Transcript document
Social Psychology Chapter 12 Explaining Behavior Attribution The process of inferring the cause of someone’s behavior, including your own The explanation you make for a particular behavior We tend to attribute the behavior of others to internal, personal characteristics – fundamental attribution error Biases in our thought Fundamental attribution error Blaming the victim The just-world hypothesis – we have a psychological need to believe the world is just; otherwise we are not safe What questions circulated upon the safe rescue of Elizabeth Smart…or consider the safe rescue of Sean Hornbeck and Ben Ownby? Attributional Biases Actor-observer discrepancy – we are more likely to use an external, situational attribution when we are the actor Self-serving bias We congratulate our efforts and claim intelligence assisted with a high score on a test We claim …”They were trick questions…” when we do poorly on an exam Individualistic vs. Collectivistic Culture and attribution Self serving bias common in individualistic culture Self-effacing (or modesty) bias common in collectivistic culture One blames himself for his failure and attributes success to external, situational causes Table 12.1 Hockenbury: Psychology, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2005 by Worth Publishers Attitudes A learned tendency to evaluate some object, person, or issue in a particular way Three components Cognitive – reflected in thoughts and conclusions Behavioral – reflected in action Emotional – reflected in emotional expression Figure 12.1 The Components of Attitudes Hockenbury: Psychology, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2005 by Worth Publishers Attitudes and Behavior We don’t always act in accordance with our attitudes Conditions that increase the likelihood of behaving in accordance with one’s attitude: Attitudes are extreme or frequently expressed Attitudes have been formed through direct experience You are very knowledgeable about the subject You personally stand to gain or lose something on a specific issue You anticipate a favorable outcome or response from others Prejudice A negative attitude toward people who belong to a specific social group Racial and ethnic groups are far more alike than they are different Differences that may exist between members of different racial and ethnic groups are far smaller than differences among various members of the same group Stereotypes A cluster of characteristics that are attributed to members of a specific social group or category Stereotypes simplify social information so that we can sort out, process, and remember information about other people more easily Potential Problems with Stereotypes Attributing a stereotypic cause for an outcome or event can blind us to the true causes of events They are hard to change once they are formed We see what we expect to see We discount information that contradicts a stereotype Stereotypes (cont.) The out-group, in-group tendency We speak in terms of “us” and “them” We tend to view “us” more favorably then “them” We notice diversity within our own group, but not among the “out-group” We tend to believe that our own ethnic group or culture is superior, ethnocentrism Prejudice and Emotion As with other attitudes, there is an emotional component Intensely negative Hatred Contempt Fear Loathing Prejudice and Behavior Discrimination Prejudice and intergroup hostility increases when different groups are competing for scarce resources Emotional basis – People are often prejudiced against groups that are perceived as threatening important in-group norms and values How do we overcome Prejudice? Contact theory – as members of different groups got to know one another as individuals, negative stereotypes would be disproved What do you think? Overcoming Prejudice (cont.) Sherif and the Robbers Cave Experiment Hostility between groups can be created Hostility could be overcome Applicable to other situations? Aronson and the Jigsaw Classroom Displayed a greater self esteem and a greater liking for children from different ethnic groups compared to children in traditional classrooms Conformity Asch Conformity Studies The subjects followed the majority and gave the wrong answer on 37% of the trials Those who responded alone gave the right answer 99% of the time On almost 2/3 of the clinical trials in which the majority named the wrong line the subjects stuck to their answer, despite being the minority Conformity and Culture Generally higher in collectivistic cultures Viewed more positively Less in the West Carries a negative connotation given our values of self expression, independence, and “standing out from the crowd” Obedience The performance of an action in response to the direct orders of an authority or person of higher status Stanley Milgram Could a person be pressured by others into committing an immoral act, some action that violated his or her own conscience, such as hurting a stranger? Forces that influenced subjects A previously well-established mental framework to obey The situation, or context, in which the obedience occurred The gradual repetitive escalation of the task Forces that influenced subjects (cont.) The experimenter’s behavior and reassurances The physical an psychological separation from the learner Figure 12.4 Factors That Decrease Destructive Obedience Hockenbury: Psychology, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2005 by Worth Publishers Helping Behavior Kitty Genovese Why didn’t anyone help? Apathy – “…alienation and depersonalization of life in a big city” Factors That Increase the Liklihood of Bystanders Helping The feel good, do good effect Feeling guilty Seeing others who are willing to help Perceiving the other person as deserving help Knowing how to help A personalized relationship Factors that Decrease the Liklihood of Bystanders Helping The presence of other people – diffusion of responsibility Being in a big city or very small town Vague or ambiguous situations When the personal costs for helping outweigh the benefits