Chapter 1: An Invitation to Social Psychology

Social Psychology - Scientific study of the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of individuals in social situations.

The Power of the Situation:

History: 

The earliest social psychology lab was on social facilitation in 1898 (Triplett). 

1940s - 1950s experimental approach to studying behavior was refined by Kurt Lewin, founder of social psychology, and Leon Festinger who focused on experimental methods, lab experiments, and deception.

Asch Conformity Study: 75% of people went along with the group, at least once, even when their senses told them otherwise. Wanted to test Obedience to Authority.

• Normative Social Influence - we use others to know how to fit in; want to be liked and not rejected.

Milgram Experiment: There was a “Learner” who was strapped to an electrical chair where they would be shocked by the participants for every incorrect answer. The level of shock would increase with each mistake. If the participant refused to increase the voltage they would be told a series of prods to continue. 62.5% of participants went to the max of 450 volts and all went to at least 300 volts. It had the same effects on men, women, different ages, and different social classes. It was predicted that < 1% would follow past the 330 volts mark.

Seminarians as Samaritans: Explained when people do/don’t help others in need, and what situational determinants there are. Told groups of people they would be early, on time, or late. Overall, 40% helped a stranger. 63% of the early group, 45% of the on time group, and 10% of the late group.

The Fundamental Attribution Error (Ross, 1977): The tendency to assume that the causes of behavior can be found mostly within the person, rather than outside the person. Assume that it’s a person’s fault rather than outside influences. People believe it's more disposition: beliefs, values, personality traits, and abilities rather than reality where there is less influence of disposition that people think. 

Main situational influences on our behavior are the actions of other people.

The Role of Construal:

Construal - Interpretation about stimuli or situation and others’ behavior. 

How we construe situations has a major impact on how we react to the situation.

We depend on stored knowledge or schemas to understand situations.

Schema - Elaborate stores of knowledge about the world which tell us what type of behavior to expect and how to behave. Construal processes need schemas to understand anything.

• Help us classify the world. 

• Lead us to have certain expectations of the world. 

• They can change our interpretation of events and people.

Types of Schemas:

• Scripts - schemas about events

• Stereotypes - schemas for groups of people; belief that certain attributes are characteristic of members of a particular group.

Automatic vs. Controlled Processing:

Automatic Processing:

• Automatic, emotion based, involuntary and unconscious

• Give rise to implicit attitudes and beliefs

• Ex: Recognizing a friend, being happy and smiling

Controlled Processing:

• Conscious, systematic, and deliberate

• Can override automatic responses

• Results in explicit attitudes and beliefs of which we are aware

• Ex: Decide what to say, adjust behavior based on others

People’s construals of situations are often automatic and nonconscious rather than controlled.

• Much of our cognitive activity is hidden from us

• We are often unaware of how we reached a conclusion or behaved a certain way

Nisbett & Wilson (1977): 

• Tested a group to evaluate 4 nightgowns

• Highest rating was given to the last one

• Participants couldn’t believe that the experimenters thought they were influenced by position.

More Examples:

• Ideomotor mimicry - Mimicking your conversation partner

• Less violence in buildings surrounded by greenery than concrete.

It’s more efficient for processing to happen when we are unaware; it’s important to respond rapidly to a situation.

Research should not always depend on verbal (self) reports about why they believed they engaged in a behavior.

Evolution and Human Behavior: How we are the same:

Evolutionary Theory can explain many human behaviors, why we have them, and how we’ve come to have them. May explain why many human behaviors are universal - throughout all cultures.

Human Universals:

• Group Living - evolutionary advantage with protection, success in obtaining resources, and offspring care. 

• Language - Facilitates ability to live in complex groups, convey emotions and intentions, beliefs, attitudes, thoughts.

Understanding the Brain:

•  Social Neuroscientists - study the neural underpinnings of social behavior

• fMRI - functional magnetic resonance imaging; blood flow to active parts of the brain (emotions, win/loss, problem solving, rejection, esteem). 

Culture and Human Behavior: How we are different:

How we understand ourselves depends on cultural background ie. personal goals, values, beliefs, etc.

Independent/Individualistic Cultures:

• Tendency: distinct social entities, tied together by voluntary bonds

• Separate from other people; attributes exist in the absence of any connection to others

Interdependent/Collective Cultures:

• Defined as part of a collective; tied to others in their group

• Less importance on individual freedom or personal control over their lives

• Less importance on personal uniqueness

Individualism is more common in Western Countries and Collectivism is more common in Non-Western Countries.

