Social Psychology: Altruism, Prejudice, and the Justice System

A set of vocabulary flashcards derived from social psychology lecture notes focusing on altruism, theories of prejudice, and social cognition within the justice system.

Altruism

Acting to help someone else at some cost to oneself.

Social exchange theory

A rational economic model stating people evaluate costs and benefits to minimize costs and maximize rewards when deciding whether to help.

Reciprocity Norm

A social norm where people feel obligated to help those who have helped them in the past.

Social responsibility Norm

A moral and social obligation to help others if we are able to, regardless of whether they have helped us.

Kin Selection

The evolutionary theory that we are most likely to help those to whom we are most closely related genetically.

Example of Kin Selection

Helping your cousin before helping a stranger, but helping your sibling before helping your cousin.

Why is reciprocity an evolutionary trait?

Evolution has hardwired humans to engage in reciprocity because the only way homo-sapiens were able to survive was by staying together and being a part of a collective.

Explain the Kitty Genovese Incident and its relation to the bystander effect

in 1964 Kitty Genovese was walking home from work to a large apartment complex where she lived. She arrived outside her apartment complex in the early evening with her neighbors inside their apartments and their windows were open. Suddenly, she was attacked, hurt, and repeatedly raped outside of her apartment complex with many bystanders who must have heard the incident. 40 people who lived in the apartment admitted to hearing this but did not do anything to help her (no calling the police or stepping in). This incident highlighted the "bystander effect," where individuals are less likely to help a victim when others are present, as they assume someone else will intervene.

Latane & Darley’s Decision Tree

A model of situational influence identifying steps to helping: noticing the problem, interpreting it as an emergency, and assuming responsibility for giving help.

Explain the smoke filled room study (Darley & Latane, 1968)

Subjects are placed in a room and asked to complete a survey.

Some subjects are placed alone and other subjects are placed with other people.

subjects who were alone reported the smoke after 60 seconds on average, subjects who were with one other person reported the smoke after 80 seconds, and subjects who were in a group of five people took significantly longer to report the smoke (160 seconds).

The less people in a room, the faster someone reported the smoke.

This showed plural ignorance as when others in the room were not responding, subjects assumed the smoke to not be an emergency and did not as quickly

Explain the epileptic seizure phone call experiment

People were taking part in a group phone call.

One of the people on the phone call starts having an epileptic seizure (mispronouncing words, slurring, and eventually passing out).

Half the subjects believe they are having the phone call with just the person having the seizure and the other half of the subjects believe they are having a group phone call varying between 2-4 people.

The subjects who believed they were on the phone with just the person having a seizure, make an attempt to help 80% quicker.

The subjects who believed they were on the phone with others took significantly longer to help the person having a seizure.

This shows the diffusion of responsibility as the more bystanders the subject believes is in on this phone call, the less likely to assume responsibility for helping.

Pluralistic ignorance

The belief that if others are not responding to a situation, it must not be an emergency.

Diffusion of responsibility

The feeling that other bystanders will take responsibility in an emergency, which reduces the likelihood of any one individual helping.

Bystander effect

The phenomenon where the likelihood of an individual helping is reduced in the presence of other bystanders.

Factors that contribute to the bystander effect

The situation is ambiguous

When bystanders are strangers

Others reactions are difficult to interpret

The number of bystanders increase

Other factors influencing helping behavior

Time pressures

Affective State of potential Helper

Darley & Batson’s “good Samaritan” study and it’s relation to time pressure

A seminarian is someone who performs speeches and sermons for their church.

They study the word of god and interpret the bible.

The seminarians were primed with a sermon about helping thy neighbor and treating those around you as if they were yourself.

The seminarians were then told they had to deliver a homily (speech regarding how the word of god is interpreted in your everyday life).

Half of the seminarians are told you have to get over to the chapel immediately and had no time to waste.

The other half were told the mass just started and have 15 minutes to get to the chapel.

All of the seminarians encounter a man having a heart attack on the street and is asking for help.

None of the seminarians who were in a rush with less time stopped to help the man having a heart attack even when they were primed with the good Samaritan speech.

The seminarians who were not in a rush and had more time stopped to help the man having a heart attack.

Even when all the seminarians were primed with a sermon about caring for thy neighbor, the time pressure was the real factor in deciding if they would help or not.

