Social Psychology

Question 1

What is an attitude?

Answer 1

a positive or negative feeling towards an ‘object’

we can have attitudes towards nouns, sensory qualities, sensory qualities, abstract concepts, actions and even attitudes towards attitudes

Question 2

why study attitudes?

Answer 2

they are pervasive
they predict behaviour
they shape how we see the world

Question 3

Direct experience - where do attitudes come from

Answer 3

interaction with concepts produce attitudes

Garcia et al (1955) caused rats to develop an aversion to sugar water after exposing them to varying levels of radiation to induce nausea.
Berstein and Webster (1980) = ice cream in humans

Question 4

Mere exposure - where do attitudes come from

Answer 4

another example of direct experiences where novel, non-aversive stimuli is liked

Goetzinger (1986) = hooded studied in class become more liked as semester went on

can be applied to real life e.g in Britain more diverse areas were less likely to vote for Brexit

Cook (1971) was able to reduce prejudice in white American by forcing them to work with African Americans

Question 5

Modelling - where do attitudes come from

Answer 5

Attitudes can develop from observing what others do and say

Bandura (1961) SLT bobo dolls

Question 6

Internally - where do attitudes come from

Answer 6

people have the desire for cognitive consistency - we are motivated to change attitudes or behaviours, so they are consistent (Cognitive dissonance theory - Festinger et al, 1959)

Question 7

Explicit attitudes

Answer 7

• stored in memory
• constructed after experience
• conscious of these attitudes
• complex and cognitively demanding
• have ‘truth values’
• easy to lie about
• can be measured in self -reports (sometimes)

Question 8

Implicit attitudes

Answer 8

• formed from long term associations
• unconscious attitudes = simple and not cognitively demanding
• independent from ‘truth values’
• hard to lie about- more difficult to measure

Question 9

measuring implicit attitudes

Answer 9

• cognitive = reaction timing/matching or memory tasks = implicit association test (IAT)
• neuroscientific = scan brain (focus on limbic system for response) for evidence of an attitude

Question 10

relationship between implicit and explicit attitudes

Answer 10

Nosek and Smyth (2007) studied both of these on a range of topics and found that the median correlation between them is r = 0.48

when an object is encountered, implicit attitudes are activated automatically whereas explicit attitudes require effort to be activated.
Explicit attitudes can over-ride implicit attitudes, but we must consciously make the effort to do this

Question 11

Theory of planned behaviour

Answer 11

attitudes + subjective norms + perceived behavioural control → intention → behaviour

Armitage & Conner (2001) found that theory of planned behaviour predicted 27-38% of all variances in behaviour. Perceived behavioural control was the best predictor of behaviour

Question 12

problems with the theory of planned behaviour

Answer 12

• assumes people are rational and consider all implications of their behaviour before acting
• assumes attitudes are monolithic, single cognitive constructs
• MODE model seeks to explain how and when implicit and explicit attitudes shape behaviour

Question 13

Motivation and Opportunity as Determinants (MODE) model

Answer 13

it is cognitively demanding to engage explicit attitudes which requires motivation and time - without these, only implicit attitudes govern behaviour

Sanbonmatsu and Fazio (1990) has Ps form braod automatic attitudes towards two stores
- shop A is generally good but has a bad camera department, shop B is generally bad but has a good camera department - where do you want to buy a camera from?
- shop A was the automatic response as it required little time or motivation to think = implicit

Question 14

Associate and Propositional processes in Evaluation (APE) model

Answer 14

associative processes rely on activation in memory from long term activation and external input stimuli

propositional processes = evaluative responses effect the attitude only when consistent with other propositions e.g. the implicit attitude alongside other propositions leads to the final evaluation (explicit attitudes)

Question 15

How do we change implicit attitudes?

Answer 15

change semantic network
- attitudes are derived from automatic associations in semantic network
- Olson and Fazio (2001) showed we could change the structure of semantic network by forcing associations to create positive or negative implicit attitudes

change the activation of the attitude
- change the relevant reference point for the implicit attitude
- Dasgupta and Greenwald (2003) demonstrated the increasing prominence of associations can reduce negative implicit attitudes
- as this does not change the structure of attitudes, effects are short lived

Question 16

How do we change explicit attitudes

Answer 16

• accessible through introspection are more easily operated on by the conscience so are easier to change
• when attitudes conflict with other attitudes or conflict with behaviours, we alter one to match

Question 17

Cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957)

Answer 17

humans are motivated to avoid tension between behaviours and attitudes

Festinger et al., 1959 had Ps complete an extremely boring task designed to induce negative attitudes towards the task
The experimenter then offered that participant $1 or $20 to tell the next P that the task was fun = cognitive dissonance
This was resolved in the Ps minds as in later interviews, they reported more positive attitudes towards the task

Question 18

When can cognitive dissonance change attitudes?

