Transcript Slide 1
Social psychology (branch) – • effects of social variables & cognitions – individual behavior & social interactions • social cognition• social influence- Social context – combo of… (a) (b) (c) (d) people activities & interactions among people setting (behavior occurs) expectations & social norms governing behavior (setting) adapt behavior to demands of social situation ambiguous situations: cues from others (behaviors) in setting Situationism – • environmental conditions influence behavior as much or more than their personal dispositions – thoughts / feelings / behaviors Dispositionism• internal forces dictate behavior – genes / traits Social role – • socially defined patterns of behavior expected – setting or group ascribed achieved Role Conflict What to do? How? When? Script – • knowledge: sequence of events & actions expected in setting Social norms – • expectations regarding appropriate & acceptable – attitudes & behavior general specific emergent norm • adjustment period…new person 1) notice regularities 2) negative consequences • T. Newcomb’s study… influence students’ political views • if grp opinion/fact clearly wrong? The Asch Effect Solomon Asch • influence of a grp majority on judgments of an individual – real or imagined social pressure Experiment: • deception: study on visual perception • procedure… Correct estimated (percent) No opposition (control) 100 With partner 80 60 Alone against majority 40 20 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Critical trials 9 10 11 12 Results… • discomfort & disbelief 3/4th / 76% succumbed • conformed = 1+ times / 37% critical trials • 1/4th independent related studies = 50-80% conform • factors influencing pressure: – size of majority – presence of a partner (dissenter) – discrepancy b/w correct answer & majority position • other studies… – judgment of task (difficult or ambiguous) – especially competent members – public v private response social influence normative- motivation: gain social acceptance & approval informational- motivation: correctness • individual heroic defiance– remain true to personal values [“whistleblowers”] – usually despised by colleagues & pay high price social loafing- expend less effort on grp task – assess individual contribution? • reduced or eliminated… 1- familiarity of grp 2- highly valued grp 3- task is meaningful or unique deindividuation social facilitation- others (presence) enhances individual performance – arousal & motivation increase • increase performance… 1- simple task (well learned) 2- evaluation • “groupthink”- attempt to conform opinions to consensus conditions promoting group isolation cohesiveness directive leadership lack of procedures homogeneous [social background & ideology] high stress external threats (all $$ on group leader) • that’s-not-all • door-in-the-face • foot-in-the-door • low-ball approach • historical evidence… • 1st obedience experiment @ Yale – teacher instructed: punish memory errors of learner • @ 375v- learner’s scream thud = silence – all participants stopped BUT then continued end = 450v or teacher’s refusal Shocking Results • “He can’t stand it! I’m not going to kill that man in there! You hear him hollering? He’s hollering… Who is going to take the responsibility if anything happens to that gentleman?” • “You mean I’ve got to keep going up with that scale? No sir, I’m not going to kill that man!” • 20 variations… social models = huge influence • no lasting issues [most fine w/] • participants went along b/c experiment • reality? agreed to participate = obey orders – same w/ real soldiers Stanford Prison & Milgram • good people situational conditions – other studies… Hoffling (’66): Sheridan & King (’72): Bickman (’74): nurses puppy actor on street • likelihood to provide help? – person or situation Factors Decreasing Help… • group size* – diffusion of responsibility • vague or ambiguous situations • personal costs / benefits 100 Percentage helping 2-person groups 80 3-person groups 60 6-person groups 40 20 0 20 80 120 160 200 240 Seconds: beginning of emergency 280 Does Training Encourage Helping? • no personality traits @ issue • helpers often have had… – training – education Need help? Ask for It! • T. Moriarity (’75) positive situational power – favor creates human bond --- shared social world sense of responsibility develops ask for help reduce ambiguity [problem & steps to assist] identify specific individuals does not insure safety --- ?? Influences Our Judgments of Others? others’ behavior but also… interpretation of actions w/in social context Social reality – subjective interpretation of other people & of relationships w/ them Reward theory of attraction – • social learning: like best = those max. rewards @ minimum cost – benefits… Proximity Similarity Self-Disclosure Physical Attractiveness Matching hypothesis – • prediction: most find friends & mates = same level of attractiveness Expectancy-value theory – • decide whether or not to pursue a relationship – potential value of relationship – expectations of success in establishing relationship Leon Festinger(’59) & J. Merrill Carlsmith • Cognitive dissonance – – conflicting cognitions, actions (voluntary) conflict w/ attitudes highly motivating state Resolution of Cognitive Dissonance 1. changing your attitude is the easiest way to solve this – Ex: I am a loyal friend, but yesterday I gossiped about my friend Chris . . . Well I can’t change my action . . . but I don’t want to change my view of myself, so my attitude about Chris must be wrong. He is more of an acquaintance than a friend. 2. Increase # of supporting elements – # of thoughts that back one side. – It was awesome gossip / people needed to know / they won’t mind / etc 3. Reduce importance of one of both of the sides – person I gossiped with won’t really tell that many people. • attribution– actions & outcomes to personal traits NOT situational forces homeless v. successful athlete F.A.E.– • tendency: emphasize internal causes & ignore external pressures [remind ourselves of circumstances] – more like a bias attributional charity- • Blaming the Victim • Just-world hypothesis – Retributive justice • actor-observer discrepancydouble standard! – self-serving bias – credit for success but denies responsibility for failure • self-effacing bias- Prejudice – – neg. attitude (individual) based solely on grp membership powerful force! ethnocentrismstereotyping- Discrimination – – neg. action against individual result of grp membership • numerous sources… – defensive reactions / distinguish strangers Dissimilarity & Social Distance • In-group v. Out-group – individual identifies Economic Competition Media Stereotyping Scapegoating Conformity to Social Norms Research suggests possible tools: New role models Equal status contact Legislation power of situation: helps us understand violence & terrorism, broader understanding… requires multiple perspectives that go beyond boundaries of traditional psychology • intense competitive situation conflict Cohesiveness: • solidarity, loyalty, & a sense of grp membership Aggression (violence): • refer to behavior that is intended to cause harm Mutual interdependence – • shared sense: need for each other – order to achieve common goals Terrorism Terrorism – use of violent, unpredictable acts by a small group against a larger group for political, economic, or religious goals multiple perspectives can provide important insights on the problems of aggression, violence, & terrorism Ten Steps Toward EvilGetting Good People to Harm Others 1. Provide people with an ideology to justify beliefs for actions 2. Make people take a small first step toward a harmful act with a minor, trivial action and then gradually increase those small actions 3. Make those in charge seem like a “just authority” 4. Slowly transform a once compassionate leader into a dictatorial figure 5. Provide people with vague and ever changing rules Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2007 Ten Steps Toward EvilGetting Good People to Harm Others 6. Relabel the situation’s actors and their actions to legitimize the ideology 7. Provide people with social models of compliance 8. Allow verbal dissent but only if people continue to comply behaviorally with orders 9. Encourage dehumanizing the victim 10. Make exiting the situation difficult Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2007 Social Inequality Prejudice develops when people have money, power, and prestige, and others do not. Social inequality increases prejudice. Social Divisions Ingroup: People with whom one shares a common identity. Outgroup: Those perceived as different from one’s ingroup. Ingroup Bias: The tendency to favor one’s own group. Mike Hewitt/ Getty Images Scotland’s famed “Tartan Army” fans. Emotional Roots of Prejudice Prejudice provides an outlet for anger [emotion] by providing someone to blame. After 9/11 many people lashed out against innocent Arab-Americans. Cognitive Roots of Prejudice One way we simplify our world is to categorize. We categorize people into groups by stereotyping them. Michael S. Yamashita/ Woodfin Camp Associates Foreign sunbathers may think Balinese look alike. How we explain someone’s behavior affects how we react to it Situational attribution “Maybe that driver is ill.” Tolerant reaction (proceed cautiously) Dispositional attribution “Crazy driver!” Unfavorable reaction (speed up & race past, give a dirty look) Negative behavior