EXAM 2 STUDY GUIDE (Social PSYCH) PDF

EXAM 2 STUDY GUIDE Chapter 5 (The Self) Self concept (Who am I?) ​ Self-description ○​ Physical self description- refer to physical qualities that do not imply social interaction “identity card” type information. Example: “I am female, “I am brunett” “I am 18...

EXAM 2 STUDY GUIDE Chapter 5 (The Self) Self concept (Who am I?) ​ Self-description ○​ Physical self description- refer to physical qualities that do not imply social interaction “identity card” type information. Example: “I am female, “I am brunett” “I am 18” “I live in Texa” ○​ Social self-descriptions- refer to relationships, group memberships, social roles and attitudes which are socially defined and validated. Example: “I am a daughter” “I am Mexican-American” ○​ Psychological self-description- refer to psychological traits and states and to attitudes which do not refer to particular social referents. Example: “I am shy” “I am stressed” “I am a music lover” ○​ Temporary states- characteristics that are true right now, don’t say much about enduring characteristics. Example: “I am me” “I am a human being” -​ Cultural Differences -​ Independent view of the self:A way of defining oneself in terms of one’s own internal thought, feelings, and actions and not in terms of thought, feelings, and action of other people./Seeing yourself based on your own thoughts, feeling and action, without being influenced by what other’s think, feel or do. It is about being true to your own identity -​ People who grow up in Western cultures tend to have an independent view of the self -​ Interdependent view of the self: A way of defining oneself in terms of one’s relationships to other people recognizing that one’s behavior is often determined by the thoughts, feeling, and actions of others./seeing yourself based on your relationship with others. You understand that your actions and feeling are influenced by the people around you. It’s about being connected to and shaped by those relationships. -​ People who grow up in Asian cultures tend to have an interdependent view of self -​ Gender Differences -​ Relational -​ Collective interdependence Self Schema and Self-Reference Effect -​ Self Schema: beliefs about the self that organize and guide the processing of self-relevant information. Structure underlying your self concept. Guides how we process social information./ beliefs about yourself that help you organize and understand information related to you. They shape how you see yourself and the world around you  -​ Self Reference Effect: Tendency to process efficiently and remember information better when it is related to oneself./We are better at remembering information if it’s related to ourselves -​ ACTIVITY 2: we had to list our paper from 1 to 20 and the teacher was saying a list verbally, we couldn’t write down any of the words being said but we had to circle or do any type of chck in the number (with the word) that described us. Then later on we had to write down all the words we could remember from that list and then we noticed that most people just remember the words that described them instead of the words that did not. There were exceptions tho. Self-Peception (How do we learn about ourselves?) -​ Motivation -​ Intrinsic motivation: the desire to engage in an activity because we enjoy it or find it intresrung , not because of external rewards or pressures. -​ Extrinsic motivation: the desire to engage in an activity because of external rewards or pressures, not because we enjoy the task or find it interesting. -​ Schacter’s Two Factor Theory of Emotion -​ The idea that emotional experience is the result of a two-step self-perception process in which people first experience physiological arousal and then seek an approopiate explanation for it -​ First (perceive): Our psychological arousal. -​ We experience a physiological response to a situation. This could be a racing heart, sweating, tembling. It’s our body automatic reaction to what’s happening around us -​ Second (Attribute): Explanation Arousal. -​ We look for a reason or explanation for why we’re feeling this way. We consider the situation and attribute our arousal to somethink specific like fear, excitement, anger, etc. -​ We first notice how our body reacts (perceive) and then figure out why we’re feeling that way (attribute) -​ Example: The experiment about the questionnaire and the injection of placebo or epinephrine. -​ Misattribution of Arousal -​ Misattribution of Arousal:the process whereby people make mistakes inferences about what is causing them to feel the way they do./ people wrongkly guess why they feel a certain way. EXAMPLE: you think you are in love because your heart is racing but it’s actually because you just ran up a flight of stairs -​ Example/Dutton and Aaron (1974):A woman approach males in the park