Chp 4/5 Attitudes & Attributions

quiz 3/10

attitude

enduring evaluation towards thing (cannot be fleeting)

Sleeper effect

you forgot who told you but your opinions change over time

central route

facts, logic, pros & cons, details, logic, flow charts, requires thinking

peripheral route

emotion, relies on heuristics, like elevator pitch

strong message

data/stats/base rate info

weak message

opinion/anecdotes (w/ maybe one outlier)

foot in the door

ask for a little favor & then later ask for a big favor

door in the face

asking for a big favor knowing you’d be rejected then ask for a (relatively) smaller favor

low ball

say price is lower than it actually is (like price before v after taxes)

bait & switch

cheap good advertised is out of stock when you get there only expensive version there

reciprocity (pre-giving)

giving something unsolicited →set up expectation for gift/$ in return

Source expertise w low personal relevance issue

rely on the person telling us versus quality

Source expertise w high personal relevance issue

rely more on quality of info versus the person telling us

self perception

behavior used to determined feelings (I hugged him bc I like him…duh…?)

postdecisional dissonance

regardless of which you choose you’ll feel regret →cognitive dissonance →rationalize →we like our choice better

Insufficient justification

we think we cause behaviors but it’s the situation

overjustification

you get reward →we think we only do behavior for the reward & not our personal enjoyment

negative state relief

how we minimize our discomfort. Take action v walk away

Inoculation effect

forewarning of peer pressure (like counterargument in essay). prep to fight against peer pressure

psychological reactance

when we feel like we are being told what to do & we don’t like it we’ll go in the opposite direction (D.A.R.E →doing drugs)

how do we feel about warm & cold

we like warm better than we like cold. EX of central traits

what are we good at finding in people?

competence, sexual orientation, confidence, power, anger, personality, political orientation, likeability, optimism

what do liars do more of?

negative statements, less personal accounts, higher pitched, tense, take longer, fewer details, pause more frequently

principal of attitude consistency

for any given attitude object, the ABCs of affect, behavior, and cognition are normally in line with each other

Theory of planned behavior

intention to perform behavior → predicts our actual behavior

1. are we supported doing behavior (group norms)

2. strength of attitude

3. how much we believe we can do the action

forewarning

telling someone about peer pressure →letting them practice standing their ground = resistance to persuasion

person perception

the process @ learning about others

halo effect

influence of a global positive evaluation of a person on perceptions of their specific traits

casual attribution

process of trying to determine the causes of someone’s behavior

personal attribution

we believe the behavior is caused by the person

situational attribution

we believe the behavior was caused by the situation not the person

covariation principle

a given behavior is more likely to have been caused by the situation if that behavior changes (covaries) across situations

consistency info

the situation consistently (always) causes the behavior

distinctiveness info

the behavior distinctly (only) happens because of the situation

consensus info

the situation causes similar behaviors in most other people

fundamental attribution error

overestimate how behavior is PERSONAL like personality v a result of the situation

*we think the behavior is fundamental to their personality

correspondence bias

tendency to form assumptions about a person's character based on their behavior

*corresponding behaviors we think correspond to personality

actor-observer bias

(tendency) when it comes to others we attribute their behaviors to them as a person but if it’s us, awww it was the situation that caused us to do that not us as a person

trait ascription bias

we view our traits/personality/behaviors as more fluid than other people

*Tommy Alone Believes he is more variable than other people

self-serving bias

when we do good it’s because we are serving, we literally did all of that by ourselves but when we fail that’s obvi other people’s fault & the messed up situation

*we are biased to believe when we succeed it’s bc we serve ourself success but when we fail others/situations serve us failure

self-serving attribution

we say things bc we wanna view ourselves in a pos light

*Sasha Says I’m Awesome

group-serving bias

when our group does good it’s because we are serving, our literally did all of that by ourselves but when we fail that’s obvi other people’s fault & the messed up situation

*our group serves success & other groups serve failure bias

group attribution error

we see one of the opp group’s team members do something disgusting like two times ever→so we assume the entire opp group is disgusting bc of small observations (aka we generalizing!)

*When I see the one of the opps make an error I think the whole opp group is stupid

just-world bias

the world is fundamentally just & good, so like people get what they “deserve”…like sexual harassment…

defensive attribution

well this would never happen to me & if I were hypothetically the victim it wouldn’t be my fault. It’s the victim’s fault, she should’ve known better than wearing shorts in summer…

*we defend ourselves in the hypothetical better than the victim in reality

need for cognition

tendency to think carefully and fully about our experiences

self-hadicapping

when we make statements/do behaviors to create convenient external attribution for potential failure

entity theorist

tend to believe that people’s traits are fundamentally stable and incapable of change

incrementalist theorists

believe that personalities change a lot over time and who therefore are more likely to make situational attributions for events

attribution style

type of attributions that we tend to make for the events that occur to us.

stable attribution

we think this is relatively permanent

unstable attribution

expected to change

global attribution

broad appliance

specific attribution

those we feel apply to specific events

negative attribution style

tendency to explain negative events by referring to their own internal, stable, and global qualities

learned helpness

continually make external, stable, and global attributions for their behavior

positive attribution style

ways of explaining events that are related to high self-esteem and a tendency to explain the negative events they experience by referring to external, unstable, and specific qualities

unrealistic optimism

tendency to be overly positive about the likelihood that negative things will occur to us and that we will be able to effectively cope with them if they do