Midterm 2 - Readings Flashcards
People stigmatize unattractive people, particularly those with ———.
facial disfigurements
ex. mothers are less affectionate to children if unattractive
ex. unattractive defendents get harsher sentences
Define beauty-is-good stereotype
less attractive people are less intellegent, less competent, and less emotional warmth
stereotype produces an unconcious bias against unattractive people!
Moral traits are strongly biased by irrelevant factors such as ———.
one’s physical attractivness !
Attractiveness has a strong influence on moral character judgements
In a study where people are shown photographs of attractive an unattractive faces and asked to judge their characters, what was the finding?
People percieve unattractive people more negatively than attractive people.
Effect is stronger for judgements of moral character (trustworhiness, honesty, selflessness)
Effect less strong for judgements of non-moral character (funny, organized)
What is our behavioural immune system? How does it connect to attractiveness?
Behavioral Immune System = psychological mechanisms that serve as an early defense against pathogens
Works as a “smoke detector” that is oversensitive to things that only resemble disease
Disease can sometimes cause facial irregulatiries (but not commonly), which causes unattractiveness (facial disfigurement) to be a disease cue
——– is an important part of the behavioural immune system
Digust
It motivates us to avoid diseased things (such as people with faical irregularities)
Unattractive individuals are perceived as more likely to engage in purity violations (ex. spitting on sidewalk) compared to attractive individuals. There is no similar expectation for harm violations. What does this finding suggest?
That unattractive people are viewed as more immoral overall
Especially with engaging in behaviours that are considered “disgusting”
How can we reduce our bias against unattractive people?
- Be aware that a person’s physical attractiveness shapes our perceptions and biases of them (particularly facial disfigurements)
- Need to get rid of the “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” idea
(same psychological function as “ I don’t see color”)
Studies show that people are percived to be more trustworthy if they….
- look attractive
- have a relatively narrow face
- have baby-like facial features
- appear to be smiling (even if not)
In a study looking at the process of emotional overgeneralization, what were the results of rating facial images for dominance and trustworthiness?
Attractive people and people appear to be smiling (even when neautral) are seen as more trustworthy
Men and people who appear to be angry (even when neautral) are seen as more dominant
When we look at someone and make immediate inferences about someone’s character, what is this process called?
Emotional Overgeneralization
(oversenstivie emotion detection system)
We constantly look for emotional signals (ex. smiles), and overgeneralize this signals to judge another’s character (ex. they are happy and nice in general)
What is the two step process of emotion overgeneralization?
- Oversensitive emotonal detection system - constantly looking for emotional signals (smiles and frowns)
*Causes us to see emotions not even there, such as a smile because the corners of mouth are tilted upwards. - Tendency to overgeneralize - think a certain feature tells us info about that person’s character
*if we see a smile, we assume that person is happy right now, but also that they are nice in general
If someone is attractive, what are some things they might expect in their life?
- attractive people become sexually active earlier
(increases number of short-term partners for men, increases number of long-term partners for women) - attractive people data individuals higher in attractiveness
- attractive people are more popular with peers and friends (even in early childhood)
——- and ——- attractivness impact social outcomes.
Body attractiveness
(overweight ppl less likely to get jobs, have parents pay for education, or admitted to college)
Voice attractiveness
(people with attractive voices are treated better)
Attractiveness halo effect
endency to associate attractiveness with a variety of positive traits, such as being more sociable, intelligent, competent, and healthy.
What are the 6 categories of advantages of high attractivness?
1. First impressions
2. Mating prospects
3. Parents and peer favoritism (strangers more likely to help attractive people)
4. Education and employment
(attractive people are hired more and have higher salaries)
5. Electoral success
(attractive candidates get more votes)
6. Judicial outcomes
(attractive defendents get smaller sentences)
Attraction is multifaceted. What does that mean?
there are some facial qualities that are universally attracitve, but others depend on an individual level.
attraction is a dual proccess that combines sexual and aesthetic preferences:
- diff brain regions activated for judging sexual vs nonsexual attractivness!
What are the universal features of high attractiveness?
Youthfulness
Unblemished skin
Symmetry
Averageness
Femininity in women
Masculinity in men
Positive expressions and behaviors
Negative reactions to obesity start at a young age. What study demonstrated this?
When ranking other kids they want to be freinds with, children ranked obese children lower than children missing a hand, in a wheelchair, etc.
While there is no single quality for attractiveness, what is a single quality that garuntees unattractiveness?
When a face differs greatly from that of the average face (not prototypical!)
For men, what are the 3 combined features that make a women attractive?
- youthfulness
- sexual maturity
- approachability
What are the 4 explanations explored in the “attraction and beauty” reading for why certain people are attractive?
- Cultural explination
(attractiveness based on what culture is preferred) - Cognitive explination
(attractiveness is a result of a cognitive mechanism where we prefer familiar stimuli) - Evolutionary explination
(attractiveness is based on our adaptive nature for genetic fitness) - Overgeneralization explination
(attractiveness is a result of an innate avoidance of qualities that signal poor health or low genetic fitness)
Out of the 4 explinations for why certain people are seen of attractive, which one is the most accurate in explaining the attractiveness halo effect?
