This site is 100% ad supported. Please add an exception to adblock for this site.

psy99 final


undefined, object
copy deck
a change in one’s behavior due to the real or imagined influence of other people
a direct request from another person
the commands of authority
Sherif’s study
Experiment shows how three participants’ estimates of the apparent movement of light gradually converged. Before they came together, their perceptions varied considerably. Once in a group, however, they conformed to the norms that had developed. (Sherif’s study was more private acceptance because they seemed to conform to other people’s behavior out of a genuine belief that what they were doing or saying was right.)
Asch’s study
line judgment studies, no ambiguity. Correct answers obvious. Public compliance (or Normative social influence) – conform to group’s social norms in order to be liked and accepted
What do ambiguity and the importance of being accurate have to do with the degree of conformity that occurs?
If it is important to be accurate and the task is ambiguous (informational influence) → more susceptible to influence (greater conformity) If the task is not ambiguous (normative social influence) → less conformity, but not 0.
How can informational social influence backfire?
Informational Social Influence: the influence of other people that leads us to conform because we see them as a source of information to guide our behavior; We conform because we believe that others’ interpretation of an ambiguous situation is more correct than ours and will help us choose an appropriate form of action. Occurred during WAR OF THE WORDS broadcast on radio – listeners looks to those around them, all were worried.
What three conditions make people more likely to conform to informational social influence?
-when situation is ambiguous -when the situation is a crisis -when other people are experts
Social impact theory
the idea that conforming to social influence depends on the strength of the group’s importance, it’s immediacy, and the number of people in the group
When do people conform to normative social influence? (6 conditions)
-when group size is three or more -when the group is important -when one has no allies in the group -when group’s culture is collectivistic -when we have low self-esteem -when we’re female and in group pressure situation with an audience
What steps can you take to resist normative social influence? What is the role of idiosyncrasy credits in resisting normative social influence?
-be aware of its presence -if possible, find an ally -it’s easier if you have idiosyncrasy credits (=the tolerance a person earns over time, by conforming to group norms; if enough idiosyncrasy credits are earned, the person can occasionally behave deviantly without retribution from the group.
What conditions make minority influence possible?
-if minority expresses a consistent, unwavering view the majority is likely to take notice and may even adopt the minority view. -not effective if minority wavers between two different viewpoints or if two individual express different minority views.
What’s the difference between descriptive and injunctive norms? Which is most effective in promoting positive behavior change?
Injunctive norms: people’s perceptions of what behaviors are approved or disapproved by others Descriptive norms: people’s perceptions of how people actually behave in given situations, regardless of whether the behavior is approved or disapproved by others. *injunctive norms are more effective at changing behavior.
According to evolutionary psychology, what are the three reasons that people help?
Evolutionary Psychology is an attempt to explain social behavior in terms of genetic factors that evolved over time according to the principles of natural selection. -Kin Selection: idea that behaviors that help a genetic relative are favored by natural selection; people increase the chances that their genes will be passed along, not only by having their own children but also by ensuring that their genetic relatives have children -Norms of Reciprocity: the expectation that helping others will increase the likelihood that they will help us in the future. -Learning Social Norms: people are genetically programmed to learn social norms (to increase chances of survival) and one of these norms is altruism.
How does social exchange theory explain helping?
Social exchange theory argues that much of what we do stems from the desire to maximize our rewards and minimize our costs; does not trace desire back to evolutionary roots. -says that true altruism, in which people help, even when doing so is costly to themselves, does not exist; people help when the benefits outweigh the costs. So why help? -It’s still self-interest to maximize our rewards (reciprocity norm, gain social approval, increase self-esteem) and minimize our costs (reduce distress -- ours). -Sometimes “help” as a way of hurting
the ability to put oneself in the shoes of another person and to experience events and emotions the way that another person experiences them
empathy-altruism hypothesis
when we feel empathy for another person, we will attempt to help the person for purely altruistic reasons, regardless of what we have to gain.
Baston\'s research (designed to tease apart whether helping is altruistic or egoistic, i.e., what proof does he offer for the existence of true altruistic helping?)
-According to Batson, if you do not feel empathy, then social exchange concerns come into play, meaning that you will help if there is something for you to gain but you will not help if there is nothing for you to gain by helping. -In Batson’s experiment, participants were asked to help a student (who had been hurt in a car accident) by giving her their class notes. Results: those that experienced more empathy towards her were more likely to help her regardless off the costs and rewards – ie regardless of whether they or not they would encounter her in class (see page 350).
What are the gender differences in helping?
-Gender differences: Men are more likely to perform chivalrous and heroic acts, whereas women are more likely to be helpful in long-term relationships that involve greater commitment.
Cultural differences re: in-group and out-group for helping?