under two different circumstances. One condition, the men were walking across a 450 foot-long suspension bridge that spanned a deep canyon, this is a scary experience and most people who cross the bridge become more than a little aroused, their heart pounds againtst their chest, they breathe  rapidly, and they begin to persipire. It was at this point that the attractive woman approachd a man on the bridge and asked him to fill out her questionnaire. In the other condition, the woman waited until men had crossed the bridge and rested for a while on a bench in the park before approaching tgem. They had a chance to calm down, their hearts were no longer pounding, and their breathing rate had returned to normal. They were peacefully admiring rge scenery when the woman asked them to fill out ger questionnaire. A large portion of the mean approached on the bridge called the woman later to ask her on a date, while few men approached on the beanch called the woman. Self-Knowledge (Learning from others) -​ Looking glass self -​ Looking glass self: person views self through eyes of others against self-concept./ we form our self-concept beased on how we think others see us (pretty much our self-image is influenced by our perception of others’ views) -​ Three steps of the looking-glass : 1.​ Imagine how we appear to others- we think about how we look or behave in the eyes of others. 2.​ Imagine the judgment of that apperance- we consider what others might think or feel about what they see. 3.​ Develop self through judgemnt of others- based on what we think others’ judgments are, we form our self image -​ Self-fulfilling prophecies -​ Self fulfilling prophecies: seek out people who validate beliefs about self./we tend to look for people who make us feel good about our beliefs and ourselves. -​ Example/Bloomer’s study (Rosenthal and jacobson 1968): Researchers randomly chose a group of students and told their teachers that these students were expected to experience significant academic growth. Teachers believed these students were “bloomers” and would do well academically. The students identifies as “bloomers” actually performed better over time. The students with low expectations led to poorer outcomes. The teachers’ high expectations and positive attitudes towards these students helped improve their performance. The study showed that teachers’ expectations could significantly influence students performance. -​ Role of social environments on self-knowledge -​ Composition of group we are in make some aspects of self more salienrt than others./ Our social environment or the groups we’re part of make certain parts of our identity stand out more than others. -​ Example: Ethnicity, age, gender, religion, etc -​ Spotlight effect  -​ Spotlight effect: Tendency to overestimate how much attention people are paying to us. (More common in individualistic culture)./We often think people are paying more attention to us than they really are. -​ Social Comparisons -​ Social Com[arison- we learn about our own abilities, attitudes, and statues by comparing ourselves to other people. Primarily donw when there’s no objective standard and there’s uncertainty -​ Upward Social Comparison: comparing ourselves to people who are better than we are with regard to a particular trait or ability./ when we compare ourselves to people who are better than us in a certain area to gain inspiration or understand our own standing -​ A problem with it is that it can be dispiriting, making us feel inferior. -​ Downward Social Comparison: comparing ourselves to people who are worse than we are with regard to a particular trait or ability -​ Feel good about ourselves and boost our egos. -​ Sometimes it is used a the point of comparison with our past self and not someone else. -​ Illusory Superiority: Tendency to overestimate one’s skills/talents compared to others./ when people think they are better than they really are compared to others. -​ Uncommon in collectivist cultures Impression management (getting othe to see u show we want to be seen) -​ Self-monitoring -​ Self-monitoring:Ability to regulate one’s public behavior to fit the requirements of one’s current situation./ Ability and desire to regulate one’s public behavior to fit the situation. -​ Some people are high self-monitors, others are low self-monitors -​ HIgh self-monitors are very good at reading social cues and adjusting their behavior to fit different situation -​ Low self-monitors tend to act more consistently across different situations, they are more true to themselves regardless of context -​ Strategies (self-promoting, ingratition, exemplification, intimidation, supplication) -​ Self-promoting- when individuals call attention to their accomplishments to be perceived as capable by observers -​ Ingratitation- when individuals use favors or flattery