Test #5 Applying Social Psychology Flashcards
stress
negative feelings and beliefs that arise when you unable to cope the demands of the situation
stress and subjectivity
what causes one person stress can differ from another
life events inventory
a tool that measures the relative severity of stressful life events
distress
negative stressors
eustress
positive stressors (wedding or nation planning)
catastrophes
large scale disasters
associated with physiological and mental stress that can lead to negative health outcomes
63% increase in suicides after earthquakes
63% increase in violence after eruption
life stresses
things that commonly occur but still tends to be significant, most are due to the connection of another person like a death
everyday stresses
common, daily things, like traffic.
interpersonal conflict
while smaller they can be worse because they add up leading to worse health outcomes
how to respond to stress
resilience: having small increases in stress, then coming back to the baseline
hostility: becoming aggressive due to a stressor. correlation between racism and heart disease
stress and imunne response
there is a correlation between stress and an immune response
stone (1994) had participants keep a diary then coded for stressful events, also had them take a daily saliva sample. found that on the days that people recorded stress there was a decrease in immune response in their saliva
stress and cancer
chronic stress/ long lasting stress is correlated to cancer more so than acute stress.
rats are more likely to row tumors if they were shocked daily
male employees who had lower self esteem and depression were more likely to die from cancer
cognitive appraisal
looking at stress as if the cognitive resources of an individual can meet the demands of a situation
primary step - the stage where we determine if it is positive negative or neutral, if negative is it harmful threatening or challenging?
secondary step - looking to see if you have the resources to cope with the event, if there is a gap between the resources and demands you will experience stress, the larger the gap the more stress
internal locus of control
feeling like you have control over yourself and the situation at hand. those who feel more of an internal locus of control have better outcomes with mental illness (specifically breast cancer and heart issues)
external locus of control
feeling like you don’t have control over yourself or the situation. more correlated with stress. people are showing increases in external control
longer and Rodin (1976)
had participants in nursing homes choose to either watch a movie or have a plant in their room. the other group was assigned. those who chose died 15% those who did not choose had 30% death
shulz (1976)
also took place in nursing homes where participants could choose when people could visit them or not. the group who once had control over visiting time but then lost it had worse health outcomes
cultura differences in control
individual cultures care more about having internal locus of control than collectivist cultures
problem focused coping
attempting to solve the issue or problem that is causing the stress
emotion focused coping
focusing on the consequences of the stress, using mental/behavioral methods to cope with the feelings that come from stress. people with an external locus of control associate more with emotion focused because they don’t feel like they’re able to solve the problem.
positive strategy in coping
trying to increase the positive emotionality
neutral strategy in coping
shutting down to feel nothing
sharing strategy in coping
sharing the experience you’re having to help cope
proactive coping
engaging with the event before it happens, either eliminating - preventing the event from happening at all, or decreasing - decrease the effects or ramifications of the event, I can’t stop the exam so I am proactive by studying to decrease the negative outcomes
social support and coping
because we are such social creatures one of the key ways we cope with stress is to reach out to closely affiliated others
received social support
the actual support that is provided to a person, important when reacting to a stressful event
perceived social support
the amount of support an individual believes is available to them, important for our day to day mental health. everyone is going to experience stressful events in their life, the idea that in the future I can experience help but I have the resources to help me when I get to that point helps my mental health
instrumental social support
receiving tangible material support or resources like borrowing dollars from a friend
informational social support
advice
emotional social support
helping to deal with our emotional needs, generally we look to this the most followed by informational then instrumental
health outcomes and social support
physical and mental health increase when we have social support. spending any time in isolation in jail increased death in the next five years
social interventions
generally it is people who we are closely affiliated with who might engage in an intervention and try to help us change unhealthy behavior
people have a colloquial understanding of interventions but this can apply to any kind of unhealthy behavior, it does not need to be formulaic or defined.
interventions with more social support tend to be more successful
biopsychosocial model
in order to understand health we must understand the biological, psychological and social components of a person. A lot of our health behaviors are socially defined.
one reason people may perform unhealthy behaviors is social pressure
study looked at people in Tanzania regarding having tan skin. Many women incorrectly assumed that other women thought it was attractive and the many thought others thought that protecting from sun damage was not important. when researches corrected these beliefs women were more likely to wear protective clothing and not be in the sun as much getting tan. (social desirability bias)
industrial and organizational psychology
business psychology
Hawthorne effect
people tend to work harder when they are aware they are being watched. originally discovered as the most effective technique in a western electric plant in Hawthorne trying to make their workers more productive. this was the most impactful
job interviews
physical attraction seems to matter a lot
similarity also seems to be very impactful
self presentation on both the interviewer and interviewee is important
oftentimes the impression an interviewer has is built before they even meet the interviewee. this perception will guide the interaction (self fulfilling prophecy
structured job interviews: where you ask everyone the same questions in the same order
interview tests, seen more often in full time jobs, can be on intelligence or personality. the latter is problematic to use because of social desireailithy bias. integrity tests, where you examine a person’s honesty and character, and can be divided into overt and covert, the first is where an individual is aware, covert is when they are unaware.
leadership and cognitive ability
cognitive ability like intelligence, processing speed, and creativity are important for leadership
leadership and inner drive
intrinsic motivation is important for leadership. often times the leader is expected to always ave the drive, while follows may have variations over the lifespan of the task, by the leader having a consistent high level of intrinsic motivation it can make up for fluctuation in followers.
leadership and motivation
people who are given a position of leadership because they want it often times don’t have the same level of success as someone who wants to be a leader
leadership and flexibility
leaders need to be able to spontaneously deal with troubles as they arise, if you have a very rigid or structured leader they can have trouble when there are random mistakes
integrity and leadership
absolute power corrupts absolutely. People in leadership have power and if they don’t have integrity there is potential they will abuse their power
guilt prone leaders
a leader who will feel bad when bad things happen. if you have a leader who blames everyone else or is neutral when bad things happen you won’t be as successful as when you have a leader who is able to carry the burden of failure
task oriented leaders
leaders with a single minded focus on the task at hand
relations oriented leaders
leaders concerned about the feelings and wellbeing of their followers
which is better a task or relations oriented leader
if the group is together for a longer period of time it is better to have a relations orientation. if it is a temporary group then it is better to have a task orientation
if it is a low control situation when the task is not well defined or it is a noel task then it is better to have a task oriented leader for you are likely to have setbacks in a poorly defined or a new task and in these cases it is important to be able to bounce back,
in a high controlled situation when the employees are comfortable with the task a relations oriented leader is more successful, the followers have the task under control and they need a leader to help maintain group cohesion, focusing on relationships will help with group success
transformational leadership
a style of leadership that will change the opinions of your followers. most commonly seen in startups, this is helpful here in order to create dedicated employees. also often used by cult leaders to trap their members
what traits are found in transformational leaders
charisma,
intellectual stimulation: the leader will present new ways of thinking and encourage open expression of ideas even if those ideas seem silly or foolish, for example most cults have some driving philosophy that largely originates from their leader and changes how their followers think about the world
inspirational motivation: where the leader convinces their followers to do good, be successful, and become more than they are now
individualized consideration: when the leader supports and recognizes the achievements of individuals, this can be one on one or in public
irrelevant traits found in leadership
we don’t often choose leaders based on traits that will lead to success. over the last 28 presidential elections the tallest candidate won 89% of the time
over promotion in leadership
people who are good at dealing with small groups may be promoted to a group that they can’t handle. some people are better sited for lower or middle management and can lead to problems in a company with their leadership
poor team hiring as a sign of bad leadership
rather than choosing the best people for the job, if a leader chooses people they like the best it can be a sign of poor leadership, for example, nepotism is often a sign of poor leadership
lack of trust in leadership
generally you want your followers to be able to trust their leader, if they don;t trust their leader they won’t listen to what he says and that will lead to chaos
job appraisals and the yam study on start times
people could repot to a job from 5 to 945 in the morning, found that supervisors reported late arrivers worse than early arrivers regardless of their actual output.
restriction of range in job appraisals
people tend to rate something more similar rather than using the entire range, this can be weak when assessing a large number of employees
self-evaluations in job appraisals
when you are asked to evaluate your own job performance, people are overly optimistic, also they underestimate the number of absences they had in comparison to their coworkers. honesty is good for yourself but it pays to be dishonest in this situation when painting your self image for someone else
immediate ratings in job appraisals
job appraisals tend to be most accurate when done right after the performance, most job appraisals are not immediate they are done just every six months or a year
360 assessment in job appraisals
not just asking supervisors to rate employees but also asking inferiors and quals to rate their capabilities. this larger perspective yields more accurate ratings
Folgers
due process: there are three elements necessary to create a perception of fairness for appraisals - a lack of fairness can lead to unhappiness in an employee which can lead them to perform worse or find a different job.
