Special Extra Credit Opportunity Annual Psychology Symposium

Friday, December 9, 2011, 3:30 - 4:30 p.m. Poster Presentations—Beck Atrium

This can be used for 1 experiment credit or extra credit. To complete assignment: •  Attend Symposium and give Dr. Martin your name on a

slip of paper. •  Interview people who are giving poster presentation. •  Send me an email with the following information for

three studies: –  Title of the study. –  State the theory behind the study and the hypotheses. –  Summarize the results. –  Must be typed, Return to me by email.

1 experiment requirement, or 1 extra credit.

Social Psychology

Humans are the preeminent social animals. No other species has the extensive, complex, and differentiated social interactions that we humans do.

Social psychology studies: •  How others influence the way we feel and act •  How we explain our behavior and the behavior of

others •  What determines the positive and negative behavior we

show to one another

What do you think of Rodney Stokes? Rodney Stokes can be arrogant and egotistical. At time

he tries to control most situations by dominating others. He seems most concerned with himself and shows little interest in others. He sometimes makes remarks that are hostile, although he is funny and usually keeps others laughing. He is confident of his ability and is not afraid to take on responsibilities. He is an independent thinker who is quite capable of making decisions on his own. He understands detailed information and can act quickly to solve problems. He is bright and intelligent.

How about this Rodney Stokes? Rodney Stokes is bright and intelligent. He understands

detailed information and can act quickly to solve problems. He is an independent thinker who is quite capable of making decisions on his own. He is confident of his ability and is not afraid to take on responsibilities. Although he is funny and usually keeps others laughing, he sometimes makes remarks that are hostile. He can be arrogant and egotistical. At time he tries to control most situations by dominating others. He seems most concerned with himself and shows little interest in others.

Social Perception and Cognition

Primacy effect-First impressions matter. •  Information that comes at the beginning more strongly

influences our perception of the person. We spend less time and effort processing later information.

•  Once we form an impression, we interpret the material that follows differently, so that if our initial impression is negative we interpret what follows as more negative or vice versa if positive.

Current research suggests we form these impressions very fast, in matter of seconds.

Social Cognition

Social Cognitions (schemas) can be based on past learning and can guide are actions in new social situations.

Social Schemas can be of different types •  Person schemas: Represent specific people or types of people

(librarians, police, psychotherapist, college professors, college students)

•  Situation schemas: How to use silverware at a formal dinner, or how should you act in class.

•  Role schemas: Represent shared expectations for a persons in prescribed roles, student-teacher, parent-child, buyer-seller.

•  Relationship schemas: Represent expectations about self and others in relationships, romantic vs. friendship.

Social Cognition

Stereotypes or Stereotyping •  Although we stereotype all the time because of the

benefits, it can have harmful effects when they become automatic and inaccurate and we don't correct them based on our experience.

•  Negative stereotypes are usually called prejudices although we are “prejudging” in both positive and negative instances.

The Formation of Stereotypes People who naturally divide into social categories or groups based upon sex, race, age, nationality, religion, etc. are more likely to be stereotyped.

•  New Yorkers, Midwesterners, women, blondes, old people, fraternity members, athletes, students from Edina, St. Olaf students.

Categorization magnifies differences between groups (outgroups) and minifies differences within groups (ingroups) •  Outgroup homogeneity bias.

–  The belief that members of outgroups are more similar to each other, “whites,” “blacks,” “Asians.” Ignoring differences.

•  Ingroup favoritism. –  We see members of our group having more positive

characteristics, and feel more positive toward them.

Stereotypes

Many stereotypes, although erroneous, can be self-perpetuating •  Illusory correlation

–  We are biased toward information that supports our stereotypes, e.g., “The English are prim, proper, and up-tight”

–  And we ignore examples that disconfirm our stereotype. –  If we are forced to recognize disconfirming information we

make it a subtype, within our stereotype. “Peter Gladstone, who I met in England, was so unusual for a Brit, in that he was very friendly, warm, and fun-loving.” This protects it.

Stereotypes can also be encouraged because our behavior toward representatives of the stereotyped group causes them to react in ways that fulfill our expectations.

When Stereotypes Lead to Problems

When stereotypes are negative (prejudices) they become a problem, that leads to: •  Discrimination: Acting negatively toward a person by

rigidly applying inaccurate stereotypes for all members of a particular group.

