Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

FALL 2022 > important concept 215 > Flashcards

important concept 215 Flashcards

1
Q

Fundamental attribution error

A

tendency for people to overestimate the influence of personal dispositions on their behaviour (undervaluing the situation)

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

hindsight bias

A

believing that you could have predicted an outcome after learning the outcome

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

confirmation bias

A

seeking out, paying attention to, and believing information that confirms a hypothesis while discarding information that disproves it
*death penalty study
*seeing if someone was an introvert/extrovert = leading questions

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

social desirability bias

A

answering questions in a way that will be favourably viewed by others

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

mediator vs. moderator

A

mediator: IV causes the mediator, mediator causes the DV (not a direct relationship between IV and DV - like the teacher’s behaviour toward students in the self-fulfilling prophecies experiment)
moderator: effect of the IV depends on the moderator (relationship depends on this variable - like the prior attitudes in the Chaiken & Baldwin study)

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

measurement validity

A

are we measuring what we mean to measure

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

what is internal validity, how do you control it, and what are its threats

A

are the results due to confounds? control using random assignment, study scripts, double-blinds, don’t reveal hypotheses to Ps
differential attrition (Ps drop out more of one condition than the other)

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

external validity and its threats

A

can the results be generalized to the population? difficult to get both internal and external validity because internal requires controlling the environment, while external needs to be applicable to the real world

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

reliability

A

can the results be replicated? *if the measurement isn’t valid, the study can still be reliable (i.e. you aren’t measuring what you think you are but are still getting the same results)

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

self-perception theory + its associated study

A

we infer our attitudes by looking at our behaviour (when attitudes are unclear)
Chaiken & Baldwin study about being an environmentalist - weak prior attitudes strongly affected by external cues

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

looking-glass self & reflected appraisals

A

we use feedback from others to form our self-perceptions - how we imagine others see us

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

social comparison theory + its associated study

A

1: we want to evaluate our opinions and abilities
2: when there are no objective standards, we compare ourselves with others
3: we compare ourselves with people who are similar to us
encountering “dirty” (self-esteem increase) vs. “clean” person (self-esteem decrease)

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

upward vs. downward comparison

A

upward = comparing with people who are better than us (self-improvement)
downward = comparing with people who are worse than us (self-esteem maintenance)

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

contingencies of self-worth model

A

we stake our self-worth in certain domains - success in these domains increase self-esteem and failing decreases self-esteem

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

sociometer theory

A

self-esteem derives from how accepted by others we feel we are (success in a domain that is ‘valued’ by others increases self-esteem)

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

naive realism + self-esteem

A

belief that we perceive the world as it is (so others also see it as it is)
belief that others share our negative self-view

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

better-than-average effect

A

for abstract traits: belief that we are better than the average (because we can construe the trait in different ways - self-serving construals) = boosting self-esteem

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

self-affirmation theory

A

when self-esteem is threatened, we affirm other valued aspects of ourselves

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

self-enhancement motivation

A

motivation to view oneself positively

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

self-concept clarity

A

clearly defined, consistent sense of self

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

strategies for self-verification

A

developing confirming envirvonments: seeking out relationships with people who confirm our view of ourselves
signalling how we expect to be treated with clothing, possessions
selective attention to and better recall of feedback that confirms our self-view

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

self-verification

A

motivation to keep our self-view consistent - keeps the world and our interactions predictable

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

self-regulation and strategies

A

attempt to control behaviour - prioritizing long-term over short-term
implementation-intention: “if-then” plan
shifting from hot processes to cold processes (illusion that the immediate reward isn’t as tempting)

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

self-discrepancy theory

A

actual self: beliefs about what you are like
ideal self: what you would like to be
ought self: what we think we should be

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

when actual self approaches/moves away from ideal self

A

PROMOTION FOCUS
positive outcomes = happiness
absence of positive outcomes = dejection emotions (disappointment, shame)

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

when actual self approaches/moves away from ought self

A

PREVENTION FOCUS
absence of negative outcomes = calmness
negative outcomes = agitation emotions (anxiety, guilt)

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

self-presentation & face

A

presenting the person we want others to think we are (impression management)
face: public image

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

self-monitoring

A

monitoring our behaviour to fit the current situation
high = “fake”
low = internally guided

