Midterm 2 Review Flashcards
Examples of persuasion:
Climate change skepticism
Spread of weird beliefs & conspiracy theories
Online reviews
Promotion of healthier living
Example of positive vs negative persuasion:
Education and propaganda, respectively
System 1 is the “fast” system which reacts instantaneously, reflexively and emotionally. This part of the brain is automatic, intuitive and subconscious. System 2 is the “slow” system that is deliberate, controls abstract thinking, and stores memories such as facts and events. The System 2 part of the brain is more rational and reflective
When people hear a persuasive argument, what is crucial is not so much remembering the message as remembering one’s own thoughts, feelings, reactions in response, showing that they are more likely be influenced by the message.
True
Paths that lead to persuasion:
Pay attention, comprehend it, believe it, remember it, behave accordingly, action
Different routes of persuasion:
Central route, peripheral route, different routes for different purposes.
Central route focuses on
Arguments
Peripheral route focus on:
Incidental cues (superficial factors like attractiveness of speaker, credibility, mood or emotions, likability or familiarity, number of arguments, positive or negative images or music.
Different routes for different purposes depending on the context:
Often take peripheral route
The elements of persuasion:
The communicator, message, how message is communicated, the audience
What characteristics of the communicator support persuasion:
Credibility
Perceived trustworthiness
Perceived expertise
Attractiveness, liking, similarity
The six persuasion principles:
Authority
Liking
Social proof
Reciprocity
Consistency
Scarcity (people prize what’s scarce)
Reading while eating increases positive thinking. How?
Reason vs emotion
Linking good feelings with message
Reason vs emotion depends on the audience
Yes
(However, reason vs. emotion will depend on whether the audience is more influenced by emotional states or by logical, factual information).
The effect of good feeling enhances persuasion:
True
Canadian cigarette uses fear arousal and state the benefit:
True
Effective if it can lead people to fear the severity but also realize the solutions and feel empowered implementing it.
Only a highly credible person maintains effectiveness when arguing extreme positions:
True
What values give credibility to a person:
Formal language
Jargon
Statistics
Expert opinion
When evaluating messages:
Does the argument present facts, statistics, evidence or logical reasoning?
Does the info. come from reliabel and credible sources?
Is the argument structured and coherent?
Are there any flaws and inconsistencies?
Soldiers who disagreed were influenced by two-sided argument:
True
Primacy effect vs recency effect:
Primacy effect: two persuasive messages back to back and the audience then responds at a later time, the first message has advantage.
Recency effect: When two messages are separated by time and audience then responds soon after the second message, the second message has advantage
Comprehension and recall best with writing
And more lifelike, more persuasive
True
Most research shows generational effect of persuasion:
True
Our views stay the same as we get older
Life-cycle effect is about changes in beliefs over the course of an individual’s life.
What impacts persuasion of an audience:
Forewarning
Distractions
Uninvolved audience
Need for cognition
How do cults indoctrinate:
Main: Group effects
Communicator - message - channel - audience
75% of Canadians believe global warming is caused by humans.
True
This refers to a tendency to believe and justify the way things are in culture and not want to change familiar status quo
System Justification
How to resist persuasion:
Attitude strength (certainty or subjective confidence)
Information-processing biases
- selective exposure and attention
- selective perception and judgement
Selective memory
Reactance
- protecting sense of freedom
Strengthening personal commitment
- challenging beliefs
- counter-arguments
Attitude inoculation
- children against peer pressure and smoke
- against advertising
Implication of attitude inoculation
- exposure to variety of ideas
A change in believe or behaviour to accord with others:
Conformity
Public compliance vs private compliance
Public compliance: agrees with group or authority to fit in, but not privately only outwardly
Private compliance: both public and private of change in beliefs and attitudes to align with the group views.
Conformity vs obedience
Conformity: changing one’s own beliefs or behaviours to align with the group or social norms.
Obedience: direct commands or instructions from authoritative figure.
Sherif’s studies: of norm formation
Asch’s studies: of group pressure
Milgram’s: obedience studies
What breeds obedience?
Reflections on the classic studies
Sherif’s study of norm formation investigated the autokinetic effect, describe it:
stationary point of light in a dark room appears to move due to visual perception. He was interested in whether people’s perceptions of the light’s movement would change when they were in a group and heard others’ estimates of how much the light was moving.
Over time, participants tended to conform to the group’s estimates, even though the light was not actually moving. This showed how informational influence works: people look to others for guidance when they are uncertain, believing that the group has more accurate information.
