COM 109 Final Flashcards
PASS
Language reflects social context
The view that social factors influence behavior more than the influencer
French & Raven (1958) 6 Power Types
Legitimate
Coercive
Reward
Referent
Expert
Informational
Legitimate Power (French and Raven)
Power is based on mandate (‘positional
power’)
Coercive power (French and Raven)
Punishments or threats can be issued
Reward Power (French and Raven)
Rewards for obedience
Referent Power (French and Raven)
Based on receivers identification with
attraction to, respect for the source -> Buying a Lexus because a famous Tennis player you like is in an ad for one
Expert Power (French and Raven)
Based on receivers belief in the knowledge,
competence etc. of the source
Informational Power
Based on receivers belief that the
source has more information
Faceism
Ratio of head to body in images is larger for men:
i.e., there is a (sometimes) subtle emphasis on
men’s faces and on women’s bodies
Androcentric coding of man and his
Using masculine terms as the generic way to refer to everyone (ex: guys) Spender says this makes women secondary to men/erasure/discredit and sexism
Hobbes on Power
People have a constant, restless desire for power that only ends with death.
Russell on Power
“power is the production of intended effects”
Lewin on Power
Relationship between Source and Target and is not the same as effects -> Inducement of forces
Status Dominance
The effect of ___ is. Determines your…
Social and economic inequality can determine how likely you are to die. Hierarchies and health disparities. Your group plays a huge role in your livelihood. People further up the chain live longer even with the same access to health care.
Conversational Dominance - Zelditch 1985
Status recognition (dominance) creates social hierarchies in honor, respect, and esteem, influencing both specific tasks (e.g., math, mechanical tasks) and general traits (e.g., intelligence).
Sociobiological Definition of
Dominance - Wilson
Pecking Order: measured by superiority in aggressive
encounters and order of access to food,
mates, resting sites, and other objects
promoting survivorship and reproductive
fitness
Dominance Explanation (3)
P S I
What makes a person dominant?
1.Personality and individual differences
2. Evolved dominance signaling
3. Interpersonal and Group processes -> Human Hierarchies
1.People who are extroverted smart and contentious are expected to be higher up
2.Human hierarchies are more competence based than say dominance/violence
3.Complicated relationships, larger groups etc
Evolution and Dominance Signaling
Rapid structuring of status in various species (chickens/chimps) -> Status is the organizing principle of human societies
Characteristics of dominance hierarchies (3)
They form __. Found in ___. ___ humans have it.
have some survival value: Highly beneficial for all of us
From rapidly and automatically in social interactions
Found in most social species
Human Universal
Marxism on Hierarchies
emerged
because of
industrialization, pitting
capitalists vs. workers
Marxist believe this is recent and is caused by capitalists who exploited labor of workers
Egalitarian Hierarchies
Common occurring theme in this society is “Big Man” who wants more resources for himself -> More wives
Very violent
Rosa & Mazur Study
Averting Gaze/Eye contact first then group activities: The more you speak the further higher up you are in the hierarchy
Meltzer, Morris, & Hayes (1971) Study
Morris (1971) did an experiment where they tried to change how loud people spoke during conversations to see if it affected their ability to interrupt or defend a point.
Control: They recorded normal conversations without any changes.
Expt 1: They made the person defending their point speak 50% louder, and this had a noticeable effect—perhaps making them more effective at defending themselves.
Expt 2: They made the person trying to interrupt speak 50% louder, but this didn’t make a significant difference—they weren’t any more successful at interrupting.
Interruptions more successful for brief increases with
amplitude increase (< 1s or so)
If interruption continues, amplitude no longer
predicts interruption success
What works:Louder while defending, Louder & Swift while interrupting
MacLaren et al. (2020) Study
Student groups solve problems for an hour and measure their speaking time w/ factors like personality gender and intelligence then let them choose a leader -> The most important factor was personality -> Talking a lot alone raises your chances of being leader
Dovidio, Brown, Heltman, Ellyson,
& Keating (1988)
Men vs Women topic talking Men talk the most/are more dominant about male topics AND NUETRAL TOPICS
Women talk the most about female topics
“Specific competencies and generalized competencies” (Gendered vs non gendered)
Expectation States Theory
Measured with 2 competencies. Leaders should be __ not ___.