Guilty Study (Mcmillen & Austins “liars”) and its relation to affective state being a factor of the potential Helper

Half of the subjects were manipulated by the researcher to lie to the experimenter.

The other half of the subjects were not asked to manipulate/lie to the experimenter.

The experimenter then asks all subjects for help with something to see which subjects were more likely to help.

The subjects who lied to the experimenter gave up 50% more of their time to help the experimenter compared to the subjects who did not lie to the experimenter.

The subjects who lied provided additional help to the experimenter, to relieve the cognitive dissonance they felt when they lied to the experimenter.

Negative State Relief Hypothesis

the theory that helping other people helps us feel better about ourselves. When people are sad or their self esteem is threatened, they tend to engage in more helping behavior than those who are not sad or do not feel their self esteem being threatened.

Explain how Positive Affect = Increased Helping

When people are in a positive state or mood, they want to stay in that mood state. So they engage in helping behaviors to sustain their positive state

Additional factors influencing helping behavior

Religiosity

Gender of the helper

Explain how religiosity influences helping behavior

People who are more deeply religious tend to give more help but there is a qualification of situational contexts. (public vs private). Religious people are more likely to help others in public compared to nonreligious people, but do not give any more help compared to people who are nonreligious when in private.

Explain how Gender influences helping behavior

Men are more likely to help compared to women in heroic/ chivalric intervention contexts (one-type interactions with a stranger where that person is in distress)

Women are more likely to help compared to men in long term or committed intervention contexts ( long term interactions with someone in distress)

Chivalric helping

One-time intervention helping often involving a stranger in distress, a behavior most associated with men in certain social contexts.

Committed helping

Long-term intervention or committed care for someone in distress, a behavior most associated with women tasks like community or elderly healthcare.

Batson argues that pure altruism is most likely to come into play when we experience ____ for the person in need

Empathy

Empathy

The ability to experience events and emotions the way another person experiences them; proposed by Batson to override cost considerations in helping.

Explain the Empathy & cost of not helping when costs make no difference Study

Subjects were college students who were randomly assigned to one of two groups

• Group 1: subjects will experience low empathy

• Group 2: subjects experience high empathy

The situation given was about a fellow college student named Carol who was in a terrible car accident that confined her to a wheel chair

Empathy is manipulated by what the subjects were told about carol

• Low empathy group was told carol was in a car accident and she will need help

• The high empathy group was told about Carol's situation and was given personal letters from Carol where she describes the pain she is experiencing, the adverse effects of the medication, and how difficult it was to be in a wheelchair.

Now the groups are also tested based on if the scenario is low or high cost

• Low cost group were told because Carol is in a wheelchair and it is difficult for her to move around, she will no longer be able to attend lectures. (cost is guilt, which is low because they will not have to see or interact with carol if they do not help het)

• High cost group were told Carol will still attend every lecture and position her wheelchair in the front of the lecture hall ( cost is guilt which is high because carol will be present and will see the people who chose to either help or not help her)

In the low empathy group who will see carol (high cost), 75% of people will offer to help

In the low empathy group who will not see carol ( low cost), only 35% of people will offer to help

In the high empathy group who will see carol (high cost), about 80% of people will offer to help

In the high empathy group who will not see carol (low cost), also about 80% of people will offer to help, leaving virtually no significant difference between the groups

This shows that empathy matters more than cost and benefit considerations (social exchange theory)

Target variables influencing helping behavior

Gender: Women are more likely to be helped

Similarly to the potential helper: greater similarity = increased likelihood of helping because we relate and feel more comfortable helping someone who we find similar to us.

Explain the prosocial children and altruism when helping Study (Myers)

Children were randomly assigned to watch a TV show episode with the dependent variable being the amount of time they spend helping the research assistant

• One subject group was assigned to watch Lassie where Lassie the dog is saving someone's life

• The second subject group was assigned to watch Lassie in an episode where lassie does not help or save anyone

• The third subject group was assigned to watch The Brady Bunch comedy TV series that involved no helping behavior, just fiascos.

The children who watched the Lassie episode with the helping behavior (lassie saving someone’s life) helped the research assistant for almost twice as long as the other two subject groups who observed no helping behavior.

