Transcript Social Influence

Note to self: add reciprocity norm and social exchange theory to pp.
Social Psychology
scientific study of how we think
about, influence, and relate to
one another
Social Thinking
Attribution theory
Fundamental attribution error
Effects of Attribution
Relationship btw. Attitudes and action
Cognitive dissonance theory
SOCIAL THINKING
• ATTRIBUTION THEORY
 tendency to give a causal
explanation for someone’s
behavior, often by crediting
either the situation or the
person’s disposition
“So! If it’s good, it’s Mr.
Coffee, If it’s bad, it’s
me.”
•http://cogweb.ucla.edu/Discourse/Narrative/heider-simmel-demo.swf
•http://cogweb.ucla.edu/Discourse/Narrative/michotte-demo.swf
SOCIAL THINKING
• FUNDAMENTAL
ATTRIBUTION
ERROR
 tendency for observers,
when analyzing
another’s behavior, to
underestimate the
impact of the situation
and to overestimate the
impact of personal
disposition
• Unfortunately, our new apartment is not completely
sound-proof. My husband and I can easily hear the
person above us. We have never met the person but
we already have preconceived ideas about who she
is, what she does, and what her attitudes are. Last
night, she came home very late and right away Bruce
starts going on about what a tramp she must be for
staying out so late. Since we have never met her, we
cannot possibly take her actual perspective of things.
However, we could give her the benefit of the doubt.
Who knows, maybe her car broke down or she was on
vacation and her plane came in late. Although we
don't know her and we probably shouldn't think things
about her without even meeting her, it's common to
believe it is a person’s personal character rather than
their external circumstances that determine behavior.
• I used to drive into a gas station and get upset
at another driver whose car was sitting at the
second pump in an aisle while there was no
car at the first pump. "What an idiot. Why didn't
he/she just pull up to the first pump?" Of
course, it usually hit me that perhaps there
had been a car at the first pump when this
driver pulled in. I no longer jump to the
conclusion that the driver is an idiot
• So, I'm in a fast food restaurant when I decide I need to use the
bathroom. The door to the single-user bathroom is closed. Is
anybody in there? I try the doorknob to find out. It is unlocked, so I
proceed to enter. A man, with his back to me, fortunately, is at the
urinal. I exit and close the door. Enter the FAE. Why wouldn't he
lock the door? What kind of guy is he? I am not just led to negative
attributions; I also consider that he is comfortable enough with
himself that he is not embarrassed.
You probably know where this is going. As I take my turn in the
bathroom I notice that the lock is broken on the door. And as I
continue to use the bathroom, another person opens the door only
to find it occupied. I wonder what he was thinking? And why didn't
I or the previous occupant tell the next person that the lock was
broken?
Sometimes referred to as:
• “The actor-observer bias”
– I attribute the things YOU do to your
personal characteristics, but the things I do
are strongly influenced by the situation
SOCIAL THINKING
•
Effects of attribution
– How we explain someone’s behavior affects how we react to it
Situational attribution
“Maybe that driver is ill.”
Tolerant reaction
(proceed cautiously, allow
driver a wide berth)
Negative behavior
Unfavorable reaction
Dispositional attribution (speed up and race past the
“Crazy driver!”
other driver, give a dirty look)
SOCIAL THINKING
• ATTITUDES
 belief and feeling that predisposes one to
respond in a particular way to objects,
people and events
everybody likes you.avi
Prior attitudes shape current ones
•
•
65% - Views of “Watchdog” Press Change with President
The belief that the press should keep political leaders from doing things
that should not be done often depends on who those political leaders
are, or more specifically, which party controls the White House.
Currently, in the midst of the Obama administration, two-thirds of
Republicans (65%) support the so-called "watchdog role" for the press,
compared with 55% of Democrats. But last year, while Bush was still in
office, only 44% of Republicans felt it was good that press criticism
keeps political leaders honest, and Democrats were much more pro
watchdog (71% supported press criticism). This partisan pattern has
existed since the question was first asked by Pew Research in 1985.
Throughout the Bush administration, Democrats were more likely than
Republicans to support the press's watchdog role. During the Clinton
years, Republicans were the strongest proponents of press criticism,
and during Reagan and Bush Sr., it was again the Democrats. Political
independents express far less change in opinion. Two-thirds of
independents currently favor the watchdog role for the press, little
changed from 1985 or any time in between. Read more
•
SOCIAL THINKING
• Do attitudes guide
action?
Determinism
V
Free will
Cheating
possible
Behavior
• When?
– Looking glass effect
(anagram task) 71% v.
7% cheating
•Attitudes follow
behavior
• Cooperative
actions feed
mutual liking
• Low ball
technique
SOCIAL THINKING
Do actions affect attitudes
• Foot in the door
 tendency for people
who have first agreed to
a small request to
comply later with a
larger request
• Role /Role Playing
 set of expectations
about a social position
 defines how those in the
position ought to
behave
• Why?
SOCIAL THINKING
• Cognitive Dissonance
theory
 we act to reduce the
discomfort
(dissonance) we feel
when two of our
thoughts (cognitions)
are inconsistent
 example- when we
become aware that our
attitudes and our
actions clash, we can
reduce the resulting
dissonance by
changing our attitudes
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-september-32008/sarah-palin-gender-card
Cognitive dissonance
Cognitive dissonance
• Working hard to achieve a goal makes
the goal more attractive than the same
goal achieved with no effort
Social Influence
Conformity and obedience
Group influence
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Group pressure and conformity
• Conformity
–
adjusting one’s
behavior or thinking to
coincide with a group
standard
• conformity candid
camera.avi
• Conditions that
strengthen
conformity
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
 Participants judged which person in Slide 2
