L18-L20 Flashcards
Overconfidence
part of self-enhancement
having an unjustifiably positive belief in one’s characteristics or performance
3 kinds of overconfidence
overestimation, overplacement, overprecision
- thinking that you did better than you actually did
- thinking that you’re better than more people than you actually are
- claiming certainty about your guess when you have no information that warrants that certainty
2 questions humans tend to ask regarding agency and control
- Can we change?
- Can the world around us change?
- implicit theory of the self vs of the world: beliefs regarding whether attributes are malleable or fixed
- different cultural environments foster different ways of exercising control
2 implicit theories of the self
incremental theory of the self and entity theory of the self
- abilities are malleable and can be changed with efforts
- abilities are largely fixed and reflect innate features of the self
2 implicit theories of the world
incremental theory of the world and entity theory of the world
- world is flexible and responsive to our efforts to change it
- world is fixed and it is beyond our ability to change it
Primary control
- exercising agency by making changes in your environment to suit your needs
- you assume an internal locus of control (i.e. seat of control is within yourself)
e.g. incremental theory of the world, entity theory of the self, independent view of self
Secondary control
- exercising agency by adjusting goals and desires to control the psychological impact of reality
- you assume an external locus of control (i.e. compelled by external events to change)
e.g. incremental theory of the self, entity theory of the world, interdependent view of the self
2 kinds of self-construals based on differences in choice-making
stem from differences in agency and control
independent self-construal and interdependent self-construal
- important decisions must be made by ourselves
- important decisions often made by others close to us
Findings on engagement in a game depending on who is making choices
among Europeans and Asians
choice made by themselves, strangers, or their social circle
- European Americans are more engaged when there’s personal choice
- Asian Americans are more engaged when there’s ingroup choice
What are the consequences of having too many choices vs too little choices?
i.e. paradox of choice
- too much choice depletes our mental resources
- too little choice leads to learned helplessness
Sensation
sensory signals reaching the detectors in our bodies and eventually reaching our brains
e.g. light waves hitting the retina; sound waves hitting the ear drum
Perception
process by which the brain selects, organizes, and interprets the sensory information it receives from sense organs
3 reliable differences in perception due to cultural experience
- susceptibility to optical illusions
- pictorial depth perception
- object vs field focus
2 hypotheses regarding susceptibility to optical illusions
- foreshortening hypothesis
- carpentered world hypothesis
how we see the 3D world is developed through experiences and learning (e.g. using 2D visual cues)
Foreshortening hypothesis
people who reside in more open environments are more susceptible to optical illusions
e.g. horizontal-vertical illusion: tendency to overestimate vertical line length relative to horizontal line of the same length
Carpentered world hypothesis
- optical illusions reflect differences in our physical environment
- differences in the physical environment then lead to differences in susceptibility
e.g. Müller-Lyer illusion
5 kinds of depth cues in 2D images
that help with perceiving 3D images
- relative size of objects
- object superimposition
- vertical position
- linear perspective
- texture gradient
used in context with one another
Relative size
pictorial depth cue
more likely to perceive bigger objects to be closer to us than smaller objects
Object superimposition
pictorial depth cue
an object closer to us is superimposed onto (i.e. overlaps) an object that is farther away
Vertical position
pictorial depth cue
an object higher up in the visual field is farther from us
Linear perspective
pictorial depth cue
2 parallel lines placed on a 2D medium recede into a vanishing point at the horizon
Texture gradient
pictorial depth cue
greater detail when an object is closer to us than when a object is farther away (texture becomes more grainy)
How is sensitivity to depth cues assessed in Western education?
- examining how quickly people interpret an “immposible” figure (e.g. 2-pronged trident) by copying it
- those exposed to Western education take longer to copy the figure
- others simply see it as a series of lines and figures, thus they are able to copy it with less errors
One-point perspective vs oblique perspective
i.e. in perspective vs not in perspective
- everything recedes into a vanishing point
- everything is parallel and there are no receding lines
Holistic thinking and field dependence
- perceive scenes and situations as an integrated whole, paying more attention to the context surrounding focal object
- tendency to categorize objects based on relationships among objects in their environment
- related to collectivism/interdependence
- more characteristic of children from China and Indigenous groups
Analytical thinking and field independence
- perceive objects with a focus on specific elements rather than contexts, and use fixed abstract rules to explain and predict behavior
- tendency to categorize objects based on common traits
- e.g. focus on internal traits and dispositions
- related to individualism/independence
- more characteristic of children from the U.S.