-People in all cultures are more likely to help someone they define as a member of their in-group, the group with which an individual identifies; less likely to help someone they perceive to be a member of an out-group, a group with which they do not identify. -cultural factors come into play in determining how strongly people draw the line between in-groups and out-groups. Also note: Because there is more of a distinct separation between the in-group and out-group in interdependent cultures, people in these cultures are actually less likely to help those in the out-group than people in individualistic cultures are. However, those in interdependent groups are more likely to help those in the in-group than individualistic cultures are.
What effect do different moods have on helping? (the phone booth study, the broken camera study)
The mood that people are in at a given time plays a huge role in behavior (whether or not someone will offer help). -Phone booth study: people who found a dime in a phone booth at a mall (and were thus in a good mood) were much more likely to help a man pick up papers that fell out of his folder than people who did not find a dime.
Why, according to the urban-overload hypothesis, are people in rural environments more helpful than those in urban environments?
Urban Overload Hypothesis: theory that people living in cities are constantly being bombarded with stimulation and that they keep to themselves to avoid being overwhelmed by it. -According to the urban overload hypothesis, if you put urban dwellers in a calmer, less stimulating environment, they would be as likely as anyone else to reach out to others.
What is the bystander effect?
Bystander effect: the finding that the greater the number of bystanders who witness an emergency, the less likely any one of them is to help.
What are the five steps involved in whether or not people help in an emergency? What processes can lead to non-intervention at each of those steps?
-5 steps involved in whether or not to help in an emergency (in parentheses are the processes that can lead to non-intervention at each step) 1. notice the event (distracted, in a hurry; fail to notice) 2. interpret the event as an emergency (pluralistic ignorance; interpret events as non-emergency) 3. assume responsibility (diffusion of responsibility; fail to assume personal responsibility) 4. know appropriate forms of assistance (lack of knowledge, can’t offer appropriate help) 5. implement decision (costs of helping too high – danger to self, legal concerns, embarrassment)
Be familiar with Latane & Darley’s ‘seizure’ and ‘smoke-filled room’ studies
-Latane & Darley’s “seizure” study: a participant was taking part in a conversation over an intercom when one of the other students over the intercom starts to have a seizure; the participant was less likely to go find help for the seizure victim when he/she thought there were more people who were also hearing the victim suffer. (85% of the participants helped in the first minute when they thought they were the only ones who had witnessed the emergency). -“smoke-filled room studies” – participants in study sit in a room and white smoke begins to fill the room; if the participant is alone he/she is much more likely to leave room and report smoke, but if there are others in the room that are not reacting the participant is likely to not react either (363).
Be familiar with Darley & Batson’s Good Samaritan study, and the principles they illustrate
-Darley and Batson’s Good Samaritan study: In this study, the research participants were seminary students (so you would assume that they would be very altruistic). However, it seemed that they were less likely to stop if they were in a hurry (late to give a speech). More likely to stop if they were early or on time. -topic of the speech made no difference, those who were supposed to talk about the parable of the Good Samaritan (which very closely resembled the situation in the study) were no more likely to stop than those talking about another topic (page 360-361).
How can we increase prosocial behavior? How might the overjustification effect limit intrinsic motivation for helping?
-educate -parent well -increase volunteerism but don’t force it (risk of overjustification effect: tendency for people to view their behavior as caused by compelling extrinsic reasons, making them underestimate the extent to which it was caused by intrinsic reasons) -connect
What is the psychological definition of aggression?
Aggression: intentional action aimed at doing harm or causing pain. (*what’s important is the intention behind the act – the intention to harm.)
Distinguish between hostile (hot) and instrumental (cold) aggression
-hostile (hot) aggression: an act of aggression stemming from feelings of anger and aimed at inflicting pain -instrumental (cold) aggression: there is an intention to hurt another person, but the hurting takes place as a means to some other goal other than causing pain (ex: sports)
What gender differences are there in types of aggression?
In most circumstances, men behave far more aggressively than women (testosterone?); but when people are subjected to frustration or insult, women will react almost as aggressively as men. Men are more likely to interpret ambiguous situations as provocative than women are – and therefore more likely to react aggressively in what we would call everyday situations (being cut off in traffic, etc.) Gender differences from slides: -Males more physically and overtly aggressive -When people are provoked, gender differences are smaller -Females more likely to engage in indirect or relational aggression (do girls manipulate and boys fight?)
Review neural/chemical influences on aggression.
Certain chemicals have been shown to influence aggression. Seratonin seem to have an inhibiting effect on impulsive aggression; studies have shown that violent criminals have especially low levels of naturally produced serotonin. Too little serotonin leads to aggression – so does too much testosterone.
Why does alcohol foster increased aggression? What other situational factors seem to increase aggression? What environmental factor has been linked to riots and violent crime?
Alcohol increases aggression – serves as a disinhibitor, reduces social inhibitions, making people less cautious than they normally are. Alcohol also disrupts the way we process information so drunk people usually miss subtleties of situation (think someone steps on toe on purpose, etc.) -Environmental factors linked to riots and violent crime: HEAT, humidity, air pollution, offensive odors, etc.
What is a hostile attribution bias?
