Social Psychology Exam 3

Prejudice

Emotion-centered judgments or evaluations about people based on their perceived membership in a particular group.

Stereotype

a type of oversimplified and overgeneralized schema that occurs when an individual assumes that everyone in a group has the same trait

Discrimination

Negative behaviors toward a people because of their perceived membership in a group

Stereotype Threat

when an individual feels at risk for confirming a negative stereotype about his or her group

• This anxiety can be distracting and can ironically cause the stereotype to come true as a type of self-fulfilling prophecy

• We are usually aware of negative stereotypes about our in-groups

Super-ordinate Goals

Muzafer Sherif’s Robber Cave study

• Inter-group conflict arises from competition over limited resources → Realistic Conflict Theory

• Super-ordinate Goals (shared objectives requiring mutual cooperation) can reduce inter-group conflict

Scapegoating

prejudice results from blaming an out-group for our frustrations

• prejudice toward immigrants increases when people believe the economy is bad

Jigsaw Classroom

students divided into groups to teach materials, but they have to work together as a group in order to succeed

• dividing topics and each group teaches a different topic to the class

  • Combining efforts and identities with people might lead to out-groups being considered helpful

Egoistic Altruism

helping others in exchange for some personal benefit

Pure Altruism

helping others purely out of selfless concern for their well-being

Negative State Relief

The idea that seeing another person in need causes individuals emotional distress and helping decreases those negative emotions.

• Egoistic altruism

Social Norms

Social Responsibility Norm - the idea that each individual has a duty to improve the world by helping those in need

• Prosocial behavior and a belief in a just world

• Social Exchange Theory - people form groups because of mutually exchanged beliefs

• prosocial norms increase helping

Social norms guide a surprising amount of prosocial behavior

Prosocial Moral Reasoning

Some think people with a prosocial personality are more likely to help people → However, there is no such thing as a single dominant personality trait

Kitty Genovese Case

Kitty Genovese arrived home when a man chased and stabbed her

• She screamed for help, which caused him to run away → however, he came back to stab her, sexually assault her, and take cash from her

• Bystander Effect

• 37 people in Genovese’s apartment either heard her screams or saw the attack

  • Would it happen today? → People have cell phones in higher amounts compared to 52 years ago → however, people don't always know what to do, are afraid of intervening, and tend to follow the behavior of others.

Latane and Darley Study

Established the bystander effect, demonstrating that individuals are less likely to help in an emergency when other people are present

• the number of bystanders increases, then the likelihood of intervention decreases, and the speed of response slows down

Bystander Effect

people are less likely to help in a situation where more people are present

Aggression

behavior intended to harm others

General Aggression Model (GAM)

Inputs → Routes → Outcomes

Inputs - personal factors (traits, beliefs, gender) and situational factors (pain, frustration, media violence) influence an individual

Routes - These inputs affect cognition in an individual (hostile thoughts, affect (angry feelings), and arousal (increased heart rate)

Outcomes - the internal state dictates how the situation is appraised, leading to automatic or controlled decisions for aggressive or non-aggressive actions.

• each aggressive act serves as a learning experience, reinforcing “knowledge structures” that make future aggression more likely

• E.g. media violence, domestic and social violence, etc.

Typology 1

Aggression Content…

• Physical, verbal, relational

  • direct bodily harm, using words to inflict psychological pain, and manipulating social standing (reputation)

Typology 2

forms of aggression…

Physical

• Direct → hitting, stabbing, and beating, or positioning your car to prevent someone else from changing lanes

• Indirect → cheating in a competition, hiring a hit-man, refusing to stop the bleeding of an enemy soldier

Verbal

• Direct → putdowns and insults, giving someone the silent treatment to punish the person

• Indirect → spreading mean rumors or gossip, failing to defend someone who you know is being treated unfairly

Typology 3

Aggressive Motivations

• Hostile Reactive - impulsive, emotion driven act intended to cause harm, triggered by perceived provocation, threat, or frustration

  • Rage at a lover’s infidelity

• Instrumental Reactive - more thoughtful/proactive, reason based decision to harm others to gain a resource

  • Gossiping about a colleague to avoid them as competition

Typology 4

microaggressions

• subtle behavior/insult that marginalizes or negatively stereotypes a group of people (rude statement)

Physical (direct)

(active)—hitting/stabbing/beating—(passive) positioning your car to prevent someone else from changing lanes

