Social Psychology

Social Psychology

The branch of psychology that studies how people think, feel, and behave in social situations

Social Cognition

The mental processes that people use to make sense out of their social environment Person perception Social categorization Implicit personality theory Attribution Attitudes Stereotypes

Person Perception

Your reactions are determined by your perceptions of others.

Your goals determine the amount and kind of information you collect.

You evaluate people partly in terms of how you expect them to behave (social norms).

Your self-perception influences how you perceive others.

Physical Attractiveness

Implicit cultural message is “beautiful is good” Attractive people are perceived as more

intelligent, happier, and better adjusted. Really no difference between attractive and

less attractive people on these characteristics Attractive people are more likely to attribute

other people’s approval of their accomplishments to looks rather than effort or talent.

Attribution

Process of inferring the causes of people’s behavior, including one’s own

The explanation given for a particular behavior

Attribution Bias

Fundamental attribution error Actor-observer discrepancy Blaming the victim (just-world hypothesis) Self-serving bias Self-effacing bias

Fundamental Attribution ErrorSocial Thinking:

Williams College study: A woman was paid and told to act friendly to some students, unfriendly to others. The students felt that her behavior was part of a her disposition, even when

they were told that she was just obeying instructions.

We make this error even when we are given the correct facts:

Using Attitudes as Ways to “Justify” Injustice

Just-world bias a tendency to believe that life is fair, e.g., it would

seem horrible to think that you can be a really good person and bad things could happen to you anyway

Just-world bias leads to “blaming the victim” we explain others’ misfortunes as being their fault,

Attitudes

What is an attitude? Predisposition to evaluate some people, groups, or

issues in a particular way Can be negative or positive Has three components

Cognitive—thoughts about given topic or situation Affective—feelings or emotions about topic Behavioral—your actions regarding the topic or

situation

Example:

Social Thinking

Attitudes affect our actions when:1. External influences are minimal2. The attitude is stable3. The attitude is specific to the behavior4. The attitude is easily recalled.

“I feel like [attitude] eating at McD’s, and I will [action];”1.There are no nutritionists here telling me not to, 2.I’ve enjoyed their food for quite a while,3.It’s so easy to get the food when I have a craving, 4.It’s easy to remember how good it is when I drive by that big sign every day.”

Cognitive Dissonance

Unpleasant state of psychological tension or arousal that occurs when two thoughts or perceptions are inconsistent

Attitudes and behaviors are in conflict it is uncomfortable for us we seek ways to decrease discomfort caused by

the inconsistency

Festinger’s Study (1957): Students were paid either large or small amounts to express enjoyment of a boring activity. Then many of the students changed their attitudes about the activity. Which amount shifted attitudes?

Origin of Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Cognitive Dissonance: When our actions are not in harmony with our attitudes.

Cognitive Dissonance Theory: the observation that we tend to resolve this dissonance by changing our attitudes to fit our actions.

Social Thinking:Cognitive Dissonance

Getting paid more: “I was paid to say that.”

Getting paid less: “Why would I say it was fun? Just for a dollar? Weird. Maybe it wasn’t so bad, now that I think of it.”

16

If Fiona agrees to do some fundraising for her college, her attitudes about school finances might shift to resolve her cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive Dissonance

Prejudice

A negative attitude toward people who belong to a specific social group

Levels of Prejudice can Change

The Greatest Generation

The Silent Generation

Baby Boomers

Generation X

Generation Y

Support for

interracial dating

Thinking Habits

Reinforcing

Prejudice

The Availability Heuristic:

Stereotypes are built on vivid cases

rather than statistics

Confirmation Bias: we are not likely to

look for counterexampl

es to our stereotypes.

Hindsight Bias: “they should have known

better,” blames victims for

misfortunes.

Cognitive dissonance:

“My culture and family treats

minorities this way, can we be

wrong?”

Aggression can have many forms and purposes:Aggression can be physical, verbal, relational: e.g. punching, insulting, shooting, betraying.Aggression can be planned or reactive.Aggression can be driven by hostile rage or can be a coldly calculated means to an end.

Social RelationsAggression

Definition: Behavior with the intent of harming another

person.

Levels of aggression are influenced by:Aversive conditions and feeling frustrated;Getting reinforced for aggressive behavior; Having aggression modeled at home or in the mediaAdopting social scripts for aggression from culture and the media.

