text:
Social Psychology - Exam 2
The flashcards below were created by user
FreezingBlue Flashcards
Social behavior
behavior that takes place in a social context and results from interaction between individuals
Social psychology
study of social behavior
tentative predictions or explanations for an observation or phenomenon that can be empirically tested
Internal validity
the extent to which an association between an independent variable and a dependent variable reflects a causal relationship between the two
External validity
the extent to which the results of research can be applied to circumstances outside the specific setting in which the research was conducted
Demand characteristics
environmental cues that make participants aware of what the experimenter expects to find or how participants are expected to behave
Experimenter effects
subtle cues or signals that are given out by an experimenter who knows the experimental hypothesis
Archival research
the reanalysis and interpretation of information collected by others for a different purpose
fundamental part of every human, a symbolic construct which reflects our consciousness of our own identity
psychological state in which people are aware of their traits, feelings and behavior
realizations of oneself as an individual entity
Anterior cingulate
are of the frontal lobe in the cerebral cortex responsible for monitoring/controlling intentional behavior
Private self-awareness
when an individual temporarily becomes aware of private, personal aspects of the self
Intensified emotional response
when reflecting on one's feelings intensifies them with private self-awareness
Clarification of knowledge
more accurate self-knowledge with private self-awareness
Adhere to personal standards of behavior
more aware of true beliefs and acting in line with them with private self-awareness
Public self-awareness
when a person is aware of public aspects of themselves that can be seen and evaluated by others
Evaluation apprehension
concern about being evaluated by others in public self-awareness
Loss of self-esteem
if a person's actual public image does not match their desired public image, public self-awareness can lead to this
Adherence to social standards of behavior
more likely to conform to group norms even if it goes against their normal attitudes in public self-awareness
chronic self-awareness
Private self-consciousness
experience more intense emotions, more likely to remain true to personal beliefs, and have more accurate self-perceptions
Public self-consciousness
more likely to adhere to group norms, avoid embarrassing situations, concerned with own physical appearance, and likely to judge others based on their physical appearances
cognitive structures that represent the knowledge we have about a particular concept or type of stimulus
we are self-schematic on a particular self-schema if it is highly embedded in our self-concept; this is likely to be the case for a self-schema that we are extreme on, that is particularly important to us, and for which we are certain that the opposite is not true
occurs on a dimension if it is not important to you and does not reflect who you are
Control theory of self-regulation
theory proposing that we use our self-awareness to assess whether or not we are meeting our goals and, if not, make efforts to improve the self in line with these goals
Test phase of control theory of self-regulation
compare the self against one of two standards; public or private based on type of self-awareness
Operation phase of control theory of self-regulation
change in behavior in order to meet the chosen standard
Re-testing phase of control theory of self-regulation
re-compare self against public or private standard
Exit phase of control theory of self-regulation
if self and standard align with each other, the individual exits the self-regulation loop
Self-discrepancy theory
according to this theory, we compare the self to two points of reference, the ideal self and the ought self. Discrepancies between actual and ideal self can lead to dejection-related emotions and discrepancies between actual and ought self lead to agitation-related emotions
Actual self (Higgins)
reflects how we are at present
Ideal self (Higgins)
point of reference which reflects how we would really like to be
Ought self (Higgins)
represents the traits or characteristics that an individual believes they should possess, based on a sense of duty, responsibility or obligation
Social comparison theory
theory that proposes that we form a definition of the self by comparing ourselves with those around us
Self-evaluation maintenance model
Tesser proposed that comparison with someone who is successful results in self-reflection or social-comparison, depending on whether that success is relevant domain, and on whether we are certain of our own performance in that domain
Social reflection
associating ourselves with the success of close others
Upward social comparison
comparing our achievements with the achievements of others who we believe are outperforming us
Four strategies in the self-evaluation model
1. exaggerate the ability of successful target
2. change the target of comparison
3. distance the self from successful target
4. devalue the dimension of comparison
Individual self - Brewer & Gardner
unique, personal aspects of the self - personality traits and personal preferences
Relational self - Brewer and Gardner
defined by our relationships with significant others
Collective self - Brewer and Gardner
aspects of the self that reflect relationships with other individuals and groups - family status
Social identity theory
theory which proposes that when our membership in a particular group is salient, it is our social self rather than our personal self that guides our self-concept, attitudes and behavior - this explains how affiliation to groups influences behavior
Personal identity
reflects idiosyncratic aspects of the self, including our personality traits and our close relationships with other individuals
Social identity
reflects our membership in a particular group, and incorporates the attitudes, behaviors and social norms associated with that group
Group norms
a collection of shared beliefs about how group members should think and behave
Self-categorization theory
an extension of social identity theory which proposes that when an individual's social identity is salient they come to see themselves as a depersonalized group member rather than an idiosyncratic individual - they self-stereotype
when group membership is salient, individuals come to see themselves in terms of the shared features that define the group membership, thinking and behaving as a group member rather than as a unique individual
Meta-contrast principle
group members exaggerate similarities within the group and differences with other groups
an individual's personal evaluation of their own self-concept
Demanding aspect of parenting
controlling, imposing rules and punishments
Responsive aspect of parenting
warm and supportive
Authoritative parenting
place a lot of demands on their child, imposing rules on them and disciplining them for disobedience but they are also responsive, supportive and warm
Authoritarian parenting
overly strict and demanding, failing to be responsive to the child's needs
Permissive parenting
responsive but not strict enough, indulging their child's every desire
Mood regulation
people with high self-esteem are better at regulating their mood than those with lower self-esteem and are better able to react constructively to life events
people are motivated to hold an accurate self-perception and seek out information which will help them to do so
Diagnostic tests
evaluate the performance of an individual and distinguish their performance from the performance of others, when evaluating the self
people are motivated to confirm their existing self-perceptions and so often seek out similar others who are most likely to do so
people are motivated to hold a positive self-image and are selectively biased toward information that helps them to see themselves in a positive light
Self-affirmation theory
the idea that people respond to threats to self by affirming positive aspects of themselves, allowing them to maintain a positive self-concept
Self-serving attribution bias
we have a pervasive tendency to attribute successes to internal, personal attributes and failure to external factors outside of our control
Including others in the self
our self-concept cognitively overlaps with the self-concept of close friends and romantic partners
Extended contact effect
just knowing memebers of the ingroup who have friends in an outgroup reduces prejudice
Social change strategy
low status group members compete with the high status group to improve their status relative to that group
Social creativity strategy
low status group members finding new dimensions on which they compare more favorably
strategy which members of a low status group use to maintain a positive self-concept by distancing themselves from the group, disregarding he importance of that group membership
Basking in reflected glory
people often derive a positive self-concept from the achievements of other group members even if they were not personally instrumental in those achievements
Cutting off reflected failure
when a group is unsuccessful, group members may limit damage to their own self-concept by distancing themselves from the group. However, this strategy is only used by individuals for whom the group is not highly important
Individualist culture
culture that promotes individual goals, initiative and achievements, encouraging people to view themselves as unique and independent individuals - US, UK
Collectivist culture
culture that promotes conformity, and actions that promote the best interests of the group rather than its individual members, placing high value on cooperation, social support and respect for others - China, India
people who are adept at dealing with both cultures (their own and their host society's)
Alternation model
an individual may successfully take part in two different cultures by understanding the cultural assumptions that guide attitudes and behavior in both, and switching smoothly between the two depending on the social context
What is the basis for attribution theory?
The idea of the naive scientist
Who developed the naive scientist?
Heider, 1958
What two needs are people motivated by?
The need to form a coherent view of the world
The need to gain control over the environment
How do we satisfy the needs for a coherent view of the world and control of the environment?
We act as naive scientists, rationally and logically testing our hypotheses about the behavior of others
What did Heider and Simmel (1994) study?
The basic need to attribute causality
How did Heider and Simmel illustrate the basic need of attributing causality?
Asked participants to simply describe the movement of abstract geometric shapes
Participants (all but one) described the movements as actions of animated beings - indicative of human intentions and motives
Why do people have a basic need to attribute causality?
Ascribes meaning to our world
Makes the world clear, definable and predictable, thereby reducing uncertainty
Locus of causality?
What are the two different ways behavior can be explained?
Internal or external causes
How can we subdivide internal and external causes of behavior?
1. Stable vs unstable causes (stability)
2. Controllable vs uncontrollable causes (controllability)
Who developed the correspondent inference theory?
Jones and Davis, 1965
What type of attributions do people prefer to make? Why?
Dispositional because they are more valuable with regard to making predictions about behavior
How do we assess whether there is a correspondence between behavior and personality?
Process three key types of information: social desirability, choice, and non-common effects
Social desirability
Internal attribution is more likely when socially undesirable behaviors are observed
Choice (freely chosen?)
Internal attribution is more likely when the actor has freely chosen the given behavior
Noncommon effects
Internal attribution is more likely when the outcome of a behavior has a unique effect
How is the correspondent inference theory limited?
It is limited to single instances of behavior and focuses on internal attributions
How is the covariation model different from the correspondent inference theory?
It accounts for multiple observational points and details the processes that result in external as well as internal attributions
It expands on the correspondent inference theory
What is the covariation principle?
For something to be the cause of a particular behavior it must be present when the behavior is present and absent when the behavior is absent
Who developed the covariation model?
Kelley, 1967
How do we determine causality with the covariation model?
We ascribe causality to the cause that covaries with the behavior to the greatest extent
What information is crucial for the covariation model to work?
When consensus information is high and consistency and distinctiveness information is low, what does this imply about causation?
Cause is internal disposition
If consensus information is low and consistency and distinctiveness information is high, what does this imply about causality?
Cause is external situation
Is Kelley's covariation model easily applied and consistently used by all?
No, it's idealized and individuals don't put the same amount of weight on each element (people pay more attention to target person information than the context)
What happens when Kelley's model isn't applied correctly?
Attributional biases
What are attributional biases?
Tendency in particular contexts to make one type of attribution over another
What are the three most common attributional biases?
Fundamental attribution error
Actor-observer bias
Self serving attributions
Who studied the fundamental attribution error?
Jones and Harris in 1967
What is the fundamental attribution error?
Tendency to make internal rather than external attributions for people's behavior
What study did Jones and Harris perform on the fundamental attribution error?
Had participants read essays written by fellow students for or against Fidel Castro
Students either picked their position on Castro or were assigned their position
Participants were then asked to guess what attitude the person had toward Castro
In choice condition participants reasonably assumed the writer had written based on their own opinion
Participants also thought that the essay reflected the writer's opinion in the non-choice condition as well
Why does the fundamental attribution error occur?
Perceptual salience - person being observed is the most perceptually salient aspect of the situation, so an internal attribution becomes much more accessible
True or false: In non-Western cultures, the tendency to make internal attributions is just as fundamental as in Western cultures
False: less fundamental in non-Western
What is the tendency for people to attribute their own behavior to external causes but that of others to internal factors?
The actor-observer bias
Who performed an important study on the actor-observer bias?
Storms, 1973
What methods did Storms use in his study?
Two participants as observers and two as conversational actors
Two actors had a conversation with each other while being observed by the other two
The observers were then asked to attribute causality and judge whether the opinions reflected by the actors reflected their stable personality or not
Observers focused attention on the actor they were facing
Observers emphasized dispositional factors when explaining the actor's behaviors, but the actors emphasized situational factors when explaining their own behavior
This is caused by perceptual salience
: actor's attention is away from them (external) and observer's attention is on the actor (internal)
Note that the actor-observer bias was reversed when the actors were shown videotapes of their opposite perspective before making attributions leading them to make internal attributions instead of the before stated external ones
Olson and Ross, 1988, say what about the self serving attribution bias?
The pervasive tendency to attribute successes to internal, personal attributions and failure to external factors outside of our control is how we protect and maintain our self esteem
How does the self serving attribution bias work on a group level?
We tend to attribute our group's successes to internal factors and other group's successes to external factors
What negative effects can intergroup attributions cause?
Can serve to propagate prejudice and discrimination in society
What effect does our state of mind have on the types of attributions we make?
State of mind can sometimes determine if we make an internal or external attribution
Who studied the effects of the state of mind on attributions?
Neumann, 2000
What did Neumann test in 2000?
Participants were primed by pairing 20 symbols depicting everyday activities with 20 phrases describing the activities
They then had to come up with either self or other referent sentences, depending on which condition they had been assigned
After this, participants were instructed to go to a second lab down the hall and when they entered the lab an experimenter shouted at them to get out
Participants with self-referent mindset were more likely to react with guilt (internal attribution)
Participants with other-referent mindset were more likely to react with anger (external attribution)
Suggests that whether we feel guilty or angry after something bad happens may depend on factors entirely unrelated to the situation
What do Neumann's finding support?
Weiner's 1986 idea that anger emerges from external attributions for negative events while guilt from the internal attribution for negative events
How are attitudes formed?
Through self perception
What is social influence?
When we attribute credibility to people, we believe in them
What is romantic love, according to attributions?
We are fooled into love because we are making mis-attributions
Who studied social representations?
Moscovici, 1961
What does Moscovici have to say about social representations?
Social representation refer to shared beliefs and understandings between broad groups of people and these can include culturally held and transmitted knowledge about causal relations
According the the theory of social representations, how is understanding of causality transformed and communicated?
Through informal discussion to form a common-place, consensually held belief - a social representation
This is in line with Heider's assertions that we are all naive scientists, attempting to make sense of the world around us
Is the true self scientific?
Are the true self and self awareness the same?
True self is often different from self awareness
What do scientists believe about our perceptions?
That we are trapped inside of them
Which type of awareness is this: what you are aware of about your self?
Private self awareness
What type of awareness is this: awareness that others are aware of things you know about yourself
Public self awareness
What is this: if someone knows what we are thinking of, then we are being evaluated and this causes fear and we manage how we look through public self awareness
Evaluation apprehension
Where are we always locked?
In our minds
In our individual perceptions
Information you store in your head about a concept?
What do schemas involve?
Information stored in your head
What is the self-concept equal to?
Self schema
How much you value yourself
What is the evaluation of the self-concept?
Self esteem
What drives our behaviors?
Our concept of our self
What drives behavior pertaining to the self?
Self motives
Seeking out info to see ourselves in a positive light
Self enhancement
Inviting complements
Self verification
What allows us to think about who we are and how we are perceived by others?
Reflexive thought
What two variables does our level of self awareness depend on?
The realization of oneself as an individual entity
Self awareness
At what age did babies recognize themselves in the mirror in Lewis and Brooks (1978) study?
around 18 months
What cells grow rapidly around 18 months of age?
Spindle cells
What are spindle cells?
Specialized neurones in the anterior cingulate
What part of brain is thought to be responsible for monitoring and controlling intentional behavior?
Anterior cingulate in the cerebral cortex in the frontal lobe
What area of the brain is activated when adults are self aware?
Anterior cingulate
The prefrontal cortex is thought to do what?
Make inferences about what other people are thinking and process information about the self
How can we infer what other people are thinking while processing information about ourselves?
We might make inferences about the thoughts and feelings of others by imagining what our own thoughts and feelings would be if we were in the same situation
Who are the researchers involved in studies on the prefrontal cortex?
Mitchell, Banaji, and Macrae (2005)
What methods were used in Mitchell, Banaji, and Macrae's (2005) study?
Participants went under an fMRI scan to show activity in different areas of the brain while making judgements about photographs of a series of faces
Participants either made judgements about the mental state of the person or a nonmental state task
After the fMRI, participants were shown each photograph again and reported how similar they perceived themselves to be to the person in the photo
What were the results of Mitchell, Banaji, and Macrae's study on the prefrontal cortex?
Participants showed mental activity in the prefrontal cortex when they were making inferences about mental states but not when they were making a judgement on the physical appearance of the person
There was also a correlation between the amount of activity in the cortex and perceived similarity of the participant to the individual when making judgements on mental state
What can be interpreted from Mitchell, Banaji, and Macrae's study?
The prefrontal cortex is specifically used when trying to understand the attributes that other people possess, but not for making more general judgements about others
When the participants believed they were more similar to the person in the photograph, they believed they were better able to predict the behavior of that individual on the basis of how they themselves would feel in the same situation
The prefrontal cortex showed greater activation during these times
When do people become privately self aware?
When they see their face in a mirror
When they experience physiological arousal which may lead them to reflect on their emotional state
If an individual already feels positive, what will reflection on those feelings lead to?
Feeling even happier
What did Scheier and Carver (1977) test?
Private self awareness in emotional response
What methods did Scheier and Carver use to test private self awareness, and what were the results?
Had participants read aloud a series of positive statements or a period of negative statements
They found that participants who looked at themselves in a mirror became more extreme in their emotional responses than participants who had not been looking in a mirror
What consequences does private self awareness have?
Intensified emotional responses
Clarification of knowledge about self
Adherence to personal standards of behavior
How do privately self aware individuals experience clarification of knowledge?
By focusing on internal events they able to report them with greater accuracy
Gibbons, Carver, Scheier, and Hormuth (1979) tested what?
Private self awareness in clarification of knowledge
Gibbons et al. (1979) used what methods for testing private self awareness, and what were the results?
Gave participants a placebo which they were told was a drug that would induce arousal and a number of other side effects
Participants with mirror-induced self awareness reported less arousal and fewer side effects than participants in a control condition who could not see themselves
Self aware individuals ignored the placebo and focused on how they were really feeling resulting in more accurate self perceptions
How does more awareness of true beliefs influence behavior?
Individuals who are more aware of their true beliefs will act in line with those beliefs rather than being influenced by normative pressures
Scheier and Carver (1980) performed what study?
Private self awareness and adherence to beliefs
In Scheier and Carver's 1980 study on individual's adherence to beliefs, what methodology was used and what were the results?
Had participants write a counter-attitudinal essay using the theory of cognitive dissonance
Participants who wrote the essay in front of a mirror showed less attitude change than participants who wrote the essay without the mirror
What is the theory of cognitive dissonance?
People feel negative arousal if their attitudes and behavior are inconsistent and often deal with this by changing their attitudes in line with their behavior
When are people publicly self aware?
When they are being watched by others
What can the fear of a negative evaluation lead to?
Loss of self esteem
What can public self awareness lead to that is opposite of private self awareness?
Adherence to social standards of behavior instead of to personal beliefs
People high in private self consciousness experience what?
Chronically heightened private self awareness
More intense emotions
More likely to remain true to their personal beliefs
Have more accurate self perceptions
What are the pros and cons of being chronically privately self aware?
Less likely to experience ill health as a result of stress because they pay more attention to their physiological state
Greater tendency to suffer from depression and neuroticism
More likely to pay attention to and ruminate about any feelings of unhappiness or discomfort
What are individuals high in public self consciousness concerned with?
How they are perceived by those around them
What behaviors are publicly self conscious individuals going to portray?
More likely to adhere to group norms
More likely to avoid embarrassing situations
More concerned with their own physical appearance
More likely to judge others based on their physical appearance
How is the knowledge we have about the world stored?
What are schemas?
Cognitive structures that represent the knowledge we have about a particular concept or type of stimulus
How are schemas developed?
Through our experiences with a stimulus
What does each self-schema consist of?
Our perception of our self, and our experience on that dimension of our self
Who argued that if an aspect of the self is perceived as particularly important, the individual can be described as self-schematic on that dimension?
Markus, 1977
If the person thinks they are extreme on that dimension, and if they are certain that the opposite is not true for them, then the individual can be described as what on that dimension?
Self schematic
If a particular dimension is not important to you and does not reflect who you are, what would it be?
Self aschematic
Why are self schemas more likely to be more complex and varied than other schemas in memory?
We acquire more information about the self than about anything else
Markus and Sentis (1982) proposed what?
As well as current self schema, we also hold possible future self schema
Why would having complex and varied self schemas be beneficial for us?
Buffer us from negative events or failures in our lives
If we have one self schema producing a negative effect, we derive satisfaction from other self schemas to show ourselves in a positive light
Dimensions on which we are self schematic are particularly likely to be activated in relevant domains. Who conducted a study on this?
Markus (1977)
What methods were used, and what were the results in Markus' 1977 study?
Participants who had either previously rated themselves as self-schematic on the trait of dependence or independence (or aschematic on both) completed a reaction-time task
They were presented with words on a screen associated with independence and dependence and were asked to press a "me" button if this described them or a "not me" button if it didn't
Participants who were self schematic on independence or dependence were much faster at identifying whether a word characterized them than participants who were aschematic on either of the characteristics
Self schematic participants also had better memory for incidents from the past which demonstrated their dependence or independence
What are the six theories that explain how our self concept is managed and maintained?
1. Control theory of self regulation
2. Self discrepancy theory
3. Social comparison theory
4. Self evaluation maintenance model
5. Social identity theory
6. Self categorization theory
What can the self be compared to?
Perceptions of how the self should be
Perceptions of the self to other individuals
Perceptions of the self to other groups
What do the control theory of self regulation and the self discrepancy theory have in common?
They both argue that when people are self aware, they can think about whether they are the sort of person they want to be or whether there are ways in which they would like to change
What did Carver and Scheier (1981, 1998) propose in relation to self awareness and goals?
Through self awareness, we are able to assess whether or not we are meeting our goals
What is the central element of the control theory of self regulation?
The cognitive feedback loop which illustrates four steps involved in self regulation
What are the four steps in self regulation according to the control theory of self regulation?
1. Test
2. Operate
3. Test
4. Exit
What occurs in the first test phase of the control theory of regulation?
People compare the self against one of two standards - privately self aware people compare themselves again a private standard and publicly self aware people compare themselves against a public standard
What is an example of a private standard a privately self aware individual would compare herself to?
Values she believes to be important
What is an example of a public standard a publicly self aware individual would compare himself to?
Values held by his friends and family
If an individual believes they have failed meet the relevant standard in the control theory of self regulation, what happens?
They put into operation a change in behavior in order to meet the standard
After the operation phase in the control theory of self regulation, what does the individual do next time they reflect on the issue?
They retest themselves, comparing their self to their values/values of others for the second time
If the self still falls short of the standard after the operation phase of the feedback loop, what happens?
The feedback loop repeats itself
If the self and standard are in line with another on the feedback loop, what occurs?
The individual exits the feedback loop for that standard
Who performed a study on the control theory of self regulation?
Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Muraven, and Tice in 1998
What methods did Baumeister et al. (1998) use for their study, and what were their results?
Participants were led to believe the study was about taste perception and were instructed to make sure they had not eaten for at least 3 hours
They entered a room with an oven in it with the aroma of chocolate and baking
They were seated at a table with chocolate cookies on one side and a bowl of radishes on the other
Radishes condition:
Participants were asked to eat at least 2 or 3 radishes
Only eat the food assigned
Chocolate condition:
Participants were asked to eat at least 2 or 3 cookies
Only eat the food assigned
Both conditions:
They were left alone for five minutes and observed
After completing the task, participants were asked if they minded helping out the experimenter by taking part in an unrelated experiment on problem solving
They were instructed to complete a problem solving task, taking as much time as they wanted and were told that they would not be judged on how long they took
The task had been prepared so it was impossible to solve
Participants in the radishes condition gave up more quickly than those in the chocolate condition
Participants who previously had to exert self control by only eating the radishes, were less able to persist on the difficult and frustrating puzzle task
Baumeister et al. argued that we have limited cognitive resources at our disposal to self regulate and when we self regulate in one domain, the resources we have left to self regulate in another domain are temporarily depleted
Who argued that people possess three types of self schema?
Higgins, 1987
What are the three types of self schema
Actual self
Ideal self
Ought self
According to the self discrepancy theory, people are motivated to ensure what?
That their actual self matches their ideal self and ought self
What is an actual-ideal discrepancy?
Associated with the absence of positive outcomes, which result in dejection-related emotions like disappointment and sadness
What is an actual-ought discrepancy?
Associated with the presence of negative outcomes, which results in agitation-related emotions like anger, fear and nervousness
What did Higgins, Bond, Klein and Strauman do in their study in 1986?
Identified participants who had previously reported either a low or a high discrepancy between their ideal and their actual and ought selves
Several weeks later, participants completed a task in which they either had to focus on and describe the difference between their ideal or ought self and their actual self
What were the results of Higgins et al. study on the self discrepancy theory?
Participants with a high level of discrepancy showed an increase in dejection related emotions after thinking about their actual-ideal discrepancies, and an increase in agitation related emotions after thinking about their actual-ought discrepancies
Participants with low or no discrepancies showed no significant changes in their emotions
What does self discrepancy theory imply about generating negative arousal?
By generating negative arousal, discrepancies will motivate people to reduce the discomfort they are experiencing by making changes that reduce discrepancies
What do social comparison theory and self evaluation maintenance theory argue?
We learn about the self by comparing ourselves with other individuals
What does social comparison theory argue?
That beliefs, feelings, and behaviors are subjective
There is no objective benchmark against which we can compare them
By comparing the self with others, we are given an objective benchmark to make comparisons to, providing us with a sense of validation for the way we are
What is an upward comparison?
Comparing the self to someone you believe to be better than you
What is a downward comparison?
Comparing the self to someone who you believe to be worse than you
People motivated by a desire for an accurate self evaluation make what types of comparisons?
Both upward and downward
Who developed the self evaluation maintenance model?
Tesser in 1988
How do people respond to the success of someone else?
Social reflection
Upward social comparison
When are we likely to engage in social reflection?
Domain in which the individual is successful must be irrelevant to us and doesn't threaten our self concept
We must be certain about our abilities in that particular domain
When are we likely to engage in upward social comparisons?
When the domain on which the other person is successful is relevant
Uncertainty about our own abilities
What are the four strategies we can use to maintain a positive self concept according to the self evaluation maintenance model?
1. Exaggerate the ability of successful target
2. Change the target of comparison
3. Distance the self from successful target
4. Devalue the dimension of comparison
True or false: The self concept is thought to be made up of one self schema
False; made up of many self schemas
What are the types of self proposed by Brewer and Gardner in 1996?
Individual self
Relational self
Collective self
Who are the four researchers contributing to the social identity theory?
Hogg and Abrams 1988 and Tafjel and Turner 1979
What are personal identities?
Those that reflect idiosyncratic aspects of the self (personality traits)
What are social identities?
Broader social groups to which we belong
What does our sense of self at any given time depend upon?
Which of our many personal or social identities is psychologically salient
Who developed the self categorization theory?
Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, and Wetherell, 1987
What does the self categorization theory say about an individual's social identity?
When it becomes salient, their perceptions of themselves and others become depersonalized and they see themselves more in terms of the shared features that define group membership
What principle do group members, under the self categorization theory, obey?
Meta-contrast principle
What researchers studied the effect of social identity on adherence to group norms?
Jetten, Spears and Manstead in 1996
What were Jetten et al. methods of research?
Participants social identity was made salient by being told they were being assigned to one of two groups, based on the technique they had used during an initial task
To increase identification, they then took part in what they believed was a group task (which actually had no other members)
They estimated the number of black squares appearing on a screen and were given false feedback about the estimates of three other group members
They were then asked to distribute money between members of their own group and members of another group.
What were the results of the Jetten et al. study on group norms?
Participants were strongly influenced by the norms of their own group, giving a greater proportion of money to members of their own group when their was a norm of discrimination but distributing money more equally between the two groups when there was a group norm of fairness but only when the norm of the other group was also fairness
What happens to our level of self esteem over time?
It varies depending on the context we find ourselves in
What study did Robins and colleagues conduct in 2002?
A meta-analysis of 50 self esteem studies showing that over the course of people's lifespan general tendencies to have either high or low self esteem can vary
They found that self esteem among children aged between 6 and 11 was relatively unstable
Self esteem was most stable among people in their 20s and remained relatively stable until mid adulthood
By age 60, self esteem stability declines
What did Joanne Wood and her colleagues discover?
People with lower self esteem are less likely to make the effort to feel good than people with higher self esteem
What did Wood, Heimpel, and Michela (2003) discover about self esteem?
They recorded participants' memories of positive events and found that people with lower self esteem were more likely to dampen the good feelings they experienced by distracting themselves trying to make themselves feel less good and trying to calm themselves, than were people with higher self esteem
In another study on self esteem, Wood, Heimpel, Michela and Brown (2002) discovered what?
Had participants who had reported a failure in their everyday life to list their immediate plans and reasons for those plans
Participants with lower self esteem were less likely to express goals to improve their mood
They found that having a goal to improve one's mood was associated with a greater improvement in mood the following day
What do the findings from Wood et al. and Heimpel et al. studies indicate?
That people with lower self esteem make less effort to regulate their mood
They do not try to maintain a good mood after a positive life event
They are not motivated to elevate their mood after a negative life event
Who argued that higher self esteem is associated with higher levels of aggression and violence under certain circumstances?
Baumeister, Smart and Boden, 1996
What type of self esteem do individuals have if they respond with aggression to an ego threat?
How is narcissistic self esteem laid out?
Individuals have extremely high self esteem, believing they are special and superior to others, but their self esteem is very unstable
What study did Bushman and Baumeister do in 1998?
A study on the relationship between narcissism and the tendency to be aggressive
What methods did Bushman and Baumeister use in their study and what were the results?
Told participants they were taking part in a study on how people respond to feedback from others and that they would be working with another participant
They wrote a one paragraph essay and it was taken away to the other (nonexistent) participant
Participants marked and gave feedback on the essay of the 'other participant' and were given feedback on their own essay
Praise condition:
Participants were given positive ratings and comments
Negative condition:
Participants were given negative ratings and comments
The participants were then told they would be in a competitive reaction time task and whoever failed the trial received a blast of noise
There was a positive relationship between narcissism and aggression but this relationship was particularly strong when there was an ego threat
Why are we motivated to have an accurate self perception?
To reduce uncertainty about our abilities or personal characteristics
What are diagnostic tests, in relation to self motives?
Tests which evaluate the performance of an individual and distinguish their performance from the performance of others, when evaluating the self
What are the three self motives?
Self assessment
Self verification
Self enhancement
Who performed a study to demonstrate the self verification motivation?
Swann, Stein-Seroussi and Giesler, 1992
What did Swann et al. find out in 1992?
They asked people who had either a positive or negative self concept whether they would prefer to interact with evaluators who had a favorable impression of them or unfavorable
They found that people with positive self concept were more likely to choose the evaluator who had a favorable impression, but it was the opposite for those with negative self concepts
Morling and Epstein, 1997, found out what about people with lower self esteem and self motives?
They seek a compromise between self enhancement and self verification by seeking out individuals who make them feel better about themselves without completely disconfirming their existing negative self concept
How did Sedikides (1993) study self motives, and what were the results?
He pitted the three self motives against each other
Participants completed a self reflection task
Participants' strongest tendency was to ask themselves questions that focused on positive rather than negative aspects of self
Self enhancement appears to be the most powerful self motive
How did Steele, 1975, demonstrate the self affirmation theory?
Study conducted among Mormon women
Self concept threat condition:
The researcher questioning the women commented that Mormons were typically uncooperative with community projects
Self concept irrelevant threat condition:
Researcher commented that Mormons were typically unconcerned with driver safety and care
Self concept affirmation condition:
Researcher commented that Mormons were typically cooperative with community projects
Two days later, the women received an "unrelated" phone call from a person in the community asking for help
65% agreed in the self concept affirmation condition
95% agreed in both threat conditions
Participants who felt threatened wanted to reaffirm a positive aspect of their self concept and did so by publicly demonstrating their community spirit
In regards to the self-serving attribution bias, what researchers were involved in a study?
Mischel, Ebbesen and Zeiss, 1976
What were Mischel, Ebbesen and Zeiss' methods and results in their study?
Exposed participants to an equal amount of positive and negative information about their personality and then tested their memory of that information
Participants had a better memory for the positive information than for the negative information
What research study suggests that people are more critical of information that criticizes them than information that praises them?
Wyer and Frey, 1983
What did Wyer and Frey discover about the self serving attribution bias?
They gave participants an intelligence test and then gave either positive or negative feedback
Participants then had the opportunity to read a report on the validity of intelligence tests which contained a mix of supportive and critical info
Participants who had been told they had performed poorly subsequently judged intelligence tests to be less valid than did participants who had received positive feedback
What do Aron and colleagues name the research that shows that our self concept cognitively overlaps with the self concept of close friends and romantic partners?
Including other in the self
What are the benefits of including other in the self?
The positive feelings and treatment we usually reserve for the self can then be extended to others
What did Agnew et al. study in 1998?
They found that greater inclusion of other in the self among dating couples was associated with greater satisfaction, commitment and investment in the relationship
What did Wright, Aron, McLaughlin-Volpe and Ropp, 1997, find out about including the other in the self?
They studied the extended contact effect and found that just knowing members of the ingroup who have friends in an outgroup reduces prejudice
What methods and results were found in Wright and colleagues 1997 study?
They led participants to believe they had been assigned to one of two groups based on their performance on an initial task
Participants then observed an ingroup and an outgroup member interact on a problem solving task
The relationship between the individuals was either close, strangers of disliked acquaintances
The outgroup was evaluated more positively when the observed interaction was friendly than when it was neutral or hostile
Who illustrated the dis-identification strategy in 1976?
Robert Cialdini and colleagues
What methods did Cialdini and colleagues use, and what were the results?
Investigated the behavior of fans of college American football teams
Students at seven universities were monitored during an intro psych class
The proportion of students in class wearing university apparel was recorded
The researchers considered whether the apparel differed depending on if their team had won
Students wore more apparel when their team had won that weekend
What did Cialdini et al, call the phenomenon of wearing apparel after a winning weekend?
Basking in reflected glory
Snyder, Lassegard and Ford, 1986, discovered what about social strategies?
Compared to groups of college students who performed adequately on a group task, groups who failed on the task were more likely to distance themselves from other members of their group
They reported a desire to avoid the group
What is the desire to avoid a group that failed?
Cutting off reflected failure
Who performed a study on the differences between individualist and collectivist cultures?
Trafimow, Triandis and Goto, 1991
How did Trafimow et al. study culture?
Had North American and Chinese participants write down 20 self descriptions
North American students wrote down a significantly greater proportion of individual self descriptions than Chinese students
What other researchers studied culture in self and identity?
Gardner, Gabriel and Lee, 1999
What methods did Gardner et al. employ to study the relationship between self-construct and values?
Primed American students to temporaily have either a more individualist or more collectivist self concept by having them read a story
One story used independent pronouns and the other used interdependent pronouns
Participants then wrote down 20 self descriptions and completed a questionnaire about values that were important to them
Participants primed to hold a personal self concept wrote more individual self descriptions and more strongly endorsed individualist values than the students primed for collectivist self concepts
People who are adept at dealing with both cultures are?
Hong, Morris, Chiu and Benet-Martinez (2000) studied what?
Biculturalism in Chinese Americans
Found that Chinese American bicultural individuals primed with Western or East Asian cues changed their behavior in line with the cued culture
Buriel and colleagues (1998) found out what about holding two identities simultaneously?
Bicultural individuals felt more at ease interacting with individuals from outside their ethnic minority, and had better problem solving strategies and interpersonal skills
Schwarzer, Bowler and Rauch (1985) found out what about minority students?
Minority students proficient at communicating with the majority culture had no only higher levels of self esteem but also reported having less experience with racial tension and interethnic conflicts
Rogler, Cortes, and Malgady (1991) and Martinez (1987) discovered what about bicultural individuals who alternate between cultures?
They have higher cognitive functioning, better mental health and higher self esteem
Who was not so optimistic about biculturalism?
Lorenzo-Hernandez (1998) - not committed to their group of origin or dominant group
LaFromboise and colleagues (1993) - to successfully alternate, they must hold positive attitudes toward both cultures and be able to communicate effectively
What is the self?
A symbolic construct
What does the self reflect?
Consciousness of our own identity
Awareness that we exist as an individual, separate from other individuals
What is self awareness?
A psychological state in which people are aware of their traits, feelings and behaviors
Lewis and Brooks performed their study in what year?
What was Lewis and Brooks (1978) study?
Put a spot of rouge on the nose of babies and then put them in front of a mirror
Around 18 months, children recognized that the reflections was themselves
Where do scientists believe self awareness exists in the brain?
Prefrontal cortex in the anterior cingulate
What group of scientists researched biological correlates of self-perceptions and perspective taking?
Mitchell, Banaji, and Macrae (2005)
What are the two differences in temporary self awareness?
Private and public
What are some factors of private self awareness, discovered through different studies?
Intensified emotional response
Report with greater accuracy
More likely to adhere to personal standards of behavior
What are some factors of public self awareness?
Evaluation apprehension
Adherence to social standards of behavior
What is a chronic differences in self awareness?
Having a self-conscious personality trait or not
If an individual is high in private self-consciousness, do they experience lowered or heightened self awareness?
If an individual is high in public self-consciousness how do they feel about others around them?
They are concerned with how they are perceived by others
What year did Scheier and Carver perform their self awareness study?
What study did Scheier and Carver (1977) perform?
Private self awareness study
Participants read aloud positive or negative statements
Participants who looked in the mirror during this task were more privately self aware and had more extreme emotional responses than those who did not look in a mirror
How do individuals organize self knowledge?
With self schemas
What are self schemas?
How we expect ourselves to think, feel and behave in a particular situation
When do self schemas become active?
In relevant situations
What information do self schemas provide us in a situation?
How we should respond, based on our beliefs of who we are
What are self-schematic traits?
Traits important to our self concept
What are somewhat schematic traits?
Traits that describe our self to some extent
What are a-schematic traits?
Traits that do not describe our perception of our self
What are the theories of self-comparison?
Self Regulation Theory
Self Discrepancy Theory
What are the theories of individual comparison?
Social Comparison Theory
Self Evaluation Maintenance Model
What is the theory of group comparison?
Social Identity Approach
Who developed the control theory of self regulation (self regulation theory)?
Carver and Scheier, 1981
What is the self regulation theory?
We examine the self to assess whether we are meeting our personal goals
What is a good comparison in science to the self regulation theory?
The scientific method - start with a self schema, test it, evaluate it, if it passes we move on, but if it doesn't we retest it
Who developed the self discrepancy theory?
Higgins, 1987
What is the self discrepancy theory?
People are motivated to ensure that their actual self matches their ideal and ought self
Who developed the social comparison theory?
Festinger, 1954
What is the social comparison theory?
We learn how to define the self by comparing ourselves to others through two different comparisons (upward and downward)
What are the two different comparisons employed in the social comparison theory?
Upward and downward
Who developed the self evaluation maintenance model?
Tesser, 1988
What is the self-evaluation maintenance model?
When someone is more successful than us, it can have a negative effect on our self esteem, so we use self reflection and upward social comparisons to deal with it
What are the four levels of upward social comparison?
1. exaggerate the ability of successful target
2. change the target of comparison
3. distance the self from successful target
4. devalue the dimension of comparison
"They're just a genius so how can you compare them to normal people?" This is an example of what upward social comparison technique?
Exaggerating the ability of the successful target
"Yeah, anyway, forget about her, I did better than Briony, Phillip, and Tasmin" This is an example of what upward social comparison technique?
Changing the target of comparison
"She's a bit weird; we've got nothing in common at all! I think I'm going to avoid sitting near her in class..." This is an example of what type of upward social comparison?
Distancing the self from the successful target
"She may get better grades than me, but I have a much better social life. Being popular is much more important!" This is an example of what type of upward social comparison?
Devaluing the dimension of comparison
Tajfel and Turner developed what theory and in what year?
Social identity approach in 1979
What are the two important aspects of self in the social identity approach?
Personal identity
Social identity
Is the social identity approach applicable in every context, or is it context dependent?
Context dependent
What is the evaluative component of the self concept?
Self esteem
What is self esteem?
A person's subjective appraisal of him/herself as intrinsically positive or negative to some degree
Who's definition of self esteem is used in the book?
Sedikides and Gregg, 2003
Depending on the context we find ourselves in, what happens to our self esteem levels?
They vary from time to time
Are differences in self esteem acute, chronic or both?
What are consequences of low self esteem?
Disability to adequately regulate mood
Wood et al. (2003) found out what about people with low self esteem?
They dampen positive feelings
Heimpel et al. (2002) found out what about people with low self esteem?
Following failure, the make fewer goals and plans to improve their mood
What is narcissism?
Extremely high self esteem
Very unstable/fragile self esteem
Reliant on validation from others
What are positive characteristics of narcissism?
Initially likeable, extraverted, unlikely to suffer from depression and perform well in public
What are negative characteristics of narcissism?
Crave attention, overconfident, lack empathy
Who defined the positive and negative characteristics of narcissism?
Young and Pinksy in 2006
What are the self motives?
Self assessment
Self verification
Self enhancement
Which self motivation is most important to us?
Self enhancement
Who said self enhancement was the most important self motivation?
Sedikides, 1993
Who developed the self affirmation theory?
Steele, 1975
Mischel et al., 1975 developed what theory?
Self serving attribution bias
What is the self affirmation theory?
We respond to threatened self esteem by publicly affirming positive aspects of the self
What is the self serving attribution bias?
Successes are attributed to internal characteristics
Failures are attributed to external characteristics
We have a memory for self enhancing information
What are different strategies to enhance the social self?
Deriving a positive self image from their group memberships
Holding a positive collective identity in a group
Actions of low status group members to enhance themselves
What are strategies employed by low status group members to enhance their social self?
Join a higher status group
Social change strategies
Social creativity strategies
What are cultural differences in self and identity?
Individualistic vs Collectivist
Are collectivist mindsets of the self still individual perceptions?
Yes, they are still individual perceptions dwelling in the mind
What is biculturalism?
Individuals who simultaneously hold two cultural identities, their original and the identity of their host society
What is the alternation model used in biculturalism?
Individuals alter their cultural orientation depending on the situation (which culture they are immersed in at the time)
Possible to have a sense of belonging in two cultures
Social cognition
the way in which perceivers encode, process, remember and use information in social contexts in order to make sense of other people's behavior
Social context
a real or imagined scenario including reference to self or others
Social inference
the way in which we categorize others and use cognitive shortcuts to clarify and understand all of the information bombarding our senses
Two primary needs people are motivated by, according to Heider
1. the need to form a coherent view of the world
2. the need to gain control over the environment
Naive scientists
people rationally and logically test out hypotheses about the behavior of others because of a desire for consistency and stability
Attribution theory
Heider proposed that we have a basic need to attribute causality as this ascribes meaning to our social world, making it more clear, definable and predictable
Locus of causality
the dimension that describes whether people make internal or external attributions
Internal attribution (person attribution)
an explanation that locates the cause as being internal to the person, such as personality, mood, abilities, attitudes, and effort
External attribution (situation attribution)
an explanation that locates the cause as being external to the person, such as the actions of others, the nature of the situation, social pressures or luck
a dimension that describes whether the causes of a behavior or event are perceived to be relatively stable and permanent or temporary and fluctuating
a dimension that describes whether the causes of a behavior or event were perceived to be influenced by other or whether they were perceived to have occurred at random
Social desirability
information about whether the behavior observed is consistent with, or counter to, social norms - the more consistent the behavior is with social norms, the more socially desirable that behavior is seen as being
Choice (chosen)
internal attributions are more likely to be made when the person being observed has freely chosen to behave in a particular way
Non-common effects
when a behavior has unique consequences, rather than range of possible other consequences, an internal attribution is more likely to be made
Consensus information
information about the extent to which other people in the scene react in the same way as the target person
Consistency information
information about the extent to which the target person reacts int he same way on different occasions
Distinctiveness information
information about the extent to which the target person reacts in the same way in other social contexts
Attributional biases
describe the tendency in particular contexts to make one type of attribution over another
Perceptual salience
tendency to categorize on the basis of the features that are the most salient in a particular situation - fundamental attribution error may be explained by the fact that the person being observed is the most perceptually salient aspect of the situation
Actor-observer effect
tendency to attribute other people's behavior to internal causes and our own behaviors to external causes
Self-serving attribution bias
we are more likely to make internal attributions for our successes and external attribution for failures
Cognitive misers
theory that, far from being naive scientists, we are reluctant to expend cognitive resources and look for an opportunity to avoid engaging in effortful thought
time-saving mental short-cuts that reduce complex judgements to simple rules of thumb
Representative heuristic
tendency to allocate a set of attributes to someone if they match the prototype of a given category
Social categorization
the way in which we organize our social world by putting people into groupings - males and females, old and young, black and white
Base rate fallacy
tendency to ignore statistical information in favor of representativeness information
Availability heuristic
tendency to judge the frequency of an event in terms of how easy it is to bring to mind examples of that particular event; we use availability as a cognitive short-cut; the easier it is for something to come to mind, the more likely it is that it will affect our behavior
extent to which a concept is readily brought to mind
False consensus effect
robust bias we have to overestimate how common one's own opinion is in the general population
Anchoring heuristic
tendency to be biased toward the starting value, or anchor, in making quantitative judgements
Motivated tacticians
the idea that people are neither cognitive misers nor naive scientists; instead, they are strategic in their allocation of cognitive resources, deciding whether to be a cognitive miser or a naive scientist depending on the situation
Time (motivated tactician)
In heuristic versus systematic processing
people are more likely to be a cognitive miser when they are short of time; in addition, the longer the time lag between assessing a person's attitude and behavior toward a stimulus, the less likely it is that attitude and behavior will correspond with one another
Cognitive load (motivation tactician)
In heuristic versus systematic processing
to be a naive scientist, one must think, analyze and contemplate; people are therefore more likely to be a cognitive miser when they have lots on their mind and do not have the cognitive resources available to think in depth about an issue
Importance (motivation tactician)
In heuristic versus systematic processing
if a decision we have to make is important to us, then we are much less likely to use a heuristic and much more likely to be a naive scientist
Information (motivation tactician)
In heuristic versus systematic processing
we can only act as naive scientists if we have all the information we need at hand; where there is lack of information, we are more likely to rely on heuristics to make a decision; possessing more information about an attitude object leads to greater attitude strength and greater correspondence between attitude and behavior
- the process of understanding what something is by knowing what others things is is equivalent to, and what other things it is different from
- a way of classifying some collection of objects, events, opinions, attitudes, concepts or people
- labeling
- comparing
the most representative or typical object, person, or characteristic in a particular category
prototype of a social category
Illusory correlation
belief that two variables are associated with one another when there is little or no actual association
Shared distinctiveness
term that describes when two things are both infrequent and therefore distinctive, which tends to lead to an illusory correlation
Heterogeneous (in categories)
a category that is perceived to be made up of many different sorts of people
Homogeneous (in categories)
a category that is perceived to be made up of only a few types of people who are all very similar to one another
Outgroup homogeneity effect
the general tendency that people have to perceive outgroup members to be more homogeneous than ingroup members
the outgroup homogeneity effect may be explained by the fact that we are more familiar with our own group, holding a more detailed and varied impression of it
Temporal primacy
we tend to categorize on the basis of the features of a category that we encounter first
Perceptual salience
we tend to categorize on the basis of the features that are the most salient in a particular situation; the fundamental attribution error may be explained by the fact that the person being observed is the most perceptually salient aspect of the situation
Chronic accessibility
some categories, such as age, gender, and race, are used so frequently that they become chronically accessible, and are automatically applied to people in most situations
Stereotype consistent
categorization heightens accessibility of info that is consistent with the category stereotype
Stereotype inconsistent
information that goes against our normal stereotypical expectation about a member of a particular group; may be better remembered than stereotype consistent info because it is attention getting, but only if people have enough cognitive resources available to process it
even is stereotype inconsistent information is remembered, it may often be discounted as an 'exception to the rule' where the stereotype is concerned; subtyping often preserves and perpetuates the overall stereotype as it negates the impact of disconfirming information
Behavioral assimilation
phenomenon whereby when people think about a particular category they can unconsciously begin to act in line with the stereotype associated with that category (elderly = slow)
Subliminal priming
unconscious activation of knowledge structures, such as traits or stereotypes, which can then have an unintended influence on an individual's subsequent behavior
Stereotype threat
when a negative stereotype about the group to which we belong is made salient, we tend to show impaired performance on dimensions related to that stereotype
Dual process theory
theory that argues when forming impressions of others, people take either a heuristic or a systematic approach
Continuum model
Fiske and Neuberg argue that there is a continuum from category-based (heuristic) processing where people are seen as individuals to attribute based (systematic) processing where people are seen as representative of a group
seeing a person as an idiosyncratic individual with unique characteristics rather than as an interchangeable group member
process by which people switch from forming impressions based on categories to forming impressions based on individual characteristics
Social cognition
the way in which perceivers encode, process, remember and use information in social contexts in order to make sense of other people's behavior
Social context
a real or imagined scenario including reference to self or others
Social inference
the way in which we categorize others and use cognitive shortcuts to clarify and understand all of the information bombarding our senses
Two primary needs people are motivated by, according to Heider
1. the need to form a coherent view of the world
2. the need to gain control over the environment
Naive scientists
people rationally and logically test out hypotheses about the behavior of others because of a desire for consistency and stability
Cognitive misers
theory that, far from being naive scientists, we are reluctant to expend cognitive resources and look for an opportunity to avoid engaging in effortful thought
time-saving mental short-cuts that reduce complex judgements to simple rules of thumb
Representative heuristic
tendency to allocate a set of attributes to someone if they match the prototype of a given category
quick and easy way of putting people into categoires
Social categorization
the way in which we organize our social world by putting people into groupings - males and females, old and young, black and white
Base rate fallacy
tendency to ignore statistical information in favor of representativeness information
fallacy of the representative heuristic
Availability heuristic
tendency to judge the frequency of an event in terms of how easy it is to bring to mind examples of that particular event; we use availability as a cognitive short-cut; the easier it is for something to come to mind, the more likely it is that it will affect our behavior
extent to which a concept is readily brought to mind
False consensus effect
robust bias we have to overestimate how common one's own opinion is in the general population
tendency to exaggerate how common one's own opinions are in the general population
Who said people are flexible social thinkers who choose between multiple cognitive strategies based on their current goals, motives and needs?
Kruglanski, 1996
Motivated tacticians
the idea that people are neither cognitive misers nor naive scientists; instead, they are strategic in their allocation of cognitive resources, deciding whether to be a cognitive miser or a naive scientist depending on the situation
People are flexible social thinkers who choose between multiple cognitive strategies based on their current goals, motives, and needs
Who developed the outline determining whether people adopt systematic or heuristic processing?
Macrae, Hewstone and Griffiths, 1993
Time (motivated tactician)
In heuristic versus systematic processing
people are more likely to be a cognitive miser when they are short of time; in addition, the longer the time lag between assessing a person's attitude and behavior toward a stimulus, the less likely it is that attitude and behavior will correspond with one another
Cognitive load (motivation tactician)
In heuristic versus systematic processing
to be a naive scientist, one must think, analyze and contemplate; people are therefore more likely to be a cognitive miser when they have lots on their mind and do not have the cognitive resources available to think in depth about an issue
Importance (motivation tactician)
In heuristic versus systematic processing
if a decision we have to make is important to us, then we are much less likely to use a heuristic and much more likely to be a naive scientist
Information (motivation tactician)
In heuristic versus systematic processing
we can only act as naive scientists if we have all the information we need at hand; where there is lack of information, we are more likely to rely on heuristics to make a decision; possessing more information about an attitude object leads to greater attitude strength and greater correspondence between attitude and behavior
- the process of understanding what something is by knowing what others things is is equivalent to, and what other things it is different from
- a way of classifying some collection of objects, events, opinions, attitudes, concepts or people
- labeling
- comparing
the most representative or typical object, person, or characteristic in a particular category
prototype of a social category
Illusory correlation
belief that two variables are associated with one another when there is little or no actual association
Shared distinctiveness
term that describes when two things are both infrequent and therefore distinctive, which tends to lead to an illusory correlation
Heterogeneous (in categories)
a category that is perceived to be made up of many different sorts of people
Homogeneous (in categories)
a category that is perceived to be made up of only a few types of people who are all very similar to one another
Outgroup homogeneity effect
the general tendency that people have to perceive outgroup members to be more homogeneous than ingroup members
the outgroup homogeneity effect may be explained by the fact that we are more familiar with our own group, holding a more detailed and varied impression of it
Perceptual salience
we tend to categorize on the basis of the features that are the most salient in a particular situation; the fundamental attribution error may be explained by the fact that the person being observed is the most perceptually salient aspect of the situation
Chronic accessibility
some categories, such as age, gender, and race, are used so frequently that they become chronically accessible, and are automatically applied to people in most situations
Stereotype consistent
categorization heightens accessibility of info that is consistent with the category stereotype
Stereotype inconsistent
information that goes against our normal stereotypical expectation about a member of a particular group; may be better remembered than stereotype consistent info because it is attention getting, but only if people have enough cognitive resources available to process it
Salient and attention-grabbing
even if stereotype inconsistent information is remembered, it may often be discounted as an 'exception to the rule' where the stereotype is concerned; subtyping often preserves and perpetuates the overall stereotype as it negates the impact of disconfirming information
Behavioral assimilation
phenomenon whereby when people think about a particular category they can unconsciously begin to act in line with the stereotype associated with that category (elderly = slow)
Subliminal priming
unconscious activation of knowledge structures, such as traits or stereotypes, which can then have an unintended influence on an individual's subsequent behavior
Stereotype threat
when a negative stereotype about the group to which we belong is made salient, we tend to show impaired performance on dimensions related to that stereotype
Dual process theory
theory that argues when forming impressions of others, people take either a heuristic or a systematic approach
Continuum model
Fiske and Neuberg argue that there is a continuum from category-based (heuristic) processing where people are seen as individuals to attribute based (systematic) processing where people are seen as representative of a group
They say people begin the process of impression formation by adopting a cognitive miser mode of processing, unless they find there is not a good fit - then they shift to naive scientist mode
seeing a person as an idiosyncratic individual with unique characteristics rather than as an interchangeable group member
process by which people switch from forming impressions based on categories to forming impressions based on individual characteristics
What is social cognition?
Describes the way people encode, process, remember, and use information in social contexts in order to make sense of other's behavior
What is systematic versus heuristic processing?
1. Time
2. Cognitive overload
3. Importance
4. Information
Two ways we use systematic versus heuristic processing
Naïve scientist
Cognitive miser
What is a cognitive miser?
Processing resources are valuable so we engage in time-saving mental shortcuts when trying to understand the world
Who developed the definition of a cognitive miser?
Fiske and Taylor, 1991
Who developed the concept of the naïve scientist?
Types of heuristics (4)
False consensus effect
What are heuristics?
Time-saving mental shortcuts that reduce complex judgments to simple rules of thumb
Quick and easy, but can result in biased information processing
What are the two most commonly used heuristics?
Who made definitions for heuristics?
Tversky and Kahneman, 1974
Ajzen, 1996
What is the representativeness heuristic?
Tendency to judge the category membership of people based on how closely they match the prototypical member of that category
Who developed the representativeness heuristic?
Kahneman and Tversky, 1973
What is the easy way to explain the representativeness heuristic?
Quick and easy way of putting people into categories
What is the base rate fallacy?
The representativeness heuristic is prone to error
It has a tendency to ignore statistical information in favor of representativeness information
What is the availability heuristic?
Tendency to judge the frequency or probability of an event in terms of how easy it is to think of examples of that event
Who developed the availability heuristic?
Tversky and Kaneman, 1973
What concept is the availability heuristic related to?
Concept of accessibility
What study did Schwarz and colleagues do in 1991?
Had participants recall 12 or 6 examples of assertive/unassertive behavior, then rate themselves as assertive or unassertive
Participants recalled 6 examples of their assertive (or unassertive) behavior subsequently rated themselves as more assertive (or unassertive) than those who had recalled 12 examples
People attend to the difficulty of retrieving instances of certain behaviors and not just the content – when recalling 12, examples became less available to them so they didn't believe they were assertive/unassertive
****Who developed the false consensus effect?
Gross and Miller, 1997
Ross, Greene and House performed what study in 1977?
The false consensus effect
"Would you walk around campus for thirty minutes wearing a large sandwich board saying EAT AT JOE'S"
Students estimated that the number of students who would make the same choice as them
Whatever choice the participant made, they estimated that the majority of other people would make the same choice
What is the anchoring heuristic?
Anchoring is the tendency to be biased toward the starting value or anchor in making quantitative judgments
Who defined anchoring?
Wyer, 1976
What did Plous do in 1989?
The anchoring heuristic
Survey during the Cold War
Asked either:
Is there a greater than 1% chance of nuclear war occurring soon?
Is there less than a 90% chance of a nuclear war occurring soon?
Participants who received the 1% question anchor estimated a 10% chance of nuclear war, while those who received the 90% anchor estimated a 25% chance
What did Greenberg et al find in 1986 that was similar to Plous' findings on the anchoring heuristic?
In a mock jury study, participants asked to consider first a harsh verdict were subsequently harsher in their final decision than participants asked to first consider a lenient verdict
What do studies on the anchoring heuristic generally tell us about judgments?
Our judgments on a range of issues are significantly influenced by the point at which we start our deliberations
What types of cognitive strategies could a person employ as a motivated tactician?
What factors determine whether we use heuristic vs systematic strategies?
Time constraints, cognitive overload, low importance, little information regarding issue = heuristic
After the perceiver decides between systematic vs heuristic processing what happens?
In systematic processing the perceiver acts like a naïve scientist, using rational, logical analysis of available information – higher accuracy
In heuristic processing the perceiver acts like a cognitive miser making quick and easy analyses – lower accuracy
Is heuristic processing or systematic processing more accurate?
***Who defined the motivated tactician theory?
Kruglanski, 1996
What is categorization?
Process of understanding what something is by knowing what other things it is equivalent to, and what other things it is different from
Way of classifying some collection of objects, events, opinions, attitudes, concepts or people
What is the classical view of social categorization?
Bruner, Goodnow, and Austin (1956) – category membership determined via defined features, if one feature was missing, then it was something else
What is the problem with the classical view of social categorization?
Many categories have uncertain or "fuzzy" boundaries – Rosch, 1978
What is the newer view on social categorization?
Not all or nothing
Members are more or less typical of a category
Typicality is variable
What are prototypes?
Most representative members of a category
What happens to categorization of less typical members of a category?
May be slower/error-full because they are less available
How are categories defined (in general)?
By prototypes
When we are dealing with social categories, we are dealing with?
Why do we come to perceive some characteristics as typical of certain categories?
Social learning and exposure
Illusionary correlations
What can social learning and exposure lead to?
What are stereotypes?
Prototypes that are social categories
What is an illusionary correlation?
Two variables are associated with one another when there is little or no actual association
What can illusionary correlations lead to?
Negative stereotypes associated with minority groups
What study did Hamilton and Gifford perform in 1976?
Illusory correlations
Asked participants to read info about people from two made-up groups
Twice as much info was provided about group A (majority) than group B (minority)
Twice as much of the info provided for both groups involved desirable behaviors rather than undesirable
More of the undesirable negative behaviors were attributed to group B, than group A
Participants believed that negative behaviors were more characteristic of the smaller group than the bigger group
Explained this through shared distinctiveness
How are categories structured?
What is a heterogeneous category?
Perceived to be made up of many sorts of people
What is a homogenous category?
Perceived to made up of only a few types of people who are all very similar to each group
What is the outgroup homogeneity effect?
The general tendency to perceive outgroup members to be more homogenous than ingroup members
What study did Shapiro and Penrod perform in 1986?
Outgroup homogeneity effect
Found that white people found it difficult to tell Asian faces apart, and Asian people found it difficult to tell white faces apart
What study did Park and Rothbart (1982) perform?
The outgroup homogeneity effect in how people structure their memory
People remember more about someone they encounter from their own group than another group
What are the two main reasons we categorize?
Saves us time and cognitive processing
Categorization provides meaning
How does categorizing save time and cognitive processing?
Frees up cognitive resources for other tasks
How does categorization provide meaning?
Reduces uncertainty
Provides prescriptive norms for understanding ourselves in relation to others
When do we categorize? (3)
Temporal primacy
Perceptual salience
Chronic accessibility
What is temporal primacy?
We categorize on the basis of the features we encounter first
What are consequences of categorization?
Heightened accessibility of stereotype consistent information
Categorization and prejudice
How does categorization lend to heightened accessibility of stereotype consistent information?
Selective encoding of subsequently acquired target information
How does categorization lead to prejudice?
People recall more positive than negative information about someone from their own group, but more negative than positive information about someone in another group
Categorization and unconscious behavior
When people think about categories, they can unconsciously begin to act in line with the stereotype associated with those categories
Behavioral assimilation
When people think about categories, they can unconsciously begin to act in line with the stereotype associated with those categories
What defines typicality in categorization?
What were the methods and results of Bargh, Chen and Burrows study in 1996?
Investigated whether priming participants with a social category would lead them to behave in line with the stereotypical traits associated with that category
Participants were primed with words related to the elderly stereotype vs neutral words using a "scrambled sentence task"
They were then told the experiment was finished
The experimenters then timed/observed the participants walking down the hall
Participants who had been primed with the elderly stereotype walked significantly slower from the experimental norm
The participants behaviorally assimilated to the stereotype they were primed for
What happens a stereotype threat is felt?
The individuals tend to show impaired performance on dimensions related to that stereotype
What is self-efficacy?
Your estimation of how effective you are
What study did E.G. Schmader perform in 2002 on stereotype threats?
Stereotype threat and gender identification
Female and male participants indicated how important their gender identity was to them at the beginning of the semester
Two conditions - gender identity relevant condition and gender identity irrelevant
Participants then took a difficult math test
In the gender identity relevant condition, women performed significantly worse than men if they HIGHLY identified with their gender group, proving the stereotype threat effect
Dual process theory in social cognition
Either a heuristic versus systematic approach is used when forming impressions of others
In the dual process theory, heuristic and systematic approaches are comparable to what?
Cognitive miser and naive scientists
How is impression formation in the dual process theory based on?
Categorization (heuristic)
Individuation (systematic)
What is decategorization in the dual process theory in social cognition?
A switch from using categorization to individuation (target primarily defined as individual rather than group member)
Do we want people to use categorization or individuation when forming impressions of others?
Individuation because it defines individually instead of in groups
Cohen performed what study in 1981 about consequences of categorization?
Showed participants a videotape of a woman having a birthday dinner
They were told she was a waitress or a librarian
Participants told she was a waitress remembered her drinking beer
Participants told she was a librarian remembered her wearing glasses
This illustrates how stereotypes can influence our attention and what we remember from any social scene
Gaertner and McLauglin (1983) found what about categorization and prejudice?
Found that white participants were faster to name positive words after they had seen the racial category 'white' compared to 'black'
Dijksterhuis and van Knippenberg performed what study in 1998?
On behavioral assimilation
Found that participants who imagined a typical professor subsequently outperformed those who imagined a typical secretary, on a general knowledge task
Although priming did not change the participants' actual intelligence, it did temporarily induce participants to behave differently in their reaction to the multiple choice task
What did Steele and Aronson find out about stereotype threats in 1995?
Found that African-Americans underperformed on a test when they were told it was indicative of intelligence, but they also found simply asking African-Americans to state their race before taking a test reduced the students' subsequent performance
set of beliefs that we hold in relation to an attitude object, where an attitude object is a person, thing, event or issue
a positive or negative evaluation of an object
Four ways in which attitudes can form
mere exposure
associative learning
functional reasons
Mere exposure effect
the more exposure we have to a stimulus, the more positive our attitude is toward it
tendency to develop more positive feelings toward objects and individuals the more we are exposed to them
True or false: Action/interaction is not required in the mere exposure effect
What experiment did Zajonc perform in 1968?
Participants were told they were in an experiment to determine how people learn a foreign language, but it was actually to test the mere exposure effect
10 Chinese-like characters on the computer screen for 2 seconds each, some were shown a lot, some just once
The second part of the test, the participants were told the characters were adjectives and they were asked to decide if they were positive or negative
Participants thought the characters they saw more often were positive
The more exposure they had to the character, the more positive they felt it was
The more we see something, the more we like it
Who performed a study similar to Zajonc's on the mere exposure effect?
Mita, Dermer and Knight (1977)
What was Mita et. al's study in 1977?
On the mere exposure effect
Took a picture of the participants and showed them the picture and the mirror image of the picture
Also showed both pictures to friends of the participants
Participants preferred the mirror image picture because it's what they saw when they looked in the mirror, while the friend's preferred the original picture because it's what they see when they look at their friend
Preference was higher for the perspective that was most commonly experienced by the person rating the photo
Who performed a study on the mere exposure effect and music preference?
Brickman, Redfield, Harrison, and Crandall (1972)
What were the methods and results of the study Brickman et. al performed in 1972?
Study on the mere exposure effect
Undergraduate students listened to 90 second segments of 5 rock and roll songs
They either listened to each song 0, 1, 2, 5 or 10 times
At the end, they listened to a 3-5 second segment from the chorus of each song and were asked to rate how much they liked the song
They found a DECREASE in liking with increased exposure
Participants began with a report of liking rock and roll but at the end of the study they said they didn't like the antiquated style of the music in this experiment
Brickman et al performed another study in which participants were exposed to abstract paintings they had previously rated very positively, very negatively or neutrally. People with initially neutral impressions liked the paintings more with repeated exposure as did people with initially positive impressions. However, participants with an initially negative attitude liked the paintings less
The effectiveness of mere exposure for improving attitudes depends on the initial attitude being neutral or positive
What does the mere exposure effect assume about stimuli?
That they are novel and neutral
Classical conditioning
type of associative learning in which two things become strongly connected because we are repeatedly exposed to them
When a neutral stimulus is paired with a stimulus that naturally evokes an emotional response - pairing is required
What study used classical conditioning in 1958?
Staats and Staats
Paired "Dutch" with negative words and "Swedish" with positive and vice-versa
Repeated associations of the positive words with Dutch or Swedish, led to a more positive evaluation of the group - associative learning
What study used pairing of aversive stimuli with nonsense words and what were the results?
Cacioppo et al
Classical conditioning experiment in which they found pairing aversive stimuli with nonsense words created more of a negative association with those words
This suggests that associative learning may be a more powerful determinant of attitude formation when little knowledge is available about the attitude object
Operant conditioning
type of associative learning in which an association forms between a behavior and a consequence
response-stimulus conditioning (Faraday)
Behavior is strengthened following rewards and weakened following punishment
Participants must carry out some action that is either rewarded or punished
Self-perception theory
theory proposing that we form attitudes through the observation of our own behavior
Behaviors can cause attitudes
We attribute our own behavior as being indicative (caused by) certain attitudes but mainly if little knowledge is available about the issue at hand
Chaiken and Baldwin (1981)
Study on self-perception theory
Participants were pre-screened to assess their attitude toward pro-environment practices - self-perception of their attitude
Participants then were asked either pro- or anti-environmental questions about their behaviors
Then they were asked to indicate their own attitude toward environmental practices
Participants induced to report pro behaviors were more likely to rate themselves as pro-environment and the same happened for anti, but only when they had a weak prior attitude
If participants had a strong prior attitude, there was no effect on their final reported attitude
Facial feedback hypothesis
people's own facial expression provides a cue to their attitudes; people who are made to smile form a more positive attitude than people made to frown
self-perception theory
Who tested the facial feedback hypothesis and what were their methods and results?
Strack, Martin and Stepper (1988)
Had participants hold a pen between their teeth or between their lips while evaluating a series of humorous cartoon images
They were asked to form an attitude on how amusing the cartoons were
Participants holding the pen between their teeth evaluated the cartoons as more humorous because their facial expression made them feel like they were smiling
Facial 'behaviors' can inform subsequent attitudes
Vascular theory of emotion
Zajonc, 1993
alternative explanation offered for the facial feedback hypothesis
smiling increases blood flow to the brain lowering brain temp, creating a positive mood, and frowning decreases blood flow to the brain increasing brain temp and creating a negative mood
What did Zajonc et al find in 1989 that supported the vascular theory of emotion?
