Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

PSY 210 > exam one > Flashcards

exam one Flashcards

1
Q

Social psychology

A

the scientific attempt to explain how the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the individual are influenced by the actual presence of other human beings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Person-situation debate

A

What determines individual behavior?
Is it the person– personality, values, interests
Is it the situation– social norms, expectations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

The person

A

Personality– long-standing traits and patterns that propel individuals to consistently think, feel, and behave in certain and consistent ways

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Big 5 personality traits

A

you either have high or low levels of these characteristics
Openness to experience– open-minded, curios
Conscientiousness– thoughtfulness, organized
Extraversion
Agreeableness– willing to compromise, cooperative
Neuroticism– emotional stability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

History of the person-situation debate

A

Key Figure: Walter Mischel
Topic: Personality and Assessment
Arguments:
- Lack of consistency in behavior
- Situations may be more predictive of behavior than personality traits

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Correlation Findings:

A

Strongest correlation found: r = 0.30
r^2: Proportion of variance explained
Only 9% of behavior variation explained by personality (for r = 0.30)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Field Division

A

Trait theorists vs. situationists
Conclusion: Situations deemed more crucial than traits in explaining behavior

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Correlations

A

Range from -1 to 1
Magnitude– strength of relationship
Direction is positive or negative
Positive– r > .5
Negative– r < -.5

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Learning styles

A

Reflective (deep processing)
Synthesis analysis and elaborative processing– breaking down complex concepts to make them easier to understand

Agentic (shallow processing)
Methodical study and fact retention– more goal driven

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Hypothesis of study

A

Openness to Experience:
Associated with reflective strategies
Deep engagement likely
Higher GPA expected

Conscientiousness:
Associated with agentic strategies
Timely completion of tasks
Higher GPA expected

H7:
Relationship between openness and GPA mediated by reflective strategies
Mediation:
DV-IV relationship influenced by a third variable

Article found that personality traits and learning styles together explained 17% of the variance in GPA

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Fundamental attribution error

A

an individual’s tendency to attribute others actions to their character or personality, while attributing their own behavior to external situational factors outside of their control

we tend to attribute other people’s behavior to their personality or character traits, while overlooking the influence of situational factors.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Cognitive ease
(fundamental attribution error)

A

Takes more effort to consider circumstances that account for why someone did something

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Information asymmetry
(fundamental attribution error)

A

We know much more about what’s happening in our lives than we do random strangers

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Self-serving biases
(fundamental attribution error)

A

We want to protect our ego as much as possible to think well of ourselves so we give ourselves more grace than we do other people

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Interactionism

A

Behavior influenced by both individual and situation
Lewin’s Equation: B f(P,E)
Behavior as a function of Person and Environment
Person-Situation Interactions: Personality effect on behavior depends on situational characteristics
Situational Strength: Environmental cues for desirable behaviors
Personality Influence: Guides individuals to enter or avoid situations
Situational Alteration: Situations changed based on individual behavior

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Strong situation

A

knowing what’s expected of you, strong cues that make you know what you should be doing
Sitting in a classroom

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Weak situation

A

fewer situational cues that signal what is expected of them
More room for personality to guide their behavior

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Behavior is informed by both personal characteristics and situational factors

A

The impact of personality can depend on the situation, and vice versa

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Deindividuation

A

Concept: Hiding identity reduces personal accountability
Article Focus: Illusory anonymity
Explanation: Feeling anonymous, but it’s just psychological
Result: More deviant behavior due to reduced accountability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Attitude

A

summary evaluation of an object
Person, place, event, etc
Relatively stable feeling/belief that is decided towards an object

Mood is more of a general state of feeling that doesn’t have a source of origin

Emotion is more a more intense reaction that is typically tied to an event that can disrupt your tasks throughout the day
Emotions can help us form our attitudes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Affect

A

feeling and emotion centered
Ex– eating ice cream makes me happy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Behavior

A

actions relevant to the object
Ex– i eat ice cream often

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Cognition

A

thoughts and beliefs about the object
Ex– ice cream is sweet and has a smooth, satisfying texture

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Understanding attitudes

A

The importance of an attitude, as assessed by how quickly it comes to mind
Stronger attitudes are more resistant to change, more predictive behavior

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Influenced by attitude consistency

A

the degree of alignment between components of the tripartite model attitudes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Origin of Attitudes

A

Environmental vs. dispositional
Heritability: Attitudes that are highly influenced by genetics are harder to change.
Self-Perception Theory: People often look at their own behavior to figure out their attitudes.
Equifinality Issue: Behavior can have multiple causes, not just one.
Environmental Cues: Social interactions help shape our attitudes.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Cognitive dissonance

