Losing the self, Losing control Flashcards
What is objective self-awareness?
A: Credited to Robert Wicklund, objective self-awareness refers to the ability to recognize oneself in a mirror or photograph, understanding that the image represents their physical appearance. This can lead to a focus on physical attributes and the way one’s looks are perceived by others, often leading to changes in self-presentation to match social standards.
B: Credited to Robert Wicklund, objective self-awareness refers to the ability to focus on oneself as an individual with unique personal goals and ambitions. When people experience objective self-awareness, they concentrate on their personal achievements and aspirations, seeking ways to fulfill their own potential regardless of external perceptions or evaluations.
C: Credited to Robert Wicklund, objective self-awareness refers to the ability to focus on oneself as an object of attention, NOT objectively! When people experience objective self-awareness, they see themselves from an external perspective, as if they are being observed by others and use the generalized other to evaluate and guide their behavior. This can lead to increased self-consciousness and an acute awareness of how one’s actions, appearance, and behaviors are perceived. We try to escape this in various ways as it causes extreme anxiety (corresponds to Sartre).
C: Credited to Robert Wicklund, objective self-awareness refers to the ability to focus on oneself as an object of attention, NOT objectively! When people experience objective self-awareness, they see themselves from an external perspective, as if they are being observed by others and use the generalized other to evaluate and guide their behavior. This can lead to increased self-consciousness and an acute awareness of how one’s actions, appearance, and behaviors are perceived. We try to escape this in various ways as it causes extreme anxiety (corresponds to Sartre).
What is the generalized other?
A: Coined by sociologist George Mead. It represents the unique thoughts and feelings of each individual that are influenced by their personal experiences and interactions. This perspective emphasizes the subjective nature of self-awareness, where personal viewpoints and internal dialogues shape one’s behavior and self-perception.
B: Coined by sociologist George Mead. It represents the common behavioral expectations and norms of society that individuals internalize but speaks to you in your own voice and feels like introspection. It is essentially the collective perspective of the broader social group, encompassing societal rules, values, and attitudes that individuals use as a reference point for evaluating their own behavior. When objectively self-aware (looking inward) we use the “generalized other” to evaluate and guide our behavior. It’s very Apollonian. If we find ourselves meeting the standards of the generalized other we feel fine, if not we try to escape or change our behavior.
C: Coined by sociologist George Mead. It represents the collective goals and ambitions of a community that individuals adopt as their own, driving their actions and decisions. This concept highlights the external influence of societal aspirations on personal development, encouraging individuals to align their objectives with those of the larger group to achieve communal success.
B: Coined by sociologist George Mead. It represents the common behavioral expectations and norms of society that individuals internalize but speaks to you in your own voice and feels like introspection. It is essentially the collective perspective of the broader social group, encompassing societal rules, values, and attitudes that individuals use as a reference point for evaluating their own behavior. When objectively self-aware (looking inward) we use the “generalized other” to evaluate and guide our behavior. It’s very Apollonian. If we find ourselves meeting the standards of the generalized other we feel fine, if not we try to escape or change our behavior.
What is naive realism?
A: Refers to the belief that the world is perceived directly as it is, without any subjective interpretation or bias. According to naïve realism, people tend to assume that their perceptions, beliefs, and opinions about the world accurately reflect objective reality. This belief leads individuals to think that others who see things differently are uninformed, irrational, or biased.
B: Refers to the belief that personal experiences and emotions play a crucial role in shaping one’s understanding of reality. According to naïve realism, people tend to think their feelings and intuitions are the best guides to understanding the world, and those who rely on logic or evidence are missing out on the true nature of reality.
C: Refers to the belief that one’s cultural background and social environment significantly influence their perception of the world. According to naïve realism, people tend to believe that their cultural norms and values are universally valid, leading them to view other cultures as strange or incorrect in their interpretations of reality.