Making vowel sounds that mimicked frowning lowered forehead temperature and mood, whereas vowel sounds that mimicked smiling decreased forehead temperature and elevated mood
Functional approach
attitudes are formed/changed based on the degree to which they satisfy an individual's psychological needs
How is the functional approach to attitude formation different from exposure, learning and self-perception approaches?
It is an active attitude theory, rather than passive
The four basic psychological needs that can influence attitude formation
Utilitarian function
We sometimes hold a particular attitude because it is useful for us to do so
: Liking your nursing degree because it will help you get a job in the future
At times our public attitude may be different from our private attitude
Knowledge function
holding particular attitudes helps us to organize and simplify our social world
our attitudes enable us to predict behavior of others
: Liking your nursing degree because it provides you with useful information in dealing with people
Kind of like cognitive schemas
Ego-defensive function
some attitudes help to protect us from acknowledging threatening self-truths, helping us maintain a positive self-image
: Liking your nursing degree because you really wanted to become a doctor but weren't good enough
Value-expressive function
some attitudes express values that are of high personal importance to us (politics, environment, religion)
: Liking your nursing degree because it illustrated your commitment to helping people
What study did LaPierre perform in 1934?
On attitudes and behavior matching
He spent 3 months with a young Chinese couple traveling across the US
He wanted to know how many restaurants and hotels would refuse service to the couple
Only 1 out of 250 refused to serve the couple
But, when he sent out letters to same establishments, of the 128 replies, 90% said they would refuse to serve Chinese people
Attitudes did not predict behavior at all
This was later linked to a lack of the same specificity between the attitude (general) and behavior (specific Chinese couple)
Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975
attitudes and behavior are more likely to correspond if they are at the same level of specificity
the determinant of attitude-behavior link
specific attitudes = specific behaviors
Time (in attitude measurement)
the longer the time between attitude measurement and the measurement of behavior, the more likely it is that the attitude will change
What study was done in time in attitude measurement in 1974?
Fishbein and Coombs observed that the correlation between attitudes and voting behavior was stronger one week before voting in an election compared to one month before voting
How does self-awareness effect behavior?
Privately self-aware individuals behave in line with their own attitude (private attitude predicts private behavior)
Publicly self-aware individuals behave in line with the attitude they perceive the majority of other people to hold (public attitude predicts public behavior)
What three things can effect attitude strength and attitude-behavior consistency?
Greater information about attitude object
Greater personal involvement with attitude object
Greater direct experience with attitude object
All lead to greater attitude strength and greater attitude-behavior consistency
Availability heuristic for attitude accessibility
The more accessible an attitude the greater attitude-behavior consistency
Measured by speed of response to questions concerning the attitude object
Attitude strength
The stronger one's attitudes are, the more likely they are to have an influence on behavior
Theory of planned behavior
theory developed to explain the processes by which people deliberately decide to engage in a specific action
Who performed a study on the theory of planned behavior in 1975? What about in 1999?
Fishbein and Ajzen
Terry, Hogg and White
What were the study methods and results of Terry et al's study on group norms and behavioral intentions?
Terry et al said that in some cases subjective norms could be better conceptualized as group norms
143 participants from households that had access to recycling bins were asked to report how likely it was that they would engage in household recycling during the following fortnight
They were also asked how many of their friends and peer they thought would engage in household recycling and how much they thought their friends and peers would approve of them engaging in household recycling
They were also asked how much they identified with and fit in with their group of friends and peers
Participants who strongly identified with their peer group had stronger behavioral intentions if they believed their group had strong norms concerning recycling and the opposite was true for participants without a strong identity
Three factors, when together, can predict behavioral intentions
Attitude toward behavior
Subjective norms
Perceived control
How are attitudes determined?
By one's beliefs about the consequences of performing the behavior and one's evaluation of the possible consequences of performing the behavior
Subjective norms
perceived expectations of significant others who may approve or disapprove of the planned behavior
Perceived control
person's perception of how easy or difficult it is to perform the behavior
Behavioral intention
a person's attitude, subjective norms and perceived control over the behavior combine in an interactive way to determine behavioral intention, which in turn determines whether or not the behavior will be carried out
Group norms
set of shared beliefs about how group members should think and behave
Self-perception theory
when we have no (or very weak) prior existing attitudes on a particular issues we can infer our attitudes from observing our own behaviors
Reasoned action vs spontaneity
Many social behaviors are automatic and do not entail much deliberate thought
Reasoned action = naive scientist = systematic processing
Spontaneity = cognitive miser = heuristics
Cognitive dissonance theory
when people behave in a way that is inconsistent with their existing attitude, they experience discomfort
to eliminate this discomfort, it is necessary to adjust one's attitude in line with one's behavior
What is the heart of cognitive dissonance theory?
Motivational instead of cognitive
Who developed the cognitive dissonance theory?
Festinger, 1957
What study did Festinger and Carlsmith perform in 1959?
Cognitive dissonance theory
Participants had to complete one of two boring tasks for an hour, and then were told to lie to the next participant and tell them it was great
They were offered $1 or $20, and the control group did not have to lie and were not offered money
After completing the task, all participants were asked to give their true attitude regarding how fun and interesting the task really was
The $1 participants experienced greater inconsistency between their attitude and behavior than the $20 participants so they changed their attitude to match their behavior, while the $20 participants had enough justification to tell their lie
Three key factors that determine whether cognitive dissonance occurs
if people can justify why they behaved inconsistently with their attitudes, they are less likely to change their attitude in line with their behavior
Freedom of choice
if a person is forced to behave in a way that contravenes their attitudes, they have a justification for their behavior and will therefore be unlikely to change their attitude in line with their behavior
the more invested someone is in their point of view, the stronger the effect of dissonance will be
What was Aronson's argument accounting for cognitive dissonance and self-perceptions theories are both correct?
Cognitive dissonance will occur when discrepancies are clear and distinct, the attitude in question is important for the self-concept, and when it is not possible to explain away the discrepancy
When discrepancies are mild and/or the attitude is not particularly important to someone, then self-perception processes are likely to operate
when attitudes change as a result of being influenced by an EXTERNAL message
Dual route models of persuasion
models that propose our attitudes can be changed as a result of external messages via two different routes (central and peripheral)
proved most successful in explaining how, when and why people are or are not persuaded by others
Elaboration-likelihood model
Petty and Cacioppo (1986) argued that attitudes could change via two routes depending on how much an individual elaborates on the message - central or peripheral
Heuristic-systematic model
Chaiken (1980) argued that when people hear a persuasive communication, they either process it systematically, considering its strengths or weaknesses, or use heuristic 'short-cuts'
Central route
when people are motivated and able to think carefully about the content of a message, they are influenced by the strength and quality of the arguments
(systematic/naive scientist)
Peripheral route
when people are unwilling or unable to analyze message content, they instead pay attention to cues that are irrelevant to the content or quality of the communication to make a decision more quickly and with less effort
(heuristic/cognitive miser)
True or false: the peripheral route of attitude change develops attitudes that are weaker, less resistant to counter argument and less predictive of behavior than central route attitudes
Five factors influencing what route (central or peripheral) is taken
Speed of speech
Individual differences
Rapid speech
Makes it hard to process the content of the message so the peripheral route is used
good mood = more willing to help; tend to use peripheral route to persuasion
bad mood = less willing to help; tend to use central route to persuasion
Importance to self
if a decision we have to make is important to us, or is likely to have personal consequences, we are more likely to think in depth about the issue, taking the central route to persuasion, rather than relying on heuristics
Martin and Hewstone did a study in 2003 on minorities and majorities changing attitudes in different ways. What were their methods and results?
On importance to self
Participants in favor of voluntary euthanasia and against single currency in Europe read a counter-attitudinal argument
Participants either received the message from a minority source or a majority source and read either strong evidence based messages or weak messages on the topic
When the message did not have a very negative personal outcome for participants people receiving info from a minority source were more persuaded by strong message, whereas people receiving info from a majority source were equally influenced by strong and weak message
In contrast, when the message concerned was perceived as having a very negative personal outcome, people receiving info from a majority source were more persuaded by strong messages
Need for cognition - individual difference
the degree to which an individual is oriented to engaging in effortful thought
people high in need for cognition are more likely to take the central route to persuasion
Need for closure - individual difference
tendency to desire knowledge that is clear, stable and unambiguous, as opposed to confusing and uncertain
people high in need for closure are more likely to take the central route to persuasion
Need to evaluate
some people have a stronger tendency than others to judge the nature of objects, people and situation
the stronger this tendency, the great the use of the central route to persuasion
degree to which someone is concerned with what other people think of them
people high in self-monitoring are more likely to take the central route to persuasion
relevant humor leads to the central route, while irrelevant humor leads to the peripheral route
What are the cues when the peripheral route is taken in persuasion?
Physical attractiveness
Similarity to self
Source credibility
Physical attractiveness
we are more likely to be persuaded by someone who is physically attractive than someone who is unattractive
Similarity to self
we are more likely to be persuaded by someone who is similar to us in terms of shared attitudes, appearance or social categories
Source credibility
a key peripheral cue to persuasion
if the source of a persuasive argument is an expert on the topic, or appears to be unbiased and trustworthy, we are more likely to perceive them to be credible, and to accept their message
Source memory
we encode info about the source of the argument as well as the argument but our memory of the source decays over time
if the source was not credible, we may be persuaded more by the argument over time
if the source was credible, we may be persuaded less by the argument over time, as we forget info about the source
What is the sleeper effect?
The delayed effectiveness of a persuasive message from a non-credible source
Who performed a study on the sleeper effect and what were the methods and results?
Hovland and Weiss, 1951
Participants read an article stating that nuclear submarines were safe by a credible author or an incredible author
Immediate results = high credibility source had the greater persuasion
4 weeks later = effect of source credibility had disappeared (source memory had disappeared) and content was the only thing recalled
Card Set:
Social Psychology - Exam 2
2011-10-02 20:11:05
social psychology
the self, attribution theory, social cognition and attitudes
Show Answers: