Social Psych Exam 4

Physical vs Instrumental vs Relational Aggression

physical harm(more likely for men)

instrumental - harming in a way that is not physical

relational - trying to hurt social standing(more likely for women)

Physiological Approach (Aggression)

arousal - when under high autonomic system arousal, increase in aggression

alcohol and drugs - stimulants and alcohol decrease impulse control, people have schemas of alcohol and aggression

testosterone - in prisons people with higher testosterone were more likely to be in for violent crime, quick change in testosterone also cause this, people with testosterone seek more sensations(dangerous jobs)

Alcohol ad study

When there are adds of alcohol on the wall vs other ads, people act more aggressively

Evolutionary Approach(Aggression)

As a result of Differential Parental Investment

Male sexual jealousy - highest cause of homicide among women

child abuse - step children, adopted children are more likely to be abused

Individual Level/Trait Approach(Aggression)

Genetics - species can be bred for violence, identical twin study

Personality - Type A have higher need for power and achievement and are therefore aggressive, narcissists tend to be more aggressive, people with low empathy tend to be more aggressive(psychopaths), aggressive schemas - some people have more things tied to aggression schema, priming studies(weapons study)

Identical Twin Study

If one twin commits a crime, the rate is high for the other twin to have committed a crime.

Weapons Study/Effect

Stopped at green light in front of a singular car and measured aggression of driver behind. Sometimes had rifle in the back and sometimes had a contractor’s level. The driver was more aggressive with the rifle

Group level approach(Aggression)

Discontinuity effect - people are more competitive/aggressive in groups

deindividuation - frees you up to behave aggressively

diffusion of responsibility - aggression is spread across the group

social identity - self-esteem is tied to groups, leading to competition and aggression.

Situational Approach(Aggression)

social exclusion - being excluded causes aggression

frustration - when people are frustrated, aggression is a common response

excitation-transfer - you can’t always act aggressively so people will channel it and release when they can

provocation(reciprocity) - wanting to be aggressive to people who are first aggressive to you, there is a tendency for aggression to level off

normative approaches - there are norms of where/when aggression is not ok(church, class), and acceptable(parking lots), people will behave usually according to norm

Exclusion study

chat rooms were set up and controlled how people acted. Some people were accepted into the group and some were social excluded and kicked out. People were aggressive after they were forced to leave.

Learning Theory Approaches(Aggression)

classical conditioning - develop automatic response to a previously neutral stimuli and can happen to aggression when feeling threatened.

operant conditioning - when people are rewarded for aggressive behavior they are more likely to be aggressive and vice versa(can undermine intrinsic motivation to not be aggressive)

social learning - watching others’ consequences for aggression teaches you

modeling - bobo doll studies, media effects, tv/movies, video games

Bobo doll studies

when adult punches bobo doll, children do as well, when adult taps it, children are less aggressive with it even if the adult showed any sense of pleasure or stress.

General Aggression Model(GAM)

Person variables(personality) + situation variables(social exclusion)
Present Internal State: Cognitions(aggressive schemas), affects(frustration), arousal

Appraisal processes: Automatic → controlled → aggressive behavior → target response.

Reduction Approach(Aggression)

Catharsis: Freud - releasing aggression/anger in a socially acceptable manner

Learning: Operant conditioning with aggression

Modeling: imitation, having modeling of non-aggressive behavior helps

Biofeedback: training yourself to calm yourself down

competing responses: emotional states that compete with aggression(humor)

norms against: establishing norms against aggressive behavior can be very effective

Nonaggressive Modeling Study

Older elementary school kids were trained to reduce aggression, and the younger children imitated them because they admire them.

Humor study

had people get to same level of aggression and showed two different clips, one of which is funny. The shocks that people gave after seeing the funny video were a lot less.

Social Norms approach(Helping)

norm of reciprocity: doing something nice because they did something nice to you

norm of social responsibility: norm of giving help when you see someone in need.

norm of social justice: giving help when someone deserves our help

Study example of norm of social justice

Had confederates ask for notes saying they missed class. Some gave an excuse of doctor’s appointment and others just said they didn’t feel like going to class. Rates of helping were higher for good excuse.