–  Unfortunately, our prejudiced responses to people can become automatic, and we may not even be aware of our prejudice or discrimination, e.g. Stud Turkel’s wife.

Amadou Diallo Shooting

In the early morning of February 4,1999, Diallo was standing near his building after returning from a meal. Four police officers passed by in a Ford Taurus, when they thought Diallo matched the description of a serial rapist, and approached him. The officers were in plain clothes. The officers claimed that they loudly identified themselves as NYPD officers and that Diallo ran up the outside steps toward his apartment house doorway at their approach, ignoring their orders to stop and "show his hands." As the suspect reached into his jacket, one of the officers believed Diallo was drawing a firearm and yelled "Gun!" to alert his colleagues. The officers opened fire on Diallo. The four officers fired forty-one shots, hitting Diallo nineteen times. Investigation found no weapons on Diallo's body; the item he had pulled out of his jacket was not a gun, but a wallet. All of the officers were exonerated by jury trial of any wrongdoing.

Stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination

Prejudicial Stereotypes that are a cause of discrimination are likely to be formed on the basis of ignorance, and hearsay, and the lack of realistic information. •  Education about people causes prejudice to decline.

Not surprisingly college educated people become less prejudiced

•  Most prejudiced people have no real experience with the group discriminated against. A consistent finding is that long term social contact on a personal basis goes a long way to solving the problem.

•  Mere Contact not especially helpful. But joint activities in working or playing TOGETHER found repeatedly to break down prejudice and discrimination.

Attribution Theory

Not only do we stereotype people based on their external characteristics, we also have biases in thinking what is motivating them. We tend to attribute causes for their behavior to two categories:

Categories of attribution: •  Internal or Dispositional attributions based on an

individual’s perceived stable characteristics, such as personality traits, feelings or abilities.

•  Situational or External attributions are explanations based on the the demands of the situation that are outside individual’s control.

Social Perception and Cognition

The Fundamental Attribution Error •  The most common attribution is that a person’s

behavior is dispositional even though we are aware of possible external influences

–  Half of students told a young woman would either act warm or aloof depending on how they were instructed to act or that she was spontaneous. Didn’t make a difference. Both groups believed it was her personality and that she acted spontaneously (Napolitan & Goethals, 1979).

–  College debaters, “flattery will get you everywhere”.

Making Attributions

I am walking out of the Market Place and down the hallway and I trip and almost fall. •  You are watching me and what are you thinking about

me? Internal or situational? •  What am I thinking? Internal or situational?

Actor-observer effect •  We are more likely to use an internal attribution for

others’ behavior and situational attribution for our own. –  When we observe others we are not aware of how the situation

may be affecting them because we are focusing on the person. –  However, when we are the actors we are focusing on the

situation, and we are aware of how it is affecting us.

Making Attributions

Why don’t we take in the situation more? •  A waiter fails to bring our order on time. We say, “What

a lazy good for nothing.” •  Then if we make the effort to see if we are correct we

notice “Its really busy here tonight.”

Two Step Process •  First, we identify an individual’s behavior and make a

quick personal attribution. –  The first step is simple, natural, and automatic. Like a reflex

•  Second, we then try to correct or adjust that inference to account for situational influences based on our experience and knowledge.

–  Second step requires attention, thought, and effort.

Making attributions

But •  You are on the mall on a nice summer day and Lance

Armstrong is riding his bike down the side walk, when he smashes into a garbage can and falls down. How do you interpret this.

Question: •  You talk to your professor about not doing well on their

exam what kind of attributions are each of you likely to make about why you didn’t do as well as you would like? What are you thinking? What is he/she thinking?

Cultural Differences—What do you see? Cultural differences in attribution

Americans are more prone to commit the Fundamental Attribution Error. This may be because we emphasize individual responsibility and accomplishment in our society.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

8 11 15ad

ult 8 11 22Adult

Personal Situational

AmericansIndians

Types of Attributions At times we use attributions to maintain positive

perceptions of ourselves •  Self-serving bias.

–  Back to the exam question. If you do well on an exam you tend to take credit for your success(internal). “I worked hard”, or “I am smart”

–  If you fail, you tend to blame your prof(external). “He/she is confusing, didn’t explain it well, questions messed up.”

–  The self-serving bias is operating when our attributions for success are internal, and our attributions for failure are external.

•  We also use attributions known as self-handicapping strategies to protect our self-image.

–  We intentionally put ourselves at a disadvantage to provide an excuse for an expected defeat or failure.

