PSY220 - 8. The Self & Social comparison

Question 1

Self-schemas

Answer 1

What self-related thoughts are most accessible?
Markus (1977): If certain self-attributes are more accessible, then information about that attribute should be processed more readily and efficiently.

Question 2

Markus (1977)

Answer 2

1. Used q’aire to identify 3 types of subjects:
   a. Dependent
   b. Independent
   c. Aschematic
2. Flashed a list of adjectives on computer screen (15 related to independence – e.g., “individualistic”, 15 related to dependence, 15 unrelated.)
3. Subjects asked to judge as quickly as possible whether each word described themselves (pressed “me” button or “not me” button). (BTW, similar to IAT.)

Question 3

Markus (1977)

Answer 3

Results:

1. Dependents said “me” to more of the dependent adj’s and independents said “me” to more of the independent adj’s.
2. But more interestingly…
3. Although independents said “me” to an equal number of dependent and independent traits, it took them longer to respond to dependent traits! – longer RTs, not as efficiently processed

Question 4

Markus (1977)

Answer 4

4. Independents’ shorter RT’s for independent adjectives suggests that these adjectives were more accessible (easier to process). Longer RT’s for their “me” responses to dependent adjectives suggests that they were thinking harder about these adjectives…e.g., “hoped-for me,” potentially me.”

Question 5

self-complexity

Answer 5

Who takes it harder after failing an exam?

Less complex – shelley

Question 6

Linville (1987)

Answer 6

1. Had subjects list the personality traits that they believed applied to them.
2. Had subjects sort this list into meaningful groups (as many or as few as they wanted.
3. Used a mathematical formula (that you don’t have to worry about) to calculate each subject’s self-complexity score. (Higher s-c if number of items high and amount of overlap low).

Question 7

Linville (1987)

Answer 7

4. Had subjects list of life stresses they had experienced in the previous two weeks.
5. Completed questionnaire to measure depression and questionnaire to assess various physical ailments.
6. Subjects returned two weeks later and filled out same DV’s again.

Question 8

Linville (1987)

Answer 8

Low stress high stress
No diff hi s-c > lo s-c
High s-c had better immune functioning
Unless you arrange your life so you don’t get setback, then having high complexity is better
The flipside: low s-c may have an advantage when stress is low and they experience positive events. Their positive affect will go even higher and spill over into other areas of the self. For complex person, triumph in one area is compartmentalized…no generalized rise in perceived self-worth.

Question 9

Social comparison

Answer 9

BIRG-ing: sense of pride and satisfaction in someone else’s achievements
no connection, even arbitrary connection can lead to birging phenomenon
CORF-ing: sense of shame and disassociation with someone else’s failures

Question 10

Social comparison

Answer 10

Tesser (1986): pointed out that the success of people similar or close to us can cause envy, resentment, lower self-esteem
Direct comparisson
Similarity can cause envy because it highlights inadequecy
Closeness contributes to alignable comparison

Question 11

Festinger (1954)

Answer 11

Much of social comparison is because of informational influence.
#1 The standards by which we judge ourselves are often unclear.  Therefore, we are most likely to do social comparison when in a state of uncertainty about our abilities, attributes, attitudes.
For amiguous traits, we try to gage ourselves relative to others

Question 12

Festinger (1954)

Answer 12

2 It’s most informative to compare with people close to us in ability.

True test is to play with someone with similar ability
Given a choice when there’s a choice, play someone with similar ability
Drive upward, choose ppl similar but slightly better – gain as much info as we can to improve performance

Question 13

Schacter

Answer 13

“Misery loves miserable company.”

Receive electric shocks, 1 of 2 waiting rooms. 1 had ppl waiting for electric shocks, others had ppl already had shocks. Wanted a match in emotional states. Want to gauge appropriateness of own fear.

Question 14

Goethals & Darley (1977)

Answer 14

distinguished between beliefs and values. We compare to similar person vis a vis values, but dissimilar person vis a vis beliefs. (If dissimilar person holds same view as us, that’s considered highly informative.)
Beliefs – informative to compare with someone who is dissimilar – leads to augmentation

Question 15

Downward social comparison: (Big fish in a small pond)

Answer 15

Short term makes you feel better – short increase in self esteem
But long term its bad for you: lose important info on how to improve
Tradeoff between feeling good and learning something
Prevention focused downward – make sure you’re not as bad as that person

Question 16

Downward social comparison: (Big fish in a small pond)

Answer 16

Promotion focused upward – want to be good as that guy
Motivation to think highly of one’s self vs.
Motivation to have an accurate view of one’s self
Self verification – opportunity to self enhance, but inaccurate because they think they’re no good

Question 17

SELF-ESTEEM

Answer 17

affective component of the self – our positive and negative evaluations of ourselves. – attitude toward ourselves (Coopersmith, 1967, J.D. Brown, 1998).