Someone with ___ should be….
Expectation states theory: People have a range of expectations for performance on tasks.
Specific competencies and generalized
Behavior Interchange -> Performance expectations -> Status cycle
Members will engage in resistance behavior and force a pushy (wannabe) leader to be proactive vs reactive and force them to create a hierarchy based on competency
High status should not be using reactive language if you try to your interruption attempts are less successful
Proactive vs Reactive EST
Proactive: Making a statement, “we should do this”, giving ideas and proposals etc
Sound like they know what they are talking about
Sounds competent
Gets a boost in status compared to others
Reactive:Someone else says something - good idea, that’s smart - concenting, agreeing
Ridgeway & Diekema (1989)
Goes against Rosa and Masur -> They had four-person groups with two confederates (people working with the researchers).
The dominant confederate acted aggressively (e.g., interrupting, making rude remarks, leaning forward, speaking loudly).
The neutral confederate didn’t do any of these things.
They measured how much the bystanders (other group members) intervened in the situation.
Men had total dominance.
Competency builds hierarchy
If you try to assume dominance too much you will get cut down.
Dominance Theory
believes that a person who is…..will….
A overly pushy loud interrupting dismissing leader will jump up
Status Hierarchies are built on
COMPENTANCY
Successful Proactive Interruption
A proactive interruption is when someone interrupts early in a conversation to take control or make a point before others do.
If you try to be reactive when it doesn’t fit your role you will be ignore and pushed to act more proactively especially if you are made the leader.
Successful Reactive Interruption
& how is success determined for both?
A reactive interruption happens when someone interrupts in response to something another person says, usually to challenge or add to the conversation.
Both are successful if they help the interrupter make their point effectively.
Conclusion on Dominance
Has _ origins. Heirarchies come from _. Humans use _to make status.
Focused on _not violence. Works because ___ ___ to __.
Strong likelihood for biological origins of
dominance behaviors—hierarchies emerge from
competition over fitness-enhancing resources
Humans use subtle cues to arrange status and
dominance, but are typically focused on
competence
The process is collective—it involves people
collectively agreeing upon the status order, as
well as coalitions
Language Reflecting Power
Power of a speaker can be deduced from his/her accent
Integrative Complexity
What, 2 parts, s not c, when
A coding scheme for the structure of arguments
Language coding scheme for the structure not content of the complexity of information processing and decision making
IC = Differentiation + Integration
Influences on IC
War
Personality
Social Context
Future directions
Both Liberals and conservatives can be integratively simple when considering hot button issues
When a president is giving a speech before war/politician is giving their take on hot button issues they will use:
Minimal integrative complexity ->Solution is Straightforward
Differentiation Integration
Seeing different aspects of something and being able to view it from different angles. This is needed before you can bring everything together.
Creates the difference between moderate and extremists
*Extremists do better when their persuasion is integratively simple
Integration
“Heres these set of arguments for both positions let’s compare and integrate a solution to address both things”
It’s about creating links between different ideas or views, like understanding trade-offs between options, combining perspectives, or connecting them to a bigger concept that includes all the differences.
Integrative Complexity Contingent on
A person’s level of __ & __. Influenced by how ___ they are.
If the crowd is using __. The ___ climate.
Accountability and self presentation
Fatigue stress intrapsychic conflict
Audience characteristics
Group decision making (Group Think)
The political environment
Low differentiation/low integration
“I don’t like him. He bad. Let’s get rid of him”
Medium Differentiation/Integration
Recognize the existence of other views but no attempt to balance differences
High Differentiation/Integration
Recognizes two sets of interests and choices
Efforts to integrate conflicting perspectives + self reflective commentary on the viability of particular integrative proposals
Wallave Suedfeld and Thachuk
_identifies how well __ and if __ is going to start.
Looked at political speeches before, during, and after the Gulf War. They found that the tone of the speeches showed how well coalitions were forming and that stress in the speeches marked the start of the war. Hawks supported the war, while doves were against it.
Saddam Hussein and George Bush Integrative Complexity
Saddam Hussein had low integrative complexity when Iraq invaded Kuwait, focusing on his own goals. George Bush had high integrative complexity, considering the perspectives of coalition members. As Saddam noticed his success, his complexity increased. However, Bush’s complexity dropped as the war progressed and Saddam started winning. When peace talks began, Saddam’s complexity dropped again. Once it became clear the U.S. coalition would win, Bush’s complexity rose and peaked, reflecting his confidence in victory.
