PSYC 206 Introduction to Social Psychology Exam 2 Review

Social Perception

Importance of Warm and Cold Traits

  • Traits "warm" and "cold" are vital as they significantly influence impression formation:

    • Warmth can evoke positive perceptions, while coldness may generate negative feelings.

Biases in Impression Formation

  1. Primacy Effect:

    • Definition: Information learned first has a greater impact on impression formation.

    • Example: First impressions set a baseline for subsequent evaluations.

  2. Halo Effect:

    • Definition: One positive trait impacts our judgments of other traits, leading to assumptions about overall character.

    • Example: Perceptions of physical attractiveness may lead to beliefs about goodness; "Beauty = Good".

  3. Impact of Racial and Gender Stereotypes:

    • Milkman et al. (2012) study:

      • Participants with fictional names signaling gender and race applied for doctoral mentorships.

      • White males received 26% more opportunities than women and minority students.

Types of Attributions

  • Examining reasons behind lateness:

    1. Dispositional Attribution (Internal Factors):

    • Example: "They arrived late because they are lazy."

    1. Situational Attribution (External Factors):

    • Example: "They arrived late because there was probably traffic."

Kelley’s Covariation Model

  • Application for Alex's Behavior:

    • High Distinctiveness: Alex only yells at Sarah, not others.

    • High Consistency: Alex yells at Sarah every time they work together.

    • High Consensus: Others also become frustrated with Sarah.

  • Attribution:

    • Alex's behavior is situational concerning Sarah.

Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE)

Reasons for FAE:

  1. Belief in a Just-World:

    • People believe others get what they deserve.

  2. Role of Perceptual Salience:

    • Situational context is often overshadowed by the person observed.

    • Example: In Taylor & Fiske (1975), observer location affected impressions during an “get acquainted” conversation.

Cultural Differences

  • Individualistic Cultures:

    • Tend to make dispositional attributions.

  • Collectivistic Cultures:

    • Tend to make situational attributions more often.

Social Influence

Conformity vs. Obedience

  • Conformity:

    • Changing beliefs/opinions to align with group norms.

  • Obedience:

    • Changing behavior due to authority influence.

Sherif’s Autokinetic Study

  • Key Takeaway:

    • Participants changed their answers based on the group, demonstrating informational social influence (seeking correct answers).

  • Context:

    • The task was deliberately ambiguous, prompting reliance on group consensus.

Asch’s Line Study

  • Key Takeaway:

    • Examined if participants would conform to false group answers despite clear evidence.

  • Type of Social Influence:

    • Normative social influence; desire to avoid standing out.

Factors Impacting Conformity

  1. Group Size:

    • Conformity increases with 3-4 members, plateaus with larger groups.

  2. Unanimity:

    • Presence of a single dissenter significantly reduces conformity.

  3. Importance of Group/Task:

    • Increased likelihood of conformity in emergencies or valued groups.

  4. Culture:

    • Collectivistic cultures show higher conformity than individualistic ones.

Milgram Studies

  • Experiment Description:

    • Involved an experimenter, teacher (participant), and learner.

    • The teacher shocked the learner for incorrect answers; shocks escalated in intensity.

    • Result: 65% of participants continued to the highest shock level without disobedience.

  • Critiques:

    • Unethical design.

    • Ambiguity in whether results indicated pure obedience due to participant indecision.

Factors Impacting Obedience

  1. Victim Salience:

    • Closer proximity decreased obedience.

  2. Authority Salience:

    • Physical distance of the experimenter reduced obedience rates.

  3. Authority Legitimacy:

    • Experimenter's identity (normal person vs. researcher in lab coat) influenced obedience.

  4. Unanimity:

    • Seeing others disobey increased likelihood of participant disobedience.

Attraction and Close Relationships

Interpersonal Attraction Factors

  • Physical Attractiveness:

    • Initially significant, but can be overshadowed by shared similarities and proximity.

  • Similarity:

    • Those with common interests or backgrounds are more drawn to each other.

  • Proximity:

    • Physical closeness often results in increased attraction.

Pratfall Effect

  • Example of Darren's Spill:

    • A small mistake made Darren appear more relatable and likable to his classmates.

    • Definition: Highly competent individuals become more appealing after blunders.

Misattribution of Arousal

  • Definition: Incorrectly labeling the source of arousal.

    • Example: Fear from a roller coaster or scary movie misattributed to attraction towards a date.

Exchange vs. Communal Relationships

  • Exchange Relationship:

    • Trade-based; expectation of reciprocity: "If I help you, I expect help in return."

  • Communal Relationship:

    • Based on mutual support without expectations: "I help because I care."

Investment Model of Commitment

  • Factors Predicting Commitment:

    1. Satisfaction: Level of happiness derived from the relationship.

    2. Comparison Levels for Alternatives: Considering potential alternatives for better relationship satisfaction.

    3. Investments: Assessing what one has sacrificed or put into the relationship.

Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love

  • Example of Jamie and Taylor:

    • Representing Companionate Love:

      • Characteristics include emotional intimacy and commitment, but less physical passion.

Attachment Styles

  1. Secure Attachment:

    • Comfort with interdependence and trust in close relationships.

  2. Anxious Attachment:

    • Fear of abandonment, seeks closeness and reassurance.

  3. Avoidant Attachment:

    • Values independence, struggles with intimacy and trust.

  4. Disorganized Attachment:

    • Desires closeness but fears rejection; exhibits mixed signals.

Helping and Altruism

Empathy vs. Personal Distress

  • Empathy:

    • Concern for others’ suffering, leading to altruistic behavior.

  • Personal Distress:

    • Egoistic motivation to help oneself, leading to egoistic helping.

Elaine Experiment Findings

  • Group with low empathy and easy escape options was least likely to help:

    • Low empathy leads to reduced motivation to assist, favoring escape.

Extraordinary Altruists Brain Differences

  • Findings:

    • Larger amygdala in extraordinary altruists enhances fear detection.

    • More often engaged in voluntary and costly altruistic behavior.

    • Compassion remains a significant driver of altruism.

Identifiable Victim Effect

  • Example of Campaign A vs. Campaign B:

    • Campaign A’s focus on a specific, identifiable victim led to more donations.

    • Psychological reasons:

    • Perceived capability of making an impact on an individual level vs. a broad statistic.

Bystander Effect

  • Definition: Individuals are less likely to assist in emergencies when others are present.

  • Study: Smoke in the room by Latané and Darley (1968).

  • Causes:

    1. Diffusion of Responsibility: Expectation that someone else will intervene.

    2. Audience Inhibition: Fear of appearing strange if one responds alone.

    3. Pluralistic Ignorance: No reaction from others suggests there’s no emergency.

Five Steps in Latane and Darley’s Model of Helping

  1. Notice the Event:

    • Barriers: Distractions preventing recognition of the emergency.

  2. Interpret the Event as an Emergency:

    • Barriers: Ambiguity and pluralistic ignorance affect interpretation.

  3. Assume Responsibility:

    • Barriers: Belief that others will intervene causes reluctance.

  4. Decide How to Help:

    • Barriers: Lack of knowledge about how to assist in emergencies.

  5. Provide Help:

    • Barriers: Audience inhibition and situational constraints hinder action.