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

self-handicapping

A

engaging in self-sabotaging behaviours to avoid ‘true’ failure (creating an excuse for your failure)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

overconfidence bias

A

tendency to have greater confidence in judgments and decisions than our accuracy merits

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Dunning-Kruger effect

A

double curse of incompetence - people lack to ability to recognize that they are incompetent in a given domain & most likely to overestimate their abilities

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

pluralistic ignorance

A

when people act in ways that conflict with their private beliefs because they incorrectly think these beliefs conflict with those of the group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

secondhand information is misleading because…

A

information is transmitted in ways that further one’s ideological agenda
in the service of entertainment: bad-news bias, selective reporting, leading questions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

positive and negative framing

A

same information is presented with either a positive or negative focus (66% survived vs. 34% died) - negative info is given more weight

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

spin framing

A

altering the content of a message to change the focus (torture vs. enhanced interrogation)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

construal-level theory

A

distant effects are thought of in abstract terms, while close events are thought of concretely

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

availability heuristic & risk assessment, joint projects

A

ease of recall = the more likely it seems (crime in NYC seems more probably than in St-Louis)
risk assessment: over-represented negative information is thought to be more likely than it is
joint projects: it’s easy to come up with instances of our contributions, so we think we have contributed more than we have

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

representativeness heuristic

A

tendency to judge the likelihood of whether something belongs to a category based on whether it resembles the prototype
useful when the prototype is accurate
not helpful when it leads us to ignore other information

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

illusory correlations

A

belief that two variables are correlated when they’re not because of the availability and representativeness heuristics - instances in which the variables went together are better remembered & things that are similar go together

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

pessimistic explanatory style

A

internal, stable, global causes of events = negative life outcomes (lower grades and poor health)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

covariation principle & three types of information

A

behaviour is attributed to causes that occur at the same time
consensus: do many people partake in this behaviour (low = dispositional, high = situational)
distinctiveness: is this behaviour specific to a situation (low = dispositional, high = situational)
consistency: is the behaviour regular over time (must be high to make a judgment)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

when would one make a dispositional attribution according to the covariation model?

A

when consensus is low (the behaviour is unique to this person), distinctiveness is low (the behaviour isn’t specific to a situation), and consistency is high (the behaviour has occurred many times)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

when would one make a situational attribution according to the covariation model?

A

when consensus is high, distinctiveness is high, and consistency is high

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

discounting principle

A

when a behaviour is not likely to be due to a specific cause because there are other possible causes (when everyone would act similarly in the same context)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

augmentation principle

A

when a behaviour is likely to be due to a particular cause because other possible causes would produce different outcomes (other people would act differently in the same context)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

self-serving attributional bias

A

we make situational attributions for our failures and dispositional attributions for our successes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

functional value of fear and shame

A

fear: increase vigilance to threat-related cues
shame: appeasement strategy to avoid social conflict, remorse for social transgression

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

James-Lange Theory

A

stimulus - physiological response - emotional reaction

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

Canon-Bard Theory

A

stimulus = physiological response and emotional reaction at the same time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

Schachter-Singer Two-Factor Theory

A

stimulus - physiological response - cognitive label is applied - emotion (Using context clues to interpret the physiological response)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

focal emotions

A

emotions that more common within the culture

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

affect valuation theory

A

the emotions that promote cultural ideals are valued and more prominent in everyday lives of individuals

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

display rules of emotions

A

how, when, to whom we should display certain emotions within a culture

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q

affective forecasting & evidence

A

predicting future emotions and how long they will last (we’re bad at doing this accurately)
luckies (thought they would be more unhappy) and leftovers (not as unhappy after a breakup)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
55
Q

immune neglect

A

we underestimate our resilience and psychological immune system which enable us to get over negative life events

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q

focalism

A

focus on the central aspect of an event and fail to consider other factors

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q

cognitive dissonance theory

A

inconsistencies between thoughts, attitudes, and behaviours lead to an aversive state of psychological distress, which individuals try to eliminate (by changing the attitude to match the behaviour or changing the behaviour to match the attitude)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q

spreading of alternatives

A

emphasizing positives of your choice and minimizing the negatives of your choice, and minimizing the positive and emphasizing negatives of discarded options
*shift in desirability after choosing between two products

