collection

positional level of analysis

ties beh to rank

ideological level of analysis

ties beh to shared beliefs

subconsensual statement

require an interpretation- happy, bored

iNDI ATTRIBUTES

consensual statement

our relations with others eg student , boyfriend

brewer and gardner self concepts theories

diff forms of self- personal self and collective self

personal self is temp states, experiences, actions and beliefs about self in terms of our connections with others

collective self is how we identify ourselves within groups - eg CARGO eg I am Cornish

self-coherence and Baumeister’s suggestions

overall we have a coherent pic of who we are even if it changes in different situations

to maintain this

1) limit contexts

2) revise autobiographies

3) attribute change in self to circumstance

carpenter, limits of introspection and the lecturer

a confident lecturer increases perceived learning score but not actual learning

van gyn and self perception with imagination

group that biked did best on exercise task, followed by imagination group followed by controls

miller and neat kids- feedback from others

kids in the attribution condition who were told they were neat kept rooms tidier

synder’s extravert introvert study

ppants acted more extraverted when told they were interacting with an extravert

self categorisation theory

we get a social identity from group membership

sedikides self-knowledge persual

self assessment- find out who we are

self verification.- confirm prior beliefs

self enhancement- feel better about ourselves

four positive illusions to self -protect

1) self serving attributions- attribute pos outcomes to self and negative outcomes to external factors (think of the football team who lost versus when they won)

2) above average effect (the worst students think they do better than they did, the best students think they did worse)

3) unrealistic optimism

4) false consensus and uniqueness- we do something and think that others will act and think. like we do, when we do something well we think our talent is unique

main threats to self image (3)

failures

inconsistencies (eg becoming panicked in first aid)

stressors

how do we cope with threats to self worth

escape physically

downplay threat

attack threat

note: if our self worth is threatened by superior ppl, we then attack the criticiser (they’re biologically superior, but we have friends) (self maintenance model)

we compare ourselves w inferior people to make ourselves feel better

what is self handicapping and how was it studied?

we try and sabotage our performance to provide an excuse for failure

the condition that had hard problems in trial 1 picked the inhibiting drug so they had an excuse for doing badly in trial 2

result of actual-ought discrepancy

agitation related emotions

stems from when we distinguish between actual, ideal and ought self

result of actual-ideal discrepancy

dejection-related

there is a “d”

higgins’ regulatory focus theory and promotion versus prevention focus

result of self-discrepancies, we alter our beh

promotion focus- work hard to become better

prevention focus- avoidance strategy based on not failing

what is impression management

we try to shape the way ppl see us

we claim desired identities that we want (eg think of neds)

we self monitor to adapt to the situation and audience

we use self promotion (concern to get ahead and gain respect for being able), ingratiation, exemplification (morals), supplication (pity) and intimidation to manipulate people’s views of us

hovland’s dual sided propaganda

uneducated soldiers presented with a one sided argument fell to this propaganda for war

educated soldiers presented with a two sided argument were more persuaded this way as shows both sides considered

what are factors to consider in persuasiveness

source factors: -attractive communicators better

-expertise (more the better)

-credibility (higher=better)

message factors:

-strength of argument (one sided or two sided)

-messages that arouse fear (fear creates temporary compliance)- low fear messages better for dental, high fear needed for smokers

audience factors:

-educated, self esteem (moderate most persuadable), age (older= more resistant)

channel factors:

-face to face for complex and mass media appeals for simple

central versus peripheral in the elaboration likelihood model

central- strong logical arguments that change attitudes when relevant to us (eg buying a laptop when I need one)

peripheral- source characteristics like charm, for example Florence Pugh advertises a laptop I will form a positive attitude towards it

systematic (Central) versus heuristic (peripheral) processing and how these can be effected

self-confidence: systematic processing when we lack confidence, heuristic when we are confident

mood- when we feel good or sad we process heuristically

fear- high fear causes panic and heuristic processing, low fear gives us time so we are systematic

what is the foot-in-the-door technique versus law-ball technique

foot in the door: A asks B for small favour, B agrees, A asks for bigger favour as we like to see ourselves as consistent and helpful

law-ball technique: A gets B to commit to something, A tells B it is no longer possible, so then A asks B for something bigger

how do people construct talk (6 ways)