to obtain an attribution of likability from observers -​ Examplification- when individuals go above and beyond what is necessary or expected to be perceived as committed or hardworking -​ Intimidation- when individuals project their power or ability to punish to be viewed as dangerous and powerful. -​ Supplication- when individuals present their weaknesses or deficiencies to receive compassion and assistance from others -​ Self-Handicapping  -​ Self Handicapping: Creating obstacles for yourself so that if you fail, you can blame failure on the obstacles -​ Two ways in which people self-handicap : -​ Self-handicapping: people act in ways that reduce the likelihood that they will succeed on a task so that if they fail, they can blame it on the lack of ability./people sometimes set themselves up to fail on purpose so they can blame their failure on something other than their ability -​ Reported self-handicapping: people devise ready-made excuses in case they fail./people come up with excuses in advance, just in case they don’t do well. -​ Chapter 6 (Self-Justification) Cognitive Dissonance -​ Dissonance theory -​ Dissonance theory/ cognitive dissonance theory: the idea that when we experience a conflict between our beliefs, values, or atttudes and our actions, it creates a feeling of discomfort or tension -​ Reducing Dissonce (4 methods) -​ Change the behavior -​ Change the attitude -​ Add new cognitions to justify the behvior or attitude -​ Affirm self-concept in an unrelated domain -​ Types of Dissonance -​ Internal justification: the reduction of dissonance by changing something about ourself such as attitude or behavior./when we feel uneasy because our actions don’t match our beliefs, we can make ourselves feel better by changing how we act or what we believ -​ External justification: explaining a counterattitundial behavior as due to something about the situation or environment./ shifting the blame for your action onto the situation or environment rather than your own attitudes. -​ Example: Burger example about being vegetarian but you had a bad day and you really just want to eat a burger. After you eat it you are trying to find a way to justificing it since no one made you eat the burger so you must think there in a internal justification -​ Insufficient punishment: the dissonance aroused when individuals lack sufficienct external justification for having resisted a desired activity or object, usually resulting in individuals devaluating the forbidden activity or object./when people don’t have a good reason for resisting something they want, they start to think it is not that great after all -​ The less severe you make the threat, the less external justification there is; the less external justification, the higher the higher the need for internal justification  -​ Example/Toy Experiment:The experimenter first asked each child to rate the attractiveness of several toys, He then pointed to a toy that the child considered among the most attractive and told the child that they were not allowed to play with it. Half of the children were threatened with mild punishment if they disobeyed the other half were threatened with severe punishment. The experimenter left the room for a few minutes giving the children the time and opportunity to play with the other toys and to resist the temptation to play with the forbidden toy. None of the children played with the forbidden toy. Then the experimenters asked each child to rate how much they liked each of the toys. Everyone had wanted to play with the forbidden toy, but during the temptation period, when they had the chance, not one child played with it. The children were experiencing dissonance. These children continued to rate the forbidden toy as highly desirable, some even found it more desirable than they had before the threat. -​ Example:Teenage drinking, you get the chance to drink and you know that your parents will be disappointed that you do it so you don’t do it or something like that -​ Justification of effort: the tendency for individuals to increase their liking for something they have worked gard to attain./when you work hard fior something, you tend to like it more, because our brain wants to justify all that effort, making whatever you achieved seem more valuable or enjoyable than of you got it easily. -​ Example:you join a fraternity and you had to go through a lot of initiation “games” or stuff you had to do so you convince yourself that it was worth it and that you enjoy it a lot. -​ Example/Aronson and Mills 1959: asked women to join a discussion group about sex. Some women had to go through an embarrassing initiation to join, while others had an easy one. The women who went through the tough initiation ended up liking the group more. This is because they wanted to justify the effort they put in, making