Test 2 Content Flashcards
Principle Axiom
People construct their own reality, social influence, interaction
Attitudes include…
functions, sources, behaviours
What is attitude?
The conceptual understanding is that an attitude is an object, evaluation, link stored in the memory.
Functions of attitudes
- Object appraisal (Similar to categories, help us organise our experience of the world)
- Instrumental / Utilitarian (attitudes that maximise benefits, rewards, minimising cost)
- Value expressive (self expression can also affirm relationships)
Sources of Attitude
- Cognitively based attitude (evaluating good, bad, long-term costs, benefits. Use if striving for mastery)
- Affectively based attitude (more on emotional reaction, sensory reaction is likely going to lead to dislike)
- Behaviorally based attitudes (needs to be something that is weak or novel, NOT something that can have another explanation)
Heredity?
There is some evidence that you have inherit likes and dislikes
If most beliefs are POSITIVE then you will likely have POSITIVE attitude.
If most beliefs are NEGATIVE then attitudes are NEGATIVE
If attitude is mixed, often referred to as ambivalence, not the same as difference.
Attitude Ambivalence
- Cognitive (mixed beliefs)
- Affective
- Affective-Cognitive
Predicting SPECIFIC
behaviours?
You need to use a SPECIFIC attitudes
Predicting general behaviours?
You need to use GENERAL attitudes
Attitude Strength
NOT talking about extremity, talking about accessibility
Four aspects for determining attitude strength
- Persistance
- Resistance
- Impact on information processing
- Guidance of behavior
Theory of Reasoned action
Attitudes can guide behaviour WITH
deliberation
Behavioural Intention
Attitude toward the behaviour
Subjective norms regarding the behaviour
Behavioural Intention MODEL
MODEL suggests that attitudes can guide behaviour with deliberation, when we are thinking.
Subjective norms will be telling you not to do it, maybe you care, maybe you don’t.
Subjective norms are NOT blocking you, they make up behavioural intention that predicts action.
Attitude-Behaviour Process Model
(Fazio, 1986)
Attitudes can guide behaviour WITHOUT deliberation
‘Automatic Activation Model’
MODE Model
(Fazio, 1990)
Motivation & Oppourtunity as Determinants.
Anytime something is activated that you don’t want to influence behaviour, it requires motivation and oppourtunity (capacity).
If there are multiple things going on, capacity is LOWER.
To have effect, attitude must be…
Accessible
Appropriate to intended behaviour
Useful
Attitude Innoculation
People immune to attempts to change attitude, giving small doses.
Reactance Theory
Peoples behavioural freedom is threatenend, unpleaseant arousal of reactance occurs
Effectiveness of Persuasion: WHO
The source.
1. Credible Speakers
2. Attractive Speakers
Effectiveness of Persuasion: WHAT
The nature of communication
1. Perceived intent
2. One vs. Two-sided
3. Order
One-sided vs. Two-sided
If you have audience agreeing with you, you are presenting a one-sided argument, you are more persuasive.
You want to present a two-sided argument, makes you look like you are being fair minded, that perception makes you more persuasive.
Order
If you present last you are more memorable.
When there is NO delay in discussion = go first
When there is delay in discussion = be last
Effectiveness of Persuasion: WHOM
The audience
1. Distracted
2. Age
3. Indiviudal Differences
i. Self-monitoring
ii. Need for cognition
iii. Intelligence
Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
Two routes to persuasion; central & peripheral
Central persuasion
Requires thinking
Effort
1. Attending to the message
2. Comprehend the message
3. Reacting
If the elaboration leads to agreement, then next step is ACCEPTING, accepting it beng true.
Peripheral persuasion
NO effortful thought
NO consideration of quality
Why do we use peripheral route?
Expertise
Attractiveness
Speed of delivery
Familiarity
Message length
Scientific objectivity
Feelings as heuristic cue
Superficial processing
Persuasion shortcuts
The attractiveness heuristic
Agreeing with those we like.
Familiarity heuristic
Missatribute feeling to liking.
Expertise heuristic
Who are you most likely to believe in a scientific moment; a scientist or janitor?
Doesn’t mean the janitor is wrong, just means they don’t have the same background / knowledge.
Message-length heuristic
A longer message is more persuasive than a short message
When do we use the central route?