1) empirical evidence

2) citing neutral sources

3) rule of three in talk (shes beautiful,stunning,slaying)

4) common-place values - eg im not transphobic but

5) constructing logical arguments, “revolutions happen because people want them”

6) mundane talk- makes you seem more credible and trustworthy - eg in paranormal talk ,, or using reported speech

informational influence

we want to be right so we use other people as a guideline when stimuli are uncertain

leads to internalisation

normative influence

we want to not stand out and want to fit in

leads to compliance

factors that affect if people conform

1) group size- only 3-5 needed to conform

2) group unanimity- conformity reduces even if 1 person doesn’t conform

what are effects on obedience?

victim’s distance

closeness and legitimacy of authority

peer pressure

why did people obey milgram

agentic shift- attribute responsibility to authority

gradual slippage- gets easier and easier to administer voltage

legitimacy- as we obey, more likely to trigger agentic state

what is a co-actor and how did triplett test it

co-actor is somebody doing the same task in same presence

children act quicker on a task when there is another child doing the same thing

social facilitation AND drive theory

when performance improves in presence of other, even without a co-actor due to arousal BUT ONLY FOR TASKS WE ARE GOOD AT, OTHERWISE IT IS INHIBITION

this falls under drive theory, and was evidenced by students making fewer mistakes learning a simple maze but more when learning a complex maze when observed by co-actors

could be due to evolution (we want to perform better), evaluatation apprehension: fear of being evaluated by others, distraction and attentional conflict (we get energetic focusing on trying to pay attention to the task and to people watching us)

what is the ringelman effect

young men alone or in groups of 2,3,8

force exerted per person decreases as group size increases, as we rely on others

social loafing def, explanation, how to reduce it

loss of motivation in performing well in group contexts

there is less effort in clapping , in tipping etc

due to output equity (we expect others to loaf so we do as well), anonymity (diffusion of responsibility) and no individual performance evaluation

to reduce this we make output of each indi identifiable, increase indi commitment to tasks, increase value or importance of task

stoner’s group polarisation

indis are less risky than groups

groups will shift towards original stance, ie if they’re already feeling risky they’ll be riskier

what is groupthink? how to prevent?

common process that leads to irrational decision making due to wanting a unanimous decision over a rational one

caused by having a highly cohesive group that have many blind spots, but we think we are invulnerable and correct due to the echo chamber, we stereotype outgroup members that disagree with us and we also have pressure towards uniformity

avoid: we can be impartial, encourage critical evaluation, use breakout subgroups, welcome outside critiques and have a second chance meeting before deciding

brainstorming illusions- why it doesn’t work

we think it works due to group effectivity as we get new exposure to ideas

but instead there is social loafing, evaluation apprehension, production matching (give as many examples as other ppl), production blocking (more interference from having to discuss with others)

pam and peter schemata- Carli

students told a story about pam and peter with two different endings (rape versus marriage)

students then recalled details aligned with the ending that didn’t actually exists

priming and how Holland used citrus cleaner to test it

where you make a schema readily available through cues

students do a lexical decision task

they remembered more cleaning words when primed with a citrus scent

issues with automatic thinking and biases

1) self- overconfidence in our own judgments and of others’ beh

2) false consensus

3) illusion of control

4) illusory correlation- we think there is a link between 2 things/we overestimate how much theyre linked

eg with driver accidents they’re due to violations not errors, we think that the accident happened to circumstance (Attribution bias), false consensus and illusory thinking (think it won’t happen to them)

how did batson categorise helping (2)

1) distress leads to the egoistic motivation to reduce stress so we help

2) empathy leads to an altruistic motivation to reduce others’ distress

in his study, empathisers helped a woman getting electric shocks by choosing to swap with her in both conditions

distressed people only helped when the choice was to stay and watch

even in a second study when people had a drug that “fixed their mood” empathetic people still helped

illusion of transparency

we overestimate others’ ability to read our internal states

when we are alone we are more likely to help than if we are with strangers

due to diffusion of responsibility

what are the 5 factors that lead to bystander apathy

1) diffusion of responsibility

2) audience inhibition- bystanders make us self-conscious, no intervention because of fear of social blunders)

3) social influence- others provide a model for action

4) ambiguity of emergencies

5) communication- you’re more likely to intervene when with friends than strangers

6) seeing someone else help increases helping beh

7) time pressure- no time pressure increases helping beh

8) perceived social similarity- identification increases

9) danger increases helping beh

10) listening to altruistic music increases helping beh

what are 3 factors that predict how much we like someone?

