Transcript File
CHAPTER 16: SOCIAL PSYCH Conformity, Obedience & Group Dynamics Introductory Definition Social Psychology study of how other people influence our thoughts, feelings, and actions “Power of the Situation” Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Study: were randomly assigned as “prisoners” or “guards.” Original study scheduled to last for 2 weeks but terminated after 6 days due to alarming psychological changes in both “prisoners” and “guards.” Students Social Influence Conformity changing behavior because of real or imagined group pressure Obedience following direct commands, usually from an authority figure Conformity Asch’s Conformity Study: Participants were asked to select the line closest in length to X. When confederates gave obviously wrong answers (A or C), more than 1/3 conformed and agreed with the incorrect choices. Conformity Why do we conform? Normative need Social Influence for approval and acceptance Informational need Social Influence for information and direction Reference people Groups we conform to because we like and admire them and want to be like them Obedience Milgram’s obedience study: Participants serving as “teachers” are ordered to continue shocking someone with a known heart condition who is begging to be released. Obedience Result? 65% of “teachers” delivered highest level of shock (450 volts) to the “learner.” Obedience Milgram’s “Shock Generator” Obedience Four Major Factors Affecting Obedience: Legitimacy and closeness of the authority figure Remoteness of the victim Assignment of responsibility Modeling/imitation Obedience Milgram’s study http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xlllu7_stranle y-milgram-obedience_school Stanford Prison Experiment What is the value of Zimbardo's prison study? Can we really learn anything from role playing or is the real prison situation too different from a group of college students being paid to role play? Is role playing a valid method for collecting social data? Group Processes Group membership involves: Roles set of behavioral patterns connected with particular social positions Deindividuation reduced self-consciousness, inhibition, and personal responsibility Problems with Decision Making Group polarization group movement toward either a riskier or more conservative decision; result depends on the members’ initial dominant tendency Groupthink faulty decision making occurring when a highly cohesive group seeks agreement and avoids inconsistent information Group Processes Symptoms of Groupthink: Illusion of invulnerability Belief in the morality of the group Collective rationalizations Stereotypes of out-groups Self-censorship Illusion of unanimity Direct pressure on dissenters Social Exchange Theory We want to maximize our benefits and minimize our costs We examine the costs and rewards of helping and not helping 3 rewards of helping Reciprocity Relieves distress Social approval Altruism Altruism Actions designed to help others with no obvious benefit to the helper Altruism Why Don’t We Help? Diffusion of Responsibility dilution, or diffusion, of personal responsibility Ambiguous unclear needed Situation what help is Why do we help? Egoistic Model helping motivated by anticipated gain Empathy-Altruism helping Model motivated by empathy Gender and Helping Women are more likely to… Help those they already know Help in nurturing ways involving long-term commitment Men are more likely to… Help strangers in emergency situations Help in chivalrous, heroic ways Bystander Effect Bystander effect The tendency to be less likely to help if others are also present The story of Kitty Genovese (1964) The Greyhound bus beheading Why didn’t other passengers help? Bystander Effect Smoke-filled room study (Latané and Darley, 1968) IV: left alone with 2 other real participants with 2 other confederates who pretended nothing was wrong DV: Percentage of participants who reported smoke Smoke-Filled Room Study 80 Percent who report smoke 60 40 2 0 0 Alone With 2 other real subjects With 2 calm confederates Attribution Attribution Statements that explain why people do what they do To determine the cause we first decide whether the behavior comes from an: internal (dispositional) cause personal characteristics external (situational) cause situational demands Attribution Examples of attribution Dispositional: “John hit me because he is a mean person” Situational: “John robbed the bank in order to avoid losing his family home to a bankruptcy” Attribution Our behavior is effected by our internal attitudes as well as our external influences Internal attitudes External influences Behavior Attributional Errors Fundamental Attribution Error Tendency to attribute behavior of others to internal causes (personality, likes, and so on). We believe this even if they really have external causes Saliency bias: tendency to focus on the most noticeable factors when explaining causes of behavior Fundamental Attribution Error 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 Attributional Errors Self-Serving Bias: We tend to take undue credit for positive outcomes and attribute negative outcomes to external causes maintains our self-esteem A function of culture Attitude Attitude Belief and feeling that predisposes you to respond in a particular way to objects, people and events Three elements Cognitive Affective Behavioral Attitude Attitudes Can Affect Action Not only do people stand for what they believe in (attitude), they start believing in what they stand for. D. MacDonald/ PhotoEdit Cooperative actions can lead to mutual liking (beliefs). Small Request – Large Request In the Korean War, Chinese communists solicited cooperation from US army prisoners by asking them to carry out small errands. By complying to small errands they were likely to comply to larger ones. Foot-in-the-Door Phenomenon: The tendency for people who have first agreed to a small request to comply later with a larger request. Actions Can Affect Attitudes Cognitive Dissonance When our attitudes and actions are opposed, we experience tension. This is called cognitive dissonance. To relieve ourselves of this tension we bring our attitudes closer to our actions (Festinger, 1957). Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive Dissonance Festinger and Carlsmith’s Cognitive Dissonance Study Participants given very boring tasks to complete, and then paid either $1 ($7.42) or $20 ($148.40) to tell next participant the task was “very enjoyable” and “fun.” Result? Those paid $1 felt more cognitive dissonance, therefore, they changed their attitude more about the boring tasks. Social Influence The greatest contribution of social psychology is its study of attitudes, beliefs, decisions, and actions and the way they are molded by social influence. 40 Individual Behavior in the Presence of Others Social facilitation: Refers to improved performance on tasks in the presence of others. Social Loafing: The tendency of an individual in a group to exert less effort toward attaining a common goal than when tested individually (Latané, 1981). Prejudice and Discrimination Prejudice learned, generally negative, attitude toward members of a group Discrimination negative behaviors directed at members of a group Prejudice and Discrimination Three components of prejudice: Cognitive Stereotypes Affective Feelings Behavioral Discrimination In and Out Groups 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. Scotland’s famed “Tartan Army” fans. 44 Cognitive Roots of Prejudice The tendency of people to believe the world is just, and people get what they deserve and deserve what they get (the just-world phenomenon). © The New Yorker Collection, 1981, Robert Mankoff from cartoonbank.com. All Rights Reserved. 45 AGGRESSION Chapter 16 – Social Psychology Aggression Aggression can be any physical or verbal behavior intended to hurt or destroy. Can stem from hostility or as a means to an end Three biological influences on aggressive behavior are: 1. Genetic Influences 2. Neural Influences 3. Biochemical Influences Aggression Genetic Influences: Neural Influences: aggression is linked to the Y chromosome. Limbic system (amygdala) and the frontal lobe, are intimately involved with aggression Biochemical Influences: Low testosterone = docility Exposure to testosterone increases aggression The Psychology of Aggression Four psychological factors that influence aggressive behavior are: 1. 2. 3. 4. Dealing with aversive events Learning aggression is rewarding Observing models of aggression Acquiring social scripts 1. Aversive Events Studies of people who experience unpleasant events revealed that those made miserable often make others miserable. 2. Learning that Aggression is Rewarding When aggression leads to desired outcomes, one learns to be aggressive Shown in both animals and humans. Frustration-Aggression Principle A principle in which frustration (caused by the blocking of an attempt to achieve a desired goal) creates anger, which can generate aggression. 3. Observing Models of Aggression Sexually coercive men are promiscuous and hostile in their relationships with women. This coerciveness has increased due to television viewing of Rand X-rated movies. 4. Acquiring Social Scripts The media portrays social scripts and generates mental tapes in the minds of the viewers. When confronted with new situations people may rely on such social scripts. If social scripts are violent in nature, people may act them out. Gender Differences in Aggression Men use more physical, direct forms of aggression Men’s aggression is more likely to do physical harm, and thus gets more attention Girls and women use more indirect forms of aggression (e.g., spreading rumors). Assertiveness Assertiveness Behavior intended to express dominance or confidence Assertiveness is not aggression Do Video Games Teach or Release Violence? The general consensus on violent video games is that, to some extent, they breed violence. Adolescents view the world as hostile when they get into arguments and receive bad grades after playing such games. 56 Media Violence More TV sets in United States than toilets Media consumption is #1 pastime among Americans, particularly youth 60%-70% of all TV programs contain violence 70%-80% show no remorse, criticism, or penalty for the violence Common Responses “Not all who play violent games/watch violent media become killers.” True. Not all smokers die of lung cancer, either. The point is NOT whether exposure leads inevitably to criminal mayhem, but that the likelihood of aggression is increased Common Responses “Effects are trivially small” False. Effects are larger than many that we take for granted Effects of VVGs (Bushman & Anderson, 2001) Findings from a meta-analysis Correlation with VVG Exposure 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 -0.2 -0.3 Aggression Helping Hostile Thoughts Hostile Affect Arousal Media Violence More recently, video games have become kids’ favorite form of media 90% of kids age 2-17 play regularly Majority of popular games are violent Common Responses “Playing violent games/watching violence allows people to “vent” feelings of anger” False. Watching violence or engaging in virtual violence increases aggression Catharsis doesn’t work! Media Violence Since at least 1970, researchers have known of a link between violent media and aggression Weakened inhibitions against violent behavior Imitation of specific violent acts Aggression primed as a response to anger Desensitization to violence Overestimation of prevalence of violence in real life Media Industry Response The media is simply “holding a mirror to society.” False. Real world is far less violent than the TV/Movie world. 0.2% of crimes are murders; 50% of crimes on TV are murders Average of 7 characters are killed on TV each night If applied in reality, this proportion of murder would wipe out U.S. population in 50 days Media Industry Response “Violence sells!” False. TV violence significantly decreases memory for commercial messages Bushman, 1998 19% of viewers will be less likely to remember an ad if it is embedded in a violent or sexually explicit show CHAPTER 16 Interpersonal Attraction Interpersonal Attraction Interpersonal Attraction positive feelings toward another Three Key Factors: Proximity Similarity & Familiarity Physical Attractiveness Attraction - Proximity We like those we are close to both physically and functionally Why does proximity work? It increases familiarity Often linked to similarity It makes others more available Cognitive consistency It's easier to be around others who we like, therefore we feel a need to get along with people we see often Attraction - Familiarity Simply seeing a person more frequently can increase our liking of that person This only works if our initial reaction is either neutral or positive Seeing a negative stimulus repeatedly simply makes us not like it even more Why does familiarity work? Repeated exposure increases recognition We assume that familiar others are similar to ourselves Attraction - Similarity Matching Principle The tendency to choose similar partners Friends Social class, educational level, and religious backgrounds Romantic Age, partners social class, ethnicity, and religion Attraction - Similarity Why does the similarity effect occur? Similar others are easier and more pleasant to be around Expectancy-value Theory Maybe we deliberately select people for their similarity to us The reward for dating someone similar to us is high…but so is the probability that they will like us What does being physically attractive mean? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder…for the most part Walster et al (1966) Computer Dance study Physical attractiveness was the only significant predictor of liking What does being physically attractive mean? Halo effect of beauty Attractive people are judged more favorably on other traits than are less attractive people Pretty people are assumed to have better: Social skills Intellectual competence Greater integrity and concern for others Is it true? Certainly not social skills for intelligence or integrity but sort of for Liking and Loving Liking is a favorable evaluation of another Loving can be defined in terms of caring, attachment, and intimacy Liking and Loving Sample items from Rubin’s liking and loving test: Interpersonal Attraction Romantic Love State of intense positive absorption present at beginning of a love relationship Typically lasts 6-20 months Companionate Love lasting attraction based on trust, caring, tolerance, and friendship Love and Attachment Mutual Absorption: When two people almost always attend only to each other Avoidant Attachment Fear of intimacy and a tendency to resist commitment to others Ambivalent Attachment: Mixed emotions about relationships; conflicting feelings of affection, anger and emotional turmoil Gender Differences What do people look for when considering potential dating partners? Here are the results of a study in which personal ads were placed in newspapers. As you can see, men were more influenced by looks, and women by success (Goode, 1996). According to evolutionary psychologists, women tend to be concerned with whether mates will devote time and resources to a relationship. Men place more emphasis on physical attractiveness and sexual fidelity. Personal Space Area surrounding the body that is defined as private and is subject to personal control Proxemics: Systematic study of human use of personal space, especially in social settings Proxemics (Spatial Norms) Intimate Distance: 18 inches from the skin. Reserved for special people or special circumstances Personal Distance: Interactions with friends. 18 inches to 4 feet from body; arm’s length Social Distance: Impersonal Public interaction; 4 to 12 feet Distance: Formal interactions (like giving a speech); 12 feet or more Proxemics Fig. 18.2 Typical spatial zones (in feet) for face-to-face interactions in North America. Often, we must stand within intimate distance of others in crowds, buses, subways, elevators, and other public places. At such times, privacy is maintained by avoiding eye contact, by standing shoulder to shoulder or back to back, and by positioning a purse, bag, package, or coat as a barrier to spatial intrusions.