Summary Psychology - Chapters 1-4, 6-8, 10 PDF

Preview

Summary

Chapters 1-4, 6-8, 10 - Chapter 2 - Chapter 3 - Chapter 4 - Chapter 6 - Chapter 7 - Chapter 8 - Chapter 10 merged files: 1. Chapter 1 – Introduction to Social Psychology.docx - 2. Chapter 2 - The Self in Social World.docx - 3. Chapter 3 - Social beliefs and Judgments.docx - 4. Chapter 4 - Behavior a...

Description

Chapter 1 – Introduction to Social Psychology

What is Social Psychology    

Social psychology – science that studies influences of our situations, with special attention to how we view and affect one another 1) Social thinking; 2) Social influence; 3) Social relations E.g Nazi Germany – successful because people followed orders o Stanley Milgram – Asking experimenters to deliver electric shocks to people Social psychology reveals how social environment influences behavior

Major themes in social psychology Social thinking: 1. We construct our social reality – we explain behaviors 2. Our social intuitions are often powerful but sometimes perilous o Intuitions shape fears, impressions and relationships o “Dual processing” – thinking, memory, and attitudes operate on two levels – one conscious, the other unconscious and automatic Social influence: 1. Social influences shape our behavior – Matthias Mehl and James Pennebaker (2003) – social experiment – 30% of time spent talking => relationships are important; we adapt to our social context 2. Personal attitudes and dispositions also shape behavior - e.g attitudes toward smoking influence our susceptibility to peer pressures Social relations: 1. Social behavior is biologically rooted – genes and traits allow for survival and reproduction, biological & social influences affect social behavior 2. Relating to others is a basic need – Kip Williams: when being left out, self-esteem drops; Mark Leary & Roy Baumeister: relationships with others form basis of self-esteem Applying Social Psychology: influencing thinking and acting, how we interact with others, human health and well-being, judicial procedures etc.

Social Psychology and Human Values (How values affect psychologists/scientists) 

choice of research topics and types of people who are attracted to various fields of study



Hidden values in psychological concepts o Hidden assumptions when forming concepts, choosing labels, and giving advices o Good life: Abraham Maslow: “self-actualized” people (needs for survival, safety, “belongingness”, self-esteem, fulfill human potential) o Professional advice: we usually defer to these “professional” advices o Forming concepts: tendency to say nice things about oneself and not acknowledge problems => label reflects value judgments o Labelling value: usually hidden within social-psychological language o Naturalistic fallacy: error of defining what is good in terms of what is observable (e.g what’s typical is normal  what’s normal is good)

I knew it all along  

 

Hindsight bias (I-knew-it-all-along phenomenon) – the tendency to exaggerate, after learning an outcome, one’s ability to have foreseen how something turned out Paul Lazarsfeld (1949): o 4 sample statements: (soldiers battle)  1. Smarter soldiers were less prepared for battle stresses than streetsmart soldiers  2. Soldiers from southern climates adapt better to hot weather  3. Soldiers from rural background were usually in better spirits than those from city backgrounds  4. Soldiers were more eager to return home during fighting than after  But results were actually opposite  however, if mentioned actual results earier, reader would still have labelled those ‘obvious’ When we learn outcome  it suddenly seems unsurprising Karl Teigen (1986): Ask students rate proverb as true/false o E.g “Fear is stronger than love” vs. “Love is stronger than fear”  all rate as true

Research methods 



2

Forming and testing hypothesis: o Theory – Integrated set of principles that explain and predict observed events (explain facts) o Hypothesis – Testable proposition that describes a relationship that may exist between events; they provide direction for research Correlational Research: Detecting Natural Associations o Correlational research – study of naturally occurring relationships among variables o Advantages: important variables in natural settings; Disadvantages: ambiguous interpretation of cause and effect





3

o E.g Dougas Carroll, George Davey Smith, Paul Bennett (1994): higher markers on grave (status of wealth)  longer lives  status-health correlation Correlation vs. Causation (Correlation-causation confusion): o Allows us to predict but cannot tell us whether changing one variable will cause changes in another o Self-esteem (X)  Academic achievement?  May also be linked to underlying intelligence and family social status o Correlations quantify (r) – degree of relationship between two factors: from -1.0 (total inversely related) to +1.0 (positively correlated) o Longitudinal research – When correlational research is extended over time  Can sort out cause and effect ~ know which even happens first: show children always have a healthy positive self-image before achievements  Time-lagged correlations – reveal sequence of events Survey research: o Random sample – survey procedure in which every person in population being studied has equal chance of inclusion o 4 potentially biasing influences: 1. Unrepresentative samples; 2. Order of the questions; 3. Response options; 4. Wording of questions o 1. Unrepresentative samples – Sample used in an inductive inference is relevantly different from the population as a whole  Ann Landers (1984): Whether women find affection more important than sex – “Would you be content to be held close and treated tenderly and forget about ‘the act’?  72% said yes  However, only 70 million readers read the article  cannot represent entire population o 2. Order of questions:  Whether Japanese gov should set limits on American exports  Most answered No  When they first ask “Whether American can set limits on Jap exports” – answer Yes  Then ask same question  Answer Yes because they think Jap should have the same right o 3. Response Bias and Social Desirability:  Response options affecting answers  Social desirability – tendency for people to say what they want others to hear or what they want to believe about themselves o 4. Wording of questions:  E.g Favored cutting “foreign aid”, opposed cutting funding “to help hungry people in other nations”  Darin Lehman (1992): ask students to read newspaper clippings about Democratic party and social credit party  students saw bias against NDP when questions were about NDP and bias against SCP when questions were about SCP; knowledgeable students were unaffected







Experimental research: Searching for Cause and Effect: o Correlational and experimental studies of prejudice against the obese:  Perceive obese as slow, lazy and sloppy  Steen Gortmaker (1993): Obesity correlated with marital status & income  Mark Snyder & Julie Haugen (1994,1995): Men shown normal / obese woman and have a conversion on phone  Obese women spoke less warmly and happily  less desirable o Correlational and experimental studies of TV violence viewing:  Watch violence TV leads to aggressive children?  Chris Boyatzis (1995): Showed some children violent TV program  children commit 7 times as many aggressive acts per 2-minute interval as non-viewers Random assignment: The great equalizer: o Random assignment – Process of assigning participants to the conditions of an experiment such that all person has the same chance of being in a given condition o Random assignment: cause & effect; Random sampling: generalize population Ethics of experimentation: o Elliot Aronson, Marilynn Brewer, Merrill Carlsmith (1985): Mundane realism – degree to which an experiment is similar to everyday situation o Experimental realism – degree to which an experiment absorvs and involves participants  Engage real psychological processes o Demand characteristics – cues in experiment that tell participants what behavior is expected: minimize by standardizing instructions / use computer o Informed consent – Ethical principle requiring research participants to be told enough to enable them to choose whether they wish to participate

Summary:

4

Chapter 2 – The Self in Social World



   

Jacquie Vorauer (1997): send 2 students to do university life interview, after second person saw first person’s response  describe experience more negatively o Positivity of self-presentations echoed other students Social surroundings affect self-awareness Self-interest colors our social judgment: we claim prize, but blame problems onto others Self-concern motivates social behavior: agonize appearance  good impression Social relationships help define self: how we think of ourselves is liked to the person we’re with at the moment

Self-Concept: Who am I?  

Self-concept – Person’s answers to the question “Who am I” Self-schemas – Elements of self-concept, specific beliefs by which you define yourself ~ mental templates by which we organize our worlds

Possible Selves:  

Possible selves – images of what we dream of becoming in the future Developing social self: o Social identity: social definition of who you are ~ when we are part of small group surrounded by a larger group, we are conscious of our social identity o Social comparisons – evaluating own abilities and opinions by comparing yourself to others  Penelope Lockwood & Ziva Kunda (1997): 1st and 4th year accounting students comparing themselves with role model  Result: 1st year – high superstar comparison; 4th year low superstar comparison o Success and failure:  Joanne Wood: Repeating positive self-statements can backfire (people with high esteem feel a bit better, low self-esteem worsen) o Other people’s judgements:  Charles H. Cooley (1902): looking-glass self – use of how we think others perceive us as a mirror for perceiving ourselves











2

George Herbert Mead (1934): what matters for our self-concept is not how others actually see us but the way we imagine they see us  Kitayama (1996): NA last praised someone 1 day ago; Japan last praised 4 days ago Self and Culture: o Individualism – concept of giving priority to one’s goals over group goals and defining one’s identity in terms of personal attributes rather than group identifications o Shinobu Kitayama & Hazel Markus (1995): Independent self – Construing one’s identity in relation to others – people are more self-critical and have less need for positive self-regard o Collectivism – opposite of individualism, focus on priorities of group Culture and cognition: o Richard Nisbett (2003): collectivism results in different ways of thinking o Americans – more focus at objects, less at surroundings; Asian – environment and relationships among objects o Westerns – language for expressing self; Koreans – language for communication o Heejun Kim & Hazel Markus (1999): Which pen would you choose? -> 77% of Americans and 31% of Asians chose uncommon color Culture and self-esteem: o Individualist culture – self-esteem is more personal and less relational o Western individualists – make comparisons with others – self-esteem, Asian collectivists – make comparisons to facilitate self-improvement Self-Knowledge: o Predicting behavior:  Teara MacDonald & Michael Ross (1997): Predicting longevity of relationships are better from roommates than the couple  Planning fallacy – error in prediction of underestimating how long it will take to complete a task  Wilfrid Laurier University: students finished 3 weeks later than “most realistic” estimate  Nicholas Epley & David Dunning (2006): Whether students would vote. 90%  69% o Predicting feelings:  Affective forecasting: greatest difficulty predicting intensity and duration of future emotions  Impact bias – overestimating enduring impact of emotion-causing events  Gilbert (1998): we think loosing a hand/toe is sadder than reality  Immune neglect: adapt to disabilities, romantic breakups, failures  Timothy Wilson: Mental processes that control social behavior are distinct from mental processes

Attitudes people expressed toward things/people  predict subsequent behavior  Dual attitude system – Differing implicit and explicit feelings toward same object o Explicit attitudes – change with education and persuasion; implicit attitudes change slowly Murray Millar & Abraham Tesser (1992): drawing attention to reasons (cognitive) diminishes usefulness of attitude reports in predicting behaviors that are driving by feelings (emotions) 



Self-esteem: How am I?    



3

Self-esteem – Person’s overall self-evaluation or sense of self-worth Jennifer Crocker & Connie Wolfe (2001): when we feel good about domains (looks, smarts) important to our self-esteem Jonathon Brown & Keith Dutton (1994): ^ “Bottom-up” view ~ people with high selfesteem  more likely to value looks, abilities Self-esteem motivation: o Abraham Tesser (1988): Motive high self-esteem for the “capable” one in sibling o Mark Leary: threatened social rejection  motivate us to act with greater sensitivity to other’s expectations o Jeff Greenberg (2008): continue pursue self-esteem by meeting standards of societies “Dark side” of self-esteem: o Increase risk of depression, drug abuse o Fosters initiative, resilience and pleasant feelings o Robyn Dawes: teen male who had sex at young age, terrorist, teen gang leaders  high self-esteem o Todd Heatherton & Kathleen Vohs (2000): men with high self-esteem more antagonistic by treat in failure experience on aptitude test o Brad Bushman & Roy Baumeister (1998): people with biggest egos (agreed with “narcissistic” statements) were more aggressive  Criticism on writing  play reaction time game o Christian Jordon: self-esteem comes in 2 forms (implicit & explicit)  Conscious views of themselves that are positive, but low implicit selfesteem  fragile high self-esteem rationalize their decision more o Ian MacGregor (2005): defensive response o Secure self-esteem conducive to long-term well-being o Jennifer Crocker: most fragile self-esteem – most sensitive to stress, angers, less open to criticism

Self in Action 



Self-control: o Roy Baumeister: eat radishes > chocolate, exert control on emotional response o Reduce activity in brain areas responsible for detecting conflict between actions and goals  maintain self-control o Ability to regulate behavior – exhausted by use in short term, strengthened by regular exercise Learned helplessness vs. self-determination: o Martin Seligman: learned helplessness – hopelessness and resignation learned when perceives no control over repeated bad events o Uncontrollable bad events  Perceived lack of control  Learned helplessness o Megan Oaten & Ken Cheng (2006): develop self-control in one area, spill over to other areas o Ellen Langer & Judith Rodin (1976): passive elderly treatments vs. personal control treatment  93% of personal control treatment group showed improved alertness, activity and happiness

