Test 5 (Applications of Social Psych) Flashcards
stress
negative feelings and beliefs that arise from a situation where you don’t have resources/have a lack of resources
distress vs. eustress
distress: stress from negative situations (ex; divorce)
eustress: stress from positive situations (ex; planning a wedding)
catastrophes
increases in physical/mental stress that are significant and can lead to bad health issues
ex; increases in suicides after earthquakes
life stresses often come about because __________
we have to interact with other people. eats away at our cognitive resources, from everyday life! a buildup can lead to bad health effects.
everyday stresses
constant background stresses that can accumulate and lead to bad health effects
ex; traffic
resilience
when we can effectively react to a stressful event and bounce back
____________ is strongly correlated with heart disease/negative reactions to stress
hostility
stone (immune response)
had participants keep a diary, measures daily stressful events and can in for a daily saliva sample. on stressful days, immune response was lower.
______ stress will impact the immune system more than _______ stress!
chronic, acute
cancer rats experiment
researchers shocked rats predisposed to cancer over several days. those who didn’t get shocked 50% developed cancer, those who did get shocked 73% developed cancer.
cognitive appraisal (p/s stage)
how you understand the deficit between your resources and the required resources
primary stage: what event are you looking at?
secondary stage: do you have the resources to deal with it?
usually don’t pass primary unless it’s a negative event!
control
if we don’t have control we are more likely to stress.
internal vs. external locus of control
internal: i am in the driver’s seat.
external: jesus took the wheel and i’m just along for the ride.
langer + rodin (nursing home)
director of nursing home emphasized either choosing a movie night/choosing a houseplant (int.) while the other group got no choice (ext.).
after following them. for a year, better health was in the int. group, only 15% died while 30% of the ext. group died :(
shulz (nursing home again)
residents could either choose who and when people would visit, had no choice, or were offered the choice for two months before it was taken away.
the group that was moved from int. to ext. did the worst
coping (problem vs. emotion)
how we respond to stress.
problem focused: solving the event causing the stress (ex; i go to tutoring for finals)
emotion focused: solving the emotional reaction to the stress (ex; i’m stressed and will watch avatar the last airbender for six hours to feel less stressed)
emotion focused (positive/neutral/sharing)
positive: try to increase positive emotionality to replace negative stress
neutral: try to shut down all emotion (ex; scrolling on your phone instead of doing anything)
sharing: share emotional reactions with those who are or are not experiencing the same thing
proactive
do what you can to have the event not occur (ex; filling the gas tank to avoid being slaughtered when your car runs out of gas in buttfuck, nowhere)
perceived social support
managing your mental health when thinking about stressful situations that may come along.
long term, this is the amount of social support you think you have available
received social support
how you manage a response to a stressful situation, the amount of support you actually have available
instrumental, information, and emotional social support
instrumental: helps provide you with resources to fill the deficit causing you stress (ex; money for bills), PROBLEM
information: provides you with advice for how to fill the deficit, PROBLEM
emotional: try to combat/tend to your emotional needs in a stressful situation (ex; bring your favorite food) EMOTION
those with MORE and STRONGER social support have better outcomes.
interventions
how to use social support to make you healthier and change an unhealthy behavior
biopsychosocial
need a holistic approach to lead to the greatest health with a focus on biology, psychology, and social support
reid/aiken (phoenix)
in phoenix, worked with women who thought tanned skin was the best/who were exposed to sun damage.
just telling them about skin cancer risk produced no change, but cultural norms also decreased their sun damage (ex; tanned skin is not the only beautiful skin)
health belief model
e/c/e
the beliefs a person has about effectiveness, consequence, and ease of healthy behaviors predicts if someone will do them!
prototype willingness model (adolescents)
sa/r
engaging in risky behavior is determined by:
social activity (are others engaging?)
reactivity (how do you react to it? spontaneously, or otherwise?)
if you intervene, you can stop the behavior! (ex; car mode on spotify)
nonadherence
not following the doctor’s orders when it comes to health activity. usually prescriptions.
formative assessments vs. summative assessments
formative: given meaningful feedback to cause change (ex; drink less caffeine and meditate)
summative: how well you did at causing change (ex; they test your blood pressure 6 months later to see)
hawthorne effect
people act differently when aware they are being watched
job interviews: what matters, what are the issues, __________ interviews are the best
what matters: physical attractiveness and similarity
what are the issues: impressions are formed during first exposure, which includes resumes
structured! it’s when u ask everyone the same exact questions, then you show the differences between candidates more easily
interview tests
i/p/ioc
intelligence
personality
integrity (overt and covert)
what traits make a good leader?
ca/id/lm/f/i/gp
cognitive ability
inner drive
leadership motivation
flexibility
integrity
guilt-prone
task vs. relation oriented leadership
task: leader and followers are focused on the task at hand. good for clear hierarchies/structure and high control (Levi Ackerman)
relation: leader is focused on the relationships and well-being of their followers. good for novel situations with low control (Tomura Shigaraki)
transformation leadership (aka, how to become a cult leader)
c/cp/im/ic
leader is changing opinions/minds of their followers (Geto Suguru)
charisma
can provide intellectual stimulation (make followers question themselves)
inspirational motivation (make followers think they are doing something good)
individualized consideration (leader recognizes the successes and efforts of their followers)
what enables bad leadership?