Still regional and subcultural differences:

• Southern US is more interdependent

• Social class differences

A person can be independent in certain situations and interdependent in other situations.

Gender roles vary greatly around the world (and vary within subcultures of same country):

•  Variable aspects of gender roles: Male dominance

• HG societies: predominant male role = hunt & female = gather plants; yet these societies are relatively gender-egalitarian

• Relative status of women in the world ranges

Sexual Relations: what is appropriate varies

• Polygyny and serial monogamy: most common practices

• Lifetime monogamy is a rarity (US)

• Western Europe: affairs commonplace

• Other cultures: severe punishment

Chapter 2:

Value of Social Psych Research:

Teaches us how to interpret and predict outcomes of social experiences

• Understand our own behavior and others’ behavior

Hindsight Bias: tendency to be overconfident about whether you could have predicted a given outcome

• Hear a fact -> think about why it’s true -> think that we could have predicted the outcome when often we couldn’t have

• Some SP findings might seem obvious, but often only after we know what they are

How Social Psychologists Test Ideas:

Cycle of Theory and Research:

• Theory -> Hypothesis -> Research -> Correlational/Experimental Research -> Outcome-> Theory

Theory - Body of related propositions to describe an aspect of the world

Hypothesis - Specific prediction about what will happen under specific circumstances

Research - Process where scientists observe events, look for patterns, evaluate theories proposed to explain patterns

Dissonance Theory: people like their thoughts/behaviors to be consistent with one another and will do substantial mental work to achieve such cognitive consistency

Hypothesis: if people work hard to acquire something (behavior) and it ends up being disappointing (thoughts), then they will be motivated to find benefits

Research: observe events, look for patterns, and evaluate theories proposed to explain\ those patterns

Observational Research:

• Participant Observation - close range to produce ideas about others’ behavior

Archival Research:

• Past Records

Surveys:

• How you’ve sampled (quality) > how many (quantity)

• Can accurately represent a population from relatively small sample if the sample is unbiased

• Survey results may be limited if the sample is biased

Sampling Techniques:

• Random (unbiased) sampling - every person in population of interest has an equal chance of being studied

• Convenience (biased) sampling - non-random sample; Can be biased in some way; too many of some kinds of people and too few of others

Basic Research:

• Understand phenomena rather than solve a problem

• Use findings to build valid theories of world

Applied Research:

• Solving real world problems

Correlational Research:

• 2 (or more) variables measured to determine if they are associated

• Is there a relationship between X and Y

• Correlation does not equal causation

• Best option for difficult, unethical, or impossible research

Experimental Research:

• Researchers manipulate/control a variable (independent variable) and measure the effects on another variable (dependent variable)

• Can allow assertion of causality

• Experiments are generally the preferred way to conduct research in social psychology if possible

Criteria of Sound Research:

Need to consider:

• Validity - appropriateness/accuracy

• Reliability - consistency

• Statistical significance of findings

External validity - Indication of how well the results of a study generalize to contexts besides those of the study itself

How to ensure external validity:

Field experiment - Conducted in real world, usually with participants who are not aware they are in a study

Internal Validity - confidence that only the manipulated variable (IV) could have produced the results (changes in DV).

Construct Validity - Variables should be good reflections of the construct of interest

Test-retest reliability:

• Degree to which a measure gives the same result on repeated occasions in same participants

• IQ = .8+

• Personality scales = .8 or a bit lower

• Inter-rater reliability of observers - Degree to which observers agree

Psychology: 

• Probability value cutoff of .05

• The probability of obtaining the finding by chance is less than .05

• Stat. significance is a function of:

1. mean differences between groups or strength of relationship

2. size of sample

Replication: reproducing of research results; increases our confidence in results

• Scientific controversy is sometimes generated by failures to replicate -> debate

• Science is self-correcting!

Ethical Concerns:

IRB: University committee that examines research proposals and makes judgments about ethical appropriateness of the research (privacy, safety).