Self-serving bias: Seeing the self positively  

4

Self-serving bias – tendency to perceive yourself favorably Evaluating the self: o Explanations for positive and negative events:  People accept credit when told they succeeded – attribute success to ability and effort ; attribute losses to something else  Self-serving attributions – tendency to attribute positive outcomes to self and negative outcomes to other factors  “Bias blind spot” – we are biased against seeing our own bias o Can we all be better than average?  Michael Ross & Riore Sicoly (1979): couple felt they took more responsibility than their spouses credited them for  Subjective behavior dimensions (disciplined) trigger greater self-serving bias than objective behavior dimensions  Elanor Williams & Thomas Gilovich (2008): believe in their above-average self-estimates o Unrealistic optimism:  Neil Weinstein: “unrealistic optimism about future life events” ~ see ourselves as getting a good job, good salary than others + less likely to experience negative events etc.  Illusory optimism (believing ourselves immune to misfortune) o False consensus & uniqueness:



False consensus effect – tendency to overestimate commonality of one’s opinions and undesirable/unsuccessful behaviors – we think the failure we make are also common  False uniqueness effect – tendency to underestimate the commonality of one’s abilities and one’s desirable or successful behaviors ~ we think our talents and success are unusual o Temporal comparison:  Temporal comparison - Comparison between how self is viewed now and how self was viewed in past or how self is viewed in future  Anne Wilson & Mike Ross: maintain positive view by disparaging distant past selves and complimenting recent past selves ~ believe they have improved significantly over time Summary



Reflections on self-esteem & self-serving bias o Self-serving bias as adaptive:  Self-serving bias ~ protect people from depression  George Bonanno (2005): emotional resiliency on workers who escaped 911 – those who self-enhancing tendencies were the most resilient  Jeff Greenberg, Sheldon Solomon & Tom Pyszczynski (1997): “terror management theory” – buffers anxiety o Self-serving bias as maladaptive:  Barry Schlenker: rock bank members overestimate contributions to group and underestimate contributions to failure  Group-serving bias: consider own group superior

Self-Presentation: Looking good to others 

5

Self-handicapping:



6

o Steve Berglas & Edward Jones (1978): Self-handicapping – protecting one’s selfimage with behaviors that create handy excuse for later failure Impression management: o Self-presentation – wanting to present a desired image to external (other people) and internal (ourselves) audience o Happens without conscious effort o Joseph Walther (2008): make careful decisions about which pictures, activities and interests to highlight in profiles o Self-monitoring – being attuned to way you present in social situations and adjusting performance to create desired impression o Mary Leary (2004): self they know differ from self they show o China & Japan Less self-serving bias than Westerns

Chapter 3 – Social Beliefs and Judgments

Perceiving our social world 







Priming: o Priming – activating particular associations in memory o John Bargh (1996): complete sentences using words like “old”, “wise”, “retired”  Walk slower than normal o Rob Holland (2005): students exposed to scent of all-purpose cleaner  quicker to identify cleaning-related words + recall more cleaning related activities Perceiving and interpreting events: o Robert Vallone, Lee Ross, Mark epper (1985): pro-Israeli vs. pro-Arab network news on killing civilian refugees  believed coverage was biased against their point of view o Ross & Lepper, Lord (1979): favored vs against capital punishment  show same evidence  accepted evidence that confirmed their belief but critical of disconfirming evidence  confirmation bias o Myron Rothbart & Pamela Birrell (1977): in concentration camp  judged expression as cruel vs. leader in anti-Nazi  warm & kind o “Kulechov effect” – film makers control perception of emotion by manipulating setting in which they see face o Lynda, Mae, Donal Carlston, John Skowronski: Spontaneous trait transference – when we say good/bad about someone  people associate that trait with us Belief Perseverance: o Lee Ross, Craig Anderson: planted falsehood in mind  discredit it  Difficult to demolish falsehood once conjures a rationale for it  Belief Perseverance – Persistence of initial conceptions, when basis for belief is discredited but explanation of why belief night be true survives o Anderson, Lepper, Ross (1980): whether people who take risks make good/bad fighters  write explanation for it  discredit  still held on to belief o Stephan Lewandowsky (2005): implant & discredit info about ...