Flashcards in Exam II Deck (80):
1
The value of the unavailable:
Ex: Cafeteria Ratings
DV: Rating of cafeteria
-Baseline: Control and experimental were the same
Conditions:
1) Control: Told nothing before rating was asked
2) Experimental: Told cafeteria was closing before rating was asked
-After told cafeteria was closing, experimental group rated it higher
Conclusion: We like things more when they are more scarce/unavailable
2
Loss vs Gain:
Reusable Bags (Correlation tax example)
-Not an experiment because no random assignment was used
-What will get people to use reusable bags more?
Conditions:
1) Tax always
2) Tax in post period
3) Tax never
-Tax in post period had the most increase of use of reusable bags
3
Reusable Bags: (Correlation incentive example)
-What got people to use reusable bags more? (adding in after baseline)
Conditions:
1) No incentive
2) Bonus only
3) Tax only
-Tax only condition had the greatest effect because it is evoking loss
4
Promoting Healthy Behaviors:
Detection vs prevention
Detection:
-More likely to happen if messages emphasis loss if you don't go through with it
Prevention:
-More likely to happen if messages emphasis the gains/benefits if you do it
5
Promoting Healthy Behaviors:
Detection vs prevention
Ex: Breast Exams
-DV: Measuring intent to perform breast exams
Conditions:
1) Pamphlet of gains/benefits
2) Pamphlet of loss
3) No pamphlet
-Four months later the loss group got more breast exams
-Fear arousal was not present in any conditions (none of the pamphlets evoked fear response)
-Memory of content, perceived susceptibility, and belief in effectiveness were no difference
Result:
-Loss framed message lead in SELF EFFICACY (How well we can do it) in performing a breast exam
-"I think I can do that"
6
Ex: Dental Care
(Loss/gain effects)
-Participants were told benefits (gains) of using the product or loss of not using the product and asked them if they wanted to try out the product
Conditions:
1) Product prevents gum disease, told benefits
2) Product prevents gum disease, told risk/losses
3) Product detects gum disease, told benefits
4) Product detects gum disease, told risk/losses
-More tried prevents gum disease product when told the benefits
-More tried detects gum disease product when told the losses
7
Ex: Toddler Toy behind/beside the barrier
The scarce/unavailable value
-Which toy would toddlers get faster?
Conditions:
1) Beside barrier, 1'
2) Beside barrier, 2' (tall)
3) Behind barrier, 1'
4) Behind barrier, 2' (tall)
Results:
-Toddlers will go for the toy Behind barrier, 2' (tall)
Conclusion:
-We like the unavailable/more scarce items
8
2 Reasons for desiring scarce things
1) Scarce items must be desired by others and therefore high quality
2) People hate to feel like their freedom is being restricted (reactance)
9
Ex: Rating of Soap
Scarcity
-Tampa and Miami (Soap restricted in Miami)
-All categories of judgement (Ex: Freshness) rated high in scarce place (Miami)
Results:
-Scarcity increases likability and positive attitude towards thing
10
Ex: Description of book
Scarcity/age range
-What will affect a persons desire to read?
Conditions:
1) Man and women porn, no age restriction
2) Man and women porn, age restriction
3) Non porn, no age restriction
4) Non porn, age restriction
Results:
-Participants wanted to read more in both cases when there was an age restriction (scarcity)
11
Ex: Video game
Scarcity/age range
-Test same video game for how much people liked it
Cons (Participants age)
7-8
12-13
16-17
Cons (Age restriction)
7+
12+
16+
18+
-Same game was more liked when the age restriction was high (for all groups)
12
Reactance
Opinion of opposite sex at a bar throughout the night
Reactance= Reacting against limited freedom
Opinion of opposite sex at a bar throughout the night:
-People view opposite sex people more attractive as the night goes on because their time in the bar is being limited. Limited time to meet someone
-Attractiveness went up for single people of opposite sex and decreased for singles of the same sex
13
The Cookie Study
Which cookies did participants like best?
Conditions:
1) No change: Participants tasted cookies, researcher comes in and asks how many cookies they have
2) Accident: Researcher comes in, says accidentally took participants cookies and switches them
3) Demand: Researcher comes in, says his participants were eating too much or too little cookies and switches the cookies
-Each condition was done w/ both 2 cookies (scarce) and 10 cookies (abundant)
-Demand and scarce cookies rated the highest
14
Mass media communication, Propaganda, and Persuasion:
Sentinel Awards
-Celebrates TV depictions of accurate medical treatment (educates viewers and can help people)
15
Mass media communication, Propaganda, and Persuasion:
Commercial Messages
Mere Exposure effect
-Makes product more familiar
Mere Exposure effect:
-The more exposed to something you like, the more you like it
16
Mere Exposure Effect:
Ex: Familiar words vs Unfamiliar words
-Foreign words in different (high/low) frequencies, words shown in a variation of repeated times
Result:
-Characters shown more times were rated higher for "goodness"
Conclusion:
Mere Exposure effect
17
Mere Exposure Effect:
Ex: Year book pics of men
-Year book pictures of men, varied how many times they saw a guy in a slideshow and rated how well they would like him
Results:
-Men rated higher when the amount of times they saw him increased
Conclusion:
-Mere exposure effect
18
Mere Exposure Effect:
Ex: Preferences for true of mirror image
-Both prefer true print
-Both prefer mirror print
-Target prefers mirror image of themselves, friend prefers true image of their friend (target)
-Friend prefers mirror image or themselves, targets prefers true image of their friend
Conclusion:
-Mere Exposure Effect
19
Mere Exposure Effect
Ex: Confederate who went to class or didn't
-Rate impression of female confederates personality who was in their class
Results:
-Rated the confederate more highly as she increased how often she went to class, because she became more familiar
Conclusion:
Mere Exposure Effect
20
Elaboration Likelihood Model:
Depends on?
1) Motivation: To focus on the message
2) Ability: To focus on the message
21
If your have both motivation and ability from the audience then what route are you on to persuading them?
Central Route to persuasion:
-Interested
-Might have to make a decision on it
-Focused = Deep processing
-Deep processing of message --> weak argument --> No attitude change
-Deep processing of message --> strong argument --> attitude change
22
Elaboration Likelihood Model:
Ex: College students Senior exam
-Get college students interested in a message, senior exam to graduate
Conditions:
1) High prestige speaker, strong argument
2) High prestige speaker, weak argument
3) Low prestige speaker, strong argument
4) Low prestige speaker, weak argument
Result:
-High quality argument had a greater affect on persuasion (Focused on content/points when relevant to you)
23
When to use central route to persuasion?
-Should use central route to persuasion for big behavior changes, should focus on content and high quality arguments
24
Peripheral Route to persuasion
Does the audience have the ability and motivation to pay attention --> No --> Superficial processing/message --> Heuristics (Ex: Jingle, celebs, catchy tune) --> Temporary attitude change
25
When not to use peripheral route to persuasion?
