Chapter 13. Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives. Social Psychology: Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives. Social Psychology:

Transcription

1 Chapter Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives Brief Outline The Nature of Social Psychology The Nature and Functions of Attitudes Attributions: Explaining and Interpreting Behavior Impression Formation Attraction, Liking, and Loving Social Psychology: Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives Personal Perspectives Brief Outline The Nature of Social Psychology The Nature and Functions of Attitudes Attributions: Explaining and Interpreting Behavior Impression Formation Attraction, Liking, and Loving The Nature of Social Psychology social psychology The study of how others affect our thoughts, feelings and behaviors social psychology Examines cognitive, affective & behavioral aspects of humans Examines influence of others on human behavior Takes functional approach to behavior, not only how, but why people behave as they do 1

2 social cognition The study of cognition that pertains to self and others in the context of social situations Concerns thoughts and beliefs we have about ourselves and others How we perceive and interpret information about ourselves and others How these perceptions affect us social cognition Complex area interfaces with other areas of psychology such as emotion, cognition, motivation and personality Studies relationships from casual to friendships to romance Social Psychology: Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives Personal Perspectives Brief Outline The Nature of Social Psychology The Nature and Functions of Attitudes Attributions: Explaining and Interpreting Behavior Impression Formation Attraction, Liking, and Loving The Nature and Functions of Attitudes Attitude Formation Attitude Change Cognitive Consistency Cognitive Dissonance Self-Perception Theory attitude A learned, stable, and lasting evaluation of a person, object, or idea. Not innate acquired through interactions and experiences Resistant to change Possess cognitive, affective, and behavioral components Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives The Nature and Functions of Attitudes Attitude Formation Attitude Change 2

3 Attitude Formation Learning theory accounts for much of attitude formation: Classical conditioning accounts for new attitudes developed when paired with existing attitudes Operant conditioning explains attitude formation in terms of rewards and punishers associated with adopting an attitude Attitude Formation Learning theory accounts for much of attitude formation: Observational learning both from live models and from media such as television and movies accounts for much of attitude formation Parents shapes attitudes largely through observational learning How can attitudes be changed? Studies in persuasion date back to World War II when it became necessary to understand the processes through which propaganda affected attitudes. Focused on the recipient of persuasive attempts, the persuasive message, and the source of the persuasive message. Attitude Change The Recipient The Message The Source Credibility Likability The Link between attitudes and behavior Culture, Time and Attitude The Recipient Petty and Cacioppo proposed persuasion occurs under two types of cognitive processing: Central route Peripheral route Central Route to Persuasion Emphasizes thoughtful arguments related to an issue. Motivated recipients are effectively approached with this route 3

4 Peripheral Route to Persuasion Emphasizes incidental properties of the message such as the attractiveness of the sender, attractiveness of the message presentation or the rewarding aspects of the message. May be better suited to an attitude change in subjects who are unmotivated about an issue Central or Peripheral? In either case, stronger arguments are more effective than weaker arguments Strong arguments brought on greater change in those who process centrally Central attitude change tends to last longer than peripheral change. Attitude Change The Recipient The Message The Source Credibility Likability The Link between attitudes and behavior Culture, Time and Attitude The Message Much research has focused on the presentation of a balanced argument (pros and cons) versus one-sided arguments. Arguments that give a balanced presentation of viewpoints appear to be no more persuasive to subjects that are predisposed to agree or disagree, but more effective countering effects of later persuasive attempts Repeated Exposure Generally, repeated exposure tends to promote attitude change in favor of the message, an effect called the mere exposure effect. Long-term exposure to repeated messages can however reverse the effect if subjects become bored or annoyed. Attitude Change The Recipient The Message The Source Credibility Likability The Link between attitudes and behavior Culture, Time and Attitude 4

5 The Source Credibility Hovland and Weiss: Persuasive sources high in credibility or high believability are more effective than sources low in credibility. Credibility effects are greatest immediately after delivery of a persuasive message. The Source - Likability Eagly and Chaiken: Most subjects are more easily persuaded by messages from people they like than by people they do not like. Likability effect especially important is in effecting attitude change in people who find the original position unappealing. Likability more persuasive in video than audio. No effect in written media. Interaction Between the Medium of the Message and the Likability of the Message Sender Attitude Change Attitude Change The Recipient The Message The Source Credibility Likability The Link between attitudes and behavior Culture, Time and Attitude Link Between Attitudes & Behavior Factors which increase the likelihood of a behavior occurring because of an attitude: Attitude Strength Stronger attitudes more likely to be reflected in behavior Information & experience Attitudes formed because of high levels of information or experience are likely to be reflected in behavior Link Between Attitudes & Behavior Factors which increase the likelihood of a behavior occurring because of an attitude: Attitude Specificity The more specific an attitude is, the more likely behavior supporting that attitude will occur. Situational Factors Proximate events may have strong effects on behavior despite any attitudes possessed. 5

