Final Flashcards
(219 cards)
1
Q
Maintaining a Stable, Positive Self-Image
A
- As humans, we strive to maintain a favorable view of ourselves
- When confronted with unfavorable view of self
- Experience discomfort
2
Q
Three Ways to Reduce Dissonance
A
1. Change behavior
2. Justify behavior by changing one of the dissonant
cognitions
3. Justify behavior by adding new cognition
3
Q
Self-Affirmation
A
• Bolster the self-concept
• Reducing dissonance by adding a cognition about other positive attributes
• e.g., smoker who fails to quit • Not very smart of me to be smoking, but, I’m
really a very good mathematician!
4
Q
Impact Bias
A
The tendency to overestimate the intensity and duration of our emotional reactions to future
negative events.
• When we think about the future, we overestimate how bad negative events, like the end of a romantic relationship, will make us feel. What we fail to recognize is that dissonance reduction often helps
us bounce quickly.
• We overestimate the pain of disappointment because reducing dissonance is largely unconscious.
5
Q
Dissonance and the Self-Concept
A
- Dissonance is most painful when one of the cognitions is about the self
- Particularly true for those with high self-esteem
- Temporary blows to self-esteem can lead to greater behaviors consistent with low opinion of the self (e.g., cheat)
- People less likely to cheat when their self-concept of “not being a cheater” is invoked
6
Q
The Permanence of the Decision
A
- More important decisions = More dissonance
- Greater permanence = More dissonance
- Permanence of decision
- How difficult it is to revoke
7
Q
Creating the Illusion of Irrevocability
A
- When decisions are permanent (irrevocable) • Dissonance increases
- Motivation to reduce dissonance increases
8
Q
Three Reasons Lowballing Works
A
1. Sense of commitment 2. Sense of commitment triggers the anticipation of
an exciting event
3. Price only slightly higher than other prices
elsewhere
9
Q
The Decision to Behave Immorally
A
• Moral dilemmas
• Implications for self-esteem
• Dissonance reduction
• People may behave either more ethically or less ethically
in the future
Example: Cheating on a test
• Change behavior • Do not ever cheat again
• Future behavior—more ethical or vice versa (convince urself its not that bad after all = less ethical)
10
Q
Justification of Effort
A
The tendency for individuals to increase their liking for something they have worked hard to attain. (Sorority, army)
• Mild initiation or no effort: less liking of group
• Severe initiation: more liking of group
11
Q
External Justification
A
• A reason or an explanation for dissonant personal behavior that resides outside the individual (e.g., to receive a large
reward or avoid a severe punishment)
12
Q
• Internal Justification
A
• The reduction of dissonance by changing something about
oneself (e.g., one’s attitude or behavior)
13
Q
Insufficient Punishment
A
• The dissonance aroused when individuals lack sufficient external justification for having resisted a desired activity
or object, usually resulting in individuals’ devaluing the
forbidden activity or object
14
Q
When external justification for resisting an object or activity is insufficient:
A
Dissonance is aroused
• Reduce dissonance by
• Self-persuasion
• e.g., devaluing forbidden activity or object
15
Q
The Lasting Effects of Self-Persuasion
A
Results:
• Threat of severe punishment
• Forbidden toy remained highly attractive
• No change in attitude • Had sufficient external justification for resisting toy
• Threat of mild punishment
• Forbidden toy was rated as less attractive • External justification was insufficient • Resolved dissonance through internal justification
• Change attitude about toy
16
Q
Self-Persuasion
A
A long-lasting form of
attitude change that results from attempts at self-justification
17
Q
The Hypocrisy Paradigm
A
Induce hypocrisy: Students composed a speech describing the dangers of AIS and advocating for the use of condoms. Then,
after being made aware of their own failure to use condoms, students were asked to make a video for high school students )
• Make person aware of conflict between
• Attitudes • Behavior
• Hypocrisy creates dissonance
• Reduce dissonance by changing behavior
• e.g., attitudes about condoms and use of condoms
18
Q
C
Justifying Good Deeds and Harmful Acts
A
Dissonance theory predicts that when we
dislike someone, if we do them a favor, we will like them more
• Behavior is dissonant with attitude • Change attitude about person to resolve dissonance
• “The Ben Franklin Effect”
19
Q
Dehumanizing the Enemy: Justifying Cruelty
• Cruel behavior is dissonant with view of self as
A
• Cruel behavior is dissonant with view of self as a decent human being
• Resolve dissonance by changing thoughts about victim
• Davis and Jones (1960)
• Participants told a young man (confederate) they thought he was
shallow, untrustworthy, boring.
• Participants later convinced themselves that they didn’t like the victim and that he deserved to be hurt
20
Q
Yale Approach: Factors
A
According to this approach, attitude change/persuasion influenced by 3 factors:- Source – originator of communication (Attractive?
Message – features of communication itself one sided or 2? Fear?
Audience – characteristics of who is receiving the message
-Central route vs, Persuasion route
21
Q
The ABC’s of Attitudes
A
Attitudes: evaluations of people, objects, or
ideas (attitude objects)
Affective: emotions towards attitude object
Behavioral: actions towards attitude object
Cognitive: thoughts about attitude object
22
Q
Sources of Attitudes
A
Information Values Mere exposure Operant Conditioning Self-Perception Body Movement
23
Q
Function of Attitudes
A
Knowledge Function Value Expression Social Adjustment Function Binge-Eating StudyBennington Study Ego-Defensive Function Anti-Semitism Example
24
Q
Attitude Accessibility
A
strength of
association b/w attitude object and person’s
evaluation of it (i.e., reporting speed)
25
American culture
– Stresses the importance of not conforming – Celebrates the rugged individualist
26
Conformity
– A change in one’s behavior due to the real or imagined influence of other people
27
Informational Social Influence
– Conform because:
§ See others as a source of information to guide our behavior.
