1
Q
Hindsight bias
A
People are heavily influenced by the outcome that they know - the outcome becomes part of their mental representation of the past “i knew it all along”
2
Q
What does the hindsight bias make people struggle with
A
Hard to just ask people what did you thing or what was your evaluation in the past as you cannot separate what you know at the time from what you knew in the past
3
Q
Charity example of hindsight bias
A
- People randomly called and asked “would you devote an afternoon to raise money for charity”
- 40% predicted they would say yes
- This same group was actually called and asked beyond a hypothetical
- 38% than said yes
In the second group, who were not called to make predictions, only 2% would say yes
4
Q
Social processes
A
what is out there, outside of the body
5
Q
Cognitive processes
A
What is in brain, inside the mind (biases, evaluations, representations, beliefs)
6
Q
Kurt Lewin Equation (behaviour =)
A
B = f(P,E)
Behaviour = a function of the person and the environment
7
Q
P & E in lewins equation
A
Person
- Past experiences
- Traits
- Motivations
- Desires
- Beliefs
Environment
- Social norms in the given environment
- Ways of behaving
Relationships
8
Q
Social stimuli are…
A
People!!
- They cause the highest level of physiological arousal
- They change as we act upon them (are not passive objects)
- They act back on us
9
Q
First Fundamental Axiom
A
People construct their own reality
- Social reality is subjective, nothing is objectively true
10
Q
Does reality or your mental representation of reality matter more
A
Whether something is objectively true or not is irrelevant, your mental representation is what will shape your reality and therefore behaviour
11
Q
The Hostile Media Effect
A
(example of fundamental axiom 1) Pro israli and pro arab participants given identical media clips. Were then asked about many variables based on this clip and peoples perceptions & answers varied greatly.
Conclusions: Whatever mental representations people had prior to watching the video, that was what they took from it
12
Q
second fundamental axiom
A
Social influences are pervasive
13
Q
Explanation of the idea that “social influences are pervasive”
A
Other people influence almost EVERY aspect of our lives, whether they are present or not. Its like a loop whereby Our perceptions –> Our behaviour –> Others perceptions –> Others behaviour –> Our perceptions… and so on
14
Q
Attractive woman telephone study
A
Demonstrates fundamental axiom 2.
Male participants were either told they were talking to an unattractive or attractive woman. When men believed they were talking to attractive woman, they rated them funnier, warmer, smarter, more outgoing.
- When other people (seperate from experiment) listened, they found that the men who THOUGHT they were talking to attractive woman, were themsevles funnier, warmer, more outgoing.
15
Q
Conclusion of telephone attractive woman study
A
The men PRODUCED THE BEHAVIOUR THEY EXPECTED WITH THEIR OWN BEHAVIOUR
16
Q
3 basic motivational principles
A
- People strive for mastery
- People seek connectedness
- People value “me and mine”
17
Q
People strive for mastery (basic motivational principle 1)
A
People want to be able to understand, predict & control their environments. Feeling out of control (ability to predict) increases our uncertainty.
- Perception of control is just about as good as actual control, as long as people FEEL they have control, that’s okay.
18
Q
People seek connectedness (basic motivational principle 2)
A
- We are social animals
We seek out others, connections, we want to feel apart of something, and accepted
19
Q
People value “Me and Mine” (basic motivational principle 3)
A
- We are especially motivated to view the self, and things associated with the self, positively
This can be the groups we belong to (the easiest way to view our group as positive, is to view another group negative)
20
Q
3 basic processing principles
A
Accessibility, Conservatism, Superficiality vs. depth (systematic)
21
Q
Accessibility
A
How quickly something comes to mind (availability heuristic), the greater the likelihood of it being viewed as true, or likely.
- Evolutionarily, we have acquired this as things that we experience more frequency are more likely to happen
22
Q
Schema
A
Structured unit of knowledge (how we mentally represent objects/categories/scenarios)
23
Q
How are schemas built
A
From the bottom up.
- Developed over time as a result of experience (one persons perception/schema will differ to another)
24
Q
How are schemas activated
A
Top down - applied in order to interpret our world accurately
25
What can you have schemas about...
Other people, yourself, roles, events, groups (stereotypes)
26
Accessibility is affected by...?
Expectations, motivation, fears, mood, priming
27
How do expectations affect accessibility of schemas
How much you expect a particular behaviour to be demonstrated can affect how you interpret their behaviour. ie., if you were told before meeting someone, "oh shes really funny" you would be more likely to interpret ambiguously funny behaviours as funny
28
How do fears influence accessibility
Can go all the way to phobias, people that are afraid of things have these fears hyper accessible into awareness (if you are afraid of spiders, you are more likely to notice small tiny spiders that most people would overlook)
29
How does mood influence accessibility?
positive mood, more positive things accessible. Negative mood, more negative things accessible (depression). Rumination - constant exposure to a thought making it more and more… accessible
30
How does priming influence accessibility
When we have been recently exposed to something, its likely to be more quickly accessible
31
3 things important for priming
- Recency
- Frequency
- Nature (chronic?)
Think of it like a box
Recent = piece of paper on top of box.
Frequent = lots of pieces of paper more likely to pick one.
Chronic = If blue is your favourite colour that is important to you, you will be more inclined to consider this.
Therefore these schemas are more accessible.
32
Priming study with ambiguous paragraph
Same paragraph which could either be interpreted as a person displaying adventurous or recklessness.
