PSY331 - 7. Group Processes Flashcards
Group-Based Emotions
Members of social groups have more similar concerns
similar goals - interpret environment as pertinent to our goals
Group-Based Emotions
Making more similar appraisals => similar emotions
Experiencing more similar emotions (Smith, 1993)
Group-Based Emotions
collective emotions: synchronize on emotional experience
we change emotions together - similar feelings
A. “Collective Emotions”
Totterdell (2000) - Assessed the mood of members of two professional sports teams 3 times a day for 4 days during a match
controlled for match situations
A. “Collective Emotions”
Individual players’ moods were more closely associated with the average current mood of their group than:
the mood of the other groups
average mood of their group at other times
A. “Collective Emotions”
group feels positive then ppl on avg feel positive
collective emotional experience at the time
group influences indiv emotional experience
could be a function of emotional contagion
B. Emotional Contagion
During face-to-face interaction: “Mimic + synchronize expression, vocalizations, postures, and movements with those of another person and, consequently, to converge emotionally”
transmission doesn’t have to be intentional
Hsee, Hatfield, Carslon, and Chemtob
1990
Ps thought they would be interviewing another P
(confederate) in a learning session.
confederate described one of the happiest & saddest events in his life:
Hsee, Hatfield, Carslon, and Chemtob
1990
Happy = surprise birthday party his friends had
arranged for him. voice, facial expressions + gestures conveyed intense happiness
Hsee, Hatfield, Carslon, and Chemtob
1990
Sad = experience he had at his grandfather’s
funeral when he was six. His facial expressions,
tone, and gestures conveyed intense sadness.
Hsee, Hatfield, Carslon, and Chemtob
1990
DV1: Judges rated the Ps’ facial expressions of emotion as they watched the interview.
DV2: Ps reported how they were feeling when watching the confederate’s happy/sad interview
Hsee, Hatfield, Carslon, and Chemtob
1990
confederate’s facial expressions strongly influenced P’s feelings
pick up emotions of others
in groups - emotional synchrony can have important functions for us
Hsee, Hatfield, Carslon, and Chemtob
1990
filliative function: liking each other more
building up relationships
distancing function: keep groups away from each other
C. Functions of Group Emotions
1. Intragroup Relations
Affiliation: Bonding;
Sharpens group boundaries and group identity - when groups bond, we identify more with our group
C. Functions of Group Emotions
1. Intragroup Relations
informative function: Info about group environment/structure, function
helps us achieve our goals together
better group dynamics
C. Functions of Group Emotions
1. Intragroup Relations
Shared positive emotion => Cooperation & reduced conflict
Anger => collective action, resolving issues
more conflict
can lead to more affiliation
Functions of Group Emotions
2. Intergroup Relations
Shame & guilt on behalf of our groups
Group-based guilt correlated with empathy + motivation to make amends
Functions of Group Emotions
2. Intergroup Relations
Group-based shame associated with distancing the self
from shameful act
shame and guilt - feel like we have to reconcile situation
Functions of Group Emotions
2. Intergroup Relations
emotions on behalf of group - increase bonds with whoever we wronged
group guilt is less eliciting of action than sympathy
shame works in same way as indiv shame
Bizman, Yinon, and Krotman (2001)
Israelis were asked about their group.:
Actual: “Think about us as Israelis. In your opinion,
which attributes do Israelis actually possess?”
Bizman, Yinon, and Krotman (2001)
Ideal: “Think about the ideal Israeli, attributes you wish and hope the ideal Israeli would possess”
Bizman, Yinon, and Krotman (2001)
Ought: “Think about the ought Israeli. which attributes should Israelis possess, considering Israelis’ responsibilities and duties?