Hostile attribution bias describes a tendency to interpret the intent of others who create negative feelings for the individual as “hostile” when social cues fail to indicate a clear intent.
What is frustration-aggression theory?
Frustration-aggression theory: the idea that frustration – the perception that you are being prevented from attaining a goal – increases the probability of an aggressive response.
What situational factors might exacerbate aggression by someone who is frustrated?
Situational factors: -alcohol -pain, discomfort -frustration -relative deprivation -direct provocation or perceived -provocation (hostile attribution bias)
What are the effects of aggressive stimuli or cues (e.g., guns) in the presence of angry individuals? Be familiar with the Berkowitz & LePage ‘gun vs. badminton’ study.
-Berkowitz & LePage’s gun vs. badminton study: College students were made angry. Some of them were made angry in a room with a gun; others were made angry in a room with a neutral object (a badminton racquet). Participants then had to administer what they thought were electric shocks to a fellow college student. Those who had been in the presence of a gun administered more intense electric shocks than those made angry in the presence of the badminton racquet. Conclusion: aggressive cues, such as guns, tend to increase levels of aggression.
How does media violence affect those who are prone to violence to begin with and those who are not previously prone?
Seems that watching violent movies has the greatest impact on those who are already somewhat prone to violence. It may be that watching media violence in effect serves to give aggressive kids permission to express their aggression.
What are some reasons (your book gives 5) why media violence produces aggression?
1. “If they can do it, so can I” 2. Oh, so that’s how you do it!” – media violence gives people ideas 3. “Those feelings I am having must be real anger rather than simply a stressful day” -- watching media violence may put people more in touch with their feelings of anger, making an aggressive response more likely. 4. “Ho-hum, another brutal beating; what’s on the other channel?” – watching media violence reduces our sense of horror about violence and our sympathy for the victims…desensitizes viewer, making it more likely that he/she will lash out 5. I had better get him before he gets me!” – if watching a lot of TV makes me think the world is a dangerous place, I may be more apt to be hostile to a stranger that approaches me on the street.
What are the effects of viewing sexually explicit material, compared to viewing sexually violent material, on men’s acceptance of sexual violence or rape myths and actual aggressive behavior toward women? What about viewing a Playboy magazine centerfol
Studies show that exposure to violence pornography promotes a greater acceptance of sexual violence towards women and is almost certainly a factor associated with actual aggressive behavior toward women. -Prolonged exposure to depictions of sexual violence against women makes viewers more accepting of this kind of violence and less sympathetic toward the victim. This is true for both men and women! Slides: After watching sexually violent films, men reported greater acceptance of interpersonal violence towards women and somewhat greater acceptance of race myths than did men who had not seen these films. In contrast, for women who watched the sexually violent films, rating on two scales declined slightly.
Compare harsh vs. mild punishment as ways to reduce aggression. What can be learned from Olweus’s work on reducing bullying in Norway?
-the threat of harsh punishment for violent crimes only works as a deterrent when punishment is prompt and certain. Punishment must follow quickly after the violence and be unavoidable. -given these realities, severe punishment does not seem to deter violent crimes. Countries that invoke the death penalty do not seem to have fewer murders per capita than those without it. -Olweus pioneered an intervention program that used a combination of education and mild punishment to curb bullying in Norway (see page 398).
What is catharsis and does it reduce aggression?
Catharsis: the notion that “blowing off steam” – by performing an aggressive act, watching others engage in aggressive behaviors, or engaging in a fantasy of aggression – relieved built-up aggressive energies and hence reduces the likelihood of further aggressive behavior.
How does cognitive dissonance theory account for findings that aggression breeds subsequent aggression towards one’s victims?
Cognitive dissonance breaks aggression – When you hurt another person, you experience cog diss because cognition “I have hurt him” is dissonant with the cognition “I am a good person_. In order to reduce dissonance, you convince yourself that hurting that other person was not a bad thing to do – he deserved it, etc.
Why does a country’s involvement in war lead to an increase in its citizens’ aggression toward one another?
WAR: The fact that a nation is at war (1) weakens the population’s inhibitions against aggression (2) leads to imitation of aggression (3) makes aggressive responses more acceptable (4) numbs our senses to the horror of cruelty, making us less sympathetic towards the victims.
What does Aronson suggest is a major reason for the shootings at Columbine?
Aronson argued htat shooting was merely the tip of the iceberg – reacting to general school atmosphere that creates an environment of exclusion, mockery, and taunting (409).
Stereotypes are beliefs about others based solely on their membership in a particular group. -generalization about a group of people in which identical characteristics are assigned to virtually all members of the group, regardless of actual variation among the members; when formed, stereotypes are resistant to change on the basis of new information -stereotyping does not necessarily lead to intentional acts of abuse; often stereotyping is merely a technique that we use to simplify how we look at the world.
Prejudice are affective attitudes (usually negative) toward others based solely on their group membership.