-For big life change behavior
26
Routes to persuasion:
Ex: College students senior grad, but not for 15 yrs
-Get college students interested in a message, senior exam to graduate
Conditions:
1) High prestige speaker, high argument
2) High prestige speaker, low argument
3) Low prestige speaker, high argument
4) Low prestige speaker, low argument
Results:
-Higher prestige of speaker had more effect than quality
Conclusion:
-When something is not relevant to you, you focus more on the heuristic of things and skim over the content
-PERIPHERAL ROUTE TO PERSUASION
27
Routes to persuasion:
Ex: Presenting people with an ad (Distraction vs no distraction)
-Presenting people with an ad
Conditions:
1) Weak argument, no distraction
2) Weak argument, distraction
3) Strong argument, no distraction
4) Strong argument, distraction
Results:
-Strong argument had a bigger effect when participants were not distracted (Central route to persuasion)
-When distracted weak argument had a bigger effect (Peripheral route to persuasion)
Conclusions:
-Distractions lead people to peripheral route to persuasion (don't have ability to focus on content)
28
What commercial uses both central route and peripheral route to persuasion
Mac and P.C commercial:
Central Route:
-Telling viewers all the things the mac can do (Ex: easier to use)
Peripheral Route:
-Actors (Mac=young, celebrity, attractive P.C= old, no body, unattractive)
29
Prevention and detection:
Ex: Intentions to exercise
Measuring peoples intentions to exercise based on types of messages that they receive
Conditions:
1) Highly credible source (Doctor), negative message
2) Highly credible source, positive message
3) Low credible source (HS student), negative message
4) Low credible source, positive message
Results:
-Higher intentions to exercise when message was from a doctor and positive
-Follow up weeks later positive stayed high (w/ docs)
Conclusion:
-Prevention= positive message (more effective)
-Detection= negative message (more effective)
-This example is prevention of obesity/health risks so supports the theory
30
The source of communication
Credibility
Ex: Criminal and prosecutor
Source credibility= better luck when higher expertise and trustworthiness
Ex Conditions:
1) Prosecutor, saying courts need more power
2) Prosecutor, saying courts need less power
3) Criminal, saying courts need more power
4) Criminal, saying courts need less power
Results:
-People were more responsive to criminal saying courts need more power
-People were more responsive to prosecutor saying courts need less power
Conclusion:
-In those conditions their trustworthiness went up the most
31
People are more convinced by a persuasive message when the message is _____ vs _____
Overheard, directed at them
32
The sources of communication:
Ex: Attractiveness (pic of attractive man, low/or high quality)
Conditions:
1) Low quality message, attractiveness salient (noticeable, clear pic)
2) High quality message, attractiveness not salient (not noticeable, blurred out pic)
3) Low quality message, attractiveness salient (noticeable, clear pic)
4) Low quality message, attractiveness not salient (not noticeable, blurred out pic)
Results:
- When participants couldn't see mans pic (not salient), high quality message was received better (Central route to persuasion)
-When attractive mans pic was shown clearly the quality of the message did not matter, both were the same (Peripheral route to persuasion)
33
What are we more persuaded by logical or emotional messages?
Emotional
34
Fear appeals to persuasion
-Effective with high-efficacy (ability to produce desired results) info
-Defensive response if audience feels low efficacy
-Fear approach will appeal if there are specific instructions on how to do the right thing
35
Fear appeal:
Ex: College kids to get tetanus shots
Conditions:
1) No instructions, no efficacy
2) No instructions, yes efficacy
3) Yes instructions, no efficacy
4) Yes instructions, yes efficacy
Results:
-Participants who were given instructions and had high efficacy were most likely to get a tetanus shot
36
Fear appeal:
Ex: Quit smoking
-Participants smokers, measuring likeliness to quit
Conditions:
1) Instructions on how to quit
2) Scary film of bad things that can happen if you smoke
3) Both given
Results:
-The both condition shows the best results
37
Statistical evidence vs vivid examples
Example: Guy considering buying the Volvo
-Guy wanted to buy a volvo, did much research on it and considered it thoroughly, wanted to buy it. But when he heard another man at dinner tell his personal story of why he didn't like volvo's the man changed his mind
Conclusion:
-People are more persuaded by emotional messages than logical ones
38
Statistical evidence vs vivid examples
Ex: Auditor (pointing things out in the house that people should fix)
Conditions:
-Informative descriptions
-Vivid descriptions (detailed example of what could happen)
-Using vivid examples enable people to imagine consequences easier. People given vivid descriptions were persuaded more, applied for rebate. and followed through to fix their problems
39
When should someone use a one sided or two sided argument?