Bizman, Yinon, and Krotman (2001)
DV: Psychological Distress
Actual-Ideal discrepancies => feelings of dejection (sadness, disappointment, hopelessness…)
would feel shame or sadness - upsetting to think we’re not living to own standards
feel like ppl are gonna disapprove of you if you don’t live up
Bizman, Yinon, and Krotman (2001)
DV: Psychological Distress
Actual-Ought discrepancies => feelings of agitation
(tension, nervousness, apprehension…)
feel anxious, worried
Bizman, Yinon, and Krotman (2001)
DV: Psychological Distress
self processes occur in group behaviour
applying self conscious emotions at group level
Group-Based Emotions
Feeling an emotion on behalf of a group requires
awareness of eliciting stimulus + explicit sense of identification with the group
Group-Based Emotions
if we don’t care about group, we’re not gonna care about what the group cares about
Automatic emotional contagion does not require this
Group-Based Emotions
group based emotions can only be understood when we know what’s happening in the group
Intergroup Relations: Affiliation
Shared contempt for an out-group can bring an ingroup
together (9/11), makes our group feel stronger and more connected
contemptuous feeling toward another group leads to prosocial inner group affiliation
Intergroup Relations
= affiliation for own group
= social distancing from threatening group
Social distancing function => Prejudice
Intergroup Relations
more we feel diff, more we feel affiliation toward own group
ones most similar hate each other the most to feel unique
so much so they start to manufacture differences
II. Emotions and Prejudice Models
prejudice: attitudes/evaluations
tripartite model
cognition - beliefs, learn stereotypes, endorse it, then hate them because of stereotype
consensus for years
II. Emotions and Prejudice Models
behaviour - look at interactions and behaviour toward them
if you only fight with them - must hate them
affect - emotions, arousal level
=Attitudes/Evaluations
Esses, Haddock, and Zanna (1993)
Symbolic beliefs, not stereotypes => negative attitudes
asked about stereotypes, feelings toward natives, homos, british canadians
Esses, Haddock, and Zanna (1993)
emotional reactions toward group
please list stereotypes
symbolic beliefs: values, customs, traditions you have that they don’t have
Esses, Haddock, and Zanna (1993)
stereotypes didn’t predict anything
not guiding principle toward prejudice
if they have diff values and customs then we hate them
Esses, Haddock, and Zanna (1993)
Emotional reactions => positive attitudes
affect predicted positive attitudes
Smith’s (1993) prejudice-as-socialemotion
account
Prejudice comes from emotions triggered by appraisals
of intergroup situation
Smith’s (1993) prejudice-as-socialemotion
account
before: group label => cognitions (stereotype) => affect => judgements
now: appraisals as cognition instead of stereotype that lead to the affect
Smith’s (1993) prejudice-as-socialemotion
account
appraisals is not just content of stereotype, but we’re using that content to make appraisals
independent factors
Smith’s (1993) prejudice-as-socialemotion
account
Stereotypes => appraisals of out-group
Appraisals => distinct emotions & corresponding action
tendencies
Stereotype Content Model (SCM)
Fiske et al. (2002)
Stereotype content organized into 2 dimensions:
lead to diff affective space
competence & warmth
Stereotype Content Model
Status => competence
Competitiveness => warmth
Stereotype Content Model
warm not competent - pity - prosocial
cold + not competent - contempt - antisocial
Stereotype Content Model
cold + competent - malicious envy
warm + competent - admiring envy - wanting contact - groups we want to get into
Stereotype Content Model
warmth leads to approach/cold leads to avoid
competency leads to different emotion profiles
Smith’s Intergroup Emotions Theory (IET)
Self-categorization & appraisal theories
Tajfel’s social identity theory - maximize social & personal
self-esteem
want to be part of best group because it increases personal self-esteem
Smith’s Intergroup Emotions Theory (IET)
Social identities salient => perceive ourselves as group members, characterized by group’s attributes
thinking about group we’re a part of, changes our emotions
Smith’s Intergroup Emotions Theory (IET)
when we’re only member of group present, it becomes salient
emotions change depending whether we see ourselves as indiv or part of group
Smith’s Intergroup Emotions Theory (IET)
level of importance to self identity changes influence of groupieness on appraisals
Behaviours guided by group membership
Intergroup Emotions Theory
Appraisal theories: Self-involved in emotion-eliciting
situation to experience emotion
IET: When social identities salient, appraisal theories
of emotion apply at group level
Intergroup Emotions Theory
IET: prejudice
Appraisals => Specific emotion => Specific behaviours
Independent of stereotype content
Intergroup Emotions Theory
left country of origin - something happens back at home, just ‘cause you’re not there, doesn’t mean you don’t feel emotions toward it
appraisal of how it affects group that leads to the emotion
Intergroup Emotions Theory
Neuberg + Cottrell (2002)’s socio-functional approach:
1. Emotions help attain evolutionary survival & reproduction motives; interference = threat
social animals - we need groups to survive + reproduce
makes us attuned more to threats
Intergroup Emotions Theory
- Cooperative groups => achieve motives
Group threats => appraisals => emotions & action tendencies
Intergroup Emotions Theory
threats in particular to group leads to appraisals
both consider parts of self is social
both explain appraisals lead to emotions and action
Emotions and Prejudice: Appraisals
diff threats lead to diff emotions then diff actions with diff adaptive outcomes
obstacles to outcomes - anger -> aggression => adaptive outcome (removal of obstacle)
Intergroup Contact and Emotions
Intergroup contact frequently enhances prejudice
when pushing ppl together from diff group leads to more prejudice
Intergroup Contact and Emotions
physiological and cognitive disruptions (anxiety) when there’s intergroup contact
worried about being insensitive, group may dislike you interacting with them, don’t know what to expect
Intergroup Contact and Emotions
negative episodic integral affect, affective state experienced in intergroup situation
overall feeling of negative affect during the interaction
anxiety affects signals we give to other ppl
Intergroup Contact and Emotions
Shelton, West, & Trail (2010) – anxiety “leaked out”
roommates either same or diff ethnicity: do you care that you look prejudiced
pairs completed measures of anxiety + roommate’s anxiety for 15 days
among interracial pairs, concerns about prejudice increased
Intergroup Contact and Emotions
concerned about appearing prejudiced
as time passed, after 15 days, roommates could tell the other was really anxious - anxiety in interactions which led to less liking of each other
Intergroup Contact and Emotions
those that didn’t wanna appear prejudice are the ones that ended up disliked
can lead to aggressive behaviour or can overcompensate and look dishonest and leads to mistrust
Intergroup Contact and Emotions
Gray, Mendes, & Denny-Brown (2008) – in-group advantage in detecting intergroup anxiety
white/black Ps to conduct stressful activity in front of other ppl either in front of same race or other race
Intergroup Contact and Emotions
taped: doesn’t show situation - either same race or diff race watched
more anxious when diff race watching
ppl of same race can tell Ps were anxious
they looked anxious and were actually anxious
Intergroup Contact and Emotions
Mood-as-information process? - misattribution of anxiety
not taking responsibility leads to more dislike
Experiencing positive episodic integral affect
-direct conditioning
-inclusive categorization
Intergroup Contact and Emotions
have more positive experiences
positive mood - more broad representation of things/people
Intergroup Contact and Emotions
change groups outline to be more inclusive - my group is now humans or students
not everyone believes this
III. Target of Prejudice
is it always negative? what leads to negative?
