test 3 Flashcards
social dominance orientation
motivation to have one’s group dominate other social groups
realistic group conflict theory
theory that prejudice arises from competition between groups for scarce resources
social identity
the “we” aspect of self-concept
ingroup
“us”
- group of people who share sense of belonging, common identity
outgroup
“them”
- group people perceive as different from their group
consequences of prejudice
- subtyping
- subgrouping
- stereotypes
STUDY: Thai et al.
Friends with moral credentials
- belief that minority friendships make one look less racist
IV:
1) the statement on the Facebook profile (2 levels)
2) the visual picture on the profile (3 levels)
3) observers (2 levels)
DV:
1) how racist the target was seen
2) perceived negative intent
3)level of offensiveness
4) neg. affect toward statement
automatic processing
we seek patterns & categorize things and people
stereotyping
cognitive component
- generalization of a group where indiv characteristics are given to all in group regardless of actual variations
prejudice
affective (emotional) component
- neg or pos attitude toward group of people based only on membership in group
discrimination
behavioral component
- unjustified neg or pos action towards group based on group membership
STUDY: Tajfei & Turner
Minimal Group Paradigm
- show slides with lots of dots & guess # of dots
- tell based on info if you over or underestimated - results made up
- then, 2 groups play game together
- stereotypes quickly emerged within groups
is implicit or explicit prejudice greater today?
Explicit in US has increased dramatically
implicit bias
operates OUTSIDE of awareness
- having preference for a group based on implicit attitudes, stereotypes, etc
IAT knee tapping instructions
(Implicit association task - Greenwald & Banaji)
aggression as biological phenomenon
-influences:
instinctive
neural
genetic
biochemical
frustration aggression theory
theory that frustration triggers readiness to aggress
social learning theory
we learn social behavior by observing & imitating and rewards
STUDY: Albert Bandura
Bobo Doll
- children exposed to adult’s aggression against Bobo doll were likely to reproduce observed aggression
2 mental proccessess
intentional operating
- conscious / effortful
- unwanted thoughts go away through distraction
ironic monitoroing
- unconscious / little effort
- search for unwanted thoughts being surpressed
Contact Hypothesis (Allport 1954)
- contact between members of dif groups will improve relations BUT need:
1) cooperation
2) equal status
3) acquaintance potential (get to know each other)
4) institutional support
teasing vs bullying
teasing
- not making fun of characteristics out of someones control
- not meant to harm, from someone close to you
bullying
- 3 components
1) repeated
2) imbalance of power
3) purposeful
need to belong
motivation to bond with others in relationships that provide pos interactions
STUDY: Hatfield (1966)
- 752 students - matching dance
- aptitude/personality testing - how much did tests predict attraction?
matching phenomenon - tendancy for men/women to choose partners who are ‘good match’ in attractiveness & more
Proximity (propinquity)
- how much you interact with someone
- the more you interact & see the more likely to be friends
STUDY: Festinger (1950)
- looked at married housing complex at MIT & who became friends
- 65% reported best friend IN same building
- 41% reported next door neighbors were best friend
- people near common spaces friends all over building
STUDY: Shin et al (3 studies)
1) circle study
- how close in proximity people drew close friends on physical circle
2) romeo & juliet
- all male participants, female confederate
IV: distance sitting apart, 80 or 160 cm
- read romantic scene from romeo & juliet
DV: how much guys reported liking the woman
- close condition liked her more
3) closeness & attractiveness
- men & women both shown pictures of 2 women where one looked closer
- closer woman rated more attractive
Mere Exposure
the more exposure to stimulus, the more you like it
similarity vs complementary
- similarity attracts more
- open vs closed fields
- open: can be friends with anyone
- closed: brings people together
attractiveness
tendency to like people more physically attractive
- ‘what is beautiful is good’ stereotype
- more attractive people = more socially fluent
passionate vs companionate love
companionate love - feel close, develops, no passion
Sternbergs Love Triangle
1) intimacy - feeling close/bonded
2) passion - ‘hot’ part, arousal, sexual
3) commitment - short & long term
- intimacy + passion = romantic love
- intimacy + commitment = companionate love (parent - child)
- passion + commitment = fatuous love (hookup)
- ALL = consummate love
love styles
1) eros
2) ludus
3) storge
4) pragma
5) mania
6) agape
women = more storge & pragma
men = more ludic
social exchange theory
cost vs reward
STUDY: Strange Situation Task
attachment styles
- babies in room with a parent
- parents leave room (babies should cry)
- look at reaction baby has when parent returns
altruism
helping without expecting anything in return
prosocial behavior
any act performed with goal of benefiting another person
theories of helping
- evolutionary psychology (biological)
- social norms (sociological)
- social exchange theory (psych)
evolutionary psychology
people are more likely to help those in family more
reciprocity norm
expectation that helping others will result in you getting help later
social responsibility norm
expectation people will help those dependent on them
social exchange theory
aim to maximize rewards and minimize costs
- only when pros outway cons
Batson’s Empathy Altruism Hypothesis
1) observe
2) empathy?
no - social exchange
yes - will help (altruism)
STUDY: “Carol” (Batson)
- intro to psych students told to evaluate different radio shows (actually listening to same program by Carol Macey about hardship)
- participants get note from carol to student asking for help catching up at school
IV: empathy (high vs low) & costs of helping- empathy: induce or remove empathy from situation
- cost: see carol every day if you did/didn’t help
- empathy induce felt sympathy - if empathy helped regardless of cost