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
59
Q

effort justification

A

putting a lot of effort into something that ends up being disappointing = dissonance = justification of your choice to pursue something disappointing
*psychology of sex & initiation
*hazing frat groups

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q

induced compliance

A

compelling people to behave in a way that is inconsistent with their attitudes will lead to a shift in the attitude
*forbidden toy experiment - annoyance (not enough justification = shift in attitude) vs. anger (sufficient justification)
*$1 vs. $20 justification for lying

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
61
Q

conditions for cognitive dissonance

A

free choice (choosing to behave inconsistently), insufficient justification ($1 vs. $20), has negative consequences (lying but the person doesn’t believe what you say = doesn’t matter) that are foreseeable (unknown allergy)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

self-perception theory + cognitive dissonance

A

we don’t experience the distress that comes with conflicting cognitions, we didn’t change our attitudes, we just inferred them from the behaviour
No strong prior attitude = no inconsistency = no dissonance = self-perception theory
Strong prior attitude = inconsistency = dissonance = cognitive dissonance theory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
63
Q

overjustification effect

A

when an extrinsic reward reduces the pre-existing intrinsic motivation (behaviour will cease when the extrinsic motivator is removed)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
64
Q

central route to persuasion + conditions

A

thinking and elaborating carefully on the contents of a persuasive message (logic and strength of the arguments and evidence)
Conditions: message must be personally relevant, target must not be distracted
Encourages long-lasting attitude change

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
65
Q

peripheral route to persuasion + conditions

A

relying on peripheral cues and surface-level processing
Peripheral cues: superficial, easy-to-process features that don’t pertain to the message
attractiveness, heuristics (# of arguments), celebrity endorsement, friends and experts can be trusted
Conditions: if lacking ability to think deeply, message isn’t personally relevant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
66
Q

source characteristics influence on persuasion

A

credibility (is the source knowledgeable/trustworthy)
certainty (expressing confidence in your message)
attractiveness (likely peripheral, but can be central when attractiveness is related to the message = argument)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
67
Q

message characteristics

A

message quality (comprehensible, straightforward, logical, explicit takeaway, appeal to core values, refutes the opposition)
message length (can decrease central persuasion if added arguments are weak, but generally increases peripheral)
vividness (interesting and memorable)
fear (vivid and include instructions on how to avoid negative outcomes)
culture (message should fit the norms and values of a particular culture)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
68
Q

audience characteristics

A

need for cognition (drive to think deeply – higher = central route = good arguments required, lower = peripheral cues and route)
mood (message mood should match audience mood, guilt), age (younger = malleable)
self-monitoring (higher = likely persuaded by messages convey a desirable image)
knowledge (greater knowledge = resistant to change)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
69
Q

thought polarization hypothesis

A

public commitments engage extensive thought about an idea, which produces more extreme attitudes

70
Q

norm of reciprocity

A

people are more likely to comply if you do them a favour first because they feel obligated to reciprocate

71
Q

door-in-the-face technique & reciprocal concessions

A

based on reciprocal concessions (the asker concedes their large demand, so the responder concedes too and accepts the smaller) - making a large request that is to be rejected, then making a smaller request that is more likely to be accepted

72
Q

foot-in-the-door technique

A

small request = accepted, larger request = more likely to be accepted (based on a shift in self-perception)

73
Q

mood maintenance effect on compliance

A

people want to maintain their positive mood, so they agree (only if the request won’t eliminate their positive mood – hindering rather than helping)

74
Q

negative state relief hypothesis

A

people comply to relieve their negative mood and feel better about themselves
Guilt and compliance: strong relationship

75
Q

descriptive vs. prescriptive norms

A

what most people are doing vs. what people should be doing

76
Q

when are norm-based approaches most effective to reduce destructive behaviour?

A

when people overestimate the popularity of the behaviour, telling people the (surprising, lower) descriptive norm will decrease the self-destructive behaviour

77
Q

when are norm-based approaches most effective to increase constructive behaviour?