6 Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives cognitive consistency theory The Nature and Functions of Attitudes Attitude Formation Attitude Change Cognitive Consistency Festinger & Carlsmith: People try to match their actions to their thoughts. Cognitive Consistency Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives The Nature and Functions of Attitudes Attitude Formation Attitude Change Cognitive Consistency Cognitive Dissonance The Classic Experiment on Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive Dissonance Qualifying Conditions for Cognitive Dissonance Qualifying Conditions for Cognitive Dissonance (continued) 6

7 Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives self-perception theory The Nature and Functions of Attitudes Attitude Formation Attitude Change Cognitive Consistency Cognitive Dissonance Self-Perception Theory Bem: If people are unsure, they infer their beliefs from their behavior. self-perception theory Using Bem s self-perception theory to explain Festinger and Carlsmith s classic experiment, those who lied for $20 obviously did it for the money. Those who did it for $1 did not do it for the money, therefore they must have enjoyed the task and therefore did not lie. Dialectic Approach In tradition of dialectic, Fazio, Zanna & Cooper synthesize cognitive dissonance theory and self-perception theory. Cognitive dissonance seems to better explain attitude change while selfperception theory better explains attitude formation. Social Psychology: Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives Personal Perspectives Brief Outline The Nature of Social Psychology The Nature and Functions of Attitudes Attributions: Explaining and Interpreting Behavior Impression Formation Attraction, Liking, and Loving Attributions: Explaining and Interpreting Behavior The Nature of Attributions 7

8 attribution The act of assigning cause to behavior about others, as well as, about ourselves Fritz Heider One can make one of two kinds of attributions about the causes of behavior: Personal or dispositional attribution Situational or external attribution Dispositional attribution We won the football game because we have a high level of natural talent, we carefully studied our opponents strengths and weaknesses, and we paid the price of hard work and commitment by doubling our hours of practice. Situational Attribution We lost the football game because of poor calls by the officials and the bad luck of having injuries to key players on our team. Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives Heuristics Attributions: Explaining and Interpreting Behavior The Nature of Attributions Attribution Heuristics And Biases No one takes all factors into account when making attributions. We cannot, so we tend to use heuristics or rules of thumb we speculate. Although these heuristics allow us to make attributions quickly, they often lead us to make mistakes 8

9 Attribution Heuristics & Biases Social desirability The Fundamental Attribution Error Actor-Observer Effect Self Serving Bias Self-Handicapping Social Desirability Undesirable behavior of others is weighed far more heavily than is desirable behavior in the attribution process. When we see someone who is unkempt, rude or sloppy, we may discount their more positive qualities. Attribution Heuristics & Biases Social desirability The Fundamental Attribution Error Actor-Observer Effect Self Serving Bias Self-Handicapping Fundamental Attribution Error Tendency to overemphasize trait information and consequently deemphasize situational information when making attributions Example: driving slowly in traffic Attribution Heuristics & Biases Social desirability The Fundamental Attribution Error Actor-Observer Effect Self Serving Bias Self-Handicapping Actor-Observer Effect An extension of the fundamental attribution error We are more likely, according to this bias, to attribute external causes to behavior in ourselves (the actors), than we are to behavior of others (the observed). 9

10 Actor-Observer Effect Jones and Nisbett (1971): We know more about ourselves than we know about others, therefore we make a more sophisticated judgment of ourselves. In the case of others, not having that same knowledge, we revert to personality explanations. Actor-Observer Effect Some evidence suggests that we may extend the actor-observer effect to groups that we identify with. Actor-Observer Effect Islam and Hewstone (1993) found that Muslim and Hindu students in Bangladesh were likely to attribute good behaviors to dispositional causes and bad behaviors to external causes for members of a group with which they identified. They made the reverse attributions for groups with which they did not identify. Attribution Heuristics & Biases Social desirability The Fundamental Attribution Error Actor-Observer Effect Self Serving Bias Self-Handicapping Self Serving Bias In making attributions for our own behavior, we tend to be generous and attribute positive effects to ourselves, while attributing negative effects to situational factors or to others. The self-serving bias also has the function of promoting self-confidence, which may be important to our successes Self Serving Bias Not all cultures are as likely to engage in the self-serving bias Markus and Kitayama (1991) found that Japanese students are less likely than American students to engage in the selfserving bias. 10

11 Attribution Heuristics & Biases Social desirability The Fundamental Attribution Error Actor-Observer Effect Self Serving Bias Self-Handicapping Self-Handicapping Actions made to sabotage success are indicative of self-handicapping It is thought that self-handicapping provides one with excuses that can be later used to self-justify failure or potential failure. Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives Brief Outline The Nature of Social Psychology The Nature and Functions of Attitudes Attributions: Explaining and Interpreting Behavior Impression Formation Attraction, Liking, and Loving Impression Formation Forming Impressions Social Comparison Forming Impressions Forming Impressions Impression formation explains how we form opinions of others from information that is obtained both directly and indirectly. Solomon Asch: A model of impression formation Heuristics and Biases The Primacy Effect Confirmation Bias Person-Positivity Bias 11