• Overly harming research participants is an ethically unacceptable practice

• APA does not allow researchers to replicate these studies exactly, although most would consider them to be valuable

Informed Consent - signed agreement to participate after learning all the relevant aspects (including possible risks) 

Deception - misled about the purpose of the research or the meaning of something that is done to them

Ethical implications must be considered and approved by researcher and their IRBs

• Participants’ informed consent must be given when research poses possibility of significant harm

• Disclosure of procedures and potential risks

• Right to withdrawal at any time

• Debriefing

• Informative, comforting, and educational

• Research question

• Value of results

• Especially important when participants have been deceived or made uncomfortable

Chapter 3

Definition: Self-knowledge comes from introspection, but we may not be fully aware of all mental processes.

Key Point: We are better at judging internal traits; others are better at judging external traits.

Example: We might know if we're anxious, but others may judge how outgoing we are.

b. The Organization of Self-Knowledge

Self-Schemas: Cognitive structures representing our thoughts about ourselves in general and in specific situations.

Example: "I am shy, a sibling, a motivated student."

2. Origins of the Sense of Self

Self-Concept: Formed through immediate social context (family), culture, and social comparisons.

a. Family and Other Socialization Agents

Cooley (1902) Looking Glass Self: Our self-knowledge is shaped by how we think others perceive us.

b. Situationism and the Social Self

i. Aspects of the Self Relevant to Social Context: Different aspects of self come up in different situations (working self-concept).

ii. Aspects of the Self Distinctive in Social Context: We highlight traits that make us unique in certain situations.

Example: Younger employees in a workplace may highlight their age as unique.

Study: 40% of 6th graders born outside the U.S. mentioned this fact, while only 10% of U.S.-born students did.

iii. Malleability and Stability: Self-concept is malleable in different contexts but has a stable core.

Example: "I am shy around new people but outgoing with friends."

c. Culture and the Social Self

i. Independent vs. Interdependent Self-Construals

Independent Cultures: Focus on uniqueness and independence (Western).

Interdependent Cultures: Focus on social roles and relationships (Eastern).

ii. Who Are You?: Differences in how people answer this question based on culture.

d. Gender and the Social Self

Key Point: Women tend to be more interdependent, focusing on relationships and roles, while men tend to focus on independence.

Socialization Agents: Media and social groups encourage different self-construals for men (power) and women (nurturing).

e. Social Comparison

Key Point: We compare ourselves to others to assess our abilities, especially in uncertain situations.

Types of Comparison:

Downward Comparison: Comparing to someone worse off to feel better.

Upward Comparison: Comparing to someone better to improve.

f. Group Memberships: Group identities play a role in shaping the self.

3. Self-Esteem

a. Defining Self-Esteem

Definition: Overall evaluation of self (positive/negative).

Types of Self-Esteem:

Trait Self-Esteem: Stable, long-term self-regard.

State Self-Esteem: Temporary self-evaluation based on current mood/situation.

Domains of Self-Worth: Self-esteem is based on success/failure in key areas, like academic performance or family relationships.

b. Social Acceptance and Self-Esteem: Self-esteem is closely linked to social acceptance.

c. Culture and Self-Esteem

Key Point: Independent cultures report higher self-esteem (focus on self-enhancement), while non-Western cultures value self-improvement.

Situationist Hypothesis: Western cultures promote self-esteem through praise, while Eastern cultures focus on self-criticism for growth.

4. Motives Driving Self-Evaluation

a. Self-Enhancement

i. Self-Serving Construals: People tend to view themselves as "better than average" on traits like kindness and fairness, especially for ambiguous traits.

ii. Self-Affirmation: People maintain self-worth by affirming valued aspects of self when threatened.

Example: "I may not be doing well in math, but I’m excelling in social situations."

iii. Self-Enhancement and Well-Being: Positive illusions about the self (common in Western cultures) can enhance well-being.

b. Self-Verification

Key Point: We seek confirmation of our self-views, whether positive or negative.

Example: A socially awkward person seeks others to recognize that trait.

Friendships/Relationships: Greater relationship satisfaction when others’ perceptions align with our self-view, even if it's negative.

5. Self-Presentation

Definition: Efforts to influence how others perceive us.

Self-Monitoring: Adjusting behavior to fit the situation.

High Self-Monitors: Have different groups of friends for different activities.

Low Self-Monitors: Use the same friends for all activities.

a. Self-Handicapping

Definition: Engaging in self-defeating behavior to have an excuse for failure.

Example: Procrastinating on a project so you can blame the lack of time if you fail.

b. Presenting the Self Online

Key Point: People tend to present a slightly enhanced version of themselves online, but often close to their true self.

Physical Appearance: Online self-presentation often involves self-enhancement strategies (e.g., photos, posts).

Chapter 4

1. Snap Judgments: Inferring Personality from Physical Appearance

• Definition: Quick impressions about people based on physical traits.

• Study (2006): People were shown faces and asked to make judgments in varying time spans.

  • Traits: Hypermasculine (jaw), Trustworthiness (high eyebrows, baby faces).

• Important Dimensions of Snap Judgments

  • Key Point: Snap judgments are similar to those formed with longer exposure.

• The Accuracy of Snap Judgments

  • Key Point: Snap judgments can be accurate.

  • Example: Study on inmates—participants' snap judgments about psychopathy correlated with clinical assessments.

2. Inferring the Causes of Behavior (Causal Attribution)

• a. The Processes of Causal Attribution

  • Key Point: Why did a behavior occur? Internal (the person) or external (the situation)?

  • Example: Mary is late. Is it bad time management or an emergency?

• b. Attribution and Covariation

  • Covariation Principle: Behavior is attributed to causes that occur with the behavior.

    • Consensus: What would most people do in this situation?

    • Distinctiveness: How does this person act in other situations?

    • Consistency: Is this behavior consistent over time?

• c. Counterfactual Thinking

  • Definition: Thoughts of what might have, could have, or should have happened.

  • Example: "If only I applied for more internships."

  • i. The Influence of What Almost Happened

    • Emotional Amplification: Stronger emotional reaction to events that are easier to imagine not happening.

• d. Errors and Biases in Attributions

  • Key Point: Causal attributions are prone to errors.

• e. Self-Serving Attributional Bias

  • Key Point:

    • Internal explanations for successes.

    • External explanations for failures.

  • Example: CEOs take credit for 83% of positive events but only 19% of negative ones.

• f. Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE)

  • Definition: Tendency to attribute others' behavior to internal traits.

  • Example: Anna is late, and you assume she has bad time management.

  • i. Causes of FAE

    • Comfort: It helps us feel secure about unpredictable events.

    • Just World Hypothesis: Belief that people get what they deserve.

    • Perceptual Salience: We focus on visible behavior over context.

• g. Culture and Causal Attribution

  • i. Cultural Differences in Attending to Context

    • Non-westerners are more likely to attribute behavior to the situation.

    • FAE is more common in western cultures.

  • ii. Causal Attribution for Independent and Interdependent Peoples

    • Independent Cultures: Less attention to context.

    • Interdependent Cultures: More focus on social roles and context.

3. How Information is Presented

• a. Order Effects

  • Primacy Effect: First information has a stronger impact.

  • Recency Effect: Last information is remembered more.

• b. Framing Effects

  • Definition: Judgment is influenced by how information is presented.

  • Example: 75% lean vs 25% fat meat.

  • i. Spin Framing

  • ii. Positive and Negative Framing

4. How We Seek Information

• a. Confirmation Bias

  • Key Point: Tendency to seek information that supports our beliefs.

• b. Motivated Confirmation Bias

  • Key Point: Actively seeking evidence that aligns with expectations.

5. Using Schemas to Understand New Information

• a. The Influence of Schemas

  • Definition: Preexisting knowledge structures that help us interpret events.

  • i. Attention: Schemas direct our attention.

  • ii. Memory: We recall details that match our schemas.

    • Example: Participants remembered waitress vs librarian details based on prior schema.

  • iii. Construal: Schemas influence interpretation.

    • Example: Positive words lead to a positive interpretation of a paragraph.

  • iv. Behavior: Schemas can influence behavior automatically.

  • v. Consciousness of Activation: Schemas help us make quick judgments, but can mislead.

6. Reason, Intuition, and Heuristics

• Two Systems of Thought:

  • Intuitive System: Fast, automatic.

  • Rational System: Slow, controlled, rule-based.

• a. The Availability Heuristic

  • Definition: Judging frequency or probability based on how easily instances come to mind.

  • Example: Kansas is associated with tornadoes more than Nebraska due to The Wizard of Oz.

  • i. Biased Assessments of Risk

  • ii. Biased Estimates of Contributions to Joint Projects

• b. Representativeness Heuristic

  • Definition: Judging based on how closely something resembles a typical category member.

  • i. Base-Rate Neglect: Ignoring statistical information in favor of representativeness.