Evolutionary explination
(“good genes hypothesis”)
This is the closest explination we have for why the attractiveness halo effect occurs
Evolutionary assumes that as attractiveness increases, so does fitness and other good qualities (no other explinationd assume that)
Although more accurate, the evolutionary explination still does not imply a genetic link between attractiveness and adaptive traits, such as health or intelligence.
What is cultural explination for why certain people are attractive? What evidence contradicts it?
Attractiveness is based on what culture is preffered
(ex. long neck preferred in Myanmar tribe, but not for westerners)
Evidence that goes against theory:
- People across many cultures view the same faces attractive, including babies
- all people typically agree that thinner bodies are more attractive (some cultural differences: african-americans judge overweight women less)
What is the cognitive explination for why certain people are attractive?
Attractiveness is a by-product of a more general cognitive mechanism that leads us to prefer familiar stimuli.
People prefer people that are closer to a prototype of a category over the extremes of a category
It is consistent with the fact that we prefer men with masculine qualities and women with feminine qualities AND that attractiveness depends on our expereinces (a protoypical face will depend on the people we have seen)
Define morph?
a face or other image that has been transformed by a computer program so it is a mixture of multiple images
A morph of many individual faces is more attractive than the individual faces used to create it!
What is the difference between the mere-exposure effect and the generalized mere-exposure effect?
Mere-exposure effect = a preference for stimuli that have been seen before over new ones.
Generalized mere-exposure effect = a preference for stimuli that are SIMILAR to stimuli that we have been seen before.
- Explains why we prefer average faces, which look familiar, in determining how attractive someone is
The —— explination claims that certain people are more attractive because perceptual learning has rendered attractive people as more familiar.
cognitive
What is the evolutionary explanation for why certain people are attractive?
Attractiveness is determined by certain adaptive phyiscal qualities that advertise mate quality
(greater fertility for men, better genetic traits that lead to better offspring for women)
Averageness and symetry provide evidence of genetic fitness:
- ability to develop normally despite environmental stressors
- genetic diversity (strong immune system)
- Feminine faces indicate seuxal maturity/fertility and masculine faces indicate the ability to withstand the stress of testosterone
Evolutionary perspective accounts for attractiveness in youthfulness (aging associated with declines in fertility and functioning) AND attractivness is correlated to intelligence which is crucial for smart offspring and for providing prenatal care (even though attractivness is a weak predictor of intelligence)
What is the good genes hypothesis?
Proposes that certain physical qualities, like averageness, are attractive because they advertise mate quality:
- greater fertility OR better genetic traits that lead to better offspring and greater reproductive success
Included in the evolutionary explination for attractiveness
(the best explination for explaining the halo effect)
What is the overgeneralization explanation for why certain people are attractive?
Attractiveness is a result of the overgeneralization of the innate avoidance of physical qualities that signal poor health or low genetic fitness.
We overgeneralize the innate tendency to use low attractiveness as an indication of lower-than-average health AND the innate tendecy to use high attractiveness as an indication of higher-than-average health and intelligence
How do the evolutionary and overgeneralization explinations differ from each other when explaining why certain people are more attractive?
Evolutionary assumes that as attractiveness increases, so does genetic fitness –> overgeneralization only explains why we avoid unattractive people
Overgeneralization is concerned with detecting low fitness when choosing a mate but ALSO in social interactions –> evolutionary is strictly for mate
What is the trait inference process?
A 3 step process that explains how people infer their inferneces about others.
Stage 1: Behaviour Interpretation
Stage 2: Trait Inference
Stage 3: Situational Revision
(takes effort, stage will not happen if cognitively busy or unmotivated)
Explain Stage 1 of the trait inference process (behaviour interpretation)
People interpret meaning from other’s behaviour –> “ex. John seems to be behaving in a very anxious manner”
People expectations of what they expect to see impacts interpretation
People’s expectations have less of an impact if the behaviour is unambigous (when it is obvious what the other person is doing)
^Study example: When context is given to pictures of ambiguous facial expressions, context-based expections influenced people’s interpretations
(differt interpretations when told “they just won a game show” vs “a swarm of bees is coming into the room”
Explain stage 2 of the trait inference process (trait inference)
Stage where people draw an trait inference that corresponds to the behaviour –> “John must have an anxious personality”
This interpretation of behaviour to make inferes about the person’s personality happens even when distracted/preoccupied!
Studies found that participant’s recall of information is better when there are trait cues that can infer about one’s personality
Explain stage 3 of the trait inference process (situational revision)
Last stage where the inference is revised by taking into account the situational forces that could have caused the behaviour –> “John is waiting for the dentist, maybe he isn’t such an axious person”
An effortful process! People will not complete this stage is they are cognitively busy or unmotivated:
Ex. cognitively busy study:
(one condition told to memorize, other told to just listen to a interview, people listening were able to better consider the contexts of the topics when drawing infererences about the person)
Ex. Unmotivated study:
(one condition told they are going to do a fun activity after this boring one, other condition told to do a even worse activity after. Condition who had the worse activity after tried to stretch the fun of the first activity and could revise their inferences better!)
What is the difference between trait inference and situational inference?
