Module 10: Behavior in Groups

group

collection of individuals sharing common characteristics or interests

stereotype

cognitive component of person perception. beliefs about social groups

prejudice

affective component of person perception → negative attitude about a group based on stereotypes

discrimination

behavioral component of person perception → different treatment to individuals based on group membership

bystander effect

as the number of bystanders increases, the likelihood that anybody will help decreases

Diffusion of Responsibility

responsibility to act is spread across all those present

threshold of helping

• bystanders only act when this is exceeded

• not the same for everyone

• lower threshold → more likely to help

• can be influenced with emergency training or simply knowing bystander effect

social loafing

reduction of effort invested when performing a task within a group. grows with the size of the group

when can social loafing occur

working with co actors on common task AND individual contributions are concealed

4 was to reduce social loafing

task importance, group cohesion, collectivistic orientation, specialization

4 was to reduce social loafing: task importance

emphasizing urgency makes social loafing less likely

4 was to reduce social loafing: collectivistic orientation

members who prioritize the group over individual interest social loaf less → encourage collectivistic orientation

4 was to reduce social loafing: group cohesion

groups that like each other are less likely to social loaf → cultivate strong relationships

4 was to reduce social loafing: specialization

individual contributions are observable and later tasks depend on your task

social facilitation

effect where presence of others enhances performance on simple or well-practiced tasks or hinders performance on difficult or new tasks

social facilitation: what causes facilitation of an easy task

co-actors or an audience and individual contributions are identifiable

why does social facilitation occurq

being watched triggers arousal → primes dominant responses (easy or well practiced tasks).

if target task is a dominant response → facilitation from priming

if target task is NOT a dominant response → inhibition from priming

minimal group paradigm

people sort themselves into groups based on arbitrary criterion

reciprocal altruism

aka direct social exchange. helping someone whos helped you

what is the general expectation of helping

ingroup members are expected to cooperate with us and outgroup members are expected to withhold cooperation

general rule of prisoners dillemma

best outcome is always by defecting, but most choose to cooperate (especially with ingroup members)

why do we cooperate with ingroup members

• face sanctioning by the group if not (isolation)

• lower risk of being cheated on with an ingroup members (they also are scared of sanctioning)

what causes intergroup conflict

competition for limited resources

way to alleviate intergroup conflict

introduce a superordinate goal (common goal)

why do we conform to groups

social acceptance (being accepted trumps being right)

conformity

act of agreeing with peers

obedience

act of agreeing with authority figures

how can obedience lead to doing immorance acts

people tend to shift responsibility to the authority figure

Social cognition

The study of how people perceive and think about the social world

Planning fallacy

the tendency to underestimate how long tasks will take

how can planning fallacy be good

can encourage us to pursue worthwhile ambitious projects. If we knew how long it would actually take, we may have never started

Affective forecasting

Predicting future emotional reactions

Impact bias

tendency to overestimate the intensity of future emotions

Durability bias

tendency to overestimate how long future emotions will last → greater for negative events than positive ones

Hot cognition

Reasoning influenced by desires and feelings

directional goals

motivation to reach a particular outcome → bias thinking

Motivated skepticism

dismissing evidence that contradicts desired beliefs despite strength of evidence

Need for closure

The desire to reach a quick and definite conclusion

Mood-congruent memory

Recalling memories that match current mood → result of priming

• when you’re sad, its easier to think of sad memories than happy ones

Automaticity

Processes that occur unintentionally, uncontrollable, without conscious awareness, or cognitively efficiently (doesn’t need to be all)

Chameleon effect

Unconscious mimicry of others during social interactions

Attitude

Evaluation of a person, object, or idea as positive or negative → can change

Explicit attitude

A consciously held and reported attitude → can be unreliable for measuring controversial attitude

Implicit attitude

An unconscious evaluation measured indirectly

Implicit Association Test (IAT)

A reaction-time measure assessing automatic associations

Persuasion

The process by which a message changes beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors

Central route to persuasion

Persuasion based on logical arguments and careful thinking

Peripheral route to persuasion

Persuasion based on superficial cues and low-effort thinking, often exploiting heuristics

Fixed action patterns

sequences of behavior occurring in exactly the same fashion, in exactly the same order, every time

Trigger features

Small cues that automatically activate a fixed action patterns AKA releasers

Triad of trust

Authority, honesty, and likability → increase persuasiveness if the source has all 3

Authority

Influence based on perceived expertise or power

Honesty

Perceived trustworthiness of the source

Likability

Tendency to be persuaded by people we like

4 modes of manipulating trustworthiness

testimonials and endorsements, presenting the message as education, word of mouth, the maven

4 modes of manipulating trustworthiness: testimonials and endorsements

employs someone who people already trust to testify about the product or message being sold

4 modes of manipulating trustworthiness: Presenting the Message as Education

message may be framed as objective information

4 modes of manipulating trustworthiness: word of mouth

companies disguise their message as word of mouth from your peer using surveys

4 modes of manipulating trustworthiness: the maven

maven → expert of connoisseur. orgs use seeds (knowledgeable consumers) hoping consumers themselves will spread the word to each other

Reciprocity

Feeling obligated to return a favor

Social proof

Following others’ behavior to determine what is correct

where are we most succeptible to social proof

when were uncertain and if the people doing it are similar to us

Foot-in-the-door

Getting agreement to a small request to increase compliance with a larger one later

Door-in-the-face

Starting with a large request then retreating to a smaller one

That’s-not-all technique

adding bonuses or reducing price after initial offer BEFORE costumer has the chance to reject → variation of door-in-the-face

Sunk cost trap

continuing a commitment because you dont want to waste prior investment

Psychological reactance

Motivation to regain freedom when it is threatened

Inoculation

people who are subjected to weak versions of a persuasive message are less vulnerable to stronger versions later on

stinging

feeling embarrassment of being fooled once makes you more icareful and less susceptible to being fooled again

Bias

Unfair preference or judgment for or against a group

Explicit bias

aka Blatant bias. Conscious and openly expressed bias expressing hostility to out group and favoring in group

• eg beliefs of KKK members

Implicit bias

Automatic and unconscious bias

Subtle bias

Indirect, automatic, and ambiguous bias

Ingroup favoritism

Preferring and giving advantages to one's own group

Social dominance orientation (SDO)

preference for inequality as normal and natural. not just about dominance or control; prefers specifically some on top and some on the bottom

core belief of SDO and outgroup belief

groups compete for economic resources → “they” are trying to beat “us”

Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA)

Preference for obedience to authority → national unity and patriotism

core belief of RWA and outgroup belief

groups compete over values → “they” have bad values

Social identity theory

The tendency to favor one's ingroup over outgroups

social identity theory: how do view outgroups

people see members of an outgroup as more similar to one another in personality than they actually are

Self-categorization theory

Classifying oneself and others as a member of a group → favor your group disfavor the others

Aversive racism

unexamined bias where people believe in equality but feel discomfort toward outgroups

Ambivalent bias

Holding both positive and negative attitudes toward a group

Stereotype content model

Model stating groups are judged on warmth and competence

Warmth

Perceived friendliness and good intentions of a group

Competence

Perceived ability and effectiveness of a group

4 stereotypes of the stereotype content model: high warmth high competence

prejudice → we admire them (eg ingroup) → feel pride

4 stereotypes of the stereotype content model: high warmth low competence

prejudice → we are paternalistic (eg seniors) → we feel pity

4 stereotypes of the stereotype content model: low warmth high competence

prejudice → we are envious (eg rich people) → we feel envy

4 stereotypes of the stereotype content model: low warmth low competence

prejudice → we are contemptful (eg homeless) → we feel disgust