Unit 1 Flashcards
(137 cards)
1
Q
Heuristics
A
Cognitive shortcuts to reach a judgement
2
Q
Automatic processing
A
Thinking which occurs quickly, without conscious effort
3
Q
Information overload
A
When demands on cognitive processing exceed our capacity
4
Q
Controlled processing
A
Thinking carefully and using logic- triggered by unexpected events
5
Q
Overjustification effect
A
Tendency for extrinsic incentives to undermine intrinsic motivation
6
Q
Explanation for overjustification effect
A
Self-perception theory: being rewarded for doing something leads us to believe we did it for the reward, not because we love it
7
Q
Overjustification study
A
Kids who were given an expected reward to play with a marker spent less time playing with it the second time around than those who had no reward or an unexpected reward
8
Q
Self schema
A
Cognitive framework of beliefs and information about the self, which influences processing of information
9
Q
Self-schema study
A
8th graders were randomly assigned to write an essay imagining their best possible self and strategies they could take to get there. Students who did this exercise got better grades, took more initiative, and misbehaved less.
10
Q
Role of culture in self schema
A
In more individualistic cultures, people’s self schema are more independent. In more interdependent cultures, the schema characteristics are more interdependent
11
Q
Self schema study
A
When asked to write about who they were, a large portion US undergrads wrote about their personal characteristics and very few about group membership.
Same with Kenyan undergrads.
Kenyan city workers were much less likely to describe personal characteristics and more likely to describe group membership
Masai tribe members were least likely to describe their personal characteristics, and most likely to describe their roles in a group
12
Q
Representativeness heuristic
A
Making a judgement on how something (a person, stimulus, or event) resembles another- a prototype comparison.
13
Q
Prototype
A
Summary of attributes possessed by members of a category
14
Q
Errors in representativeness heuristic
A
Judgements ignore base rate.
15
Q
Availability heuristic
A
Judging frequency by the ease with which we recall instances
16
Q
Errors in availability heuristic
A
Just because it is easy to recall an event doesn’t mean such things are frequent- dramatic things are easier to remember
17
Q
Emotional judgements and availability heuristic
A
For emotional judgements, we are more likely to rely on ease of recall
18
Q
Factual judgements or difficult tasks and availability heuristic
A
For factual judgements or difficult tasks, we are more likely to rely on the amount of information retrieved.
19
Q
Anchoring and adjustment heuristic
A
Dealing with uncertainty by using a familiar starting point and making adjustments
20
Q
Status quo heuristic
A
The assumption that a practice or product which has been around for a long time is better
21
Q
Schema
A
A mental framework which helps us organize information- what to expect and how to behave.
22
Q
3 processes influenced by schema
A
Attention, encoding, and retrieval
23
Q
Attention and schema
A
We are more likely to notice information consistent with our schemas
24
Q
Encoding and schema
A
We are most likely to encode information either consistent with our schema or very inconsistent
25
Retrieval and schema
People are more likely to report information consistent with schema, but may also recall inconsistent information strongly
26
When do we rely on schemas and why?
We rely on schemas when cognitive load is high because they help us process information efficiently
27
Priming
A recent instance activated a certain schema and influences our thinking
28
Unpriming
The effects of a primed schema decrease once it is expressed
29
Perseverance effect
A tendency for schema to remain unchanged in the face of contradictory information
30
How are schema self fulfilling?
We interpret the world in a way which affirms our schema
31
Stereotype priming schema
Stereotypes can trigger either behavior consistent with a schema or trigger preparation for interacting with the group that is the focus of the schema
32
Benefits of automatic processing
Unconscious, automatic thought may have a greater capacity to handle information and reflect real preferences more accurately
33
Optimistic bias
Predisposition to ignore risks and expect good outcomes
34
Reason for optimistic bias
When we consider the future we are thinking about our goals, plans, and hopes, not what might go wrong
35
Planning fallacy
Tendency to underestimate the amount of time a task will take or how much we will be able to accomplish in a given time period
36
Reasons for the planning fallacy
Thinking about the future, not how long it took in the past
Attributing past slowdowns to outside factors
We want to finish early or on time, so we predict that we will
37
Counterfactual thinking
Tendency to imagine outcomes other than what really happened
38
What effects emotional responses when engaging in general counter factual thinking?
How easy the circumstances are to mentally ‘undo’
39
Above average effect
On average, people think they are above average
40
Reasons for above average effect
Self-esteem protection
Impression management
Information
41
Above average effect and self esteem evidence
People with high self esteem are more likely to show this effect, and people with low self esteem are less likely
When self esteem is threatened, above average effect increases
42
Impression management and above average effect
We say we are above average because we want others to believe it. There is less above average effect when people are allowed to answer in private
43
Information and above average effect
We are above average based on our own definitions of a certain quality.
Evidence: there is more above-average effect for general categories
44
Dunning-Kruger Effect
The incompetent lack the ability to judge their competence
45
Self-handicapping
We place an obstacle in our own path to protect our self esteem.
Study: people halfway through a difficult intelligence test were more likely to take a drug that handicaps them, to convince themselves of their own skill
46
Upward counterfactual
Can cause feelings of dissatisfaction or envy
47
Downward counterfactual
When we imagine a downward counterfactual we experience greater satisfaction
48
How can counterfactual thinking be useful?
Counterfactual thinking can improve performance by helping us to imaging strategies to do better
49
Magical thinking
Thinking which results in judgements that don’t hold up to rational scrutiny
50
Terror management
The efforts to come to terms with our mortality and its implications
51
Mood congruence effect
Our current mood effects what information we notice and remember
52
Mood-dependent memory
Mood acts as a retrieval cue, and we are more likely to remember things encoded in a similar mood to our current mood
53
2-factor theory of emotion
We infer our feelings or attitudes from information in the outside world, I.e. interpreting a high arousal state based on context
54
Channels of nonverbal communication
Facial expressions, eye contact, body movements, posture, and touching
55
5 basic emotions represented clearly
Anger, fear, happiness, sadness, disgust
56
Emblem
A body movement carrying a specific meaning within a culture
57
Facial feedback hypothesis
Our expressions not only reflect but influence internal emotions
58
Why is attribution important?
If we understand why somebody has done something, we can better predict future behaviors
59
Non common effects
Effects caused by only one aspect. These are more powerful in illuminating someone’s character.
60
3 types of information important in attribution
Consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness for
61
When do we attribute to internal cause
Low consensus, low distinctiveness, high consistency
62
When do we attribute to an external cause?
High consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness
63
When do we attribute to a combination of external and internal causes?
Low consensus, consistency and distinctiveness high
64
Correspondence bias AKA the fundamental attribution error
Overestimating dispositions caused. Strongest in situations where consensus and distinctiveness are low.
65
Reason for fundamental attribution error
Anchoring and adjustment heuristic- we anchor at dispositions cause, then adjust insufficiently
66
Actor-observer effect
We attribute our own behavior to external causes and the behavior of others to internal causes.
67
Reason for actor observer effect
We are more aware of the external factors affecting ourselves
68
Self-serving bias
Attributing successes to internal causes and failures to external causes.
69
Reason for self serving bias
We are motivated to protect our self esteem and look good to others
70
Depression and attribution
Depressed people tend to have the reverse of the self serving bias- negative outcomes have internal causes, and positive causes have temporary external factors
71
Venues of impression management
Self-enhancement: improving appearance or describing ourselves positively
Other enhancement: making others feel good, agreeing, acting interested, etc
72
Kelley’s theory of attribution
3 elements-
Consensus (do others do it too?)
Consistency (does this person always do this?)
Distinctiveness (do they do the same thing in other situations?)
73
Castro study
In 1960s, researchers had people read pro or anti Castro papers. Even after being informed that the author had been assigned to write the paper, they still concluded that the essay reflected the author’s views
74
Quizmaster study
People assigned randomly to be questioners, answered, or observers. Observers incorrectly assumed that questioners were smarter than the answerers
75
Reason for the fundamental attribution error
Our attention is on the actor, not the situation, and we attribute cause to where our attention is.
76
Fundamental attribution error
There is more fundamental attribution in individualistic cultures. Collectivist cultures are more likely to observe context rather than actor
77
Defensive attributions
A motivational attribution- when an outcome is worse, we are more likely to attribute it to somebody’s disposition
78
Car study
Subjects told a story where ‘Lenny’ leaves his car on a hill without the parking break on. In one version the car rolls a few feet back. In another version, the car rolls down the hill and hits a pedestrian. In version #2, readers were more likely to believe Lenny was careless.
79
Reasons for the self-serving bias
Protects our self esteem- we show more in situations that are important to our self esteem.
Informational- generally we succeed in things we do every day and failures are relatively uncommon
80
Confirmation bias
The tendency to see, recall, perceive, and create Information consistent with our beliefs
81
Hostile media bias
The belief that the media is biased against you/your group
82
Carter-Reagan hostile media study
Prior to the carter Reagan election, a majority of both Carter and Reagan supporters believed the media was biased against their candidate
83
Israel Palestine hostile media study
Pro-Israel and Pro-Palestine students were shown the same clip of a massacre on Palestinians- both groups believed the clip was biased against their group
84
Self-fulfilling prophecies
Once we have a belief, we will act in a way to confirm that belief
85
Intellectual growth study
Teachers were told that randomly selected students were about to grow intellectually. These students actually improved over time as a result of getting extra attention from their teachers
86
Belief perseverance
The tendency for beliefs to continue when initial evidence is discredited
87
Firefighter study on belief perseverance
1/2 of participants were told firefighters need to take risks, 1/2 were told they need to be cautious. Even after being told they were initially lied to, they continued to believe what they were initially told.
88
Death penalty study
People who were pro or anti death penalty were given evidence both for and against it. People accepted the study that supported their beliefs and found flaws in the study that was against their views. CONFIRMATION BIAS.
89
Overconfidence bias
We are more confident about our judgements than we should be
90
Overconfidence bias study
Experts were asked to predict world events. Predictions they were 80% confident on happened 40% of the time.
91
Availability heuristic study
1/2 of students were asked to think of 6 times they were assertive, 1/2 of 12. The first group was more likely to think they were assertive, because with more instances the task becomes harder.
92
“Person who” statistic
A vivid case that bucks the odds and makes you believe that case is more frequent
93
Priming
Activating a category when making judgements
94
Priming carter Reagan study
People were assigned to watch news about the environment or about defense without mentioning a specific candidate. Those who were primed to think about the environment were more likely to judge the candidate (Carter or Reagan) based on how they thought the candidate was doing on that topic.
95
Thought suppression
Involves 2 processed, a controlled process of distraction and an automatic process of goal checking. Because of the goal checking, trying to suppress a thought makes us think about it more
96
Appraisal theory of emotion
We appraise and judge how we are doing on a certain goal, and this prepares us to act. We can override this, can be automatic or controlled.
97
Ideal affect and culture
In the US, people are more likely to value high arousal states like excitement. In Asia, people are more likely to prefer low arousal states. Why? Asia values harmony, US values individual achievement
98
Priming and ideal affect
Being primed by an exciting passage makes people prefer high arousal states
99
Meta emotion
Emotion about emotion. E.g., people with agoraphobia avoid the public because they are afraid of panic
100
Avenues of emotion regulation
Situation selection, attentional deployment, cognitive changes, response modulation
101
Amputation study
Group of volunteers asked to watch amputation video. 1/3 were given no specific instructions, 1/3 were told to control their response, and 1/3 were told to imagine they were medical students. Suppression group showed more stress, cognitive group showed less stress and remembered details more
102
Durability bias
We think things will affect our emotions for a longer time than they really do
103
HIV durability bias
People were asked before an HIV test how they thought they would feel 5 weeks out after finding out they were positive. They didn’t feel as bad as they thought
104
Impact bias
Overestimating the intensity of emotion that an event will create
105
Gore-Bush impact bias study
After the Gore Bush election, Bush voters were less happy than predicted, and Gore voters were not as unhappy as they predicted. In retrospect 4 months later, they remembered their emotions as stronger than they really were.
106
Reason for impact bias
When we forecast, we focus only on the target event. In reality, there are a lot of other things going on which temper our emotions.
107
Minimal groups study
Groups were created based on a minimal difference. When given the opportunity to allocate points, they favored their group members.
Conclusion: we don’t need a meaningful history with a group to show favoritism.
108
Why do we show favoritism towards our group?
To feel good about ourselves, we need to feel our group is good.
109
Evidence for self esteem and in group favoritism
When self esteem is threatened, in group favoritism increases.
110
Self esteem and outgroup discrimination study
When self-esteem is threatened (poor IQ test), participants judged our group members (Jewish people) more harshly.
111
Terror management theory and prejudice
We all fear our mortality and need to feel we are valuable parts of a meaningful universe. Feeling better than the our group allows us to feel valuable.
