to a biger request
Door in the face
refusal of a large request inc likelihood of agreeing to a smaller request
Low-balling
when you agree to buy a product, if they raise the price you’re more likely to buy it
Milgram’s research
people may be horrible things when an authority figure orders them to (they feel like the authority figure is responsible for the actions, not themselves)
Aggression
any behavior that involves the intent to hurt
Adults’ agressive acts
involve words, symbols, intend to threaten, intimidate, emotionally harm
MAOA gene
“warrior gene”, a particular form of the gene + environmental risk factors associated with antisocial behaviors seems to make individuals more violent
MAOA gene and serotonin
MAOA gene regulates serotonin which affects amygdala activity
Testosterone and agression
Testosterone changes may be the RESULT of aggressive behaviors (remains high for winners to protect them from further fights, and drops lower for losers)
Culture of honor
belief system in which men believe they have to protect their reputations through physical aggression
Bystander intervention effect
failure to offer help when other people are present
4 reasons for bystander intervention effect
- Diffusion of responsibility (someone else will do something)
- Fear of making social blunders in an ambiguous situation
- People are less likely to help if they’re anonymous and can remain so (no one will know you could’ve helped and didn’t)
- People weigh the costs v benefits of helping
Attitudes
people’s evaluations of objects, events, ideas (shaped by social context and affect how we interact with other people)
Cognitive dissonance
an uncomfortable mental state resulting a contradiction between 2 attitudes or an attitude and a behavior (ex. smokers know it’s wrong to smoke)
try to reduce by changing attitudes or behaviors, or by rationalizing/trivializing dissonance
Cognitive dissonance study
participants did a boring study then told other people how it was
people who were paid $1 to lie experienced cognitive dissonance and said they remembered the task being way better than it was (they didn’t believe they could be persuaded to lie for only $1), people who were paid $20 to lie didn’t experience conflict and said the task was slightly better than those who weren’t paid anything
Personal attributions
using INTERNAL CHARACTERISTICS to explain people’s behavior (more common in individualistic cultures)
Situational attributions
using EXTERNAL EVENTS to explain people’s behaviors (more common in collectivist cultures)
Correspondence bias
tendency to expect that people’s actions align with their beliefs and personalities
Fundamental attribution error
when explaining OTHER’S behavior, the focus is on personality traits rather than situational factors
Actor/observer discrepancy
when explaining ONE’S OWN behavior the focus is on SITUATIONAL factors, when they explain OTHER’S behavior the focus is on DISPOSITION
Stereotypes
cognitive schemas that quickly organize info about people on the basis of their membership in certain groups
occurs AUTOMATICALLY and streamlines formation of impressions
Negative stereotypes
can lead to prejudice (negative feelings, opinions, beliefs bc of a stereotype) and discrimination (inappropriate and unjustified treatment of people as a result of prejudice)
Factors of prejudice
we distrust people who look and behave differently
we feel uncomfortable around people we don’t understand
we want to feel superior/special
Illusory correlations
a psychological reasoning error of seeing relationships that don’t exist
Subtyping
when a person doesn’t fit in the stereotype, we make a special category for them instead of changing our stereotype
Sulf-fulfilling prophecies
if we have stereotyped a behavior for someone, we tend to behave in a way that encourages them to do things that confirm our stereotypes (ex. Prof Warren says he’s not religious and isn’t as happy, which makes a student want to talk to him about religion)
Stereotype threat
fear/concern about feeding negative stereotypes about one’s own group impairs performance on a task (ex. women do worse on tests when they hear about how women get worse scores on tests than men)