•  “What do you expect, I ate a large pizza half-hour before the swim meet with the current league champions.”

Types of attributions

Defensive attributions •  Attributing internal causes to people who experience

terrible events. Why are there homeless? Why did John get mugged and Susan get raped?

–  Preserves our belief in a "Just World” phenomenon, and that We can control our fate.

What causes us to be attracted to others? Proximity or exposure

•  We like people who are in physical proximity to us (propinquity). May reduce to an exposure effect. More likely to do talk or do things together.

•  Why were Dave LeVesque and Steve Miller my best friends in Room 115 when I started high school?

•  MIT Housing study •  Love blooms in FTS01 •  Aren’t you lucky that “special person” just happens to attend GAC

Similarity •  We like people who have similar Interests, Attitudes and Values.

Opposites don’t attract? •  Newcomb’s college roommate study

Reciprocity •  We like people who like us in return. They have “good” taste.

Familiarity •  People or things that have become familiar to us become preferred.

Familiar Strangers on trip. Mirror image preferences.

Which

Do

You

Prefer?

What causes us to be attracted to others?

Physical attractiveness •  Physical attractiveness is one of the strongest factors in

causing us to be attracted to others. •  Elaine Walster’s computer date study at the U. of M. •  Stereotype for Physical attractiveness

–  We tend to perceive physically attractive people as warmer, more responsive, successful, well-adjusted, happy, confident, socially skilled, and popular.

•  People from various cultures tend to agree on what is physically attractive. Possible evolutionary significance.

•  Tape

Attractiveness

How important is it that your mate is physically attractive?

How important is your mate’s financial prospects?

Age of Prospective Mate? What Attracts us to others? If you were told your prospective date was “average looking” would you be hopeful? (Langlois)

Is physical attractiveness related to better health and fertility

Waist/hip ratio = .70

What traits would make a person liked?

Many of the attraction studies were with subjects that had minimal information about others. What happens in the long-term?

Most Positive Most Negative Sincere Unkind Honest Untrustworthy Understanding Malicious Loyal Obnoxious Intelligent Cruel Dependable Mean Thoughtful Phony Considerate Liar

Attitudes People have attitudes toward objects, ideas and

concepts that predict their behavior. Attitudes composed of three components. For

example my attitude on smoking: •  Cognitive or Belief component

–  “Smoking causes cancer.”

•  Affective component –  “Dying from lung cancer would be terrible.”

•  Behavioral component –  “I refuse to smoke.”

Most of the time the three components are consistent but not always.

Predicting Behavior by Attitudes

Usually we behave in ways that are consistent with our beliefs but not always. Other influences constrain our behavior. •  If you believe in gender equality and your roommate

makes a sexist comment would you correct him or her? •  If your minister made a racial remark in her sermon,

would you correct her afterwards.

Even though we are at times inconsistent, when we act in ways that are contrary to our beliefs we become uncomfortable. •  The surgeon who smokes.

This state called Cognitive Dissonance, and it can cause us to change our behavior or our beliefs.

Cognitive Dissonance

Festinger’s boring” experiment. •  What if you were asked to participate in an extremely

boring experiment but after you finished the experimenter asked you to tell your fellow students that you found it fun and interesting and paid you money to do it?

–  Group 1 paid $1 for saying experiment “fun” –  Group 2 paid $20 for saying experiment “fun”

•  Would membership in one of these groups be more likely to change your attitude toward the experiment?

Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive Dissonance

In both of these groups you are lying to your fellow student and you don’t consider yourself to be that kind of person. In which case would cognitive dissonance be greater? Group 1 or Group 2?

Cognitive Dissonance

Paid $1 Paid $20

Attitude before

“This is a boring experiment” “This is a boring experiment”

Behavior/ Cognition

“I told my fellow student it was interesting for $1. My honesty can’t be bought for $1.”

“I told my fellow student it was interesting for $20. Who wouldn’t for that much money.”

Dissonance High Low

Attitude after

“Actually, the experiment was more interesting than I thought.” Dissonance reduced.

“It is still a boring experiment.” No dissonance.

How is cognitive dissonance involved?

Your girlfriend, Amy, plays hard to get and it can be quite frustrating, but you are sure she is the one for you.

The sorority you wish to join hazes its applicants severely, but after you join and go through pledging you decide that it has brought you closer to your sorority sisters.