When you’re about to go to war/need to boost war efforts use low IC.
When the war is declared on you, you are winning, and when you’ve won you use high IC.
Tetlock 1983 Study
Coded the policy statements of senators
Classified based on voting record as liberal moderate or conservative
Statistically control for age education length of service in senate
Also investigated stability of IC over time
Conservatives: Lowest integrative complexity
On average liberals and moderates are more integratively complex
Works with personality hypothesis
Argues against an alternative ideology hypothesis
Conway et al 2012
The way to win is to start ___.
Simplicity and complexity moves around based on social goals
DC:Inherent assumption its legitimate to have multiple or two different views
IC: Advocating for one viewpoint
If you want to win START WITH HIGH INTEGRATIVE COMPLEXITY AND END WITH LOW INTEGRATIVE COMPLEXITY
Conway Gornick and Houck 2014
while automated coding is less accurate than manual coding, it’s much faster and can handle large samples. But certain statements or language indicate differentiation or integration in speeches.
Computer less accurate but can handle more and fast.
Statements, words, tone can measure IC in speeches.
Lakoff 1973 Women’s Speech (12)
Women’s interests: clothing, sewing etc
Empty adjectives: charming, sweet
Tag questions: I’m coming with you, all right?
Hedges: sort of, I guess
Intensifiers: very, so, really
Hyper-correct grammar: let’s go fishing
Super-polite forms: sorry to bother you but . . .
Avoidance of humor: (see Hitchens)
Talking in italics: I am very frustrated with you
Indirect speech: I’m so thirsty (give me a drink!)
Avoidance of expletives
Less talking, more listening
Brysbaert, Mandera, McCormick, & Keuleers
(2018)
Chart
Word familiarity and usage can differ between gender -> women were more familiar with and preferred words that were rare or uncommon
Leaper & Robnett (2011
found that there were small but significant differences in language use between men and women
Who speaks more?
Men and women talk about the same
Mehl, Vazire, Ramírez-Esparza, Slatcher, &
Pennebaker (2007)
(Electronically Activated Recorder) to study people’s real-life conversations. The device secretly records 30-second clips every 12.5 minutes, and people don’t know when it’s recording, which helps capture natural, unplanned speech
Lakoff’s double bind
Women are socialized to use certain terms. Women can choose to use tentative language forms but then
risk being perceived as unintelligent or incompetent (justifies subordination) women can choose more
direct male language, but then risk being demeaned and ostracized for being unfeminine.
Spender Connotations
words have different meanings based on gender. For example, “bachelor” sounds positive, but “spinster” has a negative meaning. Also, “handsome” is for men, while “pretty” is for women, and titles like “Mr.” and “Mrs.” show different expectations for men and women
Spender Linguistic Sexism
More fleshed out than Connotation! What do the connotations mean?
words linked to women or non-males are seen as negative or inferior.
two fundamental categories,
male and minus male. To be linked with male is to be
linked to a range of meanings which are positive and
good: to be linked to minus male is to be linked to
the absence of those qualities, that is, to be decidedly
negative and usually sexually debased”
Spender: “Man Made Language”
English language was created by men and is still controlled by them. This gives men power and makes women seem less important or “other.” Women continue to use this language, which keeps the gender imbalance going.
Zimmerman & West (1975)
Party conversation study on interruptions -> men interrupted more than women, especially in mixed-gender conversations
Male dominance is exhibited through male control of macro-institutions in society and is also exhibited
through control of at least a part of one micro-institution.
Makri-Tsilipakou (1994)
Women interrupt as much as men do.
(1) Women do more affiliative interrupting than men;
(2) Men interrupt women more than other men, but
the kind of interruption doesn’t matter
(3) When women use disaffiliative content they are
more likely to direct it at men than women
Self-Categorization Theory Hoggs
His study on SCT explains that male and female stereotypic speech shows: Under competition between groups women will use masculine speech.