A

desire for consistency between thoughts, statements and behaviors
When inconsistent, feeling of tension and anxiety arise
Dissonance resolved though either behavioral or attitude change

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Theory of planned behavior

A

attitudes lead to behavioral choices through people’s intentions

Attitude towards behavior, subjective norms, and behavioral control develop our intentions which leads to the attitudes and behavioral choices

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Reciprocation

A

the normative expectation of mutual exchange
Helps build social relationships with others
Ex– free samples or gifts, door in the face technique

30
Q

Door in the face technique
(reciprocation)

A

following larger request with a smaller request so the person feels more indebted to say yes to the smaller request because they said no to the first one

31
Q

Consistent

A

tendency to seek alignment in behaviors, beliefs, and attitudes
Examples– foot in door technique, effectiveness of public commitment
Foot in the door– asking for a small request will more likely lead to a yes to a bigger request down the line

32
Q

Social validation

A

desire to align behavior with the behavior engaged in by others
When other people engage in a behavior, we find it more acceptable to engage in that behavior

33
Q

Liking

A

increased likelihood to be persuaded by those we like or admire
Factors that increase liking– similarity, familiarity, cooperation, praise/compliments

34
Q

Authority

A

increased likelihood to comply based on perceptions of competence or expertise
Perception vs. true authority– more likely to listen to people that are better dressed or look smarter

35
Q

Scarcity

A

tendency to assign higher values to items that are perceived as less available
“Act now, limited time offer, only one left”

36
Q

Forewarning

A

reminder to individuals that they are likely to encounter a persuasive situation
Allows opportunity to develop counterarguments ahead of the influence attempt

37
Q

Inoculation

A

build defenses against persuasion by mildly attacking the attitude position
Providing examples of arguments and defense prior to influence attempt

38
Q

Prejudice

A

unfair negative attitude toward a social group

39
Q

Stereotypes

A

overgeneralizations about a group or its members

40
Q

Discrimination

A

unjustified negative behaviors towards members of outgroups based on outgroup membership
Behavioral manifestation

41
Q

Explicit bias

A

attitudes and beliefs that we have about a person or group on a conscious level
We are fully aware of these, so they can be self-reported

openly expressed biases and actions

42
Q

Implicit bias

A

unconscious attitudes that lie below the surface that we can consciously report
Measure via behavioral means like IAT
Implicit association test (IAT)– assessment intended to detect subconscious associations between mental representations of objects in memory

43
Q

Traditional prejudice

A

explicit
Conscious statements, discriminatory acts
Strategies to reduce traditional forms– Emphasize norms that prejudice is wrong and direct persuasive strategies
Social validation– normalizing what behaviors are socially acceptable
Present counter-stereotypical or non-stereotypic information about outgroup members

44
Q

Contemporary prejudice

A

implicit
People on the surface saying they don’t have a bias, but evidence suggest there is underlying prejudice
Strategies to reduce contemporary forms– Techniques that lead people to discover inconsistencies among their self-image, values and behaviors that may arouse feelings of guilt and tension

45
Q

Cognitive dissonance

A

Strategies that emphasize intergroup processes like intergroup contact and social categorization and identity

46
Q

Intergroup contact

A

Contact hypothesis– the prediction that increased intergroup contact will reduce prejudice
Intergroup contact is particularly successful when groups
Have equal status
Are under cooperation (vs competitive) conditions
Are allowed opportunities to interact socially
Operate under egalitarian norms

47
Q

Social categorization

A

When we automatically sort people into groups based on certain characteristics like race, gender, or nationality.

Often results in us vs. them mentality

48
Q

Decategorization

A

Making group differences less noticeable

49
Q

Recategorization

A

Changing how groups are defined or categorized
Important to retain positive distinctiveness– positive self-concept or image related to one’s identity
Still valuing the different identities people hold while also saying we are united and inclusive

50
Q

Close relationships

A

relationships between people that are characterized by loving, caring, commitment, and intimacy
Inclusive of romantic relationships, friendships, and family relationships

51
Q

Interpersonal attractions

A

the level of attraction between people which leads to the development of platonic or romantic relationships
Not always physical attraction, but the feeling of being drawn to a person

52
Q

Similarity attraction paradigm

A

tendency for people to be attracted to those who are similar to themselves
Similarity in
Status
If we feel like they have a higher status than us, insecurity happens because the person will feel like their partner will stray and be with someone that is more in their “league”
Liking levels
We like to invest in relationships when we feel like we are on the same page as the other person
Mere exposure effect– the tendency to prefer stimuli (including, but not limited to, people) that we have seen frequently

53
Q

Benefits of Expressing Gratitude

A

impact on Relationship Quality
Communal Strength:
Felt responsibility for partner’s welfare
Conceptualization:
Personal sacrifice
Distress/guilt
Partner placement in communal hierarchy

54
Q

Conditions for Causality

A

it should always be linked to the effect.