Question 18

Is it best to conceptualize s-e as a single, unitary trait?

Answer 18

There is evidence of contextualized s-e (diff for each domain) and compartmentalized s-e (universal).
Prevailing idea that everyone needs self-esteem

Question 19

TWO PREVAILING CONTEMPORARY THEORIES

Answer 19

1. It’s driven by a more primitive need to connect with others and gain their approval. Thus, our self-esteem is an indicator of how we are doing in the eyes of others. According to this view, self-esteem is inherently social in origin. (Evolutionary basis…it’s adaptive to be part of a group, and even more adaptive to a member of high standing in a group.)
   Fundamental human need
   When not saisfied – physical + psychological ailments
   self esteem reflective of how we think others see us

Question 20

TWO PREVAILING CONTEMPORARY THEORIES

Answer 20

2. terror management theory–Greenberg, Solomon, & Pyszcynski (1997): people are motivated to see themselves as valuable members of society as a mechanism for helping themselves cope with the deeply rooted fear of death that privately haunts all of us.
   Buffer that blocks us from thinking about painful thoughts of our nonexisting

Question 21

Benefits of self-esteem

Answer 21

1. longer task persistence
2. better sleep at night
3. fewer ulcers
4. less likely to conform to peer pressure
5. less depressed, more optimistic about future
6. more confidence as they take on a new task
7. clearer sense of who they are

Question 22

Campbell (1990):

Answer 22

1. asked high and low self-esteem subjects to rate selves on various trait dimensions such as quiet/outspoken, competitive/cooperative.
   Results: hi and lo s-e groups did not differ in mean ratings. Did differ on standard deviation of ratings.
   High self esteem rated themselves more extremely – felt more confidence
   Low self esteem rates themselves in the middle – lack confidence

Question 23

Campbell (1990):

Answer 23

self-defeating cycle of low self-esteem:
self-helpless cycle
low s-e → negative expectancies → low effort/high anxiety → failure → self-blame→low s-e

Question 24

Baumeister, Heatherton, & Tice (1993)

Answer 24

In a series of studies, had subjects with high and low self-esteem perform a variety of tasks that varied in how risky they were and how rewarding they were.
Results: Found that subjects with high s-e in general set appropriate goals and performed effectively

Question 25

Ego-threat

Answer 25

caused only high s-e subjects to set inappropriately risky goals that were beyond their performance capabilities. These subjects ended up with smaller overall payoffs than low s-e subjects.
In other words, ego-threat induces an overly powerful compensatory process (“I’ll show you!”) that can lead high s-e people to attempt tasks they simply can’t perform.
Low self-esteem actually means you are giving scores in the middle of the scale
Low scores means they are vulnerable to depression
Esteem IAT

Question 26

Self-awareness theory (Duval & Wicklund, 1972)

Answer 26

Found, across a wide array of studies, that heightening self awareness (e.g., via a mirror in the room) has the common consequence of:
1. heightening negative self-discrepancies,
2. leading to a temporary decrease in self-esteem.
Falling short of ideal and oughts

Question 27

Self-awareness theory

Answer 27

Macrae and colleagues (1998) found that subjects were less likely to use stereotypes in describing others when they were seated in view of a mirror, when they could see themselves on a TV monitor, or when their names were subliminally primed on a computer screen (thus unconsciously raising self-awareness). (The “ought” of avoiding stereotyping was activated.)
More likely to act on attitude
Raising discrepancies – painful – fix the problem

Question 28

SELF-EFFICACY AND PERCEIVED CONTROL: Rodin & Langer (1977)

Answer 28

Nursing home residents who were given more control over their daily routines (e.g., when to eat, when to watch TV, when to administer pills, etc.) became happier and more active, showed improved health and actually lived longer…compared to those residents who were not given control over their daily routines.
Improve outcomes for range of diseases as well. More about the perception of control.

