Social Psych Midterm 2

Self Concept and sources of self knowledge

Self-concept is our understanding of who we are,
including traits, abilities, roles, and identities.
We develop it through introspection, observing our 
behavior, feedback from others, social comparisons, 
group memberships, and context.

Introspection, Attributions and inferences

Introspection involves examining our own thoughts 
and feelings. Attributions and inferences involve 
interpreting why we behave a certain way to understand 
ourselves. Ex: Realizing you enjoy helping others because
 you frequently volunteer.

Self Perception theory and Chaiken & Baldwin

When our attitudes are weak or unclear, we 
infer them by observing our behavior. 
Chaiken & Baldwin found that people with 
weak environmental attitudes were more 
influenced by recalling their 
environmentally friendly or unfriendly behaviors.

Feedback, socialization, and looking glass self

Feedback and reactions from others shape how we 
view ourselves. Socialization teaches us social 
expectations and roles. The looking-glass self 
describes how we develop our self-concept based
 on how we believe others perceive us.

Social comparison theory

We learn about our abilities, opinions, and 
characteristics by comparing ourselves with 
others, especially when objective standards
 are unavailable. Ex: Comparing your exam 
score with classmates to evaluate your performance.

Social identities and self stereotyping

Social identities are parts of our self-concept 
based on group memberships. 
Self-stereotyping occurs when we apply characteristics associated 
with those groups to ourselves. 

Ex: Seeing yourself as hardworking because you
 identify as a Berkeley student.

Context and working self-concept

Our self-concept changes depending on the situation.
We focus on what's distinctive (what makes us 
different from others) or relevant (what matters 
in the situation). The working self-concept is the
part of our identity currently active. 

Ex: Being the only psychology major makes that identity
more noticeable.

Cultural differences in self- concept

Individualistic cultures tend to emphasize an
independent self-concept based on personal traits, 
goals, and achievements. Collectivistic cultures 
tend to emphasize an interdependent self-concept 
based on relationships, roles, and group memberships.

Self-complexity theory

Self-complexity refers to how many distinct aspects of ourselves we have and 
how much they overlap. High self-complexity means having many separate
 self-aspects, while low self-complexity means having fewer or more 
overlapping self-aspects.

Affective implications of self complexity

People with low self-complexity experience 
stronger emotional reactions to positive and 
negative self-relevant events. People with
 high self-complexity experience less extreme
 reactions because one event affects a smaller 
portion of their overall self-concept.

Self- Discrepancy theory

Actual self: Who we believe we are. 
Ideal self: Who we want to be. 
Ought self: Who we believe we should be.

 Actual-ideal discrepancies produce dejection 
(sadness or disappointment), while actual-ought
 discrepancies produce agitation (anxiety or guilt).

Four self- motives

Enhancement: Wanting to feel good about ourselves. 
Accuracy: Wanting to understand ourselves correctly.
Improvement: Wanting to become better. 
Consistency: Wanting to maintain stable self-views.

Self- Evaluation Maintenance (SEM) model

Our self-esteem is influenced by another person's 
performance depending on three factors: relevance 
of the activity, closeness of the person, and relative 
performance. 
2 fundamental self evaluative process: reflection process or comparison process


Comparison: A close person's success 
threatens us in an important domain. 
Reflection: Their success boosts our self-esteem 
in an unimportant domain.

Examples of the four self motives

Enhancement: Downward social comparison, SEM, or self-presentation. 
Accuracy: Social comparison to evaluate abilities. 
Improvement: Upward social comparison to learn from someone better. 
Consistency: Self-verification, seeking feedback that confirms existing self-beliefs.

Self- Regulation and regulatory focus

Self-regulation is controlling 
our behavior to achieve goals. 
Promotion focus emphasizes achieving 
ideals, gains, and positive outcomes.
Prevention focus emphasizes fulfilling 
obligations, avoiding losses, and
 meeting ought expectations.

Automatic self control strategies

Strategies that help us resist 
temptation without constant conscious effort.
These include changing how 
we mentally represent temptations 
and automatically associating temptations
 with long-term goals.
 Ex: Seeing your phone while studying 
reminds you to finish your assignment.