A: Refers to the belief that the world is perceived directly as it is, without any subjective interpretation or bias. According to naïve realism, people tend to assume that their perceptions, beliefs, and opinions about the world accurately reflect objective reality. This belief leads individuals to think that others who see things differently are uninformed, irrational, or biased.
What is subjective construal?
A: The concept that individuals interpret the world based on collective societal norms and expectations, rather than their personal experiences and beliefs. This means that different people will perceive the same event or situation similarly if they are part of the same cultural or social group, as their perceptions are aligned with shared values and conventions.
B: The concept that individuals automatically perceive, interpret, and understand the world through their own personal lenses, shaped by their unique experiences, beliefs, emotions, and cognitive processes. This means that different people can perceive the same event or situation in vastly different ways based on their individual perspectives. Our perceptions are not purely objective reflections of reality but are influenced by internal and external factors.
C: The concept that individuals view the world primarily through a logical and rational framework, relying on objective evidence and reasoning. This suggests that different people will come to similar conclusions about events or situations if they follow the same logical processes, minimizing the influence of personal experiences and emotions.
B: The concept that individuals automatically perceive, interpret, and understand the world through their own personal lenses, shaped by their unique experiences, beliefs, emotions, and cognitive processes. This means that different people can perceive the same event or situation in vastly different ways based on their individual perspectives. Our perceptions are not purely objective reflections of reality but are influenced by internal and external factors.
Naïve Realism vs. Subjective Construal:
A: Subjective construal (constructive model of seeing) is NOT an error but the brain’s way of making sense of the world. It’s an interpretive process, not a direct reflection of reality. Naïve realism (Smart Phone Model of Seeing), however, is AN ERROR. It’s the mistaken belief that our perceptions are objective and unfiltered. This belief ignores how expectations, culture, and experiences shape our views. Naïve realists think they see the world as it is, while in reality, perception is a constructive process. All of this relates to Hyp 3: we don’t know what we don’t know.
B: Subjective construal (constructive model of seeing) is a critical error that distorts our perception of reality. It suggests that the brain often fails to accurately interpret the world, leading to misunderstandings. Naïve realism (Smart Phone Model of Seeing), on the other hand, is a correct understanding that our perceptions are a direct and accurate reflection of the world. This belief emphasizes that our views are not influenced by personal biases or cultural contexts.
C: Subjective construal (constructive model of seeing) involves interpreting the world based on social consensus and shared cultural norms. It proposes that people perceive reality through a collective lens, making it a direct reflection of their social environment. Naïve realism (Smart Phone Model of Seeing) suggests that perceptions are highly individualized and subjective, and thus prone to errors due to personal biases and experiences.
A: Subjective construal (constructive model of seeing) is NOT an error but the brain’s way of making sense of the world. It’s an interpretive process, not a direct reflection of reality. Naïve realism (Smart Phone Model of Seeing), however, is AN ERROR. It’s the mistaken belief that our perceptions are objective and unfiltered. This belief ignores how expectations, culture, and experiences shape our views. Naïve realists think they see the world as it is, while in reality, perception is a constructive process. All of this relates to Hyp 3: we don’t know what we don’t know.
Who is Sartre and what does he believe in?
A: A philosopher who argued that human behavior is entirely determined by external forces beyond our control. He believed that free will is an illusion, and our actions are dictated by societal norms, genetics, and environmental factors. Sartre suggested that individuals have no real autonomy and are merely products of their circumstances.
B: A philosopher (“The Look”) and existentialist, who argued that the self only exists during self-reflection. Our desires pull our consciousness inward, making the “I” disappear in the moment and reappear when we reflect. This self-awareness brings anxiety, as we realize others judge us based on an observable nature we can’t fully control. Sartre suggested that we often conform to societal norms to shape how others perceive us, a process involving both conscious reflection and pre-reflective obedience.
C: A philosopher and existentialist who believed that the essence of human beings is predetermined by a higher power. He argued that individuals are born with a set purpose and must strive to fulfill this predetermined destiny. Sartre suggested that true freedom comes from accepting and embracing one’s inherent purpose, rather than resisting it.