The both make inferences from behaviour but…
trait inference = people interested about people (trait goal)
situational inference = people interested about the situation (situational goal)
What is the situational inference process?
Process that happens when people are interested in the situation, where tehy draw situational inferences from behaviour
If people have the ability and motivation, they can revise these inferences by considering the person’s personality
(exact opposite process of the trait inference proccess)
What is the social inference process?
Explains why we either make trait or situational inferences –> both occur with the main goal of increasing our ability to predict other’s behaviours
Example of trait goal = someone interacts with someone they might expect to interact with in the future
(“I just met our new neighbors, they seem very friendly)
Example of situational goal = someone is expecting to enter a situation
(“Did you hear those people laughing from the theatre? I’m excited to see the movie”)
People may be predisposed to either trait inference or situational inference based on culture or personality. What is the difference between westerners and non-westerners?
Westerner’s default process = trait inference
Non-westerner’s default process = situational inference
Makes sense because people higher in individualisitic views are more likely to infer traits effectively from behaviour than those with more collectivist views.
What is a potential explination for the seasonal cycle in binding moral values?
May be explained by a percieved threat, which encourages people to stick to their group:
Anxiety patterns are an emotion that is associated with threat perception –>
and these anxiety patterns align with the seasonal cycle of binding values!
What are 3 potential consequences with the seasonal cycle of binding moral values?
- Binding moral values make people better cope with crisis → may cause groups to cope better with crises that happen in spring and autumn (rather than summer and winter)
- Binding moral values also promote distrust of people who do not meet the norm → may cause seasonal cycles in prejudices against minorities
- Politics can be influenced because liberals prioritize individualizing values, while conservaties prioritize binding → with the timing of political elections, the seasonal cycle could influence the outcome in tight votes!
What is argued to be the most poweful determinant of overall impressions of people and groups?
Moral character!
Prior theories attributed warmth and comptetnce to form impressions, but they fail to account for the role moral character has on impression formation
New perspective is that moral character functions alongside warmth and comptence as a SEPERATE course of how impressions form.
What was one of the first influential studies (by Rosenberg) on impression formation?
Subjects asked to sort traits into categories they thought belonged to the same person –> results showed that people organize traits along two axes that correspond to warmth and competence
Warmth dimension in this study = friendliness, sociability, kindness, trustworthiness, extraversion
The warmth dimension does not have a clear measurement of which traits are relevant to wamth (someonce can be trustworthy but not warm), which has made the category unclear
What research examples have explored the importance of morality instead of warmth and competence?
- Impressions of in-groups best predicted by moral traits, not social traits or competence
- Evalutation of unfamiliar ethnic groups were influened more by rating moral traits
- Individuals prefer to know moral traits about a person rather than sociability or competence traits
In the “moral character in person perception” reading, what were the main findings and arguments?
Found that morality determines impressions much more strongly than warmth and competence (with morality causing almost x8 more variance in impressions)
Warmth traits and compitence traits showed little predictive power
Argue that morality, warmth, and competence should be treated as seperate predictors because they each point to different aspects of people and that moral character is the most important source of information used by people to form impressions
What do morality, comptence, and wamrth each indicate about a person?
Moral character = indicates nature of person’s intentions (has the most prective power on impressions!)
Competence = indicates how effectively a person can carry out their intentions
Warmth/sociability = indicates how successful someone would be in recruiting people to support their intentions.
How are considerations of character also relevant to how people grant moral standing to animals?
Animal intelligence and their capacity to suffer = grants animals high moral standing
“Cruel Nature” (tendency for animal to inflict harm) = grants animals lower moral standing
Finding reflects a dislike of cruelty (even for animals who cannot carry out their instincts) which makes animals capable of harm being granted lower moral standing simply because they have harmful potential.
What are the two categories of moral character traits?
“Core Goodness” traits - honesty, kindness, etc.
Implicitly enhances the perceived morality of an agent (good, bad, and neutral)
(ex. A good student who shows honesty enhances the impression that that student is good)
“Value Commitment” traits = eg. dedication, commitment
Implicity enhances the perceived morality of good and neutral agents, BUT amplifies the immorality of bad agents!
(ex. A kind Nazi is better than a Nazi, but a dedicated Nazi is worse than both)
Both morality and warmth independently predicted —— and negatively predicted —– (morality being the stronger predictor).
admiration
antipathy
AKA: Morality and warmth are both traits that promote admiration and reduce negative feelings, like antipathy (feelings of dislike), independently from each other.
A group’s —— tended to predict envious responses toward it, whereas its —— negatively predicted envy toward it.
sociability
morality
AKA: a group’s morality tends to reduce envy because people may admire the group’s ethical behavior, rather than feeling jealous of them (socialiability).
*demonstrates that these dimensions should be treated as independent when forming impressions
What are the two primary reasons for conformity?
1. Normative Influence = people people go along with what people around them are doing because they are concerned about what others think of them. (ex. Saloman Asch study)
2. Informational Influence = people are often a source of information for what we should do and how we should act
- Reliance on descriptive norms (norms regarding the way most people act)
- “Do you think we should” → “Sure, everyone else is doing it”
What’s an example of informational influence?
informational influnce = people’s behaviour is a source of information for what we should do and how we should act
Example = b inge drinking among college students
- Students drink how much they believe the average student drinks → students often overestimate the descriptive norm for student drinking.