Gender becomes more important when people focus on it -> Men are less likely to be influenced by assertive women -> BUT if there’s a shared identity (like a common goal), men are more likely to be influenced
People’s language and identity become more important based on the social groups they identify with. In his study, men and women in same-sex or mixed-sex groups used different language styles, and their speech was rated by others. Identity salience, or how strongly someone identifies with a group, influenced their language use.
Conclusion on Gender and Language
There is evidence that men and women use language
differently
On average, women do use more tentative language
than men
However:Women can use equally assertive language
as men, particularly when there is conflict between
men and women, where tentative/assertive language
is not stereotypic, and when it fits the topic of
discussion
Hilary Clinton and Kamala were told to “Warm up their image” Role Congruity theory says this means these women were expected to be more
Communal
Role Congruity Theory
People are judged more positively when their behavior fits social expectations for their gender or role. For example, women are seen more favorably in nurturing roles, while men are expected to be more assertive in leadership positions. When someone’s behavior doesn’t match these expectations, they may be judged negatively.
In a multi-sex organization with strong organizational identification all around a woman who is ___ vs ___ will succeed
Direct women would probably advance to a better position than a tentative woman
Carli 1990
Coquette
USES NO THEORY
Women use tentative language strategically
Women who use more tentative language than men and the more they use it the more influential they are with men.
Men are threatened by assertive women and as a result they are more likely to be influenced like tentative non threatening women
Not influenced by pushy women (makes sense?)
Sara Buckwitz and Utne Reader
Real Women wear pink: female executives at certain companies are trained to be less assertive and more feminine to fit traditional expectations of femininity -> Limits women in their professions
Lakoff 1973 Language and Woman’s Place
direct language makes people seem more competent but less likable. In their study, they showed that female managerial applicants who used more powerful, direct language were seen as more competent, but also less likable. For male applicants, the use of direct language didn’t affect how they were perceived.
Joudavalkis et al 2003
Study with teacher -> Male and female students reactions ->
Looked at how dominant communication (being assertive or in control of a conversation) affects male and female teachers.
Both male and female teachers who communicated dominantly (took charge in the conversation) were seen as more proactive (like they were in control and organizing the class well).
There was no difference in how effective the male and female teachers were—both were equally effective regardless of their gender.
gender differences in language and influence
_ _ theory. Gender is a _ trait/characteristic. Women who are _ earn _.
Expectation states theory (berger)
Gender is a diffuse status characteristic
Legitimacy of status expectations
Tentative women can be influential with men by being tentative and thus liked by men
Gender is a status trait
Role congruity theory (eagly and karau 2022)
Women are communal (pleasant kind trustworthy)
Men are agentic (assertive dominant powerful)
Leaders are agentic
Women who try to be agentic are resisted by men and not influential because they have to be communal
When women try to act assertive or dominant, men resist them, and they aren’t seen as influential.
Reid Keerie Palomares 2003
Compared how males and females approach and coordinate discussions on different issues. How tentative language affects people’s opinions after a discussion.
When college identity was important, tentative language had a strong effect -> when gender was highlighted, there was no significant effect
Schaerer et al 2023
The goal was to understand how gender bias in hiring has changed over time and if people could anticipate these trends.
Ceci Study
the mechanism resulting in womens undereprensation today may lie more on the supply side in womens decisions not to apply than on the demand side in antifemale bias in hiring
Summary on Gender Language 2
Gender salience and language use
Social influence and gender salience
The glass cieling phenomenon
Very few ecologically valid experiments
Meta analysis shows women’s choices not to apply may explain much of the gender gap in STEM, not hiring discrimination.
Gender Salience
Gender salience refers to how important or noticeable gender is in a particular situation. When gender is salient, it means people are more aware of or focused on gender differences, which can influence behavior, communication, and decision-making.
Tentative
Tentative refers to something that is uncertain, hesitant, or not fully decided. In language, tentative language includes words or phrases that soften statements or show hesitation, like “maybe,” “I think,” or “could be.” It’s often used to express uncertainty or politeness.
Who abuses power
(Fields/Careers)
Government
Private Sector
Personal Motivation
Corporate malfeasance
Corrupt politicans
Military leaders on boards of weapons and companies
Leaders of authoritarian states
Large corporations that control politicans
Physicians who perform non functional treatments
Types of leadership theory (3)
P S C
Personality or great man approach
Situational approach
Combinatorial approaches most theories
Personality/Great Man Approach – Suggests leaders are born, not made, with innate traits like charisma and intelligence.