Discrimination is negative or harmful behavior directed at others based solely on their group membership. -stereotypical beliefs often result in unfair treatment
What are the effects of gender stereotypes on attributions for achievement and failure by men and women?
Study found that if a man was successful on a given task, observers of both sexes attributed his success to ability; if a woman was successful at that same task, observers attributed her success to hard work. If a man failed on a given task, observers attributed his failure either to bad luck or to lower effort; if a woman failed, observers felt the task was simply too hard for her ability level.
What are the consequences of social categorization that facilitate prejudice?
-Social Categorization = putting people into groups based on certain characteristics and others into another group based on different characteristics. -consequence of social categorization: overestimation of differences between groups and under-estimation of differences within groups; in-group bias and out-group homogeneity
How do in-group bias and out-group homogeneity contribute to the formation and perpetuation of prejudice?
-In-group bias: positive feelings and special treatment for people we have identified as being part of our in-group and negative feelings and unfair treatment of others simply because we have identified them as being in the out-group. -Out-group homogeneity: perception that individuals in the out-group are more similar to each other than they really are, as well as more similar than the members of the in-group are.
How does Tajfel say that self-esteem is related to in-group bias?
-Tajfel said that the underlying motive for in-group bias is related to self-esteem. Individuals seek to enhance their self-esteem by identifying with specific social groups. Yet self-esteem will only be enhanced if the individual sees these groups as superior to other groups. (Ex: Klu Klux Klan – convinced themselves that white race was superior.)
Be familiar with how stereotypes can distort our perceptions of others (e.g., Sagar & Schofield’s ambiguous aggression study, the “Mark Flick” basketball study, Allport’s subway study).
PERCEPTION OF SIMILARITY TO STEREOTYPE -Sagar & Schofield’s ambiguous aggression study –found that ambiguous behavior (shoves) was interpreted more negatively when performed by a Black person than when it was performed by a white person. CONFIRMATION BIAS -Mark Flick basketball study – college students listened to a audiotape recording of a basketball game and looked at folder containing info about one of the players. Those who saw a photo of an African American male rated him as having more athletic ability and having played a better game than those who thought he was white. Those who thought he was white rated him as having greater hustle and greater basketball sense. -Allport’s subway study: study showed participants picture of two men (one white and one black) arguing on a subway train. Participants invariably remembered the weapon (razor) as being in the hands of the black man, when really it was in the hands of the white man.
Describe Devine’s two-step model of cognitive processing as it relates to stereotypes and prejudice. What is the role of automatic processes in the activation of stereotypes, and of controlled processes in disregarding the stereotype? Can the behavio
What Devine’s theory suggests is a two-step model of cognitive processing: the automatic processing brings up information – in this case, stereotypes—but the controlled (or conscious) processing can refute or ignore it. But what happens if you are busy, overwhelmed, distracted or not paying much attention? You may not initiate that controlled level of processing, meaning that the information supplied by the auto process – the stereotype – is still in your mind and unrefuted (page 431).
Greenberg & Pyszczynski study
Black debater and white debater. For half the group, the Black debater clearly presented better arguments; for other half, the white debater was clearly better. Just before the participants were asked to rate the debaters’ skills someone planted in the group either (1) made a highly racist remark (2) made a non-racist remark about the African American debater or (3) said nothing. Results: when the really racist comment was made participants rated the black debatersignificantly lower (but the non-racist comment and the no-comment had no effect). See page 429-430.
Rogers & Prentice-Dunn study
-Rogers & Prentice-Dunn study (page 430) – White students were told they would be inflicting electric shocks on another student, the “learner,” whom they were told was either White or Black. The students initially gave a lower intensity of shock to black learners than to white ones – reflecting a desire to show they were not prejudiced. The students then heard the learners making derogatory comments about them, which made them angry. As a result the students working with black learners took out their anger by giving black learners more intense shocks than those working with the white learners gave.
Devine studies
-Devine study – words were flashed in front of participants’ eyes and then read a story about a guy named “Donald” – whose race was not specified. Those who had seen words reflecting the stereotype of black Americans interpreted Donald significantly more negatively than those who saw the neutral words did. Stereotypes functioning at a sub-conscious level. -Devine also did an experiment where she asked participants to list all of the words they could think of that are used to describe Black students. The high-prejudice students listed significantly more words than the low-prejudice students did. In other words, the less prejudiced participants used their conscious processing to edit out negative stereotypes.
What is the justification-suppression model of prejudice?
According to this model, people struggle between their urge to express prejudice and their need to maintain a positive self-concept (as someone who is not a bigot). However, it requires energy to suppress prejudiced impulses. People are always looking for valid justification for holding negative attitudes towards a particular out-group. Once we find a valid justification for disliking this group, we can act against them and still feel as though we are not bigots (page 433).
How can we change someone’s stereotypical beliefs?