One sided:
-If the person they are trying to persuade does not know anything about the topic
-If they already agree with you
Two sided:
-For an informed audience
-If the person is leaning towards the opposite position
40
Order of presentation:
Primacy effect vs Recency effect
Where would speaker 1 and speaker 2 want their breaks to influence the decision
-Speaker 1 wants the break right after speaker 2 speaks to increase their primacy effect and reduce their recency effect
-Speaker 2 wants the break right after speaker 1 speaks to reduce their primacy effect and increase their recency effect (also gives them kind of a primacy effect since the audience is fresh)
41
Define Primacy and Recency effect
Primacy effect:
-People remember the first thing they heard when given a lot of content
Recency effect:
-People remember the last thing they heard when given a lot of content
42
Primacy and Recency effect
Ex: Plaintiff and Defense
-Had people play the role of jurors
Conditions:
1) Plaintiff (1st speaker, delay before decision)= Primacy effect
2) Defense (1st speaker, delay before decision)= Primacy effect
3) Plaintiff (1st speaker, delay before speaker 2)= Recency effect
4) Defense (1st speaker, delay before speaker 2)= Recency effect
43
Size discrepancy:
(Likelihood of changing someones mind)
Size discrepancy:
-How different the message is from the audience's current position
Graph:
Iv: Low-High discrepancy
Dv: Attitude change
Results
-If source is credible there is a positive correlation on graph (because trustworthy and has expertise)
-If source isn't credible works on a linear curve (upside down U) from Low to High
44
Size discrepancy:
Ex: College students reading through oems and rating them, picking out the worst one and TS Eliot (Poet)
Conditions TS Eliot:
1) Glowing review
2) Mildly Favorable review
3) Mildly critical review
Conditions Student:
1) Glowing review
2) Mildly favorable review
3) Mildly critical review
Results
-People's thoughts on the poems changed the most if TS Eliot gave it a glowing review
-People's thoughts on the poems changed the most if the student gave the poem a mildly favorable review
Conclusion:
-Corresponds to graph, TS Eliot= positive correlation, student= linear correlation
45
Characteristics of the Audience and ability to persuade them
1) Self esteem: Easier to persuade someone w low self esteem
2) Mood: Easier to persuade someone in a better mood
3) Forewarned: Easier to persuade someone who isn't forewarned
46
Characteristics of the Audience and ability to persuade them:
Ex: Told speaker is going to come in to a school and talk to students about how you should have to be 21 to drive
Conditions:
1) No warning of speaker
2) 2 minute warning
3) 10 minute warning
Results:
-People were more persuaded when there was no warning, then a 2 min warning, then a 10 min warning
47
Inoculation Effect
-Getting someone w a weak attitude to bulk it up and be stronger
Example: Middle school student knows smoking is bad, you tell them someone is going to make fun of you if you don't smoke and they defend themselves
-You are not changing someones mind only strengthening previous attitudes
48
Social Cognition
-The study of how people think about people (ourselves and others)
49
Attribution theory
-Something someone does is due to their dispositions (internal self/traits) not external situations
50
Contrast effect
Example: Attractiveness of celebs
-You get exposed to something good or bad and then something neutral is introduced and it seems like the neutral is the opposite extreme
Ex:
-Bombardment of attractive people in the media effects our perception of attractiveness of normal individuals (makes us think they are uglier)
51
Contrast effect:
Example: Attractiveness, Charlie's angels
-Not an experiment bc no random assignment =
self selection bias (correlational)
-Male participants were asked to rate a picture of a female (that was rated at avg. level of attractiveness=neutral attractiveness)
Conditions:
1) Watching Charlie's Angel's
2) Different time watching Charlie's Angels
3) Control not watching Charlie's Angels
Results:
-Control rated picture more attractive than Charlie's Angel's groups
Conclusion:
-Contrast effect, seeing Angel's made men think avg women was less attractive
52
Contrast effect:
Follow up study, Slides of Sara
Coverstory:
-Judge personality and rate appearance of another women
Conditions:
1) Seeing slides of Sara (attractive)
2) Seeing no slide
Results:
-People who say Sara rated the other woman's appearance lower than the no slide control group
Conclusion:
-Contrast effect
