Social Psychology Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Define social psychology.

A

The scientific study of how peoples’ thoughts, feelings and behaviour are influenced by the presence of others.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Describe social influence.

A

The change in behaviour (intentional or unintentional) that occurs as a result of a person’s social environment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is a group/the characteristics of a group?

A

Two or more people who interact regularly, identify as a collective, have interdependence on members and share a common purpose.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Define and describe Social Facilitation.

A

The tendency for individuals to perform better in the mere prescence of others in comparison to performing the task on their own.

  • may occur when people are observed without observers participating in the task e.g. a sporting event, where the presence of spectators makes the athlete run faster (Audience Effect)
  • may also occur when a person is performing a task in front of co-actors performing the same task e.g. getting more study done in a library where one sees others studying, than at home (Co-Action Effect)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

How did Triplett study social facilitation?

A

Triplett (1898) observed that cyclists rode faster when racing against each other, than when they rode alone against the clock. He tested the idea that this was due to the presence of others in a lab experiment where children were asked to reel a fishng rod as fast as they could, individually or among co-actors. Triplett found that participants who performed the task with co-actors reeled the line faster then those who reeled the line alone, allowing him to conclude that the co-actors caused this boost in performance.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Define Social Inhibition.

A

The tendency for the presence of others to hinder an individual’s performance of a task.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is the Yerkes-Dodson Law?

A

An empirical relationship between arousal and performance which states that performance increases with mental/physiological arousal up until a certain point, meaning there is an optimum level of arousal for performance and an over or under-arousal leads to a decrease in performance.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Using Zajonc’s Drive Theory of Social Faciliation, explain why social facilitation and inhibition occur.

A

Zajonc (1965) used the Yerkes-Dodson Law to theorise that since arousal from others can improve or worsen performance, the presence of others brings about a person’s dominant/best-learned response. This means social facilitation occurs in simple tasks, where the dominant response is likely to be correct, and social inhibition occurs in complex tasks (where the dominant response is probably incorrect) as the arousal from other people and the difficulty of the task bring arousal past its optimal level.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Define evaluation apprehension and describe how it was studied.

A

The fear of being judged by others (either formally or informally). Cottrell (1968) tested whether this phenomenon exists by blindfolding participants and asked them to perform a perception experiment, and found there was no change in their performance, which he concluded was because the participants were blindfolded and evaluation apprehension did not occur.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Define and explain the Bystander Effect.

A

The tendency for an individual to be less likely to take action/help someone in a situation than if they were alone, which occurs due to a diffusion of responsiblilty (since other people are present, individuals assume that ohters will help). It may also occur due to audience inhibition (the individual feels self-conscious/afraid of breaking social norms when helping).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What is Group Polarisation and what is its basic assumption?

A

Tendency for the opinions of individuals to become more extreme when they are in a group with people who hold similar attitudes. The principle of group polarisation is that whatever the inital preference of the group prior to its discussion, this preference is strengthened during the discussion.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Define the Risky Shift Phenomenon.

A

Form of group polarisation referring to a change in the group’s attitude that raises the chance for negative consequences (group decisions tend to be more risky than individual ones, but may sometiomes be more careful if that is the group’s initial leaning).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Name and describe three causes of group polarisation.

A

1) Persuasion via. the central route - members of a group bring their own set of arguments/perspectives to a discussion, some of which other group members may not have considered. Being presented more arguments in support of the group shifts peoples’ views more towards the group’s position.
2) Social comparison - during group discussions, people evaluate the feelings and views of the group. As a result of humans’ desire to gain acceptance, people compare their own ideas to those held by the group, and take a similar position.
3) Confirmation Bias - people will pay more attention to and readily accept information that confirms their views, strengthening the group’s position as counter-arguments are seen as weak and unclear.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

How did Myers and Bishop test Group Polarisation?

A

Myers and Bishop (1970) tested group polarisation by surveying students and classifying them based on their racial prejudice, and then putting students with similar amounts of prejudice in group discussions about racial issues. They found that students who were prejudiced to begin with were even more biased after the discussion and students who were initaally less prejudiced were even more accepting after the discussion. This allowed Bishop and Myers to conclude that the group of people with similar attitudes strenghtened individuals’ attitudes.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Define conformity and explain how it is different to obedience.