2 conditions, one primed to activate schema of adventurousness or recklessness. The people primed with the idea of recklessness viewed this behaviour negatively and then ranked their affinity towards Gary low, and vice versa…
33
What are the consequences once a schema is activated/cued
It affects EVERY SINGLE STAGE of info processing (what we notice, how quickly we notice, how we interpret & evaluate and what we remember)
34
Aggressive behaviour interpretation with ambiguous image study (activation of stereotypes)
Ambiguous images - could be aggressive/based on play. When protagonist was black, exact same behaviour was viewed as more aggressive then when protagonist was white (this effect was the same for white and black participants)
- As black children get older it changes over time
35
Activation of stereotype study conclusions
Stereotype of blackness, associated with aggression and criminality can become activated & accessible REGARDLESS of whether you are member of that group or not. Whether we BELIEVE the stereotypes in our society or not, we still KNOW they exist & they can be activated in our brain and drive interpretation
36
Activation of stereotype seen on a legal scale
White person killing black person 240% more likely it will be justified
Black person killing white person 67% LESS likely to be justified
37
Concept activation
- Representation will be the basis for further action by the perceiver. How we perceive someone will form our representations of that person which will influence subsequent action & thought
38
Conservatism (basic processing principle no. 2)
Once we form a belief/make a judgement, that attitude is VERY slow to change - ingrained
- On one level, this is adaptive - otherwise every single time you get information that is slightly different to what you believed, you'd completely change your attitude. We NEED stability so are hardwired to be conservative
39
Superficiality vs. depth (basic principle no. 3)
Most of the time, we don't spend a lot of effort in thinking about stuff (heuristics, cognitive things allow us to process info quickly and good enough), we can, when necessary and under right conditions, switch over to more systematic and deliberate kind of thinking
40
Bank teller/feminist study
85% of people tend to pick B where linda is bank teller & feminist (even though this is statistically WAY more unlikely as it involves conjunction between categories)
- However, it shows our quick heuristic response is to see feminist and assume its more likely
41
Dual processes model (and what is each system used for)
Argues that there are 2 processing systems.
System 1 is
- Fast
- Efficient
- Automatic
- Association based
System 2 is
- Slow
- Systematic
- Rule based
- Deliberate
42
Underlying concept of automatic Stereotype Activation (divine study)
Divine proposed a dual process model of stereotype activation & use. She argued that stereotype activation occurred automatically but stereotype use was more controlled
43
Divine stereotype study findings
- Use of subliminally activated stereotype found that both groups LOW & HIGH prejudice had stereotype activation affecting their consequent judgement.
- Use of consciously activated stereotype, there was a big difference between resulting prejudice of each grouo
44
Divine stereotype study conclusion
YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE RACIST TO ACT RACIST
- even people that are not prejudice, when stereotype was activated, this influenced their behaviour
45
4 components of automaticity
- Awareness (no awareness of process occurring)
- Intentionality (no control over start-up of process)
- Efficiency (association based, in system 1 easy)
- Controllability (cannot be controlled)
46
Mere exposure effect
people tend to develop a preference for things merely because they are familiar with them
- Fluency is misinterpreted as liking
47
Geometric figures study - mere exposure effect
- 1 type of stimulus 10 times, but show very very fast (low consicous thershold), other type of stimulus shown once.
Then asked two questions:
Which one did you see?
- Below conscious threshold = out of awareness, and could not have seen it
Which one do you like better?
- Frequent > Infrequent
WHY??
- Even though you don’t know you saw it 10 times, your visual system has seen it 10 times and is familiar with encoding the shapes & corners of the image
48
Awareness of stimuli but NOT influence study (Lewiki) - Room study
2 rooms
Room 1 - Has woman who is either neutral or rude
Room 2 - Two experimenters, both running same study. You can go to either one
Findings:
- When initial interaction was neutral, it was random. Participants would go wherever. When interaction was negative, MOST (80%) went to the one that looked different. People said they just picked randomly, but when asked to evaluate rudeness of receptionist, they were AWARE she was rude, but did not realise the influence this had on their behaviour
49
What 2 things do controlled processes require
MOTIVATION and CAPACITY.
50
What are sources of first impressions
Expectations, salient features,
51
Expectations in first impressions
we see in other what we expect to see (based on what they look etc)
52
Salient features in first impressions
- Attractiveness
- Emotional expression
Non-verbal behaviour
53
Salient features: What makes something salient
Signal to noise ratio important to consider. - Salience is an interaction between stimulus and environment (how well does signal cut through the noise)
54
Clothing as status & perceived confidence study Oh, Shafir & Todarov
Presented same faces, either in expensive clothing or less fancy clothing
Findings:
Clothing serves as a status cue
Affects how confident individuals are perceived to be
Even when flashed on the screen for 120ms, clothing signals had same effect
55
Wills & Todarov, facial processing and inferences (at different durations)
Wanted to answer how quickly can we present a face, and it still be percieved and made inferences about
Findings: Found a strong correlation between all participants scores REGARDLESS of whether they looked at face for 1/10 second all the way to as long as they want. The highest correlations occured with trustworthiness and attractiveness
56
What makes an untrustworthy face (versus trustworthy)
Inner eyebrows, indentation, cheeckbones, chin. Manipulating these four features manipulates perceptions of trustworthiness
57
Attractiveness in first impressions
We tend to infer that attractive others are likely to have other positive characteristics (without any evidence this is true)
- This also affects our likelihood of helping
58
Children judgements of attractiveness
Attractive children are..,
- Judged to be more intelligent than their less attractive pairs
- If you infer a child is more clever, you are more likely to treat them as such, which will further make this true
Children also perceive their less attractive peers as more aggressive
59
Agthe, Sporrle & Maner hiring & attractiveness study
When males are hiring, more likely to hire
- Attractive woman over less attractive woman
- Unattractive man over less attractive man
(same thing is true for heterosexual woman - less attractive woman, more attractive man)
60
Attractiveness & legal system
- Attractive defendants receive lower bail recommendations
If convicted, attractive people get lesser sentences
61
Emotional Expression
(basic emotions and their critiques)
There are said to be 6 universal emotional expressions (sad, happy, angry, surprise, fear, disgust)
- These were taken to indigenous tribes to see if these were universally expressed
- Everyone makes and recognises these emotions
- HOWEVER evidence is not great - forced choice, hit rates above chance but not impressive
62
Context & emotional expression interpretation
There is ambiguity when just looking at face
Emotions are complex and involve multiple expressions, are dynamic, and changing.
63
Duchenne smile
Real smile when eyes are involved
64
Spontaneous Trait Inferences (STI)
The inferences we make about others based on their behaviour are functionally automatic (can occur without our attention)
65
Why is it an advantage to have functionally automatic trait inferences
- If you had to put in effort to understand every behaviour and social actions you saw, you could never interpret the entire world
66
Savings and relearning paradigm phase one
- Get lots of photos, each paired with a behaviour
Half of the behaviours would imply a specific trait, and the others would be neutral
67
Savings and relearning paradigm phase 2
- Pair all of the photos with a specific trait word
- For the person that it was easy to make an inference about based on description, easy to remember trait word (as they are more relearning their prior inference)
For the person without trait implication, easy to forget trait word (as they are having to do new learning to pair trait with person)
68
Gilbert's three stage model
Categorisation, characterisation, correction
69
Categorisation (gilberts three stage model)
- Identify the action
Person tripped = clumsy action
70
Characterisation (gilberts three stage model)
- Identify the person
Clumsy action = clumsy person
71
Correction (gilberts three stage model)
- Reevaluate characteristics based on environment/appraisal
Correction requires effortful thinking
- Room is dark, anyone would have tripped = not clumsy person
72
Anxious woman interview recording study findigns from both conditions)
Shows gilberts 3 stage model.