§ Believe that others’ interpretation of an ambiguous situation is more correct than ours and will help us choose an appropriate course of action.
28
Private Acceptance
• Conforming to other people’s behavior out of a genuine belief that what they are doing or saying
is right
• Informational social influence often results in private acceptance!
29
Public Compliance
Conforming to other people’s behavior publicly without necessarily believing in what we are doing
or saying
30
The Importance of Being Accurate
Informational social influence affected by how important it is to make an accurate judgment
• Eyewitness conformity when picking “perpetrators”out of police lineups
• Manipulated importance of task
EXAMPLE:
(– High-importance: Expect to receive $20 for accurate
identification, used to develop real task – Low-importance: Just another PSYC experiment – Confederates gave incorrect answers)
31
Contagion
– The rapid spread of emotions or behaviors through a crowd
32
When Will People Conform to Informational Social Influence?
When the situation is
– ambiguous (Ambiguity is the most crucial variable.)
– a crisis
-- When other people are experts
Example: Passenger who sees smoke coming out of an airplane engine will probably check the flight
attendants’ reaction rather than their seatmates’
33
Normative Social Influence: The Need to Be Accepted
* Humans are a social species. • Other people are important to our well-being.
* Being deprived of human contact is stressful and traumatic.
34
Normative social influence
– Conform in order to be liked and accepted by others
– Results in public compliance with the group’s beliefs and behaviors but not necessarily private acceptance of those beliefs and behaviors.
35
Normative Social Influence Results in
Usually results in public compliance without private acceptance
– Go along with the group even if you think the group’s actions are wrong
36
Conformity and Brain Imaging (fMRI)
When participants conformed to group (gave incorrect answer)
– Vision and perception areas active in brain
• When participants disagreed (gave correct answer)
– Different brain areas active
§ Amygdala
– Negative emotions
§ Right caudate nucleus
– modulating social behavior
37
Minority influence
– The case where a minority of group members influence the behavior or beliefs of the majority
• Consistency is key
– People with minority views must express the same view over time
• Members of the minority opinion must agree with one another
38
Injunctive norms
– People’s perceptions of what behaviors are approved or disapproved of by others
39
Descriptive norms
– People’s perceptions of how people actually behave in given situations, regardless of whether the behavior is approved or disapproved of by others
40
Foot-in-the-Door Technique
Getting people to agree first to a small request makes them more likely to agree later to a second,
larger request
41
Door-in-the-Face Technique
• First asking people for a large request that they will probably refuse makes them more likely to
agree later to a second, smaller request
42
Propaganda
• A deliberate, systematic attempt to advance a cause by manipulating mass attitudes and
behaviors, often through misleading or emotionally charged information
43
The Role of Normative Social Influence of milgram studies
Don’t want to disappoint experimenter
| When someone wants us to do something, it’s difficult to say no
44
The Role of Informational Social Influence of milgram studies
Participants were free to get up and leave. Why didn’t they do so?
– Confusing circumstance, not sure what to do
• Informational social influence is powerful when
1. Situation is ambiguous 2. Situation is a crisis 3. Other people in the situation have expertise
45
Reason for Joining a Group
Groups have a number of other benefits:
– Important source of information:
-- Help us resolve ambiguity in the social world
– Important aspect of identity:
--Help us define who we are
-- Help us feel distinct from other groups
– Establishment of social norms
46
Social Norms
• Potential costs to social roles
• If enmeshed in a role, individual identities and
personalities can get lost.
47
Social Roles
Shared expectations in a group about how particular people are supposed to behave in that group
48
Stanford Prisioner Experiment
Zimbardo and colleagues (1973) randomly assigned male volunteers to play roles for two weeks as:
– Prisoners
– Guards
• Students quickly assumed these roles.
– Researchers had to end the experiment after only six days.
49
Group Cohesiveness (Definition) Part 1
Qualities of a group that bind members together and promote liking between members
50
Group Cohesiveness Part 2
The more cohesive a group is, the more its members are likely to:
– Stay in the group
– Take part in group activities
– Try to recruit new like-minded members
Task requires close cooperation?
– Cohesiveness helps performance.
• Maintaining good relationships most important?
– Cohesiveness can interfere with optimal performance
51
Group Diversity
• Group members tend to be alike in age, sex, beliefs and opinions
• Why are they similar?
– Attracted to and likely to recruit similar others
– Groups operate in ways that encourage similarity in the members
• Homogenous groups are more cohesive
• Diverse groups perform better
52
Social Facilitation
People do better on simple tasks, and worse on complex tasks, when they are in the presence of others and their individual performance can be evaluated
53
Social Facilitation : The presence of others can mean one of two things:
1. Performing a task with coworkers doing the same thing you are
2. Performing a task in front of an audience that only observes you
54
Social Facilitation: If task is simple, well-learned
--The mere presence of others improves performance
| – This phenomenon is found in humans as well as other species!
55
Social Facilitation: Triplett
Triplett (1898) asked children to wind up a fishing line on a reel.
– By themselves or in the presence of other children
– They wound faster when in the presence of other
children than when by themselves
---One of the first social psychology experiments ever done
56
Arousal and the Dominant Response (Zajonc, 1965)
The presence of others increases physiological arousal
§ i.e., our bodies become more energized
• When such arousal exists:
– It is easier to do something that is simple.
– It is harder to do something complex or learn something new.
