Final Flashcards
1
Q
Social Norms
A
Rules or guidelines in a group or culture about what behaviours are proper and improper. Implicit or explicit.
2
Q
Conformity
A
People changing their perceptions, opinions, and behaviour to be consistent with group norms.
3
Q
Two reasons that people conform
A
Information influence or Normative influence.
4
Q
Conforming due to information influence
A
People conform because they want to be correct, and when everyone else agrees, it is likely that they are correct. More based on information people present/discuss. More likely to conform when uncertain or ambiguous.
5
Q
Conforming due to normative influence
A
People conform because they fear the consequences of appearing deviant. Conforming when wanting to be liked. People express prejudices only toward groups that are “ok” to be prejudiced against.
6
Q
Sherif’s Autokinetic Effect Study
A
Participant in dark room shown a single point of light. Task: Estimate distance that light moves (difficult & ambiguous task, light is stationary but appears to move). Do task first alone, then with other people in the room. 37% of the time participants agreed with the obviously incorrect majority.
7
Q
Two types of conformity
A
- Private conformity: true acceptance or conversion, being truly persuaded others are correct.
- Public conformity: superficial change in behaviour, politicians regularly caught in hypocrisy.
8
Q
Why do people conform
A
The clearer (less ambiguous) the activity, the more that desire for acceptance/fear of exclusion predicts public conformity. People who don’t care about being accepted/excluded by group don’t conform. Those that do, do.
9
Q
When do people conform?
A
Group size: larger groups have a larger impact on conformity, up to a point. Strength of norms. More likely to litter in littered area. Gender: Asch said women conform more than men, but modern studies says that the topic and expertise matters. A single ally can reduce conformity.
10
Q
How to be a convincing minority voice of dissent?
A
Consistent, unwavering. Appearing flexible and open-minded. Stimulates majority group members to reexamine their own views. more influence (but initially more disliked) when part of “us” rather than “them”.
11
Q
Compliance
A
Explicit requests for help.
12
Q
Norm of Reciprocity
A
If given something, we feel compelled to give back. Eg: Wait staff writing “thank you”, smiley faces, etc, get bigger tips.
13
Q
Sequential Request strategies
A
Foot in the door, low-balling, door in the face, that’s not all. All two-step processes: “setting trap” and “springing it”.
14
Q
Foot in the door strategy
A
Small initial request that targets can’t easily refuse. Larger later requests are more likely to be accepted. Why? People inferring their attitudes based on their own behaviours. Self perception theory of self.
15
Q
Door in the face strategy
A
Initial request is very high and unreasonable. Second then appears more reasonable. Why? Norm of reciprocity: Conceding smaller commitment can be perceived as “giving” something (but first request has to appear sincere). Perceptual contrast: 2nd offer seems smaller than when offered alone.
16
Q
Low-balling strategy
A
After you’ve agreed to something, coming back and saying the price is a bit higher than originally agreed. Now you’ve mentally committed to the price/action.
17
Q
That’s not all strategy
A
Offer a price, but immediately offer a discount on prince.
18
Q
Resisting sequential request strategies
A
All the strategies work if perceived as sincere and employed subtly. When targets think they are being manipulated, it does not work.
19
Q
Obedience
A
Explicit requests for conformity from positions of authority. Can be good, can be bad if blind.
20
Q
Why obedience is important (1966, Hofling experiment)
A
Hofling (psychiatrist) performed a field experiment. Asked 22 nurses to give an overdose of “Astroten”. 21 did it, even though: on the label it said the maximum dose, they didn’t know the doctor, it was not on their list of approved medications.
21
Q
Milgram’s Obedience Studies
A
Trying to understand Nazis. Would normal people obey authority to harm another? Participants elicited (on average) 27 of 30 shocks. 26 of the 40 participants elicited the 450volt.
22
Q
Social Impact Theory (Latane, 1981)
A
Total impact of social influence is a function of 3 things:
1. Strength of source: status, ability, authority.
2. Distance: proximity in space and time.
3. Number: how man sources.
23
Q
Human’s need to belong
A
People are motivated to form and maintain interpersonal bonds. Optimal human functioning requires close, non-aversive, long-term relationships. The fact that belongingness is a need means that human beings must establish and maintain a minimum quantity of enduring relationships. This need is fundamental and universal. It is not limited to certain people or circumstances.
