Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

Social > Lecture 3 - Social Cognition and Perception > Flashcards

Lecture 3 - Social Cognition and Perception Flashcards

1
Q

Outline what is social cognition

A 
Attitudes 
Perceptions 
Judgements 
Expectations 
Influence beliefs intentions behaviour 
Rational, reasoned decision maker
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Define Information processing perspective

A

Assumes act like computer, logical
Cog processes understanding how people construct own social world
Cognitive structures and processes affect and affected social context

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

Outline a cognitive miser

A

Put as little effort into thinking possible to be more efficient
Short cuts
Help towards:
Cognitive encoding and stereotypes

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

Outline Categorisation

A

Short cut strategies simplify incoming info
Simplifying perceptions
Grouping - treated similar way
Promotes cognitive economy

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

Outline the rule based approach of categorisation

A

Every category represented by set necessary and sufficient features

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

Who created the rule based approach

A

Bruner et al 1956

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

Outline issues of Categorisation

A

Hard define rules - doesn’t always work (bachelor)

Can disagree - camel as Vehicle?

Doesn’t indicate how well something represents category

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

What was the Prototypical approach based on

A

Reaction rule based approach

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

Who created the Prototypical Approach

A

Rosch 1975

Barsalou 1991

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

Outline the Prototypical approach

A

Similarity. Family matching. Common attributes family members
Members share something in common - not completely identical
Often average but sometimes most extreme
Considered fuzzy sets centring around prototype
Boundaries not clear

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

Outline Exemplar Approach

A

Specific instances

Does not have to be a good example or representative

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

Outline associative networks

A

Network linked attributes activated through spreading activation
Different in different contexts
Link key attributes which activated depends context

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

Define a schema

A 
Top-down 
Organised, specific 
Cognitive representation 
Specify features and relationships 
Generalise time and space dependent individuals personal experience
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Define the 3 types of a Schema

A

Person schema

Role schema

Scripts schema

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

Define a Person Schema

A

Individualised or generalised stereotypes

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

Define a Role schema

A

How someone in particular role should behave

E.g. a lecturer

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

Outline a Script Schema

A

Schemas about events

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

What happens when a schema is activated

A

Schemas influence information processing inference
Conceptually driven processing
Implicitly activated, affect judgement and behaviour
Guide how we encode (attend, interpret) remember and respond (judge and interact)

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

How do we know which schema is activated

A

Which schema activated driven by salience, relevance and personal importance

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

Outline Bargh, Chen and Burrows 1996 study on automaticity and subliminal priming of old age stereotypes

A

Ppts unscramble sentences
Experimental condition: contained words specifically relevant old people
2nd experimenter blind conditions and timed how long ppts afterwards walked down corridor

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

Outline RESULTS Bargh, Chen and Burrows 1996 study on automaticity and subliminal priming of old age stereotypes

A

Those primed old age stereotypes walked more slowly down corridor compared neutral primed ppts
People behave according primed schema

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

Outline a cognitive miser

A

Social perception as problem solving task
Cognitive laziness
Rely heuristics decision making and interpersonal perception
Process salient info - standard out
Result mistakes and biases

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

Who investigated heuristics

A

Tversky and Kahneman 1974

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

Name the 3 heuristics outlines by Tversky and Kahneman 1974

A

Availability

Representativeness

Anchoring and Adjustment

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

Outline Availability Heuristic in Tversky and Kahneman 1974

A

Judging frequency of event based number instances brought to mind that event

How easy it is to come to mind

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

Outline Representativeness Heuristic in Tversky and Kahneman 1974

A

Whether person is example of particular stored schema
E.g. stereotype
Make judgement based previous example

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

Outline Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic in Tversky and Kahneman 1974

A

Using info about initial standard or schemas
Why sales assistant show most expensive thing in shop
Show most expensive thing more likely spend more money

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

Define attribution by Hogg and Vaughan 2005

A

Process assigning causes for own behaviour to that of others

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

Outline Casual Attribution

A

Naive scientists - Heider 1958
How people think about others - common sense
Inferring causes from observable behaviour or other info. Predict and control.
Dispositional (internal) - stable. Enduring characteristics
Situations (external) - changeable

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

Who created the co variation model

A

Kelley’s 1967

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

What is the most dominant attribution theory

A

Co- variation model

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

Outline Kelley’s 1967 co variation model

A

Treat people scientists, people look co varying behaviour
Most influential
Decide whether internal or external cause

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

What are the 3 key questions of Kelley’s covariation model

A

Does the person regularly behave this way in this situation? Consistency.