When it is self relevant and we are invested
ELM standard findings
HIGH personal relevance: you find the only thing that matters is argument strength
GOOD argument = persuasive
BAD argument = not persuasive
LOW personal relevance: weak argument from low expertise source is not persuasive. People are driven by peripheral cue of expertise and NOT quality of argument
When does FEAR work?
There has to be enough at the time, BUT not too much, and you must provide an answer.
Increased fear, gives you a solution.
Mood
Decreased mood leaves more resources for processing
Social impact theory
The amount of social influence others have depends on their number, strength and immediacy to those they’re trying to influence
The social impact depends on…
- Number of people present
- Strength or importance
- Immediacy to target person
Fixed-action patterns
Regular patterns of action.
STIMULUS produces BEHAVIOR
EXAMPLE: fixed action patterns
Camera
Click = stimulus
Whirr = behaviour
Reciprocity: THE RULE
We should try to repay, in kind, what another person has provided use
Reciprocity: THE PROBLEM
It implies obligation
Rejection-then-retreat technique
Door-in-the-face
Seems like you are making a concession, NOT a real one, people feel obligated to comply
How to avoid reciprocity?
NOT accept offers for what they seem to be, but rather what they are.
Commitment and Consistency: THE RULE
Once we make a choice, we encounter personal and interpersonal pressures to behave consistently with that commitment
Foot-in-the-door technique
This can get you to do things you have agreed to, but that are no longer in your best interest.
Start with small request, then larger etc. etc.
Low Balling
EXAMPLE: When you make an agreement with the sales person, and you feel that you must remain consistent, even if you are not happy
Social Proof: THE RULE
We view a behaviour as correct in a given situation to the degree that we see others performing it.
This is why laugh tracks exist.
Injunctive norms
The perception of what is appropriate, what you are supposed to do
Descriptive norms
Perception of what people actually do
Liking
More likely to comply with others.
Someone wants to know things about you before asking you to comply = more likely to
Authority
Strong pressure to comply with the requests of authority
e.g., symbols vs. substance
Scarcity
Oppourtunities seem more valuable when they are less available
Social Influence
Norm based form of persuasion. Ways to change, influece others and their behaviour.
Convergence / Consensus
= social norm.
A generally accepted way of thinking, feeling, or behaving that people in a group agree on and endorse as right.
Norms relation to attitudes
They are about evaluation.
Attitude: Indiviudal’s evaluation
Norm: group’s evaluation
Public Conformity
Compliance with pressure, peer pressure or pressure from some source. Not accepted as correct, a surface change you might be agreeing.
Private Conformity
When we accept the norms as reflecting our own values.
Expecting consensus
We expect others to see the world the same way as we do
False Consensus Effect
(Ross et al., 1977)
Asked indiviudals would you be willing to wear this sandwich board promoting something.
Rougly half said they would, and were asked to estimate a percentage of other people that would Agree or Disagree to wear the sign.
Functions of Conformity to Norms
Information influence: norms provide reality insurance
MODEL - private conformity
Mastery –> Information influence “it seems correct”
Connectedness –> Normative influence “identification with the group”
BOTH = Private conformity
Consensus without consideration
Is it a real consensus or does it just look like one?
Consensus without independence
Contamination
How ingroups become more persuasive
When we think about others in our group, the others are similar in some dimensions, but different in others.
When we join a grou, we find out how people differ.
Each indiviudal argument seems independen, but might not be, however seems it.
How outgroups become less persuasive
i. Group members seem all alike
ii. Listeners can’t remember who said what
iii. Arguments seem the same; suspect contamination
iv. Arguments are unpersuasive
v. out-group has little / no influence
Consensus without acceptance
Public conformity: people comply not because they agree but because they feel they have to.
The Value of Dissent: Minority influence
Any attempt at social change produces conflict.
A consistent minority is much more effective.
Dissent - AFTERMATH
What happens when minority becomes majority?
The new majority identifies a little bit with the group, but the old majority freaks out.
If you were inc harge, and now are not, that is NEGATIVE. Some people handle it poorly and can leave the group.
Deindividuation
Loss of self-awareness and evaluation apprehension, occurs in group situations that foster responsiveness to group norms - good or bad.
Does conformity help us?
YES
Holds valid opinions
Feels connected to & valued by other group members
Loose associations - ‘Groups’
Not actually groups, e.g., people standing at a bus stop.
