Social Psychology Chapters 10, 11, 14, 9

aggression

intentional behavior, intent to harm, the victim wants to avoid harm

violence

aggression with the goal of extreme physical harm

displaced aggression

“kicking the dog” effect: directing aggression towards someone/something innoc

triggered displaced aggression

minor triggering event increases aggression in angered participants

hostile/reactive aggression

hot, impulsive

instrumental/proactive aggression

cold, premeditated

passive aggression

less direct, vague, implied, target may not be present

active aggression

clear, direct, target is present

bullying

persistent aggression by a perpetrator against a victim for the purpose of establishing power over the victim

cyberbullying

use of internet to bully others, eliminates the variables of size and strength

Kurt Lewin

behavior = function of personality and environment

dark triad

machiavellianism (using people for personal gain), psychopathy (lack of empathy), narcissism (thinking they are the best)

antisocial

any behavior that damages interpersonal relationships or is socially undesirable

broken windows theory

antisocial behaviors will occur in the presence of social disorder

instinct theories of aggression

Darwin, Freud, Lorenz - aggressive behavior is an evolutionary adaptation that has permitted survival

motivational forces, like aggression, are based on instinct

eros: life giving instinct

thanatos: death/destructive instinct

learning theories of aggression

aggression is a learned behavior (modeling, bobo doll studies)

modeling

observing and mimicking back behaviors

bobo doll studies

Bandura and colleagues, children who watched the aggressive model had the highest level of aggression, seeing aggressive models extended aggressive behavior

catharsis theory

idea that venting will get rid of aggression (debunked by Bandura’s study)

inner causes of aggression

frustration, mood, appetitive aggression, risk factors/predictive variables (trauma, gender)

frustration-aggression hypothesis (1939)

the existence of frustration always leads to aggression

appetitive aggression

aggression that is motivated, in part or whole, by an intrinsic enjoyment of the aggressive act

hostile attribution bias

perceive ambiguous actions by others as aggressive (behavior is directed at you)

hostile perception bias

perceive social interactions as being aggressive (observing others)

hostile expectation bias

assume people will react to potential conflicts with aggression

age and aggression

25% of toddler interactions in day care involve physical aggression, second spike of aggressive behaviors occurs during puberty/adolescence

gender differences in stress response

fight or flight syndrome more adopted by boys, tend and befriend syndrome (be in community with others) more adapted by girls

interpersonal causes of aggression

domestic violence (occurs within home between people who have a close relationship, women attack relationship partners slightly more than men but without as much harm, physically weak family members are at greater risk, uncommitted relationships, use of drugs/alcohol)

external causes of aggression

weapons effect, mass media, unpleasant environment, chemical influences (testosterone, serotonin, alcohol)

weapons effect

mere presence of weapon increases aggressive behavior, functions through priming

Turner: stalled truck with either rifle & vengeance sticker, friend sticker, neither

mass media

violent media exposure increases aggression

wounded pride

violent individuals think that they are better than other people, have grandiose or inflated opinions of their worth, typically have traits of narcissism

culture of honor

southern us: violent response to threats to one’s honor

humiliation: primary cause of violence and aggression of cultures of honor, may be an important cause of terrorism

other antisocial behavior

cheating, littering, stealing

attraction

anything that draws two or more people together

ingredients for belongingness

regular social contact with others and close, stable, mutually intimate contact (mutual care and concern)

matching hypothesis

birds of a feather flock together - find someone on an equal attractive level, those who are more physically attractive have a larger pool

complementarity hypothesis

opposites attract

attraction: who likes whom

similarity, spouses are similar in many respects, may just be rejecting those who are dissimilar to us

people like those who are rewarding to them (reinforcement theory), interpersonal rewards

reciprocity (we like people who like us, mimicking increases liking

familiarity and exposure (propinquity: being near someone on a regular basis)

evolutionary explanation who likes whom

we seek out others who are similar to us because similar is safe

social allergy effect

if someone does something that annoys you initially, it will continue to annoy you

what is beautiful is good effect (aka halo effect)

the assumption that physically attractive people will be superior to others on many other traits

golden ratio

proportions of length of nose, chin, position of eyes

evolutionary theory of mate selection

primary goal is to survive and reproduce, males focus on health of mate, females focus on status and ability of a partner to provide

loneliness

painful feeling of wanting more human contact, have more difficulty understanding emotional states of others, bad for physical health

ostracism

being excluded, rejected, and ignored

effects of rejection

inner states are almost uniformly negative

rejection sensitivity

expect rejection and become hypersensitive to possible rejection (protective measurement)

rejection in the cookie jar

self-indulgent behaviors after rejection

criteria that constitutes a group

size, role of emotion, shared identity/similarity, presence of an outgroup

group

collection of at least 2 people that are doing/being something together

diversity in groups

greater creativity/flexible thinking, collective wisdom, greater difficulty to gain cooperation and collaboration, diversity of perspective

optimal distinctiveness theory

need to find common values but still need to find distinctiveness in one’s role

deindividuation

people lose self awareness and accountability and individuality, promoted by animosity

self-censorship

people may not fully believe in the message but will still commit to group conformity

evaluation apprehension

fear of being judged

social facilitation

Norman Triplett (bike studies) presence of others increases the levels of performance