It is very hard to change people’s stereotypical beliefs – people usually don’t change their beliefs if they are presented with 2 or 3 pieces of evidence, usually consider these “exceptions to the rule” and come up with other reasons to justify their existing beliefs. On the other hand, it is possible to change people’s beliefs when you bombard them with many examples that are inconsistent with the stereotype.
How do illusory correlations perpetuate stereotypic thinking? What does distinctiveness have to do with illusory correlations?
Illusory correlation: tendency to see relationships, or correlations, between events that are actually unrelated -illusory correlations are most likely to occur when the events or people are distinctive or conspicuous – often the case with minorities because there are fewer of them. (Ex: meet two Jews who are bankers, associate Jews with money.)
What is realistic conflict theory? Be familiar with Sherif’s Robber’s Cave experiment and its implications for reducing prejudice.
Realistic conflict theory: the idea that limited resources lead to conflict between groups and result in increased prejudice and discrimination. Prejudiced attitudes tend to increase when times are tense and conflict exists over mutually exclusive goals – jobs, etc. -Sherif’ Robber’s Cave experiment -- See page 442-443. Hostility between two groups of boyscouts that have been kept apart from one another at a campsite – eventually came together and one group was mad that the other had gotten the good food, other group reacted in aggression and fight broke out.
What is modern prejudice/racism? When is it most likely to result in discrimination? How have “bogus pipeline” studies demonstrated its existence?
Modern prejudice: outwardly acting unprejudiced while inwardly maintaining prejudiced attitudes; people have learned to hide prejudice in order to avoid being labeled as racist, but when the situation becomes “safe,” their prejudice will be revealed. -“Bogus pipeline” studies: researchers told participants that the “bogus pipeline” was a lie detector. Participants indicated their attitudes either on a paper-and-pencil questionnaire or by using the bogus pipeline. The researchers found that students’ responses showed more racial prejudice when the bogus pipeline was used.
In what way are gender stereotypes a special case of stereotyping? For example, what distinguishes sexism from racism (other than the target)? What is benevolent sexism?
Benevolent sexists hold stereotypically positive views of women. Their views are often chivalrous in nature. (Harmful to target because it is limiting.) Beneath it all, benevolent sexists assume that women are the weaker sex. Idealize them romantically and as good cooks/mothers and want to protect them when they do not need protection⬦serves to relegate women to traditional roles in society.
What is stereotype threat, and how might it explain differences in achievement?
Stereotype threat: members of stigmatized groups fear being reduced to the negative group stereotype in a given situation. Most likely if identity and self-esteem are invested in the situation. Produces anxiety and avoidance, resulting in lower or uncharacteristic performance. Ex: African Americans in standardized testing situations (scored lower when told that the test was test of intellectual ability) -women did worse on test if they were wearing swimsuit and looking in mirror. Men in swimsuit were unaffected
What are the six conditions necessary to reduce prejudice when there is contact between groups?
-mutual interdependence -common goal -equal status -informational impersonal contact -multiple contacts -supportive social norms of equity
How does the jigsaw classroom address these conditions, and why does it work in reducing prejudice?
Jigsaw classroom: After desegregation of schools in 1971 Texas, teachers had trouble because fights between whites, blacks, and Mexicans. Aronson came into the school and developed a technique that created an inter-dependent classroom atmosphere designed to place students of various racial and ethnic groups in persuit of common goals to reduce tension. -racially, academically mixed groups -each group vital for learning, teaching, and completing task -students liked others and school more, had higher self-esteem and less prejudice, and academic scores improved for racial minorities.
In the United States, what age group has the highest rate of self-reported loneliness?
18-24 year olds
What do propinquity and the mere exposure effect have to do with attraction?
-Propinquity (proximity) – the finding that the more we see and interact with people, the more likely they are to become our friends. The propinquity effect works because of the mere exposure effect: the finding that the more exposure we have to a stimulus, the more apt we are to like it
What other factors determine initial attraction?
-Similarity (birds of a feather): Research proves that it is overwhelmingly similarity – not complementarity – that draws people together. Similarity in terms of personality, interests/experiences, and inter-personal style (high-skill people who saw social interactions as complicated and complex are attracted to other high-skills; same with low-skill attracted to other low-skill). -Reciprocal liking: Whether the cues are nonverbal or verbal, perhaps the most crucial determinant of whether we will like person A is the extent to which we believe person A likes us. -Physical attractiveness: it may be that men are more likely than women to say that physical attractiveness is important to them in a potential friend, date or mate but when it comes to actual behavior the sexes are similar in response to physical attractiveness.
What explains why we seem to prefer computerized “composite” faces?
See page 316. We seem to prefer to computerized “composite” faces because we are attracted to features that more closely resemble the averages, not the extremes. Participants judged the composite photograph – the arithmetic average of all faces – more attractive than all the separate faces that helped make the composite. -but note that the composite of average looking people did not necessarily have all the qualities that people cross-culturally believed were “most attractive”. it was just that the average looking composite was considered more attractive than the photos of the individual average looking people that made up that composite.