B: A philosopher (“The Look”) and existentialist, who argued that the self only exists during self-reflection. Our desires pull our consciousness inward, making the “I” disappear in the moment and reappear when we reflect. This self-awareness brings anxiety, as we realize others judge us based on an observable nature we can’t fully control. Sartre suggested that we often conform to societal norms to shape how others perceive us, a process involving both conscious reflection and pre-reflective obedience.
Who is George Mead and what does he believe in?
A: G.H. Mead, a social psychologist, coined the “generalized other” and argued that we learn about ourselves through others’ feedback, seeing our social “objectness” through their eyes. This reflected appraisal, or “what I think you think of me,” shapes our self-perception. Self-knowledge is socially driven, not solely from introspection, and involves a dialogue with the generalized other, similar to Freud’s superego. Our self-awareness is inherently social, as we perceive ourselves as objects for others and understand this through their perspectives and the generalized other’s influence.
B: G.H. Mead, a social psychologist, believed that individuals are completely independent of social influences in their development. He argued that self-awareness and personal identity are formed solely through introspection and self-reflection, without any significant impact from social interactions or feedback from others.
C: G.H. Mead, a social psychologist, proposed that human behavior is entirely driven by biological instincts and innate characteristics. He believed that social interactions and cultural contexts play a minimal role in shaping an individual’s self-perception and identity, which are primarily determined by genetic factors and inherent traits.
A: G.H. Mead, a social psychologist, coined the “generalized other” and argued that we learn about ourselves through others’ feedback, seeing our social “objectness” through their eyes. This reflected appraisal, or “what I think you think of me,” shapes our self-perception. Self-knowledge is socially driven, not solely from introspection, and involves a dialogue with the generalized other, similar to Freud’s superego. Our self-awareness is inherently social, as we perceive ourselves as objects for others and understand this through their perspectives and the generalized other’s influence.
We already know that when we feel bad that we’re not meeting the standards of the generalized other we can either escape objective self-awareness or change our behavior BUT we also have a third option which has to do with eliminating the possibility of objective self-awareness in the first place so we never have to feel bad, how can we do this?
A: We can eliminate objective self-awareness by fully embracing and internalizing the standards of the generalized other, making them an inherent part of our identity. This alignment ensures that our behaviors naturally meet societal expectations, thus avoiding the discomfort associated with failing to meet these standards.
B: We can escape the self via distraction/engagement, drugs, sex, alcohol, etc. Doing this diminishes reflective processing, where the generalized other can’t impose standards, and instead, we tend to follow our impulses.
C: We can avoid objective self-awareness by isolating ourselves from social interactions and feedback. By reducing our exposure to the opinions and judgments of others, we minimize the impact of the generalized other on our self-perception, thereby eliminating the source of potential discomfort.
B: We can escape the self via distraction/engagement, drugs, sex, alcohol, etc. Doing this diminishes reflective processing, where the generalized other can’t impose standards, and instead, we tend to follow our impulses.
Who is Roy Baumeister and what does he believe in?
A: Roy Baumeister is a social psychologist known for his work on self-control and willpower. He believes that self-control is a finite resource that can be depleted with overuse, but can also be strengthened with practice, similar to a muscle. His research suggests that having strong self-control leads to better life outcomes, including better health, relationships, and financial stability.
B: Roy Baumeister is a social psychologist who has extensively studied the concept of self-esteem. He believes that high self-esteem does not necessarily lead to positive outcomes and can sometimes result in negative behaviors, such as aggression or narcissism. Baumeister argues that self-esteem should be based on actual achievements and competencies rather than being artificially inflated.
C: Roy Baumeister is a prominent social psychologist and a lead researcher on escaping the self. He asserted that today, our identity is shaped by the choices we make, unlike in the past when life decisions were predetermined, and people didn’t refer to the self. Historically, aspects like career, marriage, and religion were decided for individuals, resulting in fewer references to the self. Modern times, with personal choices defining us, have led to more self-awareness and references in writings and art. However, this increased focus on the self also brings more anxiety, as having many choices can be stressful.
