Studied by 5 people
Looks like no one added any tags here yet for you.
= learned, stable like/dislike of something
composed of:
cognition (thoughts)
affect (emotion)
behavior (action)
communicator
message
how the message is communicated
audience
motivation (if relevant, more likely to)
personality (if you’re usually analytical, more likely to)
accessible (easily recalled)
persistent/stable over time
resistant (to opposing messages)
predict behavior (attitude influences behavior)
= using info to make inferences about self and others
“social thinking”
when it works well:
best friend introduces you to their friends, so you trust your bsf’s judgement and assume the mutuals are cool, too
when it fails:
using stereotypes to assume things about others
a problematic attribution heuristic
= attributing negative outcomes to situational factors
serves as a protective mechanism for fragile self-esteem
“premeditated excuse making” so that the person does not have to admit their lack of skill
a problematic attribution heuristic
= a protective mechanism and tendency to think that the universe has an inherent balance
people get what they deserve
good things happen to good people
bad things happen to bad people
Results in victim-blaming!
allows people to attribute the misfortunes of others to their mistake in judgement
“I would never do that, so it can’t happen to me”
an example of self-fulfilling prophecy
= when people belong to a group about which others have a negative stereotype
when group members are aware of the negative stereotype, their reduced performance reflects the reduced expectations of others
researched by Claude Steele
due to overactivity in limbic system (anxiety) which hinders activity in prefrontal cortex, which is necessary to perform well on tests
= adapting your behavior to match others’
indirect pressure / peer pressure
Helpful:
useful when moving to new environment for adopting social norms of new group
ex. different colleges or businesses have different ideas about appropriate clothing
Harmful:
peer pressure for risky behaviors
ex. drinking / hazing
a group of students all looked at 1 vertical bar and then asked to compare it to 3 other bars of different lengths
They were asked which of the 3 were the same as the left one
HOWEVER, only 1 student was the subject, everyone else was a confederate who were told to occasionally choose the wrong bar
Results:
at least some of the time, the subject changed his answer despite believing others were incorrect in their judgment
after 3+ people making the wrong choice, the subject felt more pressure to conform to the group’s answer
= following the demand of an authority figure
there is generally a threat of punishment (perceived or not) if the command is not followed
alternatively, following demand might hold the promise of a reward (perceived or not)
subject asked to shock the person if they made mistake, another authority figure encouraged subject to continue (shock level given increased each time)
2/3 continued to lethal levels while 1/3 disagreed and stopped shocking
= How an audience affects your performance
if Dominant Response is correct or easy → Social Facilitation
if Dominant Response is incorrect or difficult → Social Inhibition
= the actions/beliefs of a group are more exaggerated than the individual members’ typical behaviors or thoughts
Effects:
Groups made up of risk-takers choose more dangerous group activities
ex. college student who likes scary activities thinks that bungee jumping would be a good spring break. When he gets together with like-minded friends, they choose naked bungee jumping into a pit of venomous snakes
Groups composed of risk-averse people choose even less riskier group activities
= stop thinking about people as individuals
We reduce others to less-than-human
tactic often used intentionally by genocide leaders
We stop thinking about ourselves as an individual with responsibilities (and choice) and just accept the role we’ve been given
We assume we are unidentifiable in a crowd (and then behave in ways we would if we knew we could be identified)
social media anonymity → trolls/cyberbllying
= judging a person based on beliefs about the group(s) that the person identifies with
are learned - via observational learning or operant conditioning
in the US, mainly based on race, in other parts of the world, based on religion
usually negative but can also be unfairly positive (some people are more respected just because of the group they belong to)
Attitudes → prejudice → antisocial actions (discrimination)
= people who are seen as depriving you of something tend to be disliked, stereotyped as “undeserving,” then mistreated
ex. throughout US history, low-wage workers disliked immigrants
= belonging to certain social groups, together with some emotional and valuational significance of that group membership (envy, pride, etc)
Being part of a group increases self-esteem and so people automatically form ingroups and outgroups
Individuals who don’t have many positive factors in their life sometimes form ingroups simply based on the idea of “at least we’re not ______”.
As a result, their ingroup beliefs and activities revolve around prejudice and discrimination
Individuals are excluded from education, housing, jobs, etc, because of the group they belong to and NOT because of their own skills, efforts, etc.
Individuals might internalize negative stereotypes
and adopt antisocial behaviors
and be harmed by the self-fulfilling prophecy
Individuals who don’t match the positive stereotypes of the group may experience anxiety or low self-esteem
ex. an Italian who is a lousy cook → low confidence
People can learn to ignore a stereotype and remember to evaluate everyone they meet as an individual
Exposing individuals, especially when they are young, to people whoa re different in some way → increases acceptance of differences
Connects to the Mere Exposure Effect = phenomenon by which people tend to develop a preference for things or people that are more familiar to them than others. Repeated exposure increases familiarity
Critical thinking about history, prejudices, and personal experiences helps to reduce prejudice
it’s a skill that can be taught!
= Study in the 1950s by Muzafer Sherif
11-year old boys at a summer camp (called the Robber’s Cave)
Phase 1:
randomly divided into 2 groups that were isolated from each other
developed sense of cohesion in each group
Phase 2:
2 groups competed for highly-desired prizes (pocket knives, medals, etc)
conflict escalated from name calling (“cowards!”) to direct acts of sabotage
negative attitudes/behaviors
Phase 3:
2 groups brought together to work on superordinate goals (a goal that can be attained only if the members of two or more groups work together by pooling their skills, efforts, and resources)
ex. restoring the camp’s water supply
tensions between groups dissolved by day 6
Results:
Ingroup-Outgroup rivalries can develop quickly between groups that had no previous animosity
Social identity is an important source of prejudice
Prejudice and discrimination can be reduced by having the opposing groups work together to solve a problem that both groups face
Aggression is a normal part of all organisms to protect themselves, their young, their home/territory
Higher levels of testosterone increase aggression
Aggression resulting from frustration, discomfort, etc. is hostile aggression
Ex. Small children lash out when they are tired or hungry
Some children learn to be aggressive by watching others (social learning) or by getting what they want when they are aggressive
Ex. The kid who steals lunch money and gets away with it
Decrease opportunities for deindividuation
Provide positive social learning experiences (i.e., role models)
Induce cognitive dissonance in people with aggression (so change their beliefs so they know their actions are wrong in the hope that they might fix their behavior to be congruent with their new beliefs)
Use Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy to help aggressive individuals respond more rationally to frustration and others’ actions
Realizing you’re in a situation where someone else needs your help
Having the time to engage in prosocial actions
Seeing yourself as similar to the person in need of help
This helps explain why Americans reacted more to the genocide in Bosnia than in Rwanda and why it’s important to teach people to see others as part of their ingroup
Understanding that prosocial behavior also has positive outcomes for the person performing the good deeds
psychological explanation for the emotional bonds and relationships between people
explains how people relate to friends and romantic partners
Securely attached children tend to also have stable, long-term friendships and successful romantic partnerships
