1. Ch. 1 Free Response Rubric 1. Subjects are Hyperactive 2. Random Sample 3. Independent Variable 4. IV described (control vs. experimental 5. Dependent Variable 6. Dependent Variable described (how measured) 7. Placebo/Control 8. Other controls (double blind, random assignment) 9. Replication (validity, reliability) 10. Groups are compared (statistical significance)

2. Prejudice & Discrimination Pro-Social & Anti-Social Behavior

3. In-Group / Out-Group Bias If we believe that someone else is in a group to which we belong, we will have positive views of them and give them preferential treatment. Why do we think and behave this way? Example: Watch children in the school yard. Notice how they form groups and how they treat those not in their group. A third grade girl feels upset and isolated because she is not able to play with the other children.

4. Prejudice & Discrimination Stereotypes: Overgeneralizations Example: Gay men are all effeminate. We develop stereotypes when we are unable or unwilling to obtain all of the information we would need to make fair judgments. Stereotype threat is the fear that one's behavior will confirm an existing stereotype of a group with which one identifies. This fear can sometimes affect performance.stereotype Prejudice: Unjustifiable beliefs; usually negative Example: believing that sexual or gender orientation makes one group inferior Discrimination: Action based on prejudice Example: Not hiring a gay man because of his sexual orientation

5. A Girl Like Me Video Clip Why do prejudices and acts of discrimination like the examples viewed in “A Girl Like Me” & “A Class Divided” continue to exist? How can prejudice & discrimination be reduced?

6. What was the main theme of this short film? How did you react to this film? (emotions, feelings) What does this film suggest about our society? Memorable moments/ quotes. What will you take away from this film? A Girl Like Me

7. Discussion Questions Are the results from the “doll experiment” proof of internalized racism?

8. Pro-Social & Anti Social Behavior Pro-Social Behavior: voluntary behavior intended to help others Bystander Effect (Kitty Genovese) Diffusion of responsibility Why don’t people help? Don’t Notice Interpretation Don’t know how to take responsibility Jericho Experiment Effects of time Kitty Genovese, picture from The New York Times article: "Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Didn't Call the Police"

9. Kitty’s Apartment

10. Altruism Selfless concern for the welfare of others. Does altruism really exist? Things to consider: Social Exchange Theory Norms of reciprocity- expecting a favor in return. Feel good-do good hypothesis "Kind words can be short and easy to speak, but their echoes are truly endless." - Mother Teresa

11. Antisocial Behavior Aggression- Any act that is intended to hurt someone or something. What are the possible causes of aggression? Biological serotonin testosterone Cultural differences Social Learning Theory- Bandura & Bobo Doll Frustration Aggression hypothesis Freud- Human Nature- aggressive tendencies- displacement

12. Deindividuation: Loss of self to the group Deindividuation occurs when group participation makes people feel aroused and anonymous. Dodd’s Study (1985) Are college freshman or prison inmates more susceptible to deindividuation?

13. Deindividuation Aggression Charity Academic Dishonesty Crime Escapism Political Activities Sexual Behavior Social Disruption Interpersonal Spying/Eves dropping Travel Other Social Desirability Scale Prosocial 9 % (intended to help others) Antisocial 36% (behavior intended to injure others or deprive them of their rights) Nonnormative 19% (behavior that violates social norms and practices but does not specifically help or hurt others) Neutral 36% (behaviors that do not meet the criteria for any of the first three categories)

14. Philip Zimbardo: Stanford Prison Experiment Recruitment and Methodology Wanted to learn about behaviors and feelings of prisoners & guards Set up a phony prison in a university building Recruited male college students to participate Randomly assigned 24 participants to role of either prisoner or guard

15. Stanford Prison Experiment: Methodology Guards instructed to make prisoners feel frustrated and not in control Prisoners arrested and booked as real prisoners Guards bullied the prisoners and began “counts”

16. Stanford Prison Experiment: Results Prisoners staged a rebellion on the second day Guards stepped up their harassment and treated rebellion “ringleaders” differently than the “good” prisoners Prisoners told they couldn’t leave; many became anxious Guards increased bullying tactics as they perceived prisoners to be a real threat Zimbardo and his colleagues adapted to their roles

17. Stanford Prison Experiment: Results Everyone took on the role to which they were assigned— the experiment became very realistic Experiment ended after six days instead of two weeks Prisoners had lost their identity