the group seem more valuable to them. -​ Choice justification:After making a tough choice, we think the chosen option is better and the unchosen option is worse than before making the choice./ we make a decision and afterwards you convince yourself that it was the right choice by focusing on the positive aspects and downplay any negatives, which helps reduce any doubt or regret you might have about your decision. -​ Post-decision dissonance: the feeling of discomfort we get after making a decision, especially when we’re unsure if we made the right choice. -​ Example/Brehm 1956: participants were asked to rate several household items and then choose one to take home. After making their choice, they rated the items again. The results showed that participants increased their ratings for the item they chose and decreased their ratings for the items  they didn't choose. This change helped them feel better about their decision, demonstrating the concept of post-decision dissonance. -​ If we know we can change our minds later, the discomfort it is less intense because you have the option to switch -​ When you can’t go back on a decision, the discomfort is stronger. To feel better you worl harder to convince yourself that you made the right choice, focusing on the positive and ignoring the negatives -​ We create lasting changes to behavior instead of temporary changes by -​ Make the new behavior change with cognitive dissonance -​ Reinforce it with positive experiences -​ Commit to it publicly for social support -​ Remove triggers for the old behavior Modern Developments -​ Self-Affirmation Theory -​ Self- affirmation theory: the idea that people can reduce threats to theui self-esteem by affirming themselves in areas unrelated to the source of the threat.it’s like a balancing scale: when something bad happens and tips one side down, you put good things on the other side to keep everything level. It is about keeping your self-wroth steady by reminding yourself of your strengths and positive traits, even if one part of your life isn’t going so well -​ When view is threatened -​ Deal with threat:addressing the situation that made you feel bad. ​ -​ We use it when you can take action to fix or improve the situation causing the threat to your self-esteem -​ Affirm in unrelated domain: boosting your slf-esteem by reminding yourself of your strengths in other areas -​ We use it when the threat feels overwhelming or when you need a quixh boost to your self-esteem -​ Self-Evaluation Maintanance Theory -​ Self-evaluation maintenance theory : this idea that people experience dissonance when someone close to us outperform us in an area that is central to our self esteem. This dissonance can be reduced by becoming less close to the person, changing our behvior so that we now outperform them, or deciding that the area is not that important to us after all./someone close to us does better than we do in an area that’s important to our-self esteem, it can create an uncomfortable feeling. We might have to distance ourselves from that person, work harder to become better than them, or decide that the area isn’t as crucial to us anymore. -​ 3 factors: -​ Closeness to other people: when someone we’re close to outperform us, it can feel more significant and uncomfortable because their success is more relevant to us. The closer the relationship, the stronger the impact on our self-esteem.  -​ Relevance of activity to self-esteem: this means how important a particular activity is to our self worth -​ Performance level on the activity: how well the other person is doing compared to you. If they significantly outperform you in a field that’s important to you, it can feel like a bigger threat to your self-esteem. If you are less invested in the activity or they don’t outperform you by much, the impact is less severe. -​ Basking in Reflected Glory (BIRG): when you feel good about yourself because someone close to you or your group achieves something great. Like you are sharing in their success -​ Close to other person -​ Activity not central to our self-esteem -​ Performance of other person in high/good -​ How to reduce dissonance? -​ Focus on other person- reduce closeness to other person -​ Focus on own attitude- reduce centrality of activity to your self-esteem -​ Focus on behavior- outperform the other person -​ Self-Discrepancy Theory -​ Self-discrepancy theory: We get upset when the actual self is different from our ideal or ought self./we feel upset when who we are now (actual self) doesn’t match who we want to be (ideal-self) or who we think we should be (ought self). -​ 3 self’s -​ ACTUAL SELF- who I really am -​ IDEAL SELF - who I would like to be -​ OUGHT SELF- who I think I am obligated to be -​ What happens when there is a discrepancy between ACTUAL and IDEAL selves? -​ When there’s a gap between your actual self an dyour ideal self, you might feel like you’re falling short of your goals and aspirations -​ Dissapointed, sad, depressed -​ What happens when there is a disctrpancy between ACTUAL and OUGHT selves? -​ You feel like you’re not meeting your responsibilities or living up yo expectationsm which can create pressure and emotional discomfort -​ Ashamed, anxious, guilty -​ Cognitive Dissonance and the Treatment of Others -​ Victim Blaming -​ Tend to blame the victim when we hurt someone. It reduces dissonance arising from hurting someone./when we hurt someone e might blame them to feel less guilty. This helps reduce the uncomfortable feeling (dissonance) from knowing we caused harm. -​ Dehumanization  -​ More likely to derogate people we have harmed if they are innocent victims. May lead to a continuation or escalation of violence against them./we see them as less than human to justify our harmful actions towards them. This helps reduce the guilt and discomfort we feel from causing harm, making it easier to continue or even escalate the violence.Easirt to shift the blame and ease our conscience. Chapter 7 (Attitudes) Three Components of Attitudes: ABC’s -​ Affective component: people’s emotional reaction toward the attitude object -​ Behavioral component: or how people act toward the attitude object -​ Cognitive components: thought and beliefs that people form about the attitude object Explicit vs. Implicit Attitudes -​ Explicit attitudes: attitudes that we consciously endorse and can easily report./these are the attitudes that you know you have and can talk about easily -​ Implicit attitudes: attitudes that exist outside of conscious awareness./opinion and feeling you have without even relaizing it they can influence your behavior anc choices without you being aware of them -​ Julie Phelan and Jessica Heppen (2007) says that implicit attitudes are rooted more in people’s childhood experiences, and explicit attitudes are rooted more in their recent experience -​ Bertand and Mulainathan 2004: They sent out fictitious resumes with names that sounded either White of Black and found that resumes with White sounding names got more callbacks. This shows clear evidence of racial bias in hiring practices -​ When do attitudes predict behavior? When do they not? -​ Attitudes can predict behavior when the attitudes is strong, specific and directly related to the behavior in question. -​ Attitudes may not predict behavior when external factors are strong, such as social pressure or situational constraints -​ Attitude-behavior consistency: sometimes we do thing we know we shouldn’t do -​ Example/Richard LaPiere 1930’s: Where scared that their Chinese friends will not get serve so they asked restaurants before hand if they would serve them and said no, yet when they went there they did or something like that. After his trip, he wrote a letter to each establishment he and his friends had visited, asking if it would serve a Chinese visitor. Of the many replies, only one said it would. More than 90% said they definitely would not; the rest were undecided. Why were the attitudes people expressed in Theory of Planned Behavior  -​ Attitude toward the behavior: people’s specific attitudes toward the behavior not their general attitude./people’s specific attitudes about a certain behavior predict their actions better than their general attitudes -​ Example: you have a strong positive attitude towards eating healthy because you believe it’s good for your body and mind. Because of this attitude, you consistently choose healthy foods like fruits, vegetables over junk food -​ Subjective norms: people beliefs about how other people they care about will view the behavior in question./how people think those they care about will perceive their behavior -​ Example: you want to drop out of college but don't actually will do it because you are afraid of what your family will say about it and see you as a failure -​ Perceived behavioral control: ease with which people believe they can perform the behavior./ how confident people feel in their ability to do something. When we believe you can do a task easily, you are more likely to try -​ Example: you are thinking about running a marathon. If you believe you can train and complete the race successfully, you are more likley to sign up and start preparing. -​ Behavioral intention: deciding consciously to try to perform the behavior./ when you make a deliberate, conscious decision to try and perform a behavior -​ Example: You weighted yourself and in the scale you didn’t see the number you wanted so you decided you will start your diet tomorrow becaus eyou want to loose weight. Attitude Accessibility -​ Strength of association between attitudes object and person’s evaluation of that object. Weak links allow situation more control over bevior./how strongly someone feels about something and how firmly that attitude is linked to their evaluation of it -​ How does attitude strength determine this? -​ Strong attitudes are easy to recall and come to mind quickly. They guied your actions reliably. -​ Weak attitudes are harder to recall and might not come to mind as quickly.Your behavior is more influenced by the situation -​ Persuation: Attempting to change attitudes -​ Yale Attitude Chnage Approach (WHO says WHAT to WHOM?)