Social RelationsPsychosocial Factors and Aggression

Alcohol may chemically or psychologically make the following more likely: Disinhibited aggressive behaviorAggressive responses to frustrationViolent crimes, especially spousal abuseLack of attention to peacemaking optionsInterpreting neutral acts as provocations

Social RelationsBiochemistry of AggressionAlcohol

Aggression in Media: Social Scripts Aggression portrayed in

video, music, books, and other media, follows and teaches a script.

When confronted with new situations, we may rely on social scripts to guide our responses. Many scripts proscribe aggression.

Social Scripts: Culturally constructed directions on how to act, downloaded from media as a “file” or “program” in the mind.

Effects of Social Scripts

Studies: Exposure to one aggressive story increases other forms of aggressive behavior.

Watchers of TV crime see the world as more threatening (needing a aggressive defense?)

Randomly assigned to watch explicit pornography, study participants suggested shorter sentences for rapists and accepted the myth that victims may have enjoyed the rape.

More Media Effects on Aggression

Exposure to violence in media, especially in pornography, seems to increase, rather than release, male aggressive impulses.

Media can portray minorities, women, the poor, and others with less power as being weak, stupid, submissive, and less human, and thus deserving their victimhood.

Video Games and Aggression

People randomly assigned to play ultraviolent video games showed increases in hostility

People playing a game helping characters, showed increased real-life helping

People have acted out violent acts from video games; People playing the most violent games tended to be the most aggressive; but what came first, aggressiveness or games?

The Many Origins of Aggression

Stereotypes

What is a stereotype?

A cluster of characteristics associated with all members of a specific group of people

A belief held by members of one group about members of another group

Social Categories

In-group—the social group to which we belong In-group bias—tendency to make favorable

attributions for members of our in-group Ethnocentrism is one type of in-group bias

Out-group—the social group to which you do not belong Out group homogeneity effect—tendency to

see members of the out-group as more similar to each other

Social Identity and Cooperation

Social identity theory states that when you’re assigned to a group, you

automatically think of that group as an in-group for you Sherif’s Robbers Cave study

11–12 year old boys at camp boys were divided into 2 groups and kept separate

from one another each group took on characteristics of distinct social

group, with leaders, rules, norms of behavior, and names

Robbers Cave (Sherif)

Leaders proposed series of competitive interactions which led to 3 changes between groups and within groups within-group solidarity negative stereotyping of other group hostile between-group interactions

Robbers Cave

Overcoming the strong we/they effect establishment of superordinate goals

e.g., breakdown in camp water supply overcoming intergroup strife - research

stereotypes are diluted when people share

individuating information

Breakdown in Water Supply

Social Influence

How behavior is influenced by the social environment and the presence of other people

ConformityObedienceHelping Behaviors

Two types of social influence

Normative Social Influence:

Informational Social Influence:

Going along with others in pursuit of social approval or belonging (and to

avoid disapproval/rejection)

Examples: The Asch conformity studies; clothing

choices.

Going along with others because their ideas and behavior make sense,

the evidence in our social environment changes our minds.Example: Deciding

which side of the road to drive on.

Conformity

Adopting attitudes or behaviors of others because of pressure to do so; the pressure can be real or imagined

2 general reasons for conformity Informational social influence—other people can

provide useful and crucial information Normative social influence—desire to be

accepted as part of a group leads to that group having an influence

Asch’s Experiments on Conformity

Previous research had shown people will conform to others’ judgments more often when the evidence is ambiguous

Asch’s Experiments on Conformity

All but 1 in group was confederate

Seating was rigged Asked to rate which

line matched a “standard” line

Confederates were instructed to pick the wrong line 12/18 times

Comparison linesStandard lines1 2 3

Asch’s Experiments on Conformity Results

Asch found that 75% participants conformed to at least one wrong choice

subjects gave wrong answer (conformed) on 37% of the critical trials

Why did they conform to clearly wrong choices? informational influence? subjects reported having doubted their own perceptual

abilities which led to their conformance – didn’t report seeing the lines the way the confederates had

Effects of a Nonconformist

If everyone agrees, you are less likely to disagree.

If one person disagrees, even if they give the wrong answer, you are more likely to express your nonconforming view.

Asch tested this hypothesis one confederate gave different answer from others conformity dropped significantly

Obedience

Obedience compliance of person is

due to perceived authority of asker

request is perceived as a command

Milgram interested in unquestioning obedience to orders

The Design of Milgram’s Obedience StudyOne layout of the

study

The “Learner” (working with researchers)

Ow! Please continue. (Give the shock.)

But… …

okay.