It must happen before the effect.

There shouldn’t be any other reasonable explanations for the relationship

55
Q

Studies on Gratitude and Communal Strength

A

Study 1:
Cross-sectional survey
Positive correlation found
Study 2:
Longitudinal survey
Positive association over time
Study 3:
Experimental manipulation
Gratitude expression highest
Impacts self-perception and communal relationships

56
Q

Self-concept

A

a knowledge representation of one’s beliefs about oneself
Cognitive and descriptive in nature
Measuring self concept– “I am (please fill in the blank)
Would best be considered as reflecting the cognitive component

57
Q

Self-complexity

A

the extent to which individuals have different and independent ways of thinking about themselves
Complexity associated with more positive outcomes, as it acts as a buffer in times of threat

58
Q

Self-esteem

A

positive or negative feelings we have about ourselves
how you feel about something with respect to your self-concept
Would be best considered as reflecting the affect component

59
Q

Self-affirmation theory

A

feeling good about one part of ourselves can make it easier to handle criticism or challenges in other parts of our lives.

60
Q

Self efficacy

A

individual belief in your ability to reach specific goals or accomplish particular tasks

ex– do I believe I have the ability to eat more fruits and veggies?

61
Q

Response efficacy

A

whether we think doing something will actually have the effect we want it to have

Do I believe eating more fruits and veggies will actually benefit my health?

62
Q

Altruism

A

doing good things for others without expecting anything in return

63
Q

Kin altruism

A

behaving to benefit a genetic relatives change of survival at some cost to ones won changes

64
Q

Reciprocal altruism

A

helping based on the normative expectation of mutual exchange

65
Q

Pure altruism

A

helping someone from a place of empathy, knowing no self benefit will come

66
Q

Bystander effect

A

phenomenon where individuals are less likely to help someone in need in the presence of others
Diffusion of responsibility– assumption that other will take action, leading to personal inaction
Kitty genovese

67
Q

Good samaritan laws

A

legal protection to people who give reasonable assistance to those in need
Some form in all 50 states

68
Q

Duty to rescue laws

A

impose penalty for those who do not help in circumstances of danger
Less frequent in the united states, more often duty to report

69
Q

Big Five Academic Achievement article

A

Study: Examined 308 undergraduates’ personality traits, learning styles, and GPA.

Findings:
Two Big Five traits, conscientiousness and agreeableness, positively related to all learning styles.
Neuroticism negatively related to all learning styles.
Extraversion and openness positively related to elaborative processing.
Combined, Big Five traits explained 14% of GPA variance; learning styles added 3%.
Openness linked to GPA via reflective learning styles (synthesis-analysis, elaborative processing).

Conclusion: Personality and learning styles both impact academic performance; integrating intellectual curiosity with thoughtful processing enhances GPA.

70
Q

Strategies for Reducing Prejudice article

A

Focus: Addressing both traditional and contemporary forms of prejudice.
Traditional Prejudice: Targeted via direct education and attitude-change techniques.
Contemporary Prejudice: May require alternative strategies.
Individual-Oriented Techniques: Identify inconsistencies in self-image, values, and behaviors to evoke negative emotions (e.g., guilt), motivating attitude change.
Intergroup Strategies: Aim to personalize interactions, redefine group boundaries, and foster inclusive representations.
Goal: Understanding prejudice’s nature informs effective interventions for both traditional and contemporary prejudice.

71
Q

Benefits of expressing gratitude article

A

Objective: Investigate if expressing gratitude enhances perception of relationship communal strength.

Study 1: Cross-sectional survey (N = 137) showed expressing gratitude linked to higher perception of relationship communal strength.

Study 2: Longitudinal study (N = 218) found expressing gratitude predicted increased perception of communal strength over time.

Study 3: Experimental study (N = 75) showed participants who expressed gratitude had higher perceived communal strength compared to control conditions.

Conclusion: Expressing gratitude boosts perception of relationship communal strength.
Implications: Highlights importance of gratitude expression in fostering strong relationships.

72
Q

Self-Affirmation Promotes Health Behavior Change article

A

Objective: Test if self-affirmation can increase fruit and vegetable consumption, exploring mediation by efficacy variables.

Procedure: Exposed to health message after task, efficacy measures taken immediately, followed by 7-day fruit and vegetable consumption diary.

Results: Self-affirmed participants ate significantly more fruit and vegetables (approx. 5.5 portions increase) compared to controls. Effect mediated by response-efficacy.

Conclusion: Self-affirmation interventions can effectively influence health-promoting behaviors.
Implication: Highlights the potential of self-affirmation in promoting positive health behaviors.

PSY 210 (3 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions