Lecture 8 - Social Psychology

8/3/2019 Lecture 8 - Social Psychology

1/61

Social Psychology

Prof George Bishop


2/61

Social Psychology

Social thinking

Social influence

Behaviour in groupsPrejudice

Aggression

Prosocial behaviour


3/61

Social Thinking

Social Psychology: the study of:

Social Thinking: how we think about oursocial world

Social Influence: how other peopleinfluence our behaviour

Social Relations: how we relate toward

other peopleThree key aspects of social thinking:

Attributions, impressions, and attitudes


4/61

Attribution

Attributions: judgments about thecauses of our own and other peoplesbehaviour and outcomes

Personal (Internal) Attributions: inferthat peoples characteristics cause theirbehaviour

Situational (External) Attributions: inferthat aspects of the situation cause abehaviour


5/61

Attribution

Three types of information determine thetype of attribution we make: Consistency Distinctiveness

ConsensusWhen all three types of information arehigh, we tend to make a situationalattribution

When consistency is high and the othertwo are low, we tend to make a personalattribution


6/61

The McGraw-HillCompanies, 2008

Attribution


7/61

Attribution

Fundamental Attribution Error: weunderestimate the impact of thesituation and overestimate the role

of personal factors when explainingother peoples behaviourFAE is reduced when people have time

to reflect on their judgments or are

highly motivated to be carefulFAE does not apply to our own

behaviour


8/61

Attribution

Self-Serving Bias: the tendency tomake personal attributions forsuccesses and situational attributions

for failuresProtects or enhances our self-esteem

Not used by people who are depressed


9/61

Attribution and Immunity in

Men with HIV

0

50

100

150

200

250

300350

400

450

Interview 18 Mo. Later

Low NIC

High NIC

ConcentrationofHelperT

Cells

Note: Data from Segerstrom et al. (1996)


10/61

Attribution

Culture and Attribution:

FAE may reflect a Westernized emphasison individualism

Members of other cultures are less likelyto display a self-serving bias

Culture influences how we go about

making attributions


11/61

Impressions

Primacy Effect: our tendency toattach more importance to the initialinformation that we learn about a

personWe tend to be more alert to information

we receive first

Initial information may shape how we

perceive subsequent information Influences our desire to make further

contact with a person


12/61

Impressions

Mental Set: a readiness to perceivethe world in a particular way

Schemas: mental frameworks that help

us organise and interpret information

Stereotype: a generalised beliefabout a group or category of people

Can bias the way we perceive otherpeoples behaviour


13/61

Percentage who agree that: Nurses Doctors

People with AIDS/HIV have brought this 40.6 32.2problem on themselves.

Homosexuals and other persons at high 84.5 77.6risk of AIDS/HIV have endangered societythrough their high risk activities.

AIDS is a punishment for immoral behaviour. 35.7 27.2

Beliefs About Persons Living with AIDS(Singapore Health Care Providers)

From Bishop, Oh, & Swee (2000)


14/61

Impressions

Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: ourexpectations affect our behaviourtoward a person, which can cause

the person to behave in a way thatconfirms our expectations


15/61

Impressions


16/61

Attitudes

Attitude: a positive or negativeevaluative reaction toward astimulus, such as a person, action,

object, or concept

Attitudes influence behaviour morestrongly when situational factors that

contradict our attitudes are weak


17/61

Attitudes

Theory of Planned Behaviour: ourintention to engage in a behaviour isstrongest when:

We have a positive attitude toward thatbehaviour

When subjective norms (our perceptionsof what other people think we should

do) support our attitudesWhen we believe that the behaviour is

under our control


18/61

HIV Testing in Pregnancy

Correlations with intention to be test for HIV

Attitudes r p

Going for a blood test 0.27


19/61

Attitudes

Attitudes have a greater influence onbehavior when we are aware of themand when they are strongly held

General attitudes best predictgeneral classes of behaviour, andspecific attitudes best predict specific

behaviours


20/61

Attitudes

Behaviour influences our attitudes

Cognitive Dissonance (Festinger,1957): people strive for consistencyin their cognitions Cognitive dissonance is created when two or

more cognitions contradict one another

People are motivated to reduce dissonanceChanging one of their cognitionsAdding new cognitions


21/61

Attitudes

Counterattitudinal Behaviour: behaviourthat is inconsistent with ones attitude

Produces dissonance only if we perceive that

our actions were freely chosen Especially likely to cause dissonance if:

Behaviours produce foreseeable negativeconsequences

Behaviours threaten our sense of self-worth


22/61

Attitudes

Self-Perception Theory: we makeinferences about our own attitudesby observing how we behave

Attitude is not produced by cognitivedissonance

People experience heightened

physiological tension when engagingin counter attitudinal behaviour


23/61

Attitudes

Both Dissonance Theory and Self-Perception theory seem to be correct

Dissonance theory explains attitude

change when counter attitudinalbehavior threatens self-worth or ishighly inconsistent

Self-perception theory explain attitudechange in situations that are less likelyto create significant arousal


24/61

Norms

Social Norms: shared expectations abouthow people should think, feel, and behave Often implicit and unspoken

Regulate daily behaviour without our consciousawareness

Social Role: a set of norms thatcharacterises how people in a given social

position ought to behave Role conflict: occurs when the norms

accompanying different roles clash


25/61

Conformity

Conformity: the adjustment ofindividual behaviours, attitudes, andbeliefs to a group standard

Informational Social Influence:following the opinions or behaviourof other people because we believe

that they have accurate knowledgeand that what they are doing is right


26/61


27/61


Conformity


28/61

Conformity

Normative Social Influence:conforming to obtain the rewardsthat come from being accepted byother people while at the same timeavoiding their rejectionSolomon Asch (1951): Students were asked to judge which of three

comparison lines was the same length as a

standard line 37% of participants conformed to the incorrect

group answer


29/61

Conformity

Factors that affect conformity:Group size:

Conformity increases as group size

increasesNo increases over five group members

Presence of a dissenter:One person disagreeing with the others

greatly reduces group conformityCulture:Greater in collectivistic cultures


30/61

Conformity

Minority Influence: to maximize itsinfluence, the minority must:

Be highly committed to its point of view

Remain independent in the face ofmajority pressure

Appear to keep an open mind

Maintain a consistent position over timeNot appear unreasonable, deviant, or

negative


31/61

Compliance

Compliance Techniques: strategies thatmay manipulate you into saying yes whenyou really want to say no

Norm of Reciprocity: involves theexpectation that when others treat uswell, we should respond in kind

Door-In-The-Face: a persuader makes alarge request, expecting you to reject it,and then presents a smaller request


32/61

Compliance

Foot-In-The-Door: a persuader gets youto comply with a small request first, andlater presents a larger request

Lowballing: a persuader gets you tocommit to some action and then - beforeyou actually perform the behaviour - he orshe increases the cost of that samebehaviour


33/61

Behaviour In Groups

Social Loafing: the tendency forpeople to expend less individualeffort when working in a group than

when working aloneCollective Effort Model: on a collective

task, people will put forth only as much

effort as they expect is needed to reachtheir goal


34/61

Behaviour In Groups

Social Loafing (continued):

More likely to occur when:The person believes that individual

performance is not being monitoredThe task (goal) or the group has less valueor meaning to the person

The person generally displays low

motivation to strive for successThe person expects that other groupmembers will display high effort


35/61

Behaviour In Groups

Social Loafing (continued): Depends on gender and culture

Occurs more strongly in all-male groups

Occurs more often in individualistic cultures

Social loafing may disappear when:

Individual performance is monitored

Members highly value their group or thetask goal

Social Compensation: working harder in agroup than when alone to compensate forother members lower output


36/61

Behaviour In Groups

Group Polarisation: when a group oflike-minded people discusses anissue, the average opinion of group

members tends to become moreextreme

Eff f G Di i


37/61

Effects of Group Discussion onRacial Attitudes

From Myers and Bishop (1970)


38/61

Behaviour In Groups

Groupthink: the tendency of groupmembers to suspend critical thinkingbecause they are striving to seek

agreementMost likely to occur when a group:

Is under high stress to reach a decision

Is insulated from outside inputHas a directive leader

Has high cohesiveness


39/61

Behaviour In Groups

Groupthink (continued):

Symptoms of Groupthink:Direct pressure applied to people who

express doubtMind Guards: people who prevent negativeinformation from reaching the group

Members display self-censorship and

withhold their doubtsAn illusion of unanimityis created


40/61

Behaviour In Groups

Deindividuation: a loss ofindividuality that leads to disinhibitedbehaviour

Anonymity to outsiders: conditions thatmake an individual less identifiable topeople outside the group reduce feelings

of accountabilityIncreases the risk of antisocial actions


41/61

Prejudice

Prejudice: a negative attitude towardpeople based on their membership in agroup

Discrimination: overt behavior thatinvolves treating people unfairly based onthe group to which they belong

Explicit Prejudice: people express publicly

Implicit Prejudice: hidden from public view


42/61

Prejudice

Cognitive Roots of Prejudice: Categorisation and us-them thinking leads to

the perception of in-groups and out-groups

In-group favoritism: tendency to attribute morepositive qualities to us than them

Out-group derogation: tendency to attribute morenegative qualities to them than to us

Out-group homogeneity bias: viewing members of

out-groups as being more similar to one another thanmembers of in-groups


43/61

Prejudice

Cognitive Roots of Prejudice(continued):

When members of out-groups contradict

our stereotypes, we can:Change the stereotype

Explain away the discrepant behaviour

Explain the person as an exceptional case

Explain the behaviour using situationalcauses


44/61

Prejudice

Reducing Prejudice: Teaching interventions designed to minimise

stereotype threat

Equal Status Contact: prejudice betweenpeople is most likely to be reduced when they:Engage in sustained close contact

Have equal status

Work to achieve a common goal that requirescooperation

Are supported by broader social norms


45/61

Contact and Prejudice Reduction

From Hamilton & Bishop (1976)


46/61


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Sy

mbolicRacism

Integrated Unintegrated



47/61




48/61

Aggression

What is aggression?

Behaviour intended to harm anotherperson

Types of aggression Instrumental aggression

Hostile aggression

Relational aggression


49/61

Aggression

Environmental Factors:

Frustration: occurs when some eventinterferes with our progress toward a

goalExtreme heat

Provocation

Painful stimuliCrowding

Influenced by learning


50/61

Aggression

Psychological Factors:Self-justification:

Blaming the victim

Dehumanising victimsAttribution of intentionality

Catharsis: performing an act ofaggression discharges aggressive

energy and temporarily reduces ourimpulse to aggress

Overcontrolled hostility


51/61

Aggression

Media and Video Game Violence:Social learning: media violence is likely

to increase viewers aggressive behavior

by providing numerous aggressivemodels

Multiple avenues:Viewers learn new aggressive behavioursthrough modeling

Viewers come to believe that aggression isusually rewarded

Viewers become desensitised to violence


52/61

Aggression

Biological Factors: Animals can be selectively bred to be more or

less aggressive

Aggression is influenced by heredityPossibly an evolutionary adaptation

No single brain center or chemical controlsaggression

Involves activity in hypothalamus, amygdala, andfrontal lobes

Low serotonin; high testosterone may play a role


53/61


Levels of Analysis


54/61

Prosocial Behaviour

Evolution and Prosocial Behaviour:Kin Selection: organisms are more likely

to help others with whom they share the

most genes, namely, their offspring andgenetic relativesIncreases the odds that genes will surviveacross successive generations

Reciprocal Altruism: helping othersincreases the odds that they will help usor our kin in return


55/61

Prosocial Behaviour

Social Learning and CulturalInfluences:Norm of Reciprocity: we should

reciprocate when others treat us kindlyNorm of Social Responsibility: peopleshould help others and contribute to thewelfare of society

We internalise these norms and valuesas our own through socializationprocesses


56/61

Prosocial Behaviour

Altruism: helping others for the ultimatepurpose of enhancing that personswelfare

Egoistic Goals: helping others to improveour own welfare

Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis: altruism isproduced by empathy Empathy: the ability to put oneself in the place

of another and to share what that person isexperiencing


57/61

Prosocial Behaviour

When Do People Help?

Situational and personal factors:

Not being in a hurry

Recently observing a prosocial rolemodel

Being in a good mood


58/61

Prosocial Behaviour

5-Step Bystander InterventionProcess (Latan & Darley, 1970):Notice the event

Decide if the event is really anemergencySocial comparison: look to see how othersare responding

Assuming responsibility to interveneDiffusion of Responsibility: believing thatsomeone else will help


59/61

Prosocial Behaviour

5-Step Bystander Intervention Process(Latan & Darley, 1970) (continued): Self-efficacy in dealing with the situation

Decision to help (based on cost-benefitanalysis)

Bystander Effect: presence of multiplebystanders inhibits each persons

tendency to help Due to social comparison or diffusion of

responsibility


60/61


61/61

Prosocial Behaviour

Increasing Prosocial Behaviour:Exposing people to prosocial models

Encouraging feelings of empathy and

connectedness to othersLearning about factors that hinder

bystander intervention

Documents

Lecture 8 - Social Psychology