1) whether they like us

2) physical attractiveness (blind date dance freshers)(essay study scores)

3) similarity in attitudes

what are the key assumptions and 4 phases of Duck’s approach to relationships?

people are active in relationships, our processes and skills change over time

many things develop in a relationship (liking, knowledge, intimacy, stories)

1) meeting people—- we judge in first 30 seconds

2) getting acquainted- — depends on other person if they like you or not whether you continue

3) forming and developing a relationship——we seek info, affinity seek (see if other person is interested in relationship) and increase intimacy (disclosure) and show relationship is growing (shared activities)

4) maintaining a relationship

is lang a direct expression of thought?

no! not always truthful and is more about what lang accomplishes with interaction

thematic analysis terminology: data corpus, set, item, extract, theme, code

• Data Corpus: Refers to the entirety of the data collected for a particular research project.

• Data Set: The specific portion of the data corpus being used for a particular analysis.

• Data Item: An individual piece of data within the set, such as a single interview or a television documentary.

• Data Extract: A specific coded chunk of data identified within a data item.

• Theme: A theme captures something important about the data in relation to the research question and represents a level of patterned response or meaning across the data set.

• Code: A feature of the data (either semantic or latent) that is identified as interesting to the analyst; codes are the most basic segment of raw data that can be assessed meaningfully

inductive versus theoretical thematic analysis

• Inductive vs. Theoretical TA:

  • Inductive (Bottom-up): Themes are strongly linked to the data itself, often bearing little relation to the specific questions asked of participants or the researcher's theoretical interests.

    • Theoretical (Top-down): Driven by the researcher’s theoretical or analytic interest; it provides a more detailed analysis of a specific aspect of the data rather than a rich description of the whole.

semantic/manifest versus latent themes for thematic analysis

Semantic vs. Latent Themes:

• Semantic/manifest (Explicit): Themes are identified within the surface meanings of the data; the analyst does not look beyond what the participant has said or written.

• Latent (Interpretative): Goes beyond surface content to examine underlying ideas, assumptions, and ideologies theorised as shaping the semantic content

problem of objectivity

we can never truly have true objectivity no matter how hard we try

induction problem

how can we make a claim more generalisable based on things we’ve seen

eg swans are white

need to make assumption that there are things beyond what we’ve seen

the myth of the given

mental states not directly knowable, based on prior concepts

eg concept of yellow, need it to understand the colour yellow

how did early experiments fail to be objective

laboratory

limited response options

mechanical devices and standard procedures

behaviourism (no mind)

what are convergent operations/triangulation

measuring the same thing using two different tests/scales

two measures get the same concept

concept not defined by operation, refers to separate abstract thing

5 levels of history psych

mental stuff, descriptions (ordinary ppl), formal concepts (psychologists create), measures, data (observable)

descriptions versus mental reality

we use descriptions to draw maps of mental territory

but we select what is drawn and how we describe particular features

very much like mental reality and how we describe it

how did learning develop in history psych?

it became a psychological concept post WWI

before it was a conscious process, like skills acquisition

After 1934 now a fundamental concept but nothing to do with consciousness (tied to behaviourism)

how was memory studied?

many different metaphors

ebbinhaus made it a fundamental category by memorising as performance and studying quantities of equally meaningless units of info

how does bartlett conceptualise memory

not as a performance but as a process

how we remember and distort meaningful info and narratives

not learning or capacity for neutral info

theory of the extended mind

mind extends into the world- not just the shopping list in our head but also what we have written down

aim of general psychology

produce knowledge about the mind and behaviour and objects (measured) via what is seen (scientific methods)

