From Cognition to Behaviour Flashcards
AVOID THESE CLAIMS!
- “social cognition has major impact on beh”
- “social cognition prepares for social interaction/instructs on appropriate beh”
- “social cognition not only concerned w/how we attain meaning/knowledge but how we use it”
- WHAT DO YOU MEAN? WHERES THE DETAIL?
CONSTRUCTUAL & BEHAVIOUR
THE INTERACTION SEQUENCE (DARLEY & FAZIO (1980))
- social interaction viewed as event sequence aka. complex dance/exchange set between people
CONSTRUCTURAL & BEHAVIOUR: COMPONENTS
THE PERCEIVER
- has currently activated goals (ie. to be nice)
- currently activated expectancies (ie. Jews = cheap)
- acts in accord w/these (ie. offers to buy lunch)
- interprets meaning of observed action -> bolsters/alters expectancy (ie. Jews really are/aren’t cheap)
THE INTERACTANT
- has observable features/actions allowing perceiver to categorise them
- interprets beh -> acts in kind (ie. accepts to be bought lunch)
PYGMALION EFFECT (SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY)
MERTON (1948)
- false definition of situation evoking new beh which makes originally false conception come true
- specious validity of self-fulfilling prophecy perpetuates error reign
- actual course of events cited as proof of being accurate from the beginning
PYGMALION EFFECT (SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY) CYCLE
our actions (to others) IMPACT -> others’ beliefs (about us) CAUSE -> others’ actions (to us) REINFORCE -> our beliefs (about ourselves) INFLUENCE -> out actions (to others)
SNYDER ET AL (1977)
- how minor misconceptions snowball into major misunderstandings aka. the halo effect
- male/female undergrad pps
- separate rooms (intercom)
- given details/photo
- photo = attractive/unattractive confed
- conversation
SNYDER ET AL (1977): RESULTS
- perceiver impressions
- formed initial target impression on stereotype basis about physical attractiveness/desirable qualities
- men who anticipated physically attractive partners thought they’d be more: sociable/poised/humorous/socially adept
- men who anticipated less attractive partners thought they’d be more: unsociable/awkward/serious/socially inept
THE HALO EFFECT
- principle stating that our perception of others can create a perception “halo” around their heads
- this can oft be misguided
- aka. WE ONLY SEE WHAT WE WANT TO
ANOTHER PYGMALION EFFECT EXAMPLE
- actual conversation recorded
- tapes doctored to erase man’s voice
- new judges (didn’t see photos/biography) rated woman based on convo
- rated “attractive” women = ^ positive > “ugly” women
- judges = no expectations aka this ISN’T perceptual assimilation so… where is this from?
SNYDER ET AL: CONCLUSIONS
- investigation = compelling behavioural confirmation in social interaction demo
- socio-psychological process of behavioural confirmation should exist stronger IRL > labs
WORD ET AL (1974): STUDY 1
- stereotyped groups
- Q: are stereotypic expectancies about groups linked to specific non-verbal beh (NVB)?
STUDY 1 - obtained NVB difs for white interviewing white/african american (AA) person
WORD ET AL (1974): STUDY 2
STUDY 2
- self-fulfilling prophecy (SFP) consequences
- white confed who acted in +/- NV way to AA/white interviewee
- judges = ONLY saw interviewee rated NVB worse if on receiving end of - NVB
- interviewer produced behs in others fulfilling - expectancies (w/o either party’s awareness)
JACOBY-SENGHOR ET AL (2016)
- expectancy confirmation = a primary explanation for minority students’ poorer academic outcomes
- BUT may be others ie. implicit bias/stereotype threat)
- white teachers may experience IB associated w/discomfort/racist appearance concern/physiological arousal -> distraction/deplete cognitive resources
- may affect instruction quality provided to BMEs
JACOBY-SENGHOR ET AL (2016): RESULTS
- greater implicit bias in white instructors predicted lower performance in black NOT white learners
- greater instructor anxiety -> poorer teaching quality
STEREOTYPE THREAT
- being at risk of confirming (as self-characteristic) a negative stereotype about one’s group