Zajon tested this with cockroaches simple maze presence helped, complicated maze presence hurt

social loafing (aka free rider problem)

Max Ringlemann - performance declines in presence of others, occurs due to lack of accountability, lack of personal relevance of task, desire to not be a “sucker”

commons dilemma

resources squandered/not used efficiently

groupthink

tendency of group members to think alike, which often leads to bad decisions, rooted in desire to belong

groupthink is likely

group is similar and cohesive to begin with, presence of a strong directive leader, group is isolated from others, group possesses high collective self-esteem or superiority

signs groupthink is occurring

pressure towards conformity, evidence of self-censorship, illusion of invulnerability, sense of moral superiority, underestimating the challenge/your opponents

risky shift

tendency for groups to take greater risks than the same individuals would have decided to take individually

group polarization

shift toward a more extreme position resulting from group discussion

leadership traits

modest & humility, extreme persistence/’fierce resolve’, decisiveness, competent, integrity, vision, task orientation vs. relationship orientation

peter principle

if you perform well in your job, you will likely be promoted until you reach a position in which you are incompetent and will be stuck in

psychological safety

belief that you won’t be punished or humiliated for speaking

prosocial behavior

doing something good for someone or society, builds relationships, includes obeying rules, conforming to socially acceptable behavior, cooperating with others

factors in prosocial behavior

effective rule of law, fairness and justice, public circumstances (impression management: tip jars, offering plates)

reciprocity

obligation to return in kind what another has done for us, willingness to accept or request help is often predicated on ability to return in kind

Professor Kunz’s Christmas card study

sent 578 cards to strangers, received 117 cards back, a few phone calls, only 6 indicated they did not know him (study on reciprocity)

direct reciprocity

you help someone who helped you

indirect reciprocity

help someone and receive help from someone else

norms that promote fairness

equity, equality

under-benefited

getting less than you deserve (can lead to feelings of anger)

over-benefited

getting more than you deserve, unique to humans (feelings of guilt), origins of survivor’s guilt

cooperation

each person does their part and works towards a common goal

game theory

the science of strategy

prisoner’s dilemma

forced to choose between competition and cooperation

non-zero-sum game

either everyone can win or everyone can lose

improving cooperation

communication, interpretation of the situation (if cooperation viewed as strength- more cooperative)

obedience

following orders from an authority figure

Milgram (1963)

participants pressed a button to “shock” the learner when they answered wrong

62\.5% of participants went all the way to strongest shock

obedience fosters

social acceptance, group life

obedience levels in Milgram’s study

obedience dropped when participants/learner were in the same room, dropped when done in a strip mall, dropped when participants had to put learner’s hand on a plate that “shocked” them, dropped when researcher had no lab coat, no difference when women participated as shocker

conformity

going along with the crowd

normative social influence

conformity to be accepted by the group

informational social influence

conformity based on actions of others (think they know better)

trust

confidence that others will provide benefits and/or not harm you, even if they may be tempted to do otherwise, slow to build, easy to unravel

evolutionary benefits of helping others

kin selection, egoistic helping, altruistic helping

kin selection

when we are faced with a decision to help, we tend to choose those who are blood related (theory most valid in life or death situations)

egoistic helping

wanting something in return for helping

negative state relief theory

you help to reduce your own distress

altruistic helping

expecting nothing in return for helping, motivated by empathy

who helps whom

helpful personality, similarity to self, men more helpful in broader public sphere, towards strangers, and emergencies, females more helpful in family sphere, towards close relationships, and in repeated contact - feel more sympathy/empathy, more likely to receive help

bystander effect

people are less likely to offer help when they are in a group than when they are alone

steps to helping

notice that something is happening, interpret meaning of event, take responsibility for providing help, decide/know how to help, provide help

pluralistic ignorance

looking to other cues about how to behave while they are looking to you, collective misinterpretation

diffusion of responsibility

reduction in feeling responsible that occurs when others are present

overcoming obstacles to helping

reduce distractions, reduce diffusion of responsibility, reduce concerns about competence to help, reduce audience inhibitions