Social Psychology Exam Two

Attitude

a favorable or unfavorable evaluation of a particular thing

3 parts of an attitude

Affect, Behavior, Cognition

Lapier (1934)

attitudes towards Asians, most Caucasian Americans had a negative view. Asked for reservations with Japanese names at various establishments, 92% said no via mail, but with the same name in person only two restaurants denied them service.

Corey (1937)

attitudes towards dishonesty in college students. Across the board students didn't like dishonesty, but the vast majority of them had been dishonest recently.

Attitudes with birth control

\n attitudes in general were correlated with use, but more specific the question, the better it predicted the behavior. Specific attitudes predict specific behaviors.

Time

more time between attitude measurement and behavior measurement are less likely to match up

Consistency

\n may be a big deal to some and not others, more likely to act the same way because its important to appear consistent

Self monitoring

people who are high monitors are chameleons and follow the group's attitudes have a low attitude behavior relationship because they are always changing and don't act in accordance with their own private attitudes

Mindlessness

mindless behavior don't align much with our attitudes, like if we are primed and go along with whatever the prime led us to, its not our attitude driving the behavior

Self-awareness

\n when we are more self aware we're more likey to act in line with our attitudes, because we want to feel right in our behavior. Ex, if a mirror is close, or a security camera, or recall a time in your life when you acted positively, you're less likely to morally transgress

Attitudes grounded in experience

\n things that have actually happened to you before or are important to you, make you more likely to act in line with attitude. Ex, Princeton dorm overcrowding study, all students signed a petition but only the students with experience actually went to a rally. Previous experience → current attitudes → future behavior

Hypnosis

\n person laughs at the snapping of fingers, but they don't know why. Behavior → attitude

Split brain patients

\n show them a joke with the wrong side of the brain and they laugh, but they can't understand why so they make something up to explain.

Spinoza

our brains automatically believe new info, then we have to go back and process/come up with reasons to justify or disbelieve. We act, then justify our behavior.

Balance theory

\n theory that people prefer harmony and consistency in their views of the world. Fritz Heider, people are motivated to maintain consistency in their attitudes. When someone we like likes something we don't like, it elicits a negative response/imbalance that we want to correct.

POX model

P = person, O = other, X = extended other

Differentiation

\n change perception of the situation, believe something else to make it balanced

Dissonance/Cognitive Dissonance Theory

\n we are motivated to maintain consistency between our attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. When we don't have consistency, which creates dissonance.

Festinger and Carlsmith (1959)

\n paid participants either $1 or $20 to tell the next participants that the mundane activity they had just done was fun.

Post decision dissonance

\n dissonance aroused after making a decision.

Aversive consequences

\n there have to be negative consequences to what you did

Personal responsibility

\n you made the choice and assume responsibility

Perceived freedom

there were options, and you chose one

Forseeability

\n could have predicted outcome, "I should have known"

Self perception theory

people have little internal knowledge, and therefore examine our behavior to determine our attitude.

Overjustification effect

rewarding people for doing something they enjoy, undermines the enjoyment,

Finger painting

\n measured how much time kids spent finger painting, how much they did after being offered a reward, and how much they painted after receiving the reward.

Theory of planned behavior

the best predictor of a behavior is one's behavioral intention, which is influenced by their attitude toward the specific behavior, the subjective norms regarding the behavior, and one's perceived control over the behavior.

Persuasion

change in private attitude or belief as a result of receiving a message.

Nonreactive measurement

\n measurement that does not change a subject's responses while recording them.

Cognitive response model

\n a theory that locates the most direct cause of persuasion in the self-talk of the persuasion target.

Counterargument

an argument that challenges and opposes other arguments.

Inoculation procedure

a technique for increasing individuals' resistance to a strong argument by first giving them weak, easily defeated versions of it.

Dual process model of persuasion

\n a model that accounts for the two basic ways that attitude change occurs—with and without much thought.

Elaboration likelihood model

\n a model of persuasive communication that holds that there are two routes to attitude change—the central route and the peripheral route.

Central route to persuasion

\n the way people are persuaded when they focus on the quality of the arguments in a message.

Peripheral route to persuasion

\n the way people are persuaded when they focus on factors other than the quality of the arguments in a message, such as the number of arguments.

Need for cognition

the tendency to enjoy and engage in deliberative thought.

Consistency principle

the principle that people will change their attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, and actions to make them consistent with each other.

Cognitive dissonance

the unpleasant state of psychological arousal resulting from an inconsistency within one's important attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors.

Counterattitudinal action

\n a behavior that is inconsistent with an existing attitude.

Postdecisional dissonance

the conflict one feels about a decision that could possibly be wrong.

Impression motivation

\n the motivation to achieve approval by making a good impression on others.

Social influence

\n a change in overt behavior caused by real or imagined pressure from others.

Conformity

\n behavior change designed to match the actions of others. Changing one's behavior to match the responses or actions of others, no overt pressure necessary. But others are doing it, and there are descriptive norms.

