HRLP - Group Dynamics

Question 1

competition

Answer 1

interpersonal and intergroup behavior aimed at benefitting onself at the cost of others

Question 2

cooperation

Answer 2

intergroup prosocial behaviors

benefit interests of others, mutual gains,

involve both parties benefitting or one sacrificing for another

Question 3

realistic conflict theory (RCT)

Answer 3

conflict b/w grp is result of competition over limited resources

competition = hostility, cooperation = compassion

Question 4

negative interdependence (RCT)

Answer 4

one group can succeed if other fails

Question 5

contact alone is ..

Answer 5

insufficient

Question 6

positive goal interdependence

Answer 6

conflict can only be resolved through cooperation

Question 7

intrinsic motivation

Answer 7

engagin in activity for its own sake = for personal fulfillment, stronger relations, etc.

Question 8

extrinsic motivation

Answer 8

engaging in activity for extrinsic reward

Question 9

Cooperation & Competition Studies

Answer 9

sherif et al (1954)
taver (2004)

Question 10

taver (2004) study summary

Answer 10

aim: to investigate impact of competition, cooperation and both on motivation & performance of task

procedure: 44 teenage boys randomly assigned to conditions while playing basketball
*competition: working alone vs another player
*cooperation: working w teammate to achieve shared goal
*co-opetition: pair vs pair
measure of motivation thru survey & questionnaire

results: co-opetition had best impact of motivation, cooperation increased motivation, competition increased performance

conclusion:co-opetition enhanced both motivation and performance

Question 11

taver 2004 study evaluation

Answer 11

controlled environment = high internal validity

participants sample is limited, cannot be generalized

only measures short term effect

did not account for individual motivation

Question 12

critical thinking ; cooperation & competition theory (RCT)

Answer 12

provides outlook into grp dynamic
inform real world behaviors
explains role of motivation

low ecological validity
limited generalizability (WEIRD)
overlooks social categorization & political factors

Question 13

prejudice

Answer 13

negative attitude towards individuals based on grp membership

Question 14

discrimination

Answer 14

unfair treatment of individuals based on grp membership = often result of prejudice

Question 15

SIT explanation of prejudice & discrimination

Answer 15

prejudice & discrimination result from social categorization & biases

Question 16

RCT explanation of prejudice & discrimination

Answer 16

intergroup discrimination can arise from competitive incompatible goals & negative interdependence (i win = u lose)

Question 17

implicit bias

Answer 17

prejudice which leads to discrimination may stem from cognitive biases

Question 18

schema theory explanation of prejudice & discrimination

Answer 18

activation of social schema linked to streotypes may influence cognitive processes like memory & thinking + decision making

Question 19

studies for prejudice & discrimination

Answer 19

harris & fiske
levinson

Question 20

Levinson prejudice & discrimination study summary

Answer 20

aim: to investigate the effect of implicit bias on memory recall

procedure: participants read two stories (1) fisfight, (2) employee being terminated, manipulation of protagonist race (caucasian, hawaiian, african american)
distraction task, yes no questionnaire for recall
separate test to measure explicit bias

results: recall demonstrated negative racial bias towards African Americans & Hawaiians = remembered aggressive details luke punching, while causians received positive details

conclusion: implicit bias influences cognitive processes but is separate from explicit racial bias = unconcious bias

Question 21

Levinson study eval

Answer 21

demonstrates unconcious racial bias influence on memory & perception w/out explicit bias

bias was inferred from memory distortion & not IAT

controlled design of identical stories ensures only race was manipulated =high internal validity

study presumes racial schemas influenced recall but didnt measure schema

relevant to criminal justice

demand characteristics

Question 22

brain regions associated with prejudice & discrimination

Answer 22

insula: linked w/ feelings of disgust

medial pfc: processing social information

amygdala: emotional reactions

Question 23

bio study for prejudice & discrimination

Answer 23

Harris & Fiske (2006)

Question 24

Harris & Fiske study summary

Answer 24

aim: to investigate socioemotional & neurological reaction to outgrp members

procedure: 10 right handed american student, fMRI scan, presented w combos of images to evoke emotion
*high competence + high warmth: ingrp member
*high competence + low warmth: rich business ppl
*low competence + high warmth: elders
*low competence + low warmth: hommless, drug addicts

results: low competence + low warmth =high insula activation = disgust
high activation in amygdala & insula: fear + disgust

no mPFC activation = area of info processing = deemed as less than

conclusion: low warmth + low competence = low activation in mPFC

Question 25

harris + fiske evaluation

Answer 25

bio evidence for prejudice fMRI = objective measure small sample size = not generalizable correlational study

Question 26

conflict

Answer 26

disagreement or incompatibility between individuals or groups, ranging from prejudice to discrimination / bias

Question 27

conflict resolution

Answer 27

strategies aimed at reducing or eliminating intergroup conflict

Question 28

socio origins of conflict

Answer 28

in group favortism, outgroup bias, negative interdependence, incompatible goals, competition over limited resources

Question 29

bio origins of conflict - brain strucutres related to prejudicial attitudes

Answer 29

insula: disgust response amygdala: emotional reaction medial PFC: social information processing

Question 30

conflict can be reduced by (6 factors)

Answer 30

increased contact equal status possession of shared goods members must endorse interaction grps must cooperate individuals must have meaningful interactions, avoiding social categorization

Question 31

Park & Rothbart study summary

Answer 31

aim: investigate if individuals of a social grp perceive themselves are more diverse and other outgrps as more similar (outgrp homogenity effect) procedure: 90 girls, 3 sororities, questionnaire to rate own sorority & 2 others on following: *positive traits: studiousness, physical attractiveness, philanthropy, econ status *negative traits: partying, sexual activit, etc. 7 pt scale (7 highly characteristics, 0 not characteristic) , and rated how similar members were to each other results: perceived own sorority as more diverse, outgrp more homogenous, positive characteristics more present in ingrp, negative more present in outgrp conclusion: ppl favor their won groups whilst negative traits are projected onto outgroup (positive distinctiveness)

Question 32

evaluation of Park & Rothbart

Answer 32

demonstrates ingrp favortism real life social grp only female = limits generalizability social desirability bias only perception measure, not behaviors correlational