Social Kognition - Instuderingsfrågor (1) Flashcards
(44 cards)
Introduction - What are the fundamental questions social cognition asks?
Social cognition investigates how individuals perceive, interpret, and respond to social information. Some of the core questions include:
How do we perceive others?
This involves impression formation, stereotyping, and biases in interpreting social cues.
How do we understand and explain others’ behavior?
This relates to attribution theory (how we assign causes to actions) and theory of mind (our ability to infer others’ mental states).
How do our beliefs and expectations shape our social interactions?
Social cognition studies schemas, heuristics, and cognitive biases that influence how we anticipate and interpret social situations.
How do emotions and motivations shape social cognition?
Emotion affects attention, memory, and decision-making, often leading to motivated reasoning.
How do culture and context influence social cognition?
Social cognition varies across cultures, and research has highlighted the role of individualism vs. collectivism in shaping thought patterns.
Introduction - What is the role of the social agent?
The social agent (the individual engaging in social cognition) plays a crucial role as both an observer and a participant in social interactions. Their cognition is shaped by:
Cognitive Mechanisms
People use heuristics (mental shortcuts) and schemas to quickly interpret social information.
Attention and memory are selective and influenced by prior experiences and biases.
Emotions and Motivations
Affective states (e.g., happiness, fear) influence how we process social information.
Motivated cognition ensures that we interpret information in ways that align with our goals and beliefs.
Social and Cultural Context
Social cognition does not happen in isolation; norms, values, and group identities shape how people perceive and interact with the world.
Example: The ingroup-outgroup bias makes people favor their own group over outsiders.
Agency and Social Influence
The social agent is not just a passive receiver of information but actively constructs and shapes their social reality.
Through persuasion, conformity, and leadership, individuals also influence others’ cognition and behavior.
Introduction - What are the assumptions of social cognitive research?
Social cognitive research is based on several key assumptions:
Social cognition is information processing
The mind is often compared to a computer, where social stimuli are inputs that go through cognitive processing before leading to outputs (behavior).
Cognition is both automatic and controlled
Some processes, like stereotyping, happen automatically, while others, like deliberate perspective-taking, require effort and attention.
Social cognition is biased and constructive
People do not process information neutrally; confirmation bias, self-serving bias, and heuristics shape perception.
Mental representations shape social behavior
Our schemas (mental models of people and situations) influence how we respond to social situations.
Social cognition is context-dependent
The way we think about social information is influenced by situational factors, emotions, and cultural background.
Introduction - What are the modern trends discussed during the lecture that exemplify social cognitive research?
Recent developments in social cognition research incorporate technology, neuroscience, and broader social applications. Some key trends include:
Neuroscience of Social Cognition
The use of fMRI and EEG to study brain regions involved in social perception, empathy, and decision-making.
Research on the mirror neuron system and its role in understanding others’ actions and emotions.
Artificial Intelligence and Social Cognition
Studies on how people interact with AI and how human cognitive biases affect trust in technology.
Implicit Bias and Unconscious Cognition
Development of tools like the Implicit Association Test (IAT) to measure biases people may not consciously recognize.
Cultural and Cross-Cultural Social Cognition
Growing awareness that Western psychology is not universally applicable (related to the WEIRD issue below).
Studies on how collectivist vs. individualist cultures influence cognition, decision-making, and morality.
Applied Social Cognition in Politics and Marketing
Research on how cognitive biases shape fake news consumption, political ideology, and consumer behavior.
Introduction - Who are the WEIRD people and why is it important to talk about them?
Who Are the WEIRD People and Why Is It Important to Talk About Them?
WEIRD stands for Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic. It refers to the fact that most psychological research has been conducted on participants from these backgrounds, particularly in North America and Europe.
Why is this a problem?
Lack of Generalizability
WEIRD samples are not representative of humanity. They often emphasize individualism, analytic thinking, and market-based reasoning, which do not apply to all cultures.
