Social Quiz Flashcards

1
Q

According to Williams and Bargh, why might experiencing physical warmth promote interpersonal warmth?

A
  • The insula cortex has a neural connection between physical and emotional stimuli and reactions
  • Early development and safety associates warmth with the comfort of the parent
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What are some of the implications of Williams and Bargh’s findings for interactions in real life?

A
  • Physical pathways could be used to influence social and emotional situations
  • However, lab tests are not representative of the real world. Issues such as length of priming effect, compounding elements, cultural differences etc
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is the principle of ideo-motor action and the perception behaviour link proposed by Bargh et al to explain automatic behaviour?

A
  • These are potential explanations for social behaviour being capable of automatic activation by the presence of features in the environment
  • The Principle of Ideo-Motor action:
    • merely thinking about soing something increases the likelihood of actually doing it
  • Perception Behaviour Link
    • representations held in the head are activatd by priming, which activates behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

According to Bargh et al (1996) under what conditions can behaviour be controlled?

A
  • Motivation: is required for priming to be controlled and lead to an effect
  • Awareness of the priming influence: reduces/eliminates the effect of the prime
  • Cognitive capacity: priming is more effective when conscious control is reduced ie when drunk
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What are some criticisms of Barghs research on priming effects?

A
  • Basic findings are not well-replicated
  • Inadequate assessment of participant awareness; is it truly unconscious?
  • Rigour of the original methodology; experimenter bias with the stopwatch timing -> not double blinded
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Summarise the experiment and findings of Bargh et al (1996)

A
  • Experiment 1: Behavioral Consequences of Trait Construct Priming
    • Sentence scramble task priming ‘rude’, ‘polite’ and neutral; measure amount of time the person waits before interrupting the experimentor to recieve next task
    • found that ‘rude’ priming interupted significantly faster than either other, no diff in polite (but only analysed those that did interupt - majority didnt)
  • Experiments 2 Behavioral Effects of Activating the Elderly Stereotype
    • Sentence scramble priming on elderly or young
    • measure speed of walking down a corridor
    • found that those primed with elderly walked more slowly
  • Experiment 3: Behavioral Effects of the African American Stereotype
    • Primed with picture of african american or caucasian male - measured anger (via expression) when computer error occurs
    • Those primed showed more hostility regardless of racist attitudes
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Summarise the experiment and findings of Williams and Bargh (2008) social warmth study

A
  • Experiment 1:
    • Participants held either a hot or iced coffee in the elevator up to the lab.
    • They read a description of “Person A” and rated them on 10 personality traits
    • people who held the warm drink rated person A significantly warmer
    • did not affect non warmth related traits
  • Experiment 2
    • participant held either hot or cold therapeutic pad
    • then asked to choose between a gift for themselves or for a friend
    • people who were warmth primed more likely to be generous
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Summarise the Doyen et al. (2012) attempt to replicate Barghs priming studies

A
  • Experiment 1
    • Attempted replication of Bargh et al. (1996) using automated infrared timers. Found no difference in walking speed between primed and non primed participants.
    • Used more sensitive measure of awareness of primes (Forced choice from pictures) Primed participants chose picture of elderly person significantly above chance.
  • Experiment 2
    • Manipulated experimenter expectation of priming effect (half expected primed participants to walk slower, half expected faster )
    • Used automated infrared timing AND manual stopwatch timing; experimentor expectations effected the recorded times
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Summarise the Lynott et al (2014) metastudy findings on replications of Barghs social warmth theory?

A
  • Reports 3 highpowered replications of Williams & Bargh (2008, Exp. 2)
  • All three failed to replicate the basic finding all found effect in opposite direction (non-sig.)
  • Concluded there is no evidence that holding warm pack increases prosocial behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What are the 6 tactics of manipulation?

A
  • Reciprocation
  • Consistency
  • Social Validation
  • Liking (physical attractiveness and similarity)
  • Authority
  • Scarcity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What is reciprocation?

A
  • The pressure to return a favour
  • Examples
    • The unsolicited gift: when veteran charities ask for donations via mail 18% respond, when a personalised gift is included jumps to 35%
    • Concessions: Ask people to volunteer for a day 17% comply, ask for a 2 year commitment then retreat to a day 50%
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is Consistency/conformity?

