SOCY230 Exam 3/FINAL

Chapters 11-17 (Minus 12)

Prosocial behavior

a broad category of actions considered beneficial to others as having positive consequences

Helping

(Type of prosocial behavior) consequence = helps others/benefits well-being; intent is unimportant

Altruism

Voluntary behavior intended to benefit another with no expectation of external reward; it only comes at a cost to the helper

Antisocial behavior

harmful to others and have negative social consequences

Feeling good as a REWARD

• Difference between intended and foreseeable outcome

• You can foresee feeling good when acting prosocially

• Depends on whether you act prosocially IN ORDER TO feel good

Egoism

Helping behavior motivated by self-gratification/selfishness

• People weigh the costs/rewards of helping/choosing not to help; we choose to help when the rewards will outweigh the costs

• Rewards include: money, admiration, gratitude, recognition, status enhancement

Altruism & Empathy

Vicarious experience of an emotion that’s congruent with or possibly identical to the emotion that another person’s experiencing

• Feeling empathy towards those in need -> helping behavior

• Empathy-Altruism Model: When witnessing another’s suffering, adults can experience distress or empathy (which changes motivations for helping)

• Altruistically-motivated helping (powered by empathy) is more sustained than giving that’s motivated by egoism

Evolutionary perspective

We engage in prosocial behavior/altruism (esp. when self-sacrificing) to help others who share our genes -> pass down our genes & keep it alive

• Prosocial behavior is passed from parent to child through processes that enhance the persistence of an individual’s genes in future generations

Bystander Effect

Occurs when people depending on others for cues (to help) can fail to provide help while everyone waits for cues from others that action is required

• As the number of bystanders increases, the likelihood of anyone helping DECREASES due to diffusion of responsibility

• Ambiguous social situations -> bystanders look for cues that might lead towards helping -> inaction and failure to help

• Bystanders might feel evaluation apprehension: concern about what others expect of them and how others will evaluate their behavior (can inhibit or promote helping depending on if audience of bystanders will judge the + or - )

Diffusion of Responsibility

bystanders fail to help bc others share the responsibility for intervening (when we believe everyone else is capable of helping or when we feel less competent)

Social Responsibility Norm

We should help those who are DEPENDENT on us; varying strength (helping our children vs. helping needy strangers)

• Experience helping others (volunteers, clubs) increases social responsibility norm

Norm of Reciprocity

We should help those who’ve helped us and NOT help those who denied us help for no reason

• Family/friendship/work relationships: small acts of kindness create conditions for reciprocity

• Reciprocity is likely when we encounter a person a lot; we match our help to the quantity we received earlier to maintain equity in the relationship; we ask for help when we’re able to reciprocate (pay it back)

Personal Norms

Feelings of moral obligation to perform specific actions that stem from an individual’s internalized system of values 

• We’re driven to act according to our identities (being religious, being kind)

Deviant Behavior

Behavior that violates the norms that apply in a given situation

• Negative deviance: crime, cheating, corruption, fraud, etc.

• Positive deviance (intentional behaviors that depart from norms in an honorable way): outstanding athletes, musicians, and geniuses 

• Deviance: thoughts/feelings/behaviors that violate norms in a given situation, is a social construct

Primary Deviance

The initial act that causes others to label an individual as a deviant

Labeling Theory

Reactions to a norm violation are an important element in deviance. Only after an act is discovered and labeled “deviant” is it recognized as such. Similar acts that AREN’T discovered & labeled aren’t deviant.

• Argues that deviance is a consequence of a social process in which a negative characteristic becomes an element of an individual’s identity

• Individuals become deviant through acceptance of a deviant label from interactions with others (friends, family, police, or doctors)

• Relation to reflected appraisals: we give meaning to ourselves based on how people react to us and our judgments of those reactions

Secondary Deviance

Open/active involvement in a lifestyle based on deviance (as an adjustment to others’ reactions), often embedded in deviant subcultures (groups who deem deviant acts as norm).

