Social Psychology: Research Methods, Attitudes, Persuasion & Conformity

Theory vs hypothesis?

Theory explains a phenomenon; hypothesis predicts a testable relationship.

What makes a hypothesis testable?

At least two concepts, predicted relationship, measurable variables.

Observational method?

Describe behavior as it naturally occurs; cannot establish causation.

Correlational method?

Tests association between variables; correlation does not prove causation.

Experimental method?

Manipulate an IV and measure its effect on a DV to test causation.

Independent variable (IV)?

The factor manipulated by the researcher.

Dependent variable (DV)?

The measured outcome.

Experimental vs control group?

Experimental receives treatment; control is the comparison.

Random assignment vs random sampling?

Assignment allocates participants to conditions; sampling selects from population.

Representative sample?

A sample reflecting important characteristics of the population.

Internal validity?

Confidence that the IV, not a confound, caused the DV change.

External validity?

Extent findings apply to other people, settings, or situations.

Construct validity?

Whether a measure captures the concept it claims to measure.

Generalizability?

Whether results apply beyond the studied sample.

Mundane vs psychological realism?

Mundane = looks like real life; psychological = evokes real-life mental processes.

Informed consent vs debriefing?

Consent before participation; debriefing explains study afterward.

Conceptual vs operational definition?

Conceptual = meaning; operational = specific way it is measured.

What does HOMER stand for?

Hypothesize, Operationalize, Measure, Evaluate, Revise/Replicate.

Attitude?

Positive, negative, or mixed evaluation of a person, object, or idea.

Valence vs extremity vs strength?

Valence = direction; extremity = degree; strength = durability/influence.

ABCs of attitudes?

Affect (feelings), Behavior (actions), Cognition (beliefs).

Object appraisal function?

Classify what is good or bad to approach rewards and avoid harms.

Knowledge function?

Organize and interpret information.

Value-expression function?

Express central beliefs and values.

Social-adjustment function?

Help manage relationships and social acceptance.

Ego-defensive function?

Protect self-esteem.

LaPiere study: key result?

Many businesses stated exclusionary attitudes, yet nearly all served the Chinese couple.

Specificity principle?

Specific attitudes best predict matching specific behaviors.

Theory of planned behavior: 3 predictors of intention?

Attitude toward behavior, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control.

Subjective norms in planned behavior?

Beliefs about what important others expect you to do.

Perceived behavioral control?

Belief that you can perform behavior despite obstacles.

Direct attitude measures: weakness?

Self-reports can be distorted by social desirability, wording, and context.

Indirect attitude measures: examples?

Physiology, implicit association tests, priming, nonverbal behavior.

Implicit Association Test (IAT)?

Measures speed of automatic associations between concepts.

Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)?

Persuasion can follow central or peripheral processing routes.

Central route persuasion?

Carefully evaluating evidence and argument quality.

Peripheral route persuasion?

Using cues like attractiveness, popularity, or reputation.

When is central processing likely?

When motivation and ability to think carefully are high.

Which route often produces longer-lasting change?

Central route, when arguments are strong.

Cognitive dissonance?

Discomfort from inconsistent beliefs, attitudes, or actions.

Three ways to reduce dissonance?

Change behavior, change belief, or justify the inconsistency.

Effort justification: Aronson and Mills?

Embarrassing initiation made a boring group seem more worthwhile.

Insufficient justification: Festinger and Carlsmith?

$1 participants rated boring task more enjoyable than $20 participants.

Why did the $1 group change attitudes?

Small payment gave insufficient external justification for lying.

Hypocrisy paradigm?

Making people notice conflict between advocated values and actions can change behavior.

New-look dissonance model?

Feeling responsible for an aversive consequence increases dissonance.

Self-concept and dissonance?

Actions that contradict one's view of oneself can produce discomfort.

Conformity vs compliance vs obedience?

Match group; follow direct request; follow authority command.

Informational influence?

Conform because others seem more accurate.

Normative influence?

Conform to avoid rejection or gain acceptance.

Public compliance vs private acceptance?

Public = outward agreement only; private = genuinely adopt belief.

Sherif autokinetic study?

Ambiguous stationary light appears to move; group estimates converge.

Sherif study demonstrates what?

Informational influence and private acceptance in ambiguity.

Asch line judgment study?

People sometimes echoed clearly wrong group answers about line lengths.

Asch: how many conformed at least once?

About 76%; roughly 24% never conformed.

Asch: what reduces conformity?

An ally dissenting from majority; private responding also reduces pressure.

Asch: effect of majority size?

Conformity rises initially, then levels off around 3-4 others.

Implicit vs explicit norms?

Implicit = unwritten conventions; explicit = stated rules.

Descriptive norm?

What people actually do or are perceived to do.

Injunctive/prescriptive norm?

What people approve or disapprove of.

Pluralistic ignorance?

Privately disagreeing but mistakenly assuming most others endorse the norm.

Mass panic and informational influence?

In ambiguity, copying others' mistaken reactions can spread panic.

Petrified Forest: warning backfire?

Saying many visitors steal wood can normalize theft.

Petrified Forest: effective message in class guide?

"Please don't remove the petrified wood" (negative injunctive).

Anti-bullying social referents study?

Influential students publicly discouraged conflict, changing peer norms.

Anti-bullying study: overall effect in class guide?

Treatment schools had about 30% less student conflict.

Invisibilia: Inspire Somalia?

Music competition modeled alternative public norms amid extremist restrictions.

Invisibilia: Rwanda radio finding?

Cooperation and perceived norms shifted more than private beliefs.

Tankard & Paluck: central distinction?

Perceived societal norms can shift without personal attitudes shifting.

Tankard & Paluck: Study 1a?

Experiment manipulated expectations about Supreme Court marriage decision.

Tankard & Paluck: Study 1b?

Longitudinal surveys before and after 2015 Court decision.

Tankard & Paluck: key result?

Perceived support for same-sex marriage rose; personal attitudes did not reliably change.

Milgram: teacher and learner?

Real participant was teacher; confederate was learner; shocks were fake.

Milgram: baseline completion rate?

About 65% continued to the 450-volt setting.

Milgram: what did experimenter do?

Issued prompts to continue despite learner's apparent distress.

Milgram: effect of victim proximity?

Closer learner generally reduced obedience.

Milgram: effect of authority distance?

Absent or less legitimate authority reduced obedience.

Milgram: effect of dissenting peers?

Other people refusing to obey greatly reduced obedience.

Milgram: historical connection?

Raises questions about authority and responsibility; does not fully explain Holocaust.

Stanford Prison Experiment: basic setup?

Students assigned to guard or prisoner roles in simulated prison.

Zimbardo classic interpretation?

Situational roles and power can shape behavior.

Haslam critique?

Cruelty is not automatic: leadership, group identification, and choices matter.

BBC prison study takeaway?

Participants did not automatically follow assigned roles; prisoners organized resistance.

Deindividuation?

Reduced salience of personal identity within a group; not inherently harmful.

Why is Stanford prison study contested?

Researcher influence and methodological/ethical issues complicate role-only claims.

Mask communication: reactance?

Perceived threats to freedom can trigger resistance to instructions.

Mask communication: social norm strategy?

Show desirable behavior as common and accepted rather than relying only on commands.