Final Flashcards
2x2 Design
• 2 Independent Variable w/ 2 Levels each
Conformity
Someone changes their perception, opinion & behaviors in ways that are consistent with group norms
- Compliance
- Acceptance
Compliance
- Conformity that involves publicly acting or going along with others, while privately disagreeing
- ex: you are new at work & everybody is going to applebees & you hate applebees, but go anyway to conform with the group norm
Acceptance
• Conformity that involves both going along AND privately agreeing
Automatic/Implicit/Unconscious
- automatic & doesn’t want to work
- quick
- effortless
- governed by habit
- difficult to control or change
- involuntary
- ppl. rely on automatic cognition
- ex: reading a sign on the street
Controlled/conscious/explicit
- controlled
- slow
- effortful
- voluntary
- flexible
- ex: studying
Hypotheses
- Prediction
* Must mention BOTH conditions
Experimental Research
• Studies that seek cause & effect relationships by manipulating one or the other
Correlation Research
- Naturally occurring relationships among variables
* Cannot make casual statements bc they are related
Positive correlation
• As 1 variable increases so does the other
Negative correlation
•As 1 variable increases the other tends to go down
Operational
• How a researchers chooses to define the variable under an investigation
Internal validity
• The extent to which conclusions can be drawn about casual effects of the IV to the DV
General factors to improve relationship (gottman,2000)
- Try to accentuate the positive, rather than eliminate the negative
- Create mutually meaningful goals (similarity is a stronger predictor of relationship success than dissimilarity)
- Improve communication during fights
Aerobic exercise & subjective well-being (Babyak, 2000)
- Overcoming depression
- Results: people who just exercised (no medicine, or combo of both) were less likely to be depressed
Diffusion of responsibility
- Failure of help occurs b/c responsibility spreads across bystanders.
- More likely to help if person is alone
- Large group less likely to help b/c of the thought that somebody else will take responsibility
Gendered nature of help (Cherry, 1995)
- Theory: attack was violence of a man against a woman, which is sometimes seen as typical.
- Results: Male on female received least amount of help.
Five steps to inhumanity via Identity (Reicher et al., 2008)
- Create an in-group
- Exclusion, exclude out group
- Threat, place out group as threat
- Virtue, represent the ingroup as GOOD
- Celebration, celebrate inhumanity as defense of heroism
Hostile Sexism
• Explicit antagonistic attitude towards women
Benevolent Sexism
• more “positive”, but often portrays women as incompetent, weak & on a pedestal for men.
The “backlash” effect
When a women uses a technique a typical male technique to advance & are judged even more negatively than women who did not use the technique
Aversive Racism
- Clear norms= non prejudice behavior
* Unclear norms= anxiety, prejudice behavior
Cialdini: 6 factors that influence persuassion
- Reciprocity
- Consistency
- Social Validity
- Liking
- Authority
- Scarcity
Reciprocity
- when you get something you feel obligated to give back
* ex: nice to me, nice to you.
Consistency
• Once we make a stand/make a choice we feel pressure to behave consistently with the commitment
Liking
Prefer to say yes to those we know & like & those who like us
Authority
Ppl rely on those w/ superior knowledge or perspective for guidance on how to respond
ex: seeking medical advice
Scaricty
Items & opportunities become more desirable as they become less available
ex: tory burch seller saying that deal was never going to be seen again
Evaluation apprehension
Worried about being judged on HOW they helped
Interpretive Ambiguity
Bystanders sometimes fail to help b/c they do not define the situation as an emergency (interpretation of situation)
Psychology of false confessions
- Voluntary
- Coerced-complaint
- Coerced-internalized
Voluntary
involving no external pressure
Coerced-complaint
person knows they are not guilty, but confess to receive a promised reward (or avoid penalty)
Coerced-internalized
Innocent suspect induced to believe (sometimes temporarily) that he/she is guilty.
Four “horsemen of the apocalypse”
- Criticism
- Contempt
- Defensiveness
- Stonewalling
Four “horsemen of the apocalypse” – Critisism
Attacking partners personality/character (e.g: you always.. you never)
Four “horsemen of the apocalypse” – Contempt
Attacking your partners sense of self with the intention to insult or abuse him or her. Name calling, hostile humor, sarcasm.