24
Q
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
A
Physiological, Safety, Love/Belonging, Esteem, Self-actualization.
25
What is the purpose of human's need to belong?
It has an evolutionary basis. Our need to belong benefits our survival and reproduction: groups share resources, help care for offspring, being in groups helps with difficult tasks such as hunting large animals. Being in groups has benefits for defending oneself and protecting one's resources against external threats.
26
The Heart Disease Study (Coyne et al., 2001).
Relationship quality was measured throug surveys and objective coding of a lab-based conflict discussion. Patients with mild CHF with lower marital quality were similar to those with sever CHF. Evidence for human's need to belong.
27
The Cold Study (Cohen et al., 1997).
Social network measure: Diversity of social roles. While in quarantine, researchers administered nasal drops contaning a cold virus to participants. Results: Greater network diversity was linked with lower likelihood of developing a cold. Evidence for human's need to belong.
28
More evidence for human's need to belong
Relationship satisfaction affects satisfaction with work, income, and general health. Happily married couples have stronger immune systems than unhappily married couples. The survival rate of elderly people who have had a hart attack doubles if they receive social support from 2 or more people.
29
Link between relationships and mortality
People with stronger relationships had 50% increased likelihood of survival. The effect of social relationships on mortality is comparable to other well-known risk factors.
30
Beyond physical health: what are some benefits of belonging to our subjective well-being?
Simply being part of a supportive social network reduces stress, even if other people do not provide explicit emotion or practical assistance. One's sense of belonging is related to greater meaning in life.
31
The Porcupine Challenge
We need to strike a balance between connection and fear or rejection. Building strong relationships require us to be vulnerable and trusting, lending ourselves to get hurt.
32
Consequences of Deprivation of Need to Belong
Loneliness: Discrepancy between the level of contact one has and the level one desires. Most likely to occur during transitions (move to new city, after romantic breakup). In North America, loneliest group is 18-30 year olds. Declines over life, until health limits social activities in older age.
33
Consequences of Loneliness
US mortality rates tend to be higher for people who are divorced, single or widowed (compared to married individuals). People who are lonely and have lower quality relationships have poorer immune functioning.
34
Pros/cons of Need to Belong
Pros: Deep attachment bonds.
Cons: Threats/radicalization
35
Four main factors of interpersonal attraction
1. Proximity
2. Similarity
3. Reciprocity
4. Physical attractiveness
36
Proximity: Westgate Housing Study
Tracked who became friends in a student housing complex at MIT. 65% of friends mentioned living in the same building. Functional distance was also important: people who lived near stairwells more likely to make friends with people on different floors.
37
Why does proximity predict attraction?
Long-distance relationships are costly. More Exposure Effect: the more you are exposed to something the more you tend to like it -because familiarity breeds liking.
38
Proximity and Similarity
Greater proximity often = shared interests. But, only happens if original evaluation of a person is neutral - if similarity is low, proximity can increase negative feelings. Similarity predicts who we are attracted to.
39
Matching Hypothesis
We tend to end up with others whose attractiveness level (or desirability level) is similar to our own.
40
Actual vs Perceived Similarity
Do you actually have to be similar to someone, or should you simply think you are similar to someone? Perceived similarity seems to have a stronger effect on initial attraction.
41
Why does similarity influence attraction?
Facilitates smooth interactions (similar attitudes, less conflicts of interest). Similar others have qualities we like; dissimilar others are "unreasonable." We expect expect similar others to like us.
42
Opposities attract?
Condition for opposites: 1. Commitment is low and plans on remaining low. 2. Reassured the other person likes them. Also, if participants want a committed relationship, they choose a similar partner. However, if they feel a low level of commitment to the relationship, they favour dissimilar partners.
43
Reciprocal Liking
We like people who like us. #1 indicator of attraction across all samples (mutual attraction). Self-fulfilling prophecy: if we believe another person likes us, we behave in more likeable ways.
44
Playing 'hard-to-get'
Study found that we like people who like us despite being generally selective.
45
Why does beauty promote relationship initiation?
