1. FRQ PRACTICE Give an example of how the following terms can impact our judgments, attitudes, or actions. 1. Fundamental Attribution Error 2. Cognitive Dissonance 3. Central Route of Persuasion

2. 1. Fundamental Attribution Error 2. Cognitive Dissonance
FRQ PRACTICE Give an example of how the following terms can impact our judgments, attitudes or actions.
1. Fundamental Attribution Error
2. Cognitive Dissonance
3. Central Route of Persuasion 3.

3. Possible Responses
1. The Fundamental Attribution Error can cause Sally to make a misjudgment about Joe’s shyness and ignore the fact that Joe is in a room where he only knows Sally.
2. Cognitive Dissonance can cause Sue to question her beliefs and attitudes about the objectification of women, when she continues to support businesses that objectify women in their advertising.
3.Joe uses the Central Route of Persuasion when he does a good job communicating his political platform, which helps people vote for him based solely on his message.

4. FRQ PRACTICE A. Use the following terms to explain why people conform or comply with others’ requests. 1. Normative Social Influence 2. Foot-in-the-Door Approach

5. FRQ PRACTICE 3/23/18 B. Using the following terms, give an example of group influence on individuals. 1. Social Facilitation 2. Group Polarization 3. Groupthink

6. Possible Responses
A1. Normative Social Influence influences people to conform based on their desire to seek approval.
A2. People comply with other’s requests when the Foot-in-the-Door Approach is used because they have already complied with something small, and it is easier to say yes again if you have already said it once.
B1. Social Facilitation influences Sue to be more creative with her painting because other members of the class can see what she is creating.
B2. Group Polarization influences Joe to develop a much stronger opinion about the dangers of climate change after he sits in on a discussion where everyone in the group has very strong opinions on the dangers of climate change.
B3. Groupthink influences the student government to seek consensus about a “No Means No” campaign, instead of thoroughly discussing the issue and coming to a decision, even if not everyone agrees.