While normative influence is about conforming to fit in with the group even if privately disagree. (Adjusting your behaviour ex.)
refers to the extent to which an experiment engages participants and makes them feel involved in the study, often to the point where they behave naturally and take the situation seriously.
Experimental realism
Asch’s Studies: Findings
The experiment showed that conformity decreased when just one person responded correctly, and increasing the number of confederates beyond three didn’t significantly raise conformity levels. Conformity is driven by the desire to fit in, especially when three people give the wrong answer and no one disagrees. Women and more homogenous groups tend to conform at higher rates due to greater similarity among members.
If one acting student responded correctly, the effect of peer pressure decreased significantly.
The oponions of three people is enough to change subject mind.
Milgram’s Obedience Studies: Four prompts (please continue, the experiment requires that you continue, it’s absolutely essential that you continue, you have no other choice, you must go on” were used, authoirity figure,
Component of foot-in the door (when the initial request was a small action (administering mild shocks), which gradually escalated to more extreme actions. Once participants agreed to administer the first mild shock, they were more likely to continue because they had already committed to a course of action).
Also with distance more likely to conform
(When the participant was physically closer to the victim, they were less likely to obey. This shows that the greater the physical or psychological distance from the victim, the easier it was for participants to conform to the authority figure’s commands). Without feeling personal responsibility or discomfort.
When there are external pressures, the link btw. Our attitudes and behavior is weak.
True
Emotional or physical distance will breed obedience and depersonalization.
True
What breeds obedience:
- The victim’s emotional distance (meaning that when the participant (teacher) couldn’t hear or see the person they were suppsedly shocking, level of obedience increased and more likely to continue to administer shocks because the victim’s emotional distance was increased, making it easier for the teacher to disregard the harm they were causing.
- Closeness (closer, more obedience and legitimacy of authority (ex: uniform)
- Institutional authority (like from prestigious university)
- Liberating Effects of Group Influence: being part of a group can either constrain or liberate individual behaviour. Either + or -
1. Group loyalty as constructive or heroic or the opposite if not
2. Witnessing defiance: observing others defy authority can be inspirational
Milgram’s study showed that average individuals could act against their personal morals under the influence of an authoritative figure, highlighting that extreme behaviors can often be attributed to the situation rather than inherent personality traits
True
An individual in a leadership role who exhibits boldness and self-confidence and emphasizes the greatness of the in-group
Charismatic Leader
Characteristics of a charismatic leader:
Takes bold action
Confidently exposes an alternative worldview
Portrays the ingroup as representing the greater good
as the number of people in a group increases, the level of conformity tends to rise—but only up to a certain point. Research, including Asch’s conformity experiments, shows that conformity increases with the number of people in the group, but only until about 3-5 people.
Looking upward example
What predicts conformity:
Unanimity
Cohesion
Status
Public response
No prior commitment
Newly elected politicians may initially want to change the system, but as they work within it, they often conform to its existing rules and behaviors due to the desire to fit in and advance within the system. example of what influence
Normative influence
See examples of normative vs info. influences
what is better predictor of conformity when social influences are weak:
Personality
Who conforms depends on:
Personality
Culture
Gender
Social rules
The process by which dissenters (or numerical minorities) produce attitude change within a group, despite the extraordinary risk of social rejection and disturbance of the status quo and example
minority Influence
2SLGBTQ+
The explanation that people are influenced by a minority because the minority’s distinctive position better captures their attention
Conversion theory
Minorities influence via thoughtful processing; tends to lead to private attitude change that guides behaviour
True
Minority slowness effect: Occurs when people who hold the minority position take longer to express their opinions
Watch video
True
A motive to protect or restore one’s sense of freedom
Reactance
The preference for being moderately unique
Asserting uniqueness
Two or more people who, for longer than a few moments, interact with and influence one another and perceive one another as “us
Group
Social facilitation refers to the idea that people tend to perform tasks better or more efficiently when others are around. The updated definition emphasizes that the dominant response (the behavior a person is most likely to do) is strengthened in the presence of others.
Social facilitation
In the context of social facilitation, Presence of others increases efficiency with easy tasks or well-learned task; increases errors with difficult tasks
Presence of others increases efficiency with easy tasks; increases errors with difficult tasks
Who developed the concept of social facilitation:
Robert Zajonic
Crowding: the presence of many others can intensify positive (enhances arousal) or negative reactions (interfere with well-learned tasks) :
True
What concept refers to a human tendency to try to look better or fear of being evaluated:
Evaluation apprehension
When people wonder how co-actors are doing or how an audience is reacting, they get distracted
Increases arousal
Driven by distraction
Mere presence of others also include non-humans as well.
True
The tendency for people to exert less effort when they pool their efforts toward a common goal than when they are individually accountable
Social loafing
People who benefit from the group but give little in return
Free-riders
Found that the collective effort of tug-of-war teams was but half the sum of the individual efforts
What is the effect known as:
The ringelmann effect
A statistical digest of 49 studies, involving more than 4000 participants revealed that effort decreases (loafing increases) as group size increases
True
When individuals cannot be evaluated or held accountable, loafing becomes more likely
True
Social loafing is less likely to occur when
- The task is challenging, appealing, or involving
- When the group members are friends
- When group members are highly committed to one another and the success of the group
When people lose their sense of self in groups:
Occurs in group situations that fosters anonymity and draw attention away from the individual
Deindividualization
When deindividualization occurs:
We loss self-awareness and evaluation apprehension
Lead us to do things we would normally not do when alone
even affection as much as violence
Factors that contribute to deindivid.
Group size
Physical anonymity
Draw attention away from the individual
Arousing or distracting activities (e.g., chants, clapping, shouting)
Contributing factors to diminished awareness:
- Group experiences that diminish self-consciousness tend to disconnect behaviour from attitudes
- Self-awareness is the opposite of deindividuation
Group discussions can encourage members to take chances or make bold choices “risky shift”
Yes
This refers to group discussion amplifying pre-existing opinions, strengthening not split within the group.
Group polarization
Factors that contribute to group polarization:
Informational influence shapes group dynamics by affecting how individuals process information, make decisions, and adopt behaviors
Normative influence pushes people to conform to what they think the group values or expects
Pluralistic ignorance leads individuals to assume that everyone else is more certain or committed to the group’s opinion than they are
Is a mode of thinking that occurs when the desire for group consensus and conformity becomes so strong in a cohesive group that it overrides careful consideration and realistic appraisal of alternative ideas or solution
Group thinking
Key features of group think:
Concurrence-seeking: desire to agree and avoid conflict
Overriding realistic appraisal: fail to critically evaluate alternative actions leading to less rational decisions.
Cohesiveness; sense of unity encourages conformity, discourages critical thinking
All these create an illusion of invulnerability:
Unquestioned belief in group’s morality, overestimating the group’s might and right, closemindedness (rationalization, stereotyped viewpoint toward others, pressure toward uniformity all represent group think.
True
Rebuffing individuals who doubt group’s assumptions
Conformity pressure
group members often withhold opinions dissenting from the group
Self-cencorship
individuals can act without being identified or held accountable for their actions
Illusion of unanimity
Sometimes even good group procedures can lead to poor decisions
True
Not presenting evidence or information contrary to decisions
Mindguards
Preventing groupthink
Be impartial
Assign a “devil’s advocate”
Subdivide the group
Invite critiques from outside experts
Call a “second-chance” meeting to air lingering doubts
Combine group and solitary brainstorming
Have group members interact by writing
Incorporate electronic brainstorming
These encourage and enhance what:
Group problem solving
The process by which certain group members motivate and guide the group
Leadership
organizing work, setting standards, and goal attainment
Task leadership
building teamwork, mediating conflicts, and being supportive
Social leadership
Concerned with how work is progressing
Sensitive to the needs of their subordinates
Transactional leadership
Consistently stick to their goals
Self-confident charisma
Vision, communication, and inspiration
Transformational leadership
Group Influences in Juries
Minority influence
Group polarization
Leniency
See minority influence of this slide
Is a motive to increase another’s welfare without conscious regard for one’s self interest.
Altrusim
Why do we help?
Social exchange (aim to maximize one’s rewards and minimize one’s costs)
Egosim (self-interest motivates all behaviors
Rewards: internal and external, positive public image, reducing stress, guilt
Social norms
Evolutionary psychology
Comparing & evaluating theories of altruism
people were more willing to donate to a “confederate’s” charity if the confederate had first done a small favor for them.