1. The "what is beautiful is good" effect (the halo effect).
2. Beautiful people are more socially skilled.
3. Beautiful people are treated differently.
4. Beautiful people elicit greater attention from others.
46
Mirror images on attractiveness
Typically people find mirror images less attractive.
47
Evolutionary Perspective: Women
Physical: Signs of fertility (waist-to-hip ratio), Face (large eyes, full lips, small nose, prominent cheekbones, high eyebrows, broad smile).
Social: Makeup, revealing clothing.
48
Evolutionary Perspective: Men
Physical: Signs of masculinity and power, Face (prominent cheekbones, large chin).
49
Physical Attractiveness Study: Pennebaker et al. (1979)
Power of the situation - traits such as attractiveness can be malleable. 103 women and men recruited from local bars near a university in the southern US. Asked on a scale from 1-10 on attractiveness, how would you rate men/women here tonight? Near midnight (hour before close) the ratings wen up.
50
Misattribution of Arousal
A process in which people make mistaken inferences about what is causing them to feel the way they do. Based on Schacter's Two Factor Theory of Emotions: Emotions have two components (physiological arousal and cognition).
51
Keeping the passion alive in long term relationships
Passion often fades because we get comfortable with each other, and feel relaxed, which is the opposite of the arousal needed for passion. Doing novel arousing activities together keeps passion alive (or restores it).
52
Implicit Theories of Relationships
Beliefs about the nature of relationships. Destiny/soulmate vs growth/work-it-out. A growth mindset is linked to relationship-enhancing responses to relationship challenges. A destiny mindset is linked to disengagement in response in response to relationship challenges - also to sooner break-up, especially in less satisfying relationships.
53
Implicit Theories: Destiny vs. Growth: Coping with Relationship Stressors
Destiny: Distancing behaviour, no efforts to repair.
Growth: Active coping, planning, re-interpret event in a more positive light, low denial.
54
Evolutionary Theory
Evolved from evolutionary biology. Only goal of relationships is reproductive success. Sex differences in mate selection.
55
What do women look for in men?
Psychological constructs: Power, dominance. These traits signal the ability to provide resources to provide for offspring, and to protect offspring. Also look for physical traits such as height, broad shoulders, muscularity, protection.
56
What do men look for in women?
Physical attractiveness. Health, the ability to produce offspring. Waist-to-hip ratio. Youthful appearance.
57
Long term vs short-term goals when attracting a mate
Short-term is based on physical for both sexes. Long-term still leans physical for males, but psychological for females (traits that will lead to an ability to provide resources).
58
Why should be more selective when selecting a mate - men or women?
Parental investment: Physical investment - Women. Monetary (resources) investment - Men.
59
Perspectives on Love: Evolutionary Theory. Buss et al. (1992): Evolutionary perspective study.
Would you rather your partner form a deep emotional attachment to another person, or enjoy sexual intercourse with another person? Emotional infidelity was more upsetting to women, and sexual infidelity was more upsetting to men.
60
Attachment Style
The way a person typically interacts with significant others, as guided by internal working models that are developed based on early experience with primary caregivers.
61
Bowlby's Attachment Theory
Evolution has 'wired' humans to seek closeness and thereby, emotional security.
62
Secure attachment style
Happy and trusting in relationships. Believes that others are responsive and seek support from partners. Stable emotional lives. Tend to stay in relationships longer.
63
Anxious attachment style
Obsession and desire for union. Fear of rejection. Extreme jealousy. Negative self-worth.
64
Avoidant attachment style
Fear of intimacy, emotional highs and lows. Independent and self-sufficient. Low need/desire for closeness. Less trusting of partner.
65
Mary Ainsworth's "The Strange Situation"
Looking at infants' reaction during the reunion with caregiver (e.g., mom) after short separation period.
66
Attachment in Adulthood
Attachment is modestly stable over time. 30% of people change their attachment style. New relationship experiences update the working models and expectations. Attachment models are also sensitive to life events.
67
General vs Specific Attachment
List 10 most impactful relationships and rate them in terms of attachment. Participant's general attachment model was also assessed (how are you in relationships generally?). Most people in general are securely attached in their relationships. Generally avoidantly and anxiously attached people have relatively more avoidantly attached and anxiously attached relationships respectively compared to the other groups.