Question 29

Albert Bandura: self-efficacy beliefs

Answer 29

people’s judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances”
I can do it.
Vary among and within people.
Self-efficacy beliefs provide the foundation for human motivation, well-being, and personal accomplishment.
Won’t be able to do anything without any self-efficacy

Question 30

Albert Bandura: self-efficacy beliefs

Answer 30

Self-efficacy is also a critical determinant of self-regulation.
Higher resistance, goals, less vulnerable to anxiety, better in bad circumstances
Based past experience which becomes new reality
Approach task with sense of serenity
“people’s level of motivation, affective states, and actions are based more on what they believe than on what is objectively true” For this reason, how people behave can often be better predicted by the beliefs they hold about their capabilities than by what they are actually capable of accomplishing

Question 31

How Self-Efficacy Beliefs Influence Human Functioning

Answer 31

They influence the choices people make and the courses of action they pursue.
The higher the sense of efficacy, the greater the effort, persistence, and resilience.
Self-efficacy beliefs also influence an individual’s thought patterns and emotional reactions.
Serenity
Low self efficacy – exaggerate difficulty which leads to self-fulfilling prophecy

Question 32

How Self-Efficacy Beliefs Are Created

Answer 32

mastery experience, vicarious experience
social persuasions, Somatic and emotional states
Own experience and vicarious experience can influence self efficacy
Therapy: convince patient they are capable
Gauge level based on emotional states
Body perceives feedback that turns into self-efficacy beliefs
more often about lack of control

Question 33

The Need to Belong

Answer 33

Newborns are uniquely responsive to human faces (Meltzoff, 1975).
Newborns capable of imitating face from birth
Predisposition to forming social relationships – born with the skills

Question 34

The Need to Belong

Answer 34

Baumeister & Leary, (1995): The need to belong is a basic human motive, “a pervasive drive to form and maintain at least a minimum quantity of lasting, positive, and significant interpersonal relationships.”
Optimum balance – between lots and small

Question 35

The Need to Belong

Answer 35

Latane & Werner (1978): Found that rats were more likely to approach other rats after a period of isolation and were less likely to approach other rats after a long period of contact.

Question 36

O’Connor & Rosenblood (1996)

Answer 36

1. Asked college students to wear beepers for four days
2. Whenever beeper went off, subjects wrote down whether they were alone/with others and whether they wanted to be alone/with others.
3. Results:
   a. Students were in the state they desired 2/3 of the time.
   b. When they weren’t, they were extremely likely to be in their desired state the next time they were beeped (self-regulated?).

Question 37

O’Connor & Rosenblood (1996)

Answer 37

Self corrected
Fixed problem of too much or too little
Dorms were arranged as suites, better friendships than single apartments
Creation of chance encounters

Question 38

Whom Do We Love?

Answer 38

1. People who are (physically) close to us
2. People who are familiar to us.
   Believe that ppl are bored or disgusted by ppl similar to us – not the case

Question 39

Moreland & Beach (1982)

Answer 39

1. Selected four women to be confederates.
   a. One woman: simply had her picture taken
   b. 2nd woman: attend a large social psych class, much like this one, 5 times over the course of a semester
   c. 3rd woman: -“- 10 times over the course of the semester
   d. 4th woman: -“- 15 times over the course of the semester

Question 40

Moreland & Beach (1982)

Answer 40

2. At the end of the semester, members of the class given the four photographs and asked to rate physical attractiveness, popularity, honesty, intelligence.
3. Results: More exposure – more liked
   Even if subliminally presented
   Mere exposure effect: subliminaly primed faces
   Friends preferred regular photo, subjects preferred reverse photo – we see ourselves in the mirror
   Can’t make you like something you don’t like

Question 41

“What is Beautiful is Good.”

Answer 41

Tend to associate beauty with other traits
Tend to have better social skills and better friends – self fulfilling prophecy
Not related to big five, intelligence, positive/negative adjustment, or self-esteem

Question 42

“What is Beautiful is Good.”

Answer 42

Tend to associate beauty with other traits
Tend to have better social skills and better friends – self fulfilling prophecy
Not related to big five, intelligence, positive/negative adjustment, or self-esteem

Question 43

Do “opposites attract’?

Answer 43

Tend to hang out with ppl similar
Byrne (1994) proposed a two-step, time sequence model:
1. First we avoid associating with people who are dissimilar. This rules out most people.
2. Then, of the remaining set of people, we approach those who are similar.
This reconciled the contradictions in the existing literature.

Question 44

Matching Hypothesis

Answer 44

Feingold (1988) found that people overwhelmingly tend to become romantically involved with others who are judged to be comparable in beauty.
Rejection painful – avoid ppl out of our league
Tend to gravitate toward comparable beauty

Question 45

Social Exchange Theory

Answer 45

Motivated by maximum gain and minimum loss
Dating couples who have many rewarding interactions early on are less likely to break up later.
Reward: sex, affirmation, companionship
Cost: conflict, dating other ppl, time spent
Dating couples who experience greater increases in rewards as their relationship continues more likely to stay together.