Findings: When only given one task (forming impression), Context is used as correction
For people who were told she was talking about anxiety provoking things corrected their interpretation of this woman and her behaviour (and therefore had lower rating of trait anxiety).
When given two tasks,no cognitive capacity for correction
In this condition, the difference between talking about relaxing and anxiety provoking things disappears
- People do not correct because they do not have cognitive capacity
72
What is trait inference affected by
- Affected by our expectations
- Motivations
- Mood
- Recent/frequent experiences
There is no objective right or wrong inference of behaviour
73
What behaviours lead to stronger inferences & why?
Negative behaviours are viewed as more diagnostic (tell us more about the person than positive behaviours. Doing a morally negative thing carries MUCH more weight
74
The primary dimensions of social perception
Warmth, competence
75
Solomon Asch - Warm, cold study
Described the guest lecture as a range of adjectives, and interchanged "warm" and "cold."
Following the lecture
- People told he was warm = more friendly, generous, humorous, happy
- People told he was cold = more intelligent, more successful
76
Inconsistency resolution
- When things are inconsistent/incongruent we have to try to make sense of it. Thus, incongruent behaviours are more likely to be remembered
77
What happens with increasing ratio of incongruency:congruency and memory
As percentage of incongruent statements increases, the correct recall difference doesn't differ as much
78
Memory distortions & reconstructions Extroverted Study
Present introverted & extroverted behaviours, when people believe the target is extroverted, they are more likely to falsely recall having read OTHER extroverted behaviours
They fit and we make the error in thinking we recognise the behaviour (it feels familiar & seems like we saw it before)
79
Snyder & Cantor (how well is Jane suited for a job)
Asked participants how well jane was suited for a job as either a real-estate agent or a research librarian (each of these jobs is either stereotypically more introverted/extroverted)
- People doing introverted job, recall all introverted behaviours (but none of the contrary), and vice versa
When extroverted thing is bought to the attention, they cast it as irrelevant
80
Confirmation bias
One you assume someone is likely something, you seek behaviours to further solidify that impression
81
Why are we called naive scientists
We test social hypotheses, but not in a rigorous/experimental way
82
Salience and causal attribution
Participants could either see one actor clearly, or both of them clearly.
They had a conversation, then observers were asked who was more causal in discussion
- The person they could see attributed greater causality to the person in their vision
Whoever was more salient = greater causal agency
83
Causal attribution and jury
Confessions that only show the suspect are viewed as being less likely to be coerced (more believed to be true)
84
Actor/observer effect
- We tend to make situational explanations for our own behaviour, and internal explanations for others
85
WHY does the actor observer effect occur
"behaviour engulfs the field"
In other words... Salience
First person gaming- YOU ONLY see the environment
Third person gaming - you MAINLY see the actor - to us, humans will be more salient than environment so you attribute behaviour to them, rather than whats going on around them
86
Correspondent inference theory (Jones & Davis)
Suggests that observers are more likely to attribute behavior to a person's personality (a correspondent inference) when the behavior is freely chosen, unexpected and undesirable
(assuming the actor knew the consequences and had the ability)
87
Why does correspondence inference theory not apply in socially acceptable situations
Its is a theory to determine ones internal dispositions and in socially acceptable situations, you don't know if someone doing that is truly good or just doing it because its just the right thing
88
Anti/Pro castro study and FAE
Had students read an essay for someone either pro-castro or anti-castro, were told student who wrote the paper either had free choice or no choice, then asked them what they thought authors true attitude towards castro was.
Even when someone has NO CHOICE, you still get inference of intenal casuality. The behaviour you see is more salient to any of the things going on around you
89
Kelleys theory of causal attribution
Says you require three types of information (consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency) in order to make an attribution
90
3 types of causal attribution you can make
Internal attribution, External about target, Situation
91
Distinctiveness
how distinctive is the behaviour of the actor
- Does John yell at other people
Low = yes, he yells at everyone (not only Micheal)
High = no, there must be something specific about Micheal
92
Consistency
how consistent is this behaviour
Does John USUALLY yell at micheal
93
Consensus
- we know John yelled at micheal, do other people
High consensus - other people yell at micheal
Low consensus - only John yells at micheal
94
To make an internal attribution
- Low consensus (other people don’t yell at micheal)
- Low distinctiveness (
High consistency
95
To make a target attribution
- High consensus
- High distinctiveness
- High Consistency
96
How to make a situation attribution
- Consensus high/low
- Distinctiveness high/low
Situation Low
97
How to target attribution
- High consensus
- High distinctiveness
High Consistency
98
What does it mean that the covariation model is a normative model
its saying that you need ALL three types of info (consensus, distinctiveness, consistency) to be able to make an attribution
99
A less normative model similar to covariate model of causal attribution.
Abnormal conditions focus model
100
Why did the abnormal conditions focus model come about
Less normative, you don’t ACTUALLY need all 3 pieces of info that the covariate model suggests (and we often do not have that information). We just need need to know what in that context is abnormal
101
Abnormal conditions focus model - Low consensus means....
Actor abnormal
(john yells, other people don’t, enough to assume its something about the actor - whats abnormal is HIS behaviour compared to everyone else
102
Abnormal conditions focus model - high distinctiveness means....
target abnormal
(john never ever yells, but he does yell at micheal = abnormal)
103
Abnormal conditions focus model - low consistency means....
Situation abnormal
104
Weiners attribution theory
explains how people interpret the causes of their successes and failures, especially in achievement contexts like school or work
105
Weiners 2 dimensions of attributions
Stability – Is the cause stable (likely to stay the same over time) or unstable (can change)?
Locus of Causality – Is the cause internal (within the person) or external (outside the person)?
106
The four common attribution types and where they sit on 2 dimensional scale
Ability (Internal, stable)
Task Difficulty (External, stable)
Effort (Internal, unstable)
Luck (external, unstable)
107
Weiners best attribution for growth
Effort (Internal, unstable)
Why?This is because effort is something you control and can change.
