PSY326: Social Cognition

social cognition

how people make sense of others and themselves

social thinker/perceiver model

explains connections between motivations and cognition

consistency seeker (social thinker model)

we like consistency and think about our behaviours to avoid cognitive dissonance

naïve scientist (social thinker model)

we think we are rational and analyze situations

cognitive miser (social thinker model)

we have limited cognitive resources and use shortcuts to save them and to think quickly

motivated tactician (social thinker model)

we think before we act; the goals of an interaction influence what cognitive strategies we use

activated actor (social thinker model)

we use automatic processes to survive and thrive in social situations

psychological field

the influence of the (social) environment as perceived by the individual on cognition, affect, and behaviour; determined by their needs, beliefs, motivation, and interpretation of the world

dual-process models

models that divide cognition into binaries, usually one conscious and one unconscious

automatic (X-system) processing

reflexive, quick information processing that can be rooted in survival or heuristics

controlled (C-system) processing

deliberate, slow information processing that can incorporate knowledge and values

Bargh’s four criteria of automaticity

A: outside of awareness
I: lacking intentionality
C: lacking control
E: efficient

full automaticity

goal-independent responses that satisfy the four criteria of automaticity

subliminal priming

priming via sensation without perception; extremely hard to empirically test

conscious priming

priming via perception of a stimulus with unawareness of its effect

conceptual priming

activation of a concept in one’s mind

affective priming

activation of an emotional state in one’s mind; doesn’t replicate uniformly

behavioural priming

activation of a concept that directly affects behaviour; only replicated by Bargh

accessibility

the extent to which a piece of information can be brought into awareness

proceduralization

the development of automaticity with practice (e.g., riding a bike); also applies to cognition (e.g., judgments)

goal-inconsistent automaticity

when a person’s own unwanted responses are governed by cognitive factors outside of control or awareness (e.g., “don’t think of a pink elephant”)

rebound effect

the increased accessibility of a stereotype due to not wanting to think about it

requirements for controlled processing

intent (attention and resources to reject the automatic response) and full control (awareness to inhibit automatic associations)

three-stage memory model

encoding → storage → retrieval

selective attention

not everything captures external (stimuli) or internal (mindfulness) attention

factors for social salience

• being novel

• standing out

• being unusual/against expectations for that person

• being unusual for that person’s social category

• being unusual for people in general

• being goal-relevant

• dominating the visual field

• being instructed to observe

self-concept/self-construal

our collected beliefs about ourselves; affected by treatment from others, cultural activities, roles, personality traits, and our private/presenting selves

working self-concept

the currently active aspect of the self-concept, usually determined by situational norms, that influences ongoing thought and behaviour (e.g., in class, the “student” aspect is active)

relational self

the ways we characterize ourselves when with another person that influence our emotions and behaviours with them; provides stability and variability

self-concept consistency

internal (few conflicting thoughts/beliefs), temporal (same over time), and cross-role (same between situations) consistency

self-schema

information that quickly comes to mind that represents the self’s qualities in a given domain; strong yeses or nos to questions about the self are self-schematic, but unsure answers are not

self-esteem

the evaluation we make of ourselves in our mental representation of the self

sociometer theory

proposes that self-esteem reflects what you believe other people think about your worth as a person and can therefore be influenced by others or by yourself

contingency of self-worth

a selected domain on which self-esteem is based (e.g., academic performance); high contingency individuals have lower self-esteem after receiving a rejection

independent self-construal

emphasizes stability, internal traits (abilities, thoughts), uniqueness, and directness; uses others to compare/reflect on the self; bases self-esteem on the ability to express oneself

interdependent self-construal

emphasizes social context, flexibility, public traits (roles, relationships), fitting in, and indirectness; uses others for self-definition; bases self-esteem on the ability to maintain harmony

self-evaluation

assessment of self-esteem, self-concept, introspection, etc. motivated by a desire for knowledge about the self, a desire for consistency, self-improvement (getting better), and self-enhancement (feeling good about ourselves)

social comparison theory

we learn about ourselves by comparing ourselves to other people

attribution

how people infer causal explanations for others’ actions and mental states (“why would they do this?”)