Meaning of the location of the horizon in East Asian vs Western drawings
Masuda et al.
- East Asian drawings have higher horizons compared to Western drawings, which provides more space to show relationships between objects
- Higher horizons are indicative of holistic thinkers
- larger difference found in drawings of artists compared to non-artists but still statistically significant
Fundamental attribution error
attribution: ascribing where responsibilities lie (e.g. reason behind a person’s behavior can be internal or external)
tendency to put too much focus on someone’s internal dispositions as attributions for one’s behavior, underestimating the impact of external/contextual factors
- despite explicit external constraints
- associated with analytic thinking style
Difference in attributions between Americans and Indians
Indians are more likely to make situational attributions while Americans are more likely to make dispositional attributions, especially adults
socialization seems to be an important driving force
What 3 world views does thinking style affect?
analytical vs holistic thinking styles
attribution, categorization, and dialecticism
Dialecticism`
and two kinds of dialecticism
- thinking style affects perceptions of patterns and relationships in the world (e.g. contradictions)
- different philosophical traditions allow people to be more/less tolerant of contradictions
- traditional laws of thought: no tolerance for contradiction
- naïve dialecticism: tolerance for contradiction
What are contradictions?
- things that are opposite to each other
- things that are inconsistent with each other
- suggest that one is correct and the other is incorrect
3 traditional laws of thought
no tolerance for contradiction
- law of identity
- law of non-contradiction
- law of excluded middle
- rooted in Ancient Greek philosophy
Law of identity
traditional laws of thought
- “whatever is, is”
- each thing has its own attributes and characteristics
- X = X
Law of non-contradiction
traditional laws of thought
- “nothing can both be and not be”
- contradictory statements are mutually exclusive (i.e. only one can be true, not both)
- example: X > Y and X < Y
Law of excluded middle
traditional laws of thought
- “everything must either be or not be”
- contradictory statements are collectively exhaustive (i.e. account for all possible outcomes)
- example: X > Y and X ≤ Y (one of which must be true)
3 principles of naïve dialecticism
tolerance for contradiction
- principle of change
- principle of contradiction
- principle of relationship
- East Asian tradition and some forms of South Asian Buddhist thought have relatively higher acceptance of contradiction
Principle of change
naïve dialecticism
- reality is a changing process, not a static process, making reality fluid
- A ≠ A
negation of law of identity
Principle of contradiction
naïve dialecticism
- because change is constant, contradiction is constant
- opposite poles complement and depend on each other for existence
- example: A = B and A ≠ B
- things are constantly changing to what they are and what they aren’t
- negation of the law of non-contradiction
Principle of relationship
naïve dialecticism
because change and contradiction are constant, everything is related and cannot be isolated into independent elements
when one thing changes, everything around it changes too
Income inequality
- uneven distribution of income within a population
- measures the difference in people’s economic well-being within a group
Wealth inequality
uneven distribution of assets within a population (e.g. income, property, cars, businesses)
What is income inequality associated with?
- power inequality in society
- tangible consequences in society
e.g. life expectancy, infant mortality, teen births, imprisonment, homicides, obesity, mental illness, etc.
Authoritarianism
and outcomes
obedience of authority figures
* intolerance of minorities (e.g. ethnic, religious)
* support for more aggressive use of military force
* more likely to condone illegal government behavior
illegal government behavior becomes legitimized as them exercising their authority
Relationship between income inequality and power inequality
in relation to authorianism
- greater the income inequality, greater the power differential in society
- greater the experience with power difference, the greater its acceptance as a natural phenomena
those with higher income can do things in society for their own benefit
Relationship between power inequality and political engagement
- more acceptance of authoritarianism leads to more fatalism about one’s situation
- less political engagement among those with less power leads to greater political inequality
those with less power exhbit less political interest, less political discussion, and less electoral participation
Differences in behavior and psychological tendencies among rich and poor people
based on how they perform in studies
- rich: more independent self-construal, dispositional attributions, sense of personal control, and unethical behavior
- poor: more interdependent self-construal, situational attributions, empathy and helping behavior
poor also exhibit less engagement with and benefit from educational and occupational opportunities (which are predominantly middle to upper class)
Behavioral tendencies of people in lower SES
more likely to engage in behaviors perceived to exacerbate situation
e.g. having many children, non-optimal financial decisions, harmful health behaviors