Situational Approach – Argues leadership depends on the situation, meaning different styles work best in different contexts.
Combinatorial Approaches – Blend multiple theories, considering both traits and situational factors to explain effective leadership.
Power Identity Model Leadership stages Hogg and Reid 20
eMERGENCE
Stabilizing the leadership position
Power differentiation
The potential abuse of power against followers
Power behind language/To be a leader you must
Engineer your image by altering how you speak:
Works in a circle with power of language
To stand out as a defining group member you
Say the right things to the right people
Use the right words, terms, and slang
I AM JUST LIKE YOU
Convince others you are just like them to gain power and opportunity
PIM: Autocatalytic relations between identity
and power mediated by language use
P, PB, S, C
Prototypicality, Power Base, Support, Contenders
Language used to create/maintain prototypicality
(2) Prototypical position makes it possible to gain
power bases
(3) Gaining power bases makes it further possible to
control the prototypical position:
(a) gain/maintain support
(b) side-line contenders
Stage 1 Leader/AOP
Leader Emergence The group decides who fits best. The most typical or representative person naturally becomes the leader because they match what the group values.
Fielding and hogg 1997
Prototypical leaders
leader ship effectiveness function of social attraction and group prototypicality
particularly for high identifying followers
Platow et al 2010 says a Prototypical leader
Leadership with ingroup stereotypic traits attributed high level of charisma regardless of their rhetoric
But leaders with outgroup stereotypic traits had to use group oriented rhetoric to be attributed high charisma
Stage 2 of Leader/AOP
stabilizing the leadership position -> A leader facing a loss may use bold actions, like war or crisis management, to rally support and stay in power—an abuse of power that still benefits the group.
Stage 3 Leader/AOP
Differentiation: leaders start seeing themselves as separate from their followers. They justify using power to protect themselves rather than serving the group, laying the groundwork for future abuse.
Stages of becoming the leader and abusing power (4)
Stage 1 Leader Emergence, Stage 2 stabilizing the leadership position, 3
pLATOW ET AL 1997
Class president -> Good to us not nice to them
Stage 4 Leader/AOP
abuse of power -> there is a shift from leadership based on persuasion and influence to leadership based on coercion and control -> leaders stop leading through influence and start ruling through force and control, turning against their own people to maintain power.
Necessary conditions for AOP
An intergroup relationship between leaders and followers
+
Much discretionary power
Differentiation of self from followers (i.e., an ingroup-outgroup
relationship)
Sufficient conditions:
A threat to the leadership position by followers
Maner and Mead 2010
Group performance task on word associations -> Unstable best performer will become leader
(protect yourself interest if you have high dominance orientation)
Manner and Mead Study -> Who Clues?
If you have low dominance it doesnt matter the conditions you just give all the clues
IF you have high and youre stable you give high level clues
If you are unstable and high the quality of clues goes down, you protect your own self interest to keep being leader
Even if it costs the group
Desire to exclude talented members
Lower dominance: no why would i do that?!
High dominance: stable - keep em
Unstable high dominance: kick them out!
Churchill and the blitz
WW2 - Accidental bombing
Hit back “He did it on purpose”
*Got revenge
Lukes 1974 on leadership
secure compliance by controlling
their thoughts and desire
Summary on Abuse of Power
Abuse of power is possible when leaders have too much power and an intergroup relationship with followers
Abuse of power is triggered by threat to leadership position
Threats due to inside sources
Threats due to external sources
Institutional capture is likely a very common form of abuse of power ie normalized abuses of power in some disciplines
political correctness
PC is a strategy in which political actors
(on the left and right) use and promote
ideologies that enable the control of
discourse and by extension, political
adversaries
Political Incorrectness (PiC) is language
and attitudes that are inconsistent with PC
Ideology
Language
Protection from sexual and ethnic minorities
Strong sense of moral authority
Proselytizing
PC excess use as a pejorative
Victimhood culture
PC children stories
a strategy where political figures, both left and right, push ideologies to control discourse and weaken opponents.
Involve claims of moral superiority to justify their stance.