Physical (indirect)

(active)—cheating in a competition or hiring a “hitman”—(passive) refusing to stop the bleeding of an enemy soldier

Verbal (direct)

(active)—putdowns and insults—(passive) giving someone the silent treatment to punish that person

Verbal (indirect)

(active)—spreading mean rumors or gossip—(passive) failing to defend someone who you know is being treated unfairly

Pluralistic ignorance

a social psychological phenomenon where individuals privately reject a norm or belief but mistakenly assume most others accept it, leading to public conformity

• prosocial behavior action → others concluding helping someone is unnecessary in a crowded room because everyone else acts against a norm, or others not helping because they think their peers are indifferent

5-Step Model of Helping

1. did somebody notice the event

   1. no → distracted/too busy

2. Did they interpret it as an energy

   1. no → event is ambiguous

3. Did they feel responsible

   1. no → other people present

4. Did thye know how to help

   1. no → don’t know how

5. Did they implement their decision

   1. No → afraid, high cost

6. If all are answered yes helping occurs

Culture of Honor

Personal reputation for toughness and defending oneself (particularly for men) against insults is paramount

• often arising in environments with weak legal systems, such as the American South or herding societies

• emphasizes retribution, self-reliance, and strict gender norms to protect property and family

Bobo Doll Study

study on modeling aggression

• adults modeled aggression towards the bobo doll (hitting the doll) and then had children act themselves in front of the bobo doll

  • predominantly, the kids replicated the behavior and started hitting the doll

Alcohol's Effect on Aggression

disinhibits our self regulation, people make bad decisions on alcohol because of frontal lobe reduced behavior

• strong predictor of sexual and physical violence, as well as suicide

Mere Exposure

the tendency for individuals to prefer familiar objects and individuals, especially as exposure to them increases

Proximity

the tendency for individuals to like people who are in close geographic proximity to themselves, due to the mere exposure effect

Similarity-Attraction Hypothesis

the idea that people tend to form relationships, romantic and otherwise, with others who have the same values, attitudes, interests, and demographics as themselves

• Assortative Mating - the process by which organisms that are similar tend to mate with each other, meaning an individual is more likely to mate with someone who shares his or her features and interests

Sternberg's Triangular Theory of Love

All intimate relationships are made up of intimacy, passion, and commitment

• Intimacy - emotional component, feelings of closeness, does not have to be romantic, bonding towards someone else

• Passion - physical attraction, motivational and behavioral, the drive to being with someone else, can change over time

• Commitment- thoughtful, reason decision to stay with a given partner, and maintain the relationship often exclusively

  • Non-love - relationships without any of these three components

  • Fluctating components change relationships over time → because of change in environments, more or less patience in a relationship, changes in individuals, and expectations may change

Attachment Theory

Early family environment affects out ability to form and maintain healthy relationships

Secure Attachment

A type of attachment style produced by consistently supportive parents, which translates into healthy, trusting, long-term adult relationships

• individuals with this tend to have relatively high self-esteem and aren’t overly jealous or anxious

Anxious/Ambivalent Attachment

A type of attachment style produced by inconsistent parents, which translates into high levels of jealousy and low self-esteem within adult relationships

• Individuals with this tend to have turbulent relationships (high jealousy, low self-esteem)

Avoidant/Fearful attachment

a type of attachment style produced by consistently unsupportive parents, which translates into a general lack of trust and isolating behaviors within adult relationships

Strange Situation Experiment

An experiment that studied attachment forms in young infants

• the reunion point where the parent returned to console the child is where the researchers observed attachment style → child goes from crying to being calm from parents presence demonstrates secure attachment, for instance

Interdependence Theory

A model for understanding romantic relationship stability with the prediction being from commitment, which is, in turn predicted by a combination of satisfaction with the relationship and the potential for quality alternative relationships

Commitment

And individuals decision to stay in a romantic relationship for the long-term

Investment Model

A statistical model for understanding romantic relationships that includes all three predictors of commitment satisfaction, alternatives, and investments

Investments

The amount of time, energy, and resources put into a relationship that would be lost if the relationship were to end.

Satisfaction

Refers to the balance of positive and negative experiences, or how well a partner meets needs, such as companionship and security

Quality of Alternatives

Evaluates if needs could be met better outside the current relationship

• being single or with a different partner