This study suggests that witnessing helping behavior can increase our likelihood to help as well

Explain the Seeing good → doing good? study (Schnall, Roper, & Fessler)

This experiment wanted to see the amount of time a person helps the experimenter after watching something that made them feel good

The researchers theorized that maybe elevating people’s mood can increase the likelihood of them helping, instead of those primed with helping behavior.

• One subject group viewed a documentary called “Open ocean” which depicted the wonders of sea life (inspirational)

• The second subject group viewed a comedy show called “Faulty’s family” which followed a man trying to run a hotel and getting into wacky situations. (funny/ comedic)

• The third subject group viewed an episode of The Oprah Winfrey show called “Oprah’s helping” where Oprah spoke to 3 grown men who grew up in the violent intercity life but through the guidance of an older mentor, were able to get out and lead successful lives. (only example with helping behavior)

The people who witnessed the Oprah Winfrey show devoted the most amount of time to helping due to them watching helping behavior which facilitated a greater amount of helping behavior compared to just elevating people’s moods

The cognitive factors of why watching prosocial behavior increases helping

Observational learning: observing people behave in a prosocial way, can demonstrate how to help others and the results/ consequences to helping other people

Priming prosocial schemas: Bringing helping behaviors to the forefront of people's minds can change the way they act

The Affective factors of why watching prosocial behavior increases helping

Moral elevation of mood: a special kind of mood elevation that inspires people to act in a helping manner for the sake of moral elevation

The neurobiological factors of why watching prosocial behavior increases helping

Activation of mirror neurons: mirror neurons can become activated when watching someone else do something. Part of your motor cortex emulates what another person is doing

Increase in trending & befriending hormones: Changes in oxytocin levels can make people more friendly and can contribute to bringing about more social behaviors

Prejudice

A negative attitude toward a socially defined group, and any person perceived to be a member of that group

Stereotypes

The cognitive component of prejudice consisting of beliefs about social groups used to make inferences, predictions, and attributions about individuals.

Stereotypic Information

Information people claim to “know” about a group of people

Individuating information

Specific information about an individual's skills and personality that allows for more accurate judgments than group-based stereotypes.

Discrimination

The behavioral component of prejudice involving differential treatment based on perceived group membership.

Explain the Janet Swim study (1994) and how it relates to stereotype accuracy vs inaccuracy

Studied whether or not the stereotypes between men and women were accurate or inaccurate

Also studied whether men and women overestimate, underestimate, or accurately judge the size of the magnitude of the differences between men and women

Findings showed that people were able to estimate the gender differences accurately, along with the accurate magnitude.

When people did not guess it accurately, they underestimated the gender difference, instead of overestimating it

Why do people prefer individuating information?

You are a more accurate judge of character when you evaluate people’s personalities, skills, and abilities than their stereotype information (race, gender, sex)

When can stereotypes help?

To get a better understanding of why others perceive, act, and react differently from each other, and to form accurate judgments of what people are like. It is also used to dispel any inaccurate assumptions.

Social Source Theories of Prejudice

Unequal status (prejudice as a justifying ideology)

Institutional supports (segregation, education, language, and media)

Conformity to social norms

Social Identity Theory

System Justification Period

an unequal system justifying its inequality by changing the beliefs about the relative superiority and inferiority of social groups to fit the unequal structure of the society.

Explain the Institutional Supports for Prejudice

Segregation: When people are segregated, they never obtain any individuating information and use stereotypes to decide your opinions, which leads to prejudice.

Education: Education is thought to be a safeguard against prejudice, but if prejudice were taught in schools, then it cannot be a safeguard against prejudice. It instead acts as a perpetuation of these stereotypes

Language: if someone repeatedly uses prejudiced language, they will change their attitudes to match the language they use.

Media sources: media portrayals of other groups can perpetuate harmful stereotypes and if others are not exposed to these outgroups outside of the media, that becomes the only information they assume about that out group.

Explain how conformity to social norms relates to prejudice

If being prejudiced is the social norm, then people will act in a prejudiced manner to fit in with the norms of a given society.

Social Identity Theory

The theory that people favor their ingroup and disfavor outgroups to protect and enhance their self-esteem.