controlled attribution

attribution which does not use shortcuts; common when it’s important to get the attribution right or after unexpected or negative events

mind perception

inferences about the mental states of others including their beliefs, intentions, desires, and feelings; people tend to project their own minds onto similar others and are over-enthusiastic to do so

cause-effect relations

a set of principles that define what makes an attribution generally (but not always) accurate

cause precedes effect (cause-effect relation)

the cause comes before the effect

temporal contiguity (cause-effect relation)

factors that occur immediately before an effect are more plausible to be the cause then those occurring much earlier

spatial contiguity (cause-effect relation)

factors that are nearby are more plausible than those far away

perceptual salience (cause-effect relation)

stimuli that are salient and easily perceived are more likely to be perceived as causal than stimuli in the background (e.g., temperature is a background stimulus)

causes resemble effects (cause-effect relation)

people assume big effects are produced by big causes (and little effects by little causes)

fundamental principles of attribution theories

1. generic: people use cause-effect relations in most places of life

2. minimal determinism: people infer causality in relatively simple rulesets (parsimony)

3. motivational point of departure: people must have a resource to search for causes (commonly unexpectedness/negativity)

attribution formation

the explanation for an action comes from whether it’s possible and has a reason to be done

correspondent inference theory

proposes we seek to identify intentions underlying behaviour in order to infer the actor’s dispositions, which informs how we act around them in the future

dispositional attribution

an inference about behaviour as due to beliefs, traits, and abilities (i.e., who somebody is)

situational attribution

an inference about behaviour as due to external factors

covariation model

when and how people seek to validate causal attributions

consensus

covariation of a person’s behaviour across different people in a similar situation

distinctiveness

covariation of a person’s behaviour across different situations

consistency

covariation of a person’s behaviour across time (similar behaviour every time the situation occurs)

self-perception theory

people infer their own attitudes from their behaviours, especially when preexisting attitudes or internal cues are weak

extrinsic motivation

behaviour attributed to external factors

intrinsic interest

behaviour that is done for minimal reward, therefore attributed to internal factors

fundamental attribution error

the tendency to attribute another person’s behaviour to dispositional causes (more salient than background factors); domain-specific, sensitive to motives/cultures, and more likely for strangers

actor-observer effect

people explain other people’s behaviour as due to dispositional factors but their own behaviour as due to situational factors (especially when the event is negative)

self-serving attributional bias

the tendency to take credit (dispositional) for success and deny responsibility (situational) for failure

group-serving bias

ingroup members attribute positive group actions to ingroup qualities and distance themselves from the group after negative group actions

person perception

the perception of others which is different than the perception of things because:

• people intentionally influence the environment

• people perceive back

• impressions of others are based on the self

• social stimuli can change when being watched

• non-observable attributes (CAB) are vital

• people change over time more than objects

• it’s harder to evaluate the accuracy of cognitions about people than objects

• people are complex

• people are more interesting to figure out

thin-slice impression study

compared impressions of an instructor between participants who watched 30 seconds of clips and participants who had an entire semester with them; found that the impressions were relatively similar

Asch’s model of person perception

compared responses to two identical lists of traits (except warm/cold); found that central traits affect perception of other traits

central trait

a characteristic that has a very strong influence on the perception of other traits (e.g, warm/cold)

algebraic model (Asch’s person perception)

each trait is evaluated separately and combined into an overall summary (outdated)

configural (holistic) model

overall impressions are formed by changing individual traits to fit overall context, schemas, and central traits

chronically accessible concepts

how people habitually code other people, especially particular trait dimensions (e.g., attractiveness as being the first thing you notice); influenced by family, culture, survival, and occupation

implicit theories of impression formation

behaviour is predicted based on prior assumptions about the person; divided into entity theory and incremental theory

entity theory

the assumption that personal qualities (e.g., intelligence) are mostly fixed and that people don’t change much between situations

incremental theory

the assumption that personal qualities are changeable and context-dependent

Molden et al.’s implicit theory study

participants watched a video of a woman acting anxiously; under cognitive load, entity theorists are more likely to attribute to disposition even if the situation was stressful and incremental theorists are more likely to attribute to situation even if the woman was an anxious person