A

when people underestimate the popularity of the constructive behaviour, telling people the (higher) descriptive norm will increase the constructive behaviour

78
Q

reactance theory

A

when people believe their free will is threatened (so experience an unpleasant state of arousal), they try to reassert it

79
Q

social facilitation definition over time

A

the enhancing effect of co-actors on performance (original) becomes the effect, positive or negative, of the presence of others on performance (new)
Triplett (original) – Allport (sometimes co-actors impair) – Zajonc

80
Q

theory of mere presence

A

Mere presence (not co-actors) facilitates easy tasks, but hinders difficult tasks
Audience helps when the task is well-practiced (dominant response is correct)
Audience hinders when the task is novel and difficult (dominant response is incorrect)

81
Q

social loafing

A

tendency to exert less effort when performing as part of a group than when performing alone

82
Q

groupthink

A

highly cohesive groups produce poor decisions because striving for unanimity overrides drive to search for alternatives and come to an accurate conclusion

83
Q

symptoms of groupthink

A

illusion of invulnerability (‘we’re a special group, so nothing can go wrong’)
belief in inherent morality of the group (members assume the rightness of their cause)
self-censorship (withholding information/opinions)
self-appointed mindguards (members that protect the leader from ideas that threaten complacency)

84
Q

factors that increase the likelihood of groupthink

A

high cohesiveness, homogeneity of social backgrounds, directive leadership, lack of procedures for information search and appraisal, insularity of the group, high stress from external threats to find a solution

85
Q

how to prevent groupthink

A

leaders refrain from sharing initial opinions and periodically leave the group, bring in outsiders, have people play devil’s advocate

86
Q

group polarization

A

people’s positions become more extreme after discussing with like-minded others

87
Q

leader characteristics

A

expertise, knowledge, technical and social skills, sharing resources with others

88
Q

approach/inhibition theory of power

A

our behavioural approach system drives us to seek desired outcomes, while our behavioural inhibition system moves us away from threats
People in power are less constrained (more approach less inhibition) and have less empathy (E experiment)
Power reveals internal attitudes and personality

89
Q

deindividuation antecedents

A

sensory overload, energizing effect of others, diffusion of responsibility, anonymity (masks at Halloween, brutality in warfare)

90
Q

deindividuation internal states

A

decreased self-observation and self-evaluation, decreased concern with social evaluation

91
Q

deindividuation behavioural effects

A

impulsivity, irrationality, emotionality, antisocial behaviour

92
Q

self-awareness theory

A

when people focus their attention of themselves, engage in more self-evaluation, and become more concerned about whether their behaviour conforms to their values

93
Q

spotlight effect

A

thinking that others are paying more attention to us than they actually are

94
Q

liking gap

A

we tend to underestimate how much people like us
because we focus on the mistakes in our interactions and have higher standards for ourselves, and we think our feelings are obvious

95
Q

signal amplification bias

A

we perceive our signals to be showing more romantic interest to potential partners than they are
(we think others take into consideration the inhibition that our fear of rejection has on our behaviour)
another explanation for the liking gap

96
Q

self-disclosure

A

revealing intimate details about ourselves fosters liking, connection, and trust in both participants
listener can demonstrate responsiveness: making the speaker feel heard and cared for
Most effective when reciprocal and appropriate for the situation

97
Q

halo effect

A

attractiveness associated with other positive qualities (intelligence)

98
Q

Harlow’s research on love and attachment

A

point of departure for love is the bond between an infant and its mother/caregiver
Refutes behaviourist perspective of love: human behaviour isn’t just conditioning
*wire vs. soft padding

99
Q

Bowlby’s attachment theory

A

evolutionary perspective that the bond is the result of an infant’s need for protection
Attachment system motivates maintenance of proximity to a caregiver by using proximity seeking behaviours when a real/imagined threat is perceived, resulting in felt security

100
Q

Ainsworth’s 3 patterns of attachment

A

Secure: when requests for proximity are attended to, infant is distressed by departure and soothed by return
Anxious/ambivalent: caregiver is inconsistent (hyperactivity of attachment system), infant distressed by her departure, not soothed by her return
Avoidant: caregiver is rejecting and discourages closeness, infant appears indifferent to her return

101
Q

internal working models

A

Model of self (am I loveable) and model of other (can others be relied on)

102
Q

Secure attachment type

A

comfortable – good internal working models
Others can be relied upon for support, distress is manageable, good at providing support, more stable relationships

