PSY 240 EXAM 3

Dr. Gulker Purdue | Chp. 8 - Yellow, Chp. 9 - Purple, Chp. 10 - Blue, Chp .11 - Green

Social Influence

the many ways people affect one another resulting from the comments, actions, or even the mere presence of others

• changes in attitudes,

• beliefs,

• feelings,

• behavior

Conformity

changing one’s behavior or beliefs in response to explicit or implicit pressure (real or imagined) from others

Compliance

responding favorably to an explicit request by another person regardless of the person’s status

Obedience

in an unequal power relationship, submitting to the demands of the person in authority

Informational Social Influence

the influence of other people that results from taking their comments or actions as a source of information about what is correct, proper, or effective

Normative Social Influence

the influence of other people that comes from the desire to avoid their disapproval and other social sanctions (ridicule, barbs, ostracism)

Autokinetic Illusion Study

INFORMATIVE: People’s guesses on how much a light moved varied greatly, but eventually converged into one guess after discussion

Line Study

NORMATIVE: Even though the confederates’ answer was obviously wrong, 75% people conformed to their answer at least once.

Group Size

conformity rates increase as group size increases, but only up to a point

Group Unanimity

more conformity when the group is unanimous

Anonymity

ELIMINATES normative social influence and therefore reduces conformity

• internalization - informational social influence

What kind of influence comes from Expertise

Informational social influence

What kind of influence comes from High Status

normative social influence

• even though the high status person may not know more than you, there may be a social cost in going against them

Which type of culture has less tolerance for deviance

Tight cultures (mainly interdependent cultures, but also the Western south)

Minorities have their effect on opinions primarily through what kind of social influence?

Informational

Automatic Mimicry and Social Interaction

people like individuals who mimic them

• may build social rapport

• synchronous mimicry can create powerful feelings of closeness

Pluralistic Ignorance

misperception of a group norm that results from observing people who are acting at variance with their private beliefs, which serves to reinforce the erroneous group norm

Effective Norm-Based Appeals

letting people know what others are doing also can be used to advance the public good

Static and Dynamic Norms

norms can be used to bring about changes by highlighting that they are changing, or that they are dynamic rather than static

• “only 35% of men identify feminist” (static) VS “now, up to 35% of men identify as feminist” (growing trend)

Descriptive Norms

the behavior exhibited by most people in a given context

Prescriptive (Injunctive) Norms

the way a person is supposed to behave in a given context

Are descriptive or prescriptive norms more powerful?

Descriptive (everyone’s doing it)

Norm of Reciprocity

a norm dictating that people should provide benefits for those who have provided benefits for them (social norms, feeling obligated)

Foot-in-the-door technique

Making an initial small request with which nearly everyone complies, followed by a larger request involving the real behavior of interest

Door-in-the-face Technique (Reciprocal Concessions)

Asking someone for a very large favor that will definitely be refused, followed by asking for a smaller favor that the person feels compelled to honor

Negative State Relief Hypothesis

strong positive association between guilt and compliance - helping others to relieve yourself of guilt

Sherif (1963)

Autokinetic Illusion Study (light movement - informative influence)

Milgram Experiment (1962)

Shock Experiment (obedience to authority)

Freedman and Fraser 1966

Foot-in-the-door (compliance without pressure)

Reactance Theory

people reassert their prerogatives in response to the unpleasant state of arousal they experience when they believe their freedoms are threatened

• loss of autonomy, forbidden fruit

The Need to Belong

Features are universal: all cultures have similar types of social relationships and dynamics

• something we desire when we don’t have them, but can be satisfied like hunger

Interpersonal Relationships

different types of relationships share common aspects but are also distinct, causing us to behave differently

• friends vs romantic partners

Communal Relationships

individuals feel a special responsibility for one another and give & receive according to the principle of need

Exchange Relationships

individuals feel little responsibility toward one another; giving & receiving are governed by concerns about equity and reciprocity

Are communal relationships short-term or long-term?

Long-term

Are exchange relationships short-term or long-term?

Short-term

Comparison Level

expectations about what people think they deserve or expect to get out of a relationship

• influenced by parents, past relationships, romcoms, etc.

