SOCIOCULTURAL APPROACH

Social Identity Theory

a theory developed in 1970 by Tajfel & Turner - explains how individuals derive part of their self-concept from their group membership; individuals categorize themselves into groups and allow that to form their social identity

• Tajfel & Turner (1970)

in-groups & out-groups

groups a person belongs to; groups a person does not belong to

4 key mechanisms of SIT

social categorization: identifying & classifying them and others into groups

social identification: adopt the norms of the in-group

social comparison: compare the in-group to out groups - emphasize positive aspects of in-group to boost self-esteem

positive distinctiveness: seek to establish superiority of their in-group over out-groups

Tajfel & Turner (1970) AIM

investigate whether in-group discrimination would take place when put into different groups with categorization of in-groups & out-groups if people just met

Tajfel & Turner (1970) METHOD & SAMPLE

2 true experiments; 64 schoolboys from the UK aged 14-15 (were randomly allocated to groups of 4 - boys knew each other well

Tajfel & Turner (1970) PROCEDURE

1 - boys estimated how many dots flashed onto a screen and were placed into “highly accurate or poorly accurate” or “over/under estimator”

2 - boys were showed paintings and were placed into groups based on who they liked

3 - in both cases participants were randomly allocated to the groups but the boys thought they weren’t

4 - asked to give money rewards to 2 boys in the experiment (identities were concealed but it was 1 in-group & 1 out-group boy)

• could give max join profit

• largest reward to in-group

• max difference

Tajfel & Turner (1970) RESULTS

majority of boys gave more money to members of in-group than out-group

what was most important to the boys was the maximum point difference (wanted to give out-groups the least amount)

competition was not necessary for discrimination to occur - out-group discrimination is very easily triggered by applying norms of behaviour

Tajfel & Turner (1970) RESEARCH METHOD

true experiment: a research design conducted in a lab setting that aims to establish a cause and effect relationship by manipulating an IV and measuring a DV

• creates a hypothesis to infer what will happen before testing to see if it actually happens

• sample is randomly allocated to conditions

• control & experimental condition

• reliable & replicable

Tajfel & Turner (1970) ETHICS

informed consent

• children are unable to give informed consent as they are unaware of the full implications of participating in a study

ethical considerations

considerations that are crucial in a psychological investigation - concern the ethics of treating participants fairly and without harm

Social Cognitive Theory

behaviour is learned from the environment through the process of modelling and reinforcement (don’t need to experience personally to learn)

• mainly developed by Albert Bandura (first in 1960s and finalized in 1986)

• Bandura et al. (1961)

modelling

involves learning through the observation of other people, which may lead to imitation if the behaviour has desirable consequences

5 conditions for SCT

attention: observers must see the modeled behaviour

retention: observers must remember the modeled behaviour

reproduction: observers must physically & mentally be able to do the act

motivation: observers must want to reproduce it & expect a certain outcome

efficacy: observer must believe that they can reproduce the behaviour & achieve the same positive outcomes

other factors that impact the potential for SCT

model stands out

model’s behaviour is consistent

model is liked & respected by observer

observer perceives a similarity (in-group) between themselves and the model

model’s behaviour is reinforced

Bandura et al. (1961) AIM

to demonstrate that if children are passive witnesses to an aggressive display by an adult model, they will imitate the aggressive behaviour when given the opportunity

• children will commit acts similar to the model

• children will imitate the behaviour of the same-sex model more

Bandura et al. (1961) METHOD & SAMPLE

Quasi experiment; 36 boys & girls between 37-69 months - matched pairs design based on level of aggression seen in each child prior to the experiment

• experimenters observed the children in a nursery and rated them on a 5 point scale of aggression

Bandura et al. (1961) PROCEDURE

stage 1 - 8 trials total (boys & girls had to observe either a same sex or opposite sex model)

• aggressive model - physically & verbally abusive to the doll

• passive model played with blocks quietly

• control saw no model

stage 2 - the children were brought into another room where they could not play with the toys as they were ‘the researchers best’ and were for the other children

stage 3 - children were brought to another room with aggressive & non-aggressive toys for 20 minutes. observers measured

• physical aggression

• verbal aggression

• non-aggressive verbal responses

Bandura et al. (1961) RESULTS

children who saw aggressive model were more aggressive

boys were overall more aggressive than girls

boys in aggressive condition were more physically aggressive if the model was male & more verbally aggressive if the model was female

girls in aggressive condition were more physically aggressive if the model was male & more verbally aggressive if the model was female

Bandura et al. (1961) RESEARCH METHOD

quasi experiment: participants are allocated to conditions based on characteristics of interest (gender & aggression)

• conducted in a lab setting that aims to establish a cause and effect relationship by manipulating an IV and measuring a DV

• hypothesis is formed beforehand

• controlled for extraneous variables (previous aggression of children)

Bandura et al. (1961) ETHICS

informed consent

• children are unable to give informed consent as they are not aware of the full implications of participating

Do no harm

• children were exposed to aggression and were made angry, may have impacted their level of aggression in the long term

Stereotyping

simplified generalizations about identifiable groups of people

• an example of schema based on a mental representation of a group of people

• basis of racism, homophobia, xenophobia

• Tajfel & Turner (1970)

in-group & out-group theory (stereotype)

this theory of the formation of stereotypes suggests that they are formed & shared

• group members are motivated to strengthen their perceived similarities with in-group and perceived differences with out-group

• stereotypes form as a consequence

schema (stereotype & enculturation)

cognitive frameworks from generalizations of repeated encounters with a given situation

discrimination (stereotypes)

bad treatment of others based on their group membership

prejudice (stereotypes)

unjustified (negative) thoughts & feelings towards an individual or a group based on their perceived membership in a specific group

