social psych final exam

Start Studying!

Terms

undefined, object

copy deck

STEREOTYPING: 3 components involved in process of stereotyping: a)CATEGORIZE TARGET => what group in (obvious, visual char M or F/race)

b)ATTRIBUTE SET CHAR. all INDIV. CATEGORY MEMBERS=> assume everyone in group has these things(all UI prof liberal)

c)ATTRIBUTE SET CHAR. any INDIV. CATEGORY=> that indiv. has those traits

MANY MISTAKES OCCUR!!!!
STEREOTYPE: cog. strategies result in reconstruction social memories: 1. new info target bring to mind pre-existing, well- defined beliefs (sterotypes)

2. Stereotype initiates & guides process of remembering -look info. fits stereotypes
a)PREFERENTIAL SEARCH: seach past/ detail becomes relevant
b)FILL IN GAPS: w/ stereotypes you have (watch certian shows)
c)SELECTIVE REINTERP: know info/ interp it/ remember events that way
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: 1. competition vs. 2. cooperation: 1. are striving for resources and goals

2. work together in group situaiton for same grade
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: deutsch findings cooperative vs. competitive study: -grades based on rank then less dependnecy/interest being respeted by other group members

- (-) group relations

- NOT ALL competitive or cooperative but BOTH
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: mixed- motive situation: -both cooperative and competitive working in groups
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: Prisoners Dilemma Game a mixed-motive situation: -have to decide if other person is in it to cooperate w/ you ro be comptetitive w/ you (decides outcome)
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: lab situations social traps show: -people get very greedy very quickly- clean out pool very fast

-think better get it quickly before everyone else does
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: factors help participants escape social trap: 1.EXPERIENCE: understand situation - been in before

2.COMMUNICATION: talk about this before each drew
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: why communication up confilict: -not always able to bargin
(THREATS NOT USEFUL)
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: Deutsch and Krauss: DESIGN: SHOW WHAT COMMUNICATON CAN DO AND HOW THREATS UP CONFLICT

-each Ss has road and has destination

-get rewards base how fast get truck there

-one way road clearly shorter
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: Deutsch and Krauss: PROCEDURE: -get truck pt. A to pt. B

-Put IV = power to threaten
1)UNILATERAL THREAT: Acme given one gate block other
2)BILATERAL THREAT: both have gate
3)CONTROL: was no gate
(behavioral and verbal threats)

DV= earnings: .60 delivery, operating costs: .01/ sec
MAIN DV: profit/ loss
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: Deutsch and Krauss: RESULTS: 1. control $1.00 profit

2. Unilateral threat: $2.03 loss

3. bilateral threat: $4.25 loss

-threats and weapons used if avaliable (esculated conflict)
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: "conflict spiral": -every trial conflict esculates or gets bigger
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: attributions contribute conflict spiral: -evil other

-they are responsible problems I am having

-*about competitor become bias
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: Roles: 1.commitment 2.entrapment play in conflict spiral: 1. to particular strategy- defend actions

2. extreme commitment leads you to be trapt
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: arousal influence communications during conflict situations: -anxiety and tensions= everything ends being emotional display

-blame others/ hostile joking
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: norm of reciprocity influence conflict: -obligated to harm others harm you
(eye for an eye)
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: 1. compromise 2. problem solving: 1.settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions

2.to find a solution, explanation, or answer for a question raised for inquiry, consideration, or solution
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: strategies rebuild trust btwn parties in conflict (instil trust): 1.COMMUNICATE: your intensions specific terms reference cooperation/ fairness

2.CREDIABILITY AND CONSISTENCY: back (1) w/ actual consistent behavior match words w/ behavior

3.TIT-FOR-TAT STRATEGY: encounter competition repond w/ cooperation they continue compete you start competition
(match them)
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: negotiation: -inviolves reciprical communication process
-see both sides
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: functions 3rd party intervention (6) 1-3: 1.REFEREE: down hostility/ allow both sides express views orderly fashioon
(controlled enviornment)

2.CORRECT MISUNDERSTANDINGS: useful mend communication break down/ if things been made up clairity

3.ALLOW FACESAVING: get sides to conceid w/o being embarasses/ make concessions look reasonable
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: functions 3rd party intervention (6) 4-6: 4.OFFER ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS: find ways at least get them talking

5.MANIP ENVIRO: how seated/ time day/ setup agenda- START SMALL!
(reciprosity start going well)

6.PROVIDE GUIDANCE: how go about problem solving this issue
SOCIAL DILEMMAS: conflict always bad?: -no, can stablilize group after

-conflict/ consequense any group interaction
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: Define: -presense of others affect up indiv. performance
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: little research done 1940-1965 why?: -theory not true thought!
-inconsistent Lit then
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: meaning E=HxD (learning theory): 1.E = EXCITATORY POTENTIAL: performance # correct answeres/speed

2.H = HABIT: strength habit => dominant response/ well learned/
practiced

3.D = DRIVE: deprivation (results from)
ex: hungry/ generalized excitment

(x) = more
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: drive effect performance simple tasks: -w/ others performance up

HARD TASK:

-arousal mult. against other things and deteriorate response correct responses not dominant to you
-performance impared
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: Sum Zajonc's drive theory basic pts.: 1. OTHERS PRESENT: drive theory

2.UP AROUSAL: when others present
(assumption 1 and 2)

3.w/ others performance up
HARD TASKS;
-arousal mult. against other things and derterioate response correct responses not diminat to you
-performance impaired
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: Zajonc's cockroach procedures: -adult female cockroaches =>reward dark box when flood light goes on

-some easy task =>habitual
some hard task =>not well practiced

-manip. presense audiance
IV = task difficulty
DV = running speed
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: Zajonc's cockroach findings: -found animals easy task did better w/ presense other than w/o

-complex presense other = up running time

-can be seen in humans as well
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: mere presense others explain social facilitization: -simple presens others up drive

-species mates most important organism in our world

-species mates some what unpredictable -why uncertinaty up = up drive
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: Smith et al. test social facilitization procedure: -type name (easy task) presense others

-IV difficult task and audiance
easy = name only
hard = name backwards and (+) digits hearing at same time
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: Smith et al. test social facilitization findings: -simple presense others up drive

-mere presense complex:
-stress... others sometimes down arousal
-sometimes other induce social facilitization in eval. situations

-did not makkter if others see or hear you or not
Graph:
Eval. Mere Presents None
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: learn drive perspective explain social facilitization: -others source learned drive up effect

-species mates up drive arousal assoc. w/ rewards and punishments

-DRIVE INDUCED THROUGH LEARNING!!
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: Distract/conflict theory: critical factor Soc. Facil. effects: -CONFLICT: presense others distraction inhances drive state attend action or audiance = more back and forth = conflict = up in drive

-any attn. conflit induces "social" facilitization effects
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: Distract/conflict theory: attn. conflict: -OTHERS DISTRACTING: want to compare performance of others to yours = change to match theirs

-task distraction bother external and internal
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: Non drive approaches: summary self-awarness theory account for Soc. Facil.: -self conciousness difficult task - impare performance
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: Non drive approaches: self presentation and perception related to Soc. Facil: -DIFFICULT TASK: audiance make you embarassasment and w/ drawl
SOCIAL FACILITIZATION: Non drive approaches: 3 limitations self-related explainations Soc. Facil: 1.requires at least 2 steps
-presense others one step

2.mirror and other people viewed as part of distraction

3.DONT WORK W/ ANIMALS!!
AGGRESSION: child respond when witness violence: a)DISTRESS= watch agg.= cover eyes/ cry (variety of reactions)

b)IMITATION= adults done child models it (hit/fight)

c)more likely fight even mroe after watch 2nd time (cummulative effect)
AGGRESSION: how can excitation (initial transfer to agg. behavior)transfer faciclitate agg.: have aversive experience up arousal => heart rate/BP => up agg.

ex: sprint to catch plane= fly off handel more
AGGRESSION: implications childhood exposure violence has adult behavior: -watch adults as an example (modeling)

-abused = abuse own children

-witness adults fighting more likely grown up more violent
STEREOTYPE: likely steps in behavioral confirmation: 1.ANTICIPATE: anticipate interation/ think hostile then prepare for that

2.IMAGINE: what likely to happen (never met)

3.IMAGINED BEHAVIOR STEREOTYPE CONSISTENT: visualize their behaviors as consistent w/ stereotypes

4.IMAGINARY BEHAIVOR GUIDES OWN BEHAVIOR: may obtain response you imagined b/c you set it up to confirm what expected
AGGRESSION: mechanism explains effects of agg. (relevan to agg. behavior) cues: -PRIMING = assoc w/ agg.
ex: prime agg. = beep horn!

-more cog. assissable => prime => agg. behavior
AGGRESSION: mechanism explains socialization of aggression: -MODELING = see adults do this more accepted to them = use this behavior
GROUP POLARIZATION: why risky shift known now as group polarization: -group discussions are MORE EXTREME although NOT necessarly MORE RISKY
GROUP POLARIZATION: steps risky shifs study involves (Moscovici and Zavalloni): 1. fill out survey on own (w/ scale on it)

2. group discussions- either told make unanimous decision or not

3. post-group private assessment
-rate each individually again
GROUP POLARIZATION: Moscovici and Zavalloni Findings: FOUND: higher ratings on ave after the group discussion than the indiv ratings
GROUP POLARIZATION: role social comparison in group polarization: -social differentiate self due to attitude change

-memebers aware each other - competition occurs (suttle)= risk desirable direction = socially optimal be above ave = favorable extreme risk

-attitude change due to social comparison
GROUP POLARIZATION: Informational influence source Group Polar.: -groups set up exposure to persuasive argue - persuaded

-attitude change due to info. intergration
-hear something not throught about before -go in that direction (start out lean one way)
-recieve something new (all favor one way or another discuss info)
GROUP POLARIZATION: ? both influence present Group polarization to occur 1.social compare is sufficient 2.info influence is sufficient 3.which is more powerful: 1. dont need other/ either will work
-Blascovich the (black jack study)
-set up situation change betting practices based on group discussion
-examine effects see what other bet
-20 hands alone then 20 hands in group
1.alone 2.3person-concensus (talk)
3.own hands presense 2 others (no talk)
(2 & 3 group polarization)
GROUP POLARIZATION: prior condition must be met GP to occur: learning one side before group discussion
STEREOTYPES: 1. STEROTYPES 2. PREJUDICE 3. DISCRIMINATION: 1. what think group like (+ or - belief) COGNATIVE!

2. emotional = feelings have about group memebers (-) AFFECTIVE!

3. how treat indiv. group members
-unfairly treated (insturmental -social approval) BEHAVIORAL!

ABC MODEL!!!
AGGRESSION: "weapons effect": -evidance sit weapon up agg.

-ex: desk has riffle on it (more likely shock subj) or fishing rod on it

-make agg. salient see gun
AGGRESSION: 1. angry aggression vs. 2. instrumental aggression: 1. response to angry affect

2. primary goal to overcome threat or gain resources
AGGRESSION 1. disinhibition 2. deindividuation 3. alcohol to agg. behavior: 1. down inhibitors agg. behavior

2. more likely show agg.
-dont feel like indiv. in group
-lose track indiv. identity = down perception personal responsibility

3.less likely notice resasons why did what did make you angry
-less likely worry about retaliation and physical injury
-lead up level agg. when provoked
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: Aronson's Jigsaw Class involved: -competition in the classroom : setup cooperative situation

-each given protion material 2 be learned

-everyone share to be able to succeed

-do well cooperate w/ others => others depend on them
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: Aronson's Jigsaw Class: influnce likeing students piolt study: -liked own group members more

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE:
-not learn any better in jigsaw groups
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: Aronson's Jigsaw Class: major findings teacher implemented: -did like gropu memebers more

-report percieves others as resources

-more (+) about school

-up self esteem end year
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: Aronson's Jigsaw Class: was he sucessful in down preudice: -no did not work globally but it is a start
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: Consequences Discrimination Day generate: -longterm => get moral and ethial lessons from this

-very sensitive discriminatory behavior then and later
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: Sherif's Robber's Cave Study: Superordinate goals provided (? influence intergroup hostility): -stage interuption water supply both bunk houses/ find movie projector together/ food truck wheel axle problem

-down conflict/ function together well (useful)
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: Sherif's Robber's Cave Study: introduce "contact" or "exposure" btwn groups: -end histility expose themselve to each other/ contact inpleasnt enviro/ neutral
(NOT WORK : EFFECT INTERGROUP HOSTILITY)
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: Sherif's Robber's Cave Study: manip. relations btwn groups and intergroup and intra group levels: -formed intergroup competition/ hostility
-took on conflicting goals in competition

INTERGROUP AND INTRA GROUP LEVELS:
-hostility btwn groups developed
-moral w/in group developed
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: Sherif's Robber's Cave Study: structure emerged assigned groups: -formed 2 groups

-came up w/ names => nicknames members/ traditions (rattlers/eagles)

-not cooperative in group disapproved of
STEREOTYPE: Shih, Pittinsky and Ambady's Study: Design and study: Design: (fill out quesionnaire)
1.a)women identify slaien (think about gender=>prime)
b)asian identity salient (race=>prime)
c)no identity salient(no self identity)

STUDY:
2. DV- accuracy in responding math items - get right out of # tried

3. sample: 46 Asian Amer. women
STEREOTYPE: Shih, Pittinsky and Ambady's Study: PROCEDURE: -identity manip.
-quanitative test
-demograh info -SAT MATH
-assissment for suspicion
STEREOTYPE: Shih, Pittinsky and Ambady's Study: RESULTS: -PERFORMANCE: best=Asian identity salien 53% then 49% control and 43% women - do worse when women identiy salien on tests

-MOTIVATION:not affected => no diff.

-TALENTED Ss: SAT scores (750)- telented sample no effect stereotyping

-ACTIVATION WAS SUBTLE: no reson believe saw demand char.
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION Sum Jan Ellot's "Discrimination Day" Exercise: -DAY 1: Brown eyes more intelligent than blue =>special privilages
Blue eyes=> colars wear/ sit back room
-made statements like brown eyes cleaner/smarter
-critical blue eye kids

DAY 2: Reversal roles blue and brown eyes
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: Sum Jan Ellot's "Discrimination Day" Exercise effect prodedure on: 1. outgroup denigration 2. affect 3. performance: 1. name calling/ playground fights/ beat them up

2. child superior group =>great/ powerful (out group =>sad/down)

3. superior performance good and bad really bad performance
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: Sum Jan Ellot's "Discrimination Day" Exercise: happened reversed roles: newly superior kids => somewhat milder toward outgroup/ still got even
AGGRESSION: aggression: intentional harm some human being
AGGRESSION: char. assoc. btwn 3 types aversive (- arousal gone wrong)experiences (not responsible own behavior)and agg.: 1.ATTACK:verbal/ physical =>invite retaliation

2.FRUSTRATION: self goal = barrier =>up possibility agg/ know why frustrated- situation- peers put there/ down agg. function frustration

3.ENVIRO CONTITIONS: enviro cues prime agg. / temp outside/ crowding/ offersive odors/ violent crimes occur = hot summer day
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: phrases involved inoculation training: a)CONCEPTULAIZATION: edu. people info particular setting=> discrimination (experience)

b)SKILL ACQUISITION: lear how to deal w/ this

c)REEXPOSURE AND APPLICATION: expose themselves real situation see if can act diff
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: purpose inoculatioin training: -try to get people able change behavior

*cope w/ stressful and trying circumstances
STEREOTYPING: self stereotyping: -where categorize self => jobs/age/race

-(+) or (-) effects (can have both)
AGGRESSION: sex diff. observed in aggressie behavior and role socilaization: -INFANT SOCIALIZATION: F=delicate/ fragile =>more talk/cuddleing
M=rough play

-SOCIALIZATIOIN: F=encourage solve problems/ask for help/cooperate/sorry
M=teach to be tough opposite girls

-SITUATIONS: F=feel guilty hurt others M= more likely hurt others/risk retalition/agg. useful in situations/

-INDIRECT AGG: F=verbal abuse/ psych torcher
STEREOTYPE: stereotype considered function basic cog. processes: -make sense of envior

-steretypes due to noticing PATTERNS

-impossible (even undesirable) avoid say NO!
(inanimate obj and animate obj)
COMBATING DISCRIMINATION: sum of Sherif's Robber's Cave Study: -observe behavior campers
-hostility btw. competitions groups
-drive apart in teams see what formed
-bring back together for common cause

Start Studying!

Deck Info

Number of cards 79