Four “horsemen of the apocalypse” – Defensiveness
Seeing self as victim, warding off attack, making excuses (it’s not my fault), cross complaining,yes-butting.
Four “horsemen of the apocalypse” – Stonewalling
Withdrawing from relationship to avoid argument (silence, disconnection, distance)
Self-fulfilling prophecy 3 steps
- Perceiver has expectation
- Perceiver behaves towards target in a way that is consistent with expectation
- Target behaves towards perceiver in a way that is consistent w/ perceivers behavior & the expectation is confirmed.
Self-fulfilling prophecy
- an originally false social belief of another person that lead the other person to fulfill the originally false belief with their behavior.
- ex: waitress not treating teenage guests 100% bc they are perceived to be bad tippers.
Moral Reasoning
- Moral judgments are often the product of quick/automatic judgments, which then give rise to slow conscious moral reasoning
- ex: the brother & the sis deciding to have sex = automatically think it is wrong, but there isn’t any consequence so is what they did really wrong?
Motivated cognition
- ppl. motivated to arrive to a particular conclusion
- often seek out info that supports their desired beliefs
- often able to provide reasonable justification
- ex: A guy tells girlfriend he is going to call on sunday but ends up calling on tuesday and the girl says, “at least he called”
Survivorship Bias
- tendency to disproportionately concentrate on the ppl. or things that survived some process & ignoring those that didn’t
- ex: happens in business (start-ups)
Heuristic
- Rule of thumb
- mental shortcut to make a judgement
- ex: when somebody tells you to buy them something and you go with what is most expensive
Availability heuristic
- tendency to judge the likely hood of an event by availability in memory
- media creates this
- ex: thinking the homicide rate is higher when in reality the suicide rate is, but we believe the homicide rate is higher bc that is what we constantly see presented in the media
Devines 2 step model of stereotyping processing
- High prejudice
2. Low prejudice
High prejudice
Stereotype activated –> persons belief matches stereotypes & BIAS OCCURS
Low prejudice
Stereotype activated–> persons belief does not match stereotype=resources are available, bias DOES NOT occur
Social Identity Theory (Taijfel; Turner. 1979)
- Social Identity, Self concept & Self esteem (define ourselves in terms of group membership)
- Need for positive distinctiveness
- We seek group distinctiveness
Common in group identity model
• To the extent that members of diff groups can conceive as a part of a whole group relationships will be improved. (e.g: positive attitudes, empathy, helping, cooperation, self-disclosure)
- Common Identity (we)
- Two groups in one ( us & them)
- Separate groups (us vs them)
Cognitive dissonance
• unpleasant state of psychological discomfort when we become aware that our cognitions (attitude) are inconsistent w/ our behavior, ppl are motivated to reduce this discomfort.
ex: I am a good person (belief). I just cheated on my exam (behavior)
Justification effort
• tendency for individuals to INCREASE THEIR LIKING for something they have WORKED for.
• Arson & Mills (1959)
- justification of effort & increased commitment
- behavior in this situation shaped attitude
- short term strategies can have long term consequences
Milgrim’s Shock experiment
- “how we respond to authority:
- results: 65% went all the way to the end
- shows power of the situation
Milgram defense
Results of the study made the study unethical
Social Roles: Zimbardo Experiment
- shared expectations about how a person who occupies a particular position is supposed to behave or act
- Results: guards become abusive, prisoners became passive & withdrawn.
Groupthink: “going along to get along”
- Mode of thinking
- don’t really aim for the best decision
- desire for harmony, agreement & don’t want to rock the boat.
Group polorization
• exaggerations of tendencies in “group think”
Internal bystanders
• Within the population that act like everything is normal, ignore the violence & often participate in discriminating against the victims
External bystanders
- outside groups looking in
- typically remain passive
- use minimal intervention
Stereotype threat
If one wants to do good, the threat of being judged is effecting their performance
Steele & Aronson (1995); Stereotype Threat
- Results: when labeled as problem solving: did same
- when labeled as an iq test: blacks did worst bc of the stereotype that blacks do poorer on iq test
- gender differences in math exam: women’s score drop
- no gender differences: about the same scores
Fundamental attribution error
• tendency to overestimate dispositional influences & underestimates situational influences for others behaviors.