68
Attachment in the Context of Pandemic (Overall et al., 2021).
New Research (2021) looked at how pre-existing vulnerabilities (eg., attachment insecurity) and contextual stress (eg., due to the pandemic) changes relationship functioning. Couples were assessed before the pandemic and during the lockdown. Similar effects were found when looking at family cohesion and home chaos as outcomes. Partner's attachment avoidance also predicted lower problem-solving efficacy and family cohesion.
69
The Investment Model of Commitment
This is a model to predict commitment and stability of one's relationship.
70
How do we maintain commitment in the face of relational threats?
Committed individuals devalue attractive alternatives by undermining their desirability. Committed people give lower attractiveness ratings to photos of attractive potential partners than singles. Committed people pay less attention to attractive alternatives. Committed people are faster at disengaging their attention from photos of attractive alternatives than singles. This is because committed individuals are motivated to maintain the relationship and attractive alternatives represent a potential threat to the relationship. To dampen the threat of an attractive temptation, people engage in maintenance responses.
71
Idealization
People tend to idealize their partners and see them positively. 1. Partners faults are seen as virtues. 2. Refute the severity or stability of the fault.
72
Motivated Inaccuracy
There are instances where couples are motivated to be less accurate about their partner's thoughts and feelings. Instances where the partner has relationship threatening thoughts: When partner finds another person attractive, partner is having negative thoughts about the relationship.
73
Gottman & Levenson, 1999 study on conflict
Brought 79 romantic couples into the lab. Each couple discussed a conflict while being videotaped. Conversation were coded for negative behaviours, or positive behaviours. Identified the four horsemen of the apocalypse: behaviours that predicted dissatisfaction and divorce.
74
The four horsemen of the apocalypse
1. Criticism
2. Defensiveness
3. Contempt
4. Stonewalling
They are associated with lower relationship satisfaction and divorce.
75
Relationship Trajectories
Satisfaction declines over time. But there's also substantial variability account in the average trajectory.
76
Finkel's Marriage Suffocation Model
Fundamental purpose of marriage has changed, and our expectations of marriage have grown. Olden days: helping spouses meet their basic economic and political needs. Nowadays: helping spouses meet their autonomy and personal growth needs. BUT, there are also smaller number of confidants outside of marriage. Expectations are higher for the romantic partner. But people also investing less time and resources in their marriages.
77
The All-or-Nothing Marriage
Marriages that succeed in meeting these new needs are more fulfilling than the earlier marriages. Marriages that do not meet these needs dissolve and have contributed to the increased rate of divorce and marital dissatisfaction.
78
How to "Reoxygenate the marriage"
Optimizing the use of available resources: Low-investment interventions (excitement intervention).
Investing more resources: set apart 'couple time', engage in shared social and civic activities.
Requiring less: Seek support from other members in the social network, consensual non-monogamy.
79
Divorce Rates
The current North American divorce rate is nearly 50% of the current marriage rate and has been for the past two decades. Countless romantic relationships between unmarried individuals end every day.
80
Predictors of Divorce
Divorce rates are higher in nations characterized by: 1. Greater socio-economic development. 2. Greater female labor participation.
81
Sex Ration Study (Uggla & Andersson, 2018).
People are more likely to divorce if they work in a sector of the economy with a larger proportion of the other-sex people (eg., healthcare is mostly women, construction is mostly men). Explanation: Salience of attractive alternatives (recall investment model).
82
Fear of being single (Spielmann et al., 2013).
People who fear being single identify with statements such as "I feel it is close to being too late for me to find the love of my life". Fear of being single is related to: Setting for less in romantic relationships, greater romantic interest in less responsive and less attractive partners, less selective in expressing romantic interest at speed-dating. Less likely to initiate the dissolution of a less satisfying relationship.
83
Singlehood & Well-Being (Girme et al., 2016)
Recruited undergrads in relationships and singles. Assessed avoidance goals (motivation to maintain social connections by avoiding conflict or disagreements) and approach goals (try to maintain their social relationships by enhancing intimacy and fostering relationship growth). Outcome: daily life satisfaction.
84
Groupiness (Entitavity)
We identify groups partly from "Gestalt" principles (german word for pattern). Close together, similar in appearance, moving together. But can assess entitativity of groups not physically present.