108
Self concept
all of an individuals knowledge about their personal qualities
109
Modern psychology's view of the self vs anscient view (multiple vs unitary construct)
Someone has argued that there are all of these different selves
- Social, spiritual, materialistic etc
Modern social psychology
- Not multiple "selves"
Instead, there is the self, and then there are different domains/roles
And then different attributes associated with the roles
110
How could you answer I am statements...
- Traits (honesty)
- Group Memberships/identitiy (woman)
- Physical characteristics (blonde)
- Relations (Mother)
- States of being (tired)
- Evaluations (a good person)
- Idiosyncratic things (individual unique things)
111
The Working Self Concept: Markus & Kunda
The self in any given moment is a part of the representational structure (as a whole). You can activate a portion of self concept (eg., relations) which then influences their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors in a specific situation
112
The working self concept - competetion vs congruency?
different situations = different poriton of same network activated
- Sometimes you get conflict between the representations (as different roles require different traits and charatceristics)
They are not ALWAYS in competition, and can coextist congruently
113
Sources of Self-Knowledge
Behaviour, internal states, other people, social identity
114
Bems Self perception theory
- We make inferences about our own likes/dislikes based on observations of our own behaviour
- More likely for things that are relatively novel, do not have established attitude
Eg., only buying orange clothing (without awareness of it) would suggest to you that maybe you like orange
115
Lepper, Greene & Nisbet Marker & reward daycare study findings & conclusions
Control & unexpected reward = similar (high) time of playing with markers
Individuals expected reward- played with markers significantly less
WHY?
- They made inference they only played with markers BECAUSE of reward
Undermined intrinsic motivation
Argument is that expected reward undermines intrinsic motivation
116
How does behaviour influence our self knowledge
- We can learn about ourselves based on observing our own behaviour
117
How do internal states influence our self knowledge
Our reactions to the world provide us with info, info we don’t have about other people. For other people, we need to rely on non-verbal behaviours, facial expressions, self reports to see if they like something
118
Valins study, need they be real (heartrate & woman)
If you think that noise is your physiological response, what does an increase in your actual HR indicate. For those participants who believed what they were hearing was their HR, the faster sound the more attractively they rated the respective woman. Didn’t even rate while getting that feedback, interpreted it and it came up later in ratings
119
Psychological-cognitive theory of emotion
Both arousal and interpretation of arousal are crucial in making judgements
120
What does the psychological cognitive theory of emotion propose
Proposes there is a stimulus, and that stimulus causes physiological arousal
The arousal is cognitively labelled, and then we feel emotion
121
Misattribution of arousal study, woman experimenter & swingbridge
Female experimenter conducting surveys
- End of study would give phone number to male participants, either before or after they crossed a scary swingbridge.
Condition 1, just crossed bridge, 65% called
Condition 2, not yet crossed bridge, 30% called
- For the men who came across the bridge, the bridge evoked fear which led to phsyiological arousal, and even when no longer in imminent danger, this arousal still present and can be interpreted as desire.
122
Residual arousal
People think they're back to physiological baseline LONG before they actually are
123
Zillman misattribution of arousal study (neutral, violent, erotic films & shock)
People who watched violent film = higher levels of shock given to lab based partner who they believed shocked them previously.
People who watched erotic film = EVEN higher level of shock than for violent
124
Schacter & Singher epinephrine waiting room study conclusion
When people had epinephrine arousal, they interpreted THEIR arousal as how the OTHER PERSON acted - and would either respond as angry or happy depending on how the confederate acted
125
Looking glass self (cooley)
We see ourselves how others see us
126
What is meta-accuracy and how accurate is it really
- The extent to which we know what other people think about us
We tend to think other people view us largely in the way we view ourselves (therefore meta-accuracy may not actually be that accurate)
127
Social comparison theory - Festinger, 1954
- We learn about the self by comparing the self to relevant others
- The goal here is accurate comparison
Eg., you wouldn't compare your basketball ability to Lebron James, but maybe the people in your team etc - need accurate point of judgement
128
Heinberg & Thompson body satisfaction study findings
Findings: Woman high in body dissatisfaction became more depressed when exposed to thin ideal
- Were comparing themselves to unattainable size
Woman who were high in awarness of societal standards about womens bodies felt much more anger when exposed to thin ideal
129
How does social identity influence our self concept
Part of learning about who we are as an individual is about learning who we are as a group member
130
(In)accuracy in predicting behaviours - Wilson et al poster study
No introspection - more likely to take art posters
Introspection - more likely to take a funny poster (as it is easier to introspect about funny posters as opposed to impressionist paintings)
People who had not introspected about their reason
- More satisfied with their choice
More likely to have hung u0
131
What kind of bias does the funny vs impressionest poster choice display
Accessibility biases, introspecting about one category is a lot easier vs harder than the other which leads us to make that sub-optimal choice
132
Self-expression and different situations
You convey your self concept through your actions, people tend to pick situations where they can display who you are
133
Self & partner appraisal - match vs mismatch
- People with positive views of themselves are more commited to the relationship when the partner also views positively (match)
- People with negative view of themselves are more commited to the relationship with the partner also views negatively (match)
If peoples views of us contradict our own, we can feel uncomfortable - not understood
134
2 motivations behind self-presentations in, say, an interview
Ingratiating - convey you are a likeable person
Self-promotion - convey competence, skill etc
135
Self expression vs Self presentation vs Self monitoring
Self-expression: "I am what I am"
Self-presentation
"I am what you want me to be"
Self-Monitoring
We often shape/change our behaviour to fit the situation
136
High self-monitors
"social butterfly" and can switch themselves depending on sitautions (i fit in here)