True
Women may be more likely to offer help or support in ongoing relationships where reciprocity is expected
True
Men might be more inclined to offer help in situations where reciprocity is immediate or directly related to a specific transaction or task
Yes
An expectation that people will help, not hurt, those who have helped them
Helps define social capital (mutual benefit and fairness)
Reciprocity norm
An expectation that people will help those dependent on them
Responses are closely tied to attributions
Gender and receiving help
Expected reciprocity vs immediate reciprocity
Social-responsibility norm
Components of evolutionary psychology:
Kin selection
Reciprocity
Group selection
The idea that evolution has selected altruism toward one’s close relatives to enhance the survival of mutually shared genes
Kin selection
Helping another because of the expectation that the favour will be returned
Stronger in small, isolated groups
Reciprocity
In-group loyalty
Group selection
See the table
Viewing someone else’s distress can evoke a mixture of self-focused distress and other-focused empathy
True
Researchers agree that distress triggers egoistic motives. But they debate whether empathy can trigger a purely altruistic motive
True
The vicarious experience of another’s feeling; putting oneself in another’s shoes
Empathy
If we feel empathy but think something else will make us feel better, we aren’t likely to help
For example, imagine seeing someone drop their groceries. You feel empathetic and sorry for them, but at that moment, you think that going to get a coffee or doing something else will give you more personal satisfaction. Even though empathy might motivate you to help, the belief that another action (like getting coffee) will make you feel better in the long run may outweigh your initial impulse to help.
True
Empathy could help increase positive attitudes towards other populations
True
Factors that affect whether we will help or not:
Number of bystanders
Helping when someone else does (responsibility diffusion)
Time pressures
Similarity (to the victim)
Smoke pouring into the testing room was much more likely to be reported by individuals working alone than by three-person groups
True
Only one path up the tree leads to helping. At each fork of the path, the presence of other bystanders may divert a person down a branch toward not helping
True
In the context you’re mentioning, social psychologists often conduct studies that involve creating situations where participants witness distressing events (like someone collapsing) to observe how people react (such as whether they help or ignore the person in need). The dilemma is that these participants may not have explicitly consented to witnessing such distressing situations, which could cause them emotional discomfort or distress.
But However, social psychologists argue that after protecting participants’ welfare, the knowledge gained from these studies can be extremely valuable for understanding human behavior.
Personality influences how particular people react to particular situations
Men might be more likely to help in situations requiring physical strength
Women might be more likely to help in caregiving or emotional support situations
True
How to increase helping:
Reduce ambiguity, increase responsibility
Personal appeal
Guilt and concern for self-image
Socialize altruism
Examples of social altrusim:
Teach moral inclusion
Learn by doing
Attribute helping behaviour to altruism
Avoid overjustification effect
Learn about altruism
Aggression:
Physical or verbal behaviour intended to hurt someone
Can be social or physical
Aggression driven by anger and performed as an end in itself
e.g., most murders
Hostile aggression
Aggression that is a means to some end
e.g., most wars or acts or terrorism
Instrumental aggression
Instinct theory and evolutionary psychology
Aggression as an innate, unlearned behaviour pattern exhibited by all members of a species
Neural influences: prefrontal cortex, hypothalamus, smaller amgydala
Genetic influences: can run in families
are example of aggression
Biochemical influences:
Alcohol
Testosterone
Poor diet
Biology and behaviour interact
The theory that frustration (the blocking of a goal-directed behaviour) triggers a readiness to aggress
Frustration-aggression theory
The redirection of aggression to a target other than the source of the frustration
Generally a safer or more socially acceptable target
Dsiplacement
The perception that one is less well off than others to whom one compares oneself
Relative deprivation
The theory that we learn social behaviour by observing and imitating and by being rewarded and punished
Social learning theory
Social learning theory examples
Bandura’s “Bobo” doll experiment
may play a role in aggression and video game links
In Bandura’s famous experiment, children exposed to an adult’s aggression against a Bobo doll were likely to reproduce the observed aggression
True
Aggression As Learned Social Behaviour because of
The rewards of aggression
the family
the culture
When something unpleasant happens (like frustration, pain, or insult), it causes an emotional reaction—you feel angry, upset, or upset, which is called emotional arousal. This feeling of anger can make you want to act aggressively (e.g., shout at someone, hit something, or retaliate in some way).
However, whether you actually do something aggressive or respond differently (like staying calm, walking away, or talking it out) depends on your past experiences and what you’ve learned about the consequences of aggression.
In other words, you learn from past situations whether being aggressive leads to something good or bad for you, and that influences your behavior the next time.
Aggression As Learned Social Behaviour
What Are Some Influences On Aggression?