Do other people regularly behave this way in this situation? Consensus

Does this person behave this way in other situations? Distinctiveness

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

What are the 3 key words of Kelley’s Covariation Model 1967

A

Consistency

Consensus

Distinctiveness

35
Q

Outline limitations of Kelley’s 1967 covariation model

A 
Availability info - lab vs life 
Need multiple observations 
Underuse consensus info 
False consensus bias 
Time and motivation
36
Q

Define how false consensus bias is an issue according to Ross et al 1977 for Kelley’s Covariation Model

A

Tendency believe others behave like us
Asked students if they would advertise local sandwich shop huge advertisement board
Asked if believed others do same
Belief in others consistent with own behaviour

37
Q

Outline limitation of Kelley’s Covariation Model according to Allow and Tabachnik 1984 and Hilton 1988

A

People poor assessing Covariation - Alloy and Tabachnik 1984

Covariation NOT causation - Hilton 1988

38
Q

What bias is fundamental attribution error associated with

A

Correspondence bias

Jones and Harris 1967

39
Q

Define Fundamental Attribution Error

A

Overestimate dispositional and underestimate situation factors
Salience of actor and differential forgetting over time
Like believe we have control Just world hypothesis - people gets what’s coming to them

40
Q

Who investigates Actor observer effect

A

Jones and Nisbett 1972

41
Q

Outline Actor Observer Effect Jones and Nisbett 1972

A

Tendency make dispositional attributions for others

Situational attributions for ourselves

42
Q

Why does the Actor Observer Effect Jones and Nisbett 1972

A

Differences salience, historical info about actor and reversed by perspective taking

43
Q

Who investigated attributions of blame and forgiveness and differences in victims and transgressors

A

Adams and Insei 2016

44
Q

Outline Adams and Insei 2016 victims vs transgressors study

A

Ppts offered choice tasks.
Ppts choice attractive task means next ppt has to complete boring task.
Ppt would choose desirable task not realising consequences
Subsequent ppt knows initial ppt choice resulted

45
Q

Outline RESULTS Adams and Insei 2016 victims vs transgressors study

A

Victims believe transgression intentional
Believe transgressors feel less guilty than actually do
Underestimate how much transgressors want to be forgiven
Perspective taking - victim take perspective transgressor reduce effects

46
Q

Outline who investigated self serving bias .

A

Miller and Ross 1975

47
Q

Define Self Serving Bias Miller and Ross 1975

A

Tendency take credit
Dispositional attributions for success, situational attributions for failure
Projects self esteem
Cognitive - focus own efforts and info

48
Q

Outline Ethnocentrism In-group serving bias

A

Positive ingroup or negative outgroup behaviour = dispositional

Negative ingroup and positive outgroup = situational

49
Q

Why does Ethnocentrism In-group serving bias occur

A

Cognitive = activate schemas and don’t think further. Cognitive misers not look for anything else

Motivational = social identity theory Tajfel and Turner 1979. Motivated see groups extensions ourselves positively

50
Q

Define Public Perceptions

A

Measure public feelings don’t necessarily correspond to reality.
Public perceptions often differ from those expected. Different groups take into account different factors.

51
Q

Outline Public Perceptions and Nuclear Power

A

Experts rate risks from nuclear power much lower than members public

52
Q

Outline the Public Deficit Model

A

Deficit knowledge about topic
People don’t understand and fall back on irrational beliefs
People knew more they would change their mind

53
Q

Outline the study by Evans and Durrant 1995 into Public Deficit Model

A

Public understanding science and support/attitudes for scientific research
Different pattern within specific areas

54
Q

Outline the correlation between knowledge and positive attitudes in Evans and Durrant 1995

A

Knowledge correlates positively with general attitudes moderately
.3

55
Q

Outline the different patterns within specific areas by Evans and Durrant 1995

A

Useful - socially relevant and practical

Non-useful - intrinsic interest not necessarily useful

Moral issues

56
Q

Outline the correlations identified by Evans and Durrant 1995 for basic research

A

Significant correlation between knowledge and attitudes for useful basic research .20

57
Q

Outline the correlations identified by Evans and Durrant 1995 for non-useful research and morally contentious research

A

Almost no relation between knowledge nd attitudes for non-useful research .05

Negative associations for morally contentious research -.27

58
Q

Outline the levels of knowledge correlation with research

A

Highest levels knowledge positive attitudes towards useful research, less positive towards morally contentious

Scientifically informed more discriminating in their judgements

59
Q

Outline Wynne 1999 proponents and opponents

A

Proponents and opponents usually value different domains knowledge
Social trust (lack of) outweighs importance knowledge
Methods and processes science be questioned
Institutions be questioned

