Psych - Social psychology Flashcards
Attribution Theory
A set of theories that describe how people explain the causes of behavior
Heider (1958) general ideas
We are all intuitive scientists trying to come up with explanations of other people’s behavior
Types of Attributions (Explanations)
- I walk into classroom on 1st day of class and trip on the cord for the projector.
Why did I trip?
- Personal (dispositional) attribution: Jim is a clumsy person, drops stuff, and trips all the time
- Situational attribution: cord was in a bad spot, could have happened
Personal or Situational (Film)? Someone comes out of the movie theater and raves about the film
Personal (Dispositional) Attribution: He likes everything
Situational (stimulus) attribution: Great film!
Kelley’s Attribution Theory
- For behaviors that are consistent, people make personal attributions when consensus and distinctiveness are low
- People will make stimulus (situational) attributions when consensus and distinctiveness are high
Fundamental Attribution Error
When explaining the behavior of other people. We overestimate the role of personal (or dispositional) factors and underestimate role of situational factors.
Are we drive by personal factors or situational factors?
We act as if other people are driven by personal factors but we are driven more by situational factors.
Pro and Anti-Castro Speeches
First demonstration of FAE
- Subjects read a speech supposedly written by students, either in favor of or against Fidel Castro
- Half subjects were told that the student was assigned the position (pro or con).
- Half were told that students freely choose the viewpoint
- Subjects then rated student’s author’s attitude towards Castro
Friendly Woman (Napolitan and Goethals)
- College students talked one at a time with a young woman who acted either aloof and critical, or warm and friendly
- Beforehand they told half the subjects that the woman’s behavior was spontaneous.
- Told the other half that she was instructed to act in a certain way
- Then subjects were asked about the woman’s personality
- Information that she was instructed to act that way had no effect
Quiz Show Game
- A simulated quiz show gave questioners an advantage over contestants
- Observers had to rate how much general knowledge the questioners and the contestants had
Who do we have this bias (Fundamental attribution error)?
Gilbert and Malone
- Attributions are a two stage process
- Make quick reflex-like initial attribution (personal)
- Then we update attribution based on situational factors
What could also be contribution to Fundamental Attribution Error?
- When we explain our own behavior, we can draw on memories of MANY different situations.
- We know that we have behaved differently in different situations
- Maybe I tripped on cord today, but I also know that I was a star athlete in high school
- Sam person in many different situations
- This knowledge allows me to give more weight to the situation and less to invariant personal trait (clumsiness).
What is self-serving bias?
We have self-serving bias to maintain our self-esteem. Better for me to blame tripping on the cord being in a bad place, than blame it on myself
Above Average Effect
- The College Board asked one million high school students to rate themselves on various abilities/traits
- Leadership ability: 70% above average, only 2% below
- Ability to “get along with others”: 100% said above average. 60% said they were top 10%
- Athletic Ability: 60% above average, only 6% below
- University professors: 94% said they were better at their job than their colleagues
Just World Hypothesis
Belief that the world is basically a just place and therefore people get what they deserve. Good things happen to good people. Bad things happen to someone, they must have done something to cause it
Experiment on JWH
- Study on “perception of emotional cues”
- Select a participant at random (confederate)
- confederate gets electric shock for wrong answer
- other subjects said that they looked down on the confederate and blame her for her own predicament
Monkey see, Monkey do? The chameleon effect
- participants worked with a ‘partner’ who was really one of the experimenters
- ‘partner’ rubbed face, shook foot, etc.
- hidden cameras recorded behavior
- participants mimicked their partner without realizing it
Autokinetic Effect
The illusion that a stationary spot of light is moving when viewed in a darkened room. Have to estimate how much the light moves - no reference points available
Asch Paradigm
Asked which line is most like the standard line. Results found that subjects conformed 37% of the time
What were the Asch paradigm subjects influenced by?
- size of group
- ambiguity of judgment
- status of group members
- presence of other dissenters
- individual and cultural differences
Group size and conformity
- Conformity increases with group size up to about 4-7 people
- adding additional persons has little effect
- one dissenter can reduce conformity by up to 80 percent
Conformity in the Sherif and Asch Paradigms: What happens when retested without group?
Sherif: Still answer using group norms
Asch: Now answer based on own judgment
Private acceptance vs. public compliance
Private conformity (Sherif)
Both behavior and opinions change
Public conformity (Asch)
- Temporary and superficial change
- Outward compliance, inward maintenance of previous beliefs
Sherif Paradigm: Private acceptance
Social comparison theory
We want to know if our opinions are correct and how good our abilities are. To the extent that physical reality is ambiguous, we are dependent upon “social reality”
Normative Power
The power that arises because the individual fears punishment from group. Always present in social situations. Decreases with presence of other dissenters.
Basics of Milgram’s Shock Study
- Three people: experimenter and two subjects
- Draw lots to see who is “learner” and who is the “teacher”
- Teacher punishes “learner” with shocks
- Shocks get more intense
What Effects Compliance?
- Authority of experimenter: more compliance at Yale then at less prestigious location
- If “learner” is in another room, more compliance. If you can see victim less compliance
- Force hand onto shock plate, less compliance
- Experimenter not in room compliance fell
- If “teacher” could choose shocks never picked over 45 volts
Milgram facts
- Punishers did not seem to show long term negative effects of their experience
- Obedience rates have no changed in 40 years after study (Blass, 1999)
- Men and women show equal rates of obedience in Milgram-type studies
Stanford Prison Experiment
- 21 students were randomly assigned to be either prisoners or prison guards
- Neither group received any specific training
- Created mock prison-like environment
- Videotape, questionnaires, self-report scales, interviews
Foot-in-the-door phenomenon (milgram shock study)
Tendency for people who have first agreed to a small request to comply later with a larger request
Takeaways from Stanford Prison Experiment
- Social setting and social roles dictate behavior
- Power of situation/environment on behavior
What did the Milgram shock experiment demonstrate?
The strength of social influence on behavior and obedience to authority.