Social Psychology 2 Flashcards
(28 cards)
Why do we join groups?
Sense of security and belonging
Receiving information, assistance or social support from other members.
Festinger’s social comparison theory- people join groups to evaluate the accuracy of their personal beliefs and attitudes.
Social identity theory
We don’t just categorize or stereotype other, we also do it for ourselves
Potential biological basis
Groups formed to help us achieve tasks we could not do alone
Social Facilitation Theory
The enhancement of an individual’s performance when that person works in the presence of other people.
The presence of others inhibits or enhances an individual’s performance, depending on whether the behaviour is dominant or non-dominant
Social Loafing
Max Ringelmann’s finding of team tug-of-war efforts.
Groups may be less motivated when working towards a common goal.
Pulled 18% harder when they knew they were pulling alone (Ingham et al, 1974)
Latane et al (1979) examined both coordination losses and social loafing. Students either:
cheered alone
cheered in 2- or 6- person groups
they were led to believe they were in 2- or 6- person groups
Results of social loafing experiment
Groups generated more noise than solitary participants- but productivity dropped as group size increased
Productivity also dropped when subjects merely believed they were in groups
This decline in productivity could be attributed to a reduction in effort.
When people are not accountable and cannot evaluate their own efforts, responsibility is diffused across all group members (Harkins & Jackson, 1985)
The Bystander Effect
The presence of others reduces the likelihood that people will help in an emergency situation or interfere with social norm violations.
The theory of ‘diffusion of responsibility’ : “why should I help when there’s someone who could do it?”
Pluralistic ignorance
Relying on others to define the situation and to then erroneously conclude that no intervention is necessary, when help is actually needed.
Leads to less help being given.
Case of Kitty Genovese
For more than half an hour 37 respectable, law abiding citizens in Queens watched a killer stalk and stab a woman in three separate attacks in Kew gardens. Twice, the sound of their voices and the sudden glow of bedroom lights interupted him and scared him off. Each time he returned, sought her out and stabbed her again. Not one person called the police until one witness called after the woman was dead.
The Bystander Effect 2
Latane and Darley (1968):
Students believed they were participating in a study about emotional issues facing students.
They were alone in rooms and given headphones to communicate over an intercom with other students.
When one of the ‘students’ started having a seizure, the participants belief about whether there were other students on the line influenced how often they sought help for the seizing student.
When alone 85% sought help, when there were 4 others on the line, only 35% did.
Reducing the Bystander Effect
Making direct appeals
Engendering responsibility
Creating social proofs
Gueguen et al. (2015) experiment: a man left a bag at a bus stop and went to a nearby ATM
Asking either one specific person to watch the bag, asked everyone in general, or no one at all.
The bag was then ‘stolen’
The researchers found that the more direct the request for help, them more likely people were to intervene.
Groupthink
A mode of thinking that people engage in when they were deeply involved in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive ingroup, when the members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.
Janis (1971, 1982) analysed the decision-making procedures behind several major fiascos
He concluded that each group fell prey to a distorted style of thinking that rendered the members incapable of making a rational decision
Symptoms of Groupthink
Type I: Overestimations of the group- its power and morality
Illusions of invulnerability creating excessive optimism and encouraging risk taking.
Unquestioned belief in the morality of the group, causing members to ignore the consequences of their actions.
Type II: Closed-mindedness
Rationalizing warnings that might challenge the group’s assumptions
Stereotyping those who are opposed to the group as weak, evil, biased, spiteful, impotent, or stupid.
Type III: Pressures toward uniformity
Self-censorship of ideas from the apparent group consensus
Illusions of unanimity among group members, silence is viewed as agreement
Direct pressure to conform placed on any member who questioned the group, couched in terms of “disloyalty”
Mindguards- self-appointed members who shield the group from dissenting information
Factors causing groupthink
Cohesion: Only occurs in cohesive groups, when increased conformity pressures exist, and members become more likely to accept the goals, decisions, and norms of the group without reservation.
Isolation: Groups prone to groupthink work too much in isolation
Biased Leadership: A biased leader is one who exerts too much authority over group members, which can increase conformity pressures and railroad decisions
Decisional Stress: When groups are stressed (particularly by time pressures) they minimise their discomfort by quickly choosing a plan of action with little argument or dissension.
Avoiding Groupthink
Leaders should not state their preferences when assigning the task to the group
Leaders should encourage open enquiry, members’ raising objects or doubts, and be accepting of criticism.
Causes or consequences of groupthink should be discussed.
The group should consider unpopular alternatives, and assign strong members the role of devil’s advocate
Outside experts and trusted colleagues outside the group should be consulted in different decision-making steps.
The organisation should consider the practice of having several independent groups work on the same issue/problem.
Cialdini’s 7 Principles of Persuasion
- Reciprocity- people feel obligated to return favours
- Scarcity- if we think something is about to run out, we want it more
- Authority- we are influenced more if something is told to us by someone in a relevant position of authority
- Commitment/Consistency- People have a psychological tendency to be consistent with their actions, statements, beliefs, and identities.
- Consensus/Social Proof- People tend to follow what others do
- Liking- People prefer similarities: the more we like someone, the greater the person’s chances of persuading us are.
- Unity- we want to say yes to people who we share an identity with, or are part of a group.
Representativeness heuristic
where we place people in different categories
This could be based on physical appearance, citizenship, gender, age, sexual orientation etc.S
Stereotyping
A mental shortcut we use to rapidly process social information
Where we infer who somebody is, based solely on the category they belong to and our representation of that category.
A belief that characterizes people based merely on their group membership
Stereotyping helps us quickly process social info, but no group is completely homogenous, so problems arise if we rely solely on stereotypes when considering individuals.
Stereotype threat
Stereotypes can be harmful, unsupported by evidence and directly harmful.
Stone et al (1999)- miniature golf game in a lab designed to test “natural athletic ability” or “sports intelligence”
White students performed worse when they were told the test measured athletic ability.
Black students performed worse when they were told the test measured sports intelligence.
Prejudice
Refers to how a person feels about an individual based on their group membership
Discrimination
Occurs when a person is biased against an individual, simply because of the individual’s membership in a social category.
Explicit Bias
Conscious beliefs, feelings and behaviour that people are perfectly willing to admit, which express hostility toward other groups while unduly favouring one’s own group.
Realistic Group Conflict Theory
Intergroup conflict occurs because there is competition to secure a scarce amount of resources.
People favour their in-group and want to gain resources for this group at the expense of the out-group.
Leading to positive feelings towards the in-group and negative towards the out-group.
“Robber’s Cave” experiment by Sherif et al.
Social Identity Theory
Conflict occurs as people strive to reach a coherent and positive identity.
Conflict stems from the need to view the ingroup, and the individual themselves, positively.
Negative bias towards the outgroup, helps maintain positive sense of self-esteem.
It interprets the Robber’s Cave finding that conflict between the boys comes from wanting superiority in the identity of their group over the other.