57
Why the Presence of Others Causes Arousal (Three Theories)
1. Other people cause us to become particularly alert and vigilant.
2. Other people make us apprehensive about how we’re being evaluated.
3. Other people distract us from the task at hand
ALSO
Because other people can be unpredictable, we are in a state of greater alertness in their presence.
Causes mild arousal
When other people can see how you are doing, you feel like they are evaluating you.
-Divert our attention
58
Social Loafing
• When in the presence of others, individual efforts often cannot be distinguished from those around them.
• If being with other people means merging into a group and becoming less noticeable than when alone: increase relaxation.
-People do worse on simple tasks but better on complex tasks when they are in the presence of others and their individual performance cannot be evaluated
Ringelmann (1913)
– When a group pulled on a rope, each individual exerted less effort than when doing it alone.
59
Slacking off in class
Sometimes being surrounded by others allows us to slack off (or “loaf”), demonstrating that there’s not a single, simple answer to the question of how the presence of other people affects individual performance.
60
Social Facilitation and Social Loafing
Arousal enhances performance on simple tasks but impairs performance on complex tasks.
• Becoming relaxed impairs performance on simple tasks but improves performance on complex tasks.
61
Gender and Social Loafing
• In a review of more than 150 studies
– Social loafing is more likely among men.
– Women tend to be higher than men in relational interdependence.
§ Focus on and care about personal relationships with other individuals
§ May make women less likely to engage in social loafing when in groups
62
Culture and Social Loafing
Tendency to loaf stronger in Western cultures than in Asian cultures
• Why?
– Self-definitions:
§ Asian cultures: Interdependent self – Reduces social loafing tendencies
63
Deindividuation
The loosening of normal constraints on behavior when people cannot be differentiated (such as when they are in a crowd), leading to an increase in impulsive and deviant acts
EXAMPLES:
– Massacre at My Lai during the Vietnam War
– Mobs of soccer fans sometimes attacking each other
– Hysterical fans at rock concerts who trampled each other to death
– Lynching of African Americans by people cloaked in the anonymity of white robes KKK
64
Deindividuation Makes People Feel Less Accountable
• Why does deindividuation lead to impulsive and sometime violent acts?
– Makes people feel less accountable
– Increases obedience to group norms
65
Deindividuation Increases Obedience to Group Norms
• Deindividuation does not always lead to aggressive or antisocial behavior.
– Depends on what the norm of the group is
66
Deindividuation Online
• Deindividuation does not require face-to-face contact
– Example: feeling less inhibited on social media that’s anonymous
• Cyberspace also provides advantages for the free and open discussion of difficult topics.
• Cost seems to be a reduction in common civility.
• The phenomenon of the internet “troll” is a modern example of deindividuation, made possible by the feelings of anonymity that often go along with being online.
67
When Group Interactions Inhibit Good Problem Solving
• Group will do well only if the most talented member can convince the others that he or she is right!
68
Process Loss
• Any aspect of group interaction that inhibits good problem solving
69
Failure to Share Unique Information
• Groups tend to focus on the information they share and ignore facts known to only some members of the group.
• Subsequent research has focused on ways to get groups to focus more on unshared information:
– Group discussions should last long enough to get beyond what everyone already knows.
– Assign different group members to specific areas of expertise so that they know that they alone are responsible for certain types of information.
70
Transactive Memory
• The combined memory of two people that is more efficient than the memory of either individual
71
Groupthink: Many Heads, One Mind
• A kind of thinking in which maintaining group cohesiveness and solidarity is more important than considering the facts in a realistic manner
• Janis (1972, 1982): Groupthink is most likely to occur when group is:
– Highly cohesive
– Isolated from contrary opinions
– Ruled by a directive leader who makes his or her wishes known
72
Avoiding the Groupthink Trap
```
• A wise leader can take several steps to avoid groupthink:
– Remain impartial
– Seek outside opinions
– Create subgroups
– Seek anonymous opinions
```
73
Group Polarization: Going to Extremes
• The tendency for groups to make decisions that are more extreme than the initial inclinations of its members
• Joining a group is likely to lead an individual’s attitudes to become more extreme through processes of group polarization.
1. Persuasive arguments interpretation
– Individuals bring to the group a set of arguments, some
of which other individuals have not considered.
2. Social comparison interpretation
– When people discuss an issue in a group, they first explore how everyone else feels.
74
Leadership in Groups
• Great Person Theory
| – The idea that certain key personality traits make a person a good leader, regardless of the situation
75
Leadership and Personality
• Personality and leadership abilities weakly related •Compared to nonleaders, leaders tend to be
slightly more:
– Intelligent
– Extraverted
– Confident
– Charismatic
• Surprisingly few personality characteristics correlate strongly with leadership effectiveness.
76
Leadership Styles
• Transactional Leaders
– Leaders who set clear, short-term goals and reward
people who meet them
• Transformational Leaders
– Leaders who inspire followers to focus on common, long-term goals
77
The Right Person in the Right Situation
* A leader can be highly successful in some situations but not in others.
* Comprehensive theory of leadership must focus on the leader, followers, and situation.
78
Contingency Theory of Leadership
The idea that leadership effectiveness depends both on how task-oriented or relationship-oriented the leader is and on the amount of control and influence the leader has over the group
79
Contingency Theory of Leadership (Two Types)
1. Task-Oriented Leader
- -A leader concerned more with getting the job done than with workers’ feelings and relationships
2. Relationship-Oriented Leader
- -A leader who is concerned primarily with workers’ feelings and relationships
80
Contingency Theory of Leadership (Work Situations)
• Task-oriented leaders, most effective
– High-control work situations
Leader-subordinate relationships are excellent § The work is structured and well-defined
– Low-control work situations
Leader-subordinate relationships are poor
The work needing to be done is not clearly defined
• Relationship-oriented leaders are most effective
– Moderate-control work situations
Fairly smooth
But some attention to poor relationships and hurt feelings is needed
81
Gender and Culture
NOTE: There are important differences...make sure you know them for the final!
