Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

Psyc 474 > Nov 12 > Flashcards

Nov 12 Flashcards

1
Q

power

A

ability to EXERT influence on the other partner to obtain desired outcomes

and being able to RESIST their influence

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

influence strategies

A

various methods or tactics that individuals use to AFFECT the:

a) behaviour
b) thoughts
c) feelings

of others

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

influence strategies vary along 2 dimensions

A
  1. VALENCE (positive vs negative)

^ use promise of rewards or punishments

  1. DIRECTNESS (direct vs indirect)

^ overt, visible, unambiguous or subtle

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

4 negative direct strategies

A
  1. coercion
  2. autocracy
  3. manipulation
  4. negative affect without explanation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

coercion

A

NEGATIVE DIRECT

criticism and blame

indicate negative consequences, threaten punishment

express negative affect

yelling, cursing

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

autocracy

A

negative direct

make CLEAR demands from a POSITION OF AUTHORITY

exert SUPERIORITY, invalidate partner

patronizing, sarcasm, condescending, interrupt, reject partner’s arguments

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

manipulation

A

negative direct

attempt to make partner feel GUILTY

ie. remind of past favours or partner transgressions, appeal to obligations, commitments or fairness

appeal to partner’s LOVE & CONCERN

ie. “don’t you love me?”

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

negative affect without explanation

A

negative direct

silent treatment, sulking, pouting

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

positive direct strategy

A

USE LOGIC AND RATIONAL REASONING

ie. suggest solutions, assess consequences, weigh pros and cons

explain behaviour or POV in way partner would find REASONABLE

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

positive indirect strategy

A

“SOFT” POSITIVE

“soften” persuasion attempts by pointing out good characteristics of partner, minimizing the problem

ie. “it’s not that big of a deal, but I’d appreciate it if…”

encourage partner to express POV & feelings about situation

be open to, acknowledge, validate partner’s views

be charming & express positive affect

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

generally, we don’t like it when…

A

partners try to change us (PARTNER REGULATION ATTEMPTS)

communicates that we aren’t living up for partner’s IDEAL

but how this is DONE MATTERS

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

partner regulation attempts: how they’re performed matters

A

NEGATIVE influence strategies can:

a. convey CONTEMPT & DISREGARD

b. ESCALATE conflict

c. lead to more NEG EVALUATIONS of relationship quality

INDIRECT influences strategies:

a. LACK sufficient FORCE (problem goes unsolved)

b. can OFFSET negative effects of regulation behaviour, convey care and regard

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

social power theory: 6 bases of power

A
  1. reward power
  2. coercive power
  3. legitimate power
  4. referent power
  5. expert power
  6. informational power
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

reward power

A

target perceives that agent has ability to provide them with desired rewards if target adopts certain beliefs, attitudes or behaviours that the agent desires

almost like a bribe

often associated with use of positive reinforcement

IF THEY OBEY/AGREE, they GET REWARDED

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

coercive power

A

target perceives that agent has the POWER TO PUNISH them for:

a) doing something the agent doesn’t like

b) NOT doing something the agent wants

ie. THREATS OF PUNISHMENT

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

legitimate power

A

target perceives that agent HAS THE RIGHT to affect them

feel they SHOULD COMPLY with agent’s request

influenced by SOCIAL NORMS

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

legitimate power is influenced by what social norms?

A
  1. norm of social responsibility

(obligated to help those who can’t help themselves)

  1. norm of reciprocity

(do unto others as they have done unto us)

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

referent power

A

target wants to EMULATE AGENT

who is someone they ADMIRE GREATLY

ie. celebrity endorsing certain products, popular kids at school

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

expert power

A

target perceives that agent has ability to PROVIDE them with VALUABLE KNOWLEDGE

ie. if person is psych major and target wants personal mental health advice

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

informational power

A

target perceives that agent has SPECIFIC INFORMATION that may be USEFUL

but target MUST COOPERATE with the agent to get it

ie. someone has a copy of last year’s exam

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

interdependence theory account of power

A

in interdependent relationships, we DEPEND ON EACH OTHER for OUTCOMES

means partner have power over each other (COUNTERPOWER)

exercise diff amounts of power in diff domains

principle of lesser interest, fate control, behaviour control

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

counterpower

A

fact that partners in interdependent relationships have POWER OVER EACH OTHER

because they depend on each other for outcomes

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

principle of lesser interest

A

(interdependence theory of power)

partner who is LESS DEPENDENT on relationship (who desires it less) has MORE POWER in that relationship

recall: DEPENDENCE = outcomes - CLalt

^ thus, partners who have better alternatives have greater power

^ likely to eventually leave relationship unless partner can provide special outcomes

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

interdependence theory: 2 types of control when making a JOINT DECISION

A
  1. fate control
  2. behaviour control
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

fate control

A

(interdependence theory of power)

ONE partner TOTALLY determines outcomes of the other partner

can draw on any of the six bases of power

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

behaviour control

A

(interdependence theory of power)

one partner can MAKE IT MORE REWARDING for the other partner to change their behavioural choices

usually draw on REWARD POWER

make it more appealing for other partner to engage in a certain behaviour, more compromise-based

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

happy couples tend to rely on what type of control when making joint decisions?