Minimal group paradigm

Experimental research showing that people favor their own group even when group membership is based on trivial or arbitrary criteria they would not normally be categorized by

Explain the over-estimators vs. under-estimators study and how it relates to the minimal group paradigm

School boys are asked to watch a video of dots flashing on a screen and guess how many dots are

Then the boys are split into 2 groups based on over or under estimators of the “correct” dot number

All the boys are actually assigned these groups by random assignment because the dot is not actually moving

Now the boys are placed in individual rooms and are asked to allocate funds to two people

One person is an overestimator and the other is an underestimator.

Depending on the group the boy who is making the allocation is in, determines which group gets more or less funds

Ex. The boy allocating the funds is an overestimator, he will give the boy who is also an overestimator more more funds than an underestimator and in fact take away funds from the underestimator ( a sign of discrimination)

This relates to the minimal group paradigm since the boys showed an ingroup bias towards their over or under estimator group when it was an arbitrary group placement

Affective Source Theories of Prejudice

Frustration-aggression Theory

Realistic Group Conflict Theory

Evolutionary Adaptative “xenophobia”

Personality factors

Frustration-aggression Theory

posits that frustration (the perception that you are being prevented from obtaining a goal) will result in an aggressive response towards others or a more convenient target

Explain Frustration-aggression Hovland & Sears “scapegoating” data

In the 1800’s, The numbers of lynching’s in the American south were inversely correlated to the price of cotton. Meaning, the rates of lynching went up when the prices of cotton was down because the farmers and plantation owners could not take their frustration out on the market, so they took their aggression out on an accessible easier target which was slaves.

Realistic Group Conflict Theory

the idea that the goods in society (privilege, wealth, status, power) are limited and the gain of one group’s social category is the loss of another group's social category

Evolutionary Adaptative “xenophobia”

the fear of unfamiliar people may be an evolutionary and adaptive part of humans. Human ancestors who survived most likely stayed within their own tribe as it was the safest and those who risked their lives going outside the tribe died and did not pass on their genes. People are now more genetically hardwired to acquire prejudice.

The Personality Factors that contribute to prejudice

Social dominance orientation (pratto & sidanius): Anti-egalitarian or are people who feel comfortable with inequality, believe it is needed as attempts to create inequality does harm to society (“inequality is the way people should be”)

Authoritarian personality: The idea that those who are different to you (in values, clothing, beliefs) are a danger and a threat to society because society needs uniformity that is imposed by authority figures. ( “People challenging the status quo are sowing disorder and chaos in our society”)

The cognitive Source Theories to Prejudice

Categorization & Stereotyping

Social dominance orientation

An anti-egalitarian perspective held by individuals who feel comfortable with social inequality and believe it is necessary for society.

Authoritarian personality

A personality type that views those different from themselves as a threat and believes society requires strict uniformity imposed by authority.

Outgroup Homogeneity Effect

The tendency to view members of outgroups as more similar to each other than they actually are.

Accentuation

The cognitive tendency to overestimate the differences between groups while maintaining mental order through categorization.

Illusory correlation

Perceiving a relationship between two variables, such as a minority group and a negative behavior, when no such relationship actually exists.

Confirmation bias

The tendency to process information by looking for or interpreting data that is consistent with one’s existing beliefs.

Ultimate Attribution Error

Mistakenly attributing an outgroup's successes to external factors and their failures to internal, dispositional factors.

Self-fulfilling prophecy

A psychological phenomenon where an initially false expectation leads to behaviors that cause the expectation to come true.

Stereotype Threat

The anxiety felt by individuals in situations where they fear their performance will confirm a negative stereotype about their ingroup.

Modern racism scale

A subtle self-report measure of prejudice that assesses the denial of continuing discrimination and resentment toward demands for equal rights.

Implicit attitudes

Unconscious beliefs and feelings that are not accessible through conscious awareness but can be measured through tests like the Implicit Association Test (IAT).

Misinformation effect

When information encountered after an event becomes woven into an individual's memory, leading to incorrect recall of the original event.

Source Monitoring

The cognitive ability to distinguish the origin of where one encountered specific information.

Reality monitoring error

A mistake in which an individual remembers what they imagined happened rather than what actually occurred.

Best guess problem

The issue in simultaneous lineups where a witness picks the person who most closely resembles their memory of the suspect, even if the actual suspect is not present.

Paradoxical rebound effect

The phenomenon where attempting to suppress a thought makes it more likely to surface when the mind is fatigued or occupied.