Hate Speech
Free Speech in U.S
You need to let people say bad things in order to keep freedom
Campbell and manning - Cultures (4)
Transition to a new moral culture
Honor culture
Dignity cultures
Victimhood cultures
vICTIMHOOD CULTURE
Status can be used to justify sanctions against those who would communicate politically incorrect opinions and beliefs
More common in places where life is characteristically stable safe and prosperous.
Involves appeals to authorities whose organizational existence validates the culture (eg: microaggression tribunals that consider evidence of microaggressions perpetuated on college campuses)
people appeal to authority or third parties to address perceived offenses, sometimes exaggerating or falsifying them (e.g., the Lindsay Shepherd case). It paradoxically thrives in highly egalitarian societies, where even minor offenses feel extreme. Victimhood becomes a tool to justify and advance ideological agendas.
Perceived victimhood robinson 2016
i.e., more conservative students (but not liberal) report being more likely to self-censor under the PC than control prime
Marginalized victims: women racial sexual and religious minority groups
Dominant victims: white christians and men
Effect not moderated by participant sex or race (white vs poc)
Ie effect ideology
Divergence of political views about who the victims are
Left and right perceive themselves as victims
Left especially sees women race victims etc
Political Correctness
“A phenomenon in which members of the political left and right aim to control opponents”
Replacement terms for those that are sexist
Avoidance of stereotyping
Avoidance of essentializing terms e.g., replace handicapped with “person with a disability”
Why are people offended
The strong moral aspect of PCSIT (Perceived Cultural and Social Injustice Theory) suggests that when there’s intergroup conflict, both the offender and the victim groups should be careful about how much offense they take and how much they want to punish others.
Also, individual differences play a role in how offended someone feels, especially things like dominance motivation (desire to control or lead) and status aspiration (wanting to be recognized or respected). These personal motivations can shape how strongly someone feels offended or wants to react.
Critic on Self Categorization Theory on Leadership
Matching prototypes is often strategic whereas SCT it is passive
The power identity model was designed to explain
Cases where leaders abuse power by pursuing self interest over intergroup interest
The most distinctive feature of contemporary political correctness
Belief in moral authority control of discourse focus on victimhood
Social Judgment Phenomena
My side bias
Biased assimilation
Confirmation bias
Ingroup favoritism
Hostile media bias
Cohen, party over policy
Pluralistic ignorance. . .
Should we expect people to have veridical perceptions of
things like racism, sexism, micro-aggressions or not?
Kleck & Strenta (1980)
Scar and Ailment Study
Perceptions of the impact of negative
valued physical characteristics on social interaction
People who “have scars” believe already that people will have stigma against them even when the people they speak to don’t
Scar Ss attended
more to the gaze of
the confederate
Scar and epilepsy Ss
saw confederates as
more tense, believed
they were judged less
attractive by the
confederate.
Self fulfilling prophecy
Jordan & Kouchaki (2021)
Virtuous Victims:
judged more
moral in 5/6
cases
(corrupt MD
being the
exception)
If someone is seen as a victim they are judged more morally valuable and more trustworthy
They have done nothing but be a victim of someone elses behavior
(Except for the corrupt doctor)
Justice restoration
hypothesis
People see
victims as morally virtuous
because (i) people typically
face incentives for justice
restorative actions, (ii)
seeing victims as virtuous
motivates people to help
victims and punish
perpetrators
incentive
Part of the reason we see victims as virtuous because it lets 3rd parties intervene in ways that benefits themselves
Does DEI Promote Diversity, Equity, and
Inclusion?
Expensive to produce -> Some (low quality) evidence that DEI initiatives can back-
fire, fostering discomfort and perceptions of unfairness, and
increased racial resentment.
DEI is effective in creating or reinforcing the belief that americans were taught to be racist and that america is a white privliged patriarchal society
Jagdeep et al. (2024)
Instructing animosity: How DEI
pedagogy produces the hostile attribution bias
Study on DEI training and systematic oppression
Kendi and DeAngelo Study
Anti-Racist Materials
PART 1
Exposed people to control essay on US corn production vs part of an essay by DEI scholars
PART 2
Told a story about a student that was rejected from East Coast University
Result:
DEI materials made people perceive bias when there was none.