82
When Goals Collide
• Often people have incompatible goals.
• These incompatibilities place them in conflict with
each other.
– This can be true of individuals, groups, companies, nations.
83
Social Dilemmas
• A conflict in which the most beneficial action for an individual, if chosen by most people, will have harmful effects on everyone
84
Prisoner’s Dilemma
• Two people must choose one of two options without knowing what the other person will choose.
• Payoff depends on the choices of both
– Example
If you and your friend both choose option X
– You both win $3
If, however, you choose option Y and your friend chooses option X,
– You win $6
– You friend loses $6
85
Increasing Cooperation in
| the Prisoner’s Dilemma
• People are more likely to adopt a cooperative strategy if:
– Playing the game with a friend
– Expecting to interact with their partner in the future
• Change norms about expected behavior – Changing name from “Wall Street Game” to
“Community Game”
§ Increased the percentage of people who cooperated from 33% to 71% in one study
86
Tit-for-Tat Strategy
– A means of encouraging cooperation by at first acting cooperatively but then always responding the way your opponent did (cooperatively or competitively) on the previous trial.
87
Negotiation
– A form of communication between opposing sides in a conflict in which offers and counteroffers are made and a solution occurs only when both parties agree
88
Integrative Solution
– A solution to conflict whereby parties make trade-offs on issues according to their different interests; each side concedes the most on issues that are unimportant to it but important to the other side
89
Negotiation and Bargaining
• When negotiating, integrative solutions are often available:
– Work on gaining trust and communicating.
– Remember people often construe situation differently.
– Neutral mediators often help solve labor disputes, legal battles, and divorce proceedings by recognizing that there are mutually agreeable solutions to a conflict.
90
Propinquity Effect
– The finding that the more we see and interact with people, the more likely they are to become our friends
91
The Person Next Door: The Propinquity Effect
• One determinant of interpersonal attraction is proximity.
– Sometimes also called propinquity
• 41% of the next-door neighbors indicated they were close friends
• 22% of those who lived two doors apart
• Only 10% of those who lived on opposite ends of the hall
• The Propinquity Effect occurs due to Mere Exposure.
92
Functional Distance
refers to certain aspects of architectural design that make it more likely that some people will come into contact with each other more often than with others
93
Mere Exposure Effect
The finding that the more exposure we have to a stimulus, the more apt we are to like it
94
Opinions and Personality
• Greater similarity leads to more liking
• Newcomb (1961): College men became friends
with those who were similar in
– Demographics
– Attitudes
– Values
95
Interests and Experiences
* Situations you choose to be in expose you to others with similar interests.
* Then, when you discover and create new similarities, they fuel the friendship.
* Close friendships are often made in college, in part because of prolonged propinquity.
96
Similarity in Committed Relationships Versus “Flings”
• For committed relationship – Choose a similar partner
Relationships based on differences can be difficult to maintain
– Perceived similarity more important than actual
similarity
• Low level of commitment (fling)
– Choose dissimilar partners
97
Reciprocal Liking
• We like people who like us
• For initial attraction, reciprocal liking can
overcome
– Dissimilarity in attitudes
– Attentional biases to attractive faces
98
Always Looking
One indicator of just how important physical appearance is in attraction is our nearly chronic tendency to shift visual attention to attractive others in our immediate vicinity.
99
Physical Attractiveness
• Physical attractiveness
– Plays an important role in liking
• Gender differences?
– Differences are larger when attitudes are measured
Men more likely than women to report attraction is important
– Gender similarities in behavior
100
Physical Attractiveness Findings and Research
The finding that we like people who like us suggests that the strategy of “playing hard-to-get” can sometimes backfire.
• Recent research suggests that the strategy tends to decrease how much another person likes you, all the while potentially increasing how much that person wants to be with you.
101
Female Faces—What Is Attractive?
```
• High attractiveness ratings are associated with:
– Large eyes
– Small nose
– Small chin
– Prominent cheekbones
– High eyebrows
– Large pupils
– Big smile
```
102
Male Faces—What Is Attractive?
```
• High attractiveness ratings are associated with:
– Large eyes
– Prominent cheekbones
– Large chin
– Big smile
```
103
Cultural Standards of Beauty
• Facial attractiveness perceived similarly across cultures
– Symmetry is preferred
Size, shape, and location of the features on one side match
the other side of face
– “Averaged” composite faces preferred
Lost atypical or asymmetrical variation
104
The Power of Familiarity
• Familiarity may be crucial variable for interpersonal attraction.
• People prefer faces that most resemble their own.
• Propinquity
– Gain familiarity through mere exposure
• Similarity
– If similar will also seem familiar
• Reciprocal liking
– People we who like and get to know become familiar
105
Assumptions About Attractive People
```
• Benefits of beauty
• Beauty has been associated with:
– better health outcomes for infants in hospitals
– better earnings
– better teaching evaluations
– winning elections
• Physical beauty affects attributions
```
106
Halo Effect
– A cognitive bias by which we tend to assume that an individual with one positive characteristic also possesses other (even unrelated) positive characteristics
107
Assumptions About Attractive People Stereotype
• “What is beautiful is good” stereotype
• The beautiful are thought to be more: – Sociable
– Extraverted – Popular
– Sexual
– Happy
– Assertive
108
Attractive People and the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
• Highly attractive people:
– Do develop good social interaction skills
– Report having more satisfying interactions with others
• Self-fulfilling prophecy
– The beautiful receive a great deal of social attention – Helps them develop good social skills
• Can a “regular” person be made to act like a “beautiful” one via the self-fulfilling prophecy?