103
Q

anxious attachment type

A

wants to get closer than others are comfortable with – bad model of self
Need to feel close and accepted, but doubt that others will keep loving them; excessive reassurance seeking, hypervigilant for threats and interpret ambiguous cues as threatening

104
Q

avoidant attachment type

A

uncomfortable being vulnerable – bad model of the other
Uncomfortable being intimate, seek independence, perhaps a reaction to fears of rejection

105
Q

self-expansion model

A

people have a fundamental need to increase their self-efficacy (resources, identities that facilitate goals) and close relationships provide this (including the other person as a part of oneself) - may decrease as the relationship goes on (explains cheating)

106
Q

investment model of commitment

A

relationship stability is determined by commitment
Satisfaction level: positive vs. negative affect experienced in a relationship
Quality of alternatives: can my needs be met somewhere outside the relationship? Desirability of alternatives
Investment size: amount and importance of resources allocated to the relationship that would be lost if the relationship ended

107
Q

relationship-maintenance behaviours

A

willingness to accommodate rather than retaliate when a partner behaves badly, willingness to make sacrifices, deprecation of attractive alternatives

108
Q

relationship-maintenance cognitions

A

positive illusions (idealizing, faults into virtues “not moody, deep”, seeing one’s own relationship as better than others)

109
Q

predictors of relationship dissatisfaction

A

criticism – personal attack
contempt – looking down on
defensiveness – cross-complaining, denying responsibility
stonewalling – withdrawing from important conversations

110
Q

evolutionary perspective on outgroup prejudice

A

preferring familiar over unfamiliar for safety reasons (using appearance cues to signal ‘otherness’)

111
Q

what is a jigsaw classroom?

A

students assigned to groups and learn about topics to teach them to other members of the group - group members must rely on each other to complete the lesson

112
Q

realistic group conflict theory

A

competition for resources leads to negative intergroup attitudes (real concrete resources like jobs)
these attitudes can be generational, so even when the conflict is gone, the attitudes remain

113
Q

minimal groups paradigm

A

no previous attitudes, no contact, arbitrary allocation to groups - still show ingroup favouritism (maximizing difference of resources b/w ingroup and outgroup rather than absolute maximum of ingroup)

114
Q

social identity theory

A

we want to enhance our self-esteem, part of which comes from group membership (so we want to boost our group’s status)

115
Q

how do threats to self-esteem promote prejudice and discrimination?

A

scapegoating: singling out a group that can be blamed for times of hardship (compensating for a blow to self-esteem by derogating another group) - self-esteem increases as a result

116
Q

when is modern prejudice likely to manifest behaviorally?

A

when there is a justification/disguise for discrimination
*not helping a black person in need of medical assistance is justified when over people are around: someone else with expertise could help

117
Q

affect misattribution procedure

A

implicit measure of attitudes: measuring people’s evaluations of stimuli (do the feelings associated with Muslims transfer to a subsequent neutral image like a belt buckle)

118
Q

paired distinctiveness and illusory correlations in relation to stereotypes

A

distinctive events are more likely to be noticed (both minority groups and negative events are distinctive) so we pair distinctive events that co-occur

119
Q

why do stereotypes persist?

A

confirmation bias
subtyping: concluding that disconfirming evidence is an exception (if girls are bad at math, but Olivia is good at math, then Olivia isn’t like other girls)
attribution to intrinsic causes when behaviour confirms a stereotype vs. extrinsic causes when behaviour disconfirms a stereotype
self-fulfilling prophecies

120
Q

attributional ambiguity

A

not knowing the underlying causes of experiences (Did I miss out on the promotion because I’m a woman?)

121
Q

how does intergroup contact decrease prejudice?

A

reduces anxiety about interactions with an outgroup, personalizes outgroup members (reducing homogeneity), increases empathy (makes us take outside perspectives), generates positive feelings toward outgroup

122
Q

evolutionary perspective on aggression

A

purposeful aggression improves odds of survival and reproduction (competing for mates = higher rates of physical aggression for men)

123
Q

frustration-aggression hypothesis

A

frustration increases the likelihood of aggression

124
Q

frustration and displaced aggression

A

frustration = blocking of goal-directed behaviour
displaced aggression = aggression directed at something other than the source of frustration

125
Q

how does the frustration-aggression hypothesis explain the link between income inequality and aggression?