High rates of false alarms
High Status Offenders
disproportionately directed at high status offenders
Comments by Obama Summers etc
If a random person makes an offensive statement nobody cares
If someone has social status there is more offense ->Worthwhile to boost your own status
Robinson and Reid (2016)
Research on sex differences seems to reliably elicit offense
High status person that is male saying these things offends women more.
Highest level of endorsement of sanctions against the researchers
Dependent Measures of Offense
Intergroup sensitivity, specifically offense
Endorsement of sanctions:
Miller: e.g., deserves to be disciplined; should be required to
make a public apology; be required to take a gender
sensitivity training course, get banned, leave the meeting
Offense and Group Membership:
Additive effects of source and recipient
Male researcher and female participants most offense
Lowest: Male with female researcher
Social status part does not matter for offense
Status Aspiration and Offense
High aspiration for social status leads you to claim you were offended
The most aspiration for social status the more you want to sanction only if they have high social status
Robinson and Reid say that offense and intergroup sensitivity
Offense and intergroup sensitivity
Sanctions and sensitivity
But there is also a role for status aspiration, which
suggests that offense and the desire for sanction is a
strategy to gain personal status
Ok, Yi, Strejcek, Aquino (2020)
Signaling
Virtuous Victimhood:
Negative consequences of being a victim:
PTSD; Psychological distress, fear, anxiety
Loss of esteem; Heightened perceptions of vulnerability
Diminished sense of power; security, trust, and optimism
Stigmatization, victim blame
Campbell & Manning (2018):
Victimhood culture emerged in the U.S.
Claiming victimhood advantageous and even fashionable
Why?
Redress, justice, healing
Victimhood signaling to pursue environmental resource
extraction
Transfer resources from individuals or organizations
If you can prove you are a virtuous victim more people are most likely/willing to give empathy, help
Dark triad traits (3)
Psychopathy
Narcissism (MOST)
Machiavellianism
Symbolic demonstrations of moral character
Dark triad traits: Willingness to use deception and
manipulation more likely to emit virtuous victimhood signals
Do people provision
victims with resources?
Yes
When you describe people in virtuous terms and ask others if they are willing to help with their challenges they get more social compensations
Someone who is manipulative might be motivated to show themselves in virtuous terms as a victims to receive the social benefit
Summary on Victimhood and Offense
People perceive bias in others responses to a stigma,
even when the stigma is not present
People are offended as a function of group
membership and status striving, thus leading to
favoritism for sanctions
Dark Triad traits are implicated in virtuous
victimhood signaling
People perceive bias where there is none, if they have
been exposed to DEI training materials
Common Conspiracy Theory Themes
Government Actions
UFOs
Consumption and Health
Diseases
Revolving door corruption
“Internal investigation”
Mark McClellan
(Former FDA commissioner Johnson and Johnson)
Run a company and be a part of the committee (you gave yourself more control)
Corporate greed
Need to keep drugs from being overregulated
Revolve from one role to another
Conspiracy Theories are
sets of often erroneous beliefs that people use to explain malevolent and or unlawful acts that are directed by and in favor of a small powerful group that works in secret against a larger group of unwitting victims
Explanations for events that provoke widespread social anxiety and uncertainty
Resist falsification aided by psychological biases
Focus on powerful groups
Social stressors (warfare pandemic disease)
Emotional significance
Sources are usually powerful groups
Content is emotionally laden discovery can be gratifying
People who spread CTs can gain social approval and status
The bar of evidentiary standards to confirm CTs is low while the bar for falsification is high
The survival of CTs aided by psychological biases and distrust of official sources
Background psychological mechanisms are part of buying into CTs
CTs are believed by most people
Knapp 1944
Rumors
People believe and pass along rumors when there is social anxiety and uncertainty
When and where do CTs form and spread -> Top Down Vs Bottom Up
Top down: leadership and justification for war
Bottom up:
Uncertain threatening environments
Intergroup conflict (war terrorism disease natural disasters)
Aided by shared psychological proclivities:
Anxiety
Emotional gratification
Sense making patterns and need for control
Places where life is tough -> More likely to believe ? No it happens anywhere there is STRESS
Bottom Up CT
CTs spread aided by shared psychological mechanisms:
Narrative appeal informational value
Emotional gratification
Illusory pattern perception
Motivations for establishing control
Cognitive processes and information gathering
Confirmation Bias
Confirmation Bias
we see patterns that conform to our prior theories and discount or ignore information that does not confirm our hypothesis
When do we share conspiracy theories
(Bottom Up)
Good story Emotionally gratifying
Illusionary patterns
Motivations for controls
Process that affect your ability to accurately process information
Heath Bell Sternberg 2001
Urban legends:
people pass along information because of informational content or because of emotions
More disgusting urban legends are more likely to be spread than less disgusting ones
Urban legends are passed on because they are plausible form a good story are entertaining and satisfy emotions
Standard explanation:
Negative emotions
diffuse emotions (anxiety)
Emotional state prompted by social events
Elicit Disgust -> Disgust stories that elicit specific emotions are passed along
Illusory Pattern Perception
Backwards songs, Carvings in trees, grilled cheese, etc pEOPLE SEE PATTERNS WHERE THERE ARE NONE
Or you cant see it unless its pointed out to you
Whitson and Galinsky (2008)
People with high stress anxiety inducing jobs are more likely to believe or create rituals superstitions patterns etc in order to ease their lack of control and anxiety. It does not matter if any of them actually work.