People will try to make themselves look more deserving - people asking for money and saying they have a family and they lost their job

Evolutionary Approach(Helping)

helping insures survival of genes - helping had helped communities survive and therefore became an integral part of community

kin selection: more likely to help people who are genetically related

reciprocity: helping so that they are more likely to help you later on.

Learning Approaches(Helping)

Operant conditioning: reward for helping increases helping behavior but there is over justification effect - intrinsic motivation is decreased due to reward.

Social Learning: seeing someone’s consequences for helping teaches you about helping

modeling: imitating helping behavior, especially effective with younger kids

Kids playing in yard study

Woman hates kids playing in her yard. She decides to pay them to play in her yard. A while later she says that she can no longer pay them. The kids then don’t want to play in the yard anymore.

Salvation Army study

Has the salvation army person be distracted and have a confederate either put in money or not. Seeing him put in money made observers more likely to also do so.

Social Exchange Approach (Helping)

Operant conditioning but also assessing probability of attaining rewards and costs

ex: good Samaritan study, subway helping study,

Mood effects - we learn that helping puts us in a good mood, so people may even be more likely to help when in a bad mood

communal vs exchange: attractiveness/availability study

Good Samaritan Study

Student at theological school and tells them to do a talk in front of people. For some students the talk is about the good Samaritan parable and another was different parable. Some of the subjects were told that they only had a few minutes while others told they had some time. There was always an old man slumped on the bench on the way over. The students who had time were likely to help than those without time. The choice of parable or background on the person did not predict but time did.

Subway helping study

In a study an old man would stumble in and fall on the ground. Sometimes he would pop a blood packet. People were more likely to help when there was no blood because there may be a greater cost to help him when there is blood.

attractiveness/availability study

single men are doing a motor function study and there is a women doing the test across from them. Some of the men are told that she is single and some are the men are told that she isn’t. The ones who are told that she is single were more likely to help her when she drops the cards.

Cognitive approaches(Helping)

schema activation - overt(some awareness but not full attention) convert(no awareness that information is being processed)

“oneness” - self-expansion theory - more likely to help those you have more overlap with.

Covert priming study for helping

People did a reaction test where they press buttons according to what’s on screen. In between shots on screen, helping words were flashed. These people are then see someone who drops a cup of pens. Those who were primed were more likely to help. Another variable was whether or not the ink flowed from the pens and people were less likely to help if they leaked(social exchange)

Empathy - altruism approach(helping)

Altruism - if people simply help when they see a need

People with high altruism have high empathy and they are more likely to help

Someone who is egoistic consider more of their rewards and costs instead

Empathy study

People tested for empathy(high and medium)

Subjects asked to volunteer for a cause and told they must pass a task to be able to volunteer. Everyone with high empathy volunteer and some people with medium. But when it comes to the test, the people with medium were a lot less likely to pass

Bystander Effect

Diffusion of responsibility and deindividuation when there are many witnesses

story of Kitty Genovese, ladder study(unambiguous need for help), seizure study(no visual information on others), smoke study(ambiguous situation), elevator study(non-emergency situation)

Ladder study

Subjects hear a loud crash and cry for help while doing a separate study. People who are with someone else delay in helping.

Smoke study

When there is smoke entering the room during a study, people are more likely to ask what is happening if they are alone. In another version a confederate is in the study and the real subject acts as they do.

Seizure study

subject puts on headphones and interacts with people they can’t see. Someone starts saying that they are having a seizure and the subject is more likely to help when it is just them and the person having a seizure.

Elevator study

Dropped a cup of pens in an elevator. People were more likely to help when they were alone with the person who dropped the pens.