Know the “what is beautiful is good” implicit personality theory stereotype and how it might produce self-fulfilling prophecies. [Be familiar with Snyder et al.’s phone conversation study (p. 318-319).] To what degree is the stereotype accurate?
“What is beautiful is good” – many studies have found that physical attractiveness affects the attributions people make about the attractive. People attribute positive qualities to beautiful people that have nothing to do with their looks. -has to do with self-fulfilling prophecies because the way we treat people affects how they behave and ultimately how they perceive themselves -Snyder et al.’s phone conversation study: men were told that they would have a phone conversation with the woman whose picture they were shown. The men who thought they were talking to an attractive woman responded to her in a warmer, more sociable manner than the men who thought they were talking to an unattractive woman. Not only that – the way the men talked to the woman actually influenced the way the woman responded.
What are the basic concepts of social exchange theory?
Social exchange theory holds that how people feel (positively or negatively) about their relationships will depend on (1) their perception of the rewards they receive from the relationship, (2) their perception of the costs they incur, and (3) their perception of what kind of relationship they deserve and the probability that they could have a better relationship with someone else. BASIC CONCEPTS OF SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY: REWARDS, COSTS, OUTCOME AND COMPARISON LEVEL
What is the difference between comparison level and comparison level for alternatives?
-Comparison Level: People’s expectations about the level of rewards and punishments they are likely to receive in a particular relationship -Comparison Level for alternatives: people’s expectations about the level of rewards and punishments they would receive in an alternative relationship
How does social equity theory differ from social exchange theory? Recognize examples.
Some researchers have criticized social exchange theory for ignoring an essential variable in relationships – the notion of fairness, or equity. Proponents of equity theory argue that people are not just out to get the most rewards for the least cos; they are also concerned about equity in their relationships – wherein the rewards and costs they experience and the contributions they make to the relationship are equal to those that their partner makes. These theorists describe equitable relationships as the happiest and most stable. -Equity theory: the idea that people are happiest with relationships in which the rewards and costs experienced and the contributions made by both parties are roughly equal.
How do social exchange theory and equity theory play out in long-term relationships? What does investment add to social exchange theory?
-Equity theory: exchange relationships vs. communal relationships Communal relationships are based on concern for the partner, whereas exchange relationships are based on quid-pro-quo (more or less an equal exchange) --Social Exchange Theory includes the Investment model -- investments are defined as anything people have put into a relationship that will be lost if they leave it. To predict whether people will stay in an intimate relationship, we need to know (1) how satisfied they are with the relationship, (2) what they think of the alternatives, and (3) how great their investment in the relationship is.
Distinguish between compassionate and passionate love.
-Compassionate love: the intimacy and affection we feel when we care deeply for a person but do not experience passion or arousal in the person’s presence -Passionate love: an intense longing we feel for a person, accompanied by physiological arousal; when our love is reciprocated, we feel great fulfillment and ecstasy, but when it is not, we feel sadness and despair.
What are the combinations of intimacy, passion, and commitment that produce the various types of love in Sternberg’s triangular theory of love?
Sternberg’s triangular theory of love – combinations of intimacy, passion, and commitment produce 7 types of love (8 if you count, “non-love): 1. Romantic love =Intimacy + Passion 2. Fatuous love = Passion + Commitment 3. Compassionate love = Intimacy + Commitment 4. Liking = Intimacy (alone) 5. Infatuation = Passion (alone) 6. Empty love = Commitment (alone) *7. Consummate Love = Intimacy + Passion + Commitment
According to the relational dialectics model, how do the three opposing pairs of forces in close relationships relate to the progress in a relationship?
These are the three opposing pairs of forces in close relationships: -autonomy : connectedness -novelty : predictability -openness : closedness
Describe the investment model’s typology of the four types of behavior that occur in troubled relationships.
Four types of behavior that occur in troubled relationships. First two are destructive behaviors: -actively harming the relationship (abusing the partner, threatening to break up, actually leaving) -passively allowing the relationship to deteriorate (refusing to deal with problems, ignoring the partner or spending less time together, putting no energy into the relationship) Other two responses are positive, constructive behaviors: -actively trying to improve the relationship (discussing probs, trying to change, etc.) -passively remaining loyal to the relationship (waiting and hoping that the situation will improve, being supportive rather than fighting, remaining optimistic)
How does relational dialectics explain the dissolution of relationships?
Relational dialects say that the dissolution of a relationship is the result of tensions resulting from conflicting emotional needs that are not met.
How do the after-effects of a breakup differ for those in the breaker, breakee, and mutual roles?
Do people want to remain friends after a breakup? Women are more interested than men in staying friends when they are in the breakee or breaker role; men and women are equally interested in staying friends when the relationship ended by a mutual decision.
What are Gottman’s “four horsemen of the apocalypse” that doom marriages to failure? What research methodology did he use to identify them?
Criticism Defensiveness Withdrawal Contempt -methodology: direct observation of couples
What approaches are more likely to elicit compliance to a request, and why? Understand the foot-in-the-door and the door-in-the-face techniques and why they are effective.
