Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Chapter 15 : Social Psychology

No description
by

William Cockrell

on 18 April 2018

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Chapter 15 : Social Psychology

Chapter 15 : Social Psychology
What is a group?
"It's hard to define, but I know it when I see it" Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart
At least two people
Common goal
Proximity
Similarity
Being Connected
Loyalty to group
Competition/Outgroups
Actual Definitions
"A group is two or more people who for longer than a few moments, interact with and influence one another and perceive one another as 'us'"
David Myers
"A collection of at least two people who are doing or being something together"
Roy Baumeister & Brad Bushman
"Groups have unique, emergent properties that differentiate them from a mere aggregate of individuals on three counts: perceived entitativity, perceived volition, and actual behavior"
Susan Fiske
" A group is a typically on-going interaction of multiple, often similar, people who are interdependent and for whom group identification is important"
H. Colleen Sinclair


Social Facilitation
Do we work better in the presence of others?
Evaluation apprehension
Dominant response theory
Give Me Some Proof
Michaels et al. (1982)
Zajonc et al. (1969)
Groupthink
The tendency for a group to "force" a consensus without considering all rational alternatives
Criteria:
Cohesion
Isolation
Biased leader
High pressure from outside forces
High or suffering self-esteem
Symptoms of Groupthink
Pressure toward conformity
Reluctance to criticize information
Illusion of invulnerability
Heightened beliefs of morality
Mindguarding
Believed unanimity
Self-censorship
Avoiding Groupthink
Make group aware of groupthink
Encourage objectivity
Appoint a devil's advocate
Create subgroups
Invite outside consultants
Independent committees
Create individual accountability
suggestions by I.L. Janis (1982)
What is a group?
Group =
people who have something in common, close proximity, respect, and admire their relationship
Aggregate
= a group of people connected by proximity, but nothing else (e.g., people in line together, people in an elevator together, bus passengers, etc.)
Category =
grouping that does not contain a sense of meaning or belonging. Examples = people with brown hair, people with a driver's license, etc.)
Types of Groups
Primary groups :
Family and friends. Most influential on your daily life and decisions. Help shape your identity. Can your primary group be online friends?
Secondary Groups :
Larger group, less intimate (use of social filter), shared interests/tasks, most have a common goal required to achieve. Examples include college class, work, political party.
Voluntary Association:
form of secondary group that is formed due to a mutual interest. Usually not required. North America has a high amount of voluntary associations.
In-group :
your personal group. You feel loyalty to the group and judge other groups by your standards.
Out-group :
other groups. Usually do not like them.
Groups Continued
Reference groups :
People important to you who often come to mind when you are making important decisions. Highly influential.
Social Network :
visual mapping of relationships with the subject as the central point (hub). Easy way to make new connections.
Classic six degrees of separation statements are still debated (Kleinfeld, 2002; Muhamad, 2010)
Technology has drastically altered how we view groups and networking
Conformity
Conformity :
conformity is adapting and responding according to the majority of the group.
The more people in the group, the higher the chance that people will conform.
The more important the issue, the less likely conformity will occur (contrast this with the line experiment).
If just one other person disagrees with the group, the chances of conformity are greatly reduced.
Conformity is highly influential with socially important topics (jury deliberations, minority issues, issues with high amounts of authority).
Many psychological studies of conformity often test the boundaries of what is ethical to research.
http://digital.films.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx?aid=27675&xtid=47379&loid=282930
Hartley (1946) study on prejudice
Hartley asked participants to rate their opinions on several racial-ethnic groups.
The researcher included three groups that do not exist: Wallonians, Pireneans, and the Danireans.
The participants with the most negative opinions of factual racial-ethnic groups also reported higher negative opinions towards the
fictional
groups
Common sense knowledge on racism was that people created negative opinions towards groups they have had negative experiences with on multiple occasions.
Contact Theory
Contact theory :
theory that more positive encounters with different groups increase overall positive opinions of the group.
A large area of research in Social Psychology
Proximity
All groups must be on equal status
Must occur frequently (the prejudiced mind recalls negative information quicker than positive information)
John Lee's Styles of Love
Eros:
the initial, physical attraction to a person. Most of the experiences are based on positive qualities (i.e., not too realistic).
Mania:

This is the infatuation love style. Characteristics include: anxiety, sleeplessness, loss of appetite, and headaches. People who adopt a mania love style typically have low self-esteem. They attract others with similar levels of esteem.
Ludus:
friends with benefits, NSA, group dating style behaviors are common for this love style. They avoid commitment, view sex as recreation, and typically do not get jealous.
Storge (STOR-gay):
Similar to companionate love mentioned earlier. This type of love develops over years of being committed. Also, older adults often start relationships at this stage. Usually has the most amicable separations.
Agape (AH-gah-pay)
:
altruistic, self-sacrificing love. Intense protection, lack of jealousy, or risking your personal health (physical or mental) for your partner are common for this love style.
Pragma:
searching for compatibility. Comes from the word "pragmatist", in other words, a person who is goal oriented. Most supportive of their partners. Perhaps the healthiest love style?
The Original Love Style Survey
Prejudice :
attitudes held by a person that is an affect-laden, unjustified opinion of an individual solely based on group membership.
Discrimination :
The outcome of prejudice is discrimination, a behavior. It is typically classified as unjustified, differential treatment to a person based on group membership.
Stereotypes can be
positive
or
negative
(a positive example would be that "Asian people are the best at mathematics" whereas a negative stereotype would be " All gay men are sexually promiscuous").
Stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination are all products of socialization (Kimmel, 2007; Henslin, 2013).
Stereotypes:
The belief that certain characteristics apply to every person in a certain group.
Once a person has been exposed to a stereotype enough, these beliefs will become a prejudice (e.g., the person now believes all black men are criminals. This will become a prejudiced belief).
Where stereotypes are highly descriptive, prejudice is usually an automatic positive or negative opinion of a group of people.
Make sure you understand the general "pattern" of the three. Stereotypes form prejudices and prejudices create discriminatory behavior.
Differential Treatment
Different types of Stereotypes
Ethnophaulism:
a term used to describe negative stereotypical characteristics.
The most basic level of ethnophaulisms are derogatory names. We do not need to go over the terms, but you are well aware of different negative names we have about groups.
The second level is when people refer to groups based on skewed characteristics. For instance, calling gay men "limp wrists", hispanics "wetbacks", or African-American's "darkies" are all examples of using harmful physical characteristics to describe a person. Most of the time these are not even accurate.
The third level is to explain behavior by describing a group of people. Examples include "don't Jew me" which references somebody is trying to over-charge you. It implies Jewish people are greedy. "That's so gay" is a term used to describe something that is stupid and obviously creates a negative opinion of homosexuals. Saying something is "ghetto" in America, tends to create images of African-Americans.
As you can see, all of these statements are harmful to the group being described.
The Social Distance Scale
The Social Distance Scale :
A scale to measure prejudice among U.S. college students
High social distance meant high negative prejudice
The participants are asked how willing they are to participate in numerous activities with 30 different racial groups. They are asked to respond on the traditional 7 point scale of 1 (acceptance) to 7 (barring them from the country).
When students take this test today, we find that prejudiced opinions have reduced in each successive generation (or they are better at hiding now). They also see very few differences between minorities now.
Questions on the Social Distance Scale
Remember, with the Social Distance Scale,
you ask the same questions
for each minority group.
For example, the test may start with asking the participant to answer the questions while thinking about African-Americans.
Next, the participant would be asked the same questions again but be requested to answer them in response to people from Afghanistan.
All answers are given on a 1-7 scale with 1(agree) to 7 (strongly disagree)
The Actual Questions
1) Would accept _______ marrying into my family (1 point)
2) Would accept _______ as a personal friend (2 points)
3) Would accept _____ as my neighbor (3 point)
4) Would work in the same office with ______ (4 points)
5) Would only have ________ as an acquaintances (5 points)
6) Would only have _________ as visitors in my country (6 points)
7) Would bar __________ from entering my country (7 points)
https://fod.infobase.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx?wID=100833&xtid=40125&loid=431872
We Become The Roles We Play?
Hunter-Gatherer:
perhaps the oldest social organization. We need to think about our very distant (10,000 years ago) ancestors.
This group was more dependent on the environment than any other social structure. This group
harvested the environment
where we
manipulate the environment
today.
Hunter-Gatherers are called nomadic because they left lands when the resources were depleted. Today, the few left are isolated.
This social structure has largely died out. Only a handful of societies still actually follow this form of social organization.
Modern Hunter-Gatherer Societies:
The Australian Aborigines, The Sentenelese Tribe on Adamans Island, and the Mbuti tribe in the Congo rainforests.
Hunter-Gatherer societies must remain small (the largest are usually 50-60 people) or they will not be able to feed everybody.
Hunter-Gatherer Societies
Attributions
People prefer to understand why others perform specific behaviors. Unfortunately, most behavior goes unexplained in public situations.
Attributions :
to help offset this uneasiness, people form impressions or attributions of why people are performing the behaviors they are
External Attributions :
Believing behavior is due to factors outside of the person's immediate control (e.g., She lost her job because the company is downsizing).
Internal Attributions :
Belief that a person's behavior is due to the primary characteristics (e.g., She lost her job because she is lazy and never shows up).
Two Dimensional Attribution Theory:
argues that attributions are actually evaluated by internal vs. external AND stable vs. unstable.
Internal - Stable Attribution:
you explain the outcome based on
your actions
and these actions are
stable
in your life (e.g., I have always been above-average in math). Highly susceptible to bias.
Internal - Unstable Attribution:
More often used on other people. You explain their behaviors by saying it was their own doing (internal) but the effort they placed in it was temporary. (e.g., the student who does nothing all semester and then makes a perfect on the final exam).
Individualistic societies value talent (internal-stable) whereas collectivist societies encourage effort (internal-unstable).
External - Stable Attribution:
Your success or failure is primarily explained by the difficulty of the task (e.g., ACT, GRE, BAR Exam).
External - Unstable Attribution:
Success or failure was due to luck because they normally do not act this way (unstable).
Actor/Observer Bias:
when we watch events occur in the world we (observer) explain events with internal attributions. The actor will explain the same events with external attributions.
Attitude and Beliefs
Beliefs:
a piece of information or fact that you know (e.g., the sky is blue, D.C. is the capital of the United States, and the 2018 Winter Olympics were in South Korea).
Attitudes:
the value you personally place on beliefs. They tend to be evaluated on a scale of good <----> bad (e.g., you like the blue sky, you think D.C. is dirty, and you know nothing about Pyongyang).
Dual attitudes:
when we hold different of conflicting attitudes about the same belief. The dual model of attitudes is explained with
automatic
and
deliberate
attitudes.
Read the following nonsense words: juvalamu, bargulum, chakaka. Research by Bargh (1997) demonstrated that we form attitudes about items we have never encountered before. The words are ranked according to average positive/negative attitudes about the words.
Mere exposure effect:
finding that humans tend to like
novel stimuli
the more they encounter it.
One classic study had upcoming college students receive a picture of their new roommate in June whereas the control group just received a biography. The students who looked at the picture over the summer had more positive attitudes about their new roommate on the first encounter than those who did not have the picture.
The mere exposure effect impacts animals as well.
It is important to remember the reverse happens with things you do not like!
Social Learning Theory
A major aspect of social learning theory is operant conditioning (the modeling of behavior through rewards and punishments).
For conditioning to work, the behavior must be exposed to the organism multiple times before it works.
Therefore, social learning theory uses the concept of
modeling
which is more of a focus on the actual source of the information the children are observing.
The most successful characteristics of strong models are : warmth, responsiveness, competence, power, and a demonstration of consistent behavior.
Children who are physically or emotionally abused are highly influenced by the social learning theory.
Social Learning Theory - Bobo Doll
Attitude Change and Consistency
Attitude Polarization:
the finding that the more we think about our attitudes, the more extreme they become.
People who join voluntary groups tend to become more invested in the cause more than the opposite.
One quasi-experimental study related to the death penalty supports attitude polarization. All participants were required to read an essay about the death penalty out loud. The participant's opinions did not change after reading the essay, their original opinions became even stronger (Lord, Ross, & Lepper, 1979)
People are more receptive in changing their attitudes if the persuader is similar to them. Out-group members are highly unlikely to change a person's mind.
Cognitive Dissonance Theory:
coined by Leon Festinger. Cognitive Dissonance is the experience people have when they hold two conflicting beliefs. This dissonance makes a person feel uncomfortable and motivated to alleviate the dissonance.
The person experiencing dissonance is either going to justify their behavior or attempt to change it.
The original study paid participants either $5 or $10 to say they like brussels sprouts (even when they did not). All participants equally performed the task of eating a brussels sprout and then saying they enjoyed it.
After the study the participants rate how much they like the vegetable. The participants who were paid $5 had a significantly higher opinion of brussels sprouts than the participants paid $10.
Alignment of Attitudes and Behavior
In 1934, a social psychologist and Chinese couple drove 10,000 miles across the country. They stopped at 184 restaurants and 66 hotels.
They were only refused service once. After the trip, the social psychologist mailed a survey to every place they stopped. The survey included a question asking would the business serve Chinese people.
92% said they would not serve Chinese people even though they previously had. Holes in the study? Yes, but still influential (LaPierre, 1934).
Think of the following examples of people: Larry Craig, Ted Haggard, Eddie Long, Wes Goodman, Lance Armstrong, Milli Vanilli
A-B Problem:
Being inconsistent between Attitudes (A) and Behavior (B). Often at the unconscious level, but still something we should strive to avoid.
It researchers about 30 years of research (ha!) to discover that we have to be very clear when measuring the A-B Problem.
For example, we could ask a person do they like helping and then ask them to donate blood. If the person says "No" we used to argue they are experiencing the A-B problem. Are they?
Behavior Aggregation:
not focusing on one behavior (e.g., giving blood) but trying to compile multiple, similar behaviors (e.g., donating to charity, volunteering at a hospital, speaking at a charity, etc.)
Attitude Accessibility:
how quick are you able to determine what your attitude is about a topic.
Normative and Informational Influence
Normative Influence:
Going along with other people in the group so they will like you.
The Solomon Asch Line Study was one of the first experimental studies to famously depict normative influence.
The more people in the group, the higher the chance that people will conform.
The more important the issue, the less likely conformity will occur (contrast this with the line experiment).
If just one other person disagrees with the group, the chances of conformity are greatly reduced.
Informational Influence:
conformity that occurs due to you believing they know more than you do.
Normative influence is more likely effected by social norms. Informational influence occurs when we have little knowledge on the topic or we are in danger.
Pluralistic Ignorance:
everybody in the group may be thinking that other people know what to do. This results in a group thinking they have made a great decision when they have not.
We are more likely to publicly conform to normative influence but informational influence is more effective in changing private opinions.
Conformity is highly influential with socially important topics (jury deliberations, minority issues, issues with high amounts of authority).
The Rules of Attraction
Interpersonal:
this term is used to imply a relationship between at least two people that creates thoughts or behaviors that would never occur without at least two people (e.g., we don't hold the door open when there is nobody behind us).
Some researchers argue that we form basic opinions (e.g., like or dislike) within minutes of meeting a person. It is also important to realize that most people form opinions before they
acknowledge
the opinions they have formed.
The Laws of Attraction :
physical proximity, physical attractiveness, competence, and similarity, and reciprocity.
Physical proximity :
A famous college dorm study first reported that the closer we live to a person and more frequent we see a person we have higher chances of forming relationships with them.
Relate this to mere exposure effect.

Physical Attractiveness :
Physically attractive people are constantly rated higher on intelligence, likability, warmth, humor, health, and social skills. Physical attractiveness is VERY important at first, but as the relationship increases this trait becomes the least important. As we get to know a person better our personality influences their attractiveness.
Similarity :
the most important traits of similarity are age, sex, and race/ethnicity. It is argued that similarity may be the strongest rule of attraction. Romantic relationships where the partners are very similar have the highest stability rates whereas highly different couples tend to experience divorce.
Mate Selection Theories
Filter Theory:
the argument we slowly "weed out" people that do not attract us based on various characteristics and features. Once we have removed undesirable people we focus on the people who made the cut.
As you can see in the picture, these measurements of homogamy are: propinquity, physical appearance, ethnicity/race, social class, religion, age, and personality.
Halo effect:
the more attractive a person is, the more likely we are to forgive or ignore their negative characteristics....the name comes from the aspect that we tend to focus on positive characteristics of attractive people.
In 2010, 91% of people married somebody of the same race.
One common trend in the United States of interracial marriage is a black man dating a white woman. This is actually a commonly reported "fear" of white men who score high on different prejudice scales.
Catholicism and Judaism argue relationships are weakened if both are not the same religion. Mormons do NOT honor relationships where one person is not a Mormon.
In the United States, most couples are usually within 10 years of each other. This is not the case in other countries.
Can you love somebody you have never met (e.g., a celebrity)? Can you love somebody who doesn't love you back (e.g., unrequited)?
Additional Relationship Findings
Social Allergy Effect:
when we first start dating a person we are pretty good at ignoring their faults. When we have been dating them for 5 years, that little fault is now a BIG problem.
Examples of social allergy effect:
dating a person who smokes, dating a person who likes football, dating a person who flirts a lot, dating a person who snores.
https://www3.nd.edu/~ghaeffel/OnineDating_Aron.pdf
Sternberg's Triangular Theory of Love :
the most scientifically respected theory about love. The three main factors of love are
intimacy
,
passion
, and
commitment
.
Intimacy :
the emotional side of love. This is having a psychological attraction to the person. Intimacy is wanting to be near a person because they make you feel good and you want to do the same for them. A high focus on positive reciprocity.
Passion :
physical attraction to the person. Passion primarily stems from visible traits initially but advance to noticing characteristics that are attractive (e.g., @ first you like him for his bangin' body, but eventually you think his laugh is equally attractive). Passion primarily deals with bodily arousal.
Commitment :
often viewed as the outcome of intimacy and passion. This is the desire to create a life together with your significant other.
Romantic love :
passionate, intimate, and sexual love that is common to Western societies. Believed that it is required to have both sexual and intimate attraction.
Online Dating
Started with match.com, eharmony.com, plentyoffish.com, etc. These sites were focused on heterosexual people finding a date.
Eventually, the websites become more specific to unique groups like Jdate.com (Jewish people), WeWaited.com (Virgins), OnlyFarmers.com (Farmers).
Instead of relationships, many of these sites are now centered around no strings attached sex encounters.
What do we think about the Ashley Madison "dating website"?
People over the age of 45 are the fastest growing group using online dating with people older than 55 being the largest group to use online dating.
Most relationship researchers that have conducted research on dating patterns find that online dating provides no advantages over real dating.
The main measurement researchers focus on would be the success rate of dates and the compatibility engine the website uses.
Not being honest is one of the main problems with online dating. Women lie about their age and weight whereas men typically lie about age, weight, height, income, and occupation!
One estimation reports that around 20% of online male daters are actually married (Fernandez, 2005; McCarthy, 2009).
The Rules of Attraction
Interpersonal:
this term is used to imply a relationship between at least two people that creates thoughts or behaviors that would never occur without at least two people (e.g., we don't hold the door open when there is nobody behind us).
Some researchers argue that we form basic opinions (e.g., like or dislike) within minutes of meeting a person. It is also important to realize that most people form opinions before they
acknowledge
the opinions they have formed.
The Laws of Attraction :
physical proximity, physical attractiveness, competence, and similarity, and reciprocity.
Physical proximity :
A famous college dorm study first reported that the closer we live to a person and more frequent we see a person we have higher chances of forming relationships with them.
Relate this to mere exposure effect.

Physical Attractiveness :
Physically attractive people are constantly rated higher on intelligence, likability, warmth, humor, health, and social skills. Physical attractiveness is VERY important at first, but as the relationship increases this trait becomes the least important. As we get to know a person better our personality influences their attractiveness.
Similarity :
the most important traits of similarity are age, sex, and race/ethnicity. It is argued that similarity may be the strongest rule of attraction. Romantic relationships where the partners are very similar have the highest stability rates whereas highly different couples tend to experience divorce.
Mate Selection Theories
Filter Theory:
the argument we slowly "weed out" people that do not attract us based on various characteristics and features. Once we have removed undesirable people we focus on the people who made the cut.
As you can see in the picture, these measurements of homogamy are: propinquity, physical appearance, ethnicity/race, social class, religion, age, and personality.
Halo effect:
the more attractive a person is, the more likely we are to forgive or ignore their negative characteristics....the name comes from the aspect that we tend to focus on positive characteristics of attractive people.
In 2010, 91% of people married somebody of the same race.
One common trend in the United States of interracial marriage is a black man dating a white woman. This is actually a commonly reported "fear" of white men who score high on different prejudice scales.
Catholicism and Judaism argue relationships are weakened if both are not the same religion. Mormons do NOT honor relationships where one person is not a Mormon.
In the United States, most couples are usually within 10 years of each other. This is not the case in other countries.
Can you love somebody you have never met (e.g., a celebrity)? Can you love somebody who doesn't love you back (e.g., unrequited)?
Additional Relationship Findings
Social Allergy Effect:
when we first start dating a person we are pretty good at ignoring their faults. When we have been dating them for 5 years, that little fault is now a BIG problem.
Examples of social allergy effect:
dating a person who smokes, dating a person who likes football, dating a person who flirts a lot, dating a person who snores.
https://www3.nd.edu/~ghaeffel/OnineDating_Aron.pdf
Sternberg's Triangular Theory of Love :
the most scientifically respected theory about love. The three main factors of love are
intimacy
,
passion
, and
commitment
.
Intimacy :
the emotional side of love. This is having a psychological attraction to the person. Intimacy is wanting to be near a person because they make you feel good and you want to do the same for them. A high focus on positive reciprocity.
Passion :
physical attraction to the person. Passion primarily stems from visible traits initially but advance to noticing characteristics that are attractive (e.g., @ first you like him for his bangin' body, but eventually you think his laugh is equally attractive). Passion primarily deals with bodily arousal.
Commitment :
often viewed as the outcome of intimacy and passion. This is the desire to create a life together with your significant other.
Romantic love :
passionate, intimate, and sexual love that is common to Western societies. Believed that it is required to have both sexual and intimate attraction.
Passionate and Companionate Love
Passionate/Romantic Love:
love where you experience strong feelings of passion, excitement, and need to be near them. There is often a focus on physical pleasure.
Companionate/Affectionate Love:
creates less intense emotional responses. You tend to view your partner as your soul mate or life partner.
"I need to be with him with all the time to feel complete. When I am without him, I feel so alone"
= Passionate Love
"We have been together for twenty years. My spouse is my best friend"
= Companionate Love
Phenylethylamine (PEA):
neurotransmitter related to butterflies and "fuzzy" feeling you experience when you see somebody you like. Also related to sexual arousal. Less related to companionate love.
Dopamine, Oxytocin, and Norepinephrine are other neurotransmitters that produce significant levels when we are aroused.
Passionate love starts a relationship but companionate love maintains a relationship. A relationship with just passion will not last.
While awkward, a common DV for measuring passionate love is "amount of sex". Using this self-report measurement, we see that amount of sex drops dramatically as the levels of PEA decline.
Two-Dimensional Attachment Theory
Two-dimensional attachment theory:
the argument that attachment is split into two components,
anxiety
and
avoidance
.
The anxiety component is referencing how you feel about YOURSELF in the relationship.
The avoidance aspect is related to how you feel about the OTHER PERSON.
The following terms are the various combinations that occur with the two-dimensional attachment theory.
Secure Attachment:
low anxiety and low levels of avoidance. Successful in forming and maintaining relationships. Trustworthy, transparent, and provide support.
Preoccupied Attachment:
High levels of anxiety but low levels of avoidance. They want to have relationships, but their low self-esteem and confidence tends to lower the chances. Constantly worried about abandonment.
View their partners as unreliable and unable to commit. Often viewed as overly controlling. Tends to shower loved ones with praise, compliments, gifts, favors, etc.
Resistant Attachment:
Low levels of anxiety and high levels of avoidance. Very low levels of trust. Are less likely to be in a committed relationship, accept help, or offer help in relationships.
Fearful Attachment:
High levels of anxiety and high levels of avoidance. They have negative opinions of themselves and others. The least likely to have committed, romantic relationships?
There are slight variations in our attachments (a person who is normally secure may become preoccupied when interacting with certain people).
Investment Model in Relationships
Rusbult's Investment Model:
the model explains there are three factors related to the likelihood of a relationship lasting.
Satisfaction:
how happy are you with your partner? Do they embarrass you in public or make you proud? Do you enjoy spending time with them?
# of high quality alternatives:
you could be in an unhappy relationship but believe nobody else is available. You could also be in a happy relationship and believe other options are better. More/less satisfaction influences how you perceive alternatives.
Amount of investment in relationship:
duration appears to be the most important factor related to perceived relationship investment (e.g., a couple of 20 years may forgive an affair whereas a couple of 6 months may not).
The three factors are significant alone, but when combined together, their influence becomes much more important.
The investment model is heavily used to explain why people stay in relationships that make them unhappy (e.g., an abusive relationship).
Trying to update or manipulate this theory would be an "easy" research design for the final project!
What if YOU think your partner has a lot of alternatives? What if YOU think your partner has no alternatives?
Rejection and Ostracism
Ostracism:
exclusion, rejection, and being ignored by other people.
As much as people tell us to ignore rejection, it tends to produce strong feelings.
Think about the kid in high school whose friends have decided they will ignore her for a week straight. That has a profound impact on a child.
Cyberball Paradigm:
Computer software created by Kip Williams at Purdue to measure the feelings of rejection.
The participant is exposed to a computer game where it appears three people are playing (the participant is actually the only one playing, the other two are A.I.).
You click on the screen and throw the ball to the player of your choice. A few minutes into the "game", the A.I. stop throwing the ball to the participant. The participant now just watches who they believe are two other participants ignoring them.
The Effects of Rejection
Symptoms related to long-term rejection:
higher pain sensitivity, illness, depression, suicidal thoughts, eating disorders, promiscuity, low self-esteem, and feelings of worthlessness.
Rejection Sensitivity:
Personality trait that develops when people experience excessive amounts of rejection. This often causes them to reject people and self-sabotage their establishes relationships.
We are not good at judging if the person's rejection is intentional or not. We also do not reflect well on if we "deserve" the rejection.
In a placebo vs. treatment experiment, participants who took Tylenol on a daily basis reported lower levels of pain related to rejection compared to participants in the control group.
Rejection causes a person to experience a drop in cognitive processing. Participants rejected before a simple quiz performed worse than participants who were not rejected.
People who experience rejection will also deal with a blow to their self-regulation (e.g., if you are on a diet and get turned down for a date, you may eat a good bit in response).
Some studies have reported that many people who deal with rejection often try to self-medicate with warm baths.
Behaviors Caused by Rejection
Drop in studying
Treat new people with skepticism, avoidance, and even hostility
Less likely to donate or help others
More likely to be impulsive (e.g., rebound)
Perform self-harm
Aggressive Responding
Clinical psychologists studied 15 school shootings in America and reported 13/15 were related to rejection.
Belief that humanity deserves punishment
Aggression
Aggression :
any act that
intentionally
harms another person or object. Aggression is the most common outcome of frustration for both humans and other animals.
Displaced Aggression :
aggression that is inappropriately used against an unsuspecting victim (be it organic or inorganic). Whoever receives the aggression did not actually cause it.
Scapegoating :
blaming a person or event for conditions that they did not cause. Many racial conflicts occur because the minority is deemed the scapegoat (e.g., think of the extreme hate towards illegal immigrants during economic downturns). The most current example for our generation is blaming all Middle-Eastern people for terrorist attacks.
Requirements of aggression: a behavior (not the emotion anger), the receiver of aggression does not want it, and the aggressor meant to harm the person as punishment.
Think of this example; a doctor performs cardiac surgery on you. To do this, they must cut open your chest. This is NOT aggression because the harmful behavior is to actually help you.
Self-harm is not considered aggression because the people want to receive the pain.
Is Aggression Innate or Learned?
Instinct Theories
Coined by Charles Darwin. Argued aggression is a naturally evolved social skill.
Two common examples in nature of aggression would be related to courtship and offspring protection.
Freud argued that aggression is the antithesis of our eros. The
eros
is what Freud called our "life-giving instinct". In other words, it compels us to create, not end life.
World War I traumatized Freud and he created the concept of Thanatos. Thanatos is our "death instinct". Freud argued this causes us to be destructive.
Instinct theories are reliable in explaining other animal's aggression, but not for humans (too much variability).
Learning Theories
Modeling:
the process in the social learning theory where humans copy another person's behavior.
One study had children in a treatment condition watch a violent cartoon (control watched nothing). After the prime, participants had the option to "harm" another kid by pressing a "HELP" or "HURT" button. Children in the violent cartoon condition were significantly more likely to press the hurt button.
Learning theories focus on "when" it is appropriate to use aggression (i.e., control).
Violence and Antisocial Behavior
Violence:
psychologists operationalize violence as an intentional act that is performed to cause extreme physical harm or death.
How can we make the argument that two intoxicated people fighting might not be performing violence?
Children fighting is not violence.
All violent acts are aggressive, but not all aggressive actions are violent.
Criminal Acts of Violence according to FBI:
robbery, aggravated assault, sexual assault, and homicide.
Antisocial behavior:
social psychologists have a weak measurement of this term compared to clinical psychologists. Any behavior that harms relationships or is culturally desirable.
Anthropologists, historians, psychologists, and sociologists all agree that violent behavior has decreased with each successive generation.
When comparing skeletal remains, deaths in war, and yearly homicide rates we find support for violence decreasing.
Death rate in England 14th century = 24 per 100,000. Death rate in England 1960s = 0.6 per 100,000 (
The Age of Reason
is sometimes used to describe this)
Why Do We Help Others?
The Selfish Gene:
Extremely important book about evolution, reproduction, and prosocial behavior. Written by famous biologist Richard Dawkins.
Kin Selection:
Dawkins' argument in The Selfish Gene which states that human behavior is instinctively selfish. He states that helping only occurs when it increases the chances of group survival.
The most important part of kin selection is the focus on biological relatives. A parent will do almost anything to protect their offspring in order to pass on genes.
Social Psychologists are NOT liked for this analogy:
Your spouse and child are in a burning building. They are on opposite sides of the house and you can only save one. Which will you save?
Another argument is that identical twins will help each other before a non-identical sibling.
What about families of affinity? Parents who have adopted children?
ARE ALL ANIMALS CONCERNED WITH KIN SELECTION?
Sympathy:
feeling sad, worried, or concerned about a person/animal and their unique circumstances.
Empathy:

sharing the same feelings
with a person/animal who is experiencing negative emotions.
College students have reported a decrease in empathy since the 1970s.
Altruism and Egoism
Egoistic Helping:
helping for the sake of receiving something in return.
We tend to automatically think of helping for money. It will also include helping to improve relationships, reputation, or your self-esteem.
Altruistic Helping:
helping for nothing in return.
Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis:
the argument that if a person experiences empathy they are more likely to perform altruistic helping.
https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/images/uploads/Baston-EmpathySourceAltruism.pdf
Helping people with selfish reasons is better than not helping at all right?
One study gave participants $5. The participants in the control did nothing except receive the money. The treatment condition had the option to donate the money. The participants who donated the money felt happier than the control condition.
Helpful personality:
personality type which encourages helping behavior. Higher ethical beliefs, strong desire for equity, greater empathy, and seeing people equal.
1960s Nonsense....ugh
"Research indicates that males are more helpful than females in the broader public sphere, towards strangers, and in emergency settings.
For example, since 1904 the Carnegie Hero Fund Commission has given awards to 'heroes', defined as a 'civilian who voluntarily risks his or her own life, knowingly, to an extraordinary degree while saving or attempting to save the life of another person.'

More than 90% of the individuals who have received Carnegie medals have been men."
(Baumeister & Bushman, 2017, pg. 316)
Helping Behavior Continued
Dozens of studies have reported results indicated that attractive people are more likely to receive help than unattractive people.
Belief in a just world:
a "belief" or mindset that people hold. They believe that what happens in the world is fair. Good people succeed and bad people fail.
People who hold high belief in a just world scores tend to blame the victim (e.g., that doesn't happen to a person unless they are somewhere they shouldn't be).
Scoring high on the belief in a just world makes a person less likely to help. If the outcome is perceived as their fault, they are highly unlikely to help (e.g., you got cancer because you smoked, it's your fault).
One of the strongest findings is that people who score high on this scale are reluctant to help people who are elderly.
People are likely to help more when they are full vs hungry, it is sunny vs dark, they are watching a comedy vs a horror movie, or they are primed to feel guilty.
The more angry a person is, the less likely they are to help.
Diffusion of responsibility:
social psychological term that supports bystander behavior. The larger the crowd, the less likely a person is to intervene and help a victim. Also known as
Bystander Effect
20-30% of bystanders actually antagonize and encourage bullying.
http://fod.infobase.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx?wID=100833&xtid=41310&loid=84691
5 Steps To Helping
1) Notice that something is happening
The participants in a group of 4 took five times longer to notice the smoke than the participant completing the survey alone!
One study had participants fill out a survey alone or in a group of 4. The experimenter had smoke (dry-ice) to exit a vent next to the participants.
2) Interpret the Meaning of the Event
A public fight between a man and woman was staged by psychologists in NY. When the fight became physical the actress either yelled "Get away from me; I don't know you!" or "Get away from me; I don't know why I married you!".
When the actress said he was a stranger, participants helped 65% of the time. When she yelled at her husband, participants helped 19% of the time.
3) Take Responsibility for Providing Help
One study had participants talk to each other through an intercom system. One participant (actually a confederate) pretends to have a seizure over the intercom.
When the condition had 6 participants listening, nobody helped. When it was just the participant and the confederate, they almost always helped.
4) Know How to Help
Participants recruited were either nursing or education majors. A participant pretended to fall and hit his head. The nursing majors usually helped where the education majors did not.
5) HELP!!!
The Psychology of Prejudice
Sociology would examine prejudice from a societal perspective. Psychology would try to examine prejudice from the individual perspective.
Cognitive level of prejudice:
this is the most basic form of prejudice. People are less aware of their prejudiced beliefs at this point, they are largely unconscious beliefs. Essentially, people are automatically recalling stereotypes they associated with a group and determining they are good or bad unconsciously.
When stereotypes have entered the cognitive level, this means that prejudiced people automatically think about those stereotypes when they encounter a person.
Look at the image of the African-American child. The cognitive level of prejudice explains that people with higher levels of prejudice automatically think those words at the cognitive level when they see the child.
Humans do the exact same thing with age and gender.
BOY
Sports
Baseball
Football
Hockey
Running
Fighting
Strong
Competitive
Pranks
Fun
Comics
Action Figures
Bugs
Gross Stuff
Video games
Slingshot
Outside
Confident
Math
Camping
Adventure
Brave
Basketball
Soccer
Being Dirty
Humor
Sneaky
Emotional level of prejudice:
these are the emotions that the prejudiced person experiences when they encounter minorities. These emotional expressions tend to be grouped: fear/envy, distrust/trust, disgust/admiration, contempt/empathy.
People that are susceptible to supporting prejudiced beliefs are not too skilled at reflecting their own emotions. Therefore, they often do not comprehend they are fearful, envious, disgusted, etc.
Aversive Prejudice:
people say that everybody should be treated fairly but they are uncomfortable around people of specific groups.
Common Characteristics of Prejudiced People
After decades of scientific research, there are numerous measurements and scales one can take that will assess the level of their prejudice.
Self-Justification:
people who commit discriminatory behavior tend to use high amounts of self-justification. For instance, people who say we should build a wall around America are using self-justification to support their racists beliefs.
When schools were still segregated, many white people argued it was "for the best and would reduce violent conflict". This is yet again another example of self-justification for their discriminatory treatment.
Children that receive high amounts of excessive punishment by their parents are more likely to express prejudiced beliefs. This has been replicated in numerous scientific studies.
Scapegoating:
when the dominant group blames their trouble on the minority or disadvantage group. Hitler blamed the failing economy on Jewish people in Germany.
Little control or freedom in personal life (Henslin, 2013)
A classic psychology study primed participants to feel frustrated by an impossible to finish task. After this primer the students reported higher rates of prejudice.
So frustration may lead to aggression
(Cowen, 1959).
Authoritarian Personality :
A person who scores high on this psychological test is prone to display high rates of narcissism, prejudiced beliefs, conformity, intolerance, respect for authority, etc. http://www.anesi.com/fscale.htm
http://www.panojohnson.com/automatons/rwa-scale.xhtml
Outgroup Homogeneity Bias:
"They all look and act alike". The original study that highlighted this was done at college fraternities.
Dehumanization Picture Examples
Full transcript