A

behaviour control

(not fate control)

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

interdependence theory: partners may use different strategies to increase their power

A
  1. increase quality of their own alternatives
  2. decrease apparent quality of partner’s alternatives
  3. improve value of rewards they can bestow on partner
  4. reducing partner’s perceived qualities & skills (to make them feel more dependent on the rewards that influencer can provide)
  5. devaluing what the partner can offer to oneself
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

relational consequences of power imbalances

A
  1. relationships with high imbalance in power tend to be characterized by:

a) LOWER SATISFACTION
b) LESS STABILITY
c) GREATER CONFLICT

  1. power affects our EMOTIONAL experience and how we RELATE to others

^ may feel guilty about imbalance

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

approach/inhibition theory of power

A

2 behavioural systems that help us navigate our world

  1. behavioural approach system
  2. behavioural inhibition system

power influences BALANCE of TENDENCIES to approach and inhibit

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

behavioural approach system

A

moves us TOWARDS desired outcomes

like a green light: go, go, go!

triggered by presence of REWARDS & OPPORTUNITIES

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

behavioural inhibition system

A

aka avoidance system

moves us AWAY from threats

yellow light: slow down, be vigilant

triggered by PUNISHMENT, THREAT, UNCERTAINTY

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

power influences balance of tendencies to approach and inhibit…

A
  1. power is associated with greater access to rewards, freedom of interference

^ thus, higher power ACTIVATES approach-related tendencies

^ more focused on SEEKING REWARDS, without any care for constraints

  1. lack of power elicits feelings of THREAT

^ thus, lack of power is associated with INCREASED INHIBITION

^ more VIGILANT and CAREFUL in making judgments/decisions

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

theory predicts that power will decrease…

A

perspective taking

don’t need to rely on accurate understanding of others to accomplish goals

don’t need to pay attention to others, because you aren’t reliant on others for your outcomes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

perspective taking experimental study

A
  1. Ps primed to feel MORE or LESS powerful

ie. recall incident where you had power over others VS recall incident where others had power over you

  1. draw an E on your forehead

RESULTS: those primed to feel powerful were LESS LIKELY to TAKE DIFFS IN VISUAL PERSPECTIVE into account

36
Q

perspective taking and power: other studies

A
  1. less accurate in DECODING emotional expressions
  2. less likely to take into account that others don’t possess their privileged knowledge

ie. read following scenario

  • co-worker recommends restaurant
  • target has terrible time
  • when asked how it was, responds sarcastically “just marvelous”
  • will the co-worker understand the sarcasm?

^ more confidence that they’ll understand in the high power manipulation

37
Q

approach/inhibition theory of power further predicts…

A

that power should make people BEHAVE IN LESS CONSTRAINED and at times MORE INAPPROPRIATE ways

ie. upper class individuals more likely to break law while driving

ie. partners who perceive themselves as more committed to relationship (lower in power) more likely to refrain from hostile behaviour during conflict discussions, less likely to retaliate

ie. the more powerful partner in relationship is more likely to be aggressive

BUTTTTT partners who have low power & desire for power may also engage in coercive controlling tactics (esp when they’re men)

38
Q

partners who have low power and desire more power may…

A

also engage in COERCIVE/CONTROLLING TACTICS

esp when they’re men

39
Q

does power always corrupt? experiment setup

A
  1. measured extent to which PS were COMMUNALLY-ORIENTED or EXCHANGE-ORIENTED
  2. manipulated power by having Ps sit in a fancy professor CHAIR or plain chair
  3. following power manipulation, asked to complete series of QUESTIONNAIRES with another participant
40
Q

does power always corrupt? experiment results

A

HIGH POWER CONDITION:

^communally-oriented Ps performed most of the task while exchange oriented Ps shirked work

LOW POWER CONDITION:

^no effect of communal vs exchange orientation

41
Q

does power always corrupt? experiment CONCLUSION

A

power doesn’t corrupt, it REVEALS

42
Q

participants who considered themselves less committed than their partners were more likely to engage in hostile behaviours…