Describe Solmon Asch’s study on conformity
Participants told to say out loud which of the three lights were the same length as the line on the left.
6 confederates, 1 participant
In third round, confederates all gave the wrong answer –> 76% of participants went along with the norm with what the confederates said for at least one of the rounds by giving the wrong answer.
Participants knew it was wrong, but concern for what others thought was stronger
What are some additional findings of Asch’s study as a result of different variations?
- More conformity when more confederates
- Teenagers more prone to conforming than adults
- People conform less when they think confederates won’t hear their response
What was the original reason why Milgram wanted to start his research on obedience?
wanted to know why so many normal German citizens went along with the Nazi leaders during the Holocaust.
Unsure if his findings actually apply to real world atrocities because social climates and prejudice cannot be replicated in a lab.
Did women and men differ in obidence in Milgram’s study?
No. Women had the same obedience rate as men.
Does recent research align with the findings of Milgram?
Yes, research shows that people respond similarly
(although cannot be closely replicated at all because it was very unethical)
Incorporating a relationship into your —— can make the relationship more resilient
identity!
What were the results of a study where participants read a scenario of a relationship that varied in terms of understanding and caring?
Scenario 1: partner was high understanding, low caring
Scenario 2: partner was high caring, but low understanding
RESULTS: Participants thought the person dating this partner would view the relationship more central to their identity in scenario 1 (partner was highly understanding!)
People who feel understood by their partners saw their current relationship as more important to their —— over time.
identity (self-concept)
Feeling understood by someone close makes people see the relationship as a source of meaning → making the relationship central to identity
Caring and acceptance does not explain how participants identified with themselves!
*this is also found to be true for close friends
What are the 5 love languages proposed by Chapman in his book?
Words of affirmation (verbal expressions of appreciation/compliments)
Quality time (intentional time spent together)
Acts of service (practical support through actions
Receiving gifts (visual tokens of appreciation)
Physical touch (holding hands to sexual interactions)
In the book on the 5 love languages, what are the three main arguments?
1. Each person has a primary love language they rely on the most for expressing and feeling love
2. There are 5 love languages
3. “Speaking” the same love language leads to greater relationship quality
(suggests that most relationship problems stem from partners speaking different love languages)
To identify one’s primary love language, what did Chapman develop for his measure?
Chapman developed a measure of 30 multiple choice options called the Love Language Personal Profile (LLPP)
Measure is problamatic because primary love language is determined in comparison to other languages.
Researchers developed a linkert-type scale to adapt his measure.
Explain why the assumption that each person has a primary love language is not accurate
Studies show that all people like all 5 love languages and people’s primary love langauge on the LLPP measure by Chapman is not the same to their scores on a contiuous measure
Ex. The number of people categorized as having gifts as their primary love language was 0% to 4% of the sample when using the LLPP measure, but over 50% of the sample for the continuous scale.
People do not have one primary love language, but people value all 5 but in different contexts
Explain why the assumption that there are only 5 love languages is not accurate.
Chapman’s 5 love languages are based on a top-down approach → but research shows that a bottom-up approach provides a more comprehensive view of relationships.
Research that used a bottom-up approach where people are asked what they do to maintain a good relationship → 7 factors were identified
Some of the factors overlapped, while some did not such as integrating into partner’s social network or developing strategies to manage conflicts
Explain why the assumption that partners must “speak” the same love language is not accurate?
Research shows there is not much support for relationships being stronger when the same love language is shared.
Some studies find support for it, but the methodology of these studies make it possible that just receiving any expressions of love can have relationship benefits regardless of one’s preferences.
Matching with someone is not guaranteed to be associated with positive outcomes (everything depends on context)
In the article on evalutating the 5 love languages, what is the main arguement?
Suggests that the love languages metaphor should be to be replaced with….
“The process of maintaining successful, loving relationships is akin to keeping a healthy, balanced diet”
Healthy-diet metaphor suggests that people need multiple essential nutrients to maintain healthy relationships.
(humans ideally need all nutritional ingredients to have the best health, although humans can survive on just some ingredients, such as carbs)
If partner’s were to strictly adhere to the love-language label, what could it lead them to do?
- undervalue expressions of love outside of their “primary” love language
- Dismiss the ange of emotional needs and preferences that go beyond the five love languages
- Not consider potential or current partners who do not “match” their primary love language
It is shown that people with chronic health conditions experience better benefits when their partner expresses ————-.
appreciation
(words of affirmation)
What does the Implicit Association Test (IAT) reveal?
An automatic pro-White bias is indicated when people show faster performance categorizing pleasant words and White people (and unpleasant words and Black paople) together, compared with categorizing unpleasant words and White people (and pleasant words and Black people) together.
Test demonstrates that implicit attitudes can be an automatic association people have between an object and evaluation (whether good or bad).
What are the hypothesized casual influences in the “sources of implicit attitudes” on one’s implicit attitudes?
