Psychology 111- Chapter 14 Flashcards
Social Comparison Theory
a lot of how we interact socially is how we compare ourselves to others (usually similar others)
upward comparison
comparing ourselves to someone doing better than us-> negative emotionality
downward comparison
comparing ourselves to someone doing worse than us-> positive emotionality
enlightenment effect
where we change our behavior after learning about a physiological concept
halo effect
when someone has one good quality, we assume they have many other good qualities
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
because we think we will act a certain way, that is how we act
- usually in more negative ways (ex: if we think we can’t complete something, we create barriers for that)
affective component
how does it make you feel
behavioral component
not necessarily actual behavior, but how you want to respond (how you want to respond vs. how you actually respond)
cognitive component
what you think about it
strength
how strong is your attitude toward the item (weak attitudes are more flexible/changeable)
accessibility
how accessible/available the attitude is
ambivalence
two different attitudes toward an item (negative and positive)
source
the person trying to convince you/get you to change
receiver
person being persuaded/looking to see attitude change in
message
what is being said/done to create the attitude change
channel
delivery component of message/how the message is getting to the receiver
cognitive dissonance
have 2 opinions in your head or have opinion and behavior that are at odds (makes us uncomfortable so we change something)
self-perception theory
we don’t actually have a good grasp on what our attitudes are and build them by looking at our behaviors
impression management theory
our behaviors, attitudes, and presentation are strategic, so others think of you in the way you want them to think of you
central route
- part of elaboration likelihood model
= meaning behind your message, harder but creates more lasting change
peripheral route
- part of elaboration likelihood model
= trying to cause attitude change by distracting you from the meaning of the message - easier, but more temporary change
Foot in the Door
starting small and getting bigger and bigger (starts with small request then builds on it until they get to the attitude they want to change)
Door in the face
- starts big and goes smaller to the attitude they want to change
- expect a no from first question, follow up with more reasonable question we are more likely to say yes to
attribution
how we explain an event or behavior
stable explanation
explanation is not likely to change
unstable explanation
explanation is likely to change/the circumstances leading to an event are likely to change
internal attribution
an aspect of the person is causing the behavior/event
external attribution
because of situation