Social PSYC: Page 1-4

Explicit attitudes

Conscious, deliberate, controllable attitudes — typically assessed through self-report (surveys)

Implicit attitudes

Unconscious and automatic attitudes that are developed through repeated pairings of a category (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity) and an evaluation (positive or negative)

Dual attitudes

our implicit (automatic) attitudes can differ from our explicit (conscious, controlled) attitudes

Implicit Association Test (IAT)

computerized sorting task designed to detect subconscious associations between concepts and attributes

Correlational research

study of naturally occurring relationships among variables

Longitudinal research

correlational research where variables are measured at multiple time points to help determine the direction of effects

Experimental research

Studies that manipulate a variable (independent variable) to see its effect on another variable (dependent variable) to test cause-and-effect relationships

Demand characteristics

cues in a study that tell the participant what behaviour is expected (solved with double blind studies and standardized instructions)

Replication

: a study that conducts the same experiment again to see if the same results are observed

Meta-analysis

a study of studies which statistically summarizes results across many studies on the same topic

External validity

Do the results generalize from the lab to everyday life? Is the sample representative of the population of interest – or is it WEIRD?

WEIRD Sample

Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic

Mundane realism

Degree to which an experiment is superficially similar to everyday situations.

Experimental realism

Degree to which an experiment absorbs and involves its participants.

Realism types

each form of realism is generally independent of the others, although, if a study has high experimental realism, it likely also has psychological realism

Psychological realism

the extent to which the psychological processes that occur in an experiment are the same as psychological processes that occur in everyday life

Social cognition

how we think about ourselves and our social worlds

Kim & Markus study

when presented 5 pens, with one pen that is unique in colour, 77% of americans chose the unique pen whilst only 31% of Asian participants chose the unique pen

Masuda et al

When shown a group of children and asked to rate the emotions of one child, Japanese participants took the facial expressions of all the children into account whilst American participants focused on the expression of the child they were asked to rate

Self concept

your overall perception of who you are, including your beliefs, identity, abilities, and unique characteristics

Self-schemas

organized cognitive structures about the self, derived from past experiences

Possible selves theory

describes the future-oriented component of self-knowledge, representing what an individual hopes to become, expects to become, or fears becoming

Self-discrepancy theory (Higgins)

three “selves” – actual self, ideal self, ought self

Independent self-construal

part of our self-concept that emphasizes what sets us apart from others

Interdependent self-construal

the part of our self concept that emphasizes what connects our self to other people

Looking glass self

we internalize other people’s perceptions of us

Symbolic interactionism

we don't actually have access to other people’s perceptions of us, thus, we internalize our beliefs about how other people see us

Social comparison theory

we form our self concept and evaluate ourselves (specifically for subjective traits like conscientiousness) by comparing ourselves to others

Downward social comparison

comparing oneself to someone doing worse for the sake of self-enhancement, more likely to occur if we’ve gone through a recent setback

Upward social comparison

comparing oneself to someone doing better with the risk of damaging self-esteem, likely to occur when the focus is self-improvement and in new environments

Moving goal posts

when experiencing an increase in wealth, status, etc, we compare ourselves to people doing even better (never satisfied)

Online comparison

based on incomplete information thus leading to findings that spending more time on social media is related to believing other people are happier

Agent self (executive function)

self-control, decision making, active responding in situations

Social self (interpersonal or public self)

Self-presentation, social roles, reputation, group membership, relationships

Social thinking (1/3 components of social psych)

• how we perceive ourselves and others, 

• what we believe, 

• judgements we make, 

• our attitudes

Social influence (2/3 components of social psych)

• Culture and biology

• Pressures to conform

• Persuasion 

• Groups of people

Social relations (3/3 components of social psych)

• Helping 

• Aggression

• Attraction and Intimacy 

• Prejudice

Norman triplett

Credited with the first published research article in social psych

Social facilitation (Triplett)

found that cyclists tended to race faster when in the presence of others than when simply racing against a clock (alone)\

(Max Ringelmann) Social loafing:

Individuals performed worse on simple tasks when working on the tasks with other people than when working alone

Kurt Lewin on social psych:

“behaviour is a function of the person and the situation”

Flyod Allport

Research on group influence and conformity

Gordon Allport

Research on attitudes and prejudice

Hindsight bias and “common sense” in social psychology

Some findings in social psych may seem obvious once you are presented with the evidence, hindsight bias is responsible for that “i-knew-it-all-along” phenomenon

Values in social psychology

shape the choice of topics studied as values differ across time

Example of values in social psych

around WWII, studies on prejudice were prevalent vs 1970s second wave feminism where studies on sexism were prevalent

Social representations

socially shared beliefs and assumptions – these preconceptions guide our interpretations

Labelling

labels can reflect value judgements (example: if you change your behaviour to align with a group, is that cooperation or conformity)

Naturalistic fallacy

the error of defining what is good in terms of what normal/common

Theory

set of principles that explains observed events

Hypothesis:

testable predictions that describe relationships that may exist between events

Respect for persons

respect autonomy and protect those with diminished autonomy

Concern for welfare

protect participant welfare (wellbeing) and minimize risks

Justice

treat people fairly and equitably

Research ethics applied:

• Informed consent

• Freedom to withdraw

• Minimize harm

• Confidentiality

• Use deception only if necessary/justifiable

• Debriefing

Archival research

uses existing data

Naturalistic observation

observing behaviour in the realistic/natural context in which it exists without interfering

Naturalistic observation flaw

Lack of control for the researcher

Participant observation

researcher joins and interacts with the participants for a realistic context and behaviour that may be otherwise difficult to observe

Participant observation flaw

serious ethical issues and loss of objectivity

Structured observation

takes place in a lab for more control over extraneous variables

Structured observation flaw

May sacrifice realism

Observer bias

observers’ expectations can shape how they attend to and interpret behaviour

Observer bias solution

masked study design (i.e., observers are blind to study hypotheses)

Behavioural reactivity (Hawthorne Effect)

People behave differently when theyre aware of being watched

Behavioural reactivity solutions

use unobtrusive observation, habituation, and measure physical traces of behaviour

Survey research flaws

• unrepresentative samples,

• wording of questions,

• response bias and social desirability,

• order effects (the order in which we ask questions might affect responses)

Avoiding poor wording of questions

avoid leading questions (How concerned are you about the growing problem of crime on campus?) and double-barreled questions (How concerned are you about crime and safety on campus?)

Avoiding random responding

place attention checks and reverse worded items

Avoiding socially desirable responding

Use neutral wording, informant reports instead of self-reports (provided by knowledgeable observers like friends, family members)

Positivity (halo) bias — in surveys

when a single positive trait or impression in one area shapes the participant’s judgment of a person, brand, etc, in other areas

Social desirability scale

a self-report tool used to measure a respondent's tendency to ‘embellish’ themselves (aka lie)

BIDR (Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding)

40-item self-report questionnaire developed to measure social desirability bias and honest self-presentation

Overt measures

Participants know exactly what is being measured and have full conscious control over their responses – people thus can censor themselves to appear better

Covert measures

Participants do not realize what specific variable is being studied – participants have more trouble manipulating responses