- Early (even preverbal) experiences
- Affective experiences
- Cultural biases
- Cognitive consistency principles
Do implicit or explicit attitudes stem from past expereinces?
Implicit attitudes typically stem from past and largely forgotten experiences
(& explicit attitudes stem from more recent or accessible events)
Examples:
- Smokers’ implicit attitudes were negative (due to early unpleasant experiences with smoking) while their explicit attitudes were positive, (based on more recent enjoyable experiences).
- Individuals raised mostly by their mothers showed an implicit preference for women → suggests that preverbal attachment influences gender-related attitudes (whereas explicit attitudes towards parents showed no preference)
Are implicit or explicit attitudes more sensitive to affective experiences?
Implicit attitudes are more sensitive to affective experiences than explicit attitudes.
Research that supports this:
- Implicit prejudice is linked to amygdala (involved in the control of affective responses) activation in White people when they are shown photos of Black people → suggest implicit attitudes can stem from automatic affective reactions to stimuli.
- White people who volunteered for diversity education showed reduced anti-Black attitudes (both implicit and explicit) at the end of the course –> implicit attitudes changed due to emotional reconditioning.
What is system-justification theory?
minorities unconsciously (“implicitly) rationalize their lower status by internalizing society’s negative view of their group
AKA: individuals from marginalized groups, may unconsciously accept and rationalize their lower social status by adopting society’s negative perceptions of their own group.
Connected to the hypothesis that implicit attitudes are heavily influenced by one’s cultural background.
Are implicit or explicit attitudes more influenced by one’s cultural background?
Implicit attitudes are more influenced by one’s cultural background than explicit attitudes!
System justification theory explains this: as the lower one’s status is in their culture, the more they implicitly believe the negative societal view of their group/status.
Poor and overweight people show a significant implicit preference for rich and slim people. What theory explains this?
System-justification theory
(minorities implicitly rationalize their lower status by beleiving society’s negtative view of them)
Finding shows that the lower the person’s status is in their culture, the more they implicitly favor the dominant out-group
In a study where Black people who perceived that White people disliked their group had stronger implicit pro-White bias AND stronger pro-Black bias in their self-reports (explicit). What theory explains this?
System-justification theory
Because implictly, they rationalize their lower status by beleiving societal’s negative view of Black people.
But when asked explicitly through a self report, they do not endorse that implicit beleive and instead share publically what they want themselves and others to beleive.
High-status groups (e.g., Whites, Christians, slim people, rich people) routinely show stronger implicit ——- bias than do low-status groups
in-group bias
*think about system-justification theory
Demonstrates that cultural biases inform implicit attitudes more than explicit attitudes!
People prefer consonant (as opposed to dissonant) evaluations of related attitude objects. What does this mean?
People prefer consistent views about themselves and related groups!! (COGNITIVE CONSISTENCY)
Ex. If I like myself and I am a female, than I should also like women.
In this example, cogntive consistency should be observed among self-esteem, gender identity, and gender attitude.
Do implicit or explicit attitudes follow cognitive consistency?
Implicit attitudes follow this!
(explicit self-reports do not)
Unified theory of social cognition explains this.
What is the unified theory of social cognition?
implicit attitudes are shaped by early experiences and cultural influences which creates cognitive consistency between our implicit evaluations and our identity.
Explicit attitudes reflect more recent, socially influenced beliefs that do not always align with these implicit evaluations of ourselves
(causing our expressed attitudes to not always be cognitively consistent)
Hows is the Implicit Association Test an example of unified theory of social cognition?
IAT shows that White individuals with high-self esteem and strong ethnic identities implicitly prefer white people over Black people
(reflects that if they view themselves positively, they view their group positively too)
Follows the implicit cognitive consistency pattern of “If I am good and I am X, then X is also good.’’
When explicit attitudes of Black people are shared, they do not follow this consistency pattern (makes sense because explicit attitudes often do not align with our implicit cognitive consistency patterns)
What are 4 takeaways from “sources of implicit attitudes” reading
- Early & Affective experiences may have a greater impact on implicit evaluations than explicit attitudes
- Culturally held views can bias people’s implicit evaluations despite their personal opinion
- Only implicit evaluations are sensitive to congitive consistency principles
- Thinking of implicit and explicit attitudes being seperate can help us understand why they are disassociated from eachother and why response latency measures (sometimes) predict behaviors better than self-reports.
All humans have implicit biases, but the way our biases are shown depends on what 3 things?
- Personal group membership
- Our conscious desire to avoid bias
- The context of our everyday environments
Implicit biases are a result of the human tendency to —– things
CATEGORIZE
Humans put things into groups and remember it’s connections to other things
(ex. cars go fast, cake is sweet, etc.)
Psychologists rely on indirest tests (IAT) to measure this automatic categorization
How dos the Implicit Association Test work?
Rely on the close linkage of concepts (categories!) where a person will respond to related concepts (hammer and nail) faster than unrelated concepts (hammer and cotton ball)
The timing of responses can reveal hidden associations (ex. Black and danger)
Explain how self-interest often generates implicit biases?
To make our status seem better, we implicitly ascribe superior characteristics to in-groups and exaggerate the differences between our own group and outsiders!