Cultural Bias in Theories
Many fundamental theories in psychology (e.g., Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, Piaget’s cognitive stages) were based on WEIRD populations and may not apply universally.
Overlooking Different Cognitive Styles
Studies show that Westerners tend to think analytically (focusing on objects separately), while Eastern cultures think holistically (focusing on relationships and context).
Ethical and Practical Implications
Psychological insights influence education, public policy, and mental health interventions, which may not be appropriate for non-WEIRD societies.
Example:
Research on fairness and cooperation suggests that WEIRD individuals prefer equal distribution, while in other societies, fairness is often defined in terms of status, kinship, or community welfare.
Final Thought:
Social cognition research must evolve beyond WEIRD samples and consider diverse cultural, social, and economic perspectives. Expanding research globally will help create a more comprehensive, representative, and applicable understanding of human cognition.
Dual Modes of Processing – What are the differences between automatic and controlled cognitive systems?
Cognitive processing operates on two levels:
Automatic Processing (System 1)
Fast, effortless, and occurs without conscious awareness.
Relies on heuristics, schemas, and past experiences.
Used in familiar situations or when cognitive resources are limited.
Example: Instinctively recognizing a friend’s face in a crowd.
Controlled Processing (System 2)
Slow, effortful, and requires conscious attention.
Involves reasoning, critical thinking, and problem-solving.
Used for unfamiliar or complex tasks that require deliberate thought.
Example: Solving a math problem or writing an academic paper.
Key Difference:
Automatic processing is efficient but prone to biases, while controlled processing is accurate but resource-demanding.
Dual Modes of Processing – What is priming?
Priming is an implicit cognitive process where exposure to one stimulus influences how we respond to a subsequent stimulus, often without conscious awareness.
Types of Priming:
Semantic Priming: Words or concepts related in meaning activate each other (e.g., seeing the word “doctor” makes “nurse” easier to recognize).
Perceptual Priming: Exposure to a shape or image makes recognizing similar stimuli easier.
Subliminal Priming: Information is processed without conscious awareness, influencing later decisions.
Goal Priming: Being exposed to a goal-related cue increases motivation (e.g., seeing an athlete before a test might improve performance motivation).
Example:
If you were recently shown the word “yellow,” you are faster at recognizing the word “banana” due to semantic association.
Dual Modes of Processing – What is the relationship between proceduralization and targeted or goal-directed behavior?
Proceduralization refers to the transition from controlled to automatic processing when performing a behavior repeatedly. This process helps individuals execute complex tasks with minimal cognitive effort.
Stages of Proceduralization:
Cognitive Stage: The task requires conscious thought and effort (e.g., learning to drive a car).
Associative Stage: The task becomes smoother, and errors decrease (e.g., needing less attention to shift gears).
Autonomous Stage: The task is performed automatically with little conscious effort (e.g., driving while holding a conversation).
Link to Goal-Directed Behavior:
Proceduralization allows people to focus on higher-order goals by automating routine behaviors.
This frees up cognitive resources for decision-making and adapting to new challenges.
Example:
A professional pianist no longer needs to think about each note individually but can focus on expressiveness and musicality.
Dual Modes of Processing – What social factors influence whether a cognitive process is automatic or controlled?
The way we process social information—either automatically or through controlled reasoning—is influenced by several social factors:
Familiarity & Experience
Frequent exposure to a person or situation leads to automatic responses (e.g., knowing how a close friend will react).
Cognitive Load & Distraction
Under high cognitive load, people rely on heuristics and automatic thinking (e.g., making snap judgments about someone when multitasking).
Social Pressure & Norms
Controlled processing is more likely when accountability is high (e.g., carefully choosing words in a job interview).
Motivation & Importance of Outcome
When stakes are high, controlled thinking is triggered (e.g., critically evaluating a political argument when voting).
Cultural Influences
Collectivist cultures emphasize context-dependent processing, while individualist cultures rely more on trait-based judgments.
