Social psychology

Question 1

Describe Norman Triplett’s Observation - Impact of the presence of others on behaviour

Answer 1

Observation:
Noticed that cyclists rode faster when they raced against each other than when they raced around the clock.

He hypothesised = the presence of others boosts performance.
- Later tested this on adolescents who had to wind in a reel.
- he found that their performance was better when they were reeling it in when another person was present, than if they were alone.

Outcome:
- boost in performance in the presence of others = social facilitation (not always the case…)
- performed worse in the presence of others = social inhibition

Question 2

Describe the diagram on relationship between arousal and performance

Answer 2

Yerks & Dodson:

• people generally work best = moderate level of arousal
• not sufficiently aroused / over-aroused = performance decreases
• on a graph = upside down U shape

The optimal level of arousal = depends on the type of task we undertake
* SIMPLE/WELL-LEARNED task > perform better with relatively HIGH level of arousal
* DIFFICULT/NEW task > perform better at LOWER level of arousal

Question 3

Describe the case of Kitty Genovese

Answer 3

• Kitty Genovese was murdered outside her apartment in New York, 1964.
• 37 of her neighbours watched as she was brutally attacked and killed
• It took her 30 minutes to die, and no-one came to her assistance
• No one phoned the police
• 2 psychologists, Latane & Darley, began studying this phenomenon.

Question 4

Describe Darley & Latane’s study

Answer 4

Aim
- To examine the diffusion of responsibility as an explanation of the failure to help in the presence of others

Procedure:
- 72 uni students (59 female, 13 male).
- participants were alone, placed in separate rooms but were able to communicate with each other via an intercom (can hear but not see each other)
- the experimenter then staged a simulated epileptic fit by playing a tape recording.
- the participants were led to believe that the person having a fit was in the next room.

3 experimental conditions were tested:
1. each participant were led to believe that they were the only one whose intercom was tuned in during the seizure
2. participants were led to believe that 2 other participants were tuned into (3 person group)
3. each participant was led to believe that 5 others were tuned in (6 person group

Question 5

Outline Darley & Latane’s Findings

Answer 5

1. The percentage of participants who helped depended on the number of students they thought were in the discussion group

• All the participant’s who thought they were alone with the epileptic person went to help - 85% went in the first 80 seconds
• Only 62% of participants who thought they were in a group with 6 other people went for help, with only 31% going quickly

(shows the bystander effect)

Question 6

Define the Bystander Effect

Answer 6

= the more people there are in an emergency, the less likely it is that each person will try to help

• Darley and Latane believes this is due to the diffusion of responsibility
  = if a person is alone, he or she accepts responsibility, but if several people are present, each assumes that the other will do something so he or she doesn’t need to take responsibility

Question 7

Define social influence

Answer 7

= when we change our behaviour in response to other people

Question 8

Describe Platow’s 2005 study on social influence

Answer 8

Study:
- university students listened to a tape of jokes
- half of the students heard ‘canned’ laughter when the joke was told, and the other half heard jokes without the ‘canned’ laughter
- in addition, half of EACH group was told that the tapes had been recorded at a show attended by students from their university , and the other half were told that the tape was recorded at a show attended by a political group (unimportant to the students)

Findings:
- students who heard the jokes believing that the recording was at the show attended by other university students rated the jokes as funnier than the other groups
- = the influence of the group is stronger if we identify with the group.

Question 9

What is a ‘peer’?

Answer 9

• extremely important to us and can influence us greatly
• peer groups have their own social norms, e.g. dress code, music taste, attitudes towards sex and alcohol, bullying and their language/expressions not understood by others outside the group
• a peer and a friend are different - a student at a school may have many peers, but a few friends (year 12 cohort vs close friendship group)

Question 10

Describe the impact of peer/peer groups

Answer 10

• the influence of peer groups start to increase around middle childhood until middle adolescents and then starts to decrease when the influence of our close on adolescent’s behaviour increases.

• social influence from peers is often given the negative label peer pressure (the pressure from the group on the individuals to think, feel or behave in certain ways, whether they want to or not)

• many people feel that peers are trying to exert pressure on the opposite direction to parents - research actually shows that parents and peers often agree on more important issues, such as decisions on education and careers and in ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ judgements. In more superficial areas, like music and clothing taste, they may disagree

• not all people react the same way to peer pressure - people who are ‘fringe’ members of the group are not sure of their social standing in the group and are more likely to be influenced by peer pressure than members who have higher social standing. They try to gain favour with the other members of the group acting in the way they think the group would approve

Question 11

Define group polarisation

Answer 11

= when individuals are in groups with others who hold similar attitudes/beliefs, discussion within groups tend to strengthen their opinions of the members of that group.

• Group polarisation can help us understand the processes that can lead to actions, such as those of suicide bombers and young people joining ISIS

Question 12

Describe what Meyers and Bishops said about group polarisation

Answer 12

when students who were low in racial prejudice talked together about racial issues, their attitudes became more accepting. However, when highly prejudiced students talked about the same issues, they became even more prejudiced.

Question 13

Describe what McCauley and Meyers said about terrorists

Answer 13

Terrorists = members of the groups whose beliefs become stronger and stronger and more firmly entrenched as a result of discussion with like-minded people

• a terrorist mentality does not come out of thin air, rather it arises when people with a shared grievance get together and talk in a group where there are no moderate influences

Question 14

Outline the 3 processes of polarisation

Answer 14

1. Persuasion - people change their mind as a result of the rational arguments presented by others
2. Comparison - people change their mind to conform with group norms, especially when those norms are socially desirable
3. Differentiation - a variation on comparison where people change their mind to fit in with their view of the sort of decisions their group should make

• these are all slightly different mechanisms, each probably operate independently, for producing the same effect: decisions are pushed further towards the extreme

Question 15

Define conformity

Answer 15

= when we change our behaviour in response to group pressure (typically in a group that holds different perspectives to us)

Question 16

Describe Asch’s experiment

Answer 16

Aim:
- to investigate the factors that results in group pressure to conform

Procedure:
- the participant would sit in a room with 6 other people and an experimenter
- the other ‘participants’ were confederates (deception)
- each participant was told the experiment was for ‘visual judgement’ (deception)
- the experimenter would show two cards to the confederates and participant:
1. had a vertical line
2. had 3 vertical lines
- the participants and confederates were asked to select the line from the second card that matched the length of the line in the first card
- in some trials, the incorrect lines were noticeably different (obvious which was right)
- the confederates answered incorrectly for the majority of the trials
- the participant had to decide between giving the same answers as the confederates (conforming) or to stand out

Findings:
- 75% conformed at least once during the trials
- 33% conformed in half or more of the trials
- 24% did not conform at all
- all reported experiencing some degree of self-doubt
- they didn’t want to spoil the experimenter’s results, create conflict or disharmony
- some of the participants who gave the correct response even apologised for their answer
- the participants who didn’t conform said they felt ‘crazy’ and like a ‘misfit’

Question 17

Explain why we feel the need to conform?

Answer 17

Normative social influence = when we conform to group standards in order to be a part of and accepted by a group - especially friendship groups

• breaking these social norms can lead to disapproval or exclusion from the group

Question 18

breaking social norms vid1

Question 19

breaking social norms vid 2

Question 20

Reasons why we conform

Answer 20

1. Society requires that some conformity exists so that norms and standards can be established and agreed upon; otherwise behaviour could be unpredictable
2. Children are socialised in to group norms and expected behaviours in different situations - teachers and parents are supposed to teach children what is expected
3. Consequently, conformity means that people will ASSUME the behaviour of others in any particular social group without explicitly being told how to behave or act
4. INFORMATIONAL SOCIAL INFLUENCE = when we conform because we are in strange situations with people we don’t know or when situations are new to us.

Question 21

Factors that influence why we conform

Answer 21

1. Group size
   = Conformity increases with the size of the group – up to a group of 4.
   - A group size of 15 actually produced a lower conformity than did a group size of 3 according to Asch.
2. Degree of unanimity
   = When others in a group are completely unanimous - ie agree completely, it is difficult to stand out.
   - But it takes only ONE individual to disagree, and the amount of conformity is reduced - known as the ally effect
3. Informational influence
   = When conformity results from a need for direction on how to respond to a situation because you are in unfamiliar territory –here you will accept others views when you are uncertain what to do
4. Normative influence
   = When our response in a group situation is guided by one or more social norms so that we can be accepted by others because our concern is that we will be rejected.
5. Culture
   = The highest levels of conformity are found in COLLECTIVIST cultures, and lower levels of conformity are found in INDIVIDUALISTIC cultures, because achieving personal goals is valued in individualistic cultures, and achieving group goals is highly valued in collectivist cultures
6. Deindivuation
   = where people participate in anti-social behaviour that they would not normally participate in
7. Social loafing
   = Tendency for the individual to make less of an effort when in a group activity than when working alone

Question 22

Define obedience

Answer 22

= occurs when we follow the commands of someone with authority, or the rules or laws of our society.

Question 23

Explain Milgram’s study - obedience

Answer 23

Aim:
- To find out whether individuals would obey an authority figure who was instructing them to inflict pain on another person.

Procedure:
- 40 male research participants between 20 and 50
- participants told that their study was on the ‘effects of punishment on learning’ (deception)
- the experimenter wore a white laboratory coat
- the participants were told that another participant (a ‘confederate’) had to draw a slip of paper, to determine who the ‘teacher’ and the ‘learner’ was. It was rigged.
- the learner is taken into another room and strapped to an electric shock machine (which the teacher/participant witnesses)
- the teacher is taken into the next room and given instructions: teach the learner to remember pairs of words.
- each time the learner makes a mistake, the teacher gives a brief electric shock which increases intensity (30 levers, 15-volt intervals, 15 - 450 volts)
- first error = 15 volts, increase to higher voltage each mistake
- the learner/confederate deliberately makes mistakes. By the 5th shock, they start to grunt out in pain. This continues until the learner is crying out in ‘agonising pain’, asking to be let out and complaining of a heart condition.
- if the participant questions the perceived authority figure (lab coat), they receive a standard answer that they must continue and have no other choice.
- afterwards, the participants were debriefed and informed that the confederates were not harmed.

Findings:
- none stopped administering the shocks before 300 volts
- 26 participants continued until the maximum 450 volts
- 5 participants refused to continue after 300 volts, when the learner began kicking the walls

Question 24

Outline the factors that affect obedience

Answer 24

1. social proximity
   = the physical distance between people or closeness of the relationship
   * the closer the ‘learner’ (victim) was to the ‘teacher’ (participant), the more likely that participant was to refuse administering the shock
   * easier to obey an order to do something horrific when the victim is distant, and not nearby or visible
   E.G. easier to drop a bomb than shooting someone
2. Legitimacy of authority figures
   = an individual is more likely to be obedient when the authority figure is perceived as legitimate and having power.
   * Milgram found that when an ‘ordinary person’ (without authority) gave orders, obedience dropped 20% compared to 60% when they had perceived authority.
3. Lack of personal responsibility
   * Milgram assured the teachers that they were not responsible for the learner - removing any responsibility for what happens, ‘acting on orders’
4. Commitment to successful achievement in the experiment (not as important)

Question 25

Describe the effects of power and status

Answer 25

Status and power within a group are often linked to the role each individual has in the group.

Role = the behaviour adopted by an individual, or assigned to them, that INFLUENCES the way in which they function or act in different situations and life in general.
- their role carries with it EXPECTATIONS of how to behave in different situations.

Generally, individuals tend to use their status and power to benefit the group. However, some misuse/abuse their power. E.g. Zimbardo’s experiment.

Question 26

Describe Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment

Answer 26

One of the most significant demonstrations of the effects of power and status within a group.

Aim:
- To find out the psychological effects of being either a prison guard or a prisoner.

Procedure:
- Set up a simulated prison environment (cells, security doors, no windows).
- 70 participants replied to the ad (selection procedure) and took a psychological tests.
- 24 of these participants who were considered ‘normal, average and healthy’ were selected.
- Equal numbers of participants were randomly allocated to be either condition - a mock guard (with considerable power and status within the group) or mock prisoner (minimal power, little or no status). Achieved through a coin toss.
- Made realistic for the mock prisoners (arrested at home by real police, taken to police station, fingerprinted, charged of a crime, searched while naked, placed in a cell with 2 other prisoners).
- The prisoners had to ask permission from the guards for routinely activities (using the toilet, smoking, writing letters etc.) Could only refer to themselves and others by their prison numbers, and to the guards as ‘Mr Correctional Officer’.
- The guards were given uniforms, clubs, whistles and reflective sunglasses to conceal their identities and emotions.
- Guards were allowed considerable freedom in developing rules to keep the prisoners under control.

Findings:
- took the guards only a day to be dominating, powerful and coercive.
- the prisoenrs became increasingly traumatised, passive and dehumanised.
- 4 prisoners were released during the first 4 days due to reactions such as rage, hysterical crying, severe anxiety and depression.
- Each day the guards abused their power further (more frequent demands, insults)
- although the experiment was meant for 2 weeks, it was terminated after 6 days due to it being out of control.
- the guards (who were becoming brutal and vicious towards the submissive, withdrawn and bitter prisoners) were reluctant to give up their power.

Question 27

Define social psychology

Answer 27

Social psychology = the scientific study of the nature and causes of individual behavior in social situations.
- Social psychologists describe and explain how people think, feel and behave in the company of, and in interaction with, others.
- Social psychologists also investigate how thoughts, feelings and behaviors are influenced by others.

Question 28

Describe Attribution Theory - Heider

Answer 28

A major development to explain how people INFER the reasons behind other people’s the behaviour.

• Internal/dispositional attribution = when we infer something about the person (their attitude, personality, belief) is responsible for their behaviour.
  E.g. driving badly because they are reckless
• External/situational attribution = when we infer that some external cause (peer pressure, threats, circumstance) is responsible for their behaviour
  E.g. driving badly because of labour

Question 29

Which attribution are we typically bias towards

Answer 29

Heider said we favour the dispositional attribution (take an individual’s behaviour at face value without properly considering the surrounding circumstances)

= Fundamental Attribution Error/Bias

Jones and Harris provided strong support for this error/bias in a series of experiments

Question 30

Describe Jones and Harris’ experiment for fundamental attribution error

Answer 30

Castro Debate: Jones and Harris

• students read an opening statement in a college debate on ‘Castro’s Cuba is a legitimate member of the family of nations’
• the speeches either supported or agued this statement
• students were told that each debator was assigned a sider (for or against) - it was not their personal choice or belief
• regardless, the students still inferred that the debater held an attitude towards Castro that was similar to what they were debating

= DISPOSITIONAL attribution > SITUATIONAL attribution

Question 31

Explain Crick and Dodge findings

Answer 31

Crick and Dodge looked at attributions when studying aggressive behaviour.

(reactive aggression = an angry response to frustration or provocation)
(proactive aggression = a deliberate attempt to get a desired goal)

= found that children showing reactive aggression are likely to show ATTRIBUTION BIAS and interpret situations as hostile when no hostility is intended

E.G. two children run into each other accidentally. Child 2, based on previous experiences, has developed a hostile attribution bias, so he thinks that child 1 purposefully ran into him and that he is a mean person. We might expect child 2 to react with hostility, like hitting child 1.

Question 32

Define self-serving bias

Answer 32

= when we distort the facts and make situational attributions to maintain our self-esteem

• we make attributions about others and OURSELVES.

E.G.
Getting a bad grade on an assessment because “i didn’t study as hard” (dispositional) or because “the teacher was mean and marked me unfairly” (situational). Even if they knew they didn’t study as hard, they succumb to self-serving bias and blame the teacher, to protect our self-esteem.

Question 33

Kelly’s theory of casual attribution

Answer 33

• ASK TEACHER.

Question 34

Describe Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Answer 34

Festinger looked at the behaviour between COGNITIONS (beliefs and attitudes) and BEHAVIOUR

Cognitive dissonance = when people experience discomfort or psychological tension when they hold two beliefs that are in conflict or when they behave in ways that are inconsistent with their beliefs

• people attempt to reduce this dissonance either by changing belief or attitude or by changing the behaviour, or by adding a belief/thought.

Question 35

How do we reduce cognitive dissonance

Answer 35

1. altering the importance/value of the conflicting belief
2. emphasise a new belief that supports your behaviour
3. changing your behaviour all together

Question 36

Example of cognitive dissonance

Answer 36

Someone is stealing office equipment from their work.

Belief = stealing is immoral and illegal, and i am an honest person
Behaviour = steals office supplies

Ways of reducing dissonance:
1. altering the value/importance of the conflicting belief - “stealing isn’t really that bad”
2. emphasising a new belief which supports your behaviour - “everyone steals supplies”
3. changing the behaviour all together - stops stealing the equipment