Introduction to Psychology, 7th Edition, James W. Kalat Chapter 14: Social Psychology Chapter 14...

Introduction to Psychology, 7th Edition, James W. KalatChapter 14: Social Psychology

Chapter 14

Social Psychology


Social Psychology

Social psychologists study social behavior. They are interested in the ways people influence and are influenced by each other.

Social psychology is a diverse field incorporating the study of attitudes and perceptions, persuasion, and typical behaviors of relatively normal people in their relationships with others.


Module 14.1

Social Perception and Cognition



Social perception and cognition are mental processes that help us to collect and remember information about others, and to make inferences and judgments based on that information.



First impressions The primacy effect is the principle that the first

information learned about someone will be a more powerful influence on our perceptions than any later information will be.



Stereotypes and prejudices A stereotype is a generalized belief or expectation about

group of people. We tend to remember unusual qualities or

characteristics more readily than ordinary ones, so we form false stereotypes easily.

Some stereotypes are based on exaggerations of essentially correct observations.

This is not a justification for basing our behavior towards other people according to rigid stereotypes.



Stereotypes and prejudices Prejudice is an unfavorable attitude toward a group of

people. Aversive racism refers to the behavior of

unintentionally discriminating against some groups while expressing the belief that all people are equal.

People tend to acknowledge that prejudice is a serious problem in the world, but deny that they themselves are prejudiced.

Similarly, many people experience ambivalent sexism; an overt belief in equal treatment of the sexes with a hidden, lingering belief that women should be treated differently.



Implicit measures of stereotypes and prejudices Some research on prejudice has been done, but subtle,

unintentional racism is difficult to measure. The Implicit Association Test, used for personality

assessment, can also be used for the purpose of detecting subtle prejudice.



Overcoming prejudice Just getting people from different groups to talk does not

appear to be enough to solve this problem. Getting people from two different groups to work

towards a common goal appears to be a more effective strategy.

Evidence for this was provided by the Robber’s Cave experiment.

But the children in the experiment were from arbitrarily formed competitive groups, not two different racial or ethnic groups.



Attribution Attribution refers to the set of thought processes we use

to assign causes to our own and others’ behavior. Internal attributions are explanations based on an

individual’s perceived stable characteristics, such as attitudes, personality traits, or abilities.

These are called dispositional.



Attribution Attribution theory

External attributions are explanations based on the current situation and events that would influence all people.

These are called situational. Due to lack of familiarity with culturally determined

responses in other societies, most people attribute externally influenced behaviors to dispositional qualities.



Attribution One psychologist, Kelley, proposed three sources of

information when we make an internal or external attribution:

Consensus information – how one individual’s behavior compares with other people’s.

Consistency information – how the person’s behavior varies over time.

Distinctiveness – how the person’s behavior varies between situations.


Concept Check:

Internal or external attribution?

He went to the theatre to impress his new girlfriend.External


Concept Check:

Internal or external attribution?

He went to the theatre because it was a requirement for his English Literature class.

External



The Fundamental Attribution Error We commit the Fundamental Attribution Error when we

make dispositional attributions for a person’s behavior despite the presence of possible external influences.

Research suggests that Americans are more prone to commit the Fundamental Attribution Error.

This may be because we emphasize individual responsibility and accomplishment in our society.



The actor-observer effect Related to the fundamental attribution error, we also

tend to make situational attributions for our own behaviors and dispositional ones for the behavior of others.

This is called the actor-observer effect. It may be engendered in part because we are more

acutely aware of how our own behavior varies from situation to situation.


Figure 14.3 Participants were asked whether certain people had certain traits, such as “leniency,” the opposite traits, such as “firmness,” or whether “it depended on the situation.” They were most likely to say that their own behavior depended on the situation and least likely to say “it depends” for Walter Cronkite, the person they knew the least. (Based on data of Nisbett, Caputo, Legant, & Marecek, 1973)



The actor-observer effect We also tend in general to attribute unusual behavior in

people to internal causes. We do not perceive ourselves as stable objects

(because we are observing) but we see other people as such.

When we watch ourselves on videotape, we tend to make more dispositional attributions about our own behavior.



Using attributions to control perceptions of ourselves Attributions that we use to optimize our perception of

ourselves are called self-serving biases. You attribute your victory in a tennis match to your

extraordinary skill. You attribute your failing mathematics to “unfair

tests.”



Using attributions to control perceptions of ourselves We also use self-handicapping strategies to protect

our self-image. We intentionally put ourselves at a disadvantage to

provide an excuse for an expected defeat or failure. For example, eating a whole pizza one half-hour

before a swim meet with the current league champions.



We are usually not fully aware of the reasons for other’s behavior, or our own.

We try to make good guesses about both. Understanding the theories of social perception and cognition can help us to improve our accuracy.


Module 14.2

Attitudes and Persuasion


Social Psychology

Attitudes and their influence An attitude is a like or dislike that influences our

behavior toward a person or thing. Persuasion refers to any attempt to change your

attitudes and thus your behavior.


Social Psychology

Attitudes and their influence Measuring attitudes and the effectiveness of persuasive

techniques is a challenging task. People answer attitude questionnaires impulsively. People answer attitude questionnaires depending on

how they interpret the question. People may hold conflicting or mixed attitudes about

some subjects.


Figure 14.4 Likert scales, such as this one assessing attitudes toward labor unions, are commonly used in attitude research. Subjects rate the degree to which they agree or disagree with items that measure various aspects of a particular attitude.



Routes of attitude change and persuasion When making serious decisions, people tend to invest

time and effort in evaluating the evidence and logic behind the message.

This is the central route to persuasion.



Routes of attitude change and persuasion When evaluating a message on a topic or decision of

relatively little importance, people pay more attention to relatively superficial aspects such as the speaker’s appearance or the amount of evidence (instead of its quality.)

This is the peripheral route to persuasion.



Highly resistant attitudes People’s attitudes tend to fall along a continuum. Some

attitudes are strongly held and could only be changed using the central route to persuasion. Others are less unshakable and could be easily changed using the peripheral route.

Some strongly held opinions are based on hardly any knowledge or evidence at all.

“Facts? Don’t try to confuse me with the facts!”



Delayed influence of messages Messages may have no effect when we first encounter

them, but change our attitudes later. The Sleeper Effect - delayed persuasion by an

initially rejected message. Minority Influence - those who hold an unpopular

opinion eventually change the attitudes of those who hold the majority opinion.


Table 14.1 The political platform of the U.S. Socialist party, 1900



Presenting persuasive messages There are two broad categories of persuasive

messages: Do what is asked of you to make something good

happen. Do what is asked of you and prevent something bad

from happening (chain letters and some internet hoaxes work on this principle; they almost always feature an implied threat).



Audience variables in persuasion Person variables:

Level of cognitive abilities Importance of message to person Mood of person

Situation variables: Perceived similarity between the audience and the

speaker Perception that idea is approved or endorsed by a

respected group Level of intelligence and interest



Audience variables: Heightened resistance What if people know they are about to hear an argument

with which they will most likely disagree? Telling them that this is the case will increase the

likelihood that they will reject the argument (the Forewarning Effect).

Presenting a weak version of an argument and following it with a stronger version increases the chance that the strong one will be rejected also (the Inoculation Effect).



Strategies of persuasion Common techniques of persuasion to know and resist!

A modest request is followed by a larger one (the foot-in-the-door technique).

An outrageous initial request is followed by a more reasonable one (the door-in-the-face technique).

A very favorable deal is followed by additional demands after a commitment has been made (the bait-and-switch technique).

The offer is improved before any reply is given (the that’s-not-all technique).


Concept Check:

Name that form of persuasion

A friend asks you to watch her kid brother one afternoon when she has an after school date. When her mother gets home, she asks you if you would come back every Tuesday and Thursday and baby-sit.

Foot-in-the-door


Concept Check:


The person you are madly in love with wants you to take him/her to the Hullapalooza Rock Festival next month. You agree to treat to the tickets. You are then informed that he/she won’t go without two good friends who also can’t afford the tickets.

Bait-and-Switch


Concept Check:


The infomercial MC says that if you call within the next 30 minutes to buy one jar of Lard-off Miracle Fat Burning Cream, he will throw in two more jars at the same low price of $59.99.

That’s-not-All!



Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive Dissonance Theory suggests that an

individual’s behavior can change his or her attitudes. Cognitive dissonance refers to a state of tension that

exists when an individual realizes that he or she holds contradictory attitudes on an issue, or has exhibited behavior that is inconsistent with an expressed attitude.


Figure 14.6 Cognitive dissonance is a state of tension that arises when people perceive that their attitudes do not match their behavior. Theoretically, they could resolve this discrepancy by changing either their attitudes or their behavior or by developing a new attitude or excuse to explain the discrepancy. Most of the research, however, has focused on how cognitive dissonance leads to a change of attitude.



Cognitive Dissonance The classic study on cognitive dissonance was done by

Festinger and Carlsmith in 1959. A variety of interesting experiments have shown that

cognitive dissonance has effects on our attitudes. The effect of cognitive dissonance on attitudes varies

cross-culturally.


Persuasion and Manipulation

Throughout your life you will make decisions about matters. Some will be important and some will be trivial.

It is important to understand and remember the techniques of persuasion that you have learned about in this module, for those who try to change your attitudes or behavior may not necessarily have your best interests at heart.


Module 14.3

Interpersonal Attraction



Established lasting relationships How do we choose the people who become our friends?

We are likely to become friends with people who live near us and become familiar to us. This effect is called proximity.

The more often we see someone or something the more likely we are to start to like the person or thing – this is called the mere exposure effect.

The mere exposure effect will not change our feelings if we hate the person or thing.



Established lasting relationships We also tend to be drawn to those who are like

ourselves in background, attitudes, interests and other important ways.

We choose people who tend to confirm our self-concept and level of self-esteem.

We seek people with whom we feel we can make equitable transactions of goods and services according to exchange or equity theories, which view social relationships as transactions.



Special concerns in selecting a mate Physical attractiveness

Though people are reluctant to admit it, it is important to both sexes.

Attractive people are generally treated better than others, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy that confirms their good self-evaluation.



Special concerns in selecting a mate Physical attractiveness.

Comparative psychology research suggests that in other species attractiveness may be interpreted as an indicator of good health and good genes.

What is considered “attractive” in most cultures is roughly synonymous with what is considered “normal” or “average-looking.”

Research evidence for these hypotheses is mixed and should be interpreted with caution.



Special concerns in selecting a mate Marriage is valued in our society as a crucial social

institution and source of fulfillment, but a disturbing number of marriages end in divorce.

What is so difficult about achieving a satisfying and lasting marriage?



Special concerns in selecting a mate Characteristics of successful marriages:

Partners have similar attitudes and personalities. Both partners find the relationship sexually satisfying. They earn an adequate income for their lifestyle. The husband feels pride in his job. The wife was not pregnant before the couple married. The couple’s parents also had successful marriages.



Special concerns in selecting a mate Trying to save a troubled marriage:

The results of marriage counseling are not encouraging.

Usually one partner has given up before the counseling starts.

Marriage counselors often give well-meaning advice that does not work.

Couples need encouragement to treat each other with respect during periods of stress and turmoil.

Every marriage has troubled times, and it is important to try to repair problems quickly when they arise.



Humans tend to crave contact with others; even mediocre company is better than none.

In our important relationships, we need to know more about our companions. To achieve fulfilling relationships requires choosing our friends and intimates wisely.


Module 14.4

Interpersonal Influence



Other people influence us in two major ways: They give us information about situations. They set the norms (the rules that establish expected

behavior) by which we conduct ourselves in situations.


Figure 14.12 In Asch’s conformity studies, subjects were asked to match one line with one of three other lines on another card. They were surrounded by people who gave obviously wrong answers.



Conformity Conformity is the maintenance or alteration of one’s

behavior to match the behavior and expectations of others.

At first it was believed that people would most likely conform in ambiguous situations where it is common to be unsure of one’s own judgment.

Asch’s classic experiment demonstrated that conformity was also likely even when one could be fairly sure that his or her judgment was correct.



Conformity Apparently the need to conform is likely to overwhelm

our need to be correct or feel right in our judgments. Size of group did not have much of an impact – it was as

hard for a subject to disagree in a group of 3 as in a group of 13.

Two people had an easier time disagreeing with the majority than one person did.


Figure 14.14 In Asch’s experiments participants who were faced with a unanimous majority giving wrong answers conformed to the majority view on 32% of trials. Participants who had one “ally” giving the correct answer were less likely to conform. Evidently, it is less difficult to be in a minority of two



Conformity Asch’s experiment has been done in other cultures. Cross-culturally the behaviors were the same. The motivations expressed were somewhat different

(Asian subjects, for example, said they did not wish to embarrass the others in the group).



Accepting or denying responsibility toward others Bystander helpfulness or apathy

Why do people fail to intervene sometimes during a crime or accident?

The presence of many people during a crime may create a sense of diffusion of responsibility.

We may convince ourselves that if there are many other people present, someone else will help, so we need do nothing.



Responsibility toward others Bystander helpfulness or apathy

Pluralistic ignorance is another explanation for this disturbing lack of action.

People will sometimes assume in the absence of information that others have a different and better-informed opinion.

They will decide therefore to say or do nothing.



Responsibility toward others Social loafing

Social loafing refers to the tendency to “loaf” or to do less work when we are with other people.

The extent of the loafing sometimes depends on group members’ perceptions of each other’s ability levels.

The effects are most pronounced when the task is considered unimportant.

Social loafing is less commonly observed in cultures with a more collectivist mentality.



Group decision-making Although there are some advantages to appointing

committees to review evidence and make decisions, there are also some special pitfalls to group decision-making processes.

Since all of us will probably be part of group decision-making processes during our lives, it is useful to understand how these problems can occur.



Group decision-making Group polarization

If most members of a group already have a strong opinion on a matter they will lean even more strongly in that direction after discussing the issue.

Under such circumstances discussion serves the purposes of making the group more extreme in its views rather than opening a dialogue on differing opinions.



Group decision-making Groupthink

Group members may suppress doubts about an issue or decision for fear of making trouble or being ostracized.

Groupthink is the term invented for this tendency. Sometimes dominant members will silence

dissenters, but sometimes dissenters will silence themselves.



Group decision-making Groupthink

The decisions to invade the Bay of Pigs and to launch the space shuttle Challenger are famous historical examples of groupthink.

Groupthink is a tendency that emerges in groups regardless of the level of cohesion.

One way to guard against groupthink is to appoint an official “devil’s advocate” whose job is to present opposing viewpoints.



Conformity: Good and bad Conformity to rules that benefit the members of society

in general is necessary for our survival as a species. It may be just as vital, however, for some of us to resist

that urge in certain situations where the human need for conformity may override our ability to see the truth and take action where it is necessary to prevent destructive mistakes.


Module 14.5

The Power of the Social Situation



Behavior traps We are often quite judgmental when we see people who

have done something that seems senseless or foolish from our standpoint.

Under some circumstances, most of us are capable of the same behaviors we are judging.



Behavior traps The situation sometimes influences, even coerces us,

into self-defeating behaviors. We refer to these situations as behavior traps

because we often wander into them without realizing the danger until it is too late.

There are several categories of behavior traps. Many behavior traps involve a gradual, detrimental

escalation of conflict.


Behavior Traps

Escalation of conflict Once a conflict is started, it is often very difficult for the

participants to quit, even when the situation becomes harmful for us.

Psychologists have held auctions for $1.00 bills in which bidders were willing to pay $25.00 for the single dollar just to successfully outbid an opponent.


Behavior Traps

The prisoner’s dilemma A prisoner’s dilemma is a situation in which a person

must choose between a cooperative act and an act very beneficial only to him or herself and most likely hurtful to others.

In the many variants of the dilemma, people have great difficulty choosing the cooperative option, even in the face of the distinct possibility of the competitive or selfish strategy backfiring and being quite a costly choice.


Figure 14.16 In the prisoner’s dilemma, each person considering the choice alone finds it beneficial to confess. But when both people confess, they suffer worse consequences than if both had refused to confess.


Behavior Traps

The prisoner’s dilemma In general, even our cooperative strategies require some

degree of individual recognition. We tend to engage in reciprocal altruism, helping

others with the understanding that they are supposed to eventually help us.

We need to keep track of who holds up his or her end of the bargain, and who does not, so that we know with who it is in our best interest to cooperate.


Behavior Traps

The commons dilemma The commons dilemma takes its name from a parable

in which a common resource is overused by those who share it.

This is generally what happens when people must share such a resource.

Research on the commons dilemma shows that in some hypothetical situations, people can imagine themselves refraining in their use of a resource if their living depends upon it.


Behavior Traps Obedience to authority

A surprising and disturbing study done at Stanford University in the 1970’s by Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues provided evidence that people are inclined to change their behavior in response to assigned roles and to follow outrageous and immoral orders when in those roles.

The study involved the establishment of a simulated prison for two weeks.

The behavior of the students involved became so real and so brutal, the study had to be called off after 6 days.

When faced with such evidence, people are still inclined to say “I would never follow such immoral orders.” Unless one is in the situation, it is hard to know if that would be true.


Behavior Traps

Obedience to Authority In a more extensive study, Stanley Milgram set up an

experiment to find out how realistic such a claim actually was.

In his classic experiment, he was able to show that, at least in the laboratory, almost three-quarters of experimental subjects would follow orders to hurt someone if the authority figure and the situation demanded it.

Variations of the original experiment were done, and although compliance could be lowered in some instances, some of participants still “followed orders.”


Figure 14.20 Milgram varied his procedure in many ways to find out what elements promoted or inhibited obedience. Division of responsibility increased obedience; an implication of personal responsibility decreased obedience.


Behavior Traps

Obedience to authority Many experts predicted a different result when told about

the plan for this experiment. It was thought that only a very few, very abnormal

people would agree to give the higher levels of shock. Some scientists and others refused to believe these

results. Milgram’s career suffered because what he told us about ourselves was not very comforting.

Today’s ethical standards for experimentation would probably have prevented the Milgram and Stanford Prison studies from being done.



We can teach people to cooperate and help each other in some instances.

But it is possible that in order to discourage destructive behavior in people, sometimes we would be well advised to consider changing the situation instead.

Date post:	26-Dec-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	brianne-shields
View:	252 times
Download:	7 times

Introduction to Psychology, 7th Edition, James W. Kalat Chapter 14: Social Psychology Chapter 14...

Documents