• Yes!
– If men talking to women on the phone believe she is
attractive
§ Elicit warmer, friendlier responses
– Same for women
109
Technology Shapes Attraction and Social Connection
• How are attraction and social connection affected by modern technology?
– Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram, Tinder, text, virtual reality
• Example: Field experiment of 100 real-life
interactions
– Pairs with mobile device rated connectedness and empathy lower than pairs without devices
110
Attraction 2.0: Mate Preference in an Online Era
• Propinquity
– In Internet world, not that many degrees of separation
• Similarity
– People seek others with similar “popularity” in online
dating sites
• Familiarity
– Liking decreased after meeting (compared to liking
based on online profile)
§ Inaccuracy of online information
111
The Promise and Pitfalls of Online Dating
• Benefits
1. Aggregates a large number of profiles
2. Provides opportunity for communication
3. Matching users based on analyses of compatibility
But success rate not higher than other “old-fashioned” methods
• 81% provide inaccurate information in their profile for at least one characteristic
– Lies about weight, age, height
– No gender differences
• Deceptive, misleading photos
112
Companionate Love
– The intimacy and affection we feel when we care
deeply for a person
– Do not experience passion or arousal in the person’s presence.
• Nonsexual relationships --Close friendships
• Sexual relationships
– Psychological intimacy without “heat” and passion
– Close friendships
• Sexual relationships
– Psychological intimacy without “heat” and passion
113
Passionate Love
– An intense longing we feel for a person, accompanied
by physiological arousal
– When our love is reciprocated, we feel great fulfillment and ecstasy
– When it is not, we feel sadness and despair
--characterized by:
– The experience of physiological arousal
– The feeling of shortness of breath
– Thumping heart in loved one’s presence
114
Passionate and Companionate Love Across Cultures
* Americans value passionate love more than the Chinese
* The Chinese value companionate more
* Taita of Kenya value both equally
115
Culture and Love
```
• Love is a universal emotion
• Cultural differences about love
– Think about
– Define
– Experience
• Example:
– Romantic love viewed as more crucial in individualistic cultures compared to collectivistic ones
```
116
Cultural Rules Alter
Experience
Expression
Memory
117
Culture and Love: Japanese Amae
– Totally passive love object, indulged and taken care of by one’s romantic partner
118
Culture and Love: Chinese gan qing
– Achieved by helping and working for another person
119
Culture and Love: Korean Jung
– Connection that ties people together
120
Attachment Styles in Intimate Relationships
```
• Attachment Styles
– The expectations people develop about relationships with others, based on the relationship they had with their primary caregiver when they were infants
• There are three styles of attachment:
– Secure
– Anxious/Ambivalent
– Anxious/Avoidant
```
121
• Secure Attachment Style
– Trust, a lack of concern with being abandoned
| – View that one is worthy and well-liked
122
• Anxious/Ambivalent Attachment Style
– Concern that others will not reciprocate one’s desire for intimacy
– Results in higher-than-average levels of anxiety
123
• Avoidant Attachment Style
– Suppression of attachment needs, because attempts to
be intimate have been rebuffed
– People with this style find it difficult to develop intimate relationships
124
Early Attachment Styles Stay With Us
• Key assumption of attachment theory:
– Attachment style learned in infancy becomes schema
for all relationships
• Secure Attachment:
– More likely to develop mature, lasting relationships
• Avoidant Attachment:
– Less able to trust others and find it difficult to develop
close, intimate relationships
• Anxious/Ambivalent Attachment:
– Want closeness, but worry partner will not return affection
125
Attachment Style Is Not Destiny
* If people had unhappy relationships with their parents, they are not doomed to repeat this!
* People’s experience in relationships can help them learn new and more healthy ways of relating to others.
* People may develop more than one attachment style over time.
126
Theories of Relationship Satisfaction
• Social Exchange Theory
– People’s feelings about a relationship depend on perceptions of rewards and costs, the kind of relationship they deserve, and their chances for having a better relationship with someone else
– Is an economic model of costs and benefits!
127
Social Exchange Theory
```
• Basic concepts
– Rewards
Positive, gratifying aspects of relationship
– Costs
Negative aspects of relationship
– Outcome
Comparison of rewards versus costs
– Comparison level
Expectations
```
128
Comparison Level for Alternatives
People’s expectations about the level of rewards and punishments they would receive in an alternative relationship
129
Social Exchange Theory: Expectations and Satisfaction
* People’s expectations about the level of rewards and punishments they are likely to receive in a particular relationship.
* Relationship satisfaction depends on your comparison level.
* Relationship satisfaction also depends on your perception of the likelihood that you could replace it with a better one!
130
Investment Model of Commitment
* People’s commitment to a relationship depends not only on their satisfaction
* Also depends on investment and what would be lost by leaving it
131
Will People Stay in Love?
• To predict whether people will stay in an intimate relationship, we need to know:
1. Their level of satisfaction in the relationship
2. What they think of the alternatives
3. The degree of their investment in the relationship
132
Theories of Relationship Satisfaction
• Equity Theory
– Equitable relationships are the happiest and
most stable
– Rewards and costs are roughly equal
133
Equity Theory
• In inequitable relationships, one person feels:
– Over-benefited
Lots of rewards, few costs
Devote little time or energy to the relationship
– Under-benefited
Few rewards, high costs
Devote a lot of time and energy to the relationship
Inequity is more important to person who is under-benefitted
134
Equity in Long-Term Relationships
• Does equity operate the same way in long-term versus new relationships?
