social psych exam 3

social facilitation effect

people tend to perform better on simple tasks when other people are watching them than when they’re alone

arousal

enhances whatever response tendency is dominant

on complex tasks, when the correct answer is not dominant, increased arousal promotes

incorrect responding

source of arousal

evaluation apprehension, mere presence, distraction-conflict

evaluation apprehension

we are self conscious when we are being evaluated

mere presence

even without thinking about being evaluated, just having others around can enhance arousal

distraction-conflict

trying to pay attention to what you’re doing but being distracted by others looking at you causes you to think about too much at once, influencing arousal

social loafing

the tendency to put in less effort in group tasks because you assume other people will pick up the slack

diffusion of responsibility

people see themselves as a collective team rather than an individual, so it is easier to place blame on the group rather than assume blame yourself

deindividuation

loss of self-awareness in group situations as you start to see yourself as a group member rather than an individual

group size

makes members unidentifiable which allows them to act out of line

physical anonymity

uniforms, online profiles, costumes, etc., enhances deindividuation and allows individuals to disregard norms

group polarization

groups strengthen average initial inclination - what you felt alone is enhanced when you talk to a group, requires somewhat like-minded group members

informational influence

being persuaded by other people’s arguments

normative influence

people trying to one up each other or look good, making social comparisons and trying to contribute

ABCs of stereotypes, prejudice, and descrimination

Affective attitude, Behaviour, Cognition / beliefs

prejudice

affective attitude (usually negative judgment) towards members of a group based on their membership in that group

discrimination

behaviour (negative) towards members of a group based on their membership of that group

stereotyping

cognition / beliefs, mentally classifying people based on their membership of a group

dispositional / internal factors of merit

someone is more talented, someone tried harder

situational factors in merit

connections, resources, discriminations, opportunities

fundamental attribution error in merit

people would say they are getting success because of who they are whereas others are getting success based on the environment or situation

self-serving bias in merit

I am doing well because I am amazing, when I don’t do well it was the environment which is out of my control

outcomes as evidence

same outcome is treated differently based on which group you’re in

modern racism

a subtle racism that appears when safe, socially acceptable, or easy to rationalize

aversive racism

conflicting unconscious negative feelings about racial groups

ambivalent racism

a combination of individualism (belief all people should make it on their own) and egalitarianism (belied all people should have equal opportunities) which can lead to cognitive dissonance

reverse discrimination

discrimination against members of dominant of majority

hostile sexism

overtly negative, easy to spot

benevolent sexism

subtle, may sound positive

women higher in benevolent sexism

seek dependency oriented help from men, where they ask men to help them with something by doing it for them rather than teaching them how to do it so if they need to do it again the men have to come help them again

males higher in benevolent sexism

provide dependency oriented help to women

glass ceiling

unofficially acknowledged barrier that makes it harder for certain people to move up in certain careers

promotion barriers

it takes longer, on average, for women to get to upper-level positions than men, so if a woman is company-hopping she is less likely to get higher positions

tokenism

the policy and practice of making only a symbolic effort

objectification

the action of degrading someone to the status of a mere object

face-ism

tendency for men to be represented by their faces but women by their whole bodies or just body parts

system justification

wanting to justify the norms because you want to see the world as a just and fair place, so if something bad happens to someone they “deserved it”

social learning

social norms that tend to get reinforced by society or by your groups

realistic conflict

competition over important commodities and resources

scapegoat

a person blamed for the fault of others, especially because they are very easy or convenient to blame

outgroup homogeneity

people viewing outgroup members as being less diverse as in group members

in-group favouritism

we have a preference for our own group

social identity

naturally divide world into ingroup vs outgroup, can enhance self esteem by seeing own group more positivelyde

dehumanization

attribute less than human qualities to people

self-image maintenance

ingroup bias, social identity, personal identity

social cognition

the way our minds operate

illusory correlation

see relationship between infrequent behaviours / traits and infrequent classes of people when none exist

own-race bias

faces of your race are better recognized than faces of another race, you’re more likely to think people of another race all look the same

selective activation of stereotypes

use stereotype when it is helpful / gains you something but don’t use it when you don’t need it

stereotype threat

risk of confirming negative beliefs about one’s own group, causing you to be less focused on the task at hand because you’re aware of and worrying about this

aggression

any behaviour intended to hurt; can be physical, verbal, or decision to harm

hostile aggression

rage and anger is causing agression

instrumental aggression

planned and unemotional, means to an end, causing harm in attempt to gain something not because you’re angry

physical aggression

hurting someone else’s body

social aggression

hurting someone’s feelings, threatening their relationships, cyberbullying, aka mean girl aggression

aggression as biological

self-destructive impulse (Freud) that if you do not release aggression you will explode

displaced anger

redirection of aggression to a target other than the source of frustration that you see as inferior / lower than you

frustration-aggression theory

unjustified frustration → anger and aggression cues → aggression

frustration

anything that blocks us / makes us unable to achieve goal

relative deprivation

gap between our expectations and our achievements, we are aware of what we are missing

social learning theory

we can learn about aggression from other people, so when we watch someone do something we realize we can do that too, e.x., Bandura’s bobo doll

culture of honour

aggression as a culturally learned way to restore status; people from the south are more likely to think aggression is okay if you are defending your self, your family, or your property

aggression triggers

pain and heat

alcohol myopia and aggression

when asked to think of relationship conflicts, intoxicated individuals tend to experience more negative emotions and more negative views about their partner because the alcohol enhances those emotions

the weapons effect

people tend to be more aggressive if there is a weapon present, even if it is not theirs and they have never used it

domestic violence

violence between a current or former romantic partner, people tend to be more tolerant of aggressive behaviours from romantic partners the more committed the relationship is

psychopathic abuser

more likely to use physical aggression inside and outside the relationship, typical bullies, low impulse control, history of violence

overcontrolled abuser

due to resentment, individual is likely not violent but over time aggression builds up until they find an easy target to displace their aggression

borderline abuser

narcissistic and ofter borderline personality, usually disordered childhood or neglected / abused, cyclical patterns of being hostile and abusive and then apologizing

sexual coercion

any non-consensual sexual activity

stress-buffering hypothesis

having someone listening to you can help us reduce negative outcomes of stress

invisible support

support that goes without being noticed is often more effective than visible support

why invisible support is better

not directly telling you that you need help or making it obvious that they think you’re nervous

visible support cons

draws attention to your problem, feel like you can’t handle it yourself, not always carried out well which makes you feel more confused or stressed than you felt initially

high maintenance interactions

when social interactions are difficult they can be exhausting and deplete mental resources for subsequent tasks

social support in married men

receive more support and better support than they give, level of support does not change relative to partners stress levels; they have one constant level of support

social support in married women

more likely to increase their workload at home in response to partners stressful day

emotional support

providing warmth, nurturance, and reassurance

informational support

providing info that helps person understand stressful event, giving advice

instrumental support

providing tangible assistance such as services, money, etc.

self-esteem

overall sense of self-worth and personal value

supportive

positive reframing and negative validation; its not as bad as you think, I get it that really sucks

unsupportive

avoidance

responsiveness

how aware are you of what someone is thinking / feeling during a negative experience

what people provide to someone with low self-esteem

positive reframing

what people with low self-esteem really want

negative validation

if you think your friend has low self-esteem you see them as

less capable which makes you less likely to seek support from them

if you think your friend has high self-esteem you see them as

more capable which makes you more willing to seek support from them

functional approach

self-interest, egotistical, I am going to help you for my benefit

altruistic approach

helping purely for the other persons’ benefit

when empathy is low people help others

when benefits outweigh costs

when empathy is high people help others

even when it has a cost to themselves

the empathy gap

people tend to underestimate other people’s experience of physical pain and pain of social rejection and thus are less likely to have empathy

guilt

increases helping even if it is not the person you originally harmed, but this effect is short lived

collective guilt

feeling a group responsibility for harm to others caused by your group even if you didn’t personally do anything

mortality

increases prosocial behaviour; making people think about their death increases helping unless the prosocial behaviour also reminds them of their death

the propinquity effect

the more we see someone the more likely we are to interact with them and thus like them

mere exposure

the tendency for novel stimuli to be liked more / rated more positively after the rater has been repeatedly exposed to it

anticipatory liking

the tendency to like other people that we expect to meet more than those who we do not expect to meet