A

A change in attitudes, beliefs or behaviour as a result of real or imagined group pressure. Unlike obedience, conformity lacks the presence of an authority figure or a direct command.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

According to Kelman (1958), what are the three levels of conformity?

A

1) Compliance - a person changes their public behaviour to be accepted/avoid rejection in the short-term, despite their private views staying the same.
2) Identification - a person changes their public behsviour in order to gain entry into a group. This only occurs in the presence of the goup and thus, may not change an individual’s private views.
3) Internalisation - a person changes their public behaviour and private beliefs, as the beliefs of the group become part of the individual’s belief system. This means this change is long-term and even occurs in the absence of the group.

17
Q

Outline two explanations for conformity.

A

Normative Social Influence - Conforming to group standards to feel accepted and fit into scoial/group norms. Humans confrom in this way to gain social approval and avoid rejection (associated with compliance and identification).
Informational Social Influence - conforming to gain knowledge, especially about an ambiguous situation in order to act appropriately and avoid standing out.

18
Q

Describe three factors that influence conformity.

A

1) Group size - people are more likely to conform in larger groups (up to 5 people) as the increased amount of people may increase a person’s fear of rejection or being wrong.
2) Ambiguity of the situation - people are more likely to conform in unfamiliar situations where they do not know how to behave (Asch found that people conformed more when he made the differences between the lengths of the lines smaller)
3) Culture - people in collectivist cultures are more likely to conform than those in individualistic cultures to feel a sense of unity/group membership

19
Q

How did Asch test conformity?

A

Asch (1951, 1955) tested conformity through a visual judgement task:

  • aim - to investigate whether an individual would give an incorrect answer to conform to the group.
  • method - 123 American male students participated in a test where they wer shown 3 lines and had to choose which one was the same as a target line. Each naiive/real participant was tested with 7 confederates/fake participants, and during the first few trials, the confederates gave correct answers regarding the target line, but the confederates began choosing the wrong line as the target line (which they had previously agreed upon) for 12 out of the 18 trials, which were called critical trials.
  • findings - Asch found that approximatelt 1/3 of participants who heard the confederate conformed with the clearly incorrect answer. He found that 75% of participants conformed in at least 1 of the critical trials while in the control group (with no confederates), less than 1% gave the wrong answer)
  • conclusion - when participnts were interviewed about their responses, most said they did not believe in their conforming answers, but went along with them to avoid rejection, allwoing Asch to conclude that the participant’s answers were a result of normative social influence
20
Q

Evaluate Asch’s line study.

A
  • the study contained a biased sample (123 American males), meaning the study has low population validity and findings cannot be generalised to females or other cultures
  • the study has low ecological validity as it used an artificial situation (determining the length of lines) to measure conformity, a task which the sample is unlikely to face in everyday life, making the findings ungeneralisable
  • the results of the study were not consistent over time (lacks test-retest reliability). This was seen when Perrin and Spencer carried out the same study in 1980 and found that on only 1/369 trials did the participant conform.
21
Q

Define obedience.

A

A change in behaviour in response to a direct command from an authority figure.

22
Q

Describe Milgram’s experiment on obedience (1963).

A

Aim - To investigate the extent to which people would obey an instruction while knowing the consequence.
Procedure - 40 American males aged 20-50 were recruited with the belief that they were taking part in a memory study. They were introduced to confederates who would play the ‘learner’ while they were the ‘teachers’. The learner was strapped to electrodes and asked to learn a list of word pairs. The learner was assessed on these words and if they guessed incorrectly, the true participant was told to administer an electric shock, increasing in voltage after every incorrect answer up to a maximum of 450 volts. The learner intentionally gave mostly wrong answers and did not actually recieved the administered shocks (unbeknownst to the participant). If a particpant was hesitant to continue, the experimenter would say probs such as “the experiment requires you to continue” and “you have no choice but to continue”.
Findings - All o fthe participants continued to at least 300 volts and 65% of participants continued to the highest level of 450 volts
Conclusion - ordinary people tend to follow orders given by authority figures, even to the extent of endangering another human. Milgram concluded that this is because obedience to authority is learned through one’s socialisation, and due to agentic shift.