53
Contrast effect:
Ex: Participants self rate their own attractiveness (poster of same sex models)
Conditions:
1) Came in and did survey w poster on the wall of same sex models
2) Came in and did survey w no poster
Results:
-Both males and women control groups rated their attractiveness higher than the other model groups
-(Interestingly women's control rated themselves lower than males on attractiveness), they are more effected by the contrast effect
Conclusion:
-Contrast effect
54
Contrast Effect:
Ex: Men and women's self rating of their own attractiveness
Males and Women's conditions:
1) Control: seeing no one
2) Attractiveness: seeing someone attractive
3) Unattractiveness: seeing someone unattractive
Results for both men and women:
-Control= middle rating
-Attractiveness= rated lower
-Unattractiveness= rated higher
-Women rated their own attractiveness lower than mens in attractiveness condition and higher than mens in unattractiveness condition. (Women are more effected by contrast effect)
55
Contrast Effect:
Ex: Ratings of target's attractiveness, w strangers/friends
-Depending on whether that target is w an attractive/unattractive stranger or friend
Results:
-Target rated more attractive when standing next to an unattractive stranger rather than attractive
-Target person is rated more attractive when standing next to an attractive friend rather than unattractive
Conclusion:
-Contrast effect (strangers)
-Opposite contrast effect (friends)
56
Contrast effect:
(Correlational study, no random assignment) Avg. Self concept of top students depending on competitiveness of the college they attended
Conditions:
1) Low competitiveness
2) High competitiveness
Results:
-Low competitiveness had higher self concept, felt better about themselves
-High competitiveness has lower self concept, felt worse about themselves
Conclusion:
-Contrast effect. Those students in high competitive schools most likely aren't the top students anymore and doing average. (Neutral placement compared to their previous superior placement in school makes them feel like they are doing really bad and feel a lot worse)
57
Priming:
Ex: Memorize words
-Memorize word list then rate man after reading vague description of the man
Conditions:
1) 6 neutral words and 4 positive words
2) 6 neutral words and 4 negative words
Results:
-Positive word condition rated man more positively than negative words condition
Conclusion:
-Priming can influence our attitudes on someone
58
Priming:
Ex: Word puzzles
-Had people complete word puzzles, told participant to come see them when they were done so that they could leave, experimenter rigged fake conversation w a confederate ignoring the participants
Dv: Will the participant interrupt the conversation?
Conditions:
1) Rude word puzzle
2) Polite word puzzle
3) Neutral word puzzle
Results:
-Rude word puzzle prime participants interrupted the conversation a lot more than other groups
-People who Interupted: Rude > Control > Polite
59
Priming:
Ex: Intentions to use a condom
Conditions:
1) Control
2) Sprayed "Liquid Ass" before convo
Results:
-"Liquid Ass" group rated higher intentions for condom usage
Conclusion:
-"Liquid Ass" group was primed w the bad smell, made them think of sickness, bad, unhealthy, dirty, and wanting to prevent that
60
Message Framing:
What type of message works best?
-People will most likely go for option that avoids loss
61
Message Framing:
Ex: Outbreak expected to kill 600 people results
-Both choices are practically the same, but people are more likely to choose the condition that appears to avoid loss (positive vocab blurb)
62
Message Framing:
Ex: Home Energy Auditors
Conditions:
1) "You will save $20 per month on your energy if you install"
2) "You are losing $20 per month by not installing"
Results:
-People are more convinced by 2) condition
Conclusion:
People are more affected by loss
63
Primacy Effect in Impression Formation
Ex: Introducing person w/ traits listed
-People w/ negative words first in list rated people worse
64
Primacy Effect in Impression Formation:
Attention decrement Hypothesis
Interpretive set hypothesis
Attention decrement Hypothesis:
-Pay most attention to beginning info then lose interest
Interpretive set hypothesis:
-Whatever you learn first creates a stereotype and the later things you see are judged based off of that
65
Primacy Effect in Impression Formation:
Representative Heuristic
Availability Heuristic
Representative Heuristic:
-Judging things by stereotypes
Availability Heuristic:
-How easily something comes to mind
66
Why does availability heuristic occur?