Attitudes and their 3 components

An attitude is a positive or negative evaluation of something. 
Cognitive: Beliefs or thoughts. 
Affective: Feelings or emotions. 
Behavioral: Actions.
 Ex: Believing exercise is healthy, enjoying it, and 
going to the gym.

Do attitudes predict behavior?

Not always. Attitudes may not 
predict behavior when their 
components are inconsistent or 
when a general attitude is used to 
predict a specific behavior. 
Ex: Supporting environmental protection but
 still driving everywhere.

LaPiere Study

LaPiere traveled with a Chinese couple who 
were served by most businesses, even though 
many later reported they would refuse Chinese
customers. The study demonstrated that reported 
attitudes do not always predict actual behavior.

Cognitive dissonance theory

When our attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors are 
inconsistent, we experience psychological 
discomfort and become motivated to reduce it. 
We can reduce dissonance by changing our behavior,
 changing an attitude, or adding justifications.

Attitude-behavior discrepancies and insufficient justification

Acting against our attitudes can create dissonance.
 When there is little external justification for 
the behavior, we're more likely to change our attitudes. 

Festinger & Carlsmith (1959): Participants paid $1 to 
lie about a boring task later rated it more positively
 than those paid $20.

Post- decision dissonance

After choosing between attractive options, people
may experience discomfort about rejecting an 
alternative. To reduce dissonance, they increase
their evaluation of the chosen option and 
decrease their evaluation of the rejected option.
Demonstrated by Brehm (1956).

Self-affirmation theory and dissonance

People can reduce dissonance by affirming an 
important value or positive aspect of themselves
 in an unrelated domain. This restores their 
overall sense of self-worth without requiring 
them to change the original attitude. 
Associated with Steele, Hoppe, & Gonzales (1996).

Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)

Two routes to persuasion. 
Central route: Carefully evaluating the quality of arguments. 
Peripheral route: Relying on simple cues like attractiveness or expertise.

 Motivation and ability determine which route is more likely.

Motivation, ability, and lasting attitude change

High motivation and ability encourage central
 processing, producing stronger and longer-lasting
 attitude change. Low motivation or ability 
encourage peripheral processing, which usually
 produces shorter-lived attitude change.

Petty, Cacioppo, & Goldman (1981)

Participants evaluated a proposed comprehensive
 exam policy. IVs: Personal relevance, argument 
strength, and source expertise. High relevance 
participants were more influenced by strong vs. 
weak arguments. Low relevance participants were 
more influenced by source expertise. Supports the ELM.

Yale Attitude Change Approach

Persuasion depends on who says what to whom.
 Who: Communicator/source. What: Message. 
To whom: Audience. Source cues and message 
features can influence peripheral or central 
processing depending on motivation and ability.

Communicator/ source characteristics and message characteristics

Source characteristics include likability, similarity, and
 credibility (expertise and trustworthiness). Message characteristics 
include argument strength, length, and affective vs. cognitive framing.
 Strong arguments matter more during central processing; simple 
source cues and message length may influence peripheral processing.

Audience characteristics

Need for Cognition is how much someone enjoys
 effortful thinking; high levels encourage 
central processing. Cultural values also influence 
persuasion. Han & Shavitt (1994): Individual-focused 
appeals were more common in American advertising, 
while group-focused appeals were more common in Korean advertising.

Linville (1985)

Main argument: Self-complexity influences how 
strongly people react emotionally to positive
 and negative events. People with low self-complexity
 experience greater emotional fluctuations because
 one event affects more of their self-concept. 
High self-complexity acts as a buffer against these
 reactions. Connection to lecture: Self-complexity
 theory and the affective implications of high vs. low self-complexity.

Petty, Cacioppo, & Goldman (1981)

Main argument: Persuasion depends on personal 
relevance and how carefully people process 
information. When relevance was high, participants
were more influenced by argument strength (central route).
 When relevance was low, participants were more 
influenced by source expertise (peripheral route). 
Connection to lecture: Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM),
motivation, and central vs. peripheral persuasion.

Santos, Leve, & Pratkanis (1994)

Main argument: Unusual requests can increase compliance 
by interrupting people's automatic tendency to refuse. 
People were more likely to comply with unusual requests
 for change (such as 17 or 37 cents) than typical requests.
 This is called the pique technique. 

Connection to lecture: Compliance techniques, 
automatic responding, and how disrupting expectations
 can increase thoughtful consideration of a request