– Not exactly
• The more we get to know someone
– More reluctant to believe that we are simply exchanging favors
– Less inclined to expect immediate compensation for a favor
135
Exchange and Communal Relationships
• Exchange Relationships
– Relationships governed by the need for equity (i.e., for
an equal ratio of rewards and costs)
• Communal Relationships
– Relationships in which people’s primary concern is being responsive to the other person’s needs
136
Communal Relationships and Equity
• Communal relationships unconcerned with equity?
– Not necessarily
Distress when intimate relationships inequitable
• Equity takes different form in communal relationships
– Partner more relaxed with what concerns equity at any given time
• Feel imbalanced, then relationship may end
137
The Process of Breaking Up
* Is the breakup moral?
* If you find yourself in a romantic relationship and your partner seems inclined to break it off, try to end it mutually.
* Your experience will be less traumatic because you will share some control over the process (even if you don’t want it to happen).
* Relationship dissolution not a single event, but process with many steps
138
Four Stages of Breaking up?
• Four stages (Duck, 1982)
– Intrapersonal: thinks about dissatisfaction
– Dyadic: discusses breakup with partner
– Social: breakup announced to others
– Intrapersonal: recover by thinking about why and how it happened
139
Fatal Attraction
– 30% of breakups
Qualities that attract are the qualities that are disliked the most at break up.
– This phenomenon demonstrates importance of similarity.
140
The Experience of Breaking Up
• Can we predict the different ways people will feel when their relationship ends?
• Responsibility for breakup important factor
– “Breakers”: high level of responsibility
Least painful, upsetting, stressful
– “Breakees”: low level of responsibility
Miserable—lonely, depressed, angry
– “Mutuals”: same level of responsibility
Not as upset as “breakees” but more stressed than “breakers”
141
Other factors that affect experience of breakup:
– Gender
| Women report more negative reactions than men
142
Do people stay friends after break up?
– Heterosexual men not interested in friendship,
regardless of role in breakup
– Women more interested in remaining friends, especially if “breakee”
– More interested in remaining friends if satisfaction and investment in the relationship were high
143
Prosocial Behavior
– Any act performed with the goal of benefiting
| another person
144
Altruism
– The desire to help another person even if it involves a cost to the helper
145
Kin Selection
– The idea that behaviors that help a genetic relative are favored by natural selection
• Increase chances genes will be passed along by ensuring that genetic relatives have children
• Natural selection should favor altruistic acts directed toward genetic relatives
146
Norm of Reciprocity
– The expectation that helping others will increase the likelihood that they will help us in the future
147
Group Selection
Natural selection operates on individuals
– People who have traits that make them more likely to survive are more likely to reproduce and pass on those traits
• Natural selection also operates at a group level
– Example: selfless behavior to benefit the group
148
Social exchange theory
– What we do stems from desire to maximize rewards and minimize costs
– In relationships with others, try to maximize the ratio of social rewards to social costs
149
Social Exchange: The Costs and Rewards of Helping
Helping can be rewarding in a number of ways:
– The norm of reciprocity
§ Increase likelihood of future help
– Investment in future
§ Someone will help us when we need it
– Relief of bystander distress – Gain rewards
§ Social approval § Increased feelings of self-worth
COSTS
– Physical danger – Pain – Embarrassment – Time
*****Social exchange theory argues that true altruism does not exist
– People help when the benefits outweigh the costs
150
Empathy
– Put oneself in the shoes of another person and experience events and emotions (e.g., joy and sadness) the way that person experiences them
151
Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis
– When we feel empathy for a person, we will attempt to help that person purely for altruistic reasons, regardless of what we have to gain
152
Three Basic Motives Underlying Prosocial Behavior
```
• Evolutionary psychology
– Pass on genes
• Social exchange theory
– Maximize rewards, minimize costs
• Empathy-altruism hypothesis
– Powerful feelings of empathy and compassion lead to selfless giving
```
153
Altruistic Personality
– The qualities that cause an individual to help others in a wide variety of situations
• Individual differences in personality not the only predictors of helping
• Other critical factors:
– Situational pressures – Gender – Culture – Current moodations
154
Cultural Differences in Prosocial Behavior
People in all cultures are more likely to help anyone they define as a member of their in-group– (The group with which an individual identifies as a member)
than those they perceive in out-groups (– Any group with which an individual does not identify)
155
When will we help in-group and out-group members?
– In-group helping
§ Help when we feel empathy
– Out-group helping
§ Help when it furthers own self-interests
156
Effects of Positive Moods: Feel Good, Do Good
Being in a good mood can increase helping for these reasons:
– Good moods make us look on the bright side of life.
– Helping others can prolong our good mood. – Good moods increase self-attention.
BUT
Feeling guilty leads to doing good
157
Urban Overload Hypothesis
People living in cities are constantly being bombarded with stimulation and they keep to themselves to avoid being
overwhelmed by it
158
Residential Mobility
• It is not only where you live that matters, but how often you have moved from one place to another.
• People who have lived for a long time in one place more likely to engage in prosocial behaviors that
help community.
Living for a long time in one place leads to:
– Greater attachment to the community – More interdependence with neighbors – Greater concern with one’s reputation in the community
159
Pluralistic Ignorance
Bystanders’ assuming that nothing is wrong in an emergency because no one else looks concerned
160
Deciding to Implement the Help
Even if you know exactly what kind of help is appropriate, there are still reasons why you might
decide not to intervene:
– Might not be qualified to deliver the right kind of help.
– Might be afraid of:
§ Making a fool of yourself § Doing the wrong thing § Placing yourself in danger
161
Prosocial video games and songs
– Increase helping
• Why?
– Increases people’s empathy toward someone in need – Increases accessibility of helping thought
162
What Is Aggression?
Intentional behavior aimed at causing physical harm or psychological pain to another person
163
Instrumental aggression
– Aggression as a means to some goal other than causing pain
164
• Hostile aggression
– Aggression stemming from feelings of anger and aimed at inflicting pain or injury
165
Culture and Aggression
Aggression is an optional strategy
– Capacity for aggression exists – Expression of aggression
§ Circumstances § Culture
166
Herding versus agriculture cultures
Agriculture: develop cooperative strategies for survival
– Herding: herds vulnerable, so to decrease likelihood of theft, hyperalert and respond to threat with force
§ Fosters culture of honor: men respond aggressively to restore status when man’s reputation for toughness is on the line
167
Gender and Aggression
– Men more likely to:
§ be perpetrators of extreme violence in families § inflict more serious injury
– No gender difference:
§ Physical aggression with partners § Less violent aggression
168
Relational aggression
harming another person through the manipulation of relationships
– Women:
§ more likely to be perpetrator
169
Social-Cognitive Learning Theory
– People learn social behavior through observation and imitation of others
– Both positive (e.g., altruism) and negative (e.g., aggression) social behavior
170
Some Physiological Influences
```
• Alcohol increases aggression.
– This link is well-documented.
• Why?
1. Reduces anxiety and inhibitions 2. Disrupts information processing
3. “Think drink” effect
§ Expectations about the effects of alcohol influence behavior more than amount of alcohol drunk!
also
• Pain
– Increases aggression
• Discomfort
– Increases aggression
§ Heat, humidity, air pollution, and offensive odors
```
171
• Frustration-Aggression Theory
– The idea that frustration—the perception that you are being prevented from attaining a goal—increases the probability of an aggressive response
172
Frustration and Aggression Examples
• Goal proximity
– Closer to goal equals more frustration
§ E.g., someone cuts in line
– More frustration equals more aggression
• Unexpectedness of frustration
– More unexpected equals more aggression
173
Frustrations links to aggression
• Frustration
| – Does not always lead to aggression – Increases anger – Increases readiness to aggress
174
Frustration–aggression link depends on:
– Size and strength of the person responsible for your frustration
– Person’s ability to retaliate – Proximity of the person
Likelihood of aggression is reduced when frustration is:
– Understandable – Legitimate
– Unintentional
175
Deprivation and Aggression
Relative (not absolute) deprivation is linked to frustration and aggression.
– People perceive a discrepancy between what they have and what they think they should have.
176
Weapons Effect
| OK
The increase in aggression that can occur because of the mere presence of a gun or other weapon
177
Motivations for Rape
• Some men commit rape to dominate, humiliate or punish others
– Men can be sexually assaulted by women, too
• 85% of all rapes or attempted rapes are acquaintance rape
• May occur as a result of physical force or incapacitation
178
Sexual scripts
| OK
– Sets of implicit rules that specify proper sexual behavior for a person in a given situation, varying with the person’s gender, age, religion, social status, and peer group
179
Studying the Effects of Media Violence
Experimental studies (cont.)
– Actively watching violent video games has a stronger
influence
§ Games that directly promote violence increase:
– hostility – aggressive thoughts
– aggressive acts
180
The Role of First-Person Shooter Games
Numbing people to difficult, violent, and unpleasant events
• Increases indifferences to real victims of violence
• Repeatedly dehumanizing the “enemy” in games can affect how players regard real people
181
Why does watching media violence have these negative consequences?
– Increases physiological arousal and excitement – Triggers an automatic tendency to imitate hostile or
violent characters – Primes existing aggressive ideas and expectations – Models social scripts—approved ways of behaving
when we are frustrated, angry or hurt
182
Does Punishing Aggression Reduce Aggression?
• If aggressive act is used for punishment:
– Punishers model aggressive behavior – Might induce person to imitate their action
• Threat of mild punishment
– Powerful enough to get the child to stop the undesired activity
– Child must then justify his or her restraint, leading toattitude change
183
Harsh Punishment
```
• Used with children
– May backfire – Does not model appropriate behaviors
• Used with adults
– Can act as a deterrent
§ Must be swift and certain
```
184
Catharsis and Aggression
• Conventional wisdom suggests doing something aggressive to reduce feelings of aggression.
– “Get it out of your system”
• Oversimplifies psychoanalytic notion of catharsis
DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY
185
What Are We Supposed to Do with Our Anger?
• Control anger by “actively enabling” it to dissipate • Use simple devices:
– Count to 10 – Take deep breaths
186
Venting versus Self-Awareness
If close friend or spouse makes you angry, expressing anger may allow you to:
– Gain insight into yourself and dynamics of the relationship
• Express feelings in a way that is not:
– hostile – demeaning
To resolve conflict, it is best to reveal anger to the person who provoked you:
– But it can be helpful to write down feelings in a journal
– Benefits of “opening up”
§ Not due to venting
§ Due to insights and self-awareness (Pennebaker, 1990
187
Disrupting the Rejection-Rage Cycle
• Social rejection is a significant risk factor for
– teenage suicide, despair, and violence
• Most teenagers who have committed murders were bullied and rejected by peers
• Awareness, empathy training, and bully-reduction programs in schools can reduce bullying
188
Prejudice
– A hostile or negative attitude toward people in a distinguishable group based solely on their
membership in that group
• Any group can be a target of prejudice.
189
Three Components of Prejudice
* Cognitive: Stereotypes • Affective: Emotions
| * Behavioral: Discrimination
190
Stereotype
– A generalization about a group of people
– Certain traits are assigned to virtually all members of the group, regardless of actual variation among the
members.