Comparison Level for Alternates

expectations about what people think they can get out of alternate relationships

• maybe they meet your standards, but if you broke up, you’d finally be able to get a cat

Social Exchange Theory

How people feel about a relationship depends on their assessments of it’s cost and rewards

Equity Theory

the idea that people are motivated to pursue fairness, or equity, in their relationships; a relationship is consider equitable when the benefits are proportionate to the effort both people put into it

Attachment Theory

early attachment with parents and other caregivers shape relationships for a person’s entire life

• begin developing a working model of relationships, understanding how warmth and security are provided

Secure Attachment

I find it relatively easy to get close to others and am comfortable with depending on someone + being dependable

Avoidant Attachment

I find it somewhat uncomfortable being close and trusting others completely

Anxious-Ambivalent Attachment

others are reluctant to get as close as I want to be, making me worried that they don’t feel the same way about me as I do with them

Functional Distance

the influence of an architectural layout to encourage or inhibit certain activities, including contact between people

• effects of proximity are based more on functional distance than physical distance

Mere Exposure Effect

the idea that repeated exposure to a stimulus, such as an object or person, leads to greater liking of the stimulus

Fluency

it is easier to process information about familiar stimuli

• pleasant feelings associated with more fluent processing

Similarity

friends and romantic partners tend to be similar in beliefs and other characteristics

• you don’t have to fight for your voice to be heard because your partner shares the same voice

Complementary

the tendency for people to seek out others with characteristics that are different from, and complement, their own

• an overly-anxious person paired with a level-headed person

Halo Effect

individuals who are attractive are more likely to be assumed as intelligent or other positive qualities

• individuals are much more popular as friends and potential romantic partners than their less attractiveness counterparts

Role of Gender in Attractiveness

physical attractiveness may have a greater impact on women’s life outcomes than men

• women who are deemed less attractive will face more consequences

Evolutionary Theory of Attraction

people may have preferences for certain physical characteristics because they were cues of health and reproductive fitness in our ancestral past

• averageness, symmetry

Investment in Offspring

large asymmetry in the minimal parental investment of males and females

• female = significant time and biological costs, causing them to be more selective when choosing partners

• males = minimal time and biological costs, causing them to look for short-term making with more reproductive partners

(naturalistic fallacy is important here)

Compassionate Love

responding to needs (parent/child)

Companionate Love

trust and shared activities (friends and family)

Romantic Love

intense emotion and desire

Rusbult’s Investment Model of Commitment

there are three determinants that make partners more committed to each other

• stability = outcomes - alternate partners

• satisfaction = outcomes - expectations

• investments can overpower both (children, anything shared)

Relationships and Situational Attribution

We construe others close to us as we do ourselves

• situational attribution

• we’re quicker to identify a trait if both us and our partner have it

Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse

Toxic Communication Styles

• criticism

• defensiveness

• stonewalling (silent treatment)

• contempt

Blame & Negative Attributions for Partners’ Behavior

partners in unsatisfying relationships are more likely to make attributions that cast the other partner in a negative light, regardless of if the situation is a good or bad thing

Creating Stronger Romantic Bonds

• capitalizing on the good - share what is good in your life with your partner, vise versa

• be playful

• finding the good in your partner… DO see them with rose-colored glasses on

Ainsworth’s Strange Situation

study involving babies and attachment styles

Gottman and Levenson (1999)

Contempt is the strongest predictor for divorce

Prejudice

an emotion-based (positive or negative) attitude toward a group and its members

• attitude

Stereotype

the belief that certain attributes are characteristic of members of a particular group

• belief

Discrimination

unfair treatment of individuals based on their membership in a particular group

• behavior

Modern Racism

prejudice directed at racial groups that exists ALONGSIDE the rejection of explicitly racist beliefs

“Benevolent” Prejudice

some stereotypes include favorable assessments of abilities or positive attitudes of group members

• women are compassionate, but also bad at math

Implicit Association Test (IAT)

a technique for revealing nonconscious attitudes toward different stimuli, including particular groups

• determining whether its a predictor of behavior

Priming and Implicit Predjudice

presentation of information designed to activate a concept (such as a stereotype) and hence make it accessible

• prime = the stimulus presented to activate the concept in question

The Economic Perspective

argues that prejudice results from different social groups competing over scarce resources

Realistic Group Conflict Theory

group conflict, prejudice, and discrimination are likely to arise over competition for limited resources