137
Low self-monitor
wants to convey an accurate impression "this is who I am" - and do not change their behaviour occasion to occasion (may be viewed as tactless, inappropriate - but.. this is who i am)
138
Lake Wobegon effect
People tend to view themselves above average on positive things, and below average on negative things, statistically not the case
139
3 primary classes of "threat" to the self
- Failures (let down)
- Inconsistencies (not living up to how you feel you should be)
Stressors (time pressure, general anxiety)
140
Negative life events & attribution (internal vs external)
- If you attribute it to global, uncontrollable, external cause
Leads to learned helplessness (no matter what I do, doesn't matter - uncontrollable external things keep me from being able to do)
- If you attribute it to global, uncontrollable internal cause
Dealing with lack of control, but cannot blame on something external, more likely to cause negative internal affect (ie., deppression)
141
Self evaluation Maintenance Theory
We can have threats based on others performance. Threats greatest when self defining & person who does better than you is a close other (anyone you are psychological close with - good friend, partner, sister)
142
3 things you can do if self-concept is threatened
1. Distance yourself from the other (we not that close anyway)
2. Reduce relevance of task to self (I don’t care about tennis, other things are more important)
Sabotage performance of other
143
Three self guides (self discrepancy theory)
Actual self (who you perceive yourself to be)
Ideal self (self you want to be)
Ought self (self you feel society/parents think you should be)
144
Actual-ideal self mismatch
Disappointment & sadness --> lowered self esteen --> depression --> poor immune function
145
Actual-ought mismatch
Guild & embarassment --> lowered self esteem --> anxiety --> poor immune function
146
Actual-ideal mismatch vs actual-ought mismatch & resulting arousal
Actual-ideal mismatch = decreasing arousal (lowered affect = depression & anorexia)
Actual-ought mismatch = increasing arousal (heightened arousal = anxiety & bulimia)
147
What buffers stress/threat of inconsistencies
- Higher self-esteem
- Optimists
- Self-complexity
148
What is a danger personality type to stress
Type A - aggressive, controlling, impatient
149
Self complexity theory Linville
Individuals vary in how many self-domains they have, the more interconnected domains, the greater the 'protective value'
150
Why does have higher self-complexity benefit individuals
Individuals with higher self-complexity tend to experience less negative impact from stressful life events, as positive or unaffected self-aspects can compensate for negative one
151
Why is low self complexity bad
Emotional extremes are NOT good for us. Even though lower self complexity may be EXTREMELY happy if something good happens in one domain (as its so defining) balance is good and we do not operate well under emotional extremes
152
Immune neglect
- People are unaware that the psychological immune system is working
- BECAUSE we are unaware of this, we overestimate how long we will feel in a bad way for
153
Fading affect bias
The faster fading of unpleasant affect than pleasant affect - an example of the psychological immune system getting rid of negative affect
154
Why fading affect bias is evolutionary
Negative emotions are VERY functional at the time - allow us to react, stronger emotions = stronger reaction. We WANT to maintain the information from event but do not want to maintain the affect
155
3 threats to the self
- stressors
- Failures
- Inconsistencies
156
Emotion focused coping
- Dealing with the emotion of threat/stressor
Less focused on finding a solution, but more just dealing with the emotion
157
How does emotion focused coping work (3 options)
- Escape from threat
- Ignore/downplay threat ("its not really that important to me")
Engage in distraction (exercising, substance use, risky behaviour)
158
Problem-focused coping
- Not fixing the problem, but explaining it away
Does not fix problem, but no longer views problem as a problem
159
How do we do problem focused coping
Engage in self-enhancing attributions (biased evaluations and making excuses)
- Making attributions (nothing to do with me, I just got unlucky)
160
Self Handicapping
The tendency to put things in the way of a test - helps people have a built-in excuse in case they do not do well
161
Self Handicapping study on test scores findings
High self handicappers showed:
- Less test preparation
- Less time spend studied
Unsurprisingly = performed more poorly of the test
- Attributed failure to lack of preparation and NOT their ability
162
Attributions to ability in self-handicappers when failing or successful
Failure: Preparation > ability
Success: Ability > preparation
163
Counterfactual thinking
Compare negative events to things that might/could have happened. These comparisons help us determine how we feel about these events.
164
Upward counterfactual
Comparing what happened to a reality in which things could have been better, in identifying this cause, makes us better prepared for the future.
165
Downward counterfactual
At least... didn't happen
- Does not help you prepare for future, but does make you feel better now
166
Cognitive dissonance theory
- Holding two conflicting beliefs in the mind results in tension
This tension motivates us to get rid of the inconsistency, which helps get rid of the tension
167
How to alleviate tension caused by cognitive dissonance
Alleviate one that is easiest to change. For example, holding thoughts "I smoke" and "smoking causes cancer" causes dissonance. You can either change behaviour or belief and its often easier to downplay connection/evidence (beleif) as opposed to changing behaviour)
168
Heider (1958): Balance theory
People have a preference for consistency
169
Why do people have a preference for consistency (heiders balance theory)
- Need for effective action (planning, predict & control)
- Fulfills a need for coherence (mastery, predict & control)
170
Festinger & Carlsmith - pegboard study
Aim: Test cognitive dissonance theory.
Method: Participants did a boring peg-turning task, then were paid $1 or $20 to lie and say it was fun to the next participant.
Results: Those paid $1 rated the task as more enjoyable than those paid $20.
Conclusion: $1 group had insufficient justification for lying → experienced dissonance → changed attitude to reduce discomfort. $20 group had external justification → no attitude change.
171
4 necessary steps to dissonance
- Perceived inconsistency (more often if things are not done together (time difference etc = no perceived inconsistency)
- Personal responsibility (if your doing something out of choice = no personal responsibility)
- Arousal (Physiological arousal as result of tension - or tension too small to cause arousal)
Attribution (have to attribute arousal to the inconsistency)
172
Control, Pill & No Pill conditions in Zanna & Coopers Study
No pill = control.