Delabeling

Individual might try to drop their deviant label/identity by enlisting help of programs or delabeling themselves (EX: Creating clean identity by distancing oneself from past deviant acts)

• Factors that make delabeling difficult: internal conflicts, situational constraints, structural forces (policies, discrimination, etc.)

Stigma

leads to status loss (Person slowly perceives themselves as deviant) & social discrimination (affects self-concept, behavior, and opportunities)

• People who’ve been labeled try to hide their stigma, and others may anticipate others’ rejection (stigma has long-term effects on psychological well-being)

Passing

Trying to manage the info abt an undisclosed stigma, trying to pass as nonstigmatized population (concealing criminal record)

Covering

Downplaying a stigma during interaction, often to reduce tension

Anomie Theory

Deviance arises when a person trying to achieve culturally valued goals (e.g., wealth) feels they have no way to attain that goal. So they break the rules to try to attain the goal illegitimately.

Anomie

State that reduces commitment to norms or pursuit of goals (a weakening of the influence of social norms on individual behavior; sense of normlessness with little consensus on what’s right/wring)

• Responses to anomie (ritualists, innovators, retreatists, and rebels)

Social strain theory

emotion connects the experience of strain with deviant behavior

Social control theory

Social ties influence our tendency to engage in deviant behavior; we conform to norms because we’re sensitive to others’ wishes & expectations; stronger bonds -> less chance of engaging in deviant behavior

• Components of social bond

  • Attachment to others (e.g., attachment to parents helps us internalize social norms)

  • Commitment to long-term goals (e.g., crime would prevent someone from going to law school)

  • Involvement in conventional activities (sports, clubs, church, etc.) gives people LESS time to engage in deviance

  • Belief: a respect for law & authority

Learning structure

An environment where one can learn info/skills required

Opportunity structure

an environment where an individual has opportunities to play a role (both learning & opportunity structure needed for success in a deviant role)

• Age/gender/ethnicity/social class can limit one’s access

Differential association theory

Although the law provides a uniform standard for deviance, some groups have different definitions of deviant/desirable behaviors

• Neutralizing beliefs: neutralize influence of definitions/beliefs unfavorable to behavior (e.g., saying cheating saves time & that everyone does it)

• In our interactions with others, we learn motives & actions that are deviant and behaviors that are socially approved.

• A person becomes deviant if they are surrounded by definitions that support violation of the law or constantly observe those acts

• Subculture of violence: groups in U.S. that justify use of violence for self-defense

• Reinforcement (both social and non-social) can promote deviance

• Dense social networks (best friends) can further influence one to be deviant

• Network multiplexity: degree to which individuals who interact in 1 context also interact in other contexts (high -> consistent definitions)

Routine activities perspective

behaviors arise from daily activities, deviant behavior requires convergence (joining) of elements necessary for it to occur

• Many crimes often involve convergence of offender and target (residence, person, item, store) and the absence of a guardian who could intervene

• Some situations facilitate deviance by allowing “convergence of offenders and targets, in the absence of a guardian.”

  • Unstructured socializing w peers in absence of authority figure: parties, car rides with friends, hanging out with friends

• Men are more likely to commit crimes because they’ve had more access to these situations that teach deviant behavior

Institutionalization of deviance

process by which members of a group come to expect & support deviance by another member over time (because it benefits them)

Self-fulfilling prophecy

Acting in accordance with expectations of behavior, whether good or bad

Deviant subcultures

deem deviant acts as norm

Deterrence hypothesis

Arrest & punishment of some for violations of the law DETER others from committing the same violations

• We must be aware of punishments to be deterred

• People whose morals define behavior as wrong are not as concerned by threat of punishment

Informal social control

The unwritten rules, community pressures, and social interactions (like praise, disapproval, gossip, or ostracism) that guide behavior and encourage conformity to societal norms, working alongside formal controls (laws/police) but without official authority, relying on family, peers, and community to maintain order through shared values and everyday reactions. 