Question 46

Social Exchange Theory

Answer 46

During honeymoon period, costs not really taken into account – just focus on rewards. Rusbult (1983) found that costs first enter the picture in people’s thinking about 3 months into a relationship on average.
Bring a priori expectations: comparison level
Avg expected outcome – CL high = good outcome, CL low = low expectation of outcome

Question 47

Social Exchange Theory

Answer 47

1. People bring certain a priori expectations about the “balance sheet”. Thibaut & Kelley (1959) coined the term “comparison level” (CL) to refer to this average expected outcome of the relationships.
2. Thibaut & Kelley also introduced a second type of expectations: “comparison level for alternatives” (CLAlt).
3. Investments
   if rewards in alternatives are high = less commited
   low CLAlt = stay even in bad relationship
   when in love reduces appeal of other perspective partners

Question 48

Equity Theory

Answer 48

Your Benefits Your Partner’s Benefits
__________ = ____________
Your Costs Your Partner’s Costs
According to equity theory, the balance is what counts (not your personal level of benefits / costs)!
Investments increase commitment – lead to long lasting relationships

Question 49

Equity Theory

Answer 49

Positive self fulfilling prophecy
When ratios are equal
Sensitive to partners benefits
Under and over benefited ppl feel guilt or unworthiness

Question 50

Sternberg (1986): Triangular theory

Answer 50

Intimacy	Passion	Commitment
(No		No		No		= no love)
Yes		No		No		= Liking
Yes 	        Yes		No		= Romantic Love
Yes 	        No		Yes		= Companionate Love

Question 51

Sternberg (1986): Triangular theory

Answer 51

Intimacy	Passion	Commitment
No		Yes		No		= Infatuation
No		Yes		Yes		= Fatuous Love Long distance
No		No		Yes		= Empty Shell Love 
Yes		Yes		Yes		= Consummate Love

Question 52

Sternberg (1986): Triangular theory

Answer 52

Passion (gazing)
Intimacy (support, understanding)
Commitment (Devotion)
Ideal lover score high on all three
Siblings high commitment
Friends high commitment and intimacy

Question 53

THE EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVE

Answer 53

Evol. Psych. Studies how natural selection predisposes not just physical traits (upright posture, opposable thumbs), but psychological traits and social behaviors that enhance the likelihood of survival and reproduction.

1. Evolutionary process is not about genetic determinism.
2. “Evolved” does not mean inevitable or inflexible.

Question 54

Social psych examples: Helping an altruism.

Answer 54

Prediction #1 from evolutionary theory: Helping will increase as genetic relatedness increases. Why?
More genes you share, more likely your genes survive
Prediction #2: Helping will decrease as age and/or reproductive fitness of victim decreases.
Once the person is past menopause, person is no longer useful

Question 55

Social psych examples: Helping an altruism.

Answer 55

Varied relatedness in saving someone from burning building
Confounded with familiarity
Burstein, Crandall, & Kitayama (1991): Found near-perfect linear relationship between relatedness and helping.

Question 56

Males greater sexual initiative

Answer 56

The average male produces trillions of sperm in his lifetime, making sperm “cheap” compared to eggs (which occur in much smaller numbers on monthly cycles). In addition, females only bring one fetus to term and then have to nurse it.
Thus, according to the evolutionary account, females invest their reproductive opportunities carefully, by looking for signs of health and resources

Question 57

Males greater sexual initiative

Answer 57

Males compete against other males for chances to propagate. Thus, “men seek to reproduce widely, women wisely.”
Men attracted to young and fertile
Older the men, bigger the gap
Women liked power and resources

Question 58

Evolutionary processes

Answer 58

NOT CONCIOUS, regulated through emotions and drives.
CRITICISMS:
1. not falsifiable
2. you can often easily imagine the opposite! – men who are loyal invest in child
3. hindsight bias

Question 59

Evolutionary processes

Answer 59

4. Evolutionary wisdom is past wisdom. It tells us what behaviors worked in the past – whether such behaviors would be adaptive today is not clear. (Most of us don’t have to forage for food!)
5. Humans are more complicated, have more sophisticated goals, than the Four F’s (feeding, fighting, fleeing, and…mating.) – do more than that, evolution doesn’t account for that
6. cannot handle cultural differences very well.