What did the sherif vs. Asch demonstrate (hint: conformity)
- Conformed to be liked
- Participants walk into a room w/ 7 other people for study about “visual perception”
- Will be judging length of lines
- more likely to say the wrong answer when everybody said the wrong answer.
- 24% never conformed
- 75% conformed at least once
- Normative influence
Automatic decision making; Dijksterhuis (2007)
Whereas controlled/conscious cognition is thought to be superior for decision-making related to following rules, automatic/unconscious cognition is thought to be beneficial for weighing complex decisions with many dimensions
Mere exposure effect
Phenomenon whereby the more often people are exposed to a stimulus, the more positively they evaluate that stimulus.
Descriptive norms
- what most others do
* ex: towels in the hotel
Injunctive norms
• what most of others approve or dissaprove
Positive illusions & mental health (Taylor & Brown research)
- unrealistic positive self- evaluations: most ppl believe they are better than average & better than others see them.
- exaggerated perceptions of control: overestimate their degree of control over heavily chance determined events
- unrealistic optimism: unrealistic positive views of the future
• Taylor & brown suggest: positive illusions is good for mental health
Self-objectification
• Objectification of women’s bodies causes women to adopt in outsider’s view of themselves, as objects or sights to be appreciated by others
What are some consequences of self-objectification?
- anxiety, regard to appearance
- increased body shame
- restrained eating
- disruptive cognitive function
Elaborated social identity model (police and protestors)
- Heterogenous crowd
- Protestors perceived as homogeneously dangerous
- Moderate crowd members become more radicalized
- Protestors unite around a share oppositional identity to authority & police
Automaticity
- influence that the environment has on your decision, automatic cognition, often w/o one’s knowledge or awareness
- Having a default choice
When does reason trump automatic cognition?
- Time
- high motivation to attend to situation
- under self-reflection
- motivation for accuracy
Elaboration-Likelihood Model
Attitude change can follow a central route (through controlled cognition) or a peripheral route (through automatic cognition).
Central Route (controlled cognition)
• person carefully thinks about the arguments in the persuasive msg
Peripheral Route (automatic cognition)
• person does not actively or deliberately think about the arguments in the persuasive msg.
Deciding to take the central or peripheral route
- ability= cable to process the msg.
- motivation= if we want to process the msg.
•High ability & high motivation = central route processing (controlled cognition)
Unconscious behavior guidance systems
- Environmental/contextual features
a. Evaluations of others & objects
b. motivational states
c. perceptual system - Behavioral Responses
In group favoritism & helping (levine et al. 2006): study 1
- Beginning of study stressed manchester identity
- IV: group membership of person needing help (manchester united, liverpool, or ordinary shirt)
- more likely to help a person wearing a manchester united shirt.
In group favoritism & helping (levine et al. 2006): study 2
- Beginning of study stressed soccer identity
- group membership of person needing help (manchester united, liverpool, or ordinary shirt)
- Equally helped soccer fans, but not ordinary person.
Kassin & Fong Research (Reid Training & Accuracy)
- Independent variables
- Guilt of suspect: (Guilty vs. innocent of mock crime)
- Interrogator Reid Technique training: (Yes vs. No)
- Dependent variable: Accuracy of interrogators in determining who was guilty/innocent & confidence in judgment
- Results: Interrogators that underwent training were less accurate, but more confident in their judgments
Normative influence
- to be liked or accepted by others
* ex: smoke in the room experiment
Informational influence
• to solve uncertainty & get info about what is the right thing to do
What increases informational influence?
- Crisis (ex: 9/11)
- When others are experts
- When being accurate is important
Gender expectations & leadership (Rudman & Glick, 2001)
- both men & women rated as highly competent
* men liked more & hired more than women
Romantic fantasies & women’s interest in power (Rudman & Heppen, 2003)
- Results: Implicit endorsement of normative romantic fantasies was associated w/ lower levels of interest in personal power.
- No relationship was found for men.
What are some irrational relationship beliefs?
- Partners can’t change
- Any disagreement is destructive
- Partners should be able to read mind
- Sexual perfection for every sexual experience
External Validity
- Looks like real life
* Does the method generalize to other samples, research settings & procedures
Social Validation
People decide what’s appropriate for them to do in a situation by examining what others are doing there