The things called groups, when you look at items that fall into a cluster
Intimacy ‘groups’
Families
Friends
Street gangs
Task-orientated ‘groups’
Coworkers
Study groups
Athletic team
Usually groups put together for a specific purpose, some reason / goal to the groups. Relatively permeable
Social categories
Large race groups
Race
Ethnicity
Religion
Gender
Tend to be LARGE
What is a group?
A group is an aggregate of indiviudals who have a common / shared identity and behave in line with this identification.
What function do groups servce?
- EVOLUTIONARY
Groups provide safety, with reciprocity allows for sharing resource - MERIT
Overall valence about the beliefs of your group, the more positive associated, the fewer negative = higher merit. - POWER
The degree to which the group has power, control over fate of others. The more power = the more influence exerted onto the world. - REPUTATION
Evaluation of your group - CONSENSUS
Groups that are consistent can direct action more effeciently - BELONGING
How well does the group create and foster sense of acceptance
Perceived Value (equation)
Merit + Power + Reputation + Consensus + Belonging
Level of identification
The more strongly you identify with the group, the more likely it is that the group will fufil those psychological needs.
Perceived Entitativity
The extent to which a group is seen as a real and legitimate group.
**Psychological value (equation)
Perceived value x Level of Identification x Perceived sensitivity of the group
The effects of groups on the individuals: SOCIAL FACILITATION
It can help (dominant responses), it can hurt (non-dominant responses)
Groupthink
The tendency of group members to think alike
Important signs that indicate when groupthink is occuring
- The pressure towards conformity
- Appearance of unanimous agreement, because dissent is suppressed, peopl eget the impression that everyone in the group agrees with the plans
- Illusion of invulnerability
- Sense of moral superiority
- Tendency to underestimate opponents
Self-censorship
Indiviudals choosing not to express doubts or other information that goes against a group’s plans or views
Risky shift
A tendency for groups to take greater risks than the same individuals (on average) would have decided to take individually
Group Polarization Effect
A shift toward a more extreme position resulting from group discussion
Conjunctive tasks
The performance of the group is determined by weakest indiviudal
Disjunctive tasks
The outcome for the group is determined by the strongest group member
Additive Tasks
Indiviudal performance is added together for the final product.
e.g., group project
Social Loafing
If you have done a group project or tasks where you were put on a team to achieve something. People do FUCK all work.
Social Facilitation
The presence of other increased or benefited performance. At the time, some people found the opposite
Indiviudal effort evaluated: YES
Mechanism: Alertness Evaluation Apprehension Distraction
Physiological State: Arousal
Simple Tasks: Enhanced performance
Complex tasks: Impaired performance
Individual Efforts Evaluated: NO
Mechanism: No evaluation apprehension
Physiological state: Relaxation
Simple tasks: Impaired performance
Complex tasks: Enhanced performance
How to get rid of social loafing?
Make sure indiviudal performance can be evaluated…
EXAMPLE: if everybody says that Ted did 10% of the work, and Ted says he did 40%, and indication that Ted probably didn’t do that much.
Social identity & Cohesiveness
Collective Effort Model (CEM)
Suggest that social loafing or the likelihood occuring, depends on what the indiviudal members expect and how much they value the outcome
Leadership
A process by which one or more group members are permitted to influence and motivate others to help attain group goals
What IS a competent face?
Decreased face roundness (seems more baby faced, therefore more feminine, therefore less competent… grr)
Closeness of eyes and brows
Greater jaw angularity
= MASCULINE
Why do men get chosen as leaders?
Stereotype
Authoritarian (Autocratic)
Leader says what to do and how to do it.
i. leader has all information
ii. time is short
iii. group members are motivated
Paternatlistic
Similar to autocratic, but greater focus on needs of indiviudal group members.
Participatory (Democratic)
Trust follows to make decisions, made of majority view, but leader makes final choice.
PROBLEM: changes are slow, processes can take a long tiime, and movement can be very slow.
Delegative (Laissez-Faire)
Leave decisions up to the group
Proximity
Geographical nearness
Mere-exposure effect
The tendency for novel stimuli to be liked more or rated more positively after the rater has been repeatedly exposed to them.
What is attraction?
The tendency to positively evaluate another person, including affective, behavioural, and cognitive components such as desire and motivation to initate contact and intimacy
Why do we get attracted to people?