Ex. basic visual perceptions are biased: studies show that people more readily remember faces of their own race than of other races
Ex. after imagining being on either Purple or Gold team for 45 seconds, people see the people on their team as “winners”
There is more brain activity in the ————- when people look at people of their own racial group
fusiform face area
(brain region responsible for facial recognition)
Demonstrates that self-interest generates implicit biases even in basic visual perceptions
What were the results of the study that measured white people’s brain activity when viewing a series of white and black faces?
important to know this & brain regions! (likely will be on exam)
When black faces flashed quickly = greater activity in the amygdala (associated with vigilance and sometimes fear)
*effect most pronounced in people who had strong implicit racial biases
When black faces flashed for longer = greater activity in prefronal brain areas (associated with detecting internal conflicts/controlling responses)
shows that people were conciously trying to suppress their bias!
When white college students looked at images of Black faces with eye contact and no eye contact, what was the difference?
White students visual attention was drawn more quickly to black vs white men (when the men in the pictures faced the camera)
Did not happen when men in the pictures looked away from the camera, likely because averted eye gaze biologically extinguishes explicit perceptions of threat
Children of mothers who have negative implicit attitudes towards Black people tended to choose a white —— over a black ——- and ascribed more negative traits to black ————.
playmate, playmate
fictional characters
*children of mothers who showed less implicit bias on tests showed less racial preferences for playmates
White preschoolers tend to categorize racially ambiguous ——- faces as black rather than white.
angry
(they did not do the same for happy faces)
Explain the case of Amadou Diallo
Police came to Diallo’s apartment with the intention to question him based on a physical description of a rapist that looked like Diallo → shot to death by police officers as he reached for his wallet which the officers believed was a gun.
Weapon bias might have played a role in this shooting.
What is weapon bias?
both black and white people tend to mistake a harmless object (cellphone, wallet) for a gun if a black face accompanies the object.
Weapon bias is especially strong when we have to judge situations quickly.
Likely played a role in he shooting of Amadou Diallo
What were the findings of the study that tested implicit racial attitudes on non-verbal baheviour with white people having a conversation with a black person?
*prof mentioned this part of the reading in class, know it well!
White participants asked to chat with one black and one white person:
- Participants non-verbal signals during the convo (ex. eye-contact) depended on implicit attitudes
White and Black participants left the conversation with a different impression!:
- Whites thought convo went well
- Black people who were attuned to white people’s behavior thought the convo did not go well and believed white people were conscious of their nonverbal behavior and blamed white prejudice
How can implicit biases affect hiring and medical decisions?
- The greater the employer’s bias, the less likely they were to call back an applicant with a Muslim name (such as Mohammad or Reza) for an interview.
- The greater a physician’s racial bias, the less likely they were to give a Black patient clot-busting thrombolytic drugs.
White people who exhibit greater implicit biases towards Black people also have a higher tendency to engage in different ———- in their everyday lives
discriminatory acts
(ex. avoiding and excluding Black people socially, uttering racial slurs/jokes, insulting Black people)
Recent work suggests that we can reshape our implicit attitudes (or lesson the effects on our behaviour). What are the 4 ways we can do so according to the prejudice reading?
- Seeing targeted groups in more favourable social contexts can help lessen biased attitudes
(ex. seeing Black person in a church vs street corner, reading about Black celeberties) - Changes in external stimuli can trick our brains into making new associations, although out of our control (ex. having a black professor)
- Confront biases head-on with consious effort
(willpower can work…people who report a strong motivation to be non-prejudiced tend to have less implicit bias) - Developing plans to prevent sterotypes in situations can lessen implicit biases
(ex. think “safe” whenever seeing a black face results in major reductions in implicit racial bias)
Did students with a Black professor show less explicit or implicit prejudice by the end of the semester?
Both!
Implicit and explicit prejudice was both decreased
What is a potential problem with trying to reduce implicit biases through confronting prejudices with concious effort?
Trying to control automatic, implicit processes is tiring and takes effort
If people leave interracial interactions feeling mentally drained after doing this, they may simply avoid contact with people from a diff race or culture.
What is a common theme in all public appologies regarding prejudice?
They all demonstrate that most people have no conception of the bias we all have → instead they act in shock and alarm when racist, sexist, etc.
Biases stem from subconscious connections in our minds → anyone has the capability to have made those horrible remarks!
Dual process models show that attitudes can predict behaviour in what two ways?
- Automatically (“gut attitudes”)
- Controllably (control “gut attitudes” when motivated)
If stressed, tired, or distracted, it is more common to reveal “gut” attitudes
If motivated, people with negative gut-level attitudes about their ———- can behave positively
partners! (if enough cognitive resources)
Negative gut-level attitudes will emerge when they do not have the resources or motivation to behave otherwise
Initial ————– predict relationship satisfaction over the first 4 years of marriage.
gut-level attitudes
What are two popular methods are used to test people’s gut-level attitudes?
- Implicit Attitude Test
- Priming Procedure
Research shows no consistent relationship between sexual frequency and relationship satisfaction. What does this suggest?
Suggests biases in explicit reporting!
Partners may say sex does help their relationship, in attempt to conform to social pressure or want to improveme their relationship and beleive that.
Attachment styles may fluctuate based on relationship factors, and using —— measures may demonstrate more stability than ———-.
implicit measures
explicit self reports
attachment measured by explicit self-report may vary depending on partners’ opportunity to regulate their automatic attitudes (aka influenced by contextual factors)
Implicit measures remove the contextual variables
What are 6 principles that impact how a person can persuade another?
- Liking
- Reciprocation
- Consistency
- Scarcity
- Social Validation
- Authority
What are the 4 primary determinants for liking another person?
1. Physical attractiveness - view attractive ppl as having other positive qualities relavent to liking
(ex. attractive people raise more money at a fundraiser)
2. Similarity - it can create an instant bond between people
(university student at fundraiser added the phrase “I’m a student too”)
3. Cooperation - feelings of working together can evoke feelings of liking, even between people who did not initially like eachother.
(ex. “our manager usually charges extra for more chips but I’ll see if I can get you some at no charge”)
4. Extent to which we feel the person likes us
(ex. best car salesman in the world send xmas cards with the words “I like you” on them)
What is the principle of reciprocation (in the context of persuasion)?
Feeling obliged to repay others for what we have recived from them
Helps us have fairness and equity in social interactions, but can also be manipulative through feelings of indebtedness.
Reciprocity most often takes the form of gifts or favors, and is also frequently used in business negotiations
Ex. corporations and fundraisers use reciprocity with the public to increase donations (such as give them a gift before donating)
How is the principle of reciprocity used in the negotiation proccess?
If Person A requests a large thing from B, and person B then makes a smaller request, Person A will feel like they need to reciprocate this request with a response to this lower plea or agree to it.
Managers an use this by starting off a negotiation with higher-than-desired prices in anticipation of having to reduce that price during negotiations
When individuals make a low-risk investment into someone, that effort/gift is returned to them usually in ———-.
Larger means
Ex. the server gets more tips when they offer a piece of chocolate at the end of the meal (even more tips when offered two chocolates)
What is the principle of consistency (in the context of persuasion)?
Takes advantage of the human tendency to want to appear consistent with their actions, statements and beliefs
Ex. using consistency minimizes the problem of restaurant no-shows by saying “will you please call if you have a change to your plans” because people realize they made a public future commitment they feel obligated to be consistent with
Server asks “Who is getting cheesecake tonight?” at the start of the night. Once everyone is full after dinner, the server reminds them of their prior commitment to cheesecake.
Even though they are full, they feel obligated to say yes. What principle does this demonstrate?
Consistency Principle!
People have a tendency to want to appear consistent to their prior and current actions, statements and beleifs.
What is the principle of scarcity (in the context of persuasion)?
Items and opportunities that are short in supply or unavailable tend to be more desirable to us than those more accessible.
Can also operate in terms of information, if info is exclusive is it seen as more valuable and hence more persuasive.
Ex. Nightclub owners commonly restrict the number of people allowed inside even though there is plenty of space (makes it look like the club is more inaccessible and hence more desirable)
When opportunities become less available, we feel as though we lose —–
freedoms! (operates within the scarcity principle)
When our freedoms are threatened or restricted, we attempt to reassert our free choice with a specific focus on regaining what was being limited to begin with.
Ex. high-threat anti-graffiti placards placed in restroom stalls were defaced to a greater extent than were the low-threat placards.
What is the principle of social validation (in the context of persuasion)?
We frequently look to others for cues on how to think, feel, and behave (especially when we feel uncertainty)
Ex. door-to door fundraising → when people shown a list of neighbors who signed that was long, they were more likely to donate
How do companies use the social validation principle?
By making popular claims like “We are the #1 cruise in America”
Makes us feel like we should go on that cruise because they are telling us it’s #1 so people must like it (looking for cues)
What are descriptive norms?
Information about what others are doing
When people gather descriptive norms, it makes them act in similar ways to those norms.
What is the principle of authority (in the context of persuation)?
Tend to look to authority figures and experts to help us decide how to behave (especially when we are not fully confident about a situation or decision)
Authority can steer us in wrong direction, but more often it helps us make good decisions.
Sometimes issues with people thinking there is percieved authority but there is not (ex. people follow man jaywalking more when he’s wearing a suit than more casual clothing)
What are consensus cues?
labels used in marketing (such as “top rated” or “best seller”) to make products more appealing.
What are the cultural differences in “top rated” and “best selling”?
Collectivist = a product being “top rated” (consensus opinions) is much more influential than “best selling” (consensus behaviors), because they are more persuaded by people’s preferences for the item than how many people bought it.
Individualistic = a product being “top rated” feels the same as calling it “best selling”
Study asked people in US and India to indicate how much they would be willing to pay for a tablet that either 85% of consumers loved or that 85% of consumers bought.
What were the differences in how much people would pay?
People in India 28% more willing to pay for a tablet that people loved (rather than bought)
US participants willing to pay the same amount regardless
——- were more persuaded by consensus opinions versus consensus behaviors and ——— didn’t distinguish between the two types of consensus.