60
Q

Outline Public Perceptions Upstream Engagement by Pidgeon and Rogers-Hayden 2007

A

Dialogue and deliberation amongst affected parties about potentially controversial technological issue at early stage research and development process and in advance significant applications or social controversy.
Feeding into policy early more likely be up-taking

61
Q

Outline Public Perceptions Upstream Engagement

A

Data feeds into policy and industry decisions - products and policies that are more likely succeed

Engagement and empowerment - public dialogue includes people in decision - subsequently more likely support and engage with activity

62
Q

Outline Risk Perceptions by British Medical Journey 2003

A

1 in 85 death road over 50yrs driving
1 in 50,000 death football
1 in 100,000 death murder
1 in 10,000,000 chance death nuclear power

63
Q

Outline the 4 public risk perception factors

A

Voluntariness - more acceptable if voluntary
Controllability - acceptable if controllable
Natural vs Manmade - acceptable if natural
Familiarity - acceptable if familiar

64
Q

What does Slovic 1987 state

A

Psychometric paradigm

Create cognitive maps risk perceptions

65
Q

Outline Slovic 1987 2 dimensions

A

Dread: uncontrollable, involuntary
Unknown: unobservable, delayed effects

66
Q

What is the 3rd factor sometimes been identified

A

Number people exposed risk

67
Q

What are the correlations identified by Slovic 1987

A

Dread risk correlated with overall perceived risk

Risks both unknown and dreaded have high signal potential

68
Q

Outline what a signal potential is by Slovic 1987

A

Idea risk occurring would have further impacts beyond immediate shocks
More likely discussed media and have impact on society

69
Q

Outline Perceived risks and benefits

A

Distinct benefits different from risks

PERCEIVED risks and benefits often negatively correlated

70
Q

Outline Finucane et al 2000 Affect Heuristic

A

Judgements risk and benefit theorised stem from overall affective feeling about behaviour
Justify benefits and risks accordingly

71
Q

What are the 4 factors of Psychological Distance

A 
Uncertainty 
Social Distance 
Temporal Distance 
Geographic Distance 
All interrelated
72
Q

What theory did Liberman and Trope 2008 come up with

A

Construal Level Theory

How you think about something

73
Q

Outline being psychologically close according to the Construal Level Theory Lieberman and Trope 2008

A

Low level construal
Concrete, unstructured
Contextualised
HOW

74
Q

Outline being psychologically distant according to the Construal Level Theory Lieberman and Trope 2008

A

High level construal
Abstract, schematic
Decontextualised
WHY

75
Q

Example of Construal Level Theory in everyday life

A

Booking holiday
Think why to do
But as holiday comes closer begin think practically e.g. how getting airport

76
Q

Outline Evolution in Construal Level Theory

A

Development human capacity for abstract mental representation
Commonality way psychological distance traversed
Guide predictions, evaluations and planning
Considering distance e.g. thinking future, taking another perspective, activates same neural substrates. Common processes work

77
Q

Outline Bar-Anan et al 2007 as Automatic processing of Psychological distance

A

Picture-word stroop task. Had decide if arrow was close or far away and ignore words on it
If concept related to distance and action ppt make facilitate performance as action already partially activated
Activated automatic

78
Q

Outline Stephan et al 2006 study on manipulating one aspect of distance can influence other aspects distance

A

Imagine meeting new roommate tomorrow or in 6 months
More familiar if tomorrow
Manipulating temporal distance but affecting social distance

79
Q

Outline Psychological Distance and Climate Change study by Spence et al 2012

A

Geographical distance - affecting both local and distant

Social distance - disproportionate effects developing countries

80
Q

Outline the relationship between geography and psychology distance by Spence et al 2012

A

Lower psychological distance related greater concerns climate change
Higher geographical distance more perceived psychological, social distance
Lower psychological distance and higher concerns related greater intentions reduce energy use

81
Q

Outline the implications of Spence et al 2012

A

Objects considered at distance considered more abstract terms and formed fewer groups
Psychological distance promotes more abstract thinking
More confident events distant future
High level construals allow transcendence of here and now

82
Q

Outline desirability concerns of implications

A

Desirability concerns should be valued more with distance

Desirability concerns high level construal whereas feasibility concerns low level construal

83
Q

Links to attribution

A

Third person perspective –> dispositional

First person perspective –> situational

84
Q

Links to intergroup behaviours

A

Outgroups described more abstract terms and in terms more enduring characteristics

Social (10 decks)

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