Social Psych Reading Notes Weeks 1-6 PDF

Preview

Summary

Reading notes and summaries of learning and key concepts from the course Social Psychology - preparation for exam...

Description

Social Psych Reading Notes Weeks 1-6 Week 1: Intro/Research Methods Text page 2-37 Social Psych: the scientific study of how individuals think, feel and behave in a social context. -

Systematic observation, description and measurement applied to human condition. Private, non conscious beliefs, attitudes, emotions, public behaviours all SP Focusses on the study of the individual (can be in group context) Can also include non-social factors that affect thoughts, motivations, actions Behaviours that concern other people or are influenced by other people Social context can be implied or imagined (not present) and still affect behaviour Scientific rather than anecdotal, insights not gained through intuition or experience alone

Questions that SP try to answer… -

Why do people sabotage their performance? Where do stereotypes come from/why so resistant to change? How do salespeople trick us into buying things we don’t really want? Bystander behaviour and help in emergencies? How can businesses most effectively motivate employees?

SP and Other Disciplines -

-

SP/Sociology: SP = individual, sociology = group; SP more likely to conduct experiments SP/Psychology: o Clinical = treat/understand MI or psych difficulties. SP doesn’t focus on disorders o Personality = stable differences between individuals. SP = social factor impact on individuals regardless of different personalities o Cognitive = mental processes (thinking, learning, remembering). SP = + social impact o Personality/SP (games + aggression) and Cognitive/SP (social cognition) closely linked Also intersect with bio, economics, public health, environmental studies, law, medicine

SP and Common Sense -

Common sense can be confused with SP. Difficulty = distinguishing common sense fact from common sense MYTH. Eg for many elements of common sense, there’s an opposite side SP uses scientific method to put theories to the test Common sense can be inaccurate, misleading or based on complex notions

SP: A History -

Triplett (late 19th century) published first research article in SP – cyclists in groups vs clock Ringlemann (1913) found opposite to Triplett – people perform worse in presence of others McDougall, Ross & Allport: wrote first three textbooks on SP Allport (1924) focus = interaction of people and their social context, scientific method helped establish SP as the discipline it is currently. Hitler’s influence is often credited for mass explosion of social psychologists in 1930s onwards Gordon Allport (brother of above) established Society for Psych Study of Social Issues Sherif (1936) published experimental research on social influence: possible to study conformity etc Lewin (1930s) established that behaviour is a function of interaction between person + environment, studied SP’s application in practical issues e.g. advertising, business, education, sport, law etc. Gordon Allport (1954) Nature of Predjudice – stereotyping and prejudice in society.

-

Asch conducted famous experiment on conformity 1951 Festinger (54-57) introduced theories about learning about self by comparing self to others, and that attitudes can be changed by behaviour – still extremely influential in current field. Milgram (1960’s) – most famous experiment in history of SP. Conformity and authority 1960’s/70’s were a time of crisis/heated debate as well as explosion of SP field, mostly over experiments Resolved in 70s/80s with stricter standards in research. Pluralism/social cognition (SC) – how we perceive, remember and interpret information about self/others.

SP: Current Trends -

-

-

-

-

E, M, C: Hot (emotion and motivation = behaviour) vs cold (cognition = behaviour) integrated increasingly o E.g conflict between what is right and what makes us feel good, how these influence info processing. o Automatic and controllable processes: how do they work and interact? Biological/Evolutionary: physical and social interaction, technology makes this possible o Social neuroscience: neural and social processes interaction o Behavioural genetics: how genes affect behaviour o Evolutionary Psych: evolution used to understand behaviour Cultural: system of meanings, beliefs, values, assumptions and practices shared by a large group of people and transmitted from one generation to the next o Cross-cultural research: compare and contrast people of different cultures eg individ/collectivist o Multicultural research: examine racial/ethnic groups within cultures Behavioural economics and interdisciplinary approaches: rapid number of SP’s who diversify o Behavioural economics: how psych relates to economic decision making o Embodied cognition: links between minds and bodies: perceptions/judgements influence bodily experiences e.g. guilt reporting reduces when hands washed with soap before answering. New Technologies/Online Environment: o TMS, fMRI used to study relationship between thoughts and brain activity o Virtual reality to explore complex questions that were impossible before technology o SP information access and research – much easier with internet etc. o Internet also a provocative field of study: interactions, dynamics and communication

Research Methods in SP -

Specific, quantifiable hypotheses that can be empirically tested and validated Developing, refining, testing, interpreting results

Developing: Question, Lit Review, Hypothesis, Research type o o o

theory: principles explaining phenomena, precise, lead to new hypothesis/further research, even if wrong can still be valuable Basic research (increase understanding of behaviour, often tests hypothesis from theory) Applied research (enlarge understanding of natural WORLD events, find solutions to social issues)

Refining: abstract to specific, measurement types o o

-

conceptual variables ( conformity) turn to operational definition (# times P agreed with confederates on clearly wrong judgements). Construct validity: does experiment manipulate or measure what is says it does? E.g. does above OD really measure conformity or something else?

Self Reports: single question or many questions measuring same variable e.g. Rosenberg self-esteem scale: agreement scale on statements related to self esteem, good CV. o Can be misleading, others can influence our responses o Bogus pipeline: participants told responses measured by lie detector = more accurate resp.

o o o o o

Wording and order of questions can affect results. Memory is prone to error if reporting on past thoughts/behaviours, esp if feelings have changed Interval-contingent reports: responses recorded at regular intervals eg once a day Signal-contingent reports: report ASAP after receiving signal to do so eg SMS Event-contingent: report on designated events ASAP after events occur

-

Observations: observe actions, can avoid faulty recollections or distorted interpretations of behaviour o Interrelater reliability: how much different observers agree on their observations. o Behaviour can change if people know they are being observed, can be better to be subtle

-

Technology: physiological responses, computers for stimulus response time, eye tracking, brain imaging

Testing Ideas: should be objective, systematic and quantifiable approaches. 3 categories of tests -

-

-

-

Descriptive: trends and tendencies o Describe people and thoughts, feelings and behaviours o Observations, past events, surveys o Qualitative (non-numerical) and quantitative (numerical): meaning vs cause-effect Correlational: associations o Observations, archives, surveys o Relationships between variables not manipulated by researcher o Correlation coefficient: -1 to 1, strength and direction of variables. o Correlation is NOT causation – no cause and effect can be demonstrated. Experimental: looking for cause and effect o Experimenter controls variables o Random assignment of participants (diff to random sampling, selection vs grouping) o Lab or field experiments o IV, DV, subject variables ( pre-existing differences between participants) o Significance and ability to be replicated o Internal validity: did IV cause DV? o Confound: other V that influences results, creates uncertain cause and effect o Experimenter expectancy: when E’s expectation affects treatment of participants/results o External validity: will results occur in different set of circumstances? o Mundane realism: experiment resembles places/events in real world o Experimental realism: are procedures involving to participants = natural responses/behaviour If findings don’t generalise between cultures, can be an opportunity to learn about cultural differences and how/why they affect the issue: not just a failure to replicate. Translation can be an issue when repeating studies in different cultures Multilingual people may think or act differently depending on language Culture may affect people’s response to questions, way they view context, respondent assumptions

Ethics in SP -

Milgram – would people obey orders to harm an innocent person? Participants commanded to induce shocks, much anxiety and stress from P, orders given by authority figure. Controversial/famous Is harm reasonable in relation to data to be gathered? Review board/informed consent Debriefing necessary, including revealing any deception used during study

Week 2: Attitudes Text 167-207 The Study of Attitudes -

Attitude: a positive, negative or mixed reaction to a person, object or idea Can vary in strength across positive and negative dimensions - +ve affect, -ve affect, ambivalence, apathy People can have positive AND negative reactions to same attitude object without internal conflict Can be mix of conscious/unconscious, e.g. openly positive to minorities but unconsciously prejudiced Attitude formation is often immediate and automatic (reflex) People who have high ‘need for evaluation’ more likely to view daily events judgementally, more opinionated on social, moral and political issues. Pre-existing attitudes can lead to bias to new interpretations, resistance to change, closed-minded

Measure of Attitudes Self Report Measures -

Attitudes may be too complex to measure with a single question – attitude scales often used eg Likert Accuracy an issue: social desirability bias, response bias

Covert Measures -

Indirect measures that cannot be controlled by participant Problem: people can monitor overt behaviour if observable behaviour measures used Facial electrograph: measures muscle activity associated with emotions and attitudes EEG: brainwaves, measures inconsistency eg present liked item then disliked, patterns change

Implicit Attitudes Test (IAT) -

Measures speed with which people associate pairs of concepts eg black/white, good/bad Categorise faces (black/white), categorise words (positive/negative), combine (black/positive vs white/negative), swap pairings (black/negative vs white/positive). Speed of response slower in swap stage, reveals implicit attitudes

Formation of Attitudes -

-

People may be predisposed to hold certain attitudes Inborn physical, sensory, cognitive skills; temperament and personality traits Most attitudes form as a result of our exposure to o Attitude objects o Rewards/punishments o Attitudes of parents, friends and enemies o Social and cultural context o Other experiences Formed through basic processes of learning: operant and classical conditioning Evaluative conditioning: attitude formation toward neutral stimulus based on its association with people, places or things (positive or negative) e.g. Trump in front of flag, advertising pairings, use of humour

Attitudes and Behaviour -

Don’t always go hand in hand, esp when self reported Kraus “attitudes significantly and substantially predict behaviour” – after meta-analysis Conditions in which attitudes predict behaviour include: o Context: do attitude measures match behaviour in question?

Link between feelings and actions Theory of Planned Behaviour (attitudes toward specific behaviour + subjective norms + perceived control = influence over actions) EXAMPLE: Smoking  Smokers more affected by people pressuring them to quit than general idea of health  People who lack confidence over ability to quit smoking are less likely to plan to do so.  Smokers may intend to quit, but fail to follow through o Strength of the attitude: importance of attitude affects behaviour. Att held most strongly when  Directly affect self-interest  Related to philosophical, political and religious values  Concern to family, friends and social groups Why some attitudes are stronger than others: o More well-informed = more consistency between A and B o How was A acquired? Personal experience stronger than secondhand information o A can be strengthened by attack against it through persuasive techniques (but not if already weak) o Strong attitudes more accessible, quickly and easily brought to mind When attitudes are strong and specific to a behaviour, it’s more likely that A predict B o o

-

-

Persuasion by Communication -

-

-

Persuasion: how attitudes are changed Two routes: central and peripheral o Central: critical, careful thinking – strength and quality of arguments is an influence  Thinking carefully doesn’t always predict objectivity/truth seeking  Overcorrection: when people are overly influenced by non-relevant factors o Peripheral: no critical thinking – focus on superficial cues  Heuristics – cognitive guidelines eg reputation, delivery, statistics, familiarity  Cues from body movements can influence attitudes Reception (learning a message) and acceptance (adopting call for a change in attitude). Influenced by self esteem and intelligence, but neither group MORE vulnerable than the other Route Selection: dependent on ability and motivation to take central over peripheral Positive or negative source, message, audience determine which route is taken o Source: credibility (competence, trustworthiness) + likeability (similarity, physical attractiveness) o People follow source when message when personal involvement is low or C + L not met BUT this can decrease over time (time erases bad reputation) – remember message forget source (sleeper) o Message: info strategies (length, primacy vs recency effect), message discrepancies (gentle better than shock) fear appeals (scare tactics most effective when clear advice to cope is given), positive emotions (good mood = increased persuasion), subliminal messages (no long term effect on behaviour) o Audience: Central and Peripheral audiences differ. Need for cognition, self monitoring, regulatory fit Mood and Persuasion: +ve emotion cognitively distracting (less critical thinking), good mood = lazy information processors, happy people want to savour mood and not engage in critical thinking.

Resisting Persuasion -

Attitude bolstering, counterargument, social validation, negative affect, assertions of confidence, selective exposure, source derogation When people are aware someone is trying to change their attitude, they become more likely to resist Inoculation hypothesis: exposure to weak arguments increases later resistance to strong ones Psychological reactance: we react against threats to freedom by asserting ourselves to maintain or restore the freedom being threatened. When people forewarned on topic not important to them, they agree before message even begins. When topic is important, they think up counter-arguments immediately

Cognitive Dissonance and Attitudes

-

Cognitive constancy: when our beliefs, attitudes and behaviours are compatible with each other. Cognitive dissonance: our motive to maintain consistency can give rise to irrational behaviour State of tension: eating tub of icecream after saying you’re on a diet. BUT if broke diet for important occasion/thought ice-cream was low fat = NO DISSONANCE, ONLY DISCREPANCY When you go against your attitudes, dissonance is aroused and motivation to reduce it is aroused also. Ways to reduce dissonance: sometimes easiest to change attitude to mirror behaviour o Change attitude – fuck dieting, don’t need it o Change perception – only had two spoonfuls o Add consonant cognitions – dairy is nutritious o Minimise importance of conflict – life is short, fuck diets o Reduce perceived choice – someone gave it to me and I was being polite o Intuit group hypocrisy – everyone I know cheats on diets

Justifying in CD -

-

-

Attitude-discrepant: action not consistent with private attitudes – doing is believing o Insufficient justification: people freely perform A-D behaviour without huge reward, results in attitude change o Insufficient deterrence: don’t do something desirable on threat of small punishment, results in attitude change Effort: inconsistency between effort and outcome – coming to like what we suffer for o More you pay for something – money, time, exertion, pain – the more you come to like it o Those who endured explicit ‘initiation’ task rated later boring group experience more positively Difficult Decisions: rationalising choice where options are equally desirable – good choices get better o Exaggerate positive features of chosen outcome and negative features of discarded options o Reassuring self you have made the right choice after experiencing CD

New Look Theory of CD -

Cooper and Fazio identified a new look at dissonance theory Certain specific conditions need to be present for dissonance to be aroused

Conditions for CD to be Present -

Attitude-discrepant behaviour must produce unwanted negative consequences Feeling of personal responsibility for negative outcome: freedom of choice and foreseeability needed Physiological arousal: high levels of discomfort during A-D task leads to change in attitudes Arousal attributed to own behaviour: directly to OWN choice, not external factors that force choice

Week 3: The Social Self Text 40-75 Self Concept -

SC = sum total of our beliefs about our personal attributes Self-schema: belief held about ourselves, guides processing of self-relevant information. Books to library Key aspect is the degree to which it is consistent across different roles eg work/social/dating/alone Self is a frame of reference that powerfully influences our thoughts, feelings and behaviours

Self as a Social Concept -

Ability to see yourself as a distinct entity is first step necessary to develop self-concept Ability to see yourself through social factors/eyes of others is second step Self-concepts match our perceptions of what others think of us

Sources of Our SC Introspection -

Looking inward at own thoughts and feelings Can impair self-knowledge – attitudes and behaviour stop matching when people are asked to analyse the reasons for their attitudes. People typically overestimate their own positive aspects eg better than average at task or skill Affective forecasting: predicting feelings in future emotional events can be difficult

Self Perception -

People infer what they think or feel by observing their own behaviour and the situation it occurs in Internal cues very difficult to interpret When punishment or reward are present, people don’t infer internal states that lead to behaviour Can also infer about self based on behaviour of people who you believe are similar to you To know yourself needs a combination of information and objectivity as well as observation o Emotion: facial feedback hypothesis: changes in facial expression = change in subjective emotion o Motivation: intrinsic and extrinsic. Reward for task previously freely enjoyed = less enjoyment

Influences of Others -<...