social psychology exam 2

changing behavior/beliefs to be in line with others, most often the majority

people are using others' comments and actions as a source of information. We conform because we want to do the right thing. we walk into a new social context, we look at the behavior of those around us, and we behave the way they do. often leads to private acceptance

real change in opinions on the part of the individual

• ambiguous situations

• when a situation is a crisis

• when others are experts

• social comparison processes: people compare their responses to others, come to the conclusion that they are wrong, and change opinions

results from the use of other people’s comments or actions as a cue to what is desired. leads to public compliance

socially accepted beliefs about what we do/should do in certain situations. can be explicit or implicit, and are powerful because people have a need to belong. people conform to them to be accepted by others

superficial change in behavior and public expression of opinions that isn’t accompanied by an actual change in one’s private opinions

• anonymity: private responses decrease conformity

• group size: bigger groups lead people to conform more

• consistency of beliefs: if the consistency is punctured, the influence of the group declines

responding favorably to another’s request. serve as judgmental heuristics, especially likely to happen when people are not motivated or are unable to think carefully

liking, authority, scarcity, social proof, reciprocity, consistency/commitment

likable people are simply more influential.

• heuristic: likeability is equated with good information

people perceived to hold authority (e.g. power, expertise) are more influential

• heuristic: authority confers value and demands respect

things seem more valuable if they are perceived to be in limited supply

• heuristic: scarcity implies desirability

evidence that others are doing it can increase compliance

• heuristic: if a lot of people are doing it, it must be a good thing (informational influence)

descriptive norms: perception of how most people behave in a given context (what actually is). When persuading others to not do something, it is important that descriptive norms say that most people don’t do something

injunctive norms: perception of what behaviors are generally approved of or frowned on by others (what should be)

you should reciprocate kind acts

• door in the face technique: asking for a large favor sure to be refused and then asking a smaller favor

people are motivated to be consistent

• foot in the door technique: ask for small favor, followed by a bigger request. once people have agreed to comply, they have identified as a person who is willing to comply and are motivated to be consistent

• even-a-penny-would-help: makes people comply due to desire to see self as good and helpful

changing behaviors/beliefs in response to someone who has power over them

ability of a person to create conformity even when the people being influenced may attempt to resist these changes

study consisted of a teacher (participant), a researcher (confederate), and a learner (confederate). teacher was told to administer shocks on wrong answers. if they hesitated, the researcher would say…

• p1= please continue/please go on

• p2= experiment requires you to continue

• p3= absolutely essential that you continue

• p4= you have no other choice, you must go on

most people went all the way to the lethal shock. in studies where there were 2 researchers and they disagreed (one didn’t think that administering further shocks was good), many less people were willing to shock

we tend to pick up on certain cues from the people around us and we adapt their mannerisms without knowing it. when we are mimicked, this tends to facilitate social bonding and makes people feel more prosocial (except when this mimicking is obvious)

2 or more people who interact with and influence one another

groups who work together towards a goals (orchestras, teams)

groups defined by social identities (women, christians)

groups have things in common but don’t necessarily interact frequently neighbors, fans of jazz

how much people feel like a cohesive group. based on common bond (dependence on one another) and common identity (sharing of similar characteristics)

• promote survival and goal achievement

• bolster self-esteem

• Acquire social identities through group membership & view groups in positive light, which leads to self-enhancement

• Help us manage concerns about mortality

• uncertainty identity theory: confidence in beliefs gained through social consensus. groups provide norms (agreements about how to behave) and roles (expectations for people in certain positions)

• identification with a tightly knit (entitative) groups should increase when uncertain

humans have an innate need to belong to groups. we have need for contact and need to perceive “bond” or connections with others

process by which people feel excluded by others. feelings of alienation. our brains are particularly sensitive to cues of exclusion and processes it in similar ways to physical threats to our bodies

• decreases self-esteem

• decreased meaning in life

• decreased perceptions of control

• increases sadness and anger

presence of others increases it. thoughts about performance and self-defeating worries deplete mental resources needed for performance on certain tasks, which can disrupt automatic action routines

presence of others increases arousal. physiological arousal increases dominant responses, or a person’s most likely response/behavior for a particular task. Enhanced performance for easy tasks (social facilitation) and diminished performance for difficult tasks (social inhibition)

tendency to exert less effort when performing as part of a group, and group performance is what’s being assessed

loosening on normal constraints in behavior when people can’t be identified. occurs in large crowds and when identities are masked. leads to lessened self-awareness, lessened concern with evaluations and accountability, weakened controls on behaviors, and greater responsiveness to salient group (descriptive) norms

groups fail to share unique information. tendency to only share things that everyone already knows, information from leaders, or information consistent with group norms.

• groups can be forced to hold discussions for longer

• tell groups to avoid sharing initial preferences at beginning of discussion

• assign specific members of group areas of expertise that they are solely responsible for

combined memory of 2 people is more efficient than that of only one person

kind of thinking in which maintaining group solidarity is more important than considering facts in a realistic manner. very likely to occur in the context of important and difficult decisions

• illusion in invulnerability: risky optimism. we can’t be wrong. we all agree

• unquestioned beliefs and morality: what we are going to do is the morally right thing to do, so how can the morally right thing to do be wrong?

• rationalizing: lack of reconsideration and ignore warnings

• stereotyping: ignore/demonize people who challenge the group. groups silence outside perspectives

• self-censorship: reluctance to share doubts due to fear of being ostracized and desire to maintain solidarity

• presence of “mindguards”: people that take on the role of eliminating voice of descent and censor problematic data

• illusions of unanimity: everyone believes there is a consensus

• direct pressure to conform

• impartial leadership

• leader should invite outside opinions

• leader can create subgroups to meet separately first

• leaders can seek anonymous opinions

tendency for groups to make decisions that are more extreme than the initial inclinations of its members. valid and novel arguments rated as more persuasive than valid but in-novel arguments. valid and novel arguments also polarize attitudes more than valid but un-novel arguments. Before discussing their own attitudes, people try to get a feel for what others think. more extreme ideas might be a result of the diffusion of responsibility

• youthfulness

• unblemished skin

• symmetry

• averageness

• femininity in women

• masculinity in men

• positive expressions

• positive behaviors

people’s level of attractiveness will predict who they’re most attractive to (people will be attracted to people who are comparable to them in levels of attractiveness). perceived similarity has the most impact

tendency for novel stimuli to be liked more or rated more positively after repeated exposure. important only in the early stages of attraction

men tend to value attractiveness more than women when asked to make predictions. however, what people say isn’t always a good predictor of their behavior. women and men actually value attractiveness the same in behavior.

if liking is more exclusive, people like those who like them. if person likes everyone, individuals tend to not desire that person

arousal can be labeled/ misattributed as love/ attraction. people use arousal as a cue to what they love and find attractive

according to self expansion theory, romantic love fulfills the need to grow and expand the self. this is because our self-concepts expand in order to include characteristics of our significant others

• passionate: arousal, lust. biological, physiological responses

• companionate: attachment, attraction, companion, strong commitment, not as intense

• knowledge about partner

• caring

• interdependence

• mutuality: thinking of themselves as a couple

• trust

• commitment: determined by satisfaction, how much they have invested in the relationship, and quality of alternatives. satisfaction is determined by rewards, costs, and comparison level (relative to what being alone/in another relationship might be)

brief response to challenges or opportunities that are perceived to be goal relevant and manifest in patterns of experience, expression, and physiology. how we think of a situation determines the emotion we will experience

emotions help people form, maintain, and negotiate social relationships. emotions cue us to whether or not behaviors are useful to maintain social connections, and help us interpret our environments and prioritize what to attend to

internal, controllable , unstable attributions. negative evaluation of self-relevant actions. didn’t study→ fail

internal, uncontrollable, stable attribution. negative evaluation of global/core self. not smart→ fail

generalized beliefs about the attributes of a group and its members

• socialization in culture transmits stereotypes across development

• stereotypes that are linked to facts are somewhat accurate, but explaining facts in terms of traits isn’t warranted or correct

• no evidence of accuracy for stereotypes about personality and actual personalities

we infer stereotypes that describe people from the roles that we see them play. ex: more women are nurses→ women must be more caring than men

stereotypes vary along 2 dimensions, warmth (social) and competence (intellectual). competition impact our view on warmth, while status impacts our view on competence

pleasure at others’ misfortunes. predicted by envy. stereotypes about high competence/low warmth should predict envy and schadenfreude

unjustified negative behavior towards an individual based in their membership in a group

preconceived negative judgment of an individual based on their membership in a group

sorting people into groups. Thinking of people based on category membership rather than on the basis of more personal information about the individual

people who belong to the same group that we do (us). we tend to like our ingroups better than outgroups, because they are familiar and they are a source of self-esteem (birging and self-serving attributions).

people who belong to a different group than we do (them). we have a tendency towards assuming outgroup homogeneity, or the idea that individuals in outgroups are more similar to each other than they actually are

• hostile feelings are linked to a category.

• people feel hostile when frustrated/ threatened

• people form schemas that color their impressions of others from one experience

• self-concept/ esteem threatened

prejudice results from negative feelings based on a real/perceived conflict over resources

people develop within a particular cultural worldview with specific ideas about good and bad. internalization of worldviews that promote prejudice, the more people are likely to show it.

people demonstrate biases that don’t conflict with their desire for fairness because they are able to rationalize. prejudice/ discrimination emerges when it can be easily rationalized/ defended

one culture is always a potential menace to another because it is a living example that life can go on heroically within a value framework totally alien to one’s own

experimental technique of assigning people to groups based on arbitrary/meaningless criteria and examining how these minimal groups behave towards one another. turns out that people generally prefer to maximize relative gain for ingroup (vs outgroup) even at the expense of absolute gain

unintended, immediate and irresistible biases

tendency to misidentify harmless objects as weapons when paired with black faces

descriptive norms (what they do) and prescriptive norms (what they should do) for sexes

targets women who violate descriptive and prescriptive norms and compete with men for control

reflects patronizing affection for women who uphold traditional gender norms; subordinates women in traditional roles, even though it is subjectively positive from perceiver perspective

not all categories are equal. some are essentialized, meaning people believe that members of category possess some deep and unchanging property that makes them a category member. characteristics are natural, stable, discrete (clear boundaries), immutable, and necessary

concern that one is devalued, marginalized, stigmatized, etc based on their membership in a certain group. can be chronic (groups that are broadly marginalized) or situational (groups that are stigmatized in some settings but not all)

expectations of being perceived by others (particularly members of majority) in terms of group membership. individual differences that vary from person to person. being perceived can illicit stereotypic behavior

salient concern that one will be evaluated based on a stereotype about one’s group. likely to impair performance when…

• stigmatized identity is made salient in situation (being only woman in engineering class) identity is chronically salient, due to stigma consciousness or high identification with the group

• task is described as diagnostic of an ability that one’s group is negatively stereotypes

• individuals are led to believe that performance will be compared with members of group positively stereotyped on the ability

• individuals are explicitly reminded of stereotype

people want to see themselves as deserving of worth, morally good, rational and adaptive. anything that threatens this view is problematic. stereotype threat undermines those beliefs. the theory states that bolstering those beliefs prior to a threat experience can protect us from negative consequences

optimal conditions of intergroup contact can reduce prejudice. contact reduces stereotypes by leading to the individuation of group members and reduces anxiety by linking positive experience with outgroups

• equal status between groups is necessary

• contact must allow people to get acquainted

• contact should involve shared goal that requires cooperation

• contact should receive institutional support

increases empathy by allowing people to see common ground between groups