A
  1. IF they were experiencing MORE NEGATIVE EMOTIONS
  2. or if HIGHER on NEGATIVE interpersonal TRAITS

ie. high trait anger, chronic jealousy, low agreeableness

43
Q

power doesn’t inherently lead to negative behaviour…

A

it DISINHIBITS

amplifies pre-existing inclinations

SITUATIONAL (ie. feeling more negative emotions at the time) or DISPOSITIONAL

44
Q

aggression

A

PHYSICAL or VERBAL behaviour intended to HARM a person who doesn’t want to be harmed

45
Q

violence

A

term that’s sometimes but not consistently reserved for ACTS intended to cause EXTREME PHYSICAL harm

ie. severe injury or death

but this course and textbook use aggression and violence interchangeably

46
Q

3 types of violence

A
  1. situational couple violence
  2. coercive controlling violence
  3. violent resistance
47
Q

situational couple violence

A

stems from angry verbal exchange that ESCALATES to physical altercation

in the ABSENCE of general intent by either partner to dominate and control the other

  1. often (not always) characterized by MILDER forms of aggression (pushing, grabbing)
  2. women EQUALLY LIKELY to engage in this type of violence (severity of injury caused by men is higher though)
  3. often MUTUAL, with both partners involved
48
Q

situational couple violence is a ______ form of violence…

A

reactive

reflects FRUSTRATION and HOSTILITY evoked by a verbal argument

49
Q

coercive controlling violence

A

form of DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

in which ONE partner uses EXTREME forms of aggression to DOMINATE the other

  1. more likely to be perpetrated by MEN
  2. PROACTIVE form of violence: reflects systematic & sustained strategy to intimidate and control another person
  3. more likely to be ONE-SIDED, PERVASIVE in relationship & ESCALATE over time
  4. more likely to result in SEVERE INJURIES, attempted MURDER, and DEATH
50
Q

alternative names for coercive controlling violence

A

intimate terrorism

battery

51
Q

where situational couple violence is reactive, coercive controlling violence is…

A

proactive

^ systematic & sustained strategy to intimidate and control another person

52
Q

characteristics and warning signs of coercive controlling violence

A
  1. feelings of FEAR/CONFUSION
  2. INVALIDATION/BELITTLING (emotional abuse, minimizing behaviour)
  3. attempts at CONTROL (isolation, economic abuse)
  4. THREATS (intimidation) & AGGRESSION
53
Q

characteristics/warning signs of coercive controlling violence: FEELINGS OF FEAR/CONFUSION

A

ie. avoid certain topics out of fear of angering partner

ie. feel emotionally numb or helpless

54
Q

characteristics and warning signs of coercive controlling violence: INVALIDATION/BELITTLING

A

ie. perpetrator humiliates & insults the other

ie. blames the partner for own abuse

55
Q

characteristics and warning signs of coercive controlling violence: ATTEMPTS AT CONTROL

A

ie. excessive jealousy & possessiveness

ie. keeps partner from seeing friends & family

ie. limits access to money, car, etc

56
Q

characteristics and warning signs of coercive controlling violence: THREATS & AGGRESSION

A

ie. volatile & unpredictable temper, aggression, threats of killing self or partner

57
Q

cycle of coercive controlling violence

A
  1. tension building phase
  2. explosive, acute battering phase
  3. contrition phase

repeats over and over

58
Q

tension building phase

A

hostility erupts in angry outbursts

often response to jealousy & desire for control

59
Q

explosive, acute battering phase

A

tension unleashed in act of rage & aggression

often in context of disagreement or frustrating moment

60
Q

contrition phase

A

perpetrator apologizes, promises to change

tries to convince victim that abuse will never happen again

61
Q

intimate terrorism perpetrators BACKGROUND

A

(intimate terrorism = coercive controlling violence)

where situational couple violence is often product of destructive couple dynamics that can be addressed in couples therapy…

coercive controlling violence is more of a PERVASIVE INDIVIDUAL problem

62
Q

intimate terrorism perpetrators are more likely to…

A

more likely to be diagnosed with PSYCHOLOGICAL DISORDERS - esp ANTISOCIAL or BORDERLINE personality disorder

63
Q

antisocial personality disorder

A

lack of regard for others, laws & social norms

impulsivity and lack of control over anger

(more common in intimate terrorism perpetrators)

64
Q

borderline personality disorder

A

intense fear of rejection & abandonment

emotional instability & difficulty regulating emotions

impulsivity

65
Q

intimate terrorism perpetrator common characteristics

A
  1. insecurity, hypersensitivity to rejection, jealousy

^ over attribute critical/rejecting thoughts to women

  1. easily provoked to anger
  2. more violent & more likely to see violence as justifiable
  3. traditional gender attitudes
  4. narcissism
  5. more likely to abuse drugs/alcohol
  6. experiences of aggression and violence in family of origin
66
Q

narcissism

A

inflated/unstable sense of self esteem

sensitivity to ego threat

proneness to respond with aggression

67
Q

coping with intimate terrorism: contrary to popular belief…

A

battered women make efforts to stop the abuse

must understand intimate terrorism & response thereto in the context of an ongoing, committed romantic relationship

it’s not a single response, but an unfolding process of growing recognition & development of coping strategies

may confront partner, try to reason with them, change their own behaviour to avoid triggers

