Social Cognition Molly Marshall. What is social cognition? How we think about other people How we...

transcript

Social Cognition

Molly Marshall

What is social cognition?

How we think about other people

How we process social information

How we explain other people’s behavior

How we explain our own behaviour

Prejudice and Discrimination

Prejudice - Allport (1958)

“an antipathy based on a faulty and inflexible generalisation. It may be felt or expressed. It may be directed towards a group or toward an individual because he or she is a member of that group”

Prejudice and Discrimination Prejudice can be seen as part of

the process of ethnocentrism

What is ‘ethnocentrism’

Prejudice and Discrimination Ethnocentrism --- the syndrome

The tendency to undervalue the products of an OUT GROUP to which we do NOT belong Hostility & rejection of out group

members

The tendency to overvalue the products of an IN GROUP to which we do belong Increased liking for in group members +

pressure for conformity & group cohesion

Name some groups to whom we belong IN GROUPS to whom we do not belong OUT GROUPS

Prejudice and Discrimination THREE major theories of prejudice

the psychoanalytic (within the individual)

the interaction between groups theory the social categorisation theory

Prejudice and Discrimination the psychoanalytic (within the individual)

locates prejudice within the individual personality - Adorno et al (1950)

caused by unresolved childhood conflicts - but this cannot explain why entire societies may be prejudiced

Prejudice and Discrimination the interaction between groups theory locates the cause of prejudice in the

struggle between social groups for scarce social resources (housing, jobs)

Sherif (1956) describes competition

between groups as the cause of prejudice

Prejudice and Discrimination the interaction between groups theory Sherif - the robber’s cave experiment

Famous study - USA teenagers in a summer camp The eagles & the rattlers

Prejudice and Discrimination Now let us do a VERY small

experiment

YOU will learn more about this in a minute

You are all allocated a code number please memorise it!!

Prejudice and Discrimination You are about to be shown a screen covered

with dots

Very quickly - and IN SILENCE estimate the number of DOTS on the

screen; write this down, fold up your answer, write

your code number on the fold

Prejudice and Discrimination And again You are about to be shown two more

screens covered with dots Very quickly - and IN SILENCE estimate the number of DOTS on each

screen; write this down, fold up your answer,

write your code number on the fold

Sorting it all out !

over estimators list TWO traits you think over

estimators have in commonthenlist TWO traits you think under estimators have in common

under estimators list TWO traits you think under

estimators have in commonthenlist TWO traits you think over estimators have in common

both groups note + for each positive trait or - for each negative trait Mark your slip O or UPut your list in the O or U heap

We will look at our results at the end of the session …...

Prejudice and Discrimination the social categorisation theory

TAJFEL (1970)

The minimal group studies

Prejudice and Discrimination the social categorisation theory TAJFEL (1970)

What does it take to make you believe you are a member of a group?

TAJFEL - The minimal group studies

What Tajfel did -

EXPERIMENT 1

A laboratory experiment

The participants

64 school boys from Bristol Age range 14 - 15 All knew each other well

Came into psychology ‘lab’ in groups of 8

They were told:

That Tajfel was investigating visual judgements

40 clusters of dots flashed onto a screen

The boys asked to estimate how many dots they had seen each time

Experimenters then ‘pretended’ to judge the boys answers

BUT really The boys were randomly assigned

to one of two groups

OVER ESTIMATORS OR UNDER ESTIMATORS

How many were there in each group?

The boys were given 18 page booklets - indicating money (pence)

Choice Number 1 2 34

Boy no 1 9 11 12 1 Boy no 2 5 9 11 3

The boys were asked to make three types of choice

In group choices - both boys IN Out group choices - both boys

OUT Inter group choices - one each

INTER GROUP CHOICES the important choice

Most boys chose a ticket which would give their own group most

The second experiment

Another lab experiment

(Still Tajfel)

Groups of 16 boys tested Flashed up 12 paintings Klee or Kandinsky (abstract art) Afterwards randomly categorised

as preferring Klee or Kandinsky

The boys again given 18 page booklets - indicating money (pence)

Choice Number 1 2 34

Boy no 1 9 11 12 1 Boy no 2 5 9 11 3

Which of THREE variables had the greatest effect

Maximum joint profit largest reward to members of both

groups

largest reward to member of in group …. regardless of size of reward for boy in out group

MAXIMUM DIFFERENCE - largest possible difference - in favour of the in group

For example … Boy (in group) 9 11 12 16 Boy (out group) 5 9 11 19 Max joint profit = blue row Largest reward to in group = blue Max difference = green

The results Most boys chose maximum difference

Boys left the study with LESS money than they would have if they had awarded maximum joint profit

The independent variable (IV) The group of the participant

Over estimator or under estimator

The dependent variable (DV)

The boys reward decisions

Tajfel concluded

Out group discrimination is very easy to trigger off

mere categorisation is enough!

Ecological validity?

Demand characteristics - Artificial setting - not like real life

The participants?

Teenage boys are competitive (esp in western culture) Unrepresentative sample - all boys

same age all from same school

Ethics !!

No informed consent Right to withdraw?

How did our experiment go!

Count up the +s and -s for each group

Did the over estimators give more -s to under estimators and vice versa?

What to do now…

Read a chapter on prejudice & discrimination

THE END

Social Cognition Molly Marshall. What is social cognition? How we think about other people How we...

Documents