Studied by 5 people
Attitudes
long lasting evaluations we hold about ourselves, other people, objects and issues
Explicit attitudes
Consciously held beliefs and opinions that individuals are aware of and can self report
Functions of explicit attitudes
Utilitarian function: serve as practical purpose by helping us gain rewards or avoid punishments
Knowledge function: help us organise and structure our knowledge about the world, making it easier to understand and predict
Ego-defensive function: can be used to protect our self esteem and maintain a positive self image
Value-expressive function: allow us to express our values and beliefs to others, helping us create and maintain social identity
Implicit attitudes
Unconscious and automatic evaluations that are difficult to self report
Functions of implicit attitudes
Adaptive function: help us navigate our environment quickly by automatically guiding our behaviour and responses
Implicit bias: can lead to implicit biases, influencing our judgements and actions without our conscious awareness
Influence on behaviour: have been found to have a stronger impact on spontaneous behaviours compared to explicit attitudes
Unconscious influence: influence our perceptions, preferences, and decision-making processes without our explicit knowledge
Implicit association test (IAT)
Test that measures the strength of associations between concepts and evaluations
Affective component of tripartite model
Feelings and emotions about the attitude object
Behavioural component of tripartite model
behavioural or action-oriented aspect of an attitude
predictable - if an individual has already acted in a specific manner to a similar experience or object, it is likely his behaviour will be consistent when the person is faced with the item again
Cognitive component of tripartite model
Our beliefs and knowledge about the attitude object
Driven by knowledge and information
Application of the Tripartite model
Helps us understand attitude change, formation and persuasion
Allows researchers to examine how different components of attitudes can be influenced and altered
Psychologists can design interventions to modify attitudes for various purposes
Limitation of the Tripartite model
Does not indicate the strength of an attitude, it can only be used to indicate the direction of an attitude
Can be a difference between what a person thinks and feels, and their behaviour
Two components of the model (thoughts and feelings) cannot be observed directly. We rely on observing behaviour
Cognitive dissonance (Festinger 1957)
The mental discomfort that results from holding two conflicting beliefs, values, or attitudes.
Signs of cognitive dissonance
Feeling uncomfortable before doing something or making a decision
Trying to justify or rationalise a decision you've made or action you've taken
Feeling embarrassed about something you've done, or trying to hide your actions from other people
Experiencing guilt or regret about something you've done in the past
Doing things because of social pressure even if it wasn't something you wanted to do
effect of forced compliance on cognitive dissonance
engaging in behaviours that are opposed to your own beliefs due to external expectations at work, school or in social situations
effect of new information on cognitive dissonance
If you engage in a behaviour that you later learn is harmful it can lead to feelings of discomfort. People deal with this by finding ways to discredit or ignore new information
effect of decisions on cognitive dissonance
when faced with two similar choices we are often left with feelings of dissonance because both options are equally appealing
Behaviour avoidance
tendency to avoid situations or actions that create cognitive dissonance
Behaviour reduction
minimising the frequency or intensity of a behaviour that conflicts with our attitudes or beliefs
Rationalisation
creating justifications or alternative explanations to reduce cognitive dissonance
magnitude of cognitive dissonance
the strength or importance of the conflicting elements involved
factors influencing magnitude
Importance of the belief or attitude
Consequences of the behaviour
Number of dissonant beliefs
Aim of Festinger and Carlsmith
To investigate if making people perform a dull task would create cognitive dissonance through forced compliance behaviour
Method of Festinger and Carlsmith
71 male students were given dull tasks such as turning pegs in a peg board for an hour. They were paid either $1 or $20 to tell a waiting participant that the tasks were really interesting
Results of Festinger and Carlsmith
Participants who were paid only $1 rated the tedious task as more fun and enjoyable than the participants who were paid $20 to lie.
Conclusion of Festinger and Carlsmith
$1 is not a sufficient incentive for lying, so those who were paid $1 experience dissonance. They could overcome that dissonance by believing that the tasks were interesting and enjoyable.
Being paid $20 provides a reason for turning pegs, therefore there is no dissonance.