You spend three months researching what camera you should buy and finally decide to buy a Sony. In contrast to the previous three months you now only read ads for Sony cameras.

Creating Dissonance to Change Attitudes

•  How do you get your boy friend or girl friend to get a date for your best friend who may not be the best looking but has a good personality? •  Gentle persuasion or bring in the artillery?

•  Rule of thumb. Best way to create dissonance is to adopt Minimal Sufficiency Rule. Influence person to act with the least amount of pressure so as to encourage an internal explanation of his/her behavior.

Do You Need Cognitive Dissonance? Darryl Bem’s Self Perception Theory

•  Individuals infer their attitudes, emotions, and other internal states by observing their own behavior. “I must have enjoyed the experiment because I said I did.”

Difference between cognitive dissonance and Self Perception or Self Attribution. •  Bem emphasizes cognitions as does, Festinger, but leaves out the internal

cognitive tension between contradictory cognitions. For Bem people infer what their attitudes are based on behavior alone.

Discovered important finding. Attitudes don’t always determine behavior, sometimes behavior determines attitudes. •  How Ben Franklin made a friend of an enemy. Civil Rights Movement. •  “You are a shallow, untrustworthy, uninteresting and unattractive person.”

The reason why I believe that, is because I said it. •  “Blaming the victim” occurs because we don’t want to admit to ourselves

that we may be responsible for acting inappropriately

The power of the group/situation

We usually consider ourselves to be “masters of our fate,” “captains of our vessels” but how do situations and groups affect our behavior.

It is surprising how quickly we conform to groups so that we fit in.

Tape.

Asch Study of Conformity

The Asch Study of the Norm of Conformity

Being a member of a groups creates pressure to conform. Asch study on conformity •  Conformity increases with size of group, up to 4 then

plateaus •  Presence of a "rebel" in the group breaks up

conformity, even if he/she doesn’t agree •  Do people really see the world differently or are they

complying under pressure. It appears to be compliance, but subjects do not like to admit this.

Bystander intervention

If you are in an emergency and people are standing around what should you do?

“Following Orders”

The power of social situations: Milgram’s Obedience Study

Milgram’s interest in the holocaust. Did the German’s have a flaw in their national character? •  Initial work of other’s suggested authoritarian

personality. •  Milgram asked the question whether it could be the

result of the social norms that are established with people in subordinate positions that creates an obligation to obey requests from those in superior positions.

•  If you were asked you to kill someone for the sake of a learning experiment would you?

Milgram’s stage play •  Jack Williams and the Yale Interaction Laboratory •  The effect of punishment on learning word pairs e.g., “Blue-neck”

•  Each time subject failed, punishment administered by way of electric shock

•  Subject complains with greater emphasis with increasing shock

Milgram’s  Study

Both  Pho

tos:  ©  1965  By

 Stanley  M

iligram

,  from  th

e  

film  Obedience,  d

ist.  by

 Penn  State,  M

edia  Sales

Milgram Obedience Study

Shock Level Response of Victim 75 - 285 Loud Grunt, “I can’t stand the pain”

“Don’t do that!”, complaints of heart trouble, agonized scream

300 No Response 315 Refusal to answer and heart

rending silence after that 330 Silence 345 Silence 360 Silence 375 Silence 390-450 Silence

Milgram Obedience Study

Shock Level Response of Victim N Refusing to Continue 75 - 285 Loud Grunt, “I can’t stand the pain” 0

“Don’t do that!”, complaints of heart trouble, agonized scream

300 No Response 5 315 Refusal to answer and heart 4

rending silence after that 330 Silence 2 345 Silence 1 360 Silence 1 375 Silence 1 390-450 Silence 0

(26 or 65% continued till the end)

“Just following orders”

Physical distance from the “learner” had a significant effect on the percentage of subjects obeying orders.

Obedience

Milgram’s subjects were all men, what else would you expect? •  “Say Cathy coed, would you like to help us train this puppy?” •  54% went to the end, even though they were terribly distraught.

We tend to obey: •  When the request comes from a “legitimate authority.” •  Because obedience is fostered by social norms; we don’t’ want to make

trouble. •  If we do not see ourselves as personally responsible for our behavior.

Was it ethical to run this study? Subject’s responses

•  83.7 % glad they participated •  15.1% neither sorry or glad •  1.3% sorry or very sorry they participated •  80% believe more experiments of this sort should be done. •  74% believe they learned something of personal importance.