C: Roy Baumeister is a prominent social psychologist and a lead researcher on escaping the self. He asserted that today, our identity is shaped by the choices we make, unlike in the past when life decisions were predetermined, and people didn’t refer to the self. Historically, aspects like career, marriage, and religion were decided for individuals, resulting in fewer references to the self. Modern times, with personal choices defining us, have led to more self-awareness and references in writings and art. However, this increased focus on the self also brings more anxiety, as having many choices can be stressful.
What is deindividuation?
A: A psychological phenomenon where individuals in a group setting lose their sense of individual identity and personal responsibility. This can lead to behavior that is atypical for the individual, often resulting in impulsive, irrational, or aggressive actions. Deindividuation can occur in situations like riots or mob activities, where the group’s influence overpowers personal moral standards.
B: A state in which people in groups feel increased self-awareness and heightened individuality, leading them to behave more according to their personal values and beliefs. This heightened sense of self often results in actions that are more controlled, rational, and aligned with their usual behavior outside of the group context.
C: Described by Gustav Le Bon, occurs when individuals in a crowd lose self-awareness and individual identity, leading to uninhibited behavior and mimicking others. This “collective mind” effect happens as self-reflection diminishes, and accountability decreases. The impact can be positive or negative, depending on the crowd’s actions, aligning with the Dionysian perspective.
C: Described by Gustav Le Bon, occurs when individuals in a crowd lose self-awareness and individual identity, leading to uninhibited behavior and mimicking others. This “collective mind” effect happens as self-reflection diminishes, and accountability decreases. The impact can be positive or negative, depending on the crowd’s actions, aligning with the Dionysian perspective.
What conditions cause deindividuation?
A: Phil Zimbardo identified conditions that cause deindividuation as anonymity, lack of accountability, arousal, being in a large group, sensory overload, and altered states of consciousness. For example, at a rock concert, darkness, crowds, and substance use can lead to sensory overload and altered consciousness, making it easier to lose self-awareness. Deindividuation is the opposite of heightened self-awareness, often induced by factors like drugs, alcohol, and lack of sleep. Very Dionysian.
B: Phil Zimbardo identified conditions that cause deindividuation as increased individual recognition, personal accountability, calm environments, being in small groups, and clear, structured settings. For example, in a small classroom with bright lights and structured activities, it is difficult for individuals to lose self-awareness and identity, maintaining a high level of personal responsibility and control over their actions.
C: Phil Zimbardo identified conditions that cause deindividuation as social isolation, quiet environments, low levels of stimulation, being alone, and maintaining high self-awareness. For example, when someone spends time in solitude in a quiet, unstimulating environment, they are more likely to maintain a strong sense of self-awareness and individuality, preventing deindividuation.
A: Phil Zimbardo identified conditions that cause deindividuation as anonymity, lack of accountability, arousal, being in a large group, sensory overload, and altered states of consciousness. For example, at a rock concert, darkness, crowds, and substance use can lead to sensory overload and altered consciousness, making it easier to lose self-awareness. Deindividuation is the opposite of heightened self-awareness, often induced by factors like drugs, alcohol, and lack of sleep. Very Dionysian.
What does deindividuation do to our minds?
A: Deindividuation increases self-awareness and concern for social evaluation, making individuals more conscious of their actions and their impact on others. It enhances the distinction between self and others, leading to more restrained and thoughtful behavior, often guided by personal values and social norms.
B: Deindividuation enhances our cognitive processing and rational decision-making abilities, allowing us to make more deliberate and well-considered choices. It heightens our awareness of long-term consequences and strengthens our ability to resist social influence, promoting individuality and self-control.
C: Deindividuation minimizes self-awareness and concern for social evaluation, leading to time distortion and a focus on the present. It reduces the distinction between self and others, making us less inhibited and more impulsive, often mimicking those around us. Very Dionysian.