Attribution theory
Psychological framework that seeks to explain how individuals interpret and explain the causes of behaviour
Attributions
inferences we make about the cause of an event, the behaviour of others or our own behaviour
Internal attributions
attributions that often blame personal factors, such as traits, attitudes, feelings, genetics and abilities of an even of a behaviour
External attributions
When people attribute the causes of events or behaviours to external factors, such as physical environment, outside of themselves
Actor observer bias
The tendency to explain our own actions by external factors, and explain the action of others by internal factors
Cognitive bias
a subconscious systematic error in thinking that occurs when people are processing and interpreting information in the world around them
Fundamental attribution error
when people place too much emphasis on dispositional attribution, and too little emphasis on situational attribution
Implications of fundamental attribution error
Miscommunication and conflict
Stereotyping and prejudice - contributes to the formation and reinforcement of stereotypes, leading to prejudice and discrimination
Legal and justice systems - can influence judgments in legal and justice systems, potentially leading to unfair treatment
Social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner, 1979)
Theory that proposes a person’ sense of self is based on the group they belong to
Social categorisation
where we sort people and objects so we are able to understand and identify them
Social identification
the process of adopting the group’s identity and value as one’s own
Social comparison
comparing our in-group with other groups to affirm our identity
Stereotype
generalised and simplified belief about a group of people or a person based on their membership or perceived membership to a group
Self fulfilling prophecy
A prediction that directly or indirectly becomes true due to positive feedback between belief and behaviour
tri-component model of stereotypes
Cognitive - assumptions are made about a group of people or person
Affective - feelings are either friendly or hostile towards a group of people based on an assumption
Behavioural - behaviour towards a group of people is influenced by the assumption
Prejudice
A preconceived opinion, belief or attitude held by individuals or groups towards others based on their perceived membership in another group
Three components of prejudice
stereotypes
negative feelings
tendency to act in a discriminatory way
Just world phenomenon
The assumption that people get what they deserve
When a group has more power, group, status and money than another group, there is a tendency for the "haves" to consider that they are well-off due to their hard work and intelligence
Social categorisation (forming prejudice)
simply categorising people into groups is enough to trigger in-group favouritism and out-group rejection
Social influence
attitudes towards others, including prejudice can be learned from other people in their live
Inter-group competition
prejudice arises against groups that are seen to be a threat as competition leads to increased in-group cohesiveness and cooperation
Cognitive interventions
Strategies that try to change the way people think about members of out groups
Decategorisation
emphasises categories that cut across basic in-group/out-group divisions.
Individuation
involves seeking information about people as individuals, rather than accepting stereotypes about the group to which they may belong
Contact hypothesis
suggests that interpersonal contact between groups can reduce prejudice
Conditions for contact hypothesis to reduce prejudice
Equal status
Superordinate goal: goals that are worth completing but require two or more social groups to cooperatively achieve. The members of the two groups work together towards a common goal
Mutual independence: two or more people must depend on one another to meet each person's needs or goals
Institutional support - group leaders support the contact between the groups
Aim of the Robbers Cave Experiment
To investigate the causes and consequences of intergroup conflict and the conditions under which cooperation and harmony between groups could be achieved
Method of Robbers Cave Experiment
Researchers selected 22 eleven-year-old boys from similar backgrounds to participate in the study. They were sent to a remote summer camp in Oklahoma, Robbers Cave State Park. The study was divided into three main parts
Stage 1 of the Robbers Cave Experiment
Formation of groups - researchers divided the boys into two separate groups; the Eagles and the Rattlers
Stage 2 of the Robbers Cave Experiment
Intergroup competition - the two groups were introduced to each other and took part in a series of competitive activities
Stage 3 of the Robbers Cave Experiment
Intergroup cooperation - researchers attempted to reduce hostility and foster cooperation between the two groups by introducing situations that required both groups to work together
Results of the Robbers Cave Experiment
During the second phase of intergroup competition, the boys developed strong in-group identities and exhibited hostility towards members of the out-group
During the third phase (intergroup cooperation) the boys worked together towards common goals and started to form friendships and positive attitudes towards each other
Conclusion of the Robbers Cave Experiment
demonstrated how intergroup conflict can emerge even in arbitrary and minimal groupings, and how cooperation and positive intergroup attitudes can be fostered through the promotion of shared goals and interdependence
Ethical considerations of the Robbers Cave Experiment
Informed consent - participants were deceived as they did not know the true aim of the study
Psychological harm - participants were not protected from physical and psychological harm
Generalisability of the Robbers Cave Experiment
Results can't be generalised to real life, because the research only used white, middle class boys. It excluded females, adults, different cultures and ethnicities
Note
Flashcard