Lack control and pattern perception in snowy image task those who lacked control were more likely to report seeing an image in random patterns
Abalakina Paap et al 1999
What predicts belief in CT:More ammonia more conspiracy theories
More authoritarian more conspiracy theories
Stress and stressful life events both predict belief in conspiracy theories
Lobato et al 2014
Epistemically unwarranted beliefs ->Paranormal eg Bigfoot ghosts
Conspiracy eg MLK assassination moon landings faked
Pseudoscience eg evolution global warming
Who believes in CTs?
EVERYONE! Any where stress exists! Does not matter the geographical location! Members of Relatively powerless groups: Neo Naxis
Militia men
Anti globalization protestors
Ethnic minorities subjected to intense discrimination
McHoskey 1995
If you are committed to a theory you are more biased towards that information process unless you are moderate
Do you believe that president John F K was killed by a lone assassin named Lee Harvey Oswald or that there were multiple assassins and therefore a conspiracy to kill president kennedy
Completely certain oswald alone killed jfk -59 to completely certain a conspiracy
Wood et al 2012
Overlapping Conspiracies
Bolded correlations are mutually exclusive but people beliefe eg both that diana was killed by birtish intelligence and that she was killed by al fayeds business enimies
Van Prooijen and Van Vugt 2018
Error Management Interpretation:
We make errors if we think the cost is low
All kinds of benefits of thinking one way
How to tell which groups have malicious intent towards you vs which ones aren’t
Better to assume safe than sorry
Make lots of false positive: low cost error and saves your life
Summary on Conspiracy Theories
Humans are willing to believe things without evidence
Explains the
Low cost mistakes that betray a mechanism that is useful for actual threats
Distinguishing truth from falsity is a scientific enterprise
Conspiracy theories are emotionally gratifying
Conspiracy theories spread informally when they satisfy a range of psychological biases
Belief in conspiracies can undermine behaviors such as valid vaccine uptake and health measures
Psychological Mechanisms that explain why Conspiracy Theories survive (2)
Based assimilation and Fundamental Attribution error
People are most likely to be attended and favor sanctions for politically incorrect statements and behaviors when
When the individual making the judgement is committed to an ideology that deems the behavior politically incorrect. The politically incorrect statements are made by an outgroup member. There is sharply polarized political environment
Perceptions of bias with respect to discrimination are likely to
Contain a relatively high rate of false positives
Research on advertising virtuous victimhood suggests
People who are high in Dark Triad traits are likely to advertise victimhood status. The people displaying them likely gain social benefits such as donations. They are more likely to engage with cancelling other people.
Brundidge (2014) studied the “Deliberative Digital Divide
opinion leaders (those with more influence) exhibited higher integrative complexity, meaning they considered multiple perspectives. However, non-leaders often showed lower complexity, focusing on simpler, less nuanced views, contributing to a divide in online political discussions.
2003 Scott Reid and Sik Hung Ng “Identity power and strategic social categorizations theorizing the language of leadership”
Leaders use language to shape identity and power. They found that leaders strategically use social categorizations (like “us vs. them”) to influence group identity, strengthen their authority, and guide group behavior. Effective leadership language helps build unity and control within a group.
