AP Psych Unit 12: Social Psychology

altruism

do you have the desire to help people when they need it

social facilitation

people perform better on a task when they are in the mere presence or others

Ex: running a race with and without an audience, you'd probably do better when other people are watching

social inhibition

the tendency to reduce or restrain behaviors, emotions, and performance in the presence of others to avoid disapproval

social loafing

the tendency to put forth less effort in a group setting than we would if we were working alone

Ex: A group project where everyone gets the same grade

diffusion of responsibility

personal responsibility takes a back-seat to inactivity due to the notion that "someone else" will take action

bystander effect

individuals are less likely to offer help to victims when there are other people present

more people = less help for victim

deindividuation

tendency for individuals to behave in groups that they normally would not, because they feel less personally responsible for their actions within the "group," herd-mentality

Ex: gangs, vandalism

groupthink

tendency for highly cohesive groups to suspend critical thinking for unanimity in decision making situations

Ex: when deciding where to go out to eat, the group may come to a decision that an individual doesn't agree with, that individual probably won't speak up because everyone else has agreed on that place

group polarization

tendency for a group to come to a consensus that is more extreme than the decisions of the individuals would be

Ex: juries, if the group is already leaning one way about the suspect, they're probably going to go the way they were leaning no matter what is said

3 major factors that affect a potentially persuasive situation

Source: easier to be persuaded if the source is credible and believable

Audience: ex: do the people watching the ad need the product

Message: what is being said and how is it framed, does it promote some sort of emotion from the audience

foot-in-the-door persuasion technique

when the person starts with a small request, then increases the stakes every time, this way the individual will feel an obligation to help each time, trying to get something small first then moving into something bigger

Ex: asking for $5 one year, then $10 the next, and $20 the next, increasing each year

door-in-the-face technique

when a person requests something from an individual and know they are gonna say "no," then they come back with a smaller request hoping that the individual will agree to the smaller task

Ex: asking for $100 first then asking for $10, the individual might not agree to $100 but are far more likely to agree to $10

central route to persuasion

being persuaded by the arguments or the contents of the message

Ex: when you're buying a car and the salesperson talks about the safety features of the car

peripheral route to persuasion

being persuaded NOT by the arguments or contents of the message but is persuaded because the thing appeals to the individual

Ex: a teen buying a car might focus more on the color, sound system, and speed of the car since they are looking for a "cool" car instead of the actual functions of the car

conformity

a type of social influence where individuals change their attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors to align with social norms or group pressure

Asch's line study

demonstrated that individuals often conform to a unanimous but wrong group majority to fit in, even when the correct answer is obvious

normative social influence

desire for approval, wanting to fit in

informational social influence

when the subject actually believe the others in the group know better than them so they trust the others judgement

factors that affect conformity

Ambiguity of the Situation: if the answer is really close another one of the choices, subjects might be more likely to conform

Size of the group: bigger group = more likely the subject will conform

Anonymity: no conformity when anonymous

Group Status: you'd be more likely to conform if you think the others in the group are superior to you

Asch Effect: when you have at least one other person that agrees with you even if you're in the minority, you are far less likely to conform to the group

obedience

how far will one go in compliance with an order by a legitimate authority figure

Milgram shock study

demonstrated that a majority of ordinary people would administer seemingly fatal electric shocks to another person when instructed by an authority figure, tested obedience to authority over moral conscience, inspired by the Holocaust, it's one of the most controversial studies regarding ethics

fundamental attribution error

when people behave in evil ways, we have a tendency to blame the individual and discount the fact that we put the person in a bad situation, overestimating personality-based explanations while underestimating situational factors

Zimbardo Prison Experiment

a 2-week long experience that randomly selected and assigned subjects to be "prisoners" or "guards" at a jail, it demonstrated how situational forces can overpower individual personality, the study had to be stopped after 6 days because the subjects assumed their role so well that the guards were torturing the prisoners

stereotyping

cognitive, thought, belief, that someone has about an individual because of some larger group that the person is associated with, believing someone is a way because of their ethnic, gender, religion, sexual orientation, social schemas, etc.

