Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

social psychology > terms and models > Flashcards

terms and models Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Psychology 101 flashcards AP® Psychology flashcards
1
Q

experimental design

A

manipulate IV, observe DV
intervention

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

non-experimental design

A

correlation

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

narrative review

A

overview of current knowledge, no new analysis

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

systematic review

A

RQ, intro, methods, results, discussion - no new analysis

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

meta-analysis

A

quantifies studies - new analysis

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

intention viability

A

lacking opportunity to act on intentions
counter intentional habits (smaller effect on behaviour when done freq)

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

intention activation

A

the context making someone do something is not accessible

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

intention elaboration

A

don’t know how to act on intention

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

monitoring progress

A

identify discrepancies
allocate effort
reference values (desired, past, others)

Private (reported)
private (not reported)
public

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

action planning

A

linking behaviours to the environment cues e.g. doing a behaviour at a certain time

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

ostrich problem

A

avoiding not making progress
denial

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

coping planning

A

planning how to overcome potential barriers

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

rubicon model

A
  1. pre-decisional phase - which goal
  2. pre-factional phase - when, where how (implementation intentions)
  3. action phase - take action
  4. post-actional phase - Evaluate
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

implementation intentions

A

‘if situation X arises… I will initiate behaviour Y’
if then format

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

affiliation

A

associating with others

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

multidimensional model of affiliation - hill, 1987

A

WHY PEOPLE AFFILIATE:
1. positive stimulation
2. emotional support
3. social comparison
4. receive attention

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

social affiliation model

A

homeostasis principle
people adjust behaviour to optimise socialisation - example of intrapersonal differences
solitude = seek affiliation
too much = withdraw

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

biological explanation- affiliation

A

interpersonal difference - desire to affiliate depends on the person
CNS arousal increases with social interaction - may explain why introverts avoid

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

culture

A

affiliation more common in individualistic countries

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

relational values

A

how important someone is

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

high relational value

A

acceptance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

low relational value

A

rejection

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

4 ways to increase RV

A
  1. seeking approval by promoting socially desirable traits
  2. reciprocity - not reciprocating = unapproachable
  3. physical appearance = better looking people are more liked (self-fulfilling prophecy)
  4. achievement and competence = successful people have high RV
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

types of rejection

A

explicit (ostracism)
implicit (bullying) - interpersonal favouritism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

four fundamental human needs

A

belonging, control, self-esteem, meaningful existence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

other 3 reactions to rejection

A

loneliness, hurt feelings, state self-esteem

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

sociometer

A

psychological system that monitors relational values in different social settings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

explanations for social modelling

A

social approval (low self esteem and high empathy), informational influence, automatic mimicry with who we identify, same weight

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

descriptive norms

A

informational influence - most common behaviour
‘join 75% of guests in help to save the environment ‘

30
Q

injunctive norms

A

social approval - what is socially acceptable and enables affiliation
personalised normative feedback - ‘you’

31
Q

prescriptive v proscriptive

A

focus on what others do/approve of v focus on what other do NOT do

32
Q

delivery of social norms

A

social norms marketing
perceived normative feedback

33
Q

boomerang effect

A

happens when undesirable trait is more common
unintended negative effects

ex ; descriptive norm message on energy use

34
Q

smith drinking evaluation

A

measured intentions
individual differences

35
Q

prosocial behaviour

A

acting in a positive way e.g. altruism

36
Q

mutualism

A

benefits others and themselves

37
Q

kin selection

A

bias towards blood relatives even if puts themselves in risk (think squirrels)
evolution

38
Q

limitations of mutualism and kin selection

A

doesn’t explain altruism to strangers
little empirical evidence

39
Q

social psychological perspective on prosocial behaviour

A

social norms, social learning

40
Q

social norms

A

reciprocity principle (help this who help us)
social responsibility (help those in need),
just-world hypothesis (help suffering to create peace)
learnt and leads to social acceptance

41
Q

social learning

A

children learn prosocial behaviours through reinforcement (instructions) and imitation
exposure to models

42
Q

lateen and Harley cognitive model

A

attend
define emergency
assume responsibility
decide what to do
= give help

43
Q

bystander effect

A

people are less likely to help others when they are alone

44
Q

processes of the bystander effect

A
  1. diffusion of responsibility (hope someone else will help)
  2. audience inhibition (self-conscious)
  3. social influence (others seem less worried)

MORE LIKELY TO HELP WHEN ALONE

45
Q

bystander calculus model

A

physiological processes e.g. empathic response which is helping ones we feel are similar to ourselves

labelling the arousal - hoping to reduce own emotional state

evaluating the consequences of helping

46
Q

perceived centered determinants

A

personality - different internal locus’ of control, individuals who feel bad less likely to help

mood

competence

group membership - perceiving to be similar

responsibility for misfortune

47
Q

bio approaches of aggression

A

psychodynamic - UNCONSCIOUS ‘thanatos’
redirect (catharsis)

evolutionary - GENETIC SURVIVAL

48
Q

limitations of bio approaches

A

no causality
aggression outside of situations where its needed

49
Q

biosocial approaches of aggression

A

frustration-aggression hypothesis - causes sublimation (using aggression in acceptable activity) and displacement (direct onto something else)

excitation transfer - arousal in different contexts builds to aggression - misattributing arousal

50
Q

critiques of biosocial approach

A

GOOD - meta-analysis showing displacement
BAD - aggression without frustration exists
can lead to more anger

51
Q

social approaches of aggression

A

social learning theory - learnt through vicarious reinforcement in role models

52
Q

critiques of social approaches

A

GOOD - empirical evidence
BAD - gender differences

53
Q

8 factors of aggression

A

gender - women = indirect aggression
personality - high neuroticism
attachment - insecure attachment = criminality (only male)
heat - not linear
alcohol - 68% of cases, placebo effect, compromises cortical control
crowding
disadvantaged groups - deprivation
violent media

54
Q

general aggression model

A

personal and situational variables influence cognition, affect and arousal

55
Q

real world violence

A

institutionalised aggression, intimate partner violence

56
Q

the dark triad

A

narcissism
machiavellianism
psychopathy

57
Q

narcissism

A

require admiration, self obsessive
envious of others, insecure

measure - narcissistic personality inventory - 40 forced choice

58
Q

machiavellian

A

manipulating others for the purpose of self gain
have cynical view of the world

measure - Mach IV - 20 questions with a scale

59
Q

psychopathy

A

antisocial
impulsive
lack of emotion

measure - self report psychopathy scale - 64 items with scale

60
Q

measure the dark triad combined

A

the dirty dozen - 12 items
disadvantage = not enough items, convergent validity

the short dark triad - 27 items
disadvantage = mach and psych merge into one

61
Q

correlations of big five

A

all negatively associated with agreeableness and conscientiousness
narcissism positively correlated with extraversion and openess

62
Q

critique of dark triad

A

unification hypothesis - merge into one

63
Q

light triad

A

humanism
kantianism
faith in humanity

64
Q

humanism

A

value worth of each individual

65
Q

kantianism

A

treating others how you would like to be treated

66
Q

faith in humanity

A

believing in goodness of humans

67
Q

light triad scale

A

12 items

disadvantages = social desirability bias
cross cultural validity

68
Q

mean balance score of light v dark

A

1.3

69
Q

nomological network

A

network of traits you’d expect to be associated with a trait

70
Q

heritability estimate

A

percentage of variability in a trait across individuals that is due to genes

71
Q

concordance rates for aggression

A

43% Mz

72
Q

Cohen 1991 effect sizes

A

s = .20
m = .50
l = .80

social psychology (3 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions