Psychology Experiment: Frustration and Attitudes Towards Minorities

The importance of subjective thoughts and socio-historical context in driving the amount and direction of aggression

It does not consider social norms and does not provide an explanation for intergroup cooperation

A discrepancy between the standard of living people have and the standard of living they think they're entitled to

A correlation between the lynching of African Americans and falling cotton prices in the United States

A measure where people were asked to indicate how they valued their past, present, and future life as compared to their 'ideal' good life

Egoistic relative deprivation refers to one's sense of personal deprivation, while fraternal relative deprivation refers to the sense of deprivation of one's group

Fraternal relative deprivation can lead to collective protest, as individuals feel that their group has less than it's entitled to

Individual stress

That behaviour can best be understood by analysing the good and bad outcomes people get in their interactions with others.

Social dilemmas.

Behaviour directed toward maximizing collective welfare.

Behaviour directed toward maximizing one's own welfare relative to others.

Behaviour directed toward maximizing one's own welfare independent of others.

The occurrence of aggressive behaviour always presupposes the existence of frustration, and contrariwise, the existence of frustration always leads to some form of aggression.

Giving some people a frustrating experience (experimental condition) and not giving it to others (control condition).

A scapegoat.

Participants in the frustration condition showed increased negativity towards minority groups, while those in the control condition did not change their attitudes over time.

The formula is a little vague, and not borne out by a great deal of anecdotal evidence.

Frustration is a subjective experience, and whether people are deprived or not is not as important as whether they think they've been deprived.

The most likely choice for a scapegoat is an outgroup that has been in conflict with the group in the past, or an outgroup that you know doesn't like your group.

Any aversive event, such as pain, extreme heat or cold, loud noises, or overcrowding.

Berkowitz's theory emphasizes the subjective experience of frustration and the role of aversive events, whereas the Frustration-Aggression Theory focuses on goal interference as the primary cause of frustration.

Participants in the frustration condition showed increased negativity towards minority groups.

Frustration is neither necessary nor sufficient to cause aggression.

Competition for scarce resources.

Realistic conflict.

Frustration-aggression hypothesis.

Mutually exclusive goals.

Competition for resources.

Relative deprivation.

It helps us understand how individuals make decisions in social settings.

Superordinate tasks.

Intragroup theory focuses on the dynamics and processes that occur within a single social group, exploring how individual behaviour and attitudes are influenced by membership in a particular group and the norms, roles, and relationships that exist within that group.

Intergroup behaviour is characterized by less trust and more competitiveness than interpersonal behaviour.

Social interdependence refers to a relationship between two or more people in which the outcomes that each person receives are jointly determined by the decisions and behaviours of that person and the others in the relationship.

The fundamental unit of analysis remains the individual, and groups are understood to be interacting individuals who have effects on each other.

The frustration-aggression hypothesis suggests that frustration can lead to aggression.

People tend to favour their own group over outgroups.

Understanding the interactions of at least two people is essential in understanding the social psychology of groups and group behaviour.

The intergroup level focuses on the interactions, attitudes, and behaviours that occur between different social groups.

The difficulty in predicting the target of aggression.

Berkowitz defines frustration as a subjective experience, rather than a response to goal interference.

Perceived conflicting group interests.

Berkowitz's explanation emphasizes the role of aversive events, rather than frustration, in causing aggression.

Participants showed increased negativity towards minority groups.

It provides a more theoretically plausible explanation for scapegoat selection.

Frustration is neither necessary nor sufficient to cause aggression.

Intergroup behavior involves interactions between groups, whereas interpersonal behavior involves interactions between individuals.

Competition for scarce resources leads to intergroup aggression, and when one group's interests are in conflict with another group's interests, it leads to deteriorated intergroup relations.

Relative deprivation can lead to greater generosity towards minorities, but it can also lead to prejudice and intolerance. Implications for intergroup relations include deteriorated relations and intergroup aggression.

Superordinate tasks promote cooperation between groups by requiring them to work together to achieve a common goal, which can reduce intergroup aggression and improve intergroup relations.

Social interdependence theory explains how individuals' behavior is influenced by their interdependence with others, leading to cooperation or competition. Implications for intergroup relations include the potential for cooperation or intergroup aggression.

The boys' camp studies identified competition for resources and conflicting interests as key factors in the origins of prejudice, which is consistent with realistic conflict theory.

The frustration-aggression hypothesis explains aggressive behavior as a result of frustration, but limitations include the need for a clear target of aggression and the role of other factors in aggression.

Cooperation in game theory refers to the willingness of individuals to work together to achieve a common goal, which can improve intergroup relations and reduce aggression.

Interdependence theory explains how individuals' behavior is influenced by their interdependence with others, which can lead to cooperation or competition, with implications for intergroup relations.

The primary assumption is that behavior can be best understood by analyzing the good and bad outcomes people get in their interactions with others. This assumption helps understand how individuals' interactions with others influence their behavior in social situations.

The outcomes of choices in a social dilemma influence cooperation and competition among individuals by either maximizing collective welfare or individual welfare, leading to either cooperation or competition.

The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis proposes that the existence of frustration always leads to some form of aggression, and that aggression is often displaced onto a scapegoat.

Social dilemmas, such as the use of shared resources, influence individual behavior and collective welfare by creating conflicts between individual and collective interests, leading to either cooperation or competition.

The 2x2 matrix is a tool used to understand social dilemmas by representing the possible outcomes of individual choices, highlighting the interdependence of choices and outcomes.

Factors such as isolation and communication influence cooperation levels in social dilemmas by either facilitating or hindering cooperation, which in turn affects collective welfare.

Goals and goal interference play a role in the Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis by creating frustration, which can lead to aggression when an individual's goals are blocked or thwarted.

Individual values and attitudes influence behavior in social dilemmas by shaping individual choices and outcomes, which in turn affect collective welfare.

The relative deprivation theory argues that the primary cause of aggression is a discrepancy between the standard of living people have and the standard of living they think they're entitled to. This differs from the frustration-aggression hypothesis, which argues that frustration leads to aggression.

Berkowitz's alternative explanation argues that aggression is not solely the result of frustration, but rather is influenced by subjective thoughts and socio-historical context. This implies that aggression can be driven by factors beyond frustration, such as perceived injustices or social norms.

Egoistic relative deprivation refers to an individual's sense of deprivation, whereas fraternal relative deprivation refers to a group's sense of deprivation. Fraternal relative deprivation is more closely linked to collective protest, as it involves a sense of shared injustice and group identity.

The relative deprivation theory explains this correlation by arguing that economic hardship can lead to feelings of deprivation, which can in turn drive aggression. This implies that social unrest may be more likely to occur during times of economic hardship, as individuals may feel more deprived and frustrated.

Social norms play a crucial role in shaping aggressive behavior, as they can influence an individual's perception of what is acceptable and justifiable. Berkowitz's theory accounts for the role of social norms by arguing that aggression is driven by a combination of subjective thoughts, socio-historical context, and social norms.

Relative deprivation can contribute to intergroup conflict by creating a sense of perceived injustice and competition between groups. This can lead to increased aggression and conflict between groups.

Cooperation in game theory refers to the mutual benefit of cooperation between individuals or groups. In the context of intergroup conflict, cooperation can be a crucial factor in reducing conflict and promoting peaceful resolution.

The relative deprivation theory explains this correlation by arguing that perceived injustice can lead to feelings of deprivation, which can in turn drive aggression. This implies that addressing feelings of injustice and promoting a sense of fairness can be crucial in reducing aggression and social conflict.

The primary assumption is that groups are more than aggregates of individuals, and that outcomes are jointly determined by the decisions and behaviors of individuals in the relationship. This understanding helps to analyze social behavior in social psychology.

Intergroup behavior is characterized by less trust and more competitiveness than interpersonal behavior. It involves interactions, attitudes, and behaviors between different social groups, with individuals favoring their own group over outgroups.

The frustration-aggression hypothesis proposes that frustration can lead to aggression, often directed towards minority groups. Its primary concern is understanding the fundamental causes of aggression and the targets of aggression.

Understanding the interactions of at least two people is significant because it implies that groups are more than aggregates of individuals, and that individual behavior is influenced by group membership and norms.

Relative deprivation refers to the feeling of dissatisfaction or discontentment that arises when individuals perceive a discrepancy between their current situation and a desired situation. It can lead to social identity conflicts and intergroup conflicts.

Cooperation in game theory refers to the behavior of individuals working together to achieve a common goal. It can be promoted in intergroup relations through external threats or superordinate tasks that promote cooperation between groups.

The boys' camp studies demonstrated that intergroup conflict and prejudice can arise from factors such as competition for resources and social identity. This significance lies in highlighting the importance of understanding the origins of prejudice in social psychology.

The core assumption is that groups are more than aggregates of individuals, and that individual behavior is influenced by group membership and norms. This assumption has implications for understanding social behavior, group dynamics, and intergroup relations.

It changes how people interact and behave, making them more likely to want to work together with members of their in-group and be competitive in intergroup situations.

To get students thinking critically about the content in a particular way.

When individuals are divided into in-groups and out-groups, social interdependence and social identity intersect, influencing behavior and motivation.

It helps us understand social behavior, highlighting the importance of interdependence in shaping group outcomes.

It increases cooperation with in-group members and competitiveness with out-group members, even when groups are formed arbitrarily.

To get students to think critically and come up with alternative explanations, rather than just producing a correct answer.

To help students develop critical thinking skills and deeper understanding of the material.

It allows students to focus on engaging with the process without worrying about submitting an answer.

It increases competitiveness and decreases cooperation with out-group members, while increasing cooperation with in-group members.

It is okay if you don't know the answer, what matters is that you are thinking about it and coming up with alternative explanations.

They intersect to influence behavior and motivation, shaping individual and group outcomes.

Tutors will explain the process and provide guidance to students.

It allows students to clarify any doubts and understand the expectations.

The assessments are concerned with the process of thinking and coming up with alternative explanations, rather than just producing a correct answer.

They are designed to get students to think critically and engage with the material.

The lab sessions are designed to get students to think critically and engage with the material, whereas a standard exam is focused on producing a correct answer.

Cross-cultural studies provide more solid evidence for a particular claim by testing it in multiple cultures, ensuring that the findings are not limited to a particular cultural context.

The concept of relative deprivation accounts for both individual and group-level feelings of deprivation through egoistic and fraternal relative deprivation, respectively.

The strength of relative deprivation theory lies in its ability to describe the existence of both individual and group-level feelings of deprivation, providing a more comprehensive understanding of human behavior and social unrest.

The survey provides evidence for the link between relative deprivation and civil unrest, highlighting the importance of considering both individual and group-level feelings of deprivation in understanding social unrest.

Relative deprivation theory suggests that feelings of deprivation can lead to competition and conflict, rather than cooperation, highlighting the importance of addressing these feelings in promoting social harmony.

Relative deprivation and social interdependence are related concepts, as both acknowledge the importance of social context in shaping human behavior; relative deprivation highlights the role of perceived deprivation in social interdependence.

The limitations of relative deprivation theory include its focus on individual and group-level feelings of deprivation, neglecting other factors that may contribute to social unrest; improvements can be made by incorporating additional factors, such as social context and power dynamics.

The concept of relative deprivation highlights the role of perceived deprivation in shaping intergroup relations and conflict, emphasizing the importance of addressing these feelings in promoting social harmony.