Interdependents (collectivist cultures)
Independents (individualistic cultures)
consensus opinions = top rated
consensus behaviours = best selling
When giving an option of 2 presents to an adult, the one they have chosen to keep becomes much more attractive than the one they did not chose.
What process is happening here?
Cognitive Dissonance
It helps justify the decision by making it the gift they chose appear better than the other option
What is cognitive dissonace?
Idea that if a person knows various things that are not psychologically consistent with one another, a person will, in many ways, try to make them more consistent.
***dissonance impels a person to change their opinions or behavior! **(just as being hungry impels a person to eat)
What are dissonance-reducing changes?
Changes in items of information that produce or restore consistency
*sometimes can be very difficult to change behaviour or opinions that have a dissonant relationship
What is dissonance?
What are some examples?
when our expectations about what things go together and what things do not are not fulfilled.
Ex. a person standing in rain would expect to get wet. If a person was in the rain and was not getting wet, there would be dissonance between those two pieces of information.
Ex. Someone who is very self-confident and expects to succeed in everything, and they fail at something, there is dissonance there.
A person has carefully weighed two reasonably attractive alternatives and then chosen one. The decision cannot be changed.
What is the dissonance here?
How will they try and reduce this dissonance?
Dissonance = all the good things about the rejected alternative is dissonant with the choice made by the person.
To reduce dissonance:
1. Persuade themselves that the good things about the other option are not actually that good
2. Persuade themselves that the bad features of the chosen option are not that bad.
(both of these strategies should lead to an increase in the desirability of the chosen options)
In a cognitive dissonance study, high-school girls rated the attractiveness of 12 “hit” records. Using two of the records girls selected as “moderate”, researchers asked them to chose which one they would rather recive as a gift.
What were the 3 conditions?
What were the results?
After decision about which one they would rather recieve as a gift was made, the girls either:
C1. Recived both records as a gift
C2. Recived only one as a gift
C3. Uncertain as to the outcome
RESULTS:
- When girls are uncertain as to the outcome or recive both records, there is NO dissonance reduction(aka. no change in attractiveness of chosen records)
- BUT there is a large dissonance change in the condition where girls only recive one record (trying to justify to themselves that that record is better)
Does dissonance reduction happen before, after, or during the decison making proccess?
Only occurs AFTER the decision is made and outcome is clear!
How does lying cause dissonance?
What impacts the level of dissonance after lying?
Causes dissonance due to inconsistency between knowing/believing one thing and knowing that one has publicly stated something quite different.
Level of dissonance will depend on:
1. The more incorrect the public statement is from the private belief, the greater the dissonance.
- The greater amount of justification the person has for making the public statement, the less bothersome the dissonance will be.
How can the dissonance of lying be reduced?
Change private opinion to agree with what was publicly stated!
The amount this private opinion will change depends on the amount of justification for making the public statement.
When there is less justification for their lying, there is greater the dissonance, causing that person’s belief to change more to fix the dissonance.
What is a study example of cognitive dissonance of lying?
Participants participated in a long “motor performance” study for an hour, with the real purpose of giving participants an identical negative/boring experience.
At the end, subjects told to tell the next person outside of the lab that the experiment they just did was very interesting and fun!
Conditions:
C1: payed $1 (less justification for their lying)
C2: payed $20 (more justification for their lying)
FINDING:
- Lower-paid students (less justification for lying) experienced the most dissonance and reduced it by changing their initial belief to thinking the study was actually enjoyable.
- Higher paid students (more justificaion for lying) kept their original opinion of the study being bad more than the lower-paid students
What is the sour grapes phenomenon?
Attitude where someone persuades themselves that they do NOT want what they cannot have.
*think about this phenomenon in the context of cognitive dissonance in resisting temptation
Think of a situation where an individual is tempted to engage in a certain action but refrains.
What dissonance arises?
How can this dissonance be reduced?
Dissonance: individual knowledge about the good parts of the activity is dissonant from knowing that he refrained from engaging in the activity.
Dissonance can be reduced by:
- Devaluing the tempted activity
^BUT will only occur when there was not enough justification for refraining (if lots of justification for refraining, there is less dissonance to begin with and would take little change to reduce dissonance)
Resisting temptation can cause cognitive dissonance. What study using toys in a playroom tested if desire will increase when an object/activity is “unattainable”?
Children ranked 5 toys in a playroom:
C1: children can play with any of the toys but experimenter took the second best with him
C2: children could play with any toys except the second best toy that was still in the room (threatened by mild punishment)
C3: children could play with any toys except the second best you that was still in the room (threatened by a more severe punishment)
When experimenter returned, children could play with all the toys and attractiveness of each toy was measured again…
FINDINGS:
No temptation = no dissonance, (toy increased in attractiveness)
Severe punishment = little dissonance (toy increased in attractiveness)
Mild punishment = much dissonance and toy was less attractive
because there is less justification (punishment) to not play with this toy
Sour grapes phenomenon in dissonance reduction for mild punishment condition (persuade themselves that they do not desire the prohibited activity)
Those who are rewarded —— for doing something that involves dissonance change their personal opinion less in agreeing with what they did than those who are rewarded ——.
1) MORE
2) LESS
Ex. how paid $ influences how much dissonance is reduced after lying