85
Why are we so groupy?
Evolutionary view: Survival, mating advantage, those in groups were most likely to pass on their genes. The need to belong = innate and is present in all societies. People in all cultures are motivated to form relationships and resist the dissolution of these relationships.
86
Why do group members tend to be homogeneous
Many groups tend to attract people who are already similar before they join. Groups tend to operate in ways that encourage similarity in the members.
87
Group Cohesiveness
Qualities of a group that bind members together and promote liking between members. The more cohesive a group is, the more its members are likely to: stay in the group, take part in group activities, and try to recruit new like-minded members. If task needs close cooperation, cohesiveness helps. If maintaining good relations seems more important than finding a solution to a problem, cohesiveness can hinder performance.
88
Social Facilitation: Triplett (1898) study
Children rolled up fishing line on a reel. Either Condition 1: by themselves or, Condition 2: in the presence of other children. Faster when: In the presence of other children. But work even back then got some mixed results.
89
Social Facilitation: Zajonc (1965)
Others' presence --> Arousal --> Strengthens dominant response --> Enhances easy behaviour OR Impairs difficult behaviour
90
Social Facilitation
The presence of others increases physiological arousal. When such arousal exists, it is easier to do something that is simple but harder to do something complex or learn something new.
91
Simple vs complex tasks in social facilitation
Simple tasks where the "dominant" or automatic response is correct: overlearned, instinctual, automatized, require no resources. Performance heightened when person is a little anxious.
Complex task where the answer is not obvious: Novel, Learned, Controlled, Require cognitive resources. Performance suffers when person is a little anxious.
92
Social facilitation in the real world
Exam rooms, office buildings, open-concept kitchens.
93
Social Loafing
When others relax us. Sometimes, in the presence of others. Can not distinguish performance of one individual from another. Merge into a group = become less noticeable than when alone = relaxed (vs. aroused). No evaluation apprehension = less effort. To get rid of social loafing, have to make individuals accountable.
94
Social Loafing in the Real World
Sports teams, work groups, group projects.
95
Does social loafing always occur with group efforts?
Not when: task is challenging, appealing, involving, group members are friends, or big reward for effort.
96
Social facilitation vs Social loafing diagram
Social facilitation:
Presence of others --> Individual efforts can be evaluated --> Alertness. Evaluation apprehension. Distraction-conflict. --> Arousal --> Enhanced performance on simple tasks OR impaired performance on complex tasks.
Social loafing:
Presence of others --> Individual efforts cannot be evaluated --> No evaluation apprehension --> Relaxation --> Impaired performance on simple tasks OR Enhanced performance on complex tasks.
97
Deindividuation
Social facilitation: groups can arouse people.
Social loafing: groups can diffuse responsibility.
When arousal and diffused responsibility combine: Deindividuation. A loss of self-awareness and evaluation apprehension. Occurs in group situations that foster anonymity and draw attention away from the individual. The loosening of normal constraints on behaviour when people can't be identified, leading to an increase in impulsive and deviant acts.
98
Examples of deindividuation
My Lai massacre, soccer hooligans, rock concerts, raves, online bullying, night club.
99
How does feeling anonymous increase deindividuation?
Participants in a darkened room cheat more, wearing sunglasses leads people to act more selfishly in a two-player game, video game chat.
100
Tragedy of the Commons
Free resource, finite, replenishes slowly. If everyone uses it uninhibited, it goes away.
101
When do groups handle social dilemmas well
Fear and Greed lead to bad outcomes. High trust, high identification with the group (both reduce fear and greed), small groups (larger groups exploit resources more). Collectivists do better. When it's groups that need to work together instead of individuals, we do particularly bad (less trust).
102
Three theories to explain the role of physiological arousal of social facilitation
1. Other people cause us to become alert and vigilant. "Mere Presence" hypothesis: others can be unpredictable, are in a state of alertness in their presence.
2. Other people make us feel apprehensive about how we are being evaluated. "Evaluation apprehension". Social facilitation effects occur only when we perceive we are being evaluated.
3. Other people distract us from the task at hand. Divided attention = increased arousal.
103
Groupthink
A kind of thinking in which maintaining group cohesiveness and solidarity is more important than considering the facts in a realistic manner.