Cognitive dissonance theory, balance theory.
Attraction happens when you get rewarded when you are with someone, if you are punished then you do not like them anymore.
Attraction is driven by a combination of evolved biological mechanisms involved in species survival
Evolved biological charcteristics —> sociocultural characteristics BOTH = attraction and mate selection
Who are we attracted to?
We have a tendency to be attracted to people who are similar to us
Taller people
Successfull people (more money)
SEXY people (hehe)
The qualitites that are considered attractive change over time
Understanding physical attractiveness: FACES
Your brain says good job, you did something right. What is inside the faces gives the brain a hit of dopamine.
Three qualities that make the face attractive…
- AVERAGENESS (Normality)
When you average all the faces, makes something easier to process - SYMMETRY
People rate symmetrical faces more attractive - SEXUAL DIMORPHISM
People tend to like dimorphic faces; either higher in testosterone or estrogen (more masculine, feminine)
What do ALL faces signal?
- sexually mature, being an adult
- being healthy
- More likely to have babies
Understanding physical attractiveness: BODIES
Starting point is sexual dimorphism.
Super focus on male and female bodies
Waist-to-hip ratio
The measurement around the waist divided by the measurement around the hips
What makes females more physically attractive?
More feminine, normative, average, and symmetrical facial features
What makes men more physically attractive?
More normative / average, more masculine, and more symmetric facial features
What makes people more psychologicall attractive?
After initial attraction, the most important feature of a romantic partner is
1. Warmth / Trustworthiness –> Loyalty, Kindness, Love
- Attractivness / Vitality —> Sexy, Fun, Sense of Humour
- Status / Resources –> Having (or potential to have), Money, Education, Career
Attraction is driven by a combination of evolved biological mechanisms involved in species survival
Attachment theory
A theory that classifies people into four attachment styles;
1. secure
2. preocuppied
3. Dismissing avoidant
4. fearful avoidant
based on two dimensions
1. Anxiety
2. Avoidance
Secure attachment
Style of attachment in which people are low on anxiety and low on avoidance; they trust their partners, share their feeling, provide and receive support and comfort, and enjoy their relationships
Preoccupied (anxious / ambivalent) attachment
Style of attachment in which people are low on avoidance but high on anxiety; they want to enjoy closeness but worry their relationship partners will abandon them.
Dismissing avoidant attachment
Style of attachment in which people are low on anxiety but high on avoidance; they tend to view partners as unreliable, unavailable, and uncaring
Fearful avoidant attachment
Style of attachment in which people have both high anxiety and high avoidance; they have low opinions of themselves and keep others from getting close
Self-acceptance
Regarding yourself as being reasonably good person as you are
Dimensional model of romantic attachment
(Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991)
LOW anxiety (positive model of self) = when you think you can support yourself, handle challenges and stressors when you need to, think by yourself
HIGH anxiety (negative model of self) = trying to figure out themselves. Mistrust of themselves, and others
LOW avoidance (positive model of others)
HIGH avoidance (negative model of others) = positive model of themselves, negative model of others.
What does our attachment system do?
Attachment system is NOT the same thing as personality. It is a system that gets activated.
When is the attachment system activated?
During contexts of…
- Indiviudal threat (e.g., feeling sick, tired, overwhelmed)
- Relationship threat (e.g., an attractive alternative, conflict)
- Relationship-bonding (e.g., needing / giving support
People become less anxious and less avoidant over time when their partners are responsive to their needs.
If you are in a relationship that is NOT responsive to your need, you will get more anxious or more avoidant
Close relationships
Are enduring and involve strong, frequent, diverse interconnections
How do people perceive close relationships?
A priority of life
The most meaningful part of life
Central to happiness
What are close relationships factor to?
Reduce stress and detrimental helath behaviours
Promote physical health and mental health
Increase survival
Two theories on the benefits of support
- Reduces the negative psychological and physiological effects of stress and negative life events
- Engages people in the mutual development, achievement, and outcomes of goals
Social support
The thing that links our social relationships to health
Action-facilitating support
Support that you give to someone to help them do stuff
Increase dependence on the support providers.
Increases resources outweight demands
Decrease views of the self as capable
Nurturant support
Support that is nurturing in some way, less orientated on what to do, more orientated on feeling.