Paragraph 3 - STEREOTYPING and TAJFEL & TURNER (1970)

• demonstrates how categorization is enough to create discrimination between in-groups and out-groups

• stereotypes emerge from group identity as individuals seek to boost their self esteem - creates prejudice

• social identity drives intergroup bias & discrimination

Culture & Cognition

people’s perception of themselves are affected by the culture in which they live - affects cognitive processes

• cultural group’s language serves to interpret, classify, & structure perception of external reality

• Berry (1967)

culture

common rules that regulate behaviour in a group, as well as shared attitudes and values in the group to create a sense of belonging

role of culture in behaviour

one’s culture affecting interpersonal decision making

social class & behaviour

positive correlation between lower social class, holistic cognition, and host country

surface & deep culture

cultural norms that are readily discernible to newcomers

profound social norms that are considerably less obvious and accessible to newcomers

cultural groups

collection of individuals who share a core set of beliefs, values, and patterns of behaviour

Paragraph 3 - CULTURE & COGNITION and BERRY (1967)

• how cultural values shape cognitive processes (decision making & perception of social norms)

• cultural upbringing structures ways of thinking

• reinforces that culture shapes cognitive tendencies

• highlight show cultural dimensions influence cognitive styles, supporting broader concept that cognition is shaped by external environment

Cultural dimensions

values within a culture that influence behavior and cognition

• Hofstede argued that understanding cultural dimensions will help better communication between cultures

power distance

the extent to which a culture respects authority and status

individualism vs. collectivism

individualistic: ties between individuals are loose, and everyone is expected to look after themselves and their immediate family - does not live up to norms of family or larger social groups

collectivist: people are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups (often extended family) - provides support and protection

uncertainty avoidance

: a society’s tolerance for ambiguity - less strict rules in society & openness to change

masculinity vs. femininity

masculinity: these societies have a focus on achievement, competition, and wealth

feminine societies: focuses on cooperation, relationships, and quality of life

long-term vs. short-term orientation

the connection to the past and attitude toward the future

• short-term orientation: means that traditions are kept

• long-term orientation: has more of a focus on the future

indulgence vs restraint

indulgent: cultures allow people to enjoy life and have fun (values the satisfaction of human needs and desires - forced on individual happiness and well-being, leisure time is important, greater freedom & personal control

restrained: cultures limit one’s desires and withhold pleasures to align with social norms - positive emotions are less expressed and contrast indulgent

Berry (1967) AIM

investigate if cultural dimensions play a role in the level of conformity & if some cultures have higher conformity rates than others

Berry (1967) METHOD & SAMPLE

quasi experiment; inuit, temne, scottish (split into 2 groups each)

• half were modernized

• half lived traditional

Berry (1967) PROCEDURE

condition 1 - given a paper with one aget line & had to match 1 of the 8 beneath with it

condition 2 - same as first but researcher would give a “hint” that other people in their same ingroup gave a certain answer (was actually wrong)

conformity was measured by the distance between participants answer and the correct one (further distance = higher conformity)

Berry (1967) RESULTS

Temne (collectivist culture) had highest level of conformity to group norms than other modernized groups

all 3 groups demonstrated that traditional cultures had higher rates of conformity (not statistically significant)

• values are encouraged through socialization, enculturation, & parenting practices

values are also influenced by economic systems

• individualistic: children raised to be independent

• collectivist: children raised to be interdependent

Berry (1967) RESEARCH METHODS

quasi experiment:

• well controlled

• standardized

• easy to manipulate IV & control extraneous variables

Berry (1967) ETHICS

informed consent

• may not have been fully informed about the nature of the study

Deceived

• deceived about the opinions of others in their group

enculturation

an umbrella term that includes all the possible ways that people might learn the cultural values, beliefs, norms, and expectations of their heritage culture

Martin & Fabes (2001)

values & beliefs

the process of learning what your society and culture cares about

enculturation occurs 3 different ways

direct instruction: when a person is directly told what to do

social learning (SCT): an individual is influenced by their social environment (minimal/superficial), letting them learn more about cultural norms

cultural learning: individual tries to empathise or imagine another persons POV

Martin & Fabes (2001) AIM

to understand the impact of peer groups on gender identity

• self-segregation by gender occurs in pre-school aged children & as time passes children develop diff social skills that make it harder to interact with the opposite sex

Martin & Fabes (2001) METHOD & SAMPLE

naturalistic, non-participant, overt, observation; 61 children aged 3-6 years old (no random allocation)

Martin & Fabes (2001) PROCEDURE

researchers observed participants for 10-second snapshots (conducted 20,000 over 6 months)

recorded the play-partner choices of children (same or opposite sex) - how that influenced their behaviour

Martin & Fabes (2001) RESULTS

sex segregation was very strong & moderately stable over time

found support for traditional stereotypical behaviour

• girls were encouraging in play & prefered indoors with adults

• boys prefered aggressive games outside without adults

results were amplified by the amount of same-sex peer interaction that occured

Paragraph 3; ENCULTURATION & Martin & Fabes (2001)

social dosage effect: the more time children spend with same sex group, the more stereotypical their behaviour

Martin & Fabes (2001) RESEARCH METHOD

naturalistic: not manipulating any IV, only measuring DV (their play partner & their behaviour)

non-participant: researcher was not part of the study

overt: participants knew they were being studied

must be observational to research impacts of gender segregation on children in its natural occurrence over a period of time

Martin & Fabes (2001) ETHICS

informed consent

• children are unable to give informed consent as they are not aware of the full implications of participating in a study