Formal social controls

agencies given responsibility for dealing with violations of rules or laws (e.g., criminal justice system, juvenile justice system, & mental health system w professionals/institutions)

Interpersonal attraction

a positive attitude held by one person toward another

Field of available

Pool of potential friends and lovers; everyone we encounter

Institutional structures (that affect availables)

opportunities available to us, e.g., college admissions, majors, etc

Personal characteristics (that affect availables)

opportunities we CHOOSE to advantage of, e.g., interest in class, convenience of time, etc

Mere exposure effect

Repeated exposure to a novel stimulus → positive attitude toward it

Norm of homogamy

(Specific to U.S.) Friends, lovers, & spouses are often similar in age, race, religion, & socioeconomic status. Less similar → less intimate relationship

Matching Hypothesis

We look for people who are around the same level of social desirability

Attractiveness stereotypes (Halo Effect)

Assumption that those who are physically attractive have other desirable qualities; what’s beautiful’s good → their behavior might confirm our expectations

Comparison Level (CL)

Level of outcomes expected based on the average of a person’s experience in past relevant relationships, evaluate if relationship is better or worse than average (above/better is good). More static than CLalt.

Comparison Level of alternatives (CLalt)

Lowest level of outcomes a person will accept in light of the available alternatives. (Low is good). “standard used to evaluate the rewards and costs of a current relationship against those of potential alternatives.”

Attitudinal similarity

Sharing of beliefs, opinions, likes, and dislikes (Produces liking!)

Shared Activities

Become an important influence on our liking for another person as we spend time with them

• Interactions allow both parties to experience reinforcement; we associate the other person with positive experiences -> more liking

Self-disclosure

The act of revealing personal information about oneself to another person. Information shared becomes more personal as relationship develops.

• Self-disclosure is usually a reciprocal act (both parties share info to learn abt each other), but it can decrease as relationship develops

• More egalitarian relationships lead to more self-disclosure

Trust

Extremely important in developing relationship, means we believe a person is honest and that their intentions toward us are positive. 

• More trust -> higher degree of self-disclosure

• We’re more likely to trust someone who’s RELIABLE and PREDICTABLE

• Relational security: sense of trust and faith in partner

Dyadic withdrawal

Increasing reliance on one person for gratification and decreasing reliance on others (like friends)

Passionate Love

A state of intense physiological arousal & intense longing for union with another; involves cognitive, emotional, and behavioral elements

• We experience passionate love when we’re intensely aroused & the circumstances fit the cultural definitions of love

• Cognitive element: preoccupation w loved one, idealizing person/relationship, desire to know person/be known by them

• Emotional element: physiological arousal, sexual attraction, & desire for union

• Behavioral element: serving partner & maintaining physical closeness

• Passionate love may decrease as relationship becomes longer

• Positive emotions are associated with and enhance passionate love

Chaos theory

Relationships don’t develop in a steady linear fashion; they go through ups and downs

Unequal outcomes (chaos theory)

• People experiencing outcomes below CLalt are likely to break up and choose alternative

• Equity theory: we compare rewards and costs of relationship and hope to have more rewards

  • Equitable relationships: outcomes are equivalent for each party -> stable relationship

Unequal commitment (Chaos theory)

• Commitment (person’s intent to remain in relationship) is related to STABILITY

• Greater commitment, greater love for partner, and more positive illusions abt partner = lasting relationships

• UNEQUAL involvement = more instability

• EQUAL involvement at BEGINNING of relationship -> more likely to last

Romantic Love Ideal

Love at first sight, we only truly love 1 person, love conquers all, our beloved is nearly perfect, we should choose partners based on love rather than other/more rational considerations (set of beliefs that many Americans are socialized to accept)

• Our assumptions abt love are VERY culture-based (some cultures don’t even define love)