Aversive incidents
Pain
Heat
Attacks
Arousal
A given state of bodily arousal feeds one emotion or another, depending on how the person interprets and labels the arousal
Aggression Cues
violence is more likely when aggressive cues release pent-up anger
the mere presence of weapons increased aggressive thoughts and behaviours, known as the “weapons effect
An aversive situation can trigger aggression by provoking hostile cognitions, hostile feelings, and arousal. These reactions make us more likely to perceive harmful intent and to react aggressively
True
Aggression against women
Study where men viewed an erotic film, university and college men delivered stronger shocks than before, especially to women
Sexual offenders acknowledge porn influence
Media awareness education
Media influence and pronography
Television’s effects on behaviour:
One type of arousal energizes other behaviours
Viewing violence disinhibits
Media influences on thinking:
Desensitization
Altered perceptions
Cognitive priming
Television viewing between ages 5 and 15 predicted having a criminal conviction by age 26
True
When 17 juvenile, orphaned bull elephants were relocated during the mid-1990s to a South African park, they became an out-of-control adolescent gang and killed 40 white rhinoceroses
When, in 1998, concerned park officials relocated six older, stronger bull elephants into their midst, the rampaging soon quieted down
Social contagion
How Can Aggression Be Reduced?
Catharsis? Can actually make things worse.
A social learning approach
Reward cooperative, nonaggressive behaviour
Threatened punishment limited effectiveness
Teach conflict-resolution strategies
Reward sensitivity and cooperation early on
Reduce media influences
Reduce triggers of aggression
Culture change and world violence
Negative attitude toward an individual, solely on the basis of that person’s presumed membership in a particular group
Prejudice
Social psychologists assume that prejudice is never justified because of three characteristics of prejudice:
involves judging an individual negatively, independent of actual attributes or actions.
variation exists in groups; assuming anything about all members of a group will lead to many errors
Prejudice often leads to acts of violence against innocent people.
People often justify prejudices with stereotypes
True
Overgeneralized beliefs about the traits and attributes of members of a particular group
Stereotypes
often lead to discrimination
Prejudices and stereotypes
Negative behaviour toward an individual, solely on the basis of that person’s membership in a particular group
Discrimination
explicit and implicit attitudes
Dual attitude system
Prejudiced and stereotypic evaluations can occur outside people’s awareness
True
Negative attitudes or affective reactions associated with an out-group, for which the individual has little or no conscious awareness and which can be automatically activated in intergroup encounters
Implicit prejudice
Hostile feelings linked to a salient category of people
Familiarity-based preferences for the in-group over out-groups (in-group bias)
Also, internalized worldview
Antilocution
Talking against a group, behind their backs, white associated with good and black with bad, derogatory terms, etc.
Conflicting, often nonconscious, negative feelings about BIPOC people that an individual may have, even though they do in fact support principles of racial equality and do not knowingly discriminate
Aversive racism
People consciously endorse values of fairness and non-discrimination
Explicit beliefs in equality
These individuals may still hold unconscious negative feelings or discomfort toward certain racial or ethnic groups
Implicit negative feelings or biases
This basic cause of prejudice is the result of two basic human tendencies
Feelings of hostility: arise when one is frustrated, threatened, or witness to unpleasantness or injustice
Categorization: often categorize people as members of social groups
Displaced aggression
Sometimes, frustrations people experience fuel negative feelings and actions toward outgroups even in the absence of any inciting behaviour by a member of that group. This is known as displaced aggression, and it can explain why in tough economic times, prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination tend to increase.
True
Realistic group conflict theory
initial negative feelings between groups are often based on a real conflict or competition regarding scarce resources
Negative feelings toward a group are often culturally transmitted through generations, even if the original conflict is no longer pertinent
True
People have a familiarity-based preference for in-groups over out-groups
Taking an evolutionary perspective
True
Most people like themselves and demonstrate a self-serving bias
True
People who feel inferior, guilty, anxious, or unsuccessful often blame an out-group for their troubles (scapegoating)
True
Viewing the world through our own cultural value system, and thereby judging actions and people based on our own culture’s views of right and wrong and good and bad
Ethnocentrism
Conforming to the norms and values of one’s worldview can lead to prejudice
True
Because worldview determines our view of what is right and good, others are often judged on the basis of those cultural values (ethnocentrism)
True
Our ethnocentrism leads us to judge people from different cultures more negatively. Ethnocentric biases are more severe when we feel vulnerable or when we see another’s worldview as threatening to our own.