-give a reason (any reason) -two-step requests—sequence of two related requests uses the first request as a trap, the second elicits the compliant response -foot-in-the-door: begin with a very small request, secure agreement. Then make a separate larger request. -door-in-the-face: begin with a very large request that will be rejected. Follow up a rejection with a more modest request.
Be familiar with Milgram’s studies. What forces were at work in influencing obedience? What percentage of participants obeyed all the way up to 450 volts? What were some of the variations Milgram performed on his initial experiment, and what effect d
-forces at work in influencing obedience:  Normative social influence  Informational social influence  The “bait and switch” of norms  Self-justification & the “slippery slope”  Moral disengagement -65% of participants obeyed to 450 volts -variations: *commands/no commands from experimenter (no commands decrease to 3% obedience) *location of experiment (decrease when located in office building) *status of the authority (ordinary person as authority decreased obedience) *participants’ proximity to victim (farther the victim is from the participant the higher obedience) *presence of confederates who rebel (rebellion causes a strong decrease in obedience)
What is social facilitation?
-Social facilitation: when presence of others energizes us; the tendancy for people The tendency for people to do better on simple tasks and worse on complex tasks when in the presence of others and when their individual performance can be evaluated.
What does arousal have to do with it and why does the presence of others cause arousal?
-Arousal: 1. The presence of others increases physiological arousal. 2. When arousal exists, easier to do something simple or well-learned (the dominant response); harder to do something complex or new. -Why does the presence of others cause arousal? ⬢ Others increase our alertness and vigilance ⬢ Others induce evaluation apprehension ⬢ Others are a distraction -> divided attention
What is social loafing? What is the explanation for its occurrence? What are some cultural and gender differences in its occurrence?
-social loafing: when the presence of others relaxes us; the tendency for people to do worse on simple tasks but better on complex tasks when in the presence of others and their individual performance can’t be evaluated. -cultural and gender differences: -Men more than women -Western cultures more than Asian *Why? -Greater relational interdependence -More interdependent view of self
Social loafing is not inevitable. I described 6 conditions where it’s less likely to happen, the first of which was when people believe their own performance can be identified and evaluated (so social facilitation occurs). What are the other five? Wh
-Other 5 conditions: ⬢ Task is important or meaningful to performers ⬢ They believe their own efforts are necessary for successful outcome ⬢ Group expects to be punished for poor performance ⬢ Group is very small ⬢ Group is cohesive
What is deindividuation and how does it affect our behavior? What are two explanations for why it leads to an increase in impulsive and sometimes deviant acts? How could deindividuation lead to more prosocial behavior?
-deindividuation: The loosening of normal constraints on behavior when in a crowd -> an increase in impulsive and deviant acts. -two explanations: *People feel less accountable *Obedience to group norms increases
Be familiar with Fiedler’s contingency theory of leadership. With stereotypical gender differences in leadership style (and the double-bind for women).
-the idea that leadership effectiveness depends both on how task-oriented the leader is and on the amount of control and influence the leader has over the group *task-oriented vs. relationship-oriented *low, moderate, high control situations -task-oriented leaders do well in high-control work situations and low-control work situations while relationship-oriented leaders are more effective in moderate-control work situations -double-blind for women: If they conform to societal expectations about how they ought to behave, by being warm and communal, they are often perceived to have low leadership potential. If they succeed in attaining a leadership position and act in ways that leaders are expected to act they are often perceived negatively for not acting like a women should.
What are some sources of process loss in groups? When are group members more likely to share unique information?
-process loss: any interaction that inhibits good problem solving. Occurs when: - Group doesn’t ID most competent member - Most competent member has low status - Most competent member can’t break from normative conformity - There are communication problems - Failure to share unique information -Unshared/unique info more likely to be shared: - Later in the process - When it is especially diagnostic - When members are responsible for specific areas of expertise
What are the antecedents, symptoms, and consequences of groupthink? (Figure 9.5) What measures can be taken to reduce or avoid groupthink?
-antecedents: *group is highly cohesive *group isolation *direct leader *high stress *poor decision-making procedures -symptoms: *illusion of invulnerability *belief in the moral correctness of the group *stereotypes views of out-group *self-censorship *direct pressure on dissenters to conform *illusion of unanimity *mindguards -consequesnces: *incomplete survey of alternatives * Failure to examine risks of the favored alternative *poor information search *failure to develop contingency plans -measure taken to reduce/avoid groupthink Leaders remaining impartial - Soliciting outside opinions - Breaking into subgroups first - Assigning a “devil’s advocate” - Using secret ballots or computerized group support systems
What is group polarization? What are two explanations for it? How is it different from the risky shift?
- tendency for groups to make decisions that are more extreme than the initial inclinations of its members. Why? -Persuasive arguments interpretation -Social comparison interpretation -risky shift: groups make riskier decision than individuals do
What are social dilemmas, including public goods and commons dilemmas? What is the Prisoner’s Dilemma? Try to be in a cooperative frame of mind for the exam.