12 Solomon Asch: A model of impression formation Asch s seminal study (1946) on impression formation led to the concept of central traits, or traits that seem to have more effect than do others on impression formation Found that words warm and cold in a description of a person led to a major change in how a person was perceived. Forming Impressions Solomon Asch: A model of impression formation Heuristics and Biases The Primacy Effect Confirmation Bias Person-Positivity Bias Heuristics and Biases As with attributions discussed earlier, people also use heuristics to help them form impressions, and those heuristics can lead to bias. Forming Impressions Solomon Asch: A model of impression formation Heuristics and Biases The Primacy Effect Confirmation Bias Person-Positivity Bias The Primacy Effect Asch (1946) First impressions are powerful, and they tend to demonstrate the primacy effect. The tendency to allow initial impressions to bias future impressions, applies to impressions of both others and their personality Intelligent Industrious Impulsive Critical Stubborn Envious Envious Stubborn Critical Impulsive Industrious Intelligent 12

13 The Primacy Effect Why does early information have a stronger effect on impression formation than later information? One explanation: our use of schemas. When we first meet someone, we take the first available information about them and begin to form a schema for that person. The Primacy Effect Once formed, we tend to assimilate additional information into that schema which means that the schema is used to interpret our subsequent interactions with that person. When we receive additional information that is quite discrepant from our initial schema, we don t abandon the schema. The Primacy Effect We modify our original schema or begin a new schema, but the original impression is not entirely abandoned. First impressions are quite enduring. Forming Impressions Solomon Asch: A model of impression formation Heuristics and Biases The Primary Effect Confirmation Bias Person-Positivity Bias Confirmation Bias Also helps to explain the endurance of first impressions Confirmation bias occurs when we keep our first impressions of others through selective attention to and remembering of information that confirms our initial impressions. Confirmation Bias This bias is common and probably saves us the time necessary to really understand others. Confirmation bias often leads to selffulfilling prophecy, a prediction that we make come true.

14 Confirmation Bias If you expect someone to be mean, you may behave toward that person in a cool, aloof, and self-protective manner. This coldness on your part may elicit unkind behaviors from that person that confirm your initial impression of him or her as being mean. Forming Impressions Solomon Asch: A model of impression formation Heuristics and Biases The Primary Effect Confirmation Bias Person-Positivity Bias Person-Positivity Bias This is when we perceive individual members of groups more positively than the group to which they belong. This bias helps to explain ethnic and racial prejudice, in that even when we meet a minority member that we really like, we still do not abandon our negative stereotype for the whole group. Person-Positivity Bias We tend to simply note that this individual does not conform to the stereotype We allow the stereotype to remain in effect for the other members of the group with whom we do not have positive and personal knowledge. Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives Social Comparison Impression Formation Forming Impressions Social Comparison Festinger s Social Comparison Theory (1954) How we judge ourselves in new and unusual situations. We observe others and make comparisons to our performance. Our self-esteem in these situations is dependent upon our models for comparison. 14

15 Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives From How to Make Yourself Miserable by Dan Greenberg Brief Outline The Nature of Social Psychology The Nature and Functions of Attitudes Attributions: Explaining and Interpreting Behavior Impression Formation Attraction, Liking, and Loving Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives Forces Influencing Attraction Attraction, Liking, and Loving Forces Influencing Attraction Theories of Liking and Interpersonal Attraction Types of Love Mere Exposure Effect Arousal Proximity Physical Attractiveness Similarity Mere Exposure Effect Predicts that we will be most attracted to those with whom we are familiar. Forces Influencing Attraction Mere Exposure Effect Arousal Proximity Physical Attractiveness Similarity 15

16 Arousal Dutton & Aron (1974) Experiment to demonstrate the effects of arousal on attraction. Experimental group men cross over rickety dangerous bridge Control group men cross over a nonthreatening bridge Arousal After crossing bridge, subjects met by male or female experimenter, asked a few questions and to write a short story in response to a picture. After completing tasks, subjects given experimenter s home phone number and told to call if they wanted more info on the experiment Arousal Men who had been made afraid by the rickety bridge and who had been interviewed by the female experimenter wrote stories that were higher in sexual imagery and were more likely to call the female experimenter at home. Appears that subjects attributed their arousal to the woman instead of their fear. Implications? Considering Dutton and Aron s experiment, how could this misattribution of arousal be used to foster romantic attraction in another? How can it explain romances that initially blossom and then quickly fizzle? Forces Influencing Attraction Mere Exposure Effect Arousal Proximity Physical Attractiveness Similarity Proximity Geographical proximity an important factor in attraction. Festinger, Schachter and Back (1950) found that friendships were more likely to be formed between dorm residents at M.I.T. whose rooms were close together. Probably affects attraction through providing opportunity to meet and through the mere exposure effect. 16

17 Forces Influencing Attraction Mere Exposure Effect Arousal Proximity Physical Attractiveness Similarity Physical Attractiveness Though many people deny it, physical attractiveness is a powerful determinant of romantic attraction. Physically attractive people are rated more favorably than unattractive people over a wide variety of attributes. But actual components of what makes one attractive show wide cultural variation Physical Attractiveness The positive effects of attractiveness diminish over the course of a relationship and are replaced by other factors, such as flexibility and compatibility. Forces Influencing Attraction Mere Exposure Effect Arousal Proximity Physical Attractiveness Similarity Similarity Do opposites attract? It appears that we are most attracted to those who are most similar to us. Similarities in attitudes, temperament, social and communication skills, and sense of humor have all be found to be attractive to others, especially comparable communicative skills Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives Attraction, Liking, and Loving Forces Influencing Attraction Theories of Liking and Interpersonal Attraction Types of Love 17

18 Theories of Liking and Interpersonal Attraction Equity theory states that people will be more attracted to others when the relationship between them is fair or equitable. A relationship in the long run should provide relatively equal benefits and costs for both parties. If not, the relationship may end. Social Psychology: Personal Perspectives Attraction, Liking, and Loving Forces Influencing Attraction Theories of Liking and Interpersonal Attraction Types of Love Love The Evolutionary Value of Love Attachment Theory John Alan Lee: Types of Love Robert Sternberg: Triangular Theory of Love The Evolutionary Value of Love Couches love in terms of species survival Attempts to account for the protection of infants and lovers and the function of the sexual drive. Romantic love may account for the bonds which allow for procreation, but what kind of love accounts for the survival and education of the young? The Evolutionary Value of Love According to evolutionary theory, the female has more of an investment in each offspring a. She must bear the offspring during pregnancy b. She knows the offspring belong to her c. Across the species, the female is most involved in raising the offspring. Should seek mates with considerable resources The Evolutionary Value of Love Males have less investment a. Can produce more offspring than female can in a lifetime b. Can never be sure that particular offspring are theirs c. Across the species, less involved in raising the offspring. Should seek mates with signs of good health 18

19 Love The Evolutionary Value of Love Attachment Theory John Alan Lee: Types of Love Robert Sternberg: Triangular Theory of Love Attachment Theory Hazen and Shaver (1987) propose three kinds of love: a. Secure b. Avoidant c. Anxious-ambivalent Attachment Theory Secure lovers find it relatively easy to trust others, and so are able to form warm, intimate relationships Avoidant lovers find it difficult to trust others, therefore difficult to form intimate, reciprocal relationships The anxious-ambivalent lover desires extreme amounts of closeness, often driving partner away Love The Evolutionary Value of Love Attachment Theory John Alan Lee: Types of Love Robert Sternberg: Triangular Theory of Love Types of Love Love The Evolutionary Value of Love Attachment Theory John Alan Lee: Types of Love Robert Sternberg: Triangular Theory of Love Lee s Six Types of Love 19

20 Types of Love Nonlove = No components The Triangular Theory of Love The Triangular Theory of Love Infatuated Love = Passion Alone Liking = Intimacy Alone The Triangular Theory of Love The Triangular Theory of Love Empty Love = Commitment Alone Romantic Love = Passion+Intimacy The Triangular Theory of Love The Triangular Theory of Love 20

21 Companionate Love = Commitment + Intimacy Fatuous Love = Passion + Commitment The Triangular Theory of Love The Triangular Theory of Love Chapter 14 Social Psychology: Interpersonal 1 and Group Perspectives 4 Social Psychology: Interpersonal and Group Perspectives Brief Outline Groups Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience Prosocial Behavior Antisocial Behavior 14 Social Psychology: Interpersonal and Group Perspectives Brief Outline Groups Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience Prosocial Behavior Antisocial Behavior 14 Social Psychology: Interpersonal and Group Perspectives Groups Social Facilitation and Social Inhibition 21

22 Social Facilitation and Social Inhibition Social facilitation occurs when the mere presence of others improves an organism s performance on a task. Social inhibition occurs when the mere presence of same-species members inhibits an organism s performance. Not limited to humans, these effects have been demonstrated in cockroaches. Social Facilitation and Social Inhibition Zajonc (1965, 1980) explains that social facilitation and social inhibition are the result of arousal and learning level. Social Facilitation and Social Inhibition The presence of others is always arousing, but it has the opposite effects depending on our learning level. Well-practiced (dominant) responses will be facilitated, but poorly practiced (nondominant) responses will be inhibited. Other Theories Distraction Conflict Theory points to the distracting effects of the presence of others to explain the same phenomena. Others point to evaluation apprehension as a source of social inhibition in humans. The phenomenon is well-established, but the explanation is not. 14 Social Facilitation Social Facilitation and Social Interference 14 Social Psychology: Interpersonal and Group Perspectives Groups Social Facilitation and Social Interference Social Loafing 22

23 Social Loafing Social Loafing Often, when working with others, people will work less vigorously than they would if they worked alone. The reduction of effort as the size of the group increases is called social loafing. Latané (1979) studied the performance of individuals working alone, working in pseudogroups, and in groups. He found that subjects did not work as hard in groups or pseudogroups as they did working alone. Social Loafing Social loafing can be prevented or minimized by individualized performance evaluation. In some cultures, where collective orientations are emphasized such as in China, people actually work harder in groups than they do in Western cultures that emphasize individualist orientations. 14 Social Psychology: Interpersonal and Group Perspectives Groups Social Facilitation and Social Interference Social Loafing Group Polarization Resolving Conflicts in Groups Groupthink Group Polarization & Conflict Resolution Being a member of a group can affect the quality of judgments one makes. Group decision making shows a phenomenon called group polarization. Group interactions tend to intensify or polarize the net original opinion of the group members. Group Polarization & Conflict Resolution Risk-takers will take greater risks if they find themselves in a group of risk-takers (risky shift). Conservatives will take fewer risks if they find themselves in a group of conservatives. 23

24 Group Polarization Myers and Bishop found that groups initially composed of low-, medium-, and high-prejudice members followed the group polarization pattern. The low-group members were less prejudiced and the highgroup members were more prejudiced after group discussions Group Polarization Why does group polarization occur? 1. Exposure to new information that supports one s view may serve to intensify one s original opinion. 2. Conformity pressures within the group may elicit movement toward the group s norm and a subsequent strengthening of the group s initial opinion. Social Psychology: Interpersonal 14 and Group Perspectives Resolving Conflicts in Groups Groups Social Facilitation and Social Interference Social Loafing Group Polarization Resolving Conflicts in Groups Groupthink Typical methods of resolving conflicts within groups include the following: 1. Cooperative orientation one seeks to maximize his or her and others outcomes. 2. Individualistic orientation one seeks to maximize his or her own outcomes Resolving Conflicts in Groups Typical methods of resolving conflicts within groups include the following: 3. Competitive orientation one seeks to maximize his or her own outcome while minimizing others outcomes. 4. Altruistic orientation one seeks to exclusively maximize others outcomes. 14 Social Psychology: Interpersonal and Group Perspectives Groups Social Facilitation and Social Interference Social Loafing Group Polarization Resolving Conflicts in Groups Groupthink 24

25 Groupthink Groupthink occurs when a cohesive ingroup seeks to have unanimity of opinion more than anything else. Janis (1972) cited the following conditions as conducive to groupthink: An isolated, powerful, decision-making group The lack of impartial leadership High levels of stress on the group Groupthink Six Symptoms of Groupthink Antidotes for Groupthink Six Symptoms of Groupthink 1. Close-mindedness: Not being open to new ideas 2. Rationalization: Heroic efforts to justify group opinion; may distort the reality process 3. Squelching of dissent: Dissenters are ignored, criticized, or ostracized Six Symptoms of Groupthink 4. Formation of mindguard : Appointment of keeper of group norm to ensure the rest of the group stays in line. 5. Feeling invulnerable: Belief that the group is right, given the intellectual power of the members and available information. 6. Feeling unanimous: Everyone in group believes group opinions are shared by all. Groupthink Six Symptoms of Groupthink Antidotes for Groupthink Antidotes to Groupthink Janis believed groupthink errors could be minimized by the leader: Encouraging criticism Being impartial Having the group look outside itself for anwers Breaking the group into subgroups, each meeting separately to consider alternative solutions 25

26 Janis: Examples of Groupthink Bay of Pigs fiasco during Kennedy Administration Mass suicide at Jonestown in Guyana in 1978 Heaven s Gate mass suicide Historical Examples of Groupthink Although Chinese warned of retaliatory attacks, President Truman still made the decision to invade North Korea in 1950 Escalation of the Vietnam War in the 1960s by President Johnson Nixon s attempted cover-up of Watergate Historical Examples of Groupthink NASA s decision to send up Challenger launch, despite warnings from engineers regarding safety of the O-rings in freezing temperatures. The War in Iraq? 14 Groupthink Janis s Groupthink Social Psychology: Interpersonal 14 and Group Perspectives Conformity Brief Outline Groups Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience Prosocial Behavior Antisocial Behavior Group Size As the group increases in size, conformity tends to increase, up to about 3 or 4 members, then remain fairly constant. Cohesiveness group members mutual attraction for the group. The more cohesive the group, the stronger the pressures to conform. 26

27 Conformity Gender Both men and women are more likely to conform when unfamiliar with the topic. Eagly (1987) found women more likely to conform due to feelings of inferiority. Social status High- and low-status members are less likely to conform. High less pressure? Low- given up on fitting in? Conformity Culture People from individualistic cultures seem less likely to conform, though not all studies show this pattern. Unanimity When faced with unanimous pressure, subjects more likely to conform Conformity Idiosyncrasy A minority group within a larger group can have considerable influence on decisions, especially if the minority group is persistent and shows some openness to majority views. Asch: Experiment on Conformity Solomon Asch (1951, 1956) Subjects told they are in an experiment on perception actually experiment on conformity One subject, rest in group confederates Will subject conform to obvious wrong answer? 14 Conformity 14 Social Psychology: Interpersonal and Group Perspectives Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience Conformity Compliance Obedience Line Length and Normative Influence 27

28 Compliance When people give in to simple requests made by others. Techniques for Eliciting Compliance 1. Justification Justify your request. Even if your justification is weak, you will gain compliance more readily than if you simply make the request and don t justify it. 2. Reciprocity Appear to be giving the other person something, to instill a sense of obligation toward you. Techniques for Eliciting Compliance 3. Low-ball Get the person to commit to a deal under circumstances that you present as entirely favorable. After obtaining the person s commitment, you reveal the hidden costs or other drawbacks. 4. Foot-in-the-door Ask for compliance with a small request, which softens up the person for the big request. Techniques for Eliciting Compliance 5. Door in the Face Make an outlandishly large request that is almost certain to be rejected, in hope of getting the other person to accede to a more reasonable, but still substantial request. Techniques for Eliciting Compliance 6. That s Not All Offer something at a high price and then, before the other person has the chance to respond, throw in something else to sweeten the deal 7. Hard to get Convince the other person that whatever you are offering (or trying to get rid of) is very difficult to obtain. 14 Social Psychology: Interpersonal and Group Perspectives Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience Conformity Compliance Obedience 28

29 Stanley Milgram (1974) Classic experiment on obedience. Subjects obeyed Milgram s requests to a level far beyond that predicted by him or others. 14 Obedience The Shocking Treatment of Mr. Wallace 14 Milgram s Baseline Results on Voltage Levels Obedience 14 Social Psychology: Interpersonal and Group Perspectives Brief Outline Groups Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience Prosocial Behavior Antisocial Behavior Social Psychology: Interpersonal 14 and Group Perspectives Kitty Genovese Slaying Prosocial Behavior Offering Help: Bystander Intervention The effects of others actions The effect of time In 1964, Kitty Genovese was killed over the course of a half-hour within earshot of at least 38 witnesses in her apartment complex in New York City. The incident spurred research on inaction of bystanders. Darley and Latané discovered the Bystander Effect. 29

30 Offering Help: Bystander Intervention 14 The Effects of Others Actions Latané and Darley s Five-Step Decision Model of Intervention When we witness someone in need of help, we use others reactions to help us interpret the situation. If we see that no one else is doing anything, we may falsely believe that inaction indicates there is no need for action The Effect of Time In a study by Darley and Batson (1973) a level of hurry was manipulated in seminary students and then they were presented a situation in which a confederate appeared to need help. Only 10% of those in a hurry stopped to help, whereas 63% who were not in a hurry stopped to help. 14 Seizing the Opportunity to Help Offering Help: Bystander Intervention Social Psychology: Interpersonal 14 and Group Perspectives Altruism Prosocial Behavior Offering Help: Bystander Intervention Altruism The willingness to help, even when there is no apparent benefit to do so Altruistic behavior may be diminishing in America due to the perceived dangers of helping others 30

31 Altruism There are many examples of altruistic behavior, but what motivates it? Cialdini (1997) proposes that altruistic behaviors are motivated by one not wishing to feel the sadness that empathy creates when we see someone in need of help. Altruism Batson (1989) says that empathetic people will help others, even when they expect that their moods will be improved through means other than helping. Williams (1966) suggests that one function of altruism may be to capitalize on reciprocity. If one helps another, then reciprocity dictates that the favor be returned. Social Psychology: Interpersonal 14 and Group Perspectives Peace Making Prosocial Behavior Offering Help: Bystander Intervention Altruism Peace Making Peace Psychology is a new branch of psychology, devoted to how psychological knowledge can be used to make peace among individuals, organizations, and nations. 3 Steps to Peace Making 1. Care about others points of views. 2. Actively seek to understand other people s points of view. 3. The desire to do something to reduce and resolve hostilities. GRIT Social psychologist Charles Osgood s strategy for hostility reduction: Graduated and Reciprocated Initiatives in Tension Reduction (GRIT) 31

32 GRIT Making an announcement of an intention to seek peace One makes a small step toward reducing tension If that effort is matched by the hostile party, another, more bold gesture is made. GRIT If the first gesture is not reciprocated, no more gestures are made. If the hostile party increases hostility, the gesturing party also increases hostility Research shows that GRIT works Was used in 2003 for the hostilities between North Korea and the rest of the world over nuclear weapons. 14 Social Psychology: Interpersonal and Group Perspectives Brief Outline Groups Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience Prosocial Behavior Antisocial Behavior 14 Social Psychology: Interpersonal and Group Perspectives Antisocial Behavior Prejudice Theories of Prejudice Aggression Evil and Hatred Prejudice Prejudice is a negative attitude for a particular group that is based on limited or faulty information about them. Prejudice is an attitude towards a group and not individuals, although we often direct are prejudicial attitudes for certain groups towards individual members of that group. Prejudice Social categorization and stereotypes Ingroups and Outgroups The Pervasive Effects of Stereotypes The Robber s Cave Study 32

33 Social Categorization and Stereotypes Social categorization derives from our universal tendency to impose order on information via perceived attributes. All humans classify people by easily perceived attributes like age, gender, occupation, and at this city. Prejudice Social Categorization and Stereotypes Ingroups and Outgroups The Pervasive Effects of Stereotypes The Robber s Cave Study Social Categorization and Stereotypes Such classifications lead us to prototypes and prototypes lead us to stereotypes, which are prototypes applied to groups of people. Stereotypes to help us to organize and simplify the world, but they also may oversimplify. Ingroups and Outgroups One such oversimplification is the outgroup homogeneity bias. The outgroup homogeneity bias occurs when we applied the behavior of a known member of another group to the entire membership of that group. However, we do not do the same for the group to which we belong (i.e., our in group). Ingroups and Outgroups The illusory correlation is a similar heuristic in which we tend to notice the unusual behavior of our group members more so than the unusual behaviors of the majority group members. Context also maintains stereotypes. Ingroups and Outgroups Gender stereotyping, for example, is most pronounced in situations in which women in positions of leadership in traditional male occupations is used masculine styles of leadership. 33

34 The Pervasive Effects of Stereotypes The Pervasive Effects of Stereotypes Prejudices and stereotypes can have powerful effects, even when they are activated subliminally. Chen, and Bargh found that white subjects who had been exposed subliminally to black faces, exhibited more hostility in their social interactions that white subjects who had been subliminally exposed to white faces did. Presumably, this occurred, because the black faces activated negative stereotypes that the subjects held for blacks, and the activation of the stereotypes caused negative emotions in the subjects. The Pervasive Effects of Stereotypes Despite the evidence for the influence of cognitive factors on stereotypes and prejudices, it is also possible that motivational and social influence factors may play a role in the maintenance of stereotypes and prejudices The Robber s Cave Study Sherif s study of 11-year-old boys and robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma still stands as the classic experimental manipulation of prejudice. Sherif was able to increase prejudice into groups of boy campers at the park by having them compete for prizes and sporting events. The Robber s Cave Study The competition combined with the fact that the boys had formed cohesive groups within their separate cabins were all it took for a full-blown prejudice and discrimination to develop. Soon, the boys were fighting, sabotaging without group members, and engaging in vandalism of outgroup properties. The Robber s Cave Study After allowing the prejudice to develop, Sheriff was able to reduce prejudice by forcing the boys to work goal operatively to accomplish superordinate goals (i.e., reestablishing water service to the cabins after a water pipe leak). 34

35 Social Psychology: Interpersonal 14 and Group Perspectives Theories of Prejudice Antisocial Behavior Prejudice Theories of Prejudice Aggression Evil and Hatred Why does prejudice exists? Realistic-conflict theory states that competition for scarce resources increases prejudice, as when new immigrant groups compete for jobs. Social-identity theories suggests that prejudices function as a mechanism to increase self-esteem relative to others. Theories of Prejudice Another theory views prejudice as similar to a bad habit. People, in this conception of prejudice, may realize that they are prejudice, and they may or may not tolerate behavior based on their prejudice. The difference between individuals, then, comes not from the attitude, but from one s tolerance of the behavior associated with it. 14 Social Psychology: Interpersonal and Group Perspectives Antisocial Behavior Prejudice Theories of Prejudice Aggression Evil and Hatred Agression Aggression comes in two forms. Hostile aggression is behavior directed against others intended to cause injury or harm. Instrumental aggression is behavior directed against others in order to obtain something of value. In most cases, instrumental aggression would not occur if the desired objects could be obtained by other means Aggression Biological Factors in Human Aggression Social Learning and Violence Environmental Factors Contributing to Aggression Deindividuation Reducing Aggression 35

36 Biological Factors in Human Aggression In other animals, brain structures and odors have been directly implicated in aggressive behavior. Further, animal aggression is mostly associated with adaptive behaviors like self-defense, predation, depreciation, reproduction, and territoritality. Biological Factors in Human Aggression Human aggression, however is more complexly motivated, even though its underlying biological mechanisms are similar. Hormone affects, testosterone than males and estradiol in females, have been found in humans. Biological Factors in Human Aggression Higher testosterone levels raise the likelihood of male aggression, and higher estradiol levels lower the likelihood of female aggression. Although the biochemical bases for aggression are universal throughout the human species, the social situations that are likely to elicit aggressive behavior in humans are not. Biological Factors in Human Aggression Observation of others, culture and individual differences play a large role in determining when and where a person is likely to exhibit aggressive behavior. Aggression Biological Factors in Human Aggression Social Learning and Violence Environmental Factors Contributing to Aggression Deindividuation Reducing Aggression Social Learning Bandura s concept of social learning is widely accepted to be one of the major mechanisms through which aggressive behaviors are acquired. According to this view, people learn to be aggressive by watching others behave aggressively. 36

