human relations erq prep Flashcards
Cooperation and competition studies
Social comparison and normative social influence
Other factors that play a role: culture (individualism vs collectivism) and cost-benefit analysis, group size (deindividualization)
Kerr 1983 (socio)
○ Free riding effect
§ Those that work with a capable partner that’s working hard pulled less weight than they did when they were working alone
○ Sucker effect
§ Those that work with a capable partner that did not pull their own weight also worked less hard
Kerr (air pump)
Aim: to determine how others’ behavior (social comparison) impacts cooperation
Procedure: 75 participants were asked to pump air by pressing a rubber bulb in each hand for 30 seconds. The air was collected and measured. 4 conditions: (1) alone (2) with a partner who worked hard (3) with a partner who didn’t work hard (4) individually but with someone who was doing the test without much effort.
Results: Pumped less air in condition 2 than 1 (free-riding effect). Pumped less air in condition 3 than 1 (sucker effect). Conditions 4 and 1 had similar results.
evaluative points —-
just men undergrads and a relatively small sample, not generalizable, may not be generalizable to women (male warrior hypothesis)
artificial, low eco validity and high internal
* Sattler and Kerr ○ Aim: To determine the role that social norms play in determining whether or not cooperation will occur ○ Procedure: Have one group of participants listen to people who pretended to be a previous group of participants comment on how they wish they had acted differently. These fake participants made statements like "maybe I could've gotten more if I was greedy but I could never do that - I have to think about the group!!". A control group did not hear these statements. ○ Results: Researchers found that those who had heard the statements before were less competitive and more cooperative within the game
Prejudice and Discrimination (biological)
○ Repeat - Harris and Fiske (bio)
§ Aim: To observe the biological basis of prejudice in the brain
§ Procedure:
□ Participants were placed into an fMRI and then shown a series of pictures (people with disabilities, rich businessmen, older people, Olympic athletes, homeless people
§ Results:
□ W``rson, their brains set off a series of disgusted reactions
□ An area of the brain associated with reactions to non human objects, like garbage and human waste wsa activated (THE INSULA)
□ The part of the brain activated when we think of other people or ourselves was not activated
§ Findings: Participants did not react to homeless people in the same way that they would react to people.
○ Hart et al (bio)
§ Aim: To investigate amygdala responses when participants were presented with the faces of either a member of their racial in-group or out-group
§ Procedure:
□ Participants were presented with faces with neutral expressions
□ The eight white and black participants were shown pictures of individuals from both racial groups and askeed to decide whether the face was male or female
□ Participants saw 10 different faces 3x each
□ After scanning, participants were asked about their feelings about the pictures
§ Results:
□ There was more activity in the amygdala when the participants looked at out-group pictures
□ But participants did not report any noticeable difference in emotional response
§ Findings:
Suggests that there is some biological reaction to out-groups but doesn’t necessarily explain prejudice or suggest that prejudice is a natural response
Prejudice and discrimination (cognitive)
Suggests that the cognitive basis of prejudice is due to the role of heuristics (errors in sys 1 processing) as well as the theory of threatened egotism
ultimate attribution error: we are more likely to use situational attribution to explain negative things about the in group and dispositional to explain positive things about the in group and the other way around for the out-group
Bodenhausen (1988) - cog, prej
- Aim: To test if participants would find a suspect with a Latino name more guilty or innocent than a suspect with a white name
- Procedure: Participants asked to take part in a mock jury task in which they were to decide the guilt or innocence of a suspect. The suspect’s name was introduced as either Carlos Ramirez or Robert Johnson.
- Results: Carlos Ramirez was more likely to be found guilty regardless of the information presented in the case.
- Eval: high ecological validity, has been replicated in job interview studies – lots of empirical evidence
- applications
○ Theory of threatened egotism
§ Argues that intergroup discrimination occurs when our own perceptions of self is threatened
§ Acting out against an out group allows us to feel better about ourselves – boosts self esteem
§ Fein and Spencer
□ Aim: To study the theory of threatened egotism
□ Procedure: 61 male undergrads were given false info on an intelligence test and the participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions – being told they were in the top 10 percent or that they were belove average
® Participants were then asked to read a description of a young man’s struggles to begin an acting career in NYC – if the description implied that the man was gay and the participant was told they were below average, they were most likely to discriminate
□ Findings: Lowering one’s self esteem makes one most likely to discriminate
Origins of conflict and conflict resolution
Realistic group conflict theory (conflicting goals/competition over limited resources — resource stress both tangible and intangible) and social identity theory
Robber’s Cave Study (socio)
○ Aim: To study groups and observe the natural development of group organization and prejudice and group norms
○ Procedure:
§ A sample of 22 white, protestant, socially well-adjusted boys were taken to a fake summer camp
§ The boys did not they were a part of an experiment
§ Part 1
□ The boys were divided into two groups and participated in challenges. Group hierarchies emerged and each groups had norms develop. Social control was maintained through ridicule. Each group selected a symbol and a name
§ Part 2
□ The researchers introduced and caused conflict through the games. The boys began to demonstrate more hostility and refused contact with the other group. The bots negatively rated boys in other groups. Solidarity increased within each group.
® Confirmed that conflict can be caused by struggles with group identity and fighting for resources
§ Part 3
□ Initial attempts to reconcile the group were not successful so the researchers introduced common goals which eased tensions
○ Findings and Results:
§ Group tensions can be eased through the creation of a superordinate goals
Diab (soc)
Aim:
To study informal groups and observe the natural and spontaneous development of group organisation, attitudes (prejudice) and group norms.
Method:
The sample was made up of 8 Christian and 10 Muslim boys. Participants would participate in group activities under a red group and a blue group. The study was stopped when one group started to physically threaten the other group. The tension came between the groups, not between the religious groups.
Findings:
The new group identity which the participants adopted became greater than the participants own personal identity. This supports the Realistic Group Conflict Theory where conflict occurs between groups due to resource stress - that being resources limited for one group.
if asked specifically about conflict resolution (knowledge and understanding)
realistic group conflict theory - whenever there are two or more groups that are seeking the same limited resources, this will lead to conflict, negative stereotypes and beliefs, and discrimination between the groups.
contact hypothesis – ○ Over the years the contact hypothesis has been developed in order to specify a series of criterion that must be met in order for contact to meaningfully reduce conflict
§ Social and institutional support: Those with the power to enforce legislation and crate the new social climate must have a plan for implementation to reduce prejudice
§ High acquaintance potential: Groups must meet enough to have high acquaintance potential
§ Equal status between groups: Less chance for reinforcing previous negative stereotypes
§ Cooperation: Groups must be able to cooperate and lead to collective positive outcomes
evaluative points for sherif
– issues with generalisability (violent boys can skew results)