Latane’s 5 step model of helping

1. Notice - realize something is even happening(being in a hurry - Good Samaritan Study)

2. Interpret as someone is in need of help(pluralistic ignorance: others not helping, must not be a problem, social exchange: potential costs to interpreting wrong)

3. Take responsibility - bystander effect, Learning(operant, social, modeling), social exchange(rewards/costs, communal vs exchange), evolutionary(kin selection), social norms(reciprocity, responsibility, justice), empathy(altruism)

4. Know how to help - if someone needs help but you don’t know how, you are less likely to even try(ex: medical emergencies)

5. Implement Help - things can get in the way of helping(someone else attempts, events prevent it etc.)

Interpret helping study

having a woman and man walk together. When they see someone the woman either says “get away from me I don’t know you” vs “get away from me I should have never married you”

First scenario resulted in more helping

Ways to increase Helping

decrease ambiguity

increase responsibility(telling one person to call 911)

reward(but not over justification)

provide models(especially for kids, showing them people helping)

activate empathy(ex: what homeless write on signs, having animals with them while raising money)

establish norm(establish that this community is a helping community)

Stress and health

Stress: response to threatening stimuli in the environment, activation of autonomic nervous system(ANS)

Two types: Chronic (eg. loneliness, poverty, chronic pain), acute (e.g. day to day hassles/deadlines/exams)

General Model of Stress

Alarm - activation of autonomic nervous system(fight or flight behavior, usually during acute stressors)

Resistance - hold off effect of stress on health for a period of time, since disease fighting cells will be diverted from doing their tasks

Exhaustion - if under too much stress or for too long, immune system malfunctions and health is affected

Stress Related Health Effects

Stress directly affects on Immune system(ANS taxes immune system)

indirect effects on IS through bad behaviors - increases likelihood of bad behaviors - not sleeping, drugs, nutrition varies

Health effects: common cold, infant mortality, cardiovascular, mental illness, adult mortalityC

Coping Behavior

Social support: quantity and quality, tangible(easing burden) and emotional(understanding what you are going through), visible and invisible(sometimes better than visible because visible can make someone feel helpless), negative vs positive life events - having people who celebrate for you during positive and empathizes with you during negative

Writing about trauma - decreases stress and makes you healthier

avoiding bad behaviors - sleep more, eat better, exercise

biofeedback - ability to calm yourself down and reduce stress

personality - type A is usually more stressful, optimism - helps with stress, self-efficacy - extent to which you feel you have an internal control

Law and Social Psychology

Pretrial issues - jury selection(pretrial questionnaires, “voire dire” exemptions) - knowing the type of people are on the jury to know which side they would help

Trial Issues - eyewitness testimony increases conviction rate, Presentation of evidence(providing a narrative story and weaving evidence in keeps jury engaged and can urge them into a certain direction, Elaboration likelihood model - putting people in central route processing when you have a good case and putting them in peripheral route processing when you have a weak case.

Deliberations - personality variables and attitudes(extroverted vs introverted juror), leadership roles(norm setting - who the jury foreman is is important as they can set the norm to their agenda), Conformity: if majority starts to form people starting joining in(

Staged Crime(Eyewitness testimony) study

A crime would be staged and have subjects be eyewitness.

They found that juries believe eyewitness 80% of the time(regardless of accuracy)

Even when there was uncertainty and evidence against someone really being an eyewitness, rates were high

Why eyewitnesses are credible

Confidence: being confident in being correct and in a manner that exudes confidence makes them see more credible

Confidence is not related to accuracy(people can be confidently wrong)

Speed and detail in answers: more detail, minute details that don’t matter, makes the eyewitness seem more credible.(also not related to accuracy)W

What makes eyewitnesses actually accurate/inaccurate

arousal factors: myth that arousal “burns in” memories(arousal actually undermines): study - man snatches purse in class being either violent or calm. People were more correct when the man was strolling and calm

Weapons: less accurate when facing weapon

time: the more time passes → less accurate, more time during event → more accurate

similarity: better at identifying the ingroup members(race usually)

suggestibility: “smashed” vs “hit” the tree(study: when asking witness how fast the car was going, they either used “smash” or “hit”. People remembering it going faster when asked with the word “smashed”)