37 Social Learning Because the models (e.g., parents, peers, or television characters) one is exposed to determine what one learns, we can expect to see wide variation in aggressiveness across cultures. Indeed, it has been shown that individualistic cultures experience more aggression than cultures that have a collective orientation Social Learning Television is a powerful medium because it supplies many models for both children and adults. Several studies have demonstrated an association between watching a lot of aggressive television and aggression in children in several countries (i.e., the United States, Australia, Poland, and Finland). Social Learning It appears that watching violent television desensitizes children to the effects of violence on others. Aggressive behavior also may be associated with the consumption of aggressive media images for adults. Social Learning Several studies show that prolonged exposure to aggressive models works to desensitize people to aggression. Once desensitized, people react less intensely to displays of aggression and are more tolerant of them are in Social Learning Of particular concern is the effect of violent pornography. Men who are exposed to violent pornography have been shown to become more accepting of violence against women, and there is also a link between such exposure and increased aggressiveness toward women. Aggression Biological Factors in Human Aggression Social Learning and Violence Environmental Factors Contributing to Aggression Deindividuation Reducing Aggression 37

38 Environmental Factors Aggression was a societal problem long before mass media. What other environmental factors can be associated with aggression? One factor is aggression in itself. Aggression is an example of positive feedback, meaning that a little aggression causes more aggression as people retaliate and conflicts escalate. Environmental Factors Pain also leads to aggression,especially if the aggression seems to reduce the pain, in which case the aggression is actually rewarded! Discomfort, too, may lead to aggression. Discomfort caused by bad smells, air pollution, and high temperatures has been shown to increase aggression. Environmental Factors Cities that have higher ambient temperatures are more likely to have higher rates of violent crime than cities with lower average temperatures. Aggression also seems to very within a city as temperatures fluctuate. 14 Aggression Temperature and Aggression Environmental Factors Environmental Factors Another important variable is frustration. According to Dollard and his colleagues, frustration is a necessary and sufficient condition for aggression. However, although many instances of frustration do seem to lead to aggression, this is not always the case. For example, when we are frustrated by others, we do at times seem to take into account their motives before becoming aggressive. If someone has frustrated us unintentionally, we are less likely to react with aggression than we would if someone deliberately frustrated us. 38

39 Environmental Factors Differences in culture also contribute to differences in aggression. Individualistic societies experience more aggression than collectivist cultures. The rates of aggression can also very with it in individualistic cultures. A culture of honor or cultures that have a high sense of honor are more likely to show aggressive or violent behavior. Aggression Biological Factors in Human Aggression Social Learning and Violence Environmental Factors Contributing to Aggression Deindividuation Reducing Aggression Deindividuation Aggression is often associated with dehumanization, the process of viewing others as he even less human. Dehumanization is often an unfortunate consequence of mob behavior. But what makes groups of otherwise normal people run amok and riot? Deindividuation One factor that makes aggressive mob behavior more likely is Deindividuation Deindividuation occurs when, as a member of a group, we lose our sense of individual identity. The Stanford Experiment When Zimbardo randomly assigned to Stanford students to the roles of guard and prisoner in his famous prison study, he intentionally the deindividuated members from each group. Guards wore uniforms and mirrored sunglasses; prisoners wore different uniforms and stocking caps and were identified by number, not name. The Stanford Experiment As a result of these circumstances, the otherwise normal participants who played the roles of the guards began to exhibit cruel and the humanizing behavior. The experiment had to be halted before completion, because that the individual waiting processes were so powerful that Zimbardo was at risk of losing control over the situation. 39

40 Aggression Biological Factors in Human Aggression Social Learning and Violence Environmental Factors Contributing to Aggression Deindividuation Reducing Aggression Reducing Aggression Can aggression be reduced to? The available research on deindividuation suggest that encouraging people to remain cognizant of their own identities and values while at the same time viewing others as individuals may help to reduce aggression. In addition, some specific techniques for reducing aggression have been developed. Reducing Aggression Can aggression be reduced? The available research on deindividuation suggest that encouraging people to remain cognizant of their own identities and values while at the same time viewing others as individuals may help to reduce aggression. In addition, some specific techniques for reducing aggression have been developed. Methods for Reducing Aggression 1. Observing nonaggressive models: Watching nonaggressive models can increase the likelihood of choosing alternatives to aggressive behavior. 2. Generating incompatible responses: one of the most successful techniques: empathy, humor, and other unexpected responses can diffuse aggression. Methods for Reducing Aggression 3. Using cognitive strategies: stopping to think raises alternatives to aggression in frustrating or threatening situations. Awareness of individual people as fellow humans and of their humanity reduces deindividuation. Awareness of the reasons for someone s behavior can reduce anger, frustration, and hostility. 40