Social pschology Researches Flashcards
Darley & Latané (1968)1
◦This study explored bystander non-intervention in staged emergencies1 ….
◦The findings presented show the percentage of people who helped varied significantly depending on the number of other bystanders present1 .
◦When there was one bystander (just the participant), 85% helped1 .
◦With two bystanders, the percentage who helped dropped to 62%1 .
◦In the presence of six bystanders, only 31% helped1 .
◦This suggests that the presence of other people might inhibit individuals from intervening in emergencies1 .
*Darley & Batson (1973)2
◦This study examined the influence of both person-related and situation-related variables on helping behavior2 .Regarding a situation-related variable (level of hurry), the findings show a clear pattern in the percentage of people who helped2 .
◦In the Low Hurry condition, 63% helped2 .
◦In the Medium Hurry condition, 45% helped2 .
◦In the High Hurry condition, only 10% helped2 .
◦This suggests that being in a hurry significantly reduced the likelihood of helping2 .
◦For a person-related variable, the sources present correlation coefficients (r) of -.03, -.03, and .062 , which typically indicate a very weak or non-existent linear relationship between that variable and helping behavior2 .
*Latané & Darley (1969)1
◦This study is mentioned in the sources alongside Darley & Latané (1968)1 , likely continuing the exploration of bystander behavior, but no specific findings or data points from this particular study are presented in the provided excerpts.
*Johnson & Goldstein (2003)3
◦This study is presented in the context of instituting behavioral change, specifically related to organ donation rates in different countries3 ….
◦The study highlights the role of “channel factors”3 .
◦A key finding or conclusion drawn is that organ donation is easier or requires less effort in countries with higher donation rates3 . This suggests that the ease or difficulty of the process (a situational or channel factor) is a significant predictor of donation rates3 .
◦This contrasts with the idea that low donation rates are primarily due to people’s lack of support for organ donation3 .
◦The sources show percentages that likely represent organ donation rates in different countries4 , with some being very low (e.g., 4.25%, 12%, 17.17%, 27.5%) and others being very high (e.g., 85.9%, 98%, 99.5%, 99.64%, 99.91%, 99.97%, 99.98%)4 .
*Hansen, Kimble, & Biers (2001)5 …
◦This study relates to causal attribution, which is the tendency to infer enduring dispositions about a person from behaviors that might be fully explained by the situation3 …. It is also described as “Reading more than warranted from random acts”6 .
◦The sources describe an experiment design where participants were randomly assigned by a coin toss to act either friendly or unfriendly during a brief interaction5 .
◦While the sources describe the experimental setup designed to manipulate behavior through situational assignment (acting friendly or unfriendly)5 , they do not present specific numerical findings from this study showing the extent to which participants or observers made dispositional attributions based on the assigned behavior. The study is used to illustrate the concept of misattribution where situational factors (the assigned role) might be overlooked in favor of dispositional explanations (e.g., thinking someone is unfriendly because they were assigned to act that way)
Hansen, Kimble, & Biers (2001)1 .
A concept described as “The tendency to draw inferences about a person’s unique and enduring dispositions from behaviors that can be entirely explained by the situations in which they occur”1 . This is also referred to as “Reading more than warranted from random acts”1 .
Zajonc (1965) and Zajonc et al. (1969)
Described as “Unraveling one of the earliest mysteries in social psychology”2 . It explores the question: “What role does the presence of others play in our performance? Do we do better alone or when we’re around other people?”1 .
- Children take longer to solve a finger maze (while blindfolded) when at a table with other children than when alone2 .
▪
Data from a Runway Maze study comparing running time (in seconds) when participants were Alone versus with an Audience3 . The presented data points as findings are 52.84 seconds for the Alone condition and 172.06 seconds for the Audience condition3 . There are also data points of 36.48 and 222.34 shown on the graph, presumably representing other conditions or trials within the study, though not explicitly labeled as averages for the Alone and Audience conditions3 .
▪Mention of tasks like “Moving On Up | Number of cups in 60 seconds” and “The Nutstacker | Maximum number stacked over the 60 second period”2 , which appear to be examples of performance tasks potentially used in studies related to social facilitation.
*
“Everyone’s a free-rider”3 :
This phenomenon explores “How does the productivity of a group change as group size increases? Do people try less hard when they contribute to larger groups?”3 .
◦
It is also described as “When the presence of others creates inefficiencies in group effort and output”2 .
A visual representation shows Relative Effort/Productivity decreasing as Group Size increases from 1 to 83 …. The graph indicates that individual relative effort/productivity is highest when the group size is 1 and declines significantly as the group size grows3 …. While not explicitly named “Social Loafing” in the text, this description and graphical representation are consistent with that well-known social psychology phenomenon.
Latane et al. (1979)
This research is mentioned in the context of disentangling “two possibilities” or “two types of social influence”. It uses the analogy of “claquers” (people hired to applaud) who can “switch on an audience” by prompting others to recognize something as “virtuosic”. The idea is that the audience does not trust itself but trusts someone else’s aggressive and intensive applause, leading them to believe “something extraordinary is going on”.
Sherif (1931)
his study is listed under the section “Others as information”. A chart related to this study displays “Inches of Perceived Movement” across pre-group and multiple group sessions for participants A, B, and C. This suggests findings related to how individuals’ perceptions might change or converge when interacting in a group setting
Asch (1956)
This study is discussed under the section “Others as judges”. The core question associated with this research is whether people will conform to a group judgment even when the judgment is unambiguous and the group is not providing useful information
Milgram (Follow-up experiments in the 1960s and 1970s)
hese experiments are presented under the topic of “Obedience”. Findings from these follow-ups are illustrated in a bar chart showing obedience rates (specifically the percentage of participants delivering the maximum shock) under various conditions, including when the experiment was conducted off-campus, when the learner was in the same room, when the teacher had to hold the learner’s hand to the shock plate, and when the experimenter communicated by phone. The chart indicates how different situational factors influenced the rate of obedience, with percentages shown for each condition (e.g., 48% for off-campus, 40% for learner in same room, 20% for hand-to-plate and experimenter by phone
Borkenau & Liebler (1993
Other college students are better able to predict the longevity of students’ romantic relationships than the students themselves are.
◦
Self-ratings of surgical skill did not predict performance on a surgical exam.
◦
However, ratings by peers did successfully predict objective metrics of performance
Dunning (2006)
his study is mentioned in the context of “Barriers to Self and Social Insight” and the “Perils of Self-Insight,” specifically regarding the extent to which we possess accurate self-insight into our own abilities relative to others. While Dunning’s work is broadly associated with meta-cognitive deficits driving illusory superiority (also known as the Dunning-Kruger effect, which is referenced as “The DKE, revisited”), the specific finding from the 2006 study is not detailed in these excerpts.
Epley et al. (2004)
This study provides evidence for residual egocentrism in adults. This relates to the idea that egocentrism, while thought to diminish, may not entirely go away in adulthood
Gilovich et al. (1998) and Gilovich, Savitsky & Medvec (1998)
hese studies are associated with the Illusion of transparency. This concept relates to people’s inferences about the readability of internal states
This study is mentioned in conjunction with the concept of the “Illusion of transparency”. The sources include a quote about a mistaken identification during the Amadou Diallo incident, where a wallet was mistaken for a gun. This appears to be used as an illustration related to the study’s context, potentially suggesting how internal states (like perception or assumptions) might be misread or how people might believe their internal states are more apparent than they are.
Bodenhausen (1990):
This study explored “When and why stereotyping ought to occur”. The sources include a chart indicating that stereotyping ratings differed based on whether individuals were “Morning People” or “Evening People” and the time of day. Specifically, “Evening People” showed higher stereotyping ratings in the morning, and “Morning People” showed higher ratings in the evening. This suggests that stereotyping might be more likely when individuals are not performing at their peak time of day.
Macrae et al. (1994):
Also discussed under “When and why stereotyping ought to occur,” this study involved providing participants with information (like “Jakarta is located on the northwest coast of the island of Java” or traits like “Creative”, “Temperamental”, “Unconventional”). A chart shows the number of items recalled, comparing conditions where a stereotype was provided versus when no stereotype was provided. The findings indicate that providing a stereotype significantly increased the number of trait-relevant items recalled compared to not providing a stereotype. Recall of other information, such as Indonesian economics and geography, appeared to be lower, particularly when a stereotype was provided. This suggests that stereotypes can influence memory and information processing, making stereotype-consistent information more accessible or memorable.
Tajfel
His work is mentioned in the context of “arbitrarily dividing the world into ‘us’ and ‘them’”. This research explores the consequences of categorizing people into ingroups and outgroups and the motivations behind ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation
Fein & Spencer (1997):
This study is presented under the theme of stereotyping and prejudice as a motivated phenomenon, following the discussion of Tajfel’s work. A chart shows ratings of a candidate’s personality. The results indicate that when participants received negative feedback, they gave significantly lower personality ratings to a Jewish Candidate compared to a Non-Jewish Candidate. However, when participants received positive feedback, the ratings were similar for both candidates. This suggests that negative self-relevant feedback can motivate individuals to derogate members of an outgroup.