104
The Groupthink Trap
Bay pf Pigs - 1961 US invaded Cuba: Kennedy organized impressive group of advisors. Inherited old plan to spark revolt and overthrow Castro. Flawed plan: Invaders supposed to land and link up with rebels in mountains. But mountains 80 miles away from landing zone with swamp in between. US soldiers all killed/captured, world pissed at US, Castro allied more closely with USSR. President Kennedy learned from Bay of Pigs decision - Cuban missile crisis: When advisers met to decide what to do about the discovery of Soviet missiles in Cuba, Kennedy often absented himself from the group so as to not inhibit discussion. Brought in outside experts who were not members of the in-group.
105
Avoiding the Groupthink Trap
A wise leader can take several steps to avoid groupthink: Remain impartial, seek outside, opinions, from independent evaluators or experts, create subgroups, seek anonymous opinions, encouraging members to raise objections and concerns, assign one or more members to be a "Devil's advocate".
106
How do groups affect decision-making
Tend to assume that a group is better than an individual.
107
Additive task in group decisions
Result is the SUM of all members. Folding a billion paper cranes.
108
Conjunctive task in group decisions.
Result is determined by the weakest link. Mountain climbing.
109
Disjunctive task in group decisions
Result is determined by the strongest member. Best shot during team golfing.
110
Brainstorming
Express ALL ideas, even if bad, the more ideas the better. Groups brainstorming actually come up with fewer ideas than people brainstorming on their own, then later combining - roughly half as productive. Possibly due to social loafing, and being constrained by other people's ideas.
111
Process Loss
Any aspect of group interaction that inhibits good problem solving. Can occur because groups might not try hard enough to find out who the most competent member is. The most competent member might find it difficult to disagree with everyone else. Communication problems can arise.
112
How do we fix process loss
Longer group discussion. Enough time to get beyond what everyone already knows. Assign different group members to specific areas of expertise. They are aware that they are responsible for certain types of info. Also occurs in close relationships.
113
Transactive Memory
The combined memory of two people that is more efficient than the memory of either individual. Develop a sense of responsibility for your area of expertise. More likely to present this unique information.
114
Three types of "Social"
Prosocial: Altruism, helping behaviour.
Asocial: Being on your own, not doing anything with anyone.
Antisocial: Aggression, violence, hurtful, destructive behaviour.
115
What is Aggression?
Aggression is a behaviour. Anger is considered the emotion underlying aggression - but are not necessarily connected, e.g., you can have anger without aggression and aggression without anger.
116
Who commits violent crimes and against whom?
In North America, teenagers and young adults, aged 14-24 years, are more likely to engage in violent crime and also be a victim of violent crime. Most violence against others within our group/around near us.
117
Aggression and Gender
Guys>Girls: Men get in fights and do more crime.
Guys = girls: Physical vs Relational - we have to examine type, women gossip in aggressive ways.
Guys>Girls: Men gossip almost as much as women (if not equal), AND punch people.
Straight men>Gay men: Both indirect, but straight men physical.
118
Evolutional Theories of Aggression
Males: Combat is high risk/high reward. Females prefer high status males for mating. Aggression as a way of displaying and maintaining status over time.
119
Evolutional Theories of Aggression: Evidence
Man v Man violence: Status
Man v Women violence: Sexual Jealousy.
We should be less violent toward those sharing our genes. Parents more likely to abuse foster children than their biological offspring.
120
Social Learning Theories
Basic idea: We learn to use aggression through personal experience and from role models/society. Personal Experience: If you want something, try aggression. If success - keep doing it. If failure - adopt other strategies.
121
Is Aggression a Learned Behaviour?
Aggressive behaviour is strongly affected by learning. Those who are rewarded for their aggression will maintain the behaviour. Aggression can be positively and negatively reinforced. Positive reinforcement: Aggression is reinforced when it produces desired outcomes. Negative reinforcement: Aggression is reinforced because it prevents or stops undesirable outcomes.
122
Learning from others: Spanking
Role of punishment to decrease aggression. Punishment may lead to a decrease in aggression, but only when it:
1) Immediately follows the aggressive behaviour.