- Normal dissonance
- Greater attitude change for high choice than low choice
- If we TOLD we have to write essay = no personal responsibility = no tension felt
Pill = relaxed
- Increased dissonance for both groups (same trend just stronger)
- People are expecting to feel calm, but instead feel tense. They then attribute this tense feeling towards their behaviour which was inconsistent with their beliefs
Pill = tension
- Decreased dissonance ( did not attribute physiological arousal to the inconsistency)
173
What does Zanna and Cooper's dissonance pill study demonstrate
- Importance of attribution
- Physiological arousal
- Personal responsibility
174
Effort justification effect
"I suffered for it… so I must like it"
examples: Toxic relationship, military training, initiation rituals
175
Aronson & Mills Psychology of Sex study findings
3 "screening" procedures for discussion group on sex pyschology - either allocated to "none" "easy" or "difficult" and then had to listen to boring tape discussion about crustacean test
Findings:
- People who went though stressful initiation procedure reported liking group more than other two conditions
Effort was justified by ranking group more positively
176
Why did people rate liking "psychology of sex" group more if they had to go through a difficult screening process
Effort justification effect
177
Effort & weightloss study
- Control & low effort group = not many changes at all
- High effort group = significantly different over year duration
Individuals perceived themselves as more dedicated to the process
178
ABC of group perception
A = Prejudice
- Affective
- Evaluation
B = Behavioural
- Discrimination
C = Cognitive
Stereotype
179
Are stereotypes accurate
They can be (sometimes they're not) but if they are accurate, we often overestimate and exaggerate those differences
180
What is the problem associated with sex and gender differences
Problem is, when you identify gender different (based on socialisation), people take it as a biological difference
181
Natural kinds
The essence of that thing does not change when you change what it is
182
Artefacts
NO essentialness, cannot break it apart and have it still exist
183
A few places stereotypes come from
Categorisation, Personal Experience/interaction, Emotion, Role justification
184
How does categorisation play into stereotyping
- We seek patterns
-We create categories to more easily navigate the world
- Mental representation = possibility of inductive potential (allows a sense of control)
We don’t know people individually, but group them into categories allow us to have a sense of knowing
185
How do stereotypes arise from personal experience/interaction
Through salient members and salient information - The common/not at all salient/non-threatening/non-dangerous majority are LESS salient than the small proportion that is violent
Loudest people = most extreme = get most attention
186
Rothbard stereotype study 40 people & 10 criminals
Group with more serious criminal behaviour was estimated to have a lot more criminals in it than other group
- Even though the same criminals, because crimes were so serious they COLOUR the rest of the group due to their salience (accessibility)
187
Hamilton & Gifford: Illusory correlation study (A & B groups)
B = minority group = heavily overestimated the negative behaviours.
Salient group crossed with salient info (Group B and Negative Information) = a lot easier to remember due to accessibility
188
Incidental affect (part of interaction) and stereotype
Any emotion that involves increased physiological arousal produces greater stereotyping
- Increased arousal - takes away capacity to not let stereotype effect you
189
Depressive accuracy effect and stereotyping
Sadness - far less stereotypical in their judgements. Sadness increases our motivation, engage in more thought (depressive accuracy effect)
190
Mood and illusory correlation
When people have high physiological arousal through fear anxiety or happiness,
are more likely to perceive a relationship between two variables when no such relationship exists
191
Orithians and Ackmians experiment on social roles and stereotyping
Orithian = nurturing, affectionate, gentle
Ackmians = competitiveness and ambitiousness
Asked "What happens when you have a child care/worker who does not do their typical role)
Idea = take societal roles & assume essentialist inference
- If orinithians are typically to childcare, they are essentially more nurturing
=A biological essentialist argument
192
Social learning & stereotypes & young children
Use stereotypes in absence of first hand knowledge. Television, books, news etc tell us true associations about society which we can pick up on (even young children who don’t understand)
193
Do children develop stereotypes earlier?
Children acquire stereotypical attitudes about things before they are able to perceptually distinguish between the categories
194
Learning stereotypes from the Media
Under-representation
Stereotypic representation
- Minority group & negative things shown = illusionary correlation creating stereotype
195
Subjective essentialism
we assume that the roles people take say something about their ESSENTIAL nature - who they are
196
Role justification and stereotypes
- All societies produce & maintain social & economic inequalities
Stereotypes justify these inequalities by providing a justification
197
"Just World Beliefs" and why do people hold them
The belief that people deserve what they get & get what they deserve
Provides a belief in a controllable world, and protect the self.
198
3 justification tendencies
Ego justification, group justification, system justification
199
System justification from minority versus majority perspective
From majority perspective
When we recognise inequalities, we might justify the "system/status quo" to view our advantage as earned. Just world hypothesis etc.
From minority perspective, implicit justification appears as they aknowledge inequality themselves and think of it and deserved
"other members of my group should work harder"
200
Latency bias in shoot no/shoot demo
- Longer to not shoot an unarmed black target than to not shoot unarmed white target
Longer to shoot a white armed target than to shoot a black armed target
201
Shooter errors in shoot/no shoot demo
- More errors shooting a black unarmed target than a white unarmed target
Less likely to not shoot an armed white target (when target was black and armed, didn’t make any mistakes at all)
202
Automatic activation of stereotype in context of black shootings
Black = associated with criminality and violence (societal level association)
Thus this stereotype is automatically activated and changes decision
- With black people, threshold is more conservative (more likely to shoot)
203
Eye tracking during shoot/no shoot demo
When target was black, trigger was typically pulled before their eye movement was directed towards the han
204
What activates a stereotype
- Presence of member of that group
- Group labels
- Symbols
- Flags
- Clothing
- Conflict (when two groups are in conflict, stereotypes will be activated)
Solo status/tokenism (ie., one black woman in a group of 20 white men)
205
Realistic conflict theory
Two minority groups in direct competition for a limited resource therefore cannot band together to gain power from majority
206
Relative deprivation theory
Perceived conflict
The idea that "they" are getting more than we are (see this with responses to equality movements)
207
Once activated, stereotypes affect....
- How quickly we percieve
- What we notice
- How we interpret what we notice
- What we remember
208
Remembering incongruent information for groups
Not like individuals where there is a memory bias for non-congruent info. When someone behaving in a stereotypically not-consistent behaviour, we tend to think "oh that’s not the whole group" and not accessible/not stored
209
How do stereotypes affect how we interpret info
Very true for ambiguous behaviours, help our brains chose and interpretation of this
210
Shifting standards in terms of stereotyping with protesting as an example
Different standards for different groups. White protestors vs people of colour = violet, anarchic, thugs = take the same behaviours and shift the standards based on our stereotype
211
Softballl & skill ambiguity study (stereotypes & shifting standards)
Tested male & female candidates with varying softball ability (low, medium, high).
High & low ability: Gender didn’t matter (clear performance).
Medium ability: Ambiguity -= men favored (more likely to play key roles) Subjectivity = more likely to conform to stereotypes
212
Attributional Differences & Group Justification (System Justification Theory)
When someone from a stereotyped group performs poorly → blamed on internal traits (e.g., “they’re just not good at it”).
When someone defies stereotypes → behaviour is scrutinised more closely or attributed to external factors (“they got lucky”)
213
How do stereotypes influence our inferences
Take away the need for individuating, we just make inferences about individuals based on group membership
214
Memory & stereotyping experiment ("nigel, doctor, caring")
Gave 5 stereotype consistent traits and 5 individual traits
Then asked people to recall as many traits as possible
Absent = no significant difference
Supraliminal = "nigel, doctor, caring" = way more likely to remember when overtly activated stereotype
Subliminal = "nigel, doctor label below consicous threshold through flash, caring" = still more likely to remember
215
How do we know that stereotypes free up processing capacity
Divided attention task while doing memorisation with stereotype/non-stereotype info. Faster reaction time when stereotype labels presented shows that stereotype freed up capacity to speed up reaction time
216
Encoding flexibility model (Sherman, 1998)
Once a stereotype has been activated, consistent information gets processed fast easy and fluently. This is because it frees up resources for thinking about those things that don't fit
The problem w this is most of the time we do not spend the extra time processing the inconsistent information
217
Out-group homogeneity effect
- Differences that do exist, as an outsider, are harder to perceive
(womans football team
218
Self-fulfillig prophecy and stereotypes
Perceiver forms expectations about target --> perceiver acts toward target based on expectations --> target responds so behaviour matches expectations and so on
219
Wor, Zanna & Cooper interiew black/white study 1
white participants interview either white or black candidates
- When candidates black = less well suited, less professional and competent
However, white students interviewing behaved differently depending on race of candidate (ie., interview sat further, less eye contact, engaged less, and gave signals of discomfort or nervousness
- THIS changes candidates behaviours
220
Wor, Zanna & Cooper interiew black/white study 2
Confederayes interviews of white pariticipants
- Some treated like black candidates from previous study
- ALL candidates are white, but some are being treated like the blacks were
- "applicants" rated by independnt judges
Found EXACT same thing as in study one
- Show its behaviour of others that can shape and drive stereotypic behaviour, not the person itself
221
Robbers Cave study, summer camp from hell
Boys split into 2 groups at summer camp. Created group identities (team names, flags). Social hierarchies and leaders emerged. Groups kept separate, then put in direct competition (e.g., sports, rewards) Tensions escalated—fights, hostility, even with prior friendships
222
Contact Hypothesis (Allport)
Idea is that contact can reduce prejudice
- Two groups that don’t like each other, all you need to do is let individuals from those groups meet, have contact with one another, learn that they're not all bad helps reduce this animosity
223
3 models of stereotyping change
- Bookkeeping model
- Conversion model
Subtyping model
224
Bookkeeping model:
Gradual change as disconfirming instances accumulate
- Each bit of disconfirming information makes small, gradual change to your stereotypes
225
Problem with the bookkeeping model
We are conservative (basic processing principle)
- We do not change our views easily. We can "explain away the inconsistencies"
- We see counter-stereotypic behaviour and instead of updating idea of group we explain it away as luck or chance
226
Conversion model
Sudden/dramatic change with critical disconfirmation
227
The problem with conversion model
"exception-to-the-rule"
- If someone is so disconfirming, so inconsistent with the stereotype
- Can easily say "that person isn't like the rest of them"
View disconfirming individual as not counting, they have no impact on stereotype of the grou
228
Subtyping model
Initial beliefs are applied less generally as subtypes accumulate
- - View of individual sub-groups can be positive, but removed = not like rest of group
- "this group that is more positive/more like me but doesn't represent group as a whole
229
The problem with subtyping model
Stereotype of group as a whole does not change. Can still think of the group as bad even if you perceive the subtypes are good
230
3 ways to overcome resistance to stereotype change
Repeated inconsistency, Widespread inconsistency, Being typical as well as inconsistent
231
How can Being typical as well as inconsistent overcome resistance to stereotype change
(helps to avoid "exception to the rule" mechanism)
232
How can Widespread inconsistency overcome resistance to stereotype change
Harder to subtype, if you can perceptually put discrepancies in particular type of group, you will do that. If there's no obvious grouping (and widespread) it makes it harder to subtype
233
How can repeated inconsistency overcome resistance to stereotype change
explaining away inconsistences is harder the more of them there is
234
When is gordon allports idea of contact enough to overcome stereotypes (3 conditions)
- Needs to be supported by authority
- Groups have to be of equal status
Cooperative tasks to blend the groups
235
How did sherif resolve tension between his two teams at the summer camp
- The only way they could get back to camp was to work together and pull the bus (achieve common goal)
This was most successful thing to get two groups to be friendly and not sabotage
236
Dunton & Fazio (1997) – Motivation to Control Prejudice Scale (two things)
- Concern with acting prejudice (motivated to not be biassed, align with their values)
Restraint to avoid dispute (motivated to supress/hide prejudice to avoid others making them feel bad)
237
Devine (1989) – Prejudice With & Without Compunction
Participants rated how they should vs would respond in biased situations
Found discrepancy between ideals and actual responses
Examined emotional reactions to this mismatch
238
Emotional Reactions to Prejudice Discrepancy – Devine (1989)
Low/moderate prejudice: Felt sad or guilty when actions didn’t match ideals
High prejudice: Felt angry, but at others for making them feel bad—not self-critical
Shows role of motivation in emotional regulation and change
239
Can we just supress stereotypes (Macrae supression stereotype)
Study asked participants to write a paragraph about someone heavily stereotyped ie., schizophrenic.