Ex: Assertive and unassertive examples
Theories:
Because there are more examples?
Because it is easier to remember?
Ex:
-People were asked to either think of 6 or 12 examples for each category (people can typically think of 8-9 examples)
Conditions:
1) Assertive examples, 6 examples
2) Assertive examples, 12 examples (difficult)
3) Unassertive examples, 6 examples
4) Unassertive examples, 12 examples (difficult)
Results:
-Assertive group: 6 examples people think they are more assertive because task was easy for them, 12 example people think they are less assertive because task was hard for them
-Unassertive group: 6 examples people think they are more unassertive because task was easy for them, 12 example people think they are more assertive because task was hard for them
Conclusion:
-Because the examples are easier to remember
67
Availability Heuristic:
Ex: Teachers evaluation
Conditions:
1) Give 2 ways to fix class
2) Give 10 ways to fix class
Results:
-"Give 2 ways" is easier than "give 10 ways" so "give 10 ways" group will think the class is better because it's harder to come up w examples
68
Attitude Heuristic:
-False Consensus Effect
-Inaccurately thinking others agree, think, or do the things you do
69
False Consensus Effect:
Ex: Wear a sign
-The people who agreed to wear the sign thought most people would agree to wear the sign as well
70
False Consensus Effect:
Ex: Athletes using illegal drugs
Non-users: Think smaller percentages are using drugs
Users: Think bigger percentages are using drugs
Conclusion:
-False Consensus effect (think people are like them)
71
Categories and Social Stereotypes
Expectations influence what?
-Observer w/ observer bias
-Interactions w/ self fulfilling prophecy
72
Expectations:
Ex: Teachers told kids "IQ's"
****** look in book for correct answer
-Experimenters gave kids IQ test, randomly assigned kids IQ's and told their teacher a kid had either a "high IQ" or "Bloomer IQ" (will do good later in life)
-Teachers treated these kids differently based on their thought to be IQ
73
Expectations:
Ex: Gave male participants a photo of a female partner and told they were talking on the phone w her
-Pic was either attractive or unattractive
-Men who got the attractive pic expected she would have more socially desirable traits attributed to them
Results:
-Women sounded completely different based on their personality depending on what picture their male partner got (Ex: Men got attractive pic, women sounded more socially desirable)
Conclusion:
-Self Fulfilling prophecy
74
Outgroup Homogeneity
Expecting people in the same group to be similar (Only works for the majority not minority)
-Minorities don't experience outgroup homogeneity
75
Outgroup Homogeneity:
Ex: Sorority
-Thought outgroup sorority was more similar and their sorority was more diverse
-Only works for majority group members
76
Outgroup Homogeneity:
Ex: Nursing students
-Rate variability among genders in program
Conditions:
-Major= females
-Minor= males
Results:
-Male nursing students thought they were more similar and females more diverse
-Female nursing students thought they were all different/diverse and men were all the same
Conclusion:
-Females (Majority) experienced outgroup homogeneity
-Males (Minor) did not experience the effect
77
Outgroup Homogeneity:
Ex: Police Officers in training
-How much variability among genders in career field?
Conditions:
-Major= men
-Minor= women
Results:
-Men see women as more similar
-Females see men as more diverse and women as more similar
Conclusion:
-Men (Majority) experienced outgroup homogeneity
-Women (Minor) did not experience the effect
(Shows it's not just gender based, works for both genders)
78
Minimal group Paradigm
-How meaningful characteristics/values does it take to get people to like each other
Ans: It takes almost nothing (He could flip a coin and people will like the group)
79
Outgroup Homogeneity, Evolutionary perspective:
Ex: Rating Musicians
-Ingroup= popular music (Music most people like)
-Outgroup= Other musicians
Results:
-People assume the ingroup deserves the most money
Conclusion:
-Evolutionary because the more people around to protect you for survival
80