Myers’ PSYCHOLOGY (7th Ed) Chapter 18 Social Psychology James A. McCubbin, PhD Clemson University Worth Publishers

Social Thinking  Social Psychology  scientific study of how we think about, influence, and relate to one another  Attribution Theory  tendency to give a causal explanation for someone’s behavior, often by crediting either:  the situation or  the person’s disposition  The Lunch Date The Lunch Date

Social Thinking  Fundamental Attribution Error  tendency for observers, when analyzing another’s behavior, to underestimate the impact of the situation and to overestimate the impact of personal disposition  Attitude  belief and feeling that predisposes one to respond in a particular way to objects, people and events

Social Thinking  How we explain someone’s behavior affects how we react to it Negative behavior Situational attribution “Maybe that driver is ill.” Dispositional attribution “Crazy driver!” Tolerant reaction (proceed cautiously, allow driver a wide berth) Unfavorable reaction (speed up and race past the other driver, give a dirty look)

Social Thinking  Our behavior is affected by our inner attitudes as well as by external social influences Internal attitudes External influences Behavior

Attitudes and Actions  Attitude  belief and feeling that predisposes one to respond in a particular way to objects, people and events

Attitudes and Actions  Do Attitudes Guide Actions?  Yes, IF:  Outside influences on are minimal  Don’t feel pressure to act or say one way or the other  The attitude is specifically relevant to the behavior  Often general attitudes contradict behavior  Attitudes about specific ACT do guide action  We are aware of our attitudes  Acting out or habit or others’ expectations then attitude doesn’t come into play  Repeatedly expressing an attitude make it come to mind more quickly  More likely to guide behavior

Attitudes and Actions  Do Actions Guide Attitudes?  TED talk TED talk

Attitudes and Actions  Foot-in-the-Door Phenomenon  Tendency for people who have first agreed to a small request to comply later with a larger request  “Thought control” programs on prisoners of war  A trivial act makes the next act easier

Social Thinking  Cognitive Dissonance Theory  we act to reduce the discomfort (dissonance) we feel when two of our thoughts (cognitions) are inconsistent  example- when we become aware that our attitudes and our actions clash, we can reduce the resulting dissonance by changing our attitudes

Social Thinking  Cognitive Dissonance Theory Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Cognitive Dissonance Theory: How do we deal with cognitive dissonance?  Thought 1 I smoke  Thought 2 smoking causes cancer (is bad) zModify (thought 1): don’t smoke enough to be worried ; I’ll quit tomorrow zTrivialize (thought 2): evidence is weak zAdd (new thought): exercise to counter effects zDeny (no connection): no evidence they’re even linked

Social Thinking  Cognitive Dissonance Theory zIn order to reduce this dissonance between belief and behavior, he has a few difference choices:  He can sell the car and purchase another one that gets better gas mileage OR  He can reduce his emphasis on environmental- responsibility. zIn the case of the second option, his dissonance could be further minimized by engaging in actions that reduce the impact of driving a gas-guzzling vehicle, such as utilizing public transportation more frequently or riding his bike to work on occasion.

Social Thinking  Cognitive Dissonance Theory zHow to Reduce Cognitive Dissonance zThree key strategies to reduce or minimize cognitive dissonance:  Focus on more supportive beliefs that outweigh the dissonant belief or behavior  Reduce the importance of the conflicting belief  Change the conflicting belief so that it is consistent with other beliefs or behaviors

Review zAttribution Theory zFundamental Attribution Error (FAE) zAttitude (influence in action and vice versa) zFoot in the Door Phenomenon zCognitive Dissonance zRole (Zimbardo) zConformity (Asch) yNormative Social Influence yInformative Social Influence z Obedience (Millgram) z Social Facilitation z Social Loafing z Deindividuation z Group Polarization z Group Think z Prejudice z Discrimination z Stereotype z Bystander Effect z In Group Out group

Cognitive Dissonance

Social Thinking  Role  set of expectations about a social position  defines how those in the position ought to behave  Zimbardo Prison Experiment Zimbardo Prison Experiment  Follow-up Follow-up

Social Thinking  Cognitive dissonance

Social Norms  Social Norm Violations…  _of_norm_violations.htm _of_norm_violations.htm

Social Influence  Conformity Conformity  adjusting one’s behavior or thinking to coincide with a group standard  Normative Social Influence  influence resulting from a person’s desire to gain approval or avoid disapproval

Social Influence  Normative Social Influence  influence resulting from a person’s desire to gain approval or avoid disapproval  To be seen as NORMal  Informational Social Influence  influence resulting from one’s willingness to accept others’ opinions about reality  Alter the perception of INFORMATION

Social Influence  Informational Social Influence  influence resulting from one’s willingness to accept others’ opinions about reality

Social Influence  Asch’s conformity experiments Asch’s conformity experiments

Social Influence Milgram’s Obedience Experiment Milgram knew people comply to social pressures, but what about outright commands? Obedience was highest when: zThe person giving the orders was close at hand and a legitimate authority figure  Supported by a prestigious title or organization (Yale researchers, for example) zThe victim was depersonalized or at a distance  No role models for defiance

Social Influence  Milgram’s follow-up obedience experiment

Lessons from the Conformity and Obedience Studies Asch (normative and informational social influences) and Milgram (obedience to “scientist”) experiments zDemonstrate that strong social influences can make people conform to falsehoods or give in to cruelty

GROUP Influence : Individual Behavior in the Presence of Others  Social Facilitation  improved performance of tasks in the presence of others  occurs with simple/well-learned tasks but not with tasks that are difficult or not yet mastered  Social Loafing  tendency for people in a group to exert less effort when pooling their efforts toward attaining a common goal than when individually accountable

 Deindividuation  loss of self-awareness and self- restraint in group situations that foster arousal and anonymity  - example: RIOTS GROUP Influence : Individual Behavior in the Presence of Others

Effects of Group Interaction  Group Polarization  enhancement of a group’s prevailing attitudes through discussion within the group  Groupthink  mode of thinking that occurs when the desire for harmony in a decision-making group overrides realistic appraisal of alternatives

Social Relations  Prejudice  an unjustifiable (and usually negative) attitude toward a group and its members  involves stereotyped beliefs, negative feelings, and a predisposition to discriminatory action  Stereotype  a generalized (sometimes accurate, but often overgeneralized) belief about a group of people

Social Relations  Bystander Effect  tendency for any given bystander to be less likely to give aid if other bystanders are present  Video Video

Social Relations  The decision-making process for bystander intervention

Social Influence  Some individuals resist social coercion

Social Relations  Does perception change with race?

Social Relations  Americans today express much less racial and gender prejudice

Social Relations  Ingroup  “Us”- people with whom one shares a common identity  Outgroup  “Them”- those perceived as different or apart from one’s ingroup  Brown Eyed - Blue Eyed Brown Eyed - Blue Eyed

Social Relations  Ingroup Bias  tendency to favor one’s own group  Scapegoat Theory  theory that prejudice provides an outlet for anger by providing someone to blame  Just-World Phenomenon  tendency of people to believe the world is just  people get what they deserve and deserve what they get

Social Relations  Aggression  any physical or verbal behavior intended to hurt or destroy  Frustration-Aggression Principle  principle that frustration – the blocking of an attempt to achieve some goal – creates anger, which can generate aggression

Social Relations

 Conflict  perceived incompatibility of actions, goals, or ideas  Social Trap  a situation in which the conflicting parties, by each rationally pursuing their self-interest, become caught in mutually destructive behavior

Attraction: liking and loving zSocial Attractiveness: What makes us attractive to each other?  Do birds of a feather flock together or do opposites attract?  Does familiarity breed contempt or does it intensify our affection?  Does absence make the heart grow fonder or is it out of sight, out of mind?

What attracts us? 1. PROXIMITY  Mere Exposure Effect  repeated exposure to stimuli increases liking of them 2. ATTRACTIVENESS  Conceptions of attractiveness vary by culture  3. SIMILARITIES Common attitudes, beliefs, interests, intelligence, age, economic status

Attraction: liking and loving zSocial Attractiveness: What makes us attractive to each other?  Concept of Beauty 11

Attraction: liking and loving  Concept of Beauty 22

Attraction: liking and loving  Concept of Beauty 33

Attraction: liking and loving  Concept of Beauty 44

Attraction: liking and loving  Concept of Beauty 55

Attraction: liking and loving  Concept of Beauty 66

Attraction: liking and loving zSocial Attractiveness: What makes us attractive to each other?  Concept of Beauty 11 22 33 44 55

Social Relations  Passionate Love  an aroused state of intense positive absorption in another  usually present at the beginning of a love relationship  Companionate Love  deep affectionate attachment we feel for those with whom our lives are intertwined

THEORIES OF LOVE: Hatfield Companionate Love affection secure, intimacy equity self-disclosure Passionate Love physical arousal cognitive appraisal physiological

THEORIES OF LOVE zRubin’s: Liking or Loving zLoving vs. Liking -Attachment- Evaluative -- Caring -- Intimacy

THEORIES OF LOVE zSternberg’s Triangular Theory Intimacy : feeling component of love, know each other well Passionate: motivating component: arousal, sex Commitment : thinking component- marriage, com When all are balanced – consummate love! Consummate Love : Intimacy + Passion + Commitment

THEORIES OF LOVE zhttp:// WRw The Notebook: kiss scene (40 seconds) WRw z zhttp:// ed Spiderman: One kiss (1 min 30 sec) ed z zhttp:// ded Seinfeld: Drafty Booth (45 seconds) ded z zhttp:// gM Friends: Ross & Rachel (I only show 2 minutes of this clip) gM z zhttp:// ed Lost: Kate & Sawyer (2min 45sec) ed

Social Relations  Equity  a condition in which people receive from a relationship in proportion to what they give to it – freely give & receive – Companionate love  Self-Disclosure  revealing intimate aspects of oneself to others  Altruism  unselfish regard for the welfare of others