23
Q

Evaluate Milgram’s experiment.

A

+ Milgram’s study has test-restest reliability, and its findings have been supported by a 2010 study in the documentary ‘Le Jeu de la Mort’, where 90% of participants gave the maximum voltage, indicating that Milgram’s findings were not a chance occurence.

  • biased sample - the sample consisted of 40 adult American males selected through convenience sampling. This means that findings lack population validity as they cannot be generalised to the wider poplation (e.g. females or children)
  • not ethically sound - participants were not protected from physiological or psychological harm as many participants pleaded to stop the experiment and showed physical signs of distress (e.g. sweating. trembling, seizures). As a result of this ethical breach, Milgram’s study cannot be considered valid.
24
Q

Identify three situational variables and explain how they affect obedience.

A
  • location: Milgram’s original study was conducted at Yale University, but he conducted a variation of the study in a run-down building. The experimenter is percieved to have less authority in this situation, and obedience fell to 47.5%.
  • uniform: The experimenter wore a grey lab coat in the original study, but in a variation, the experimenter was called away for a phone call and was replaced by a confederate in everyday clothes. Obedience dropped to t 20% in this variation as the participant was not seen as a legitimate authority figure.
  • Proximity: In one variation, the participant and confedrate were in the same room, resulting in obedience dropping to 40%, which may be attributed to the fact that participants could directly see the consequences of their actions, increasing the sense of personal responsibility. Similarly, obedience dropped to 20.5% in a variation where the experimenter left the room, as the participant feels that the experimenter will not take responsibilty for the consequences.
25
Q

With reference to the autonomous and agentic states, outline and explain Milgram’s Agency Theory.

A

Milgram’s Agency Theory (1974) may be used to explain the behaviour of participants in his study and why people obey. It assumes that when people are in social situations, they enter one of two states:
The autonomous state - people direct their own actions and take responsibility of the outcomes. Obedience is unlikely to occur in this state unless the individual’s beliefs align with the command given.
The agentic state - individuals act as agents for another peson’s will, meaning people allow others to direct their actions. Obedience is more likely to occur in this state as people feel less personal responsibilty for their actions as they are carrying out the request of others/ simply “doing as they are told” (e.g. in Milgram’s study, where they shocked to 450 v because the experimenter told them to).
Milgram suggested that this state exists for survival (social groups with leaders and followers have a better chance of survival) and through one’s socialisation (children are taught that they must obey parents, teachers etc.)

26
Q

Describe two factors that allow one to enter the agentic state.

A

1) legitimacy of authority - for a person to obey, they must believe that the person giving the order is qualified to direct the behaviour of others, or in a position of power (seen in the uniform variation)
2) the individual should believe that the authority figure will take responsibility for the outcomes (seen in the variation wherethe participant’s hand was forced onto the shock plate, seeing obedience drop to 30%)

27
Q

Define the authoritarian personality and explain how it affects obedience.

A

A personality disposition characterised by total respect and submission for authority. People with authoritarian personalities are hostile to those of inferior status, but obedient to people with high status, and hold firm and traditional beliefs. This personality trait typically stems from a strict upbringing and high expectations in childhood, with people with authoritarian personalities being more likely to obey as an extremely disciplined childhood may result in an individual having very little initative and personal responsibilty for actions.

28
Q

How did Adorno investigate the authoritarian personality?

A

Adorno (1950) conducted a study with over 2000 middle-class white Americans. The participants were given a Facism scale (F-scale) which measures a person’s potential for authoritarianism, where participants had to rate their agreement to statements such as “obedience and respect for authority are the two most important virtues children should learn”. Findings showed that individuals scoring high on the F-scale were very likely to exhibit triats related to obedience, such as loyalty and extreme respect. Furthermore, Adorno conducted clinical interviews and found that people who scored high on the scale said that they experienced a strict childhood, allowing Adorno to conclude that a disposition that makes individuals likely to obey does exist.