A
  • The desire to be/appear consistent
  • Examples
    • Say it out loud: when customers agree out loud to call back if they cant make a booking, no shows drop from 30% to 10%
    • Public commitment: contributions nearly double when the person has signed a petition on the topic in the recent past
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is Social Validation?

A
  • The desire to be part of the group
  • Examples
    • Larger group effect: A man standing in the street looking up. 4% will copy 1 man, 18% will copy 5, 40% will copy 15
    • Door to door: Advertisements say everyone is doing it
    • Backfiring: when calling attention to a problem by highlighting its frequency. Suicide rates increase after being told its very common
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What is Liking as a manipulation tactic?

A
  • People prefer to say yes to people they like
  • Liking can be due to similarity or attractiveness
  • Examples
    • Arizona State study: Good looking fundraisers generate twice as much as bad looking ones
    • Fundraisers on campus saying “I’m a student too” generate 2x donations
    • Compliments (true or false) increase sales
    • Cooperation (defence of customer from manager) promotes sales
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is the effect of Authority?

A
  • People are more likely to listen to/believe/copy an authority figure
  • Examples
    • 350% more people will follow a man in a suit crossing the street against the lights than in casual dress (1955)
    • Expertise/scientific credentials has a strong effect even if it isn’t genuine (Actor playing a doctor in a sitcom dispending medical advise)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What is the effect of scarcity?

A
  • Items and oppotunities become more valuable as they become less available
  • Examples
    • Ratings of cafeteria food at university went up when it was announced they would be unavailable for several weeks
    • Information: Beef orders - when told beef was going to be scare in the next few weeks doubled purchases, when told that this information came from exlusive sources orders increased by 600%
17
Q

How do the tactics of manipulation vary across cultures?

A
  • All operate across cultures but with different weightings
  • Survey of citibank employees willingness to agree to a coworkers request
    • USA: reciprocation priority
    • Spain: liking/friendship priority
    • China: Authority/high status
    • German: Consistency priority
18
Q

What is the minimal groups paradigm?

A
  • Developed by Tajfel (1971): All that is required for ingroup bias to occur is for there to be two groups
  • Shown through Minimal groups paradigm experiment:
    • People are (randomly) allocated into 2 groups and are asked to assign and detract points with no information other than group allocation
    • People assign points to ingroup (favouritism) and detract points from outgroup (derogation)
19
Q

What are the two main cognitive recategorisation techneques for improving intergroup relationships?

A
  • Common identity:
    • Provide a common identity that applies to both groups (encompassing)
    • strategies: terminology restructuring (I to we), sharing experiences (common understanding)
  • Dual Identity
    • Maintain a common identity while embracing differences and individuality
    • strategies: multiculturalism, specialities
20
Q

What are the limitations of the common ingroup identity model?

A
  • Common identity is a short term solution; people tend to revert or oppose it
  • Doesnt actually change the attitudes; the new group maintains a hierachy
  • Can lead to assimilation
  • Brewer’s optimal distinctiveness theory (1991) - people have competing motives for assimilation and differentiation, prefer membership in smaller groups, which provide a balance between these motives
  • Social Identity theory: people are motivated to maintain the positive distinctiveness of their group relative to other groups
21
Q

Why should social psychologists not focus solely on attitudes as a measure of bias?

A
  • The Principle-Implementation Gap
    • Attitudes dont necessarily lead to actions
  • More positive contact can lead to forgetting/ignoring systemic issues still in place
  • Eg African-American systemic discrimination - attitude improvement has not lead to dismantling of structures since many consider racism ‘solved’
    • increased common identity was associated with decreased support for social policies
  • Lab study
    • HIgh Power groups allocating credits after priming differences or commonality
    • Equally discriminatory in both cases
  • Naturalistic study; arabs in israel
    • commonality reduces minority vigilance to inequity
      *
22
Q

What are the main differences between majority and minority group attitudes towards outgroup bias?

A
  • majority groups
    • prefer common identity, pro assimilation to one (their) culture
    • want to maintain status, view commonality as a threat
    • mask bias to reflect benevolence, often not conscious
  • Minority groups
    • prefer dual identity, want to maintain culture individuality
    • want to close the gap, change status quo
    • have a stronger sense of ingroup identity and more motivated to improve group
23
Q

What are Berry’s four forms of cultural intergration?