A

relative deprivation: perception that one is less well-off than people with whom one compares oneself (displaced aggression)

126
Q

what factors increase the likelihood of frustration leading to aggression?

A

closer to goal = more frustration = aggression
arbitrary reason for goal being blocked = more frustration = aggression (does the reason make sense to you?)

127
Q

social pain

A

aversive emotional reaction to social loss, ostracism, rejection, relational devaluation (feeling undervalued by a friend)

128
Q

social pain theory

A

sensory-discriminative component: what, where, how intense is the pain?
affective component: how unpleasant is it?
the affective component captures attention and motivates action (social pain motivates because it is just as serious as physical pain the brain)

129
Q

which parts of the brain are involved in both physical pain and social pain?

A

primary somatosensory cortex (sensory-discriminative) and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, anterior insula (affective)

130
Q

why does social rejection trigger aggression?

A

social pain activates a system that produces a defensive state designed to deal with generalized threats (automatic)

131
Q

why is hot weather associated with aggression?

A

misattribution of arousal: unpleasantly aroused by the heat but we attribute it to another source
excitation transfer theory: leftover arousal from an initial event intensifies the emotional reaction to a second event (more hostile construals)

132
Q

cognitive neoassociation theory

A

when one concept is activated, the activation spreads to other concepts as well

133
Q

weapons effect

A

gun is linked to aggression-related concepts and retaliation scripts (cognitive neoassociation)
Ps more likely to respond aggressively in the mere presence of a gun

134
Q

media & video game violence + aggression

A

related through the weapons effect (chronic activation = accessible) and learning aggression scripts
some evidence, but third variable problems
moderating factors: personality differences, nature of the content, recency and amount of exposure

135
Q

person factors in aggression

A

tendencies toward hostile, negative construals and attributions (trait hostility)
certain people are more sensitive to certain threats (narcissism - threats to self-worth more likely to elicit aggression)

136
Q

rejection sensitivity & aggression

A

people who are attuned to cues of rejection and tend to have strong reactions are more likely to respond with aggression (automatic links b/w rejection and aggression)

137
Q

how do genes interact with environment to promote aggression?

A

MAOA gene interacts with childhood envrionment to produce aggressive & criminal behaviour
OPRM1 gene affects how effectively endogenous opioids bind to their receptors (painkillers) - a variant affects how sensitive people are to physical pain (perhaps social pain as well)

138
Q

factors that inhibit reappraisal following provocation

A

insufficient mental resources (S2 cannot be activated)
strong threats and emotional states

139
Q

social learning theory

A

we learn aggressive behaviour by observing others

140
Q

vicarious reinforcement/punishment

A

increase/decrease in behaviour due to the observer witnessing the model being reinforced/punished for that behaviour

141
Q

gender socialization perspective on aggression

A

men are socialized to value/exhibit dominance and aggression while women are socialized to be empathic and compassionate

142
Q

relational aggression

A

harm is caused through damage to social relationships or status instead of physical injury (more likely shown by women - result of socialization)

143
Q

culture of honour

A

concerns about reputation + willingness to defend one’s honour = more likely to respond with aggression when insulted

144
Q

social exchange theory & helping

A

cost-benefit analysis of helping vs. not helping

145
Q

negative state relief hypothesis as a cost of not helping

A

alleviating distress by helping
feeling guilty because we ought to help (self-discrepancy) - reduced by helping

146
Q

social responsability norm

A

we should help those who need help, even if they cannot reciprocate
we won’t abide if we feel the norm doesn’t apply (if the victim’s difficulties are their own fault - drunk vs. cane)

147
Q

empathy-altruism model

A

people are driven to help by empathy (low = social exchange theory prevails, high = will help even if costs outweigh benefits)
*Elaine experiment

148
Q

empathic concern vs. personal distress

A

E.C.: sympathy and concern for the other
especially likely if the other person is similar to us
low self-concept clarity/anxious attachers = more personal distress = want to escape the situation = less likely to help

149
Q

kin selection

A

propensity to help genetic relatives (increases inclusive fitness)

150
Q

reciprocal altruism

A

exchanging favours for mutual benefit has provided an adaptive advantage (if you don’t reciprocate, you’re likely to be ostracized)

151
Q

how do labels and construals affect the decision to cooperate?