True
are cognitive schemas containing all knowledge about and associations with a social group
Stereotypes
Cultures typically promote stereotypes
Some stereotypes are positive, but positive stereotyping can still have negative effects
True
Individuals who do not endorse a stereotype still know what the stereotype is.
Stereotypes are fundamentally tied to culture.
True
hypothesis suggests that stereotypes, while often overly simplistic or exaggerated, may contain some elements of truth
Kernel of truth hypothesis
Ex:disproportionate percentage of Black males are convicted of crimes
e.g., minority-group members who are low in SES do less well in school
Social inequities explain many of these “truths”
Stereotypes attached to groups are often a function of historical and culturally embedded social constraints
Stereotypes based on social roles can reinforce expectations and limitations on individuals based on their group membership
Social role theory
Although student evaluations of male and female instructors are equivalent among students who perform well, students who receive a lower grade rate female instructors as less competent than male instructors
Self-esteem threat and gender bias
The tendency to view individuals in out-groups as more similar to each other than they really are
Less details about out-group members
Out-group homogeneity effect
Automatic stereotype activation sometimes occurs.
Priming can influence behaviour
Stereotype activation
Stereotypes influence how ambiguous information and behaviours are interpreted
True
occurs when people believe outgroup members’ bad actions occur because of internal dispositions and their good actions occur because of the situation
Ultimate attribution error
- contributes to stereotype bias
Stereotypes bias how information is attended to, encoded, and remembered
Stereotypes tend to be self-confirming
True
The concern that one might do something to confirm a negative stereotype about one’s group, either in one’s own eyes or the eyes of someone else
Can lead to disidentification
Stereotype threat
The ability to identify with similar others plays an important role in attracting women and racialized folks to fields where they have been historically underrepresented
The process of disinvesting in any area in which one’s group traditionally has been underrepresented or negatively stereotyped.
Disidentification
For example, women may disidentify from science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) careers because of subtle indicators that they may not perform as well as men.
More subtle prejudice persists, increases in overt racism
Racial prejudice is still happening
ex;
Employment discrimination, favouritism galore, police behaviour, patronization, violence and aggression
Airbnb hosts less likely to accept applications from guests with “ethnic” names, longer uber wait times and more cancellations
Professors less likely to respond to emails from ethnic names
In Western countries, anti-gay prejudice endures
True
Gender discrimination is even higher for racialized women
Disproportionately among indigenous women
True
Gender discrimination even more prominent in other parts of the world
Some violence against women happens prenatally (i.e., preference for having boys)
Religious intolerance in Canada is deeply connected to its colonial history
Discrimination against religious minorities often intersects with other forms of bias, such as racism and sexism
Increase in hate crimes
Everyday manifestations of religious intolerance include:
Micoraggression
Failure to accommodate religious practices
Feeling that one’s group simply is not valued in a domain and that you do not belong there.
Social identity threat
Unfair restrictions on opportunities for certain groups of people through institutional policies, structural power relations, and formal laws
Institutional discrimination
Less economic value and pay to traditional women-held occupations; racial discrimination in everything and subtler, modern forms of prejudice
See slide
Is Perceiving Prejudice Bad for Your Health
Experiencing more prejudice in daily life leads to
Poor psychological health
Increased depression
Lower life satisfaction
Long-term physiological consequences
To reduce prejudice (top-down)
Despite compelling diversity among Indigenous communities, the common representations of Indigenous groupings limits the ability of Indigenous people to see the uniqueness and successes of their particular communities (or as individuals)
Exposure to stereotypical mascots is associated with significantly depressed state self-esteem and with depressed feelings of community wort
Significant challenges in reducing prejudice lie in changing these laws, customs, and norms.
People face limitations when they attempt to control their biases
Cognitive control is impaired when judgments of others are made when a person is aroused or upset
Regulation of automatically activated thoughts can be difficult when people are pressed for time, cognitively engaged, or distracted
All other things being equal, familiarity increases liking (mere exposure effect)
Ingredients for positive intergroup contact (Allport, 1954):
Equal status between groups in situation
Intimate and varied contact that allows people to get acquainted
Intergroup cooperation toward a superordinate goal
Institutional support or contact approved by authority, law, or custom
A common problem or shared goal that groups work together to solve or achieve.
Superordinate goal
Key mechanisms by which optimal contact creates positive change
Reducing stereotype/decatograzing
Reducing anxiety, optimal contact reduce this
fostering empathy
See last slide