-Social dilemmas – conflicts in which the most beneficial action for the individual will, if chosen by many, have harmful effects on all. -public goods dilemma: a social dilemma in which individuals must contribute to a common pool in order to maintain the public good -commons dilemma: a social dilemma in which everyone takes from a common pool of goods that will replentish itself if used in moderation, but will disappear if overused -prisoners’ dilemma: each of two criminals is offered immunity from prosecution in exchange for a confession. If both stay silent, both get off with a light sentence on a minor charge. If both confess, both receive a moderate sentence. But if one turns state’s evidence while the other stays mum, the confessing criminal goes free and the silent on spends a long time in jail.
What factors promote and sustain conflict escalation? What are the consequences of using threats while playing mixed-motive games? When does communication help? Be familiar with the “trucking game” study. (I believe this is on page 301.)
-factors that promote and sustain conflict escalation: • Group polarization process • Pressures for conformity • Entrapment • Premature use of threat capacity • Negative perceptions of “the other” -> increased “us” vs. “them” -consequences of using threats while playing mixed-motive games
What is meant by integrative solutions?
-Integrative solutions – each side concedes the most on issues less important to them -> both parties gain more than they would have from equal division of contested resources.
What is the “culture of honor?”
-Within the US, “culture of honor” within the South and West *where men were literally quick on the trigger if they thought another man was about to smear their reputation—or rustle their cattle
What are the most effective ways of dealing with pent-up anger? What is the most effective way to reduce the anger of someone you’ve offended?
-most effective ways of dealing with pent up anger: *make a clear, calm, and simple statement indicating that you are feeling angry and describing, nonjudgmentally, precisely what your friend/spouse did to bring about these feelings *write down thoughts in a journal -most effective way to reduce the anger of someone you’ve offended: *take responsibility for the action, apologize for it, and indicate that it is unlikely to happen again
What did the McKnight et al. (2004) study (of 4th grade girls’ interaction) find was the most effective strategy for dealing with a peer’s aggression?
The study found that the greatest positive outcome as the victim response came when using de-escalation.
hat egoistic explanation for Batson’s findings is given by the negative state relief model?
-negative state relief model: idea the people help in order to alleviate their own sadness and distress *helping in a way that deals with the cause of our sadness (ex. Helping a charity reduces our gloom, even though the charity and our friend’s unhappiness are unrelated.)
What does it matter whether people help for altruistic or egoistic reasons? (e.g., predicting when help is likely to occur, the study about determinants of who remained volunteers longer in helping those with AIDS).
Empathy and altruism explanations: If we feel empathy -> attempt to help regardless of the costs. If we don’t feel empathy -> social exchange theory takes over.
What characteristics or perceived characteristics of a person make it more likely that someone will help them (from lecture)?
-the person is perceived to need help -the helper/victim mentality -gender bias
Know the qualifications regarding gender differences in the importance of physical attractiveness (attitudes vs. behavior, in a potential sexual partner vs. potential marriage partner).
Both sexes rank physical attractiveness as the most highly desirable characteristic in a potential sexual partner. Men rank physical attractiveness higher than women for a marriage partner. Physical attractiveness is the most important characteristic that triggers sexual desire.
How do social exchange theory and equity theory play out in long-term relationships?
Social exchange theory says that if the rewards are less than the costs of a relationship, it will not last (also involved comparison theory). Equity theory says that if a relationship is not equitable, it will not be stable (being undervalued is worse than overvalued).
Given a description of an advertisement, be prepared to tell whether it’s targeting central or peripheral processing, and to recognize why the advertisers might have taken that particular approach.
Central advertising: if personally relevant, use logical, fact-based arguments Peripheral advertising: if not directly relevant, use peripheral cues like emotion or positive environments
How do social psychologists explain what happened at Jonestown?
People were isolated, allies were eliminated, he sucked them in and then made it impossible to leave both geographically and psychologically
How does the Implicit Association Test work? (i.e., what is the reasoning behind its use) Which of Devine’s two steps of processing (see Question 6 in Ch. 13) does it involve? What do its developers say the IAT is assessing?
The IAT was originally developed as a device for exploring the unconscious roots of thinking and feeling The IAT asks you to pair two concepts (e.g., young and good, or elderly and good). The more closely associated the two concepts are, the easier it is to respond to them as a single unit. So, if young and good are strongly associated, it should be easier to respond faster when you are asked to give the same response (i.e. the \'E\' or \'I\' key) to these two. If elderly and good are not so strongly associated, it should be harder to respond fast when they are paired. This gives a measure of how strongly associated the two types of concepts are. The more associated, the more rapidly you should be able to respond. First, we might not always be willing to share our private attitudes with others. Second, we may not be aware of some of our own attitudes. Your results on the IAT may include both components of control and awareness.

Deck Info