Answer 18

• when behaviour is visible to others (we can’t pretend it didn’t happen)
• when we have freely chosen the action
• when our behaviour is costly, and we have expended a lot of effort

Question 19

Avoiding cognitive dissonance - Frey and Rosch (1984)

Answer 19

asked participants to read about a manager and then recommend termination or not.
They were then given the chance to gather information about either 1) how good the manager was or 2) how bad the manager was
IF:
- Decision was reversible = looked at both good and bad info
- Decision was irreversible = only looked at the information that confirmed their decision (e.g., bad if they recommended to terminate the employee)

In addition to triggering attitude change, cognitive dissonance concerns can help protect our attitude from change

Question 20

Elaborated likelihood model of persuasion

Answer 20

most well-established model for understanding persuasion
Petty and Cacioppo (1986)
- central route = consider the quality of the argument carefully before being persuaded
- peripheral route = attend to cues associated with the message
route taken depends on a person’s time and motivation to change

Petty and Cacioppo (1983) asked male Ps about new razor that was either close or far away; good or had quality; and had celebrity endorsement or not
obvs low involvement, good quality and endorsed

Question 21

Can explicit attitudes change implicit attitudes?

Answer 21

Changing your explicit attitude will allow you to more readily pair the object with good or bad things, over time changing the associative network. This is effortful, if you change an attitude, you rarely use it won’t have an effect.
So might not be the most effective way to change implicit attitudes - best to target them directly

Question 22

what are intergroup relations?

Answer 22

the ways in which people who are members of groups think about, feel about, perceive and act towards members of other groups (Graf et al., 2014)

this produces conflict between ingroup members and outgroup members

Question 23

Bases of intergroup relations:

Answer 23

• cognitive limitations and faults
• cognitive motivations
• ideologies
• social explanations

Question 23

Negative outcomes of intergroup relations

Answer 23

stereotype = beliefs (cognitive)
prejudice = feeling (affective)
discrimination = action (behavioural)

Question 24

Cognitive limitations and faults (bases of intergroup relations)

Answer 24

people are cognitive misers (Fiske and Taylor, 1991)
- limited capacity to process social information leads to use of cognitive shortcuts e.g. stereotypes

category accentuation
- categorization accentuates differences between groups and similarities between groups

outgroup homogeneity effect (Quattrone and Jones, 1980)
- people are more familiar with members of their group and use category level info when judging other groups = other race effect ‘they all look the same’

illusionary correlation effect
- distinctive behaviours of minority groups capture the attention of the majority group, and they focus on undesirable behaviours, believing they occur more frequently than they actually do

Question 25

cognitive motivation (bases of intergroup relations)

Answer 25

personality variables
- people who score highly in these are more likely to be prejudice
- dogmatism (Rokeach, 1956) = closed minded people that refuse to change their incorrect belief
- personal need for structure
- need for cognitive closure (desire for answers)

Question 26

Ideology (bases of intergroup relations)

Answer 26

right-wing authoritarianism (Adorno et al., 1950)
- more likely to be prejudice
- authoritarian submission = tendency to yield to authorities
- authoritarian aggression = support aggression towards those that defy convention
- conventionalism = traditional values endorsed by authority

social dominance orientation
- measures people’s preference for hierarchy
- ‘to get ahead in life sometimes you need to step on other groups’
- higher scores = more prejudice + higher support for racism and violence

Question 27

social explanations (based of intergroup relations)

Answer 27

realistic group conflict theory
- perceived competition for finite resources
- prejudice toward immigrants
- Sherif et al (1961) Robbers case study found that competition for scarce resources produced intergroup hostility and that it took superordinate goals to improve intergroup relations (contact alone was not enough)

social identity theory
- minimal group paradigm (Tajfel et al., 1971) = minimal condition for group biases is being a member of a group

Question 28

What is a stereotype?

Answer 28

A stereotype is a generalization about the thoughts, motives, feelings, and/or behaviours of a group of people (Wright & Taylor, 2003; Gardner, 1994)

Social cognitive approach to stereotyping as a component of prejudice.
Stereotypes are a knowledge structure that create (harmful) generalisations about characteristics of a group

Question 29

Why do we stereotype?

Answer 29

• personality (Adorno et al, 1950s)
• meaning-making (Tajfel and Turner, 1970s)
• social cognitive approach - stereotypes simplify the world by categorisation

Question 30

How do we create stereotypes?

