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

Psych Test Chapters 8-13


undefined, object
copy deck
analogical representation
non-arbitrary correspondence (picture of cat looks like real cat)
symbolic representation
purely arbitrary correspondence (word CAT looks nothing like a cat but still represents it)
directed thinking
thinking with a purpose -> thinking used to solve problems and make decisions
obstacles to problem solving:
mental set
the way you conceive of a problem in your head determines how easily you'll be able to solve it
obstacles to problem solving:
functional fixedness
special case of mental set
-> when you see something as serving one function, it is difficult to consider that it could serve another
obstacles to problem solving:
sometimes problems are more easily solved when you take a break -> allows you to dispose of ineffective mental sets
inductive reasoning
specific -> general
(take a specific instance and generalize about all similar instances)
deductive reasoning
general -> specific
(take a general rule and make assumptions about something specific)
a problem-solving strategy in which you try every possible solution -> can be very slow, but guarantees that you will find the solution
short-cut that helps you see which solutions are most likely to be plausible -> saves time, but doesn't guarantee that you'll find the solution
availability heuristic
make judgments based on most readily available info -> use what comes easiest to mind
representativeness heuristic
make judgments based on uniformity presumption, like taco bell tacos represent essence of "taconess"
confirmation bias
people are slanted towards confirming their own hypotheses -> people hate to be wrong!
framing effects
people will be risk aversive to keep what they've already gained
properties of language:
1) can understand language even if you've never heard that combination of words before
2) if there isn't a word for what you mean, you can make one up ("open system")
properties of language:
language is a set of arbitrary symbols which do not directly correspond to the ideas they represent
properties of language:
grammar/syntax -> words themselves are arbitrary, but the number of combinations of words that can still convey meaning are limited
properties of language:
multiple connotations
"duality" -> same sound can convey different meanings depending upon the context (we won the game, we're number one)
properties of language:
language consists of separate and distinct words, but speakers express words in a continuous stream with no space between words -> if you are fluent in a language you know how to "parse" the stream of words
properties of language:
language is confusing and ambiguous without an interpersonal context through which it can be interpreted
are animals capable of language acquisition and use?
YES and NO -> higher primates cannot learn to speak, but can learn sign language, HOWEVER although they have a large vocab they do not have grammar/syntax
extrinsic motivation
acts performed for external purposes (e.g. mowing the lawn to get money)
intrinsic motivation
acts performed for their own sake (e.g. playing piano because you love music)
when do extrinsic rewards undermine performance?
when the activity is both interesting (attractive) and complex
extrinsic rewards and influence on learning process:
when expecting a reward, people choose easier problems that are less interesting
extrinsic rewards and influence on learning process:
when expecting a reward, people begin guessing earlier, ask redundant questions, and guess more after positive feedback than negative
extrinsic rewards and influence on learning process:
people stop when they get the reward even if they aren't finished
extrinsic rewards and influence on learning process:
people are less likely to do something again once they've been rewarded
how do extrinsic rewards affect overal learning?
they make learning less efficient
extrinsic rewards and influence on attitude:
people like some things less the more they are rewarded
-> cannot find an external justification so must justify instrinsically
what happens when people are rewarded for an interesting task?
reward = like it less, and may actually do it less in the future
what happens when people are not rewarded for an interesting task?
no reward = like it, continue to do it
extrinsic motivation and influence on creativity
creativity is significantly diminished when people are rewarded for doing things they already like
extrinsic motivation and influence on reactions to failure
extrinsically motivated people get angry and give up when they fail; intrinsically motivated people try again and try harder when they fail
when do extrinsic rewards enhance intrinsic motivation?
- when rewards are perceives as efforts to control our behavior, they are damaging to motivation
- when rewards are perceived as conveying info about our competence, they have no bad effect and sometimes have a positive effect on motivation
when do extrinsic rewards enhance intrinsic motivation?
when the reward is disproportionate to the task, people focus on the reward and lose intrinsic motivation
what is thinking?
cognitive OPERATIONS on SCHEMAS (internal representations)
how to people learn?
assimilation and accomodation -> to learn, you have to be able to connect new info to what you know already
putting new knowledge into existing schemas by making connections between new and old info
schemas acquire more complex information by becoming qualitatively different
stages of development:
- no schemas
- no operations
- lack object permanence
stages of development:
- object permanence
- simple representations (schemas)
- no operations
egocentrism in pre-operational stage
kids cannot imagine a perspective other than their own
lack of conservation in pre-operational stage
kids can't see when things remain the same if they appear to have changed
stages of development:
- schemas
- operations BUT no abstract operations (algebra)
stages of development:
- schemas
- operations
- abstract concepts
- probabilities
- hypothesis testing
what was Piaget wrong about?
- kids know a lot more a lot earlier than he thought
- many cognitive changes are the result of maturation independent of experience
why do infants get attached to their parents?
you don't love your mom, you love the food she gives you
why do infants get attached to their parents?
positive reinforcement -> monkeys liked cloth mothers better than wire ones because they liked the "contact comfort"
attachment theory
all infants form attachments to reduce anxiety
what does the specific quality of the attachment depend on?
the character of the parent-child relationship
does attachment influence anything else?
YES - the quality of the original attachment influences all subsequent interpersonal relationships later in life
Three mothering styles
1) responsive, consistent, flexible
2) overbearing, agitated, anxious
3) cruel and indifferent
Three kinds of attachment:
explore while mother is present, distress when she leaves, enthusiastic when she returns (and renewed exploration)
Three kinds of attachment:
very little or no exploration while mother is present, substantial distress when she leaves, clingy and angry when she returns
Three kinds of attachment:
very little or no exploration while mother is present, no distress when she leaves, completely ignores her when she comes back
who we want to be, how we wish to be perceived, and how we perceive ourselves
Cooley's looking-glass self
other people largely (entirely?) influence our self-concept
the ability to look within oneself to gain self-knowledge
self-perception theory
we come to know ourselves in precisely the same way we come to understand other people (self-knowledge is not as direct as "introspection")
behaviors shape attitudes: FOOT IN THE DOOR TECHNIQUE
people are more likely to comply with a greater request if they had previously complied with a smaller one
cognitive dissonance
⬢ when two beliefs we hold are plainly inconsistent with each other, or when there is conflict between what we believe and what we actually do
when do attitudes predict behavior?
- when attitudes are strong
- situational pressures
- when attitudes are enmeshed, not isolated
- when the definition of an attitude is very specific
explicit attitudes
attitudes we are aware of and could express if asked about them
implicit attitudes
attitudes revealed only indirectly, like through our behavior in certain situations
attitude priming
people are primed to make certain associations, which can run contrary to explicity held beliefs
above-average effect
a tendency people have to view themselves as above-average
why does the above-average effect occur?
1) we neglect memories of occasions when we have done badly
2)by appropriately redefining success or excellence, each of us can conclude that we are the ones who are successful
self-serving bias
people tend to take credit for successes but deny responsibility for failures; extended to groups we belong to
impression management
we are "acting" or putting on a front in social situations
one arranges an obstacle to one's own performance, so that if failure occurs, it will be attributed to the obstacle and not to one's own performance
central trait
trait that determines perception of the whole
first impression
creates framework which guide our subsequent perceptions of a person
social cognition
we can be primed to think certain things about people based on the schemas we know
why can social schemas be bad?
sometimes our preconceptions turn out to be wrong and we use the wrong schema to interpret the situationsometimes our preconceptions turn out to be wrong and we use the wrong schema to interpret the situation
when schemas are simplified and applied to whole groups, so that we talk about all members of that group as if they were alike
illusory correlations
we see correlations where they do not exist because we note and remember certain co-occurrences more than others and then apply them to new situations
out-group homogeneity effect
members of a group tend to see members of other groups as more alike than members of their own
fundamental attribution error
a tendency to ascribe people's behavior to their nature and not to their situation
actor-observer difference in attribution
when we are the observers, we tend to emphasize dispositional factors, but when we are the actors, we conclude that the responsibility lies with the external situations
social comparison
process of validating our own reactions by looking at the way others react
why do people conform?
1) information is ambiguous, so we turn to others to find out the missing information
2) people disguise what they really believe and conform to prevent embarrassment
what makes good people do terrible things?
the situation they are in or role they are made to play; also, dehumanization of the victim
social impact theory
the more targets the social influence reaches, the less impact each target will experience (stage fright is less with more co-performers)
social loafing
when people work together on the same task, they each generate less effort
social facilitation
we do better in front of other people
what makes a leader?
personal qualities as well as situational factors
group polarization
groups make more extreme decisions than individuals do
crowd behavior/pandemonium:
an single person in a group loses awarenss of himself as an individual
collectivist societies
people are considered to be fundamentally interdependent, and the emphasis is on obligations within one's family and immediate community
individualist societies
people are viewed as independent, separable entities; the emphasis is on the ways a person can stand out through achieving private goals
a group to which someone is tied by traditional bonds
a group to which someone shares no bonds
courtship rituals
behaviors that convey one's reproductive intentions
halo effect
tendency to assume that people with one trait possess others -> applies to both good and bad traits
matching hypothesis in relationships
there will be a strong correlation between the physical attractiveness of two partners
what's attractive cross-culturally?
symmetry, averageness or exaggeration of averageness, no visible deformities, waist-to-hip ratio
proximity and relationships
people are more likely to get together if they are near each other
a powerful tendency for like to choose like
several members of one sex mating with one member of the other
one member of each sex mating
sexual dimorphism
a pronounced difference in the size or bodily structure of the two sexes
one man with lots of women
-> this is what humans tend toward
Romeo-and-Juliet effect
parental opposition tends to intensify a couple's romantic passion rather than to diminish it
romantic love
passionate and short-lived
companionate love
emphasizes companionship and mutual trust and care, not as much passion
drives humans apart or drives them to fight with each other
area that an animal defends as its exclusive preserve
personal space
the physical zone surrounding us whose intrusion we guard against
dominance hierarchy
each member of the group has an assigned status
kin-selection hypothesis
unselfish behavior should be more common among relatives than among unrelated individuals
reciprocal altruism
if one individual helps another and that other later reciprocates, the ultimate result is a benefit to both
reciprocity principle
we feel that we somehow must repay whatever we have been given
reciprocity and self-disclosure
revealing something personal about oneself causes other people to feel like they should reveal something about themselves
bystander effect
people don't act in a situation of emergency
why does the bystander effect occur?
ambiguity about situation, feel weird about acting if no one is acting
attribution-of-arousal theory
bodily arousal provides only the raw materials for an emotional experience, and raw experience turns into emotion with appraisal and interpretation
excitation transfer
arousal produced in one setting is attributed to, and thus influences, an entirely different setting
cultural display rules
learned but deeply ingrained conventions, often obeyed without awareness, that govern what facial expressions may or may not be shown in what contexts
basic emotions
emotions that are hardwired, adaptive, automatic, and the result of natural selection
when do we feel guilty?
when we could have controlled the circumstances that produced a bad outcome
comparing what one did with what one could have done

Deck Info