\ -​ WHO: the communicator -​ Perceived knowledge/expertise -​ Perceived trustworthiness -​ Perceived confidence -​ WHAT: the message -​ Perceived purpose of message -​ One vs. Two sided -​ Argument order:​  -​ If two speakers go back to back you will like the first speaker more (PRIMARY EFFECT) -​ If there is a break between speakers you will like the most recent speaker (RECENCY EFFECT) -​ WHOM: the recipient -​ Distraction -​ Intelligence -​ Issue involvement/relevance -​ Effectiveness of an argument will depnde on which route of persuasion we are motivated to use -​ Elaboration Likehood Model (ELM): Routes to persuasion -​ Central route: Recipient is motivated to attend to information./the person is interested and eager to listen to the information. -​ Peripheral Route: recipient is not motivated to attend to information./the person isn’t interested or eager to listen to the information -​ When are we motivated to use central route?` -​ Pay close attention to the message -​ Weigh pros and cons -​ When are we motivated to use peripheria route? -​ When we are not motivated to think about the message -​ We don’t have the mental energy to focus -​ When the message us simple or repetitive, it doesn’t require deep thinking -​ Work with your cognitive shortcuts -​ Play with your emotions -​ What kind of information is relevant to central route? -​ Persuaded by strong messages -​ What kind of information is relevant to peripheral route? -​ Length of message -​ Likeability of communicator -​ Which route leads to long lasting attitudes change? -​ Depends onf motivation and ability to process carefully -​ Perosnal relevance is #1 -​ Need for cognition -​ Ability to pay attention -​ Central route leads to long lasting attitude change -​ Peripheral route leads to short-lasting attitude change -​ Cialdini’s 6 principles to persuasion -​ Reciprocation ​ -​ Feel indebted to those who do something for us or give us a gift -​ Social norms to reciprocate in relationships -​ Free samples  -​ Social proof -​ Uncertain about a course of action, look to those around them to guide their decision and action (especially peers)./when people are unsure about what to do, they look to others, especially peers for guidance on their decisions and actions. -​ Social norms are very powerful -​ Everyone is doing it -​ Example/Goldstein 2008: Hotels gave hotel guests different messages about reusing towels to see how many would opt to reuse vs request new towels. -​ Community/consistency -​ We’re more likely to do something after we’ve agreed to it verbally or in writing -​ Example: car salesperson offects car for certain price, you start filling out the paperwork, he find out it is actually more. Yet you still buy it -​ Liking -​ We say “yes” to physically attractive, similar to us, or people who have flattered us -​ Authority -​ We also say “yes” to people with fancy titles, impressive clothing status symbols -​ scarcity -​ The less there is of something the more valuable it is -​ Rare, uncommon in limited demand -​ Latest toy at holidays -​ Don’t miss the chance -​ Resistung Persuasion -​ Attitude inoculation ​ -​ Making people immune to persuasion by initially exploding them to small doses of the arguments./exposing people to small controlled doses of opposing arguments, they build up defenses and become more resistant to being persuaded later on -​ Better at resisting strong persuasive arguments when you have practice against weaker version of the same argument./you’ve had practice defending against weaker versions of an argument, you become more skilled at resisting stronger persuasive attempts later on -​ Reactance -​ When people feel their freedom is threatened, an unpleasant feeling is aroused, which they can reduce by performing the threatened behavior./when peolpe feel their freedom to choose is being restricted, they experience an unpleasant feeling. -​ Reverse Psychology -​ Persuasion ineffective because of perceived threat to freedom -​ Selective avoidance  -​ Avoid people/situation where others are likely to try to persuade you./istrategy of avoiding people or situations where you might be persuaded or influenced -​ Thinking rationally about persuasive attempt -​ Advertisement -​ Advertising: changing attitudes towards a product -​ Subliminal advertising: involves showing brief images or images that