• Beliefs held more by YOUNG people and males

• Idealized partner/relationship can make u happier

Group

A social unit that has two or more people and has 4 attributes

• Membership: you & other group members recognize you as part of group

• Interaction among members: any sort of communication & influence among members

• Goals shared by members: members support each other in attaining goals

• Shared norms: shared expectations of members’ behavior

Primary groups

smaller groups w strong emotional ties/bonds that LAST, more informal/intimate (e.g., family, close friends)

Secondary Groups

Often more formal, impersonal, organized around specific goal, less emotional ties (e.g., coworkers, clubs, study groups, etc); can sometimes evolve into primary group

Illusion of out-group homogeneity

Although in-group members recognize the diversity of their own group, they still overestimate the homogeneity among out-group members (often due to lack of interaction with out-group)

Ultimate attribution error

Negative behaviors from out-group are attributed to disposition (internal factors) while positive behaviors are attributed to environment (external factors); opposite beliefs when evaluating in-group behaviors

• you are more likely to blame the out-group for negative outcomes
  but are less likely to give it credit for positive outcomes

Biased evaluations

Evaluating in-group performance more positively than similar out-group performance

Stereotyping

Forming oversimplified and (often) unrealistic images of out-group members

Intergroup contact hypothesis

increased contact between groups → less stereotypes, bias, and antagonism between groups

Superordinate goal

Objective held in common by all groups in a conflict that CANNOT be achieved by just 1 group without the supportive efforts of the other group

• Reduces in-group bias and intergroup conflict by boosting cooperation & interdependence

Group Cohesion

Extent to which group members desire to stay in group and resist leaving it. More cohesion = more positive feelings & sense of unity.

• Cohesive groups have firm hold on members’ commitment, loyalty, time, energy

• More cohesion: more positive interactions, more influence among members, more communication, more conformity, more commitment

Goal isomorphism

State in which group and individual goals are compatible (actions support attainment of both); benefits group by increasing motivation (increased by recruiting the right members, reminding everyone that they’re in a group)

Majority influence

Processes by which the majority of a group pressures individual member to conform or adopt a specific position on some issue

Normative Influence

Member conforms to norms in order to receive the social rewards or avoid punishments 

• Reward: we conform when we’re attracted to a group and when conforming = being liked & accepted by members 

• Conforming = more predictable relationships and easier exchanges

Informational influence

Group member accepts information from others as valid evidence abt reality; often when members need to reduce uncertainty (e.g., looking at seniors for what to do when first entering high school cafeteria)

Intergroup conflict

Conflict between organized groups, influenced by…

• Increased group cohesion: conflict reinforces group’s boundaries, strengthens member loyalty, commitment increases as cause becomes more important, outgroup is framed as common enemy

• Increased militancy of group leaders: group might resort to harsher/angrier/more radical & militant leaders to defend group and ensure success in conflict

• Alteration of group norms: group might ignore goals/norms from before the conflict so that they can prioritize goals/norms that support their success in conflict, more pressure to conform & dislike outgroup

Realistic group conflict theory

Opposition of interest (gain from one group means loss by other) causes members in group to become frustrated and dislike other group; in-group identity increases; increased solidarity & cohesion within groups = greater chance of conflict (e.g., Israeli-Palestinian conflict)

Ethnocentrism

tendency to regard one’s group as center of everything and superior to outgroups

• this + High in-group identification → discrimination/bias between groups → escalate conflict

Minimal group paradigm

Even trivial distinctions between groups can trigger in-group & out-group processes

Group Processes

Systematic study of how individuals interact in groups

Collective Task

An activity or objective that requires the contributions and coordinated efforts of more than one individual and is typically accomplished within a specific time frame

Interaction Process Analysis (IPA)

Documents what kinds of contributions group members make & to whom they direct them to (Created by Robert Bales)

Status characteristics

Any social attribute that differentiates people and becomes a basis for evaluation and beliefs about them

• Our cultural beliefs give more esteem to some states of status (e.g., men are stronger (gender), college graduates seem more skilled than those with just a HS diploma (education), whites perceived as more competent (race)

Power and prestige order

Created by our cultural beliefs; status hierarchy in groups: those w higher status take lead & those of lower status submit to them

Diffuse status characteristics

Influence ideas about general competence (e.g., assuming men are more competent than women in many things like strength, conversation, driving, etc.)

