Term Test 4 Thursday March 9 in class, 12:00 - 1:50 40 multiple choice questions 10% of course grade Topics covered –class material: Feb 7 - Mar 2 –assigned readings: see lectures web page –Language and Nonverbal Communication (Ch. 11, end of Ch. 10, FQ37-40) –Cognitive Development (Ch. 11) –Social Development (Ch. 12) –Social Perception (Ch. 13) –Social Influence (Ch. 14)

Perception of self –Self-fulfilling prophecy (Pygmalion effect) Perception of others –Attribution Situation vs. Personality? –Fundamental Attribution Error (person bias) people overemphasize the person over the situation –Actor-observer bias the person bias is much stronger for others’ behavior than for your own –Prior information priming leads people to confirm their expectations (like the confirmation bias but for attributions) –Attractiveness bias Three Minute Review

Attitudes –“beliefs tinged with emotion” –cognitive dissonance behavior ≠ attitude  discomfort change behavior or change attitude so they are consistent insufficient justification –“The reward wasn’t enough; I must’ve done it because I wanted to.” belief in a just world –“What did I do to deserve this?” –blaming the victim

Prejudice –discrimination vs. prejudice –social categorization in-group out-group in-group bias -- “We’re better than they are.” out-group homogeneity bias -- “They’re all the same.” evolutionary factors? –stereotypes public private implicit –implicit association test –prejudice can become a self-fulfilling prophecy job interviews stereotype threat

SOCIAL INFLUENCE: OBEDIENCE Why do people obey to an extreme degree? Milgram’s Obedience Experiments –The majority of people will follow orders to an extreme degree –Results surprised many people, esp. psychologists –What factors affect obedience? Stanford Prison Experiment –Ordinary people get caught up in roles Psychology of Genocide

Banality of evil (Hannah Arendt) –Perhaps Adolf Eichmann was no different than the rest of us Psychology of genocide 1.difficult living conditions, fierce competition for resources 2.strong in- vs. out-groups 3.violence, blaming the victim 4.violence justifies itself can’t stop because of cognitive dissonance

How can we reduce prejudice? be mindful of your biases –children who were shown pictures of handicapped individuals and asked to think carefully about them (e.g., to think how they would drive a car) were more willing to play with disabled children than those who did only a superficial task (Langer et al., 1985)

How can we reduce prejudice? Robbers Cave Experiment (Sherif et al., 1961) –22 5 th grade boys in summer camp in 1954 –grouped into two groups, “Eagles” and “Rattlers” –boys only interacted with their own group for one week –groups began to interact in competitive situations (e.g., football, tug-of-war) –rivalry became violent –group flags burned, cabins ransacked, food fights

How can we reduce prejudice? Propaganda: No –positive propaganda about one group directed to the other by the experimenters did not help Contact: No –doing non-competitive activities together (e.g., watching movies) did not help Cooperative action: Yes –experimenters arranged for camp truck to break down –both groups needed to pull it uphill –intergroup friendships began to develop –cooperative approached is being used in US classrooms give assignment where students from different racial groups can only succeed by working together in a “jigsaw” approach

It’s hard to hate your friends friendships with outgroup members (as friends, neighbors, co-workers) leads to reliably lower levels of prejudice

Social Influence How do others affect our behavior? –How do others change our beliefs? –How do others get us to do what they want? follow societal rules and expectations commit atrocities

Conformity The adoption of attitudes and behaviors shared by a particular group of people. “The only thing a non-conformist hates more than a conformist is another non-conformist who won’t conform to the rules of non-conformity.”

Conformity is not always bad there would be anarchy without conformity social acceptance often depends on conformity

Asch’s Line Judgment Experiment ??? Solomon Asch, 1955 replicated by others in 1990 “Which comparison line is the same length as the standard?”

Asch’s Line Judgment Experiment On average, subjects conformed on ~40% of trials 26% of subjects never conformed 28% conformed on more than half the trials Conformity dropped to ¼ of its peak if one other person dissented (even when the dissenter made an inaccurate judgment) Conformity dropped dramatically when subjects recorded their responses privately (so actually it was compliance -- yielding to public pressure without changing private views)

Group Decisions How does this tendency to conform affect group decisions?

Group Polarization

Groupthink

Psychologist Irving Janis coined the term “Groupthink” to describe the tendency to avoid dissent and reach a consensus during group decisions Janis argued that groupthink was responsible for many stupid policy decisions e.g., JFK & Bay of Pigs invasion GWB & co. and Iraq invasion Causes of Groupthink –powerful group of people who think alike –absence of objective and impartial leadership –high levels of stress regarding decision

Déjà vu? “It seems to me that with that much carnage in the wheel well, something could get screwed up enough to prevent deployment and then you are in a world of hurt.” Robert Daugherty, engineer, Jan 30, 2003 Milt Heflin, chief flight director at Johnson said the members of the systems team concluded "that there wasn't anything else they needed to do or be concerned about.“ They agreed with the analysis by other engineers that the blow from the insulation probably hadn't done any serious damage, Heflin said. From “Why are we talking about this on the day before landing, and not the day after launch?“ William Anderson, engineer, Jan 30, 2003 Space Shuttle Challenger January 28, 1986 Space Shuttle Columbia February 1, 2003 NASA under strong pressure to launch shuttle first civilian in space many delays had occurred engineers were opposed to the launch because of concerns that cold temperatures might make rubber seals too brittle NASA executives made the decision to launch without input from engineers final NASA decision-maker was never told of engineers’ concerns

Preventing Groupthink Be impartial and objective Leader should encourage dissent Assign at least one “devil’s advocate” Occasionally break group into subgroups Seek opinions of external experts Towards end of decision, have a “second chance” meeting to review lingering doubts

Social Loafing as the number of people increases, the effort exerted by each individual declines examples that are probably all-too-familiar to you: –group projects –roommates and housework less common in collectivist cultures (e.g., China) than individualistic cultures (e.g., USA)

Preventing Social Loafing Make each person accountable Record who did what Make the task challenging, appealing and involving Keep the group small If possible, put people of the same intelligence & competence together