GS HALL

founded APA

opened 1st USA Psych lab

child study movement about minds of children

mental testing- to predict performance, guide selection, used educational psych to improve results

pre-IQ

mental testing used with kids to try and predict how well they may do in exams, as the purpose of edu psych is to improve RESULTS

wants and solutions

create a probem in mind of consumer, they want to solve it

scott wrote about psychology of advertising

variability hypothesis

men more powerful and better leaders cause women are less variable due to evolution

mary calkins challenged this

doll test

white doll preferred over brown, used in supreme court decision to help end racial segregation

six types of indi differences

basic- height, weight

physiological- lactose intolerance

psychological

surprising- organ location

developmental- puberty

CARGO differences

these create noise in psychological experiments (variance)

cronbach’s 2 types of scientific psychology

experimental versus correlational

intelligence definition

a general mental capability that involves ability to etc etc etc, not merely book learning,

classic hierarchical model of intelligence

many types of intelligences add up and correlate (spearman’s g)

an example of smth personality and IQ can’t affect

recency bias

fluid versus crystallised inteligence

cattell

fluid- biologically fixed cognitive capacities can be applied to anything- measured figurally

crystallised- acquisition of knowledge and procedural skills- measured verbally

personality traits

continuous measurable dimensions that vary across a spectrum

personality types

discrete rigid categories eg introvert or extrovert

normative and ipsative approaches measuring personality

normative- compare indis to a group

ipsative- compare indis to themselves

how are personality and intelligence similar/different

both heritable, develop over time but stable cross-situationally - they use twin studies to help measure this

personality only: NO unitary personal capacity

typical performance versus maximal performance

people take active roles in their own personality development

both used in research for description, prediction, explanation and in practice for selection, diagnosis, classification

creating test structure

pre test- create sub tests within a test

post test- factor analysis (association between many variables) and see patterns of correlations

personality type versus dynamic models versus interactionist

type models say people can be organised into discrete categories- eg INFJ test

dynamic models say traits only have modest correlations with behaviour

interactionist says that traits reflect stable patterns of corresponding “states”

beh = environment x trait

ABCD

affect. how we feel

behaviour- what we do

cognition- what we think

desire- what we want

what are projective techniques

free form reactions to ambiguous stimuli

eg inkblot images

empirically designed objective tests

match groups differ in some crucial way (eg being a good pilot)

administer tests to both groups

identify items that distinguish the sub groups

used initially for clinical testing

history summary

early psychologists developed the lexical hypothesis and idea that personality is encoded in language through traits

history summary

early psychologists developed the lexical hypothesis- personality is encoded in language

galton + pearson—> psychological attributes can be measured and analysed; traits = inherited; statistics; psychometrics are nature not nurture

spearman created factor analysis etc

binet introduced IQ test

differences between “1 intelligence” versus “many” psychologists

error comes from

impacts of stochastic (random) and systematic processes which deviate scores away from true patterns (eg SDB)

interpretive disagreements about scale among creators and users

inductive versus deductive

if we learn about noise, can understand impacts and underlying processes- inductive

minimising sources of bias- deductive

classical test theory and test scores

foundation of psychometrics (standardising, think we take shoes off)

observed score= true score + error

true score can include test and individual item components

error can include systematic + non systematic influences

simple formula: better our measurement, less error there is in the calculation of our observed score (ie closer to the truth)

content and construct validity

how well does test capture target construct

face validity

does test make sense and look right

convergent and discriminant validity

does it correlate with other tests appropriately

criterion and predictive validity

does test predict relevant outcome

which are more reliable trait or type measures

trait measures as they have high test retest reliability

what is the positive manifold?

spearman’s g

all intelligence tests correlate well with each other

what is the flynn effect?

IQ scores have been increasing

therefore tests renormed to compensate- doesn’t mean dickens was a dick

but cause of environment there were lower scores

how do we measure change over time

mean level change (do average trait scores increase or decrease- normative)

and rank order- do relative standings change or stay the same

GEPHER

genes- segment / collection of DNA that carry basic hereditary functional unit- instructions for building the proteins in your genetic makeup

environment

phenotype

genotype

heritability

environmental effects

r- gene environment correlations

chromosomes

long structures of DNA wrapped around proteins, acting as packages for storing and organising genetic material

alleles

one or 2 more alt forms of a gene that can arrise by MUTATION

found at some loci on a chromosome

base pairs

fundamental unit of DNA structure

consists of 2 nucleotides on opposite strands held together by hydrogen bonds

SNP

single nucleotide polymorphism

common genetic mutation where a single piece of DNA and a nucleotide might be diff at a certain point