C: Deindividuation minimizes self-awareness and concern for social evaluation, leading to time distortion and a focus on the present. It reduces the distinction between self and others, making us less inhibited and more impulsive, often mimicking those around us. Very Dionysian.
What does deindividuation do to our behavior?
A: Deindividuation enhances self-control and rationality, leading to more calculated and thoughtful behavior. Individuals become more aware of their actions’ long-term consequences and make decisions that align with their personal and societal values.
B: Deindividuation increases adherence to social norms and ethical standards, making individuals more likely to engage in prosocial behaviors. It strengthens the influence of societal expectations on personal conduct, leading to more responsible and community-oriented actions.
C: Deindividuation leads to uninhibited and impulsive behavior, not guided by the “generalized other” (impulsivity, irrationality, emotionality, antisocial activity). It makes nearby behaviors contagious and reduces memory for actions, as individuals live in the moment without considering consequences or forming lasting memories. Very Dionysian.
C: Deindividuation leads to uninhibited and impulsive behavior, not guided by the “generalized other” (impulsivity, irrationality, emotionality, antisocial activity). It makes nearby behaviors contagious and reduces memory for actions, as individuals live in the moment without considering consequences or forming lasting memories. Very Dionysian.
STUDY: Deindividuation and Taboos
(Singer, Brush & Lublin):
A: Participants joined a reading discussion group to discuss neutral topics like gardening and literature. Some participants’ identities were hidden, while others’ identities were known. The study found that those who were deindividuated (with hidden identities) used more formal and respectful language compared to those whose identities were known. This demonstrated that deindividuation increases self-regulation and adherence to social norms.
B: Participants joined a reading discussion group to discuss pornography, a highly taboo topic at the time. Some participants’ identities were hidden, while others’ identities were known. The study found that those who were deindividuated (with hidden identities) used more taboo language compared to those whose identities were known. This demonstrated that deindividuation reduces self-regulation and increases the likelihood of violating social norms.
C: Participants joined a reading discussion group to discuss current political issues, a highly contentious topic at the time. Some participants’ identities were hidden, while others’ identities were known. The study found that those who were deindividuated (with hidden identities) used more neutral and non-controversial language compared to those whose identities were known. This demonstrated that deindividuation increases cautious behavior and decreases the likelihood of violating social norms.
B: Participants joined a reading discussion group to discuss pornography, a highly taboo topic at the time. Some participants’ identities were hidden, while others’ identities were known. The study found that those who were deindividuated (with hidden identities) used more taboo language compared to those whose identities were known. This demonstrated that deindividuation reduces self-regulation and increases the likelihood of violating social norms.
STUDY: Deindividuation and inflicting
pain (Zimbardo, 1969):
A: Participants were asked to administer electric shocks to others. Some participants were made anonymous by wearing hoods and being referred to by numbers, while others remained identifiable. The study found that deindividuated participants (those made anonymous) administered stronger and longer shocks compared to those who were identifiable. This demonstrated that deindividuation increases aggressive behavior and reduces personal accountability.
B: Participants were asked to administer electric shocks to others. Some participants were made anonymous by being placed in separate rooms and communicating only via intercom, while others remained in the same room and could see each other. The study found that deindividuated participants (those in separate rooms) were more hesitant and administered weaker shocks compared to those who were in the same room. This demonstrated that deindividuation increases empathy and decreases aggressive behavior.
C: Participants were asked to administer electric shocks to others. Some participants were made anonymous by wearing masks and being given false names, while others wore their own clothes and used their real names. The study found that deindividuated participants (those with masks and false names) administered fewer and weaker shocks compared to those who used their real names. This demonstrated that deindividuation increases caution and reduces the likelihood of harming others.
A: Participants were asked to administer electric shocks to others. Some participants were made anonymous by wearing hoods and being referred to by numbers, while others remained identifiable. The study found that deindividuated participants (those made anonymous) administered stronger and longer shocks compared to those who were identifiable. This demonstrated that deindividuation increases aggressive behavior and reduces personal accountability.