MAJORITY (70%) SEEK HELP FROM POLICE, COUNSELLORS, MEDICAL PERSONNEL

68
Q

violent resistance

A

occurs when partner FORCIBLY FIGHTS BACK against intimate terrorism

women who defend themselves are TWICE AS LIKELY to sustain INJURY

thus, attempts at violent resistance may be short-lived

69
Q

leaving coercive relationships: longitudinal study

A

43% of women facing intimate terrorism left within 2.5 years

70
Q

considerations when thinking about escaping relationships with intimate terrorism

A
  1. escaping safely may take time (may make multiple attempts)
  2. entrapment due to psychological & economic abuse, isolation, fear of even greater violence & retaliation
  3. may be deterred by continuing attachment & commitment to partner, emotional dependence
  4. common belief that they’ll be worse off

(but people are happier after leaving abusive partner than they’d expect)

71
Q

situational couple violence - more a product of…

A

couple dynamic

influenced by situational factors

may engage in SCV in one relationship but not another

strongest predictor of violence is receiving violence

^ negative reciprocity, as exists in verbal conflict

72
Q

attachment and anger - interpersonal violence

A

ANGER = strong predictor of interpersonal violence

from ATTACHMENT PERSPECTIVE:

a) anger is a FUNCTIONAL RESPONSE to SEPARATION from an attachment figure IF it deters unreliable attachment figure from LEAVING & RE-ESTABLISHES warm relations

b) but intense, destructive, vengeful anger has potential to DESTROY relationship

73
Q

anger of hope

A

anger is a functional response to separation from an attachment figure IF:

a) it deters unreliable attachment figure from leaving

b) re-establishes warm relations

74
Q

attachment anxiety & anger

A

attachment anxiety > high levels of relational anger

  1. react with ANGER & hostility to AMBIGUOUS cues
  2. more likely to RUMINATE on anger-provoking thoughts (less effective emotion regulation)
  3. more EMOTIONAL SPREADING (activation of one negative emotion leads to activation of other negatively valenced but unrelated emotions)
75
Q

anxiously attached individuals use anger/violence to…

A

gain attention and proximity

76
Q

avoidantly attached individuals anger causes them to…

A

create distance

77
Q

attachment avoidance & anger

A

DISSOCIATED ANGER (don’t report high anger but physiological markers show higher anger)

rely on DISTANCING STRATEGIES to cope with anger:

a) may discourage outright aggression, but avoidants can become violent when involved in intense negative reciprocity & demand-withdrawal dynamics (most likely when paired with anxiously attached partner)

78
Q

dissociated anger

A

seen in avoidantly attached individuals

don’t always REPORT high levels of anger in response to anger-eliciting events

BUT exhibit more PHYSIOLOGICAL SIGNS of anger arousal, greater hostility, appraise others’ negative behaviours as having hostile intent

79
Q

distancing strategies employed by avoidants when they’re angry may… but…

A

MAY discourage outright aggression

BUT avoidants may become violent when involved in intense negative reciprocity and demand-withdrawal dynamics

^ most likely when paired with anxiously attached partner

80
Q

I3 model

A

SCV influenced by 3 factors

  1. instigating triggers
  2. impelling influences
  3. inhibiting influences
81
Q

I3 model - instigating triggers

A

events that AROUSE ANGER

ie. betrayal, insults

82
Q

I3 model - impelling influences

A

factors that make it MORE LIKELY one will experience violent impulses when provoked

ie. family history of violence, impulsivity, attachment insecurity, alcohol/drugs

83
Q

I3 model - inhibiting influences

A

factors that COUNTERACT aggressive impulses

ie. good problem solving skills, commitment & accommodation

84
Q

violence in sexual minority couples

A

while some studies have found comparable rates of violence in same sex and straight couples…

others suggest GREATER RISK OF VICTIMIZATION for gay & lesbian individuals

impact of violence for sexual minorities may be COMPOUNDED by:

a. lack of supportive services
b. hesitancy to disclose

85
Q

highest rates of victimization observed for…

A

bisexual individuals

related to perpetrator bi-negativity and perceived/real infidelity

bi-negativity relates to neg stereotypes about promiscuity

Psyc 474 (23 decks)

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