People COULD supress the stereotype, but its like holding a ball underwater. As soon as you are no longer actively supressing (and when theres another task when the activated stereotype could effect judgement) people actively supressing were more streotypic in next task
240
Optimal Distinctiveness Theory
Brewer argues we have two opposing needs
- Affiiliation need to feel similar
- Distinctiveness need to feel unique
241
Levels of Categorisation + outgroups and ingroups
Categorisation exists on a continuum: Personal (unique self) Social (group identity) Human (shared humanity) A person can be ingroup or outgroup depending on the level used We rarely categorise at the human level — no comparison group, so no "us vs them"
242
Effects of Social Categorisation
- Once we identify as a group, we self stereotype (see self as typical of group)
See oneself as a group member
- increases loyalty and outgroup bias
243
Social Identity and Self-Esteem
Our group memberships influence self-worth
We strive for positive distinctiveness (seeing our group as better)
Positive group identity = higher self-esteem
244
Basking in Reflected Glory (BIRGing)
Boosting self-esteem through ingroup success
Example: “We won” after your sports team succeeds
Even without personal involvement, group wins feel like personal wins
245
What would a group with optimal distinctiveness look like
the group the fulfils both needs (group that makes you feel connected while also allowing you to feel unique)
246
What happens when forming groups, others become "we"
- Linked the self to others
- Think of how "I" is similar to others in the group
- How the others in the group are important to the self
Social identity links the self to others
247
Liking in-group members
- We like in-group members more than outgroup members
Nothing to do with getting to know someone, learning about them, but rather liking based solely on the fact that they're in the same group as you
248
How do people treat in group members
More likely to treat ingroup members fairly
More likely to help ingroup members
- Justice and altruism (what is best for me/what is best for my group starts to blur)
249
Maas - focus on language we use for in/out group (concrete vs abstract descriptions)
- Outgroup concrete descriptions
○ He kissed the other man
- Ingroup: More abstract terms
He comforted the other man (says something about his intention/personality
250
Idea of others becomming "them"
- Perceiving the out-groups as homogenous
- Out group homogeneity effect "they all look the same, they act the same)
In group = heterogenous
251
Social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner (if boundaries are permeable/fixed)
- If boundaries of group are permeable, people will leave
- If boundaries are fixed, negatively viewed groups can produce opposition
Fight for your group (if you can't leave = race/colour)
252
Minimal group paradigm (MGP)
People in two groups NO theres no meaningful basis for group a or b
- - Each individual given chance to allocate money to ingroup/outgroup members
Could either chose to maximise ingroup money (but outgroup would get more), equitable, or relative gain. People aren't motivated by equity, or absolute gain, but rather having relative gain (more than other group)
253
Self esteem & social identity theory
1. Low self esteem individuals should show more bias that high self esteem (in order to try gain this self esteem, but HSE try to maintain)
2. In group bias should increase self esteem (more people make ingroup better than outgroup = feel better)
254
What are the negative impacts that stereotypes have on minorities
On all 3 dimensions - mental, physical and systemic.
Mental
- Depression, anxiety, ED, SUD, Suicide
Physical
- Diabetes, attacks, cardiovascular issue, early deaths
Systemic effects
- Unfair laws, poverty, economic ops, healthcare services
255
Minority stress theory
The link between minorities and these negative outcomes is internal and external stressors
256
Minoritised identity as part of the minority stress theory
- Anything that renders you "other" by society
- Intersectionality - may be compounded identity = combined unique form of prejudice (black woman is marginalised for being black, being a woman, and for being a black woman)
257
External stressors as part of the minority stress theory
- Systems of prejudice that render them minoritised
- Unfair laws, prejudice statements
Micro prejudice = make feel "other" or "excluded"
258
What is the influence of exclusion on minority people
Ball toss exclusion game found that persistent exclusion causes harm at every occurrence, doesn’t decrease or increases, becomes a constant, high level of hurt
259
Internal stressors as part of the minority stress theory
- Internal messages become part of your own self concept
Create cognitive dissonance (you may know stereotypes are not true, but its hard not to internalise these prejudices). overall just implicit attitudes that may tell us bad things about ourselves
260
Clark and clack study on black children and dolls (internal stressors)
○ Wanted to see ingroup preference for black doll
○ Over 50% said black doll looked back, general preference for white doll over black doll
Showed: Systems of prejudice are internalised, decreasing self worth
261
How do internal and external stressors interact - minority stress model
Internal and external stressors cycle around and around and create minority stress
262
How does van der tool idea of Foucault's panopticon link to idea idea of of internal and external stress
Design for prison where central guard tower in middle, and all cells form circle around guard tower. Results in hypervigilant and self-policing because could be watched at any point.
This is what the cycle of internal/external stress does for minoritised individuals. Prejudice becomes pervasive and causes hypervigilance
We are socialised into heteronormativity
263
How does external and internal stress lead to adverse outcomes
- By being minoritised, the system of that creates all this stress that feed into each other into turbulent state, and because of this leads to; depression, anxiety, suicide, SUD
264
Stereotype threat study (math test & woman) and how this links to minority stress theory
Minority identity: woman
External stressor: Reminded of stereotype "woman are bad at math:
Internal stressor: Pressure to perform, self doubt "im a woman, I wont do well," exclusion
External stressor trigger internal stressor = minority stress activated
Result: Poor performance, woman did worse on math test than people in control condition
265
Ambivalent stereotype
- If we only had bad stereotypes, we wouldn’t see these systems thrived
Theres also nice things, but these create pressure (what if you don't live up to good part of stereotype).
- this means the stress never really goes away
266
Critique of minority stress theory
Fatalistic
267
3 mitigation strategies for minoritised individuals
Concealment, disidentifying, social change
268
What is concealment in stereotype mitigation
Minimising identity to the point where you can hide it, so people do not KNOW you are part of minoritised identit
269
Issues with concealment to manage prejudice
- Increased sense of isolation/loneliness
- Imposter syndrome, heightened risk of being found out
270
Disidentifying to mitigate stereotyping
When you can not fully conceal, you can distance yourself from identity in bunch of different ways. Concept of Oreo - someone who is Black but acts White - adopting behaviours and mannerisms from powerful group.
271
Issues with disidentifying to mitigate stereotyping
Can lead to lateral violence, or ingroup prejudice
- Minority groups = too busy fighting each other and then cant actually fight the system
272
Social change to mitigate prejudice
Create equity and equality on system level, a lot of risks that come with this
273
Examples of social change to mitigate prejudice (and problems with it)
- Going to protests
- Increasing representation
- Changing curriculums
- Who's stories are being told, what voices are being silenced
- Having conversations with people you don’t agree with (potential for cutoff)
- High risk, high reward
274
Why may social safety perspective be better than minority stress theory
There is no pathway based on meyers stress model for the stress to cease to exist. This is fatalistic and almost dooms minoritised to stressful experience
275
Social Safety Perspective (Diamond and Alley)
- As humans beings, our default disposition is to be stressed (regardless of identity)
- Not necessarily about stopping stress, but creating safety to allow people to disengage from system
276
Social threat, objective
- Discriminatory laws
- Rejection but religious faith
Hearing derogatory jokes
277
Social threat, subjective
- Fear of mistreatment in public places
- Fear of loosed connection and salvation
Fear of disrespect and loss of safety
278
Social safety objective
- Hate crime legislation
- Welcoming faith communities
Others speak up against jokes
279
Social safety subjective
- Systems defend me against justice
- I can be my full self in place of worship
- Others will defend me, I don’t always have to defend myself
Give people chance to breathe, to know you can be full self without judgement
PSYC221
flashcards
Decks in class (6)
# Cards