i/o/p/p/l
irrelevant traits (chose a leader bc of something like their height)
over-promoted (too much control makes them bad at managing)
poor team hiring (nepotism)
poor interpersonal skills
lack of trust (in the leader)
yam (5am)
employees could choose to start at any time between 5am and 9:45am. supervisors then ranked their employees. those who started earlier were ranked higher irrespective of their productivity and success! the exact same thing was found with college professors and students
job appraisal: the good and bad ways
r/s/i/3/d
restricting range (don’t use whole scale 1-10) BAD
self-evaluation (we think we did better and underestimate our absences) BAD
immediate ratings (avoiding memory flaws) GOOD
360 degree assessment (have higher, equal, and lower colleagues all rate you for a well-rounded assessment) GOOD
due process (give adequate notice, a fair hearing, and evidence of job performance so ppl actually listen to their critiques) GOOD
expectancy theory
workers are more motivated when they believe the work they put in produces positive outcomes (motivation)
incentives and motivation
frame pay as incentive instead of a bribe for better work
equity theory
people who put in more work should get more reward (motivation)
progress theory
people feel the best and are most motivated after they have made some sort of progress in their work (motivation)
three ways to identify a suspect
c/i/f
construction: choose ‘filler’ faces that match the witness’s description
instruction: instructions you give a witness influence their choice. police are meant to say the perpetrator may OR may not be present.
format: bring those matching suspect description back to the crime scene immediately after crime when witness is still present. situational factors (ex; in handcuffs) influence the witness’s choice. WORST WAY!!!
format identification
s/s
simultaneous: see all pics at the same time
sequential: see picks one after the other
familiarity bias
if you’re familiar with this person, people say yes because they feel a sense of familiarity to them
brown (mugshot books)
had people flip through a mugshot book after witnessing a fake crime. gave them a lineup either with the perpetrator or with a face from the book. some guessed correctly but you’re just as likely to choose the face you’re familiar with from the book!
double-blind procedure
person giving witness the lineup doesn’t know who the suspect is to they don’t guide the witness
marion (money)
participants came in with a confederate, half were lead to believe that they were similar to the confederate. worked on a task together. experimented left, confederate came black with cash. the experimented said that $ had gone missing, confederate said they were both in the room.
23% backed confederate regardless of similarity
lies and the police
public spots a liar 54% of the time, while police only 52%
interpersonal pressure
invading the subject’s personal space
physical pressure
strongly touch subject or deny them/avoid giving physical necessities
ex; food, water, potty breaks
pressure on those they care about
threaten to arrest or interrogate their loved ones
befriend + minimize
use social tactics to make suspect tell the truth
1) act nice to get suspect to like them
2) make suspect believe consequences are small and uncertain
false confessions
c/i
compliance: you confess in order to end the interrogation, usually immediately retract the statement once released
(targets youth and intellectually impaired)
internalization: innocent suspect starts to actually believe that they committed the crime
(those impaired in interrogation, ex; drunk)
kassin (murder trial)
had participants read a double murder trial. in one there was no confession, the other low pressure, the last high pressure. they had to voice if they though the suspect was guilty.
no = 19% guilty
low = 62% guilty
high = 50% guilty
jury beliefs
p/d
personal: belief of jurors that no matter what, they wouldn’t have falsely confessed
detail: juries believe false confession because they contain accurate details corroborated by other evidence (ex; officers supplied information)
phenomenology of innocence
innocent people are most likely to fall victim to the justice system because they believe their innocence will come out
corroborating evidence
a confession can taint investigation in regards to how later evidence in processed (confirmation bias)
false confessions and forensic analysts
after a confession, forensic analysts are more likely to say that 2 fingerprints match
___% of DNA exonerations have to do with false confessions.
25%
jury size is traditionally __
12
williams v. florida (small jury)
determined that juries can be as small as 6 assuming it isn’t a death penalty case
saks + marti (smaller is bad)
meta snalysis saying smaller juries are worse as they are less diverse and reach unanimous decisions with less deliberation
jury selection
lawyers often rely on stereotypes in selection
jury selection
lawyers often rely on stereotypes in selection
pretrial publicity
people think they can ignore pretrial information, but they really can’t
instructions
juries don’t understand instructions, including what beyond a reasonable doubt means.
defendant characteristics
beautiful defendant, similarly attractive defendants get light sentencing
victim perceptions
amount of negligence or involvement of the victim in their victimhood can affect decisions of if they’re guilty (victim blaming!)
pica et al. (victim blaming)
mock jurors rated a sexual assault victim as having more control over their assault when the accused was a high status individual (star football player)
sentencing is generally left up to the ______
judge!
wilson + rule (trustworthiness)
asked people to rate the trustworthiness of 742 murderers by looking at their photos. found that those rated as less trustworthy were more likely to get the death penalty
salman et al. (black v. white jail time)
when the severity of crime and previous record were equal, black defendants were sentenced to 68% more jail time than white defendants in FLORIDA
