Lecture 18 Prejudice and Discrimination

  • more preferential preference for people in the ingroup, discrimination against people in the outgroup

  • minimal groups paradigm experiment

    • Assign groups to arbitrary groups

    • Participants showed strong favoritism towards their assigned groups, even when the criteria for group assignment were meaningless.

    • Outcome: People show ingroup bias easily

  • Allport Contact Hypothesis

    • Need:

      • Equal status

      • A shared objective/goal

      • Active collaboration

      • Needs to have clear support

    • OUTCOME: Not enough evidence because of publication bias

  • Jigsaw Classrom Outcomes:

    • LACK of random assignment, major threat to validity

    • Not enough evidence that proves it’s more effective than other methods

  • prejudice on the decline

Lecture 20: Two Track Mind

  • System 2 - effortful thinking, analytical

  • system 1 - gut feeling, automatic

  • argument vs cues, what are they

  • system 2 is more likely to activate if:

    • it is relevant to you

    • if it will happen to you soon/high stakes

  • Need for Cognition (NFC)

    • People who score high on this like to be analytical and enjoy hard things  

      • they are also more likely to engage in System 2 thinking, relying on arguments rather than initial cues

    • opposite is true for people who score lower

  • Door in the Face Effect

    • A psychological phenomenon where individuals are more likely to agree to a smaller request after first being presented with a larger, more unreasonable request.

    • Reciprocity is likely the reason: the person making the smaller request appears to be meeting halfway, making the other person feel obligated to comply.

  • Cognitive Reflection Task

    • People who scored higher on CRT are better at distinguishing fake news as not accurate (regardless of what political party they associate with)

    • People who scored lower on CRT are ass at everything

Lecture 22 Aggression and Biology

  • Aggression was NOT genetically programmed into our DNA

  • We don’t have a violence gene

  • we did inherit some violent tendencies from our ancestors, this is shown through our ancestors, related things like chimps and our parts of our brains

  • However, biology acts like a loaded gun, whether we choose to act on them is largely dependent on ourselves, cultural norms, society etc.

  • we have a fundamental desire to stand on business and seek revenge when someone does us dirty

  • Thomas Hobbes

    • Said that without a strong central authority (government), people are just gonna be stuck in a vicious cycle of violence

  • CORRECTED version of Seville Statement

    • it is scientifically CORRECT to say that we have inherited a tendency to make war from our animal ancestors

    • it is scientifically BULLSHIT to say that war or any other violent behavior is genetically programmed into our human nature.

    • it is almost CERTAINLY TRUE that in the course of human evolution there has been selection for aggressive behavior

    • it is scientifically CORRECT to say that humans possess neural systems to regulate aggression

Lecture 23

  • Dictator Game

  • Motivations for prosocial behavior

    • egoism

    • Altruism

    • Collectivism

    • Principilism