Transcript Unit 14, Social Psych

Myers’ Psychology for AP*
Chapter 14:
Social
Psychology
David G. Myers
Some PowerPoint Presentation Slides
by Kent Korek
Germantown High School
Worth Publishers, © 2010
*AP is a trademark registered and/or owned by the College Board, which was not involved in the production of, and does not endorse, this product.
Unit 14:
Social Psychology
Unit Overview
Social Thinking
Social Influence
Social Relations
Introduction
Social Psychology = the scientific
study of how we think about, influence,
and relate to one another.
Social Thinking
Social Context
*the real, imagined, or symbolic
presence of other people; the
activities and interactions that take
place among people; the settings in
which behavior occurs; and the
expectations and social norms
governing behavior in a given setting.
Social Thinking
*Attribution
theory
*Persuasion
*Foot-in-thedoor
Phenomenon
*Role-playing
*Cognitive
dissonance
Attributing Behavior to Persons or to Situations
Attribution theory = tendency to give a
causal explanation for someone’s behavior, often
by crediting either the situation or the person’s
disposition
Dispositional vs. situational attribution
Fundamental attribution error
Self-serving bias
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
*dual tendency to overemphasize personal traits while
minimizing situational inferences.
***Always try to find a
situational explanation
et.al. Did the person brake
for strange or bizarre
suddenly in front of you because
behavior of others before
he is a jerk, or because a dog ran
“blaming” them with
out in front of his car?
dispositional
explanations.
Social Thinking
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)
Dispositional attribution
“Crazy driver!”
Unfavorable reaction
(speed up and race past the
other driver, give a dirty look)
Negative behavior
Attributing Behavior to Persons or to Situations
The Effects of Attribution
Personal relationships
Political relationships
Job
relationships
Social Thinking
*Attitude
*belief and feeling that predisposes one to respond in
a particular way to objects, people and events
**OUTSIDE INFLUENCES ON WHAT WE SAY AND DO
ARE MINIMAL (2002, with most Americans supporting
preemptive war in Iraq, most Democrats publicly supported
the idea while having private reservations)
** THE ATTITUDE IS SPECIFICALLY RELEVANT TO THE
BEHAVIOR (proclaim love while yelling at mate, cherish
honesty while cheating on test)
**WE ARE KEENLY AWARE OF OUR ATTITUDES (we
mindlessly follow habit or others’ expectations while our
attitudes lie dormant)
Attitudes and Actions
Attitude
Central route
persuasion = attitude change
path in which interested people focus
on the arguments and respond with
favorable thoughts.
Peripheral route
persuasion = attitude change
path in which people are influenced by
incidental cues, such as a speaker’s
attractiveness
Social Thinking
Our behavior is affected by our inner attitudes as
well as by external social influences
Internal
attitudes
External
influences
Behavior
Social Thinking
Attitudes follow
behavior
Cooperative
actions feed
mutual liking
SHOW:
Psych in Film, Ver 2, #14, The War
(attitude/violence)
Attitudes and Actions
Actions Affect Attitudes
The Foot-in-the-Door
Phenomenon = the tendency for
people who have first agreed to a small
request to comply later with a larger
request.
“start small and build”
Attitudes and Actions
Actions Affect Attitudes
Role-Playing Affects Attitudes
Role = a set of expectations (norms)
about a social position, defining how those in
the position ought to behave.
Stanford
prison
study
Abu Ghraib
The Stanford Prison Experiment, by
Philip Zimbardo underscores the power
of social situations to control human
behavior.
This was the major
theme to emerge
from social
psychological
research in the
past 50 years.
Click here to go to
websitehttp://www.prisonexp.org/
THEMES IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
1) POWER OF SOCIAL SITUATIONS: In the prison
experiment and others, we will see how the situation can
produce conformity to group standards --- even when the group
is clearly “wrong.” Other studies demonstrate how situational
forces can lead many average people to blindly follow orders -- even orders to harm others.
2) SUBJECTIVE SOCIAL REALITY: Psychologists know
we do not respond to objective reality, but rather to
subjective interpretation--our perception--which can
vary widely from person to person.
3) PROMOTE THE HUMAN CONDITION: Important
implications regarding prejudice, violence and terrorism
for resolving conflicts among individuals, groups, and
nations.
Social Thinking
*Social Roles
*set of expectations about a social position
*defines how those in the position ought to
behave
*when you adopt a new role (college student,
marry, new job), you strive to follow the social
prescriptions. May feel phony at first while you
“act” the role. No one “teaches” you your role.
*Social Roles:
involves a person’s
knowledge about the sequence of events
and actions that are expected of a
particular social role.
Attitudes and Actions
Actions Affect Attitudes
Cognitive Dissonance: Relief From Tension
Cognitive dissonance theory = the
theory that we act to reduce the discomfort
(dissonance) we feel when two of our thoughts
(cognitions) are inconsistent. For example,
when our awareness of our attitudes and of our
actions clash, we can reduce the resulting
dissonance by changing our attitudes.
“Attitudes follow behavior”
*Cognitive Dissonance
*When we voluntarily undergo
unpleasant experiences.
Generally speaking, when
*voluntarily produce
people’s cognitions and
discomfort with ideas that
actions are in conflict (a
clash with their attitudes
state of dissonance) they
and values
often reduce the conflict
*et. al. Republican speaker in by changing their thinking
a Democratic auditorium
to fit their behavior.
*Cognitive Dissonance Theory
*people are motivated to avoid uncomfortable state of dissonance
*must change either one’s behavior or one’s cognitions
*et.al. when we become aware that our attitudes and our actions
clash, we can reduce the resulting dissonance by changing our
attitudes
Social Thinking
Cognitive dissonance
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE EXPLANATIONS
People don’t want to see themselves as foolish or inconsistent.