was the same as the person in Slide 1
50%
Difficult judgments
40
Percentage of
conformity to
confederates’
wrong answers
Conformity highest
on important
judgments
30
20
Easy judgments
10
0
Low
High
Importance
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Reasons for Conforming
• Normative social
influence
 influence
resulting from a
person’s desire
to gain approval
or avoid
disapproval
–
• Informational social
influence
– influence
resulting from
one’s willingness
to accept others’
opinions about
reality
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
• OBEDIENCE--Milgram studies
• Video-Basic instinct: Touch of Evil
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
• Lessons from conformity and obedience
studies
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Group Influence
• Individual behavior in
the presence of others
– Social facilitation
– improved performance of
tasks in the presence of
others
 occurs with simple or welllearned tasks but not with
tasks that are difficult or not
yet mastered
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Group Influence
• Social loafing
 tendency for people
in a group to exert
less effort when
pooling their efforts
toward attaining a
common goal than
when individually
accountable
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Group Influence
DEINDIVIDUATION
 loss of selfawareness and
self-restraint in
group situations
that foster
arousal and
anonymity
to kill a mockingbird
deindividuation.avi
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Group Influence
• EFFECTS OF GROUP
INTERACTION
– Group polarization
 enhancement of a group’s
prevailing attitudes through
discussion within the group.
If a group is like-minded,
discussion strengthens its
prevailing opinions
Group influence
Polarization
Lowest probability of
positive outcome that is
acceptable
HENRY-to write
novel
(risky shift)
ROGER-to make
investment
(conservative
shift)
Before
Group
discussion
5.066
After
Group
discussion
4.2
6.43
7.166
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Group Influence
• EFFECTS OF
GROUP
INTERACTION
– Groupthink
 mode of thinking that
occurs when the desire
for harmony in a
decision-making group
overrides realistic
appraisal of
alternatives
Social Relations
Prejudice
Aggression
Attraction
Altruism
Peacemaking
Social Relations
 Prejudice
 an unjustifiable (and usually negative) attitude toward a group and its
members
 involves stereotyped beliefs, negative feelings, and a predisposition
to discriminatory action
 black doll white doll.avi
 Stereotype
 a generalized (sometimes accurate, but often over generalized)
belief about a group of people
 Bob Novak-Stereotype obama.avi
Social Relations
Does perception change with race?
Social Relations
Does perception change with race?
• http://morph.cs.standrews.ac.uk/Transformer/
Social Relations
Social roots of prejudice
 Ingroup
 “Us”- people with
whom one shares a
common identity
 Outgroup
 “Them”- those
perceived as different
or apart from one’s
ingroup
• Ingroup bias
 tendency to favor
one’s own group
Social Relations
Social roots of prejudice
 Scapegoat
theory
 theory that
prejudice
provides an
outlet for anger
by providing
someone to
blame
“Apparently “executive
assistant” is just a fancy
name for scapegoat.”
Racism
Intentional/institutional
Unintentional institutional
Intentional personal
Unintentional personal
Social Relations
Cognitive roots of prejudice
– Categorization
• Just-World
Phenomenon
 tendency of people to believe the
world is just
 people get what they deserve
and deserve what they get
– Vivid cases
Social Relations
Aggression
–Biology of Aggression
• Genetic influences
• Neural influences
• Biochemical influences
Social Relations
Psychology of Aggression
• Aversive events
 Frustration-Aggression
Principle
 principle that frustration
– the blocking of an
attempt to achieve some
goal – creates anger,
which can generate
aggression
Social relations
• Do video games teach aggression?
– This is a ‘two-fer’. It addresses research on
video game violence, but it is also
demonstrates how psychological research is
designed and conducted.
Social Relations
Person 1
Choose A
Person 2
Choose B
Choose A
 Conflict
 perceived
incompatibility of
actions, goals, or ideas
 Social Trap
 a situation in which the
conflicting parties, by
each rationally
pursuing their selfinterest, become
caught in mutually
destructive behavior
Social trap
by pursuing our self-interest
and not trusting others, we can
end up losers
Choose B
Optimal
outcome
Probable
outcome
Social relations
• Bystander Effect
tendency for any given
bystander to be less likely to
give aid if other bystanders are
present
BHS video linked here
Social relations
• The decision-making process for
bystander intervention
Social Relations
• Social exchange theory:
– Weight costs/benefits to helping or being
generous
• Reciprocity Norm
• Social responsibility norm.
– r with attending religious services
Social relations
Attractiveness
 Proximity
 Mere Exposure
 repeated exposure to novel stimuli increases
liking of them
 A mysterious student has been attending a
class at Oregon State University for the past
two months enveloped in a big, black bag.
Only his bare feet show. Each Monday,
Wednesday, and Friday at 11 o’clock in the
morning, the black bag sits on a small table
near the back of the classroom. The class
is Speech 113-basic persuasion…Charles
Goetzinger, professor of the class, knows
the identity of the person inside. None of
the twenty students in the class do.
Goetzinger said the students’ attitudes
changed from hostility toward the black bag
• In a small coastal town in Ecuador was
confronted with the question of how to
deal with their new mayor, Pulvapies.
Pulvapies was fairly elected, beating
his nearest opponent by a comfortable
margin. There was one problem,
however. Pulvapies was a foot
deodorant! During the municipal
election, the manufacturer thought it
would be clever to post billboards and
distribute flyers simply saying: “For
mayor: Honorable Pulvapies.” Little
did he realize that his honorable
deodorant would actually be elected!
Social relations
triarchic theory of love

Passionate Love
 an aroused state of intense
positive absorption in another
 usually present at the
beginning of a love
relationship

Companionate Love
 deep affectionate attachment
we feel for those with whom
our lives are intertwined