Answer 30

top-down approach = a group has certain characteristics, so we attribute group characteristics to individuals

bottom-up approach = someone belongs to a group so attribute their individual behaviour to the whole group

Question 31

Are stereotypes cognitively useful?
(Macrae et al 1994, 1995; Sherman et al 1999)

Answer 31

Macrae et al (1994)
Does stereotyping save cognitive eenergy?
- Ps were given 4 people with descriptions of their character, half of Ps were also given a label for each person e.g. doctor/skin head
- FOUND that labels that fit the stereotype of the characteristics improved recall

Sherman et al (1999)
If stereotypes save cognitive energy, are we more likely to stereotype when tired?
- Ps were asked to remember a priest or skin head
- the next day, they were given a list contain both stereotypical and non-stereotypical words
- half Ps were asked to remember an 8-digit number (high cognitive load = less effort to not stereotype)
- FOUND that those with more to think about were more likely to rely on stereotypes

Macrae et al (1995)
If stereotypes are designed for cognitive efficiency, we should be faster to think along stereotype lines
- FOUND Ps were quicker on a lexical decision task when items aligned with stereotypes

Question 32

how are stereotypes maintained?

Answer 32

how we learn
we are more likely to pay attention to behaviours that reinforces a stereotypical belief than subverts it (Wigboldus et al., 2003)

how we remember
stereotype consistent info is recalled more easily and faster (Strangor et al, 1992)

how we speak
effect how we communicate with others (Kashima, 2000)

Question 33

effects of stereotyping others

Answer 33

Payne (2006) = weapon misidentification task
exposed Ps to pictures of black or white faces followed by pictures of guns or tools and Ps had to identify these as quickly as possible
Ps were more likely to falsely say ‘gun’ when presented with black faces

this shows how stereotypes can be harmful

Question 34

effects of stereotyping the self

Answer 34

can have negative effects on self-esteem and education
for example, African Americans (Steele and Aronson, 1995) and women may both be aware that they are stereotyped as being stupid, particularly as being bad at maths
Being seen as stupid is obviously undesirable. Members of this group may fear confirming this stereotype, and their preoccupation with it can hamper actual performance

Question 35

Reducing prejudice:

Answer 35

contact hypothesis (Allport, 1954)
- contact between different social groups reduces prejudice and discrimination

optimal condition for contact to reduce discrimination:
- equal status of the groups in the situation
- common goals and intergroup co-operation
- support of authorities, law or custom

Question 36

Contact theory (improving intergroup relations)

Answer 36

Tropp et al (2017) conducted two surveys with Protestants/Catholics in N.Ireland and black/white people in south Africa and found that higher contact quality predicted significantly greater trust, more positive intergroup attitudes and greater engagement in reconciliation efforts - Even when taking into account reported exposure to violence

if contact is not possible?
- extended contact coefficient = if members of ingroups are friends with friends of outgroup members they are less likely to be prejudice
- imagined contact effect (Crisp and Turner, 2009) = imagining contact with outgroup members reduces negative attitudes

negative contact/experiences have stronger influences on attitudes than positive ones

Question 37

Categorisation based approaches (improving intergroup relations)

Answer 37

Decatagorisation (Miller and Brewer, 1984) - can improve relations by promoting personalised relations with outgroup members

common ingroup identity model (Gaertner and Dovidio, 2000) = trying to destroy categorisation is impractical as our world is categorised - group members see themselves as ‘us’ which is achieved by selecting a ‘them’

dual identity approach (Dovidio, Gaertner and Saguy, 2007) = people don’t always want to think of themselves as part of the common group but may accept it if their individual identity is acknowledged

Question 38

Value based approaches (improving intergroup relations)

Answer 38

Values are beliefs, and related to goals, that transcend actions and situations (Schwartz, 2012)
Facilitating and making salient certain values might improve intergroup relations e.g. tolerance, multiculturism, egalitarianism

Question 39

Multiculturalism vs Colour blindness

Answer 39

Multiculturalism = belief that diversity should be acknowledged and celebrated
Colour blindness = belief that differences between groups should be downplayed e.g. BLM vs ‘all lives matter’

multiculturalism is a better policy for reducing bias as it celebrates differences rather than erasing them

Question 40

Media’s role (improving intergroup relations)

Answer 40

Paluck (2009) had Ps listen to either a control health soap opera or a bias NGO soap opera (prejudice messages)
FOUND that listening to the bias soap opera did not influence personal beliefs but it did influence their perceptions of social norms and behaviours

Question 41

Allyship (improving intergroup relations)

Answer 41

advantaged group members who participate in collective action for disadvantaged group
Allies can be helpful at improving social change and intergroup relations

Tensions can arise in political movement if they are not genuinely interested in improving the status of the disadvantaged group (Radke et al., 2020)