It explains why:
*smokers rationalize their habit
*why people who volunteer (putting a lot of time/effort into
something) will become more committed
*why a woman is attracted to a man who abuses her--her drive
for self-justification may make her reduce her dissonance by
focusing on his good points and minimizing the abuse
“Cognitive dissonance theory predicts that people are attracted
to those for whom they have agreed to suffer…..”
Social Influence
*chameleon
effect
*conformity
*Solomon Asch
*Normative social
influence
*obedience
*Stanley Milgram
*social facilitation
*social loafing
*deindividuation
*group
polarization
Social Influence
Social Norm
*an understood rule for socially accepted and expected
behavior (socially appropriate attitudes and behaviors)
*prescribes “proper” behavior
*”unwritten rules” for the ways members should act
*Can be broadly defined:
appropriate religious or
political attitudes
*Can be loosely defined: being
*Can guide conversation: quiet in library or shining shoes
restricting discussion of for job interview.
*Can define
sensitive or taboo
dress codes:
subjects in front of certain
uniforms,
people.
business suits,
**In the Stanford Prison Experiment, the guards
developed norms for abusive behavior. That norm
was not already present in the situation--it was an
Emergent Norm.
Adjustment to a group typically
involves discovering social norms.
First, by noticing the uniformities
and regularities in certain
behaviors and second, by
observing negative
consequences for violating the
social norm.
Conformity and Obedience
Chameleon effect
Mood
linkage
Social Influence
The chameleon effect
Number
of times
0.8
0.7
When with a
0.6
face-rubbing
0.5
and foot0.4
shaking
0.3
confederate,
participants
Participant
tended to
rubs face
Confederate rubs face
likewise rub
their face or
shake their
Chartrand & Bargh, 1999
foot.
Participant
shakes foot
Confederate shakes foot
Conformity
*adapting one’s behavior or thinking/opinions to coincide with
a group standard
*used to avoid rejection
Conformity increases when:
*one is made to feel incompetent or
insecure
*the group is unanimous
*one admires the group’s status and
attractiveness
*one has made no prior commitment to
any response
*others in the group observe one’s
behavior
*one’s culture strongly encourages
respect for social standards
Social Influence
 Asch’s conformity experiments (1955)
Imagine you are a subject who has volunteered
to participate in a VISUAL PERCEPTION
STUDY. When you arrive, seven other
participants are already seated in a row. The
experimenter reveals a pair of cards and asks
you to determine which of the three comparison
lines is the same length as the standard line.
You look at the lines and immediately decide on
the correct response…..
DO NOT BLURT A RESPONSE!!!!
Social Influence
Asch’s conformity experiments
Social Influence
Asch’s conformity experiments
Starting at the far end of the row, each person gives their
response one at a time…..giving the same OBVIOUSLY
correct answer.
On the next trial the card is revealed and each subject
gives their answer. However, this time they all choose
the wrong line!!
It’s now your turn to respond.
HOW WOULD YOU ANSWER???
Do you maintain your opinion or conform?
Social Influence
Solomon Asch’s conformity experiments
RESULTS:
Each subject participated in the
experimental situation several times.
Approximately 75% of them went
along with the group’s consensus at
least once.
Social Influence
50%
Difficult judgments
40
Percentage of 30
conformity to
confederates’ 20
wrong answers
10
0
Conformity highest
on important
judgments
Easy judgments
Low
High
Importance
Baron, Vandello & Brunsman (1996) p.705
Participants
judged which
person in Slide 2
was the same as
the person in
Slide 1
When the task was
unimportant, people
conformed about 1/3 of
the time. When the
task appeared
important, people rarely
conformed when the
task was easy, but
conformed half the time
when the task was
difficult.
Conformity and Obedience
Group Pressure and Conformity
Conditions That Strengthen
Conformity
One is made to feel incompetent or insecure
Group has at least three people
Group is unanimous
One admires the group’s status
One has made no prior commitment
Others in group observe one’s behavior
One’s culture strongly encourages respect for
social standards
Conformity and Obedience
Group Pressure and Conformity
Reasons for Conforming
Normative social influence
Informational social influence
Social Influence
Normative Social Influence
*being sensitive to social norms
*influence resulting from a person’s desire to
gain approval or avoid disapproval
Conformity and Obedience
Group Pressure and Conformity
Informational Social Influence
*influence resulting from one’s willingness to
accept others’ opinions about reality
Here, the naïve individual (#6) display obvious concern about the
majority’s erroneous judgment.
Conformity and Obedience
Obedience
Obedience
Milgram’s studies
on obedience
Procedure
Results
Ethics
Follow up studies
OBEDIENCE
Stanley Milgram knew that people often
comply with social pressures. But how
would they respond to direct commands?
*Punish the student for wrong answers
p.706
A volunteer subject, called “teacher” believed that the
research was aimed to improve learning and memory.
To administer punishment for not answering a question
correctly, the teacher was told to throw a switch which
would deliver an electric shock to the learner each time
he made an error. The teacher was told to increase the
level of the shock by a fixed amount with every error.
The experiment was overseen by the “experimenter” in a white coat---an
authority figure presenting the “rules” and ordered the teacher to do their
job whenever they hesitated or dissented.
The “shock generator” was clearly labeled that featured a row of 30
switches ranging from 15 volts to 450 volts, marked “XXX”.
The “student” was play by a pleasant, mild-mannered man about 50 years
old who mentioned having a “heart condition.” He was strapped to an
“electric chair” in the next room
HOW FAR WOULD THE PEOPLE GO BEFORE THEY DEFIED
THE AUTHORITY FIGURE AND REFUSED TO GO ON???