Shock levels in volts that participants thought they were giving

Slight (15-60)

Moderate (75-120)

Strong (135-180)

Very strong (195-240)

Intense (250-300)

Extreme intensity

(315-360)

Danger: severe (375-420)

XXX (435-450)

Stanley Milgram’s Studies

Learner protests more and more as shock increases

Experimenter continues to request obedience even if teacher balks

120

150

300

330

“Ugh! Hey this really hurts.”

“Ugh! Experimenter! That’s all. Get me out of here. I told you I had heart trouble. My heart’s starting to bother me now.”

(agonized scream) “I absolutelyrefuse to answer any more.Get me out of here. You can’t hold me here. Get me out.”

(intense & prolonged agonized scream) “Let me out of here. Let me out of here. My heart’s bothering me. Let me out, I tell you…”

Obedience

How many people would go to the highest shock level?

65% of the subjects went to the end, even those that protested

Obedience

XXX(435-450)

Percentageof subjects

who obeyedexperimenter

100908070605040302010

0

Slight(15-60)

Moderate(75-120) Strong

(135-180)

Verystrong

(195-240)Intense

(255-300)

Extremeintensity(315-360)

Dangersevere

(375-420)Shock levels in volts

The majority ofsubjects continued to obey to the end

Explanations for Milgram’s Results

Abnormal group of subjects? numerous replications with variety of

groups shows no support

People in general are sadistic? videotapes of Milgram’s subjects show

extreme distress

Explanations for Milgram’s Results

Authority of Yale and value of scienceExperimenter self-assurance and

acceptance of responsibilityProximity of learner and experimenterNew situation and no model of how to

behave

Follow-Up Studies to Milgram

Critiques of Milgram

Although 84% later said they were glad to have participated and fewer than 2% said they were sorry, there are still ethical issues

Do these experiments really help us understand real-world atrocities?

Being watched, and simply being in crowded conditions, increases one’s autonomic arousal, along with increasing motivation for those who are confident, and anxiety for those who are not confident.

Why would the presence of an audience “facilitate” better performance for everyone but newcomers?

Social Facilitation

Social Loafing

Ever had a group project, with a group grade, and had someone in the group slack off?

If so, you have experienced Social Loafing: the tendency of people in a group to show less effort when not held individually accountable.

Who will know if I’m not pulling as hard as I can? No one can tell how hard each of us is pulling on the rope.

Why does social loafing happen?• When your contribution isn’t rewarded or punished, you

might not care what people think.• People may not feel their contributions are needed, that

the group will be fine.• People may feel free to “cheat” when they get an equal

share of the rewards anyway.• Note: People in collectivist cultures don’t slack off as

much in groups even when they could. Why?

Loss of self-awareness and self-restraint.

Examples: Riots, KKK rallies, concerts, identity-concealed online bullying.

Happens when people are in group situations involving: 1) Anonymity and 2) Arousal.

Deindividuation

In pursuit of social harmony (and avoidance of open disagreement), groups will make decisions without an open exchange of ideas.

Irony: Group “think” prevents thinking, prevents a realistic assessment of options.

Groupthink

Despite all of these forces of social influence, individuals still have power: Some people resist obeying and conforming.Individuals can start social movements and social forces, not just get caught up in them.Groupthink can be prevented if individuals speak up when a group decision seems wrong.

Social InfluenceThe Power of Individuals

Keys to a Lasting Love Relationship Equity: Both giving and receiving, sharing responsibilities, with

a sense of partnership Self-Disclosure: Sharing self in conversation increases

intimacy Positive Interactions and Support: Offering sympathy,

concern, laughs, hugs

Peacemaking: The 4 C’s Contact: exposure and

interaction familiarity acceptance connection

Cooperation: finding shared goals, not just focusing on the incompatible goals

Communication: sometimes with mediators

Conciliation: Gestures that reduce tension by showing intension to build alliances rather than winning conflicts. Smile. Apologize.

Help or not?

Why Don’t People Always Help Others in Need?

Diffusion of responsibility presence of others leads to decreased

help response we all think someone else will help,

so we don’t

Why Don’t People Always Help Others in Need?

Latane studies Several scenarios designed to measure

the help response found that if you think you’re the only one

that can hear or help, you are more likely to do so

if there are others around, you will diffuse the responsibility to others

Kitty Genovese incident

Factors that Increase helping

Feel Good, Do Good Effect Feeling guilty Seeing others who are willing to help Perceiving the person as deserving help Knowing how to help A personalized Relationship

Factors that Decrease helping

Presence of other people Being in a big city or very small town When personal costs for helping outweigh

the benefits Vague or ambiguous situations

Domestic dispute, “lover’s quarrel”