Transcript Social Lecture

X. Social Psychology
A. SP approach to behavior..

2.
1. Definition:
The scientific study of how people think about,
influence, and relate to one another.
Social psych. approach to human behavior:


Social psychologists focus on causes of behavior in
the environment (including other people).
Stress impact of the situation, presence of others.
– vs.......

Lewin: B = D + S
B. Why this approach?

1. Attribution:
How people infer the cause of an event or explain
behavior.

a. Heider – internal vs. external attributions

b. Fundamental Attribution Error:
When judging other people’s behavior, people tend to
overestimate the dispositional or internal influences on
behavior, and underestimate situational or external
influences on behavior
Ross et al. (1977) – “Quiz Show Study”
B. Why this approach?

2. Attitudes
- An evaluation, either positive, negative,
or neutral, of a person, object, event,
etc., that is exhibited in thoughts,
feelings, and behaviors.
B. Why this approach?





b. Do attitudes cause or predict behavior?
LaPiere (1934)
B=D+S
Better question (according to soc. psych.) - when?
Attitude is more likely to predict behavior when:
- Attitude formed from active experience (Fazio et al., 1977)
- Self-Awareness
More self-aware, more attitudes = behavior.
(Diener & Wallbom, 1979 – mirror study)
attitudes ⇒ behavior.....
B. Why this approach?




Behavior ⇒ attitudes
3. Does behavior influence or create attitudes?
“Doing/saying is believing” – (particularly with less formed attitudes)
a. Role Playing
Zimbardo (Standford) Prison Study (1972)
Freedman & Fraser (1966): “ugly sign” study
b. Foot-in-the-Door Effect
 Tendency for people who have complied with a small
request to be more willing to comply with a larger
request later.
Low-Ball Technique
B. Why this approach?

c. Why does behavior influence attitudes?
- Stems from the need to be consistent.
 Cognitive dissonance:
An aversive state of arousal or tension that
develops when we have two inconsistent
thoughts or behaviors.
 Festinger & Carlsmith (1959) – “knob turning”
B. Why this approach?
State occurs when:
c. Insufficient justification:
There is no external reason for behavior.
to reduce or eliminate aversive feeling, find
internal reason to justify behavior, which
often means changing one’s attitude.
(“bring attitude in line with behavior”)
vs. Overjustification?

Why do we care?
 Empathy
 Tolerance
C. Social perception and thinking

Place our social world into a context...

1. Review: Confirmation Bias, Self-Fulfilling
Prophecy, Memory, etc.


Power of expectations
2. Applying these ideas to stereotyping and
prejudice
2. Stereotyping and Prejudice

Powerful tendency to categorize, see
patterns.
 In
social perception – dominant category:
– “us” vs. “them” or in-groups/out-groups
– Sometimes accompanied by negative
characteristics (stereotypes)
– Apply other concepts…..
– Stereotype threat – documented impact on
performance

Current theory:
 PC
 Unconscious

stereotypes/prejudices
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/measureyourattitudes.html
C. Social Influence

1. Persuasion:
Purposely attempting to change attitudes or behavior.

Compliance Techniques


Sometimes based on people’s need for information.
Social Proofs: determine what is correct behavior by
looking at others.
C. Social Influence

1. Persuasion
 Informational
influence: change in behavior
that results from accepting evidence about
reality provided by other people.
– Why people use “experts” to persuade others.
– **Typically leads to acceptance.
C. Social Influence
Is that always why we go along with
others or are influenced by others?
 2. Conformity:
A change in behavior as a result of real
or imagined group pressure.
- Asch (1955): Line Study

C. Social Influence


Another type of influence:
Normative Influence:
Changing behavior to gain approval or avoid
disapproval.
Typically leads to compliance.


a. Normative vs. Informational Influence
b. Factors that influence conformity:


unanimity vs. power of the dissenter
status, cohesion
C. Social Influence
Up the ante….
 3. Obedience: Milgram (1965)
Yielding to a direct request from a
person in a position of authority.
 How far would you go?
 65% of participants went to 450 volts.

Influences on obedience:

Less obedience:
 Move
learner close to teacher.
 Teacher must touch learner.
 Experimenter moves away from teacher.
 Another participant is the experimenter.
 Two other participants refuse to obey.

More obedience:
 Two

other participants unquestionably obey
Concerns or other interoperations?
C. Social Influence


4. Existing in Groups:
a. Work
Social Loafing: The tendency for people to
exert less effort when they pool their efforts
toward a common goal than when they are
individually accountable.

Free riders vs. Suckers
 How to eliminate social loafing?
C. Social Influence
4. Existing in groups.
b. Play
- Being in a group fosters anonymity and draws attention

away from individual (reduces self-awareness).
- Feel like not identifiable and not responsible.
- Yet people can become more aroused in groups.
 Deindividuation:
 When in groups, people often abandon normal restraint.
- Diener et al., (1976): Trick or Treaters Study
D. Social Relations

2. Is there “true” altruism?

empathy
Helping Others
Kitty Genovese
 What about THE SITUATION influences
helping.
 Latane and Darley:
Several step process; must complete all steps
for helping to occur.
D. Social Relations
Must notice the event.
 After noticing the event, must interpret it as
an emergency.

Latane & Darley (1970) -“Smoke-filled Room” study
 b. Pluralistic Ignorance: In an ambiguous situation,
we assume that when other people appear
unconcerned, that the situation is not an
emergency.

D. Social Relations

Must assume responsibility.
& Darley (1974) - “Seizure Study”
 Diffusion of responsibility or bystander effect:
When you know there is an emergency, and
you do not help because you think other
people will.
 Latane
Must know how to give help.
 Must decide to help.

D. Social Relations

Hurting others - Aggression:

Any physical or verbal behavior intended to hurt
someone or something.
- MULTIPLE CAUSES
a. Review – social learning theory

b. Frustration-Aggression Theory

Importance of Frustration:
Blocking of a goal-directed behavior causes people to
become angry - that anger can lead to aggression.

More we desire or expect to achieve goal, the more frustration
experienced, more aggression expressed.
 Example: Ulricht & Flavell (1970) – “tower building” study
D. Social Relations

a. Physical attractiveness
“What is beautiful is good” - halo effect
Evidence: Hatfield et al. (1966)
“Welcome Week Dance Study”
What is considered attractive?
Average, symmetrical
women: baby-faced
men: mature & dominant
D. Social Relations

b. Proximity:
Geographical or functional nearness.
Evidence? Festinger et al., (1950)
 Mere exposure:
The tendency for novel stimuli to be liked more
or rated more positively after repeated
exposure to stimuli.
- mirror vs. picture image of self
Conclusions…
Social psychology:
 Study how normal people, in everyday
life, often behavior similarly, due to the
situation.
 Do social psychologists disregard the
“internal” part?
 No.
 Personality...