At 75 volts, the student made a moan and grunt.
At 150 volts he would cry out that he could not stand the
pain any longer.
The learner’s protests increased up the scale.
At 300 volts the learner shouted that he would no longer
participate in the experiment and must be freed.
At 375 volts, the learner screamed out and there was a
thud and then silence.
The experiment ended when the “teacher” reached the
450 volt maximum or refused to go on.
HOW FAR WOULD THE PEOPLE GO BEFORE THEY DEFIED
THE AUTHORITY FIGURE AND REFUSED TO GO ON???
Conformity and Obedience
2/3 delivered the 450 volts. Most who refused
Obedience
maximum, stopped at 300 volts.
***NOONE who got to the last 5 switches
refused to go all the way.
THE BUZZER
Sitting with the number eight platter at the
restaurant
Four twenty nine for almost anything I want
Add it up,
it's cheaper than the stuff I make myself
I get by, I never needed anybody's help
And I tore out an ad and they told me that I
Would press the buzzer, would press the
buzzer
At the graduate lab, they were doing some tests
I pressed the buzzer, pressed the buzzer
Ride the circle off of the highway,
spiral into the driveway
In the maze of old prefabs,
they'll be waiting at the lab
I don't know how everybody makes it
through the daily drill
Paint the nails, walk a dog, pay every bill
I'm feeling sorry for this guy that I press to
shock
He gets the answers wrong, I have to up the
watts
And he begged me to stop,
but they told me to go
I press the buzzer, I press the buzzer
So get out of my head, just give me my line
I press the buzzer, I press the buzzer
Ride the circle off of the highway,
spiral into the driveway
In the maze of old prefabs,
they'll be waiting at the lab.
They called me back to the lab to discuss the
test
I put my earrings on, found my heels, wore a
dress
Right away I knew, it was like I'd failed a quiz
The man said, do you know what a fascist is?
I said, yeah, it's when you do things you're not
proud of
But you're scraping by, taking orders from
above
I get it now, I'm the face, I'm the cause of war
We don't have to blame white coated men
anymore.
When I knew it was wrong,
I played it just like a game
I pressed the buzzer, I pressed the buzzer
Here's your seventy bucks,
now everything's changed
I press the buzzer, I press the buzzer
But tell me where are your stocks,
would you do this again?
I press the buzzer
And tell me who made your clothes,
was it children or men?
I press the buzzer
Ride the circle off of the highway,
spiral into the driveway
In the maze of old prefabs,
they'll be waiting at the lab
THE BUZZER, by Dar Williams
The ultimate demonstration of this
effect was seen in the World War II
era, with the emergence of Adolf
Hitler in Germany and Benito
Mussolini in Italy.
These leaders transformed rational
citizens of whole nations into
mindless loyal followers of a fascist
idealogy bent on world domination.
Similar cases would include Jim Jones in Guyana, David
Koresh in Waco, Texas, Marshal Applewhite of Heaven’s
Gate fame, and Osama Bin Laden.
WHY DO WE OBEY AUTHORITY?
From Milgram variations of the study, we can conclude:
**When a peer modeled obedience by complying with the authority
figure’s commands
**When the victim was remote from the “teacher” and could not be
seen or heard.
**When the “teacher” was under direct surveillance of the authority
figure so he was aware of his presence
**When a participant acted as an intermediary bystanders, merely
assisting the one who was delivering the shock, rather than actually
throwing the switch.
**When the authority figure had higher relative status, as when he was
billed as “doctor” or “professor.”
All of these result from SITUATIONAL variables not
PERSONALITY variables. All of the participants were wellmeaning individuals
Social Influence
Some individuals resist social coercion….
…… roughly 1 in
3 in Milgram’s
experiment, as
this unarmed
man did in
Beijing in 1989.
Conformity and Obedience
Lessons From the Conformity and Obedience Studies
Ordinary people being corrupted
by an evil situation
Group Influence
Individual Behavior in the Presence of Others
Social Facilitation =
stronger responses on simple
or well-learned tasks in the
presence of others.
Task difficulty
Expertise effects
Crowding effects
Social Influence
Social Facilitation
*occurs with simple or well-learned tasks but not with
tasks that are difficult or not yet mastered
*research shows that people who work in small groups
in class learn more and are more productive than
people who work alone.
For example, after a light turns
green, drivers take about 15
percent less time to travel the
first 100 yards when another car
is beside them at the intersection
than when they are alone.
But on difficult tasks,
people perform less well
in the presence of others.
p.709-710
Social Facilitation
Home Advantage in Major Team Sports
Sport
Games
Studied
Baseball
23,034
Football
2,592
Home Team
Winning
Percentage
53.3%
57.3
Ice hockey
4,322
61.1
Basketball
13,596
64.4
Soccer
37,202
69.0
Group Influence
Individual Behavior in the Presence of Others
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
Reasons why?
Less accountability
View themselves as dispensable
People who are a part
of a group feel less
accountable.
Group Influence
Individual Behavior in the Presence of Others
Deindividuation
*loss of self-awareness and selfrestraint in group situations that
foster arousal and anonymity
Group Influence
Effects of Group Interaction
Group
Polarization =
If a group is likeminded, discussion
strengthens its
prevailing opinions
enhancement of a
group’s prevailing
attitudes through
discussion within
the group
GROUPS CAN ALSO BE PRESSURED TO CONFORM
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
SIX CONDITIONS LIKELY TO PROMOTE GROUPTHINK:
*isolation of the group
*illusion of
invulnerability
*incomplete survey of
objectives
*directive leadership
*collective
rationalization
*incomplete survey of
alternatives
*lack of norms
requiring methodical
procedures
*belief in inherent
morality of the
group
*poor information
search
*homogeneity of
members’ social
background and
ideology
*stereotypes of
outgroups
*failure to examine
risks of preferred
choice
*high stress from
external threats with
low hope of a better
solution than that of
the group leader
*self-censorship
*selective bias in
processing
information at hand
*illusion of
unanimity
*failure to reappraise
alternatives
*self-appointed
mind guards
*failure to work out
contingency plans.
*high group
cohesiveness
*direct pressure on
dissenters
This concept was first developed to help understand bad
decisions made by the U.S. Government regarding the
bombing of Pearl Harbor, the Vietnam War, and the invasion of
Cuba’s Bay of Pigs.
Later, others have
cited groupthink as a
factor that
contributed to the
faulty decisions in the
space shuttle
disasters, the
bankruptcy of Enron
Corporation, and the
decision to wage war
against Iraq.
Fastow, Lay, Skilling
Powell, Rove, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Bush
HOW TO AVOID GROUPTHINK
*encourage vigorous debate
*make recommendations on unbiased reports
*leader shouldn’t make his/her opinions known
*make sure group members are not cut off from out
side input.
*get new perspectives
*assign one person to be “devil’s advocate”
Social Relations
Prejudice
How Prejudiced Are People?
Prejudice
Stereotype
Discrimination
Prejudice
How Prejudiced Are People?
Prejudice
*an unjustifiable (and usually negative) attitude
toward a group and its members
*involves stereotyped beliefs, negative feelings,
and a predisposition to discriminatory action
Stereotype
*a generalized (often overgeneralized) belief
about a group of people
Prejudice
How Prejudiced Are People?
Discrimination = unjustifiable negative
behavior toward a group and its
members.
Self-fulfilling Prophecy = occurs when
one person’s belief about others leads
one to act in ways that induce the
others to appear to confirm the belief
Prejudice
How Prejudiced Are People?
Social Relations
Does perception change with race?
SOURCES OF DISCRIMINATION:
Economic Competition:
*where one group wins economic benefits or jobs at the
others’ expense
*studies show that prejudice against black Americans to be
the greatest among white groups poised at an economic
level just about the black Americans average---or those who
would feel their jobs most threatened by black Americans.
Scapegoating may also explain why the number of
lynchings in the southern U.S. between 1882 and 1930 was
related to the price of cotton. When cotton prices dropped,
the lynchings increased. When cotton prices rallied, the
number of lynchings fell. Scapegoating is most effective
when propoganda can create differences in the minds of
the dominant group.
SOURCE OF DISCRIMINATION:
CONFORMITY TO NORMS
*unthinking tendency to maintain conditions the way they
are
*secretaries male or female?
*executives male or female?
*when people see that the majority of a profession is of a
particular gender or race, we assume that is the social
and economic norm
*the opposing gender or race may avoid taking classes
to become a part of that group.
Historically, powerful groups have discriminated
against out-groups by:
*withholding privileges
*sending to different schools
*making them sit in back of bus
*forcing them into low-wage jobs
*forcing them into jails and ghettos
Prejudice
Social Roots of Prejudice
Social Inequalities
Us and Them: Ingroup
and Outgroup
Ingroup (Ingroup bias)
Outgroup
Emotional roots of
prejudice
Scapegoat theory
Social Relations
Ingroup
*“Us”- people with whom one shares a
common identity
Outgroup
*“Them”- those perceived as different or apart from
one’s ingroup
*people mentally place these people at greater social
distance then members of your own group.
*less likely to view these people as socially equal
*this inequality easily translates into inferiority, making
it easier for you to treat members of an outgroup
with contempt.
Social Relations
SOURCES OF DISCRIMINATION:
Ingroup Bias
*tendency to favor one’s own group
Scapegoat Theory
*theory that prejudice provides an outlet for
anger by providing someone to blame
Prejudice
Cognitive Roots of Prejudice
Categorization
Outgroup homogeneity
Other-race effect = the tendency to recall
faces of one’s own race more accurately than
faces of other races. Also called the cross-race
effect and the own-race bias.
Prejudice
Cognitive Roots of Prejudice
Vivid cases
Just-world phenomenon = the
tendency for people to believe the world is just and
that people therefore get what they deserve and
deserve what they get.
Hindsight bias
In April 1968, a student in Jane Elliot’s third grade classroom in
Riceville, Iowa, said, “They shot that King yesterday. Why’d they shoot
that King?”
So Mrs. Elliot devised an activity to allow her students to experience the
power of prejudice which led to the assassination of Martin Luther King
Jr.
Jane Elliot told the children that brown-eyed children
were superior to blue-eyed children. They were smarter,
more tolerant, fewer germs etc.
Blue-eyed children were given collars and armbands to
wear to differentiate them from the superior brown-eyed
children.
The two groups were not allowed to play together at
recess. Non-brown children had to use cups when
drinking from the drinking fountain and sit in the back of
the classroom. Brown-eyed students were praised
when they answered questions correctly.
Jane Elliot
Riceville, Iowa
Within 15 minutes, a fight broke out on the playground
when one boy called another boy, “brown-eyed.”
A smart blue-eyed girl who had never had problems with
multiplication tables started making mistakes. She
slumped. At recess, three brown-eyed girls ganged up on
her. "You better apologize to us for getting in our way
because we're better than you are," one of the brownies
said. The blue-eyed girl apologized.
When Mrs. Elliot asked the students to write an essay on
what they had learned, a typical response was "I felt like
quitting school. . . . I felt mad. That's what it feels like
when you're discriminated against."
On Monday, Elliott reversed the exercise, and the
brown-eyed kids were told how shifty, dumb and lazy
they were. Later, it would occur to Elliott that the
blueys were much less nasty than the brownies had
been, perhaps because the blue-eyed kids had felt
the sting of being ostracized and didn't want to inflict it
on their former tormentors.
After her experiment got national television coverage, Elliot recalled,
townspeople made threatening phone calls, beat and spit at her
children, and boycotted her parents' coffee shop, eventually
forcing it out of business. They feared black people would think that
they all thought like her and blacks would think life was good in
Riceville and move over there in droves.
Her father went bankrupt. Of course this created chaos within the
family.
"My mother thought I'd gone crazy and asked me, 'can't you just stop
with this nonsense?'" She has never forgiven me.
"My brothers, self-made millionaires and conservative Republicans
wondered what the hell my problem was?”
Her father, however, has never stopped her. In fact, it was his
contradictory attitude that made Jane the odd one out in her family.
"My father always said, 'never put a stone on another man's path' or
'justice will never be disadvantageous to man' or 'a just cause is a
good thing.'" At the same time he wouldn't have his daughters marry a
black man. I thought that wasn't right. I was crazy about my father.
It's a shame he was so prejudiced."
SHOW:
Psych in Film, ver 2, #35, Snow Falling on Cedars.
FEB 2013:
Chief Justice Roberts votes to declare section 4 of the Voters
Rights Act unconsitutional which would keep states from
changing election rules without permission from the Federal
Government. He states this provision “. . . is no longer justified
because racism is no longer the problem it once was.. . .”
APRIL 2014:
Clivin Bundy, nicknamed the
“Welfare Cowboy” because he
refused to pay grazing fees to the
Federal Government for his use of
federal land to feed his cattle. His
antics drew support from other
ranchers throughout the west when
they flocked to his defense by
arming themselves as militia.
“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr.
Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas,
“and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the
older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen
people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t
have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young
girls to do.
“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what
do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their
young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And
I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and
having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under
government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less
freedom.”
--Cliven Bundy (April 24, 2014)
The Pygmalion effect (or Rosenthal effect or
teacher-effectiveness effect)
*refers to situations in which students performed better than
other students, simply because they were expected to do so.
*if teachers were led to expect enhanced performance from
some children, then the children did indeed show that
enhancement.
*Can also result from racial expectations.
*When students in Jane Elliot’s class were given tests on the
day of the experiment, the students scored very low on the
day they were racially “inferior” and high on the day they
were racially “superior.”
Aggression
Aggression = any physical or verbal
behavior intended to hurt or destroy.
Aggression
The Biology of Aggression
Genetic Influences
Neural Influences
Biochemical
Influences
Aggression
Psychological and Social-Cultural Factors in Aggression
Aversive Events
Frustration-aggression principle
= principle that frustration – the blocking of an
attempt to achieve some goal – creates anger,
which can generate aggression
Fight or slight reaction
Social and cultural influences
Aggression-replacement program
Aggression
Psychological and Social-Cultural Factors in Aggression
Observing models of aggression
Rape myth = idea that some women
invite or enjoy rape and “get swept away”
while being “taken.”
Acquiring social scripts
Do video games teach, or
release violence?
Catharsis hypothesis?
Do video games teach, or release
violence?
In 2002, two Grand Rapids, Michigan, teens and a
man in his early 20s spent the night drinking beer
and playing “Grand Theft Auto III,” using cars to run
down simulated pedestrians, before beating them
with fists and leaving a bloody body behind. (Kolker,
2002) Then they went out on a real drive, spotted a
38-year old man on a bicycle, ran him down with
their car, stomped and punched him, and returned
home to play the game some more. The man, a
father of three, died six days later.
Do video games teach, or release
violence?
**Most abused children don’t become abusive adults.
**Most social drinkers don’t become alcohol dependent.
**Most youths who spend hours playing video games don’t
become teen assassins.
Although most will never commit
slaughter, how many will become
desensitized to violence and to
violent acts??
Biopsychosocial Understanding of
Aggression
Social Relations
Uncomfortably hot weather and aggression
Murders 8.0
and rapes
per day in 7.5
Houston, Texas
From the available
data, Anderson
projects that global
warming of 4 degree
Fahrenheit would
induce more than
50,000 additional
assaults and murders
in the U.S. alone.
7.0
6.5
6.0
40-68
69-78
79-85
86-91 92-99
Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit
Social Relations
Men who sexually coerce women
Sexual
promiscuity
Coerciveness
against
women
Hostile
masculinity
Social Relations
Juvenile violent crime arrest rates
Arrest per 1,000
100,000
15- to 17- 900
year-olds 800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
Social Relations
Americans today express much less racial
and gender prejudice
Percentage 90
answering 80
yes 70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Would you vote for
a woman president?
Do whites have a right
to keep minorities out of
their neighborhoods?
1936 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
Year
Aggression and Violence
Robber’s Cave Experiment
*Muzafer Sherif (1961)
*boy scout camp: 11 and 12 year old boys
*random assignment: Eagles and Rattlers
*allowed within-group activities to build group
cohesiveness, solidarity, loyalty, membership
*prizes awarded creating competitive atmosphere
Eagles arranged to arrive hour early. Half the food was
mouth-watering; the other half deliberately unappealing.
When Rattlers arrived Eagles had devoured the more
desirable food.
What happened?
Zimbardo
Aggression and Violence
As you might expect, this led to name-calling
and scuffling, culminating into a food fight.
Sherif tried various tactics to bring the groups
together--complete failure.
Social events, such as movies, eating in same room
et.al. were only opportunities for more hostility.
What did help was cooperative events--NO competitive events.
Researchers created a “broken water line” in the camp:
created a harmonious energy
Next day: broken truck; can’t go to town to get food. The
two groups had to work cooperatively to pull a rope to get
truck running.
Zimbardo
Aggression and Violence
CONCLUSION:
To serve it’s own needs, each group had to cooperate in order
to serve their mutual interests.
Suggests that effective conflict resolution can come
from identifying goals of mutual benefit and
persuading the antagonistic groups to pursue these
shared goals.
Mutual interdependence
*working relationship based on shared goals
In the end, groups actively sought opportunites to mingle with
each other. One group even used it’s own money to buy
treats for the other group.
Zimbardo
Fuel for Terrorism
*poverty, hunger, powerlessness, and
hopelessness.
*much of the world sees no way out.
*ethnic hatred and wars aggravate the situation
*most of the world’s growing population is in
poorer countries
*jobs in these countries depend on resources that
are being depleted (fisheries, forests, soil, water)
*millions flee traditional environments to the
overpopulated cities and leads to
Zimbardo
Fuel for Terrorism
Terrorism is really about psychology.
Terrorism typically involves:
*relatively small group of people
*take dramatic, violent action against a
larger group
*intention of spreading fear
*inducing anxiety and uncertainty about
their government’s ability to
protect them.
Fuel for Terrorism
TERRORISTS DO NOT WANT TO CONQUER LANDS-THEY WANT TO CONQUER MINDS!!!
The politicians’ easiest response is to demonize
those who perpetrate the evil deeds.
Labeling others as “evil” usually turns them into
objects of scorn and prevents any attempt to
understand the reasons for their actions.
Fuel for Terrorism
CONFLICT RESOLUTION
APPROACH
*applied lessons from the Eagles & Rattlers
to the Israelis and Palestinians
Herbert Kelman,
PhD
1951, Yale University
Professor, Harvard
University
*brings community leaders from both sides
together for small group discussion
*mid-level leaders, not high-profile leaders
*encourage cooperation
*minimize rewards for hostile behaviors
*although inspired by science, most of the
variables remain uncontrolled
Fuel for Terrorism
Terrorism does not always involve
international conflict.
*Columbine High
*Federal Building in Oklahoma City
*Virginia Tech Massacre
*hate crimes (racial, ethnic, gays, )
*violence against abortion facilities
CROWD CONTROL
SHOW:
Psych in Film, ver 2, #34, To Kill A Mockingbird.
Attraction
The Psychology of Attraction
Proximity
Mere exposure effect
Physical attractiveness
Similarity
Reward theory of attraction
Social Relations- Attractiveness
Mere Exposure Effect
*repeated exposure to novel stimuli increases
liking of them
*Conceptions of attractiveness vary by culture
Attraction: Romantic 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
Attraction: Romantic Love
Equity
*a condition in which
people receive from a
relationship in
proportion to what
they give to it
Self-disclosure
*revealing intimate
aspects of oneself to
others
Social Relations- Attractiveness
Proximity
*mere exposure effect- repeated exposure
to novel stimuli increases liking of them
Physical Attractiveness
*youthfulness may be associated with health
and fertility
Similarity
*friends share common attitudes, beliefs,
interests
It is no surprise that we are attracted to people who have
something to offer us.
Reward Theory of Attraction
*attraction is a form of social learning
*we like those best who can give us maximum
rewards at minimum cost.
Powerful sources of reward
that predict interpersonal
attraction:
Most of us choose our friends,
*proximity
*similarity
*self-disclosure
*physical attractiveness
associates and lovers
because they offer some
combination of these factors
with relatively low social cost.
Principle of Attractiveness
*fair or not, good looks are a real social asset.
*potential employers prefer good-looking employees.
*attractive children are judged as happier and more
competent.
*both males and females are strongly influenced by
physical attractiveness, but men seem to be more
influenced than women.
*can be bad news for very attractive people; while they
are generally seen as more poised, interesting, sociable,
independent, exciting, sexual, intelligent, well-adjusted,
and successful, they are also perceived as more vain and
materialistic.
*double standard; public favors good-looking male
politicians but disparages their attractive female
counterparts.
Show
Psych in Film, ver 2, #32,The Thrill of it All
Altruism
Altruism = unselfish regard for the welfare
of others
Kitty Genovese
Bystander
Intervention
Diffusion of
responsibility
Bystander
effect
Social Relations--Bystander Problem
In 1964, Kitty Genovese returned to her
apartment after work in a quiet, middleclass Queens neighborhood. She left her
car and was viciously attacked by a man
with a knife. She screamed for help as
she was being stabbed. After one
neighbor yelled out the window, “Leave
that girl alone”, the attacker stopped,
walked away, but then returned and
continued to assault Genovese. She
continued to scream until someone
finally called the police. By the time the
police arrived, Genovese was dead.
Social Relations--Bystander Problem
The attack had lasted 35 minutes.
Not one person telephoned the police during the
assault!!
At least 38 people in the surrounding apartments
had witnessed the attack, but had not called the
police.
One couple had moved their chairs closer to the
window in order to watch the violence.
One person called police only after Kitty had been
raped and murdered
The murderer was never found.
Social Relations--Bystander Problem
100
Percentage
attempting
to help
Bystander
Effect
90
90
80
80
*tendency for
any given
bystander to
be less likely
to give aid if
other
bystanders are
present
*more that are
present, the
slower they
are to help
70
70
60
60
50
50
40
40
30
20
30
10
20
0
10
0
11
22
3
3
Number of others
presumed available to help
4
4
Social Relations--Bystander Problem
The decision-making process for bystander intervention
Yes
Yes
Notices
incident?
Interprets
incident as
emergency?
No
No
help
Yes
Assumes
responsibility?
No
No
help
Attempts
to help
No
No
help
Individuals who perceive themselves part of a large group of
potential interveners experience DIFFUSION OF
RESPONSIBILITY, a reluctance to become personally involved.
For those who do help people in distress, it was found that most
have had some medical, police, first-aid, or CPR training in
emergency situations.
Another study by Tom
Moriarity (1975) arranged 2
experiments:
(1) New Yorkers watched
as a thief snatched a
woman’s suitcase in a
restaurant when she left her
table
(2) People watched a thief
grab a portable radio from a
beach blanket when the
owner left for a few minutes.
Most onlookers did nothing.
However, it was found that if
the victim asked the observer
to “keep an eye on my stuff”,
almost all bystanders
intervened---even to the point
of tackling the runaway thief
on the beach.
Lessons:
*Ask for help
**Reduce the ambiguity of the situation, “Someone
broke into my house--call the police and give this
address”
***Identify specific individuals so they do not dismiss
responsibility.
Altruism
The Norms of Helping
Social exchange theory = the
theory that our social behavior is an exchange
process, the aim of which is to maximize benefits
and minimize costs
Reciprocity norm =
an expectation
that people will help, not hurt those who have
helped them.
Social-responsibility norm = an
expectation that people will help those dependent
upon them.
Conflict and Peacemaking
Conflict
*perceived incompatibility of actions, goals, or
ideas
Social Trap
*a situation in which the conflicting parties, by
each rationally pursuing their self-interest,
become caught in mutually destructive
behavior
Conflict and Peacemaking
Person 1
Person 2
Choose B
Choose A
Choose A
Choose B
Optimal
outcome
Probable
outcome
Social trap
by pursuing our
self-interest
and not
trusting
others, we can
end up losers
Also called
Game Theory
or Nash
Equilibrium
Conflict and Peacemaking
Enemy Perceptions
Mirror-image perceptions =
mutual views often held by conflicting people, as
when each side sees itself as ethical and
peaceful and views the other side as evil and
aggressive.
Self-fulfilling
prophecy = a belief
that leads to its own
fulfillment.
Conflict and Peacemaking
Contact
Cooperation
Superordinate goals =shared goals
that override differences among people and
require their cooperation
Communication
Conciliation
GRIT
Social Relations
Graduated and Reciprocated
Initiatives in Tension-reduction
(GRIT)
*a strategy designed to decrease
international tensions
*one side announces recognition of mutual
interests and initiates a small conciliatory act
*opens door for reciprocation by other party
CULTURAL
PSYCHOLOGY
Cultural Influence
Culture = the enduring behaviors, ideas,
attitudes, values, and traditions shared by a
group of people and transmitted from one
generation to the next.
Culture within animals
Culture in humans
Ethnocentrism:
judging another culture
solely by the values
and standards of one's
own culture
Sumner was a critic of “natural rights,”
famously arguing:
"Before the tribunal of nature a man has no
more right to life than a rattlesnake; he has no
more right to liberty than any wild beast; his
right to pursuit of happiness is nothing but a
license to maintain the struggle for
existence..."
—William Graham Sumner, "Earth-hunger, and other essays," p. 234.
William Graham
Sumner (1840-1910)
**Held the first
professorship in
Sociology at Yale
College.
Lev S. Vygotsky (1896-1934)
*humans use various symbols and items that
help us to develop cultures
*we change, interact and go through
development within our cultures
*higherﾊthinking skills depend on the
internalization of the items we used to
develop within our culture and communicate.
*used blocks to distinguish children's
mastery of the concept from simple
memorization
**His work was suppressed by Marxist
Russian authorities for over 20 years after his
death.
Born in Russia
(Jewish)
Law degree
Unive of
Moscow
PhD Literature
& Linguistics
CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY
SHOW:
Psych in Film, ver 2, #31. Mr. Baseball
Cultural Influence
Variations Across Cultures
Norm = an understood
rule for accepted and
expected behavior. Norms
prescribe “proper” behavior.
Personal space =
the buffer zone we like to
maintain around our
bodies.
Pace of life
Cultural Influence
Variation Over Time
Changes over the generations
The Power of Individuals
Social control vs personal control
Minority
influence
QUESTIONS FOR
REVIEW
RECALL
1) The Stanford prison experiment illustrates the
power of ____ to influence people’s behavior
a) Personality
b) Heredity
c) Childhood experiences
d) The situation
e) Habituation
RECALL
2) Which of the following would be a social role?
a) Prisoner
b) Student
c) Professor
d) All of the above
e) None of the above
RECALL
3) In the Asch studies, which of the following
produced a decrease in conformity?
a) The task was seen as difficult or ambiguous
b) The subject had to respond publicly, rather than
privately
c) The majority was not unanimous in its judgment
d) The group was very large
e) The group was very small
RECALL
4) In Milgram’s original study, about what
proportion of the teachers gave the maximum
shock?
a) About two-thirds
b) About 10%
c) About 3%
d) Nearly all
e) About 50%
APPLICATION
5) In an emergency situation, you would have the
best chance of getting help from a
a) Lone bystander
b) Large group of people
c) Group of people who are friends of each other
d) Group of six people
e) Group of strangers
UNDERSTANDING THE CORE CONCEPT
6) Which of the following best illustrates people
in ambiguous situations taking their cues
from others?
a) Those who obeyed Milgram
b) Those who disobeyed Milgram
c) Helpers who have had CPR training
d) The experimenter in the Latane & Darley study of
bystander intervention
e) The majority of participants who expressed false
judgments in the Asch experiments.
RECALL
7) According to Aronson, we can explain almost
everything about interpersonal attraction with
a theory of
a) Love
b) Rewards
c) Genetics
d) Gender
e) Environmental influences
RECALL
8) Which of the following does the research say
is most important in predicting initial
attraction?
a) Physical attractiveness
b) Money
c) Personality
d) Nurturing qualities
e) Sense of humor
RECALL
9) Which theory of attraction best explains why
people who are considered extremely
competent are often not the people we are
most attracted to?
a) Reward theory
b) Expectancy-value theory
c) Cognitive dissonance theory
d) Psychoanalytic theory
e) Conformity theory
APPLICATION
10) According to cognitive dissonance theory,
which of the following would be the best
strategy for getting people to like you?
a) Give them presents
b) Show interest in their interests
c) Tell them that you like them
d) Reward them for good behavior
e) Persuade them to perform a difficult or
unpleasant task for you.
RECALL
11) Prejudice is a(n) _____, while discrimination
is a(n) _____.
a) Behavior/attitude
b) Instinct/choice
c) Attitude/behavior
d) Stimulus/response
e) Choice/ethic
RECALL
12) The evidence suggests that one of the most
effective techniques for eliminating racial
prejudice has been
a) Education
b) Threat and force
c) Legislation
d) Tax incentives
e) Choice
UNDERSTANDING THE CORE CONCEPT
13) Reward theory, expectancy-value theory,
cognitive dissonance theory, and attribution
theory all tell us that we respond not just to
situations but also to
a) Our cognitive interpretations of them
b) Our social instincts
c) The intensity of the stimuli
d) Our biological needs and drives
e) Our unconscious needs.
RECALL
14) Conflict between the groups in the Robbers
cave experiment was encouraged by
a) Punishing nonaggressive boys
b) Showing movies featuring hostile role models
c) Competitive games
d) Putting a particularly aggressive boy in charge of
each group
e) Encouraging cooperation
RECALL
15) In Kelman’s work in the Middle East, he
removed much of the incentive for
competitive responses by
a) Punishing those who responded competitively
b) Holding the meetings in private
c) Taking hostages from both sides
d) Publicly denouncing those who responded
competitively
e) Encouraging cooperation
UNDERSTANDING THE CORE CONCEPT
16) In both the Robber’s Cave and Kelman’s
work in the Middle East, helping people to
build a sense of mutual interdependence
encouraged them to
a) Become more aggressive
b) Punish those who had encouraged hostilities
c) Become more creative
d) Adopt new personality traits
e) Alter their perceptions of each other
MATCHING
a) Script
f) social loafing
b) Cognitive dissonance g) deindivduation
c) Prejudice
h) norms
d) Scapegoating
I) group polarization
e) Social facilitation
j) groupthink
C
_______
17. A negative attitude toward an individual
based solely on her or his group membership.
MATCHING
a) Script
f) social loafing
b) Cognitive dissonance g) deindivduation
c) Prejudice
h) norms
d) Scapegoating
I) group polarization
e) Social facilitation
j) groupthink
F
_______
18. A decrease in an individual’s performance
because of being in a group.
MATCHING
a) Script
f) social loafing
b) Cognitive dissonance g) deindivduation
c) Prejudice
h) norms
d) Scapegoating
I) group polarization
e) Social facilitation
j) groupthink
A
_______
19. Knowledge about the sequence of events
and actions that is expected in a particular setting.
MATCHING
a) Script
f) social loafing
b) Cognitive dissonance g) deindivduation
c) Prejudice
h) norms
d) Scapegoating
I) group polarization
e) Social facilitation
j) groupthink
E
_______
20. An increase in an individual’s performance
because of being in a group.
MATCHING
a) Script
f) social loafing
b) Cognitive dissonance g) deindivduation
c) Prejudice
h) norms
d) Scapegoating
I) group polarization
e) Social facilitation
j) groupthink
G
_______
21. A person’s loss of personal identity and
responsibility as the group “assumes” the responsibility
for behavior.
MATCHING
a) Script
f) social loafing
b) Cognitive dissonance g) deindivduation
c) Prejudice
h) norms
d) Scapegoating
I) group polarization
e) Social facilitation
j) groupthink
J
_______
22. An excessive tendency to seek
concurrence among group members.
MATCHING
a) Script
f) social loafing
b) Cognitive dissonance g) deindivduation
c) Prejudice
h) norms
d) Scapegoating
I) group polarization
e) Social facilitation
j) groupthink
D
_______
23. Blaming an innocent person or a group for
one’s own troubles.
MATCHING
a) Script
f) social loafing
b) Cognitive dissonance g) deindivduation
c) Prejudice
h) norms
d) Scapegoating
I) group polarization
e) Social facilitation
j) groupthink
I
_______
24. When individuals in a group have similar,
though not identical, views, their opinions become more
extreme.
MATCHING
a) Script
f) social loafing
b) Cognitive dissonance g) deindivduation
c) Prejudice
h) norms
d) Scapegoating
I) group polarization
e) Social facilitation
j) groupthink
B
_______
25. A highly motivated state in which people
have conflicting thoughts, especially when their
voluntary actions conflict with their attitudes.
MATCHING
a) Script
f) social loafing
b) Cognitive dissonance g) deindivduation
c) Prejudice
h) norms
d) Scapegoating
I) group polarization
e) Social facilitation
j) groupthink
H
_______
26. The rules of conduct for a group.
Show
# 19 Zimbardo, Situation
#20 Zimbardo, Social
#26 Zimbardo, Cultural
#24 Zimbardo, Applying
Psychology in Life
Social Influence
Testing facilitated communication