• physical, economic, conceptual

Ethnocentrism

glorifying one’s own group while vilifying other groups

• hostile conflict increases ethnocentrism

• strongest feelings of prejudice come from the group that feels they have the most to lose

The Robbers Cave Experiment

• cohesion phase: separating the boys into groups and having them do group activities, building unity and cohesion

• competition phase: the groups meet and have a competitive tournament with prizes

• conflict: groups became hostile during the tournament (name calling, theft, fights, raids)

Superordinate Goal

a goal that transcends the interests of any group involved and can be achieved more readily by 2+ groups working together

• conflict reduction

The Motivational Perspective

prejudice results from motivation to view one’s ingroup more favorably than outgroups

Minimal Group Paradigm Experiment

researchers create groups based on arbitrary & seemingly meaningless criteria

• individuals show preferences for the ingroup even when the group distinctions are meaningless

• Individuals are more interested in getting a relative advantage over the outgroup than maximizing the absolute gain for the ingroup

• the need to belong

Social Identity Theory

self-esteem & self-concept also come from the status and accomplishments of the group to which the person belongs (e.g., football fans)

• we may be tempted to boost the status and fortunes of those groups and their members

Basking in Reflected Glory

taking pride in the accomplishments of other people in one’s group (e.g., Olympics)

• “We won” vs “They lost”

Denigrating Outgroups

boosts the self-esteem

• after receiving negative feedback about the self, participants are more likely to endorse negative stereotypes (e.g., Purdue vs IU)

The Cognitive Perspective

prejudice results from biases in social cognition due to schemas about differences between ingroup and outgroup members

Stereotypes are…

schemas

• mental shortcuts that influence attention, perception, and memory

Conserving Cognitive Resources

we’re more likely to use stereotypes when we are mentally taxed

• less effort is required when you know what to expect

• frees up mental energy that can then be applied to other feelings

• circadian rhythm (morning/night person) can influence what time of day you’re more likely to use stereotypes

Stereotypes are efficient but…

often inaccurate

• can lead to accentuation of ingroup similarities and outgroup differences

Distinctiveness and Illusory Correlations

encountering minority group members + negative behavior are both less frequent events than majority group members + positive behavior, so it may be easier to remember examples of minorities doing negative things

Paired Distinctiveness

pairing two distinctive events that stand out even more because they occur together

Self-Fulfilling Prophecies

stereotypes can also endure because they “benefit” from self-fulfilling prophecies

• people act towards members of certain groups in ways that encourage the behavior they expect

Subtyping

explaining away exceptions to a given stereotype by creating a subcategory that can be expected to differ from the group

• “You’re not like other girls”

Concrete vs Abstract Construal

we differentially process supportive and contradictory information by varying how concretely or abstractly we encode the actions of people from different groups

Do we use abstract or concrete terms to describe stereotypes?

abstract (hateful, loving)

Outgroup Homogeneity Effect

the tendency for people to assume that within-group similarity is much stronger for outgroups than for ingroups

• impaired ability to view outgroup members as distinct individuals (“they all look alike”)

• people are more likely to assume that a single action is typical of a group if the group is not their own

• stereotypes influence how the details of events are interpreted

Own-Race Identification Bias

the tendency for people to be better able to recognize and distinguish faces from their own race than from other races

Automatic Processing

involuntary and unconscious, based on emotional responses

• implicit attitudes predict nonverbal behaviors (IAT)

Controlled Processing

systematic and deliberate, can override automatic

• explicit attitudes predict verbal behaviors

Object Recognition & Shooter Bias

white participants were quicker to recognize guns after seeing a Black person’s face and more likely to mistake a tool as a gun

• White participants were more likely to “shoot” an unarmed target if they were Black

Individual Approaches to Prejudice Reduction

• programs

• norms

• training

Individual Approaches and Norms only work if…

if the message is delivered by a high-status ingroup member

• can be short-lived

Contact Hypothesis

prejudice can be reduced by putting members of different groups in frequent contact with one another

Conditions for Intergroup Prejudice Reduction

equal status, shared goal, broader social norms, individual-level interactions

Social Dominance Theory

the hierarchical nature of societies, how they remain stable, and how more powerful or privileged groups in a society maintain their advantage

• individual discrimination, institutional, behavioral asymmetries