Example:
If someone asks about your political opinion casually, you may give an automatic response based on past beliefs. However, if you are asked to debate the topic publicly, you engage in controlled thinking to construct a strong argument.
Dual Modes of Processing – What methods do researchers use to understand what others are thinking?
Researchers use various methods to infer mental states and thought processes:
Behavioral Measures
Reaction time tasks: Measure how quickly people associate words or concepts (e.g., Implicit Association Test).
Eye-tracking: Tracks gaze direction to infer attention and interest.
Neuroscientific Techniques
fMRI: Identifies brain regions involved in social cognition.
EEG: Measures brain wave activity in response to social stimuli.
Self-Report & Surveys
Participants describe their thoughts and emotions, though subject to bias.
Observational Studies
Researchers analyze natural behavior and interactions to infer cognition (e.g., analyzing nonverbal cues in deception research).
Computational Modeling
AI and machine learning models simulate human cognition and decision-making processes.
Example:
Theory of Mind tasks assess how well someone can attribute beliefs and intentions to others, often used in developmental psychology.
Dual Modes of Processing – What are unimodal models?
Unimodal models challenge the traditional dual-process view (automatic vs. controlled) by proposing that all cognitive processing exists on a continuum rather than as two distinct systems.
Key Features of Unimodal Models:
Instead of separate automatic and controlled systems, cognitive effort varies dynamically based on task demands.
The same cognitive mechanism can be used in different ways depending on motivation, attention, and context.
Example of a Unimodal Model:
The Continuum Model of Impression Formation (Fiske & Neuberg, 1990) suggests that impressions range from categorization (heuristics) to individuation (detailed analysis) depending on effort and motivation.
Why It Matters:
Unimodal models emphasize flexibility in thinking rather than rigid categories, allowing for more nuanced explanations of social cognition.
Attribuering – Vad innebär attribuering?
Attribuering är den process genom vilken människor försöker förstå och förklara orsakerna bakom sitt eget och andras beteende. Det handlar om att tillskriva händelser interna (personliga) eller externa (situationsbaserade) orsaker.
Exempel:
Om en vän misslyckas på ett prov kan vi attribuera det till intern orsak (“hen är lat”) eller extern orsak (“provet var orättvist”).
Attribuering – Vilka grundläggande principer tillämpar människor för att förklara orsak-effekt?
Orsak kommer före verkan – För att något ska anses vara en orsak måste det inträffa innan effekten sker. Vi förväntar oss inte att en effekt uppstår före dess orsak.
Orsak kommer nära effekt i tiden – Ju närmare i tid en händelse är en effekt, desto mer sannolik är det att vi ser den som orsaken. Exempel: Om du äter en viss mat och direkt efteråt blir sjuk, tror du sannolikt att maten var orsaken.
Orsak kommer nära effekt i rummet – Händelser som sker på samma plats som effekten uppfattas som mer troliga orsaker. Exempel: Om ett glas faller från ett bord och du ser någon precis bredvid det, är det mer sannolikt att du tror att den personen orsakade fallet.
Orsak måste ske innan effekten – Detta liknar den första punkten men betonar att en orsak inte bara måste föregå effekten utan måste ske tillräckligt tidigt för att kunna påverka den. Exempel: Du kan inte skylla en strömavbrott på ett blixtnedslag som kom efter att strömmen gått.
Det som skett nyligen uppfattas som mer sannolikt att vara orsak – Människor har en tendens att koppla en effekt till något som nyligen inträffat, även om det kanske inte finns ett verkligt samband. Exempel: Om en person känner sig trött strax efter att ha druckit kaffe kan de tro att kaffet gjorde dem trötta, även om effekten borde vara motsatt.
Det som skett i närheten uppfattas som mer sannolikt att vara orsak – Händelser som sker i närheten av en effekt uppfattas som mer relevanta orsaker. Exempel: Om ett träd faller i en park och det just då blåser starkt, är det naturligt att anta att vinden orsakade fallet.