Increase relationship satisfaction
Increase trust
Increase positive mood / self-esteem
Increase diet; nutrition; sleep quality
Increase immune, endocrine, and cardiovascular functioning
Negative support
Blame, minimising, invalidation, controlling behaviours
Decrease EVERYTHING
Stressful event –> coritsol release (activates all systems), relationship comes in, helps back to baseline –> living longer
Predicing Perceived responsivity TABLE
Emotional support = YES discloses emotion
Informational support = NO discloses information, (small) yes requests advice
Negative “support” = NO discloses information, NO request for advice
Frustration-aggression hypothesis
Proposal that ‘the occurrence of aggressive behaviour always presupposes the existence of frustration’, and ‘the existence of frustration always leads to some form of aggression’
Frustration
Blockage of or intereference with a personal gain
Hostile attribution bias
The tendency to perceive ambiguous actions by others as aggressive
Hostile perception bias
The tendency to perceive social interactions in general as being aggressive
Hostile expectation bias
The tendency to assume that people will react to potential conflicts with aggression
Tend and befriend syndrome
A response to stress that involve nurturing others and making friends
Relational aggression (also called) Social aggression
Behaviour that involves intentionally harming anoter person’s social relationships, feeling of acceptance, or inclusion within a group
What was the original Community Intervention?
The Duluth Model
People who hold power don’t need to be aggressive… why?
They already have power
Three theories of aggression
- Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis
- Excitation transfer hypothesis
- Person x Situation Models
The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis
Organisms aggress when frustrated due to interference to their goal, toward the source or a surrogate for the source
Strengths / Weaknesses of the Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis
Not accounting for indiviudal differences, this model says that anyone should be aggressive when goal doesn’t got their way.
Excitation Transfer
Heightened physiological arousal increases likelihood of aggressing
Strengths / Weaknesses of the Excitation Transfer Hypothesis
Starting to include indiviudal differences, how stress people can get, connects well with attachment models
If we have treatment models based on anger management should do redirection of energy, using it up in a different way
Person x Situation Models
All models where they say there are different elements that you have to take on board.
To be aggressive you need multiple things that point in the same direction
Person Characteristics
e.g., high trait anger
Where you are quicker to anger, higher in anger. The tendency to make hostile attributions etc.
Inhibition Reduction
e.g., alcohol, contextual norms
There is a general level of inhibition of violence.
Instigating Characteristics
e.g., goal frustration, high physiological arousal
This model says there are a lot of different characteristics that instigate aggression
How to instigate aggression?
You need ALL THREE
1. Person characteristics
2. Inhibition Reduction
3. Insigating characteristics
High Jealousy x Limited Emotional control predicts?
High Aggression (regardless of alcohol)
High Jealousy x High Emotional Control predicts?
Aggression when there is alcohol abuse
Low low bars (on graph for jealously / anger control)
No aggression when lacking jealousy (regardless of emotional control OR alcohol abuse)
Reducing aggression
We can take each factor and make them an intervention target
What intervention for aggression might work?
Couple’s therapy, creating healthy relationship program
Social Dilemma
A form of interdependence in which most rewarding action for each individual will, if chosen by all individuals, produce a negative outcome for the entire group
How can the powerful effects of connectedness with a group be encouraged to increase such concern for the greater rather than the indiviudal good?
Communication among group members
Equality of opportunities and outcomes among group members
Accessibility of group norms
Linking individual efforts to the group good.
Pro-social behaviour
Behaviours inteded to help others (versus help the self)
Two classic theories on Helping
Latane and Darley’s Model
Cost-Reward Model
Latane and Darley’s Model, 1968
- Attend the situation
- Categorize the situation as needing help
- Take responsibility to help
- Know and decide on a strategy
A.C.T.S
Cost-Reward Model
Physiological response to the situation; Excitation transfer of aggression time, everything has to be physiology.
- Event happens that produces physiological response.
- Categorize that physiological response
- Calculate costs of helping or not helping (sometimes called bystander-calculus)
P.C.C
Influence
Acts of changing others’ thoughts / behaviours
Power
The capacity to influence a person in an ongoing relationship
Two theories on Power
Agentic-Communal model
Approach Inhibition model
Agentic Communal Model
Power activates different goals / need.
Approach Inhibition Model
Power (still) activates different goals / needs
Relationional state