- adequate notice: you must let them know when they will be observed and when they will receive the report from the observation, surprise inspections tend to lead to a perception of unfairness
- fair hearing: give people the parameters they will be judged against prior to the judgment. it is best if they know the judgement criteria the day they are hired
- evidence of job performance: they should be judged by a supervisor who is aware of their actual work. feedback then a rebuttal should be offered
motivation and expectancy theory
workers are most motivated when they believe their effort will produce valued outcomes. workers are most motivated when they can expect appreciation from their work
incentives and motivation
over justification effect, and make sure that you’re incentives are not perceived as bribes
equity theory in motivation
those who put in the most work should be the most rewarded, if we are not getting as much of a reward for the amount of work we put in we are going to Geel inderbenifited, if that is the case we will feel angry or disgusted which may lead us to perform worse of look for other opportunities. this can be complicated because we are not always aware of how much work others are putting in.
progress theory in motivation
people tend to feel best and most motivated after they have made actual progress in their job. if they have solved an issue, fixed a problem, or completed a task. after they have had that bacheiemnt the positive emotions from that achievement motivate them, id they can’t find more progress this may result in a rebound effect and they may start to get bored and experience negative emotionality
identifying the suspect and construction of a lineup
jones ended up in prison for 17 years when Amos was really guilty, one of the reasons is that the men look really similar, the problem was the construction of the lineup. one suspect and six foils. the foils looked nothing like the suspect and his description.
how police deliver lineups
for a long time the police did no say that the perp may or may not be in the lineup, and did not say that they will continue searching if the suspect is not found.
witnesses often report that they feel like lineups are multiple choice questions.
often times the witness or victim want to please the police so it is common they will just choose one to appease the officer
simultaneous vs sequential lineup vs shows
some think sequential is best because it is only influenced by memory rather than comparing to others in line.
showups: very problematic, generally done at the crime seen after the witness gives s description then the cop drives around looking for matches and bring them back to the crime seen and ask witnesses if this is the perp.
In a six person lineup there is a ⅙ chance you choose a person that the police suspect. In a showup if you feel like you need to make a choice to continue the relationship with the police there is only one person you can choose you don’t have the protection of the foils. Also, it is not uncommon for the police to bring you this person handcuffed in the back of a police car, all the stereotypes of this person being guilty are present. The stereotypes this is activating might make it easier for you to say yes this is the person.
familiarity bias
when you recognize the person but you don’t know where from. you assume that you must recognize them from the crime so you choose someone not because they match your memory but because they trigger some recognition
brown (1977) know this
had witnesses view a staged crime then had them right after looking through a mugshot book. a few days later they viewed a lineup. found that participants were just as likely to identify someone from the mug book as they were the actual perp and half got a lineup with photos just from the photo book. people picked the perp and the book at the same rate. this is am issue with real cases, when people frequent a common shop they confused other frequenters with the perp and accused another regular.
what is the most ideal way to do lineups
Double blind procedure: we should ideally use this, the experimenter does not know who the suspect is. In that way there can be no accidental biasing, if the police know who the suspect is it can be they are unconsciously influencing the witness to choose the suspect like accidentally smiling or moving close to the witness when looking at the photo, if the police don’t know it protects from accidental influence.
alibis
what the suspect says to how they could not have committed a crime. one of the big problems is that oftentimes the alibis are with people we have a social relationship with. Because you have a social relationship with that person the police assume they would lie for you so they don’t put much credit into it.
voluntary confessions
when someone did not commit the crime but they are for some reason taking the blame for someone else.
generally seen in a social relationship.
there are interesting subsets where people confess for notoriety but not for someone they know
confessions and lies
people think that they are pretty good at identifying lies. research has shown that people are at chance. we are able to tell the truth about 54% of the time. there is also a very common belief that police officers are better at determining if someone is lying, they are not, they also score at chance. the difference is that overconfidence in their ability which creates a situation where they fall for a lot of confirmation bias. this can lead to problems like tunnel vision.
confessions and pressure
trying to build up an environment where it is more problematic for the suspect to continue the interrogation that it is for them to confess. this is one o the reasons you can see interrogations lasting for twelve hours or more.