• People automatically use these assumptions unless they find evidence that the characteristic is irrelevant to the task (burden of proof process)

Specific status characteristics

Influence performance expectations, but MUST be relevant to the task and be applied to a more limited set of tasks (e.g., mathematical ability, athleticism, occupation); influence ideas abt task competence

Status generalization

Tendency for members’ status characteristics to affect group structure & interaction (even if status is irrelevant)

• Those w higher standing on status characteristics (in society) get more respect/esteem than others, are chosen as leaders, have more influence, and are viewed more positively (in group)

• Affects how we perceive others’ and OURSELVES (our performance/aspirations)

• To overcome status generalization, ALL parties have to change performance expectations

• It’s hard when interactions are based on and reinforce cultural beliefs

Status value

Objects associated with high-status actors become more valuable (e.g., celebrities’ clothing)

Social exchange theory

Interactions between people are like exchanges; individuals trade benefits & rewards with each other; interactions occur through a relation

• Social exchange involves trading tangible/intangible goods (smiling, money); we usually want something in return

• Actors exchange resources using an exchange process while situated in an exchange structure & it’s assumed there’s freedom of choice in social situations involving alternative actions to choose from

• We often choose actions that -> good profits & AVOID actions that -> poor profits and more costs

Conditioning

• Stimuli that -> prior rewards will elicit better FUTURE responses

• The more often a person receives a reward for a behavior, the less satisfied they are each time (compliments)

Power

One’s ability to direct or influence others’ behavior; is an attribute of a POSITION rather than the actor

• Those with more powerful positions demand more rewards in exchanges

• Depends on availability/attractiveness of alternative exchange patterns

Negotiated exchange

Joint decision process on terms of exchange; clear obligations for both parties

Reciprocal exchange

no direct negotiation, benefits given separately, more uncertain

Generalized exchange

A person receives a benefit and then give a benefit to someone else (e.g., someone holds door for you, you then hold door for someone else)

Productive exchange

jointly produced good that partners benefit from; relies on cooperation. E.g., group project

Equity Theory

When perceived rewards are proportional to perceived costs (focused on outcomes of equal vs. unequal exchange)

• People want to maximize outcomes

• Groups seek to maximize collective outcomes & develop systems of equity

• Inequitable relationships -> distress

• Individuals seek to address inequity

Distributive Justice

Perceived fairness of a distribution of rewards

• Equity principle: group members distribute rewards in proportion to members’ contributions (often at work)

• Equality principle: group members distribute rewards equally regardless of contributions (often in friend groups)

• Relative needs principle: group members distribute rewards according to members’ personal needs, regardless of contributions (often intimate relationships)

Procedural Justice

Fairness of procedures/processes that determine distributions

• People want to feel that they have some control in process & feel included/valued

Task specialist

Highest initiator of communicative acts, drives group to achieve goal, task-oriented. Leader might be pushy/antagonistic -> disliked the most from group members

Socio-emotional specialist

Eases tension caused by task specialist & soothes group, acts to encourage solidarity, exercises tact/tells jokes to maintain good spirit. Often, the best-liked member of the group.

Role differentiation

Group members divide up functions of group (getting things done & keeping relations good) to achieve goal. Division of labor -> efficiency

•  Sometimes a member may perform both roles

Social structure

The ordered & persisting relationships among these positions in a social system

Social position

Designated location in a social system

Social class

Consists of people who share a common status in society

• U.S.: social class is based on occupational prestige and income/education, defining class boundaries

Social networks

Sets of relationships associated with the various positions a person occupies

Status

Social ranking of a person’s position