A

label that encourages competition (Wall Street) = maximizing profits = no cooperation
label that encourages cooperation (community game) affects perspective adopted (construal)

152
Q

tit-for-tat strategy

A

cooperating on the first round of the prisoner’s dilemma, then reciprocating whatever the other P does (cooperation rewarded with cooperation, defection with defection)

153
Q

3 stages of response to an emergency

A
  1. Noticing: social norms of not looking around mean it takes longer for a bystander to notice an emergency when there are more people around
  2. Interpreting: looking to others to interpret an ambiguous situation (pluralistic ignorance + social norms of keeping calm)
  3. Intervene: diffusion of responsibility (someone more knowledgeable could know better than me)
154
Q

helping in rural vs. urban cities

A

diffusion of responsibility (more people in urban)
similarity = empathy (rural is tighter knit)
less likely to notice an emergency in urban (less salient)
pluralistic ignorance

155
Q

biomedical model vs. biopsychosocial model

A

disease occurs in the body (mind is separate) vs. biological, psychological, social can affect illness

156
Q

why can humans develop stress-related illnesses?

A

PFC allows us to dwell and anticipate on sources of stress, prolonging it (rumination)
we chronically activate a stress system designed to deal with acute emergencies

157
Q

general adaptation syndrome (Selye)

A

nonspecific set of physiological responses to a broad array of stressors & if they go on too long, you get sick

158
Q

which brain regions are involved in the neural alarm system?

A

amygdala, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, anterior insula

159
Q

what is the role of the hypothalamus in a stress response?

A

received input from the neural alarm system and coordinates the fight-or-flight response (sympathetic nervous system)

160
Q

sympathetic nervous system pathway of a stress response

A

hypothalamus - sympathetic nervous system (adrenal glands - epinephrine - increased blood pressure, heart rate, sweating) - parasympathetic nervous system when the emergency has passed (brakes)

161
Q

Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis

A

hypothalamus - pituitary - adrenal glands - cortisol - mobilizing sugar for fuel, narrows attention to threat, formation of flashbulbs memories - cortisol should act on the hypothalamus to inhibit prolonged activation

162
Q

effects of chronic activation of stress response

A

cardiovascular system: buildup of plaque on arterial walls = risk of heart attack
immune system: glucocorticoid resistance of immune cells = heightened inflammation = depression, cancer, diabetes

163
Q

two key factors of stressors + Trier Social Stress Test

A

uncontrollability and social evaluative threat - TSST = lack of of social feedback & surprise math test + judges

164
Q

Stress appraisal theory

A

appraisal (depend on perceived stress) shapes our emotional experience of an event and our physiological response to it

165
Q

Primary appraisal of stress

A

person’s perception of the challenges in a situation

166
Q

Secondary appraisal of stress

A

perception of our ability to handle the challenged of a situation

167
Q

when is perceived stress likely to be high?

A

when primary appraisal exceeds secondary appraisal (high harm/threat + low coping)

168
Q

positive illusions that promote coping with stress

A

illusion of control: feeling that we have more control over outcomes than we objectively do
optimism

169
Q

effects of illusion of control and optimism when dealing with stress

A

changing appraisal from threat to challenge
problem-focused coping: attempts to modify/eliminate stressor
fosters persistence, motivation, performance
faster recovery, favourable cancer outcomes, longevity in nursing homes, improves social functioning

170
Q

objective social isolation vs. subjective loneliness

A

subjective loneliness is more strongly related to negative health (hypervigilance to social threat, sleep fragmentation, HPA axis activation, depression, gene mutations and immune system)

171
Q

role of oxytocin in social support’s connection to health

A

tends to reduce anxiety and inhibit cortisol during a stressful event when individual has strong social support (blunts stress response)

172
Q

role of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex in social support’s connection to health

A

vmPFC responds to safety signals (the absence of threats) and has an inhibitory effect on the amygdala (inhibits SNS and promotes PNS, inhibits cortisol release)
viewing pictures of attachment figures stimulates the vmPFC

FALL 2022 (3 decks)

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