• Make sense of our social world by grouping people together
191
The Cognitive Component: Stereotypes
From categories to stereotypes
– “the little pictures we carry around inside our heads”
• Think about the following:
– High school cheerleader – Compassionate nurse – Jewish computer scientist – Black musician
• What did you come up with?
192
Stereotyping:
– a cognitive process – can be positive or negative
– technique we use to simplify our world
§ “Cognitive misers” take shortcuts and adopt rules of thumb to understand people
– Better memory for information consistent with stereotypes
193
The Cognitive Component: Stereotypes
Stereotypes
– Adaptive: when accurately identifies attributes of a group well
– Maladaptive: blinds us to individual differences
194
Hostile sexism
– Stereotypical views of women that suggest that women are inferior to men
§ E.g., that they are less intelligent, less competent,
and so on
195
Benevolent sexism
Stereotypical, positive views of women
196
The Affective Component: Emotions
Negative emotions about groups are often ingrained.
| • This makes such attitudes difficult to dispel.
197
The Behavioral Component: Discrimination
– An unjustified negative or harmful action toward the members of a group simply because of
their membership in that group
198
Racial Discrimination: social distance
A person’s reluctance to get “too close” to another group
– Unwilling to work with, marry, or live next to members of a particular group
– Example: Straight student not wanting to sit next to gay student
199
The Activation of Prejudice
Behave more aggressively toward stereotyped target when:
– Stressed – Angry – Suffered blow to self-esteem
– Not in control of conscious intentions
• Prejudices lurk just beneath the surface
• Once activated, it affects how we perceive and treat out-group members
200
Suppressing Prejudices
• People hide prejudice.
– When situation becomes “safe,” their prejudice will be revealed.
§ Example
– Questioning President Obama’s Americanism, not his race per se
• Suppress prejudices for two reasons:
– Sincere motivation to become less prejudiced – Avoid being labeled a sexist, racist, etc.
201
Bogus pipeline
§ Participants believed a “lie detector” could detect true attitudes § More likely to express racist attitudes
202
Stereotype Threat
• The apprehension experienced by members of a group that their behavior might confirm a cultural stereotype
– “If I perform poorly on this test, it will reflect
badly on me and my race.”
203
Institutional discrimination
| OK
– Practices that discriminate, legally or illegally,
against a minority group by virtue of its ethnicity, gender, culture, age, sexual
orientation, or other target of societal or company prejudice
204
Normative conformity
The strong tendency to go along with the group in order to fulfill the group’s expectations and
gain acceptance
Why prejudice is institutionalized
205
Social identity:
– Part of our identity that stems from our membership in groups
206
Ethnocentrism
– The belief that your own culture, nation, or religion is superior to all others
207
In-group bias:
| OK
– The tendency to favor members of one’s own group and give them special preference over
people who belong to other groups; the group can be temporary and trivial as well as
significant
-Self-esteem
208
Out-Group Homogeneity
| OK
In-group members perceive out-group members as being more similar (homogeneous) than they
really are
• Know one out-group member, you know something about all of them
• “They” are all alike
209
Blaming the Victim
| OK
The tendency to blame individuals (make dispositional attributions) for their victimization, is
typically motivated by a desire to see the world as a fair place
• Blaming the victim serves a self-protective function
210
Crandall and Eshleman’s (2003) model
– Struggle between urge to express prejudice and the need to maintain positive self-concept
(as a nonbigot)
– Requires energy to suppress prejudiced impulses
• To conserve energy, seek valid justification for holding a negative attitude toward a particular out-group
• Can then act against that group and still feel like a nonbigot
– Avoids cognitive dissonance
211
Realistic Conflict Theory
• Prejudice increases when times are tense and conflict exists over mutually exclusive goals.
– Example
§ Economic recession and violence against Latino
212
Scapegoating
| OK
– When frustrated or unhappy, people tend to displace aggression onto groups that are
disliked, visible, and relatively powerless
• Form of aggression dependent on what in-group approves of or allows
213
Economic and Political Competition•
| Realistic conflict theory
– Limited resources leads to conflict among groups, which leads to prejudice and
discrimination
214
Economic and Political Competition
• When times are tough and resources are scarce:
1. In-group members will feel more threatened by the
out-group.
2. Incidents of prejudice, discrimination, and violence
toward out-group members will increase.
• Example: Sherif’s classic study of Eagles versus Rattlers
215
How Can Prejudice Be Reduced?
• Presenting people with information counter to stereotypes does not change beliefs
– Can actually strengthen stereotypical belief
– Disconfirming evidence challenges them to come up with additional reasons for holding on
to that belief
216
The Contact Hypothesis
Mere contact between groups not sufficient to reduce prejudice
– Can create opportunities for conflict that may
increase it
• Prejudice will decrease when two conditions are met:
– Both groups are of equal status. – Both share a common goal.
217
Six Conditions that Contact Reduces Prejudice
1. Mutual interdependence 2. Common goal 3. Equal status 4. Friendly, informal setting 5. Knowing multiple out-group members
6. Social norms of equality
218
Cooperation and Interdependence: The Jigsaw Classroom
Classroom setting designed to reduce prejudice and raise the self-esteem of children
– Placing children in small, desegregated groups
– Each child dependent on others to learn the course material and do well
• Reduces prejudice and promotes integration
219
Why does jigsaw classroom work?
– Breaks down perception of in-group and out-group, creates feeling of “one-ness”
– People must do each other “favors” by sharing information
– Develop empathy for others
• One of the most effective ways of improving race relations, improving empathy, and improving
instruction