Attribuering – Vad innebär samvariation (’covariation’) enligt Kelleys teori?
Harold Kelley’s covariation model (1967) förklarar hur vi människor gör kausala attributioner – alltså hur vi bestämmer orsaken till en persons beteende.
Modellen bygger på idén att vi ser på mönster över tid och situationer för att avgöra om ett beteende orsakas av personen, situationen eller något annat.
Tre nyckelfaktorer i Kelleys Covariation Model:
Consensus – (Konsensus)
Fråga: “Gör andra samma sak i samma situation?”
Hög consensus = många andra beter sig likadant.
Låg consensus = bara den här personen gör det.
Exempel: Alla klagar på maten → hög consensus.
Distinctiveness – (Distinkthet)
Fråga: “Beter sig personen så här i andra situationer också?”
Hög distinctiveness = beteendet sker bara i den här typen av situation.
Låg distinctiveness = personen beter sig så här ofta, oavsett situation.
Exempel: Hon klagar bara på just den här restaurangen → hög distinctiveness.
Consistency – (Konsistens)
Fråga: “Uppvisar personen samma beteende varje gång i denna situation?”
Hög consistency = personen gör detta varje gång.
Låg consistency = beteendet är inte återkommande.
Exempel: Hon klagar varje gång hon äter där → hög consistency.
Attribuering – Vad är ’false consensus effect’, varför uppstår den och vilka effekter kan den få?
False consensus effect innebär att människor överskattar hur mycket andra delar deras åsikter, värderingar och beteenden.
Orsaker:
Selektiv exponering: Vi umgås mest med människor som delar våra åsikter.
Kognitiv tillgänglighet: Våra egna tankar och övertygelser är mer lättillgängliga i minnet.
Självbekräftelse: Vi vill tro att våra åsikter är normala och allmänt accepterade.
Effekter:
Missförstånd och kommunikationsproblem när människor antar att deras perspektiv är universellt.
Polarisering – människor tenderar att omge sig med likasinnade, vilket kan förstärka extremt tänkande.
Felaktiga beslut – personer kan underskatta hur mycket motstånd det finns mot deras idéer.
Exempel:
En person som är starkt emot en politisk reform antar att “de flesta” håller med, trots att undersökningar visar motsatsen.
Attribuering – Vad är det fundamentala attributionsfelet och vad skiljer det från ’the actor-observer effect’?
Det fundamentala attributionsfelet innebär att vi har en tendens att överskatta interna orsaker och underskatta externa faktorer när vi förklarar andras beteende.
Exempel:
Om någon snäser av oss i kön till mataffären antar vi att de är oartiga eller elaka (intern attribuering) istället för att tänka att de kanske har haft en dålig dag (extern attribuering).
Skillnad mot actor-observer effect:
Actor-observer effect innebär att vi attribuerar andras beteende till interna orsaker men vårt eget beteende till externa orsaker.
Exempel: Om vi själva snäser av någon, förklarar vi det med att vi är stressade (extern orsak), men om någon annan gör det, antar vi att de är otrevliga (intern orsak).
Sammanfattning:
Fundamentala attributionsfelet: Felattribuering av andras beteende till personlighet istället för situation.
Actor-observer effect: Vi tolkar vårt eget beteende mer situationellt, men andras mer personligt.
Attribuering – Vad skiljer ’self-serving attributional bias’ från ’self-centered bias’?
Self-serving attributional bias
Tendensen att förklara framgångar med interna orsaker och misslyckanden med externa orsaker.
Syfte: Skydda självbilden och stärka självkänslan.
Exempel:
“Jag fick ett A på tentan för att jag är smart och pluggade hårt” (intern attribuering).
“Jag kuggade tentan för att läraren var orättvis” (extern attribuering).
Self-centered bias
Tendensen att överskatta sin egen roll i händelser och tro att man bidragit mer än vad man faktiskt har.
Handlar mer om uppmärksamhet och självbild än att skydda mot misslyckanden.