prejudice

attitudinal, affective, biased, when a person likes/dislikes another person due to stereotypes

Ex: because you are gay, I don't like you

in-group bias

when you have a bias in favor of those that are similar to you, people who have things in common with you, same race, gender

Ex: white males in the Nazi

ethnocentrism

evaluation of other cultures according to the standards and customs of one's own culture

out-group bias

a group that you are bias against because they don't fit into the "normal" group

scapegoat

the individual/group that ends up taking the blame for everything that goes wrong

Ex: blaming the Jews for the greedy ways of the Germans

just-world hypothesis

the theory that we live in a fair world, if good things happen to you, you must've deserved those good things, and if bad things happen to you, you must've deserved that too. Good people are rewarded, bad people are punished. blaming the individual if something bad happens to them

Ex: when rapists use the excuse of "she was asking for it when she wore those shorts"

discrimination (behavioral)

a person acts upon their stereotypes and prejudices, takes the action of trying to exclude individuals

Ex: colleges only accepting individuals of certain race such as of Asians or vice versa

agression

act that has intent of doing harm

Theories to why it happens: inborn?(aggressive instincts, born with it); learned?(bobo doll, do kids learn to be aggressive); reactionary?(when you frustrate someone enough that they lash out)

instrumental vs hostile

instrumental is when the aggression focuses on gaining a reward such as money whereas hostile is aggression with the goal of causing harm

attraction

similarity: tend to gravitate towards people who are like us in certain ways

Ex: gender, nationality, religion

proximity: proximity--mere exposure effect:the idea that simply being around certain individuals consistency/frequently can lead to liking them even if the relationship had a rocky start

Ex: students having the same classes/majors and see each other often

physical attraction: romantic relationships, often times the first thing that draws people together is when one individual thinks the other is cute/hot

passionate vs companionate love

Passionate love is an intense, fleeting state characterized by high arousal, sexual attraction, and euphoria, typical in early relationships, whereas companionate love is a deep, stable, and long-lasting affection based on mutual trust, friendship, and commitment. Passionate love often matures into companionate love within 1-2 years

cognitive dissonance

when something we think or believe and a behavior we engage in don't go together, when you think one thing and act the other

Ex: when smokers know that cigarettes are bad but they continue to smoke, this could create tension in their mind

we can either change the way we think or change the behavior, often it's easier to change the way we think

self-handicapping

when you predict your own failure at something so that if and when you do fail, you don't feel as bad

Ex: I'm going to fail this test

emotional insulation, allows you to fail and not fail bad about it

attribution theory

when we try to explain why someone else is behaving the way they are

Ex: a waitress might be behaving in a kindly way in. hopes of getting a good tip

self-serving bias

how can I paint myself in the best possible way in any situation(whether things go well for me or things don't go well for me), when we do well, we like to take credit for it, when things don't go well, we turn to rationalization(blaming someone else)

Ex: the teacher doesn't like me, allows you to still feel good self-esteem, trying to make yourself look the best you can

expectancy bias

you think that something is going to happen, you wait for it to happen, and ironically, you end up making it happen leading to self-fulfilling prophecy

Ex: if a teacher sees that a student has gotten bad grades for their previous classes, the teacher might assume the student won't try as hard in their class resulting in the teacher grading the student harsher and giving that student bad grades.

the overjustification effect

when you get rewarded for things you already like to do, you lose your love for that thing, the task becomes more like a chore

Ex: not liking a sport as much as when you played it as a kid now that you are getting payed to play the game

the pygmalion effect (self-fulfilling prophecy)

a psychological phenomenon where high expectations lead to improved performance; when leaders, teachers, or parents believe in someone's potential, their supportive behavior boosts the individual's confidence and success

superordinate goals

put importance of the group above own, personal, selfish needs