2) Is strong enough to deter the agressor.
3) Is consistently applied and perceived as fair and legitimate by the aggressor.
123
Corporal Punishment and Aggression
Problems with using punishment to reduce aggression because these stringent conditions are seldom met. Studies show that "the certainty of punishment is more important that its severity". 88% of criminologists don't believe the death penalty is an effective homicide deterrent.
124
Observational Learning (Bandura)
Aggression is learned by observing others.
125
Social Learning Theory (Bandura)
Aggression is a learned behaviour through both rewards and observation (e.g., in the family) especially when the models are rewarded and not punished for their behaviour.
126
How can observational and social learning of aggression result
Such learning can result due to three factors:
1) People learn the specific aggressive behaviours from models.
2) People develop positive attitudes and beliefs about aggression, in general.
3) People construct social "scripts" about how to behave and resolve interpersonal conflict through aggression.
127
Cultures of honour
Emphasizes honour and social status - particularly for men. Aggression acceptable in defending that honour.
128
Cultures of honour: How do we know about them?
Good amount of strong evidence they are a thing: surveys, field experiments, lab experiments, correlational data. Violent behaviour toward wife: Canada vs. Chile. This is not violence overall - cultural difference. Men who grew up in the south had greater physiological arousal, higher T, reported greater threat.
129
Honour cultures: Causes?
Cultures of law: Highly regulated, 3rd party enforcement. infrastructure. Honour as reinforcement of social norms, honour as reputation management, reputation as protection.
130
Cultures of honour: What do we know about them?
In general: more school violence, greater suicide rates, higher general rates of violence, higher homicide rates. Some places "honour" is more individualistic (West) vs. family-based (Middle East).
131
Social Learning: Pornography (and violence against women)
Little evidence for non-violent porn --> violence toward women link. May be some evidence that it changes attitudes regarding women in general (dehumanizing); more objects for sex than people. In general evidence is weak because it is hard to study.
132
Theories of Aggression: Frustration
Frustration: Response to blocking of goal-directed behaviour. According to John Dollard and colleagues (1939), the frustration-aggression hypothesis states that: a) aggression is a response to frustration and b) all aggression is the result of frustration.
Aggression as a psychological drive that propels the individual towards action to decrease the drive. If we can't aggress against the source of frustration, we aggress against another target, referred to as displacement of the arousal. Releasing the aggression through action is referred to as catharsis.
133
Situational Influences on Behaviour
Pain or any other aversive event - some experimental evidence with animals and students. Heat - evidence is correlational. Intensity of Arousal - referred to as Excitation Transfer. Crowding - leads to aggression and fear of aggression, e.g., urban vs. rural settings. Aggression Cues - the presence of a gun versus a badminton racquet.
134
Global warming and crime?
Ranson (2004) concludes: Global warming will cause an additional 22,000 murders, 1.2 million aggression assaults, costing over 100 billion (this century).
135
Evaluation of Theories of Aggression
Myriad factors are implicated in the development and maintenance of aggression. There is inconsistent, mixed, or spotty empirical support for other theories. Each theory may account for some aggression, but no one theory can explain all incidents of aggression. Theories can be seen as complementary rather than competing.
136
Biological Factors of aggression
Genetic influences - some support from twin studies; aggressive parents beget aggressive children. Biochemical Influences: a) increased testosterone is associated with more aggression, b) lower serotonin is associated with heightened aggression, c) alcohol unleashes aggression by reducing awareness, inhibitions, and problem-solving.
137
Reducing Aggression: Situational and Sociocultural Factors
Reduce stressors such as frustration, discomfort, and provocation. Teach and model nonviolent responses to frustrations and social problems. Emphasize cooperation over competitiveness. Change cost-reward payoffs associated with aggression.
138
Altruism
Desire to help another, to improve their welfare, regardless of whether we derive any benefit. Helping another without conscious regard for one's self-interest. All altruistic behaviour is prosocial behaviour, but not all prosocial behaviour is altruistic behaviour.
139
Evolutionary Theory for why we help
Survival of the Fittest - The "Selfish Gene". In a way, altruism doesn't make sense from an evo standpoint: If we are dead we can't pass on our genes. Should see survival of "selfish gene" because those who helped would surely die out. Helping has survival advantages: Kin selection - Help your kin = Help your genes. Reciprocity - Help strangers = Help your survival chances.