You think of consequences right now than long term, what matters is getting out of this room so I will confess to get out of this room. One of the ways they build this pressure is by presenting false evidence.
Befriend and minimize: rather than building pressure to get someone to confess, build a social relationship with the suspect and say the crime they did was not that bad and it is okay to confess because the crime you did was trivial.
volunteering and compliance false confessions
confessing just to end the interrogation, this is the most common, most likely to happen under poor conditions hungry, tired, stressed, when cognitive and self control regulation resources are low. It is very common when you have a compliance confession to recant the confession the next day.
If we are looking at confessions once you get beyond six hours of interrogation you are more likely to get a false confession than a true confession
internalizations false confessions
when people confess to a crime because they are led to believe that they actually committed the crime.
If they don;t have any memory of what they were doing during the time of the crime because you were asleep or you were intoxicated it can be easy for police to paint this in your mind for you
Also false evidence: police can say we have dna, video, and witnesses, and if you have no memory otherwise this can build a narrative in your memory.
kassin and sukel (1997)
had people read a double murder trial with a confession and no confession, no confession 19% guilty, in the low pressure case 62% voted guilty, in a high pressure 50% voted guilty.
why do juries see confessions as so convincing
they have a hard time seeing why they would confess to a crime that they did not commit, so they have a hard time understanding why someone would confess to a crime that they did not commit.
Often times confessions include a lot of detail, we thus assume they are more truthful
It is also not uncommon for false confessions to include truthful information, say a knife in a murder, then the schema comes in and created the details
Corroborating evidence: information brought in to support the truthfulness of a confession but there is something known as corroboration inflation, if a witness or forensic analyst hears their was a confession, then this will effect their behaviors. Witnesses are more likely to choose someone from the lineup if they heard there was a confessional forensic analysts are more likely to create a match if they hear of a confession. Although these seem independent and corroborate, in reality they are biased.
jury size
size matters for conformity, most people think juries are twelve, you don’t necessarily have twelve as long as it is not a death penalty case, you can have a jury as small as six.
William v florida was the case that said you can have six to twelve if it is not a death penalty case
Saks and marti (1997): mta-analysis found that smaller juries were less likely to listen to a minority voice, were more likely to come to a unanimous decision, and spent less time deliberating
Jury selection
generally the prosecution and the defense will build out their jury from the people called out for jury duty. in the beginning they can exclude someone for the jury if they have a reason, convicts, or have a relationship to the crime, we see problems when lawyers rely on stereotypes to build their jury
Pretrial publicity
when a jury is exposed to information through media before the actual case. we see that oftentimes people are more likely to vote guilty when they know more about the case. they can’t forget the information they heard from the media and isolate the information from the actually trial.
jurors also don’t acknowledge this pretrial influence so a verdict can seem fair
jury instruction
juries do not understand the instructions that are given to them, one of the large reasons is because the instructions are often written by people with strong legal vocab that the average person does not understand. One of the areas we see this being particularly problematic is with reasonable doubt, juries don’t understand what beyond a reasonable doubt means, we found juries mess this up over 50% of the time
Defendant characteristics
the more physically attractive someone is the less likely they are to be identified as guilty.
Similarity: if the defendant is similar to you you are less likely to vote guilty
victim perceptions
If we think the victim was negligent then we are less likely to vote guilty, or in some way involved with their victimization, just world belief. I am good, good things happen to good people, and the world is good. If something bad happened to you I want it to be your fault.
If we think a victim is not acting the way we think victims should we are less likely to vote guilty
Pica (2018) had moc jurors read a sexual assault and give ratings as to if they thought a sexual assault occured as well as give ratings of guilt, varied as to who the perp was, with half the defendant was a star football player for the other half it was an average student. People were less likely to find the football player guilty, and thought the victim had more control of their assault when the perp was a football player.
Sentencing
in non capital cases juries don’t determine the sentence. Stereotypes and perceptions come into play here.
Wilson and rule (2015): had participants rate the trustworthiness of 750 convicted murderers pictures and found that the people who had less trustworthy faces were more likely to be given death as the sentence while the people who had more trustworthy faces were more likely to be given life in prison
Salman (2016) even when the previous record and severity was the exact same black participants got 68% more jail time than white defendants in florida