“Deserved” Prejudice (Major et al.)
“Deserved” prejudice/discrimination => Self-directed emotions (sadness, shame)
if we think we deserve it, it feels a lot worse
weight - believe it’s under our own control
“Deserved” Prejudice (Major et al.)
Others responsible=> Other-directed emotions (anger, resentment)
not deserved - more hostility
“Deserved” Prejudice (Major et al.)
Overweight + normal weight female Ps
“Development of dating relationships” study in pairs
Background info form included weight/height
Crocker, Cornwell, and Major (1993)
Social feedback (/5) from male partner: Like? Movies? Dinner? Dating relationship?
IV: positive (5, 5, 4.5, 4)/negative (3, 3, 2, 1)
DVs: Causal attributions for feedback & mood
Crocker, Cornwell, and Major (1993)
negative feedback for overweight
W saying he rejected me because of my weight
not blaming him saying he’s a terrible person
not because of personality
Crocker, Cornwell, and Major (1993)
he must be concerned with appearance
going straight to prejudice and feel like it’s self deserved => shame and sadness
Crocker, Cornwell, and Major (1993)
makes them feel terrible about themselves
suffering - negative self-emotions
with positive feedback
don’t see any of differences between overweight + normal
Crocker, Cornwell, and Major (1993)
does seeing them as prejudiced buffer negative self-emotions?
denied admission to course + friend says prof was
Major, Kaiser, and McCoy (2003)
a) Prejudice - sexist (prejudice condition - only other sex allowed)
b) Personal rejection - “thought they were stupid” - everyone else got in)
Major, Kaiser, and McCoy (2003)
c) Everyone rejected - “real jerk” - no one was allowed
exclusively external cause
DVs: attribution + emotional experience
not mutually exclusive - can have more than one attribution
Major, Kaiser, and McCoy (2003)
discrimination: sexist - prejudiced condition*
self-blame: my fault, deserved, ownership - personal, less prejudice
Major, Kaiser, and McCoy (2003)
internality: who i am, because of something about me, not necessarily deserving - personal highest bar, everyone rejected had lowest
Major, Kaiser, and McCoy (2003)
externality: his personality - prejudice had highest level, think he’s prejudiced
*when not deserved you think it’s about the person
personal rejection feels the most dejected
Major, Kaiser, and McCoy (2003)
undeserved rejection: not sad about it more hostility
people buffer feelings when they think it’s about other person
Major, Kaiser, and McCoy (2003)
sad when someone rejects you because of who you are
anxiety is from fear of prejudice
Schmitt, Branscombe, and Postmes
(2003): Pervasiveness
Female Ps received negative feedback about mock
interview performance
¾ - 2 discrimination conditions (biased against women)
Schmitt, Branscombe, and Postmes
(2003): Pervasiveness
Rare discrimination – other 19 evaluators not biased
Pervasive discrimination – all 20 evaluators biased against
women
Schmitt, Branscombe, and Postmes
(2003): Pervasiveness
how pervasive we think prejudice it
is it one person or everyone + we’ll encounter it over and over again
Schmitt, Branscombe, and Postmes
(2003) Results
¾ Evaluator’s disposition – external, not discrimination
disposition: all were rejected
Schmitt, Branscombe, and Postmes
(2003) Results
rare: not making you feel sad
group based self esteem is fine
Schmitt, Branscombe, and Postmes
(2003) Results
only happening in pervasive sexism - leads to upset feelings, feeling dejected
opinion on group is going down
Schmitt, Branscombe, and Postmes
(2003) Results
we can buffer hit on emotional well being unless opinions of prejudice are pervasive or deserved