140
Reciprocal altruism
Reciprocal helping - expect to have favour returned - increases our overall fitness. Through reciprocal altruism, helping someone else can be in your best interests. Increases the likelihood that you will be helped in return. Building up value in the "reputation bank".
141
Other reasons people engage in pro-social behaviour: Reciprocity
Obligation to return in kind what another has done for us. Willingness to request or accept help is often predicated on the ability to return in kind. Some suggest this norm is genetically based due to survival value.
142
Direct reciprocity
Helping someone who may help you later.
143
Indirect reciprocity
Help someone; someone else helps you later.
144
Social exchange theory on why we help
Helping can actually be rewarding in a number of ways. "Minimax" strategy. Unconscious weighing of costs and rewards. If we can minimize the costs and maximize the rewards - we will help. According to SE, true altruism does not exist. People help when the benefits outweigh the costs.
145
Social Exchange Theory: Costs vs Benefits of helping
Costs: physical danger, pain, embarrassment, time consuming.
Benefits: make us feel good, avoid punishment for breaking social norms, social approval of other, decrease stress (aversive arousal) of seeing someone in need of help, be reciprocated in the future - an investment.
146
Social Exchange: The Costs and Rewards of Helping
The norm of reciprocity can increase the likelihood that someone will helps us in return. Helping someone is an investment in the future, the social exchange being that someday, someone will help us when we need it. Helping can also relieve the personal distress of a bystander. By helping others, we can also gain such rewards as social approval from others and increased feelings of self-worth.
147
Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis on why we help
When we feel empathy for a person we will attempt to help them regardless of what we have to gain. Help motivated by empathy lasts longer than when there is not empathy. 2 motional components of empathy - personal distress & empathetic concern. Emotion experienced depends on perspective taken. Empathic concern --> altruistic motive. Personal distress --> egoistic motive.
148
Egoism vs Altruism: motivations for helping
Egoism: Helper wants a return for offering help, negative state relief theory (help to reduce your own distress).
Altruism: Expects nothing in return for helping, motivated by empathy.
149
Baston's approach to Other's Distress
Other's Distress --> Distress --> Egoistic Motivation --> Act to reduce Own distress (help or escape).
Other's Distress --> Empathy --> Altruistic Motivation --> Help to reduce Other's distress
150
Telling the difference between egoistic and altruistic motives
How easy is it to escape from a helping situation? If egoistic motive, helping should decline when escaping from the situation is easy. If altruistic motive, help is given regardless of ease escape.
151
Kitty Genovese Case
New York City, 1964 - Kitty Genovese was murdered by Winston Mosley over the course of half an hour. She was raped and stabbed repeatedly. After her assailant left, she stagged to the corner and screamed for help. Of the 38 people who heard from the nearby apartments, no one helped or called the police. Beginning of Bystander Effect Research.
152
Bystander Effect
The greater the number of bystanders who witness an emergency, the less likely it is that any one of them will help.
153
Steps to intervening in an Emergency, and reasons why people don't take them
Notice the Event (World has distractions; often in a hurry) --> Interpret as Emergency (No one else seems worried - pluralistic ignorance)--> Assume responsibility (There are others who can help - diffusion of responsibility)--> Know how to help (I don't know how CPR, I can't swim, etc) --> Decide to help. (Fear for own safety, embarrassed by rejected help)
154
Risky situations and bystander effect
Men show less of a bystander effect than women, but only. when the situation is dangerous/would require physical strength.
155
Getting Help in a Crowd
Reduce ambiguity and diffusion of responsibility. Make it clear that you need help. Single out individual. They notice you --> Understand help is needed --> Knows they're responsible --> Knows how to help
156
Urban overload hypothesis
City-dwellers are bombarded by stimuli, keep to themselves to avoid overload. Suggest this is why people in cities tend to be less helpful.
157
You are more likely to help when:
You are paying attention, you know what to do, you assume responsibility, you overlook risks, you focus on others not yourself (unless you are focusing on your morals/values), you feel guilty and/or happy, you either think others will appreciate your help or you don't worry about it.