29
Q

Describe the methodology of Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) (1973).

A

aim - to investigate whether prison brutality by guards was due to guards’ sadistic personalities or due to situational factors.
procedure - 24 male Stanford University students were selected using convenience sampling out of 75 applicants as they were deemed the most emotionally stable through pre-screening. Zimbardo set up a mock prison and participants were randomly assigned the roles of prisoner or guard. Prisoners were arrested, brought to the prison and addressed by prisoner numbers, and guards were given a uniform and were assigned the role of enforcing rules for the prisoners. The experiment was meant to go on for 14 days but was halted after 6 after concerns about participants’ welfare.
findings - Within hours of the experiment starting, both the prisoners and guards had taken on their assigned roles, with guards asserting their authority on prisoners by administering physical punishments, which became more severe as the experiment progressed, and the prisoners either obeying or conducting rebellions.
conclusion - people will readily conform to the social roles that they are given in a situation, meaning the environment of a prison has a greater effect on brutality than the guards’ personality.

30
Q

Critically evaluate Zimbardo’s study.

A

Le Texier (2019) analysed the archival records of the SPE, along with conducting interviews with participants and found that:

  • the SPE was not scientific as Zimbardo claimed, as scientific data collection is systematic and uniform, while archives showed that Zimbardo did not collect any data on day 3 of the experiment, making records incomplete
  • demand characteristics may have influenced participants’ behaviour: Banuazizi and Movahedi (1975) gave 150 students the same instructions that Zimbardo gave his participants, and found that 81% of the students could guess the hypothesis, and 90% predicted that the guards would become aggressive
  • the experiment lacked ecological validity, as letters written by participants showed that the prison experiment constructed was unrealisic and participants were not fully immersed in the experiment, with one participant writing “We all know it’s an experiment”
31
Q

Define an attribution and outline the main assuptions of attribution theories.

A

A mental explanation regarding the cause of the behaviour/events of others or oneself. Attribution theories deal with how people use informations to come to conclusions about why people behave the way they do, and Heider (1958) theories that people have an innate need to make sense of the actions of others as our judgements about people depend on how we explain their behaviour.

32
Q

Distinguish between internal and external attributions and provide an example of each.

A

Internal attributions explain an individual’s behaviour by their personal dispositions, while external attributions explain a person’s behaviour as being caused by environmental factors outside of a person. For example, if a teacher walks into class yelling and in a bad mood, students may attribute the teacher’s behaviour to a heavy workload (situational) or may assume that they are just a moody person (dispositional).

33
Q

Define an attribution bias and explain the fundamental attribution error.

A

Systematic cognitive errors that occur when people try to explain the reasoning for their own or others’ behaviour. The fundamental attribution error assumes that people tend to favour dispositional attribution and overlook the situation when explaining the personality of others. This may be explained by the saliency bias, which states that a person’s behaviour is more noticeable than the situation in which it is occuring, or the Just World Phenomenon (one assumes that the world is fair and that people get what they deserve).

34
Q

Outline the actor-observer bias and self-serving bias.

A

The actor-observer bias occurs when there is a inconsistency between the attributions a person makes when they are observing and taking part in a scenario (one attributes their own behaviour to situational factors, yet others’ behaviour is attributed to internal factors). The self-serving bias is the tendency to attribute positive events to one’s own character but attribute negative events to external factors. Unlike actor-observer bias, this bias does not explain others’ behaviour and serves to protect one’s self-image.

35
Q

Outline Kelley’s Covariation Model (1973).

A

Kelley’s model proposes that to be able to make conclusions about why behaviour occurs, a person must know what happened before and after behaviour. To determine this, people investigate three variables: consistency (the extent to which a person reacts to an event in the same way regularly), distinctiveness (extent to which a person’s behaviour in a situation differs to that in other situations) and consensus (the extent to which ohter people behave the same in the particular situation). The combination of these variables allows one to either make a dispositional or situational attribution.

36
Q

Distinguish what combination of variables leads one to make an internal or external attribution.

A
  • internal: low consensus, low distinctiveness, high consistency
  • external: high consensus, high distinctiveness, high consistency