Exempel:
I en gruppuppgift tror alla att de gjorde mer än sina gruppmedlemmar.
Ett par som gör hushållsarbete uppfattar båda att de gör mer än hälften av arbetet.
Skillnad:
Self-serving bias: Handlar om att skydda sin självkänsla vid framgång och misslyckande.
Self-centered bias: Handlar om att uppfatta sig själv som mer betydelsefull än vad som faktiskt är fallet.
Attention and Encoding – Describe the dual-stage two-phase model of selective attention
The dual-stage two-phase model explains how we selectively process information in two distinct stages:
Rapid, parallel processing (Stage 1)
Occurs automatically and unconsciously.
The brain scans the environment broadly, identifying salient or important stimuli (e.g., a loud sound, a moving object).
Focused, sequential processing (Stage 2)
Occurs when attention is directed towards a specific stimulus.
This phase involves conscious effort, deeper analysis, and encoding into memory.
Example:
While walking in a crowded place, you automatically notice someone waving (Stage 1), and then consciously recognize that it’s your friend (Stage 2).
Attention and Encoding – What is the difference between attention and encoding?
Attention is the process of selectively focusing on certain stimuli while ignoring others. It determines what gets processed. Selection of relevant info, can be automatic or controlled, temporary focus
Encoding is the transformation of attended information into a memory representation, determining what gets stored. Storage of selected info, mostly controlled (except implicit memory), long-term representation
Example:
Seeing an advertisement but not remembering its details means you attended to it but did not encode it.
Attention and Encoding – What is so special about faces?
Faces are special stimuli due to their biological and social importance. They:
Are processed holistically rather than as separate features (unlike objects).
Have a dedicated neural network (e.g., fusiform face area, FFA).
Are recognized faster than other visual stimuli.
Provide crucial social cues (e.g., emotions, intentions, identity).
Example:
The face-inversion effect shows that recognizing an upside-down face is much harder than recognizing an upside-down object, indicating specialized face processing.
Attention and Encoding – What did Todorov et al. (2005) study show?
Todorov et al. (2005) studied how first impressions are formed from facial features and found that:
People make trustworthiness and competence judgments within milliseconds.
These rapid impressions influence real-world decisions, such as voting behavior.
Facial features, even if unrelated to character, affect social and political outcomes.
Conclusion:
Social cognition is highly automatic and biased.
Facial perception plays a critical role in snap judgments of others
Attention and Encoding – What are the neural correlates of face perception?
Face perception involves a specialized neural network:
Fusiform Face Area (FFA) – Processes facial identity and distinguishing features.
Superior Temporal Sulcus (STS) – Detects social cues like eye gaze and expressions.
Amygdala – Evaluates emotional significance (e.g., detecting fear or anger).
Example:
fMRI studies show that the FFA activates more when looking at faces compared to objects, supporting the idea of face-specific processing in the brain.
Attention and Encoding – What is the difference between change blindness and choice blindness, and what do they show us?
Change Blindness: The failure to notice visual changes in a scene, even if they are significant.
Choice Blindness: The failure to notice when one’s own choice has been altered, and still justifying the false choice as if it were one’s own.
What do they show?
Our perception and encoding are limited and selective.
We construct our reality rather than recording it accurately.
Example:
Change Blindness: A person giving directions fails to notice that the stranger they are talking to has been swapped with another person.
Choice Blindness: A participant chooses a face they find most attractive, but when shown a different face, they still justify why they “chose” it.
Attention and Encoding – What is the anger vs. happy superiority effect in face perception?
The anger superiority effect states that people detect angry faces faster than happy faces.
Findings:
Evolutionary advantage: Detecting threats quickly is crucial for survival.
Attention bias: Negative emotions grab more attention because they signal danger.
Example:
In a crowd, people spot an angry face faster than a happy one, even if both are equally present.
Conclusion:
Emotion perception is not neutral—our brains prioritize potential threats over positive stimuli.