112
Prostitute/terror management study
Participants who wrote about mortality rather than dental pain were more likely to dole out a harsher judgement on prostitutes
113
Informational cause for prejudice
Using stereotypes saves cognitive resources and saves us the effort of trying to understand someone
114
Skinhead/Indonesia study
Participants were asked to form an impression of a person based on words in a screen while listening to a recording about Indonesia. Those who saw the word ‘skinhead’ remembered more descriptors as well as more information about Indonesia. This shows that using a stereotype saves cognitive resources and allows us to remember other things.
115
Outgroup homogeneity
Members of an outgroup are seen as more similar. We are better at identifying individuals of our own race. Confirmation bias plays a role.
116
Basketball player study
Participants listened to a play by play of a basketball game, half were told the player was black and half were told he was white. Those told the player was black believed he was more athletic. Those told the player was white believed he played a savvier game.
CONFIRMATION BIAS! They created information that confirms their stereotypes.
117
Arab/Israeli stereotype study
Participants were told a story about someone with either an Arab or Israeli name. If the infraction is stereotypic, participants believed it would happen more and recommended a more severe punishment. If the character fits the stereotype, participants were less likely to remember autobiographical information.
118
Robert/Roberto study
Participants were told a story about a character, named either Robert or Roberto. Both morning and evening people performed this task at different times. Participants were more likely to stereotype at their non-preferred time.
Conclusion? More likely to stereotype when cognitive resources are limited.
119
Availability heuristic and prejudice
A ‘double minority’ (e.g., black man who is also a violent criminal) are more memorable. Because they are easier to call to mind, we overestimate the frequency of such a case.
120
Effect of tokenism
The presence of a low-status group member in a high status group created an appearance of fairness and leads people to ignore structural problems
121
Social identity theory
We identify with the group we belong to and view that group more positively
122
What happens when we encounter someone who doesn’t fit our stereotype?
Rather than altering the stereotype, we may place them in a special category (subtype)
123
Relationship of risk-averse was to prejudice
Whites see increased equality as a greater loss for them than it is a gain for blacks
124
Shifting standards
Using different standards for different groups (subjective scales)
125
Bona fide pipeline
Uses priming to measure implicit racism, by priming with the face of a minority and asking participants to categorize words to positive or negative categories. People categorize positive words more slowly when primed with the face of a minority
126
Collective guilt
Guilt over wrongs done by the in-group. To relieve the guilt, people may blame or dehumanize the victims
127
Motivated forgetting
The tendency to more quickly forget wrongs done by the ingroup as opposed to by the in group
128
Contact hypothesis
Contact between groups can reduce prejudice. Contact leads us to recognize similarities and decreases anxiety about interactions with the outgroup
129
Recategorization
Shifts in boundaries leading a former outgroup to be perceived as part of the in group
130
Attributional ambiguity study
White and black participants performed a confusing task and were evaluated by a white evaluator they could or couldn’t see. For black participants. Unseen negative feedback, self esteem down, unseen positive feedback, self esteem up.
Seen negative feedback, self esteem does not change
Seen positive feedback: self esteem DROPS.
Feedback from a white evaluator is ambiguous.
131
College belongingness study
Students read surveys showing that seniors struggled to feel like they belonged as freshmen, but felt better by senior year. The students then write papers as to why this could be true. Down the line, these students were happier, had higher GPA.
132
Stroop/interracial interaction study
White subjects were interviewed by either a white or black interviewer, then performed the stroop test. Those with the black interviewer performed worse. Conclusion? Interracial interaction drains cognitive resources.
133
Compensatory strategy study
Subjects were primed with either racial prejudice or age prejudice, then interacted with a white person. When primed with race, participants smiled more, leaned in, and solicited their partners’ perspective. Conclusion? Minority subjects use these behaviors when concerned about racism.
134
Why do we interact?
Can either be for compassionate purposes (concerned about other) or self-image goals (trying to look good).
135
Compassionate vs self image study
If college freshman came in with compassionate goals towards their roommate, they later had better grades and mental health. Self-image goals predicted a downward slope in self-esteem.
136
Stereotype threat
Concern about confirming negative stereotype drains cognitive resources.
137
Stereotype threat study
Before a test, students were or were not asked to self identify race. A performance gap between black and white students emerges when black students are reminded of their race.