Compliance

\n behavior change that occurs as a result of a direct request.

Foot in the door technique

\n a technique that increases compliance with a large request by first getting compliance with a smaller, related request.

Participant observation

a research approach in which the researcher infiltrates the setting to be studied and observes its working from within.

Expert power

\n the capacity to influence that flows from one's presumed wisdom or knowledge.

Social validation

\n an interpersonal way to locate and validate the correct choice.

Norm of reciprocity

\n the norm that requires that we repay other with the form of behavior that they have given us.

Door in the face technique

\n a technique that increases compliance by beginning with a large favor likely to be rejected and then retreating to a more moderate favor.

That's not all technique

a technique that increases compliance by sweetening an offer with additional benefits.

Disrupt then reframe technique

a tactic that operates to increase compliance by disrupting one's initial resistance laden view of request and quickly reframing the request in more favorable terms.

Reactance theory

theory that we react against threats to our freedoms by asserting those freedoms often by doing the opposite of what we are being pressured to do.

Personal commitment

\n anything that connects an individual's identity more closely to a position or course of action.

Low ball technique

gaining a commitment to an arrangement and then raising the cost of carrying out the arrangement.

Bait and switch technique

gaining a commitment to an arrangement, then making the arrangement unavailable or unappealing and offering a more costly arrangement.

Labeling technique

assigning a label to an individual and then requesting a favor that is consistent with the label.

Sherif (1936)

\n studied formation of group norms using the autokinetic effect

Autokinetic effect

in a dark room, projected light on a wall. The dot "moves" because eyes are moving, although it looks like something stationary is moving.

Normative social influence

motivated by wanting to be accepted/belong; we wanted to be liked and accepted, or don't want to attract attention, be made fun of, or be rejected.

Asch line judging task (1955)

study of group pressure

Group size

\n once there are at least 3 people, more likely to conform. Levels off at 5

Unanimity

\n if whole group agrees/is strong more likely to conform, but if at least one person dissents it is much less likely/decreases

Cohesion

\n when group maintains one identity, more likely to go along with the group

Status

\n if members are of high status, more conformity.

Public response

\n people can conform more when they have to respond publicly, because concerned about standing out or being judged for their choices

Public commitment

\n making one of your own means less likely to conform to other positions

Contrast principle

comparison is made between two alternatives

Reciprocation

replying in kind

Gifts and favors

\n we feel compelled to give back/act in return

Reciprocal concessions

\n do a little favor, expect to partake/listen/buy

Door in the face technique

start with a large request and then offer a smaller one, people are more likely to do it.

Commitment Consistency

\n Maintaining consistency and doing what you've always done

Post decision dissonance reduction

when committing to past behavior and choices, feel stronger about their choices and decrease their dissonance.

Public vs. private commitments

\n if made public, much more likely to go along with it

Rite of passage and initiation

if you've gone through all this stuff to be a part of something, more committed. Like hazing, can't drop out because you made it all the way through.

Social Validation

giving an example of the appropriate ways to behave/way most people behave in an effort to sway them

Liking

we are much more likely to comply to people we already know and like.

Authority

we comply to people in authority

Uniforms

affect compliance, much more likely to follow people in dictating uniforms and nicely dressed. Ex, jaywalking more people followed guy in suit than just a normal person

Pilot/physicians effect

\n co-pilots and nurses may go along with their superiors when they are wrong, because doctors are smarter/better/etc.

Titles

\n influence if we listen and trust them. Ex, actor who plays a doctor recommends a certain brand and sales go up.

Obedience

\n changing one's behavior in response to a directive from an authority figure.

Milgram

\n what could lead a normal everyday person to do something horrible? What leads to obedience?

Friend

\n someone with whom we have an affectionate relationship.

Experience sampling method

an observational technique in which subjects fill out frequent descriptions of who they are with and what is going on.

Reinforcement affect model

the theory that we like people with whom we associate positive feelings and dislike those whom we associate negative feelings.

Domain general model

\n a model that attempts to explain a wide range of different behaviors according to a simple general rule, do it if it is rewarding, and we have friends as long as we get something good out of it.

Social exchange

the trading of benefits within relationships.

Equity

\n a state of affairs in which one person's benefits and costs from a relationship are proportional to the benefits and costs incurred by his or her partner.

Domain specific model

a model that presumes that the governing principles vary from one domain of behavior to another (such as friendship vs. romance vs. parent child relationships).

Social support

\n emotional, material, or informational assistance provided by other people.

Self-disclosure

the sharing of intimate information about oneself.

Communal sharing

a form of exchange in which members of a group share a pool of resources, taking when they are in need and giving when others are in need.

Authority ranking

\n a form of exchange in which goods are divided according to a person's status in the group.

Equality matching

a form of exchange in which each person gets the same as the others.

Market pricing

\n a form of exchange in which everyone gets out in proportion to what they put in.

Proximity-attraction principle

the tendency to become friends with those who live or work nearby.