A
  • Characterised by yes/no responses to two questions
    • are cultural identity and customs of value to be retained?
    • are positive relations with the larger society of value and to be sought?
  • Yes/Yes = integration
    • Dual Identity
  • Yes/No = separatism
    • Different groups
  • No/Yes = assimilation
    • Common identity
  • No/No = marginalization
    • Separate individuals
24
Q

What is some experimental evidence for differences in preferred representations for majority/minority relations?

A
  • Dovidio, Gaertner, Shnabel, Saguy, and Johnson (in press)
    • found that White students responded more positively to a black student emphasising common identity than dual identity
  • Saguy et al. (2008)
    • Both groups showed an equivalent interest in discussing topics of commonality.
    • High-power group members exhibited significantly less interest than did low-power group members in discussing power differences
  • Scheepers, Saguy, Dovidio,and Gaertner (2008)
    • responses were more positive to members of other groups who shared participants’ representations of the groups (one group or dual identity).
    • When encountering a member of the other group who had a different representation, participants showed a physiological threat response
25
Q

How do Maraven and Baumeister define self control?

A
  • Self-control is the exertion of control over the self by the self.
  • Self-control behaviors are designed to maximize the long-term best interests of the individual
  • The operate phase refers to any sort of action that seeks to reduce (or, in the case of negative standards, increase) discrepancies between a perceived aspect of self and a standard
26
Q

What are the key assumptions of the self control strength model?

A
  1. Self-control strength is necessary for the executive component of the self- Acts of volition and self-control require strength.
  2. Self-control strength is limited, in the sense that a person has finite capacity for self-control
  3. All self-control operations draw on the same resource
  4. The success or failure of self-control depends on the person’s level of self-control strength
  5. Self-control strength is expended in the process of self-control
  • The strength model predicts that exertion is followed by a deficit
  • That practice can increase the strength of self control
27
Q

What are some experimental stressors that display an aftereffect on self control?

A
  • Coping as inhibition: inhibiting or altering negative emotions and arousal/attention.
  • Noise: people perform more poorly following an uncontrollable or unpredictable noise
  • Crowding: crowding reduces self-control performance even after the
    person has been removed from the stressful situation
  • Odor:
  • General stress: Coping with stress often leads to relapses of smoking and drinking, as well as diet breaking
28
Q

What are the effects of mood regulation on self control?

A
  • People who are dealing with bad moods may be exerting self-control and therefore should show signs of self-control depletion
  • Resisting temptation:
    • Dieters are more likely to break their diets and eat more than they should after experiencing bad moods
  • Delayed gratification:
    • children in a bad mood are less able to delay gratification compared with children in a neutral or happy mood
  • Stamina and thoughts
    • participants who had sought to alter their emotional state showed subsequent decrements in physical endurance on the handgrip
29
Q

What are some alternative explanations to self control strength suggested by the authors?

A
  • Learned Helplessness: uncontrollable stressors are more depleting that stressors with an option of reduction
    • Contingency: sucessful application of self control should reinforce strength not the opposite
  • Mood: control over situation effects later depletion but there is no difference in reported emotional effects of the stressors so unlikely
  • Effort: self reported effort exerted on the first task did not correlate with
    subsequent self-control performance
  • Motivation: depletion may reduce selfefficacy and reduce motivation, there could be a motivation to conserve strength. Could explain effects of anticipated self control requirements
    *
30
Q

What are some issues with the strength self control model?

A
  • Link between emotional response and self control is inferred not proven
  • Cognitive theories of attention can potentially account for many findings eg motivation, attention,
  • Replication issues around ego depletion
31
Q

What is the effect of replenishment on self regulation?

A
  • Acts of self-control metabolise glucose in the brain
    • is glucose the resource that is responsible for self-control?
  • Gailliot et al. (2007): Participants watched video normally or while avoiding attending to words in lower part of screen. Drank lemonade sweetened with glucose or artificial sweetener - did better on subsequent stroop test
32
Q

What is the relationship of aggression and self control?

A
  • Finkel et al. (2009): Participants (who were couples in a romantic relationship) watched video normally or while avoiding attending to words in lower part of screen.
  • Participants then received either positive or negative feedback (from their partner) on a drawing they did at the beginning of the study.
  • Participants had to allocate a painful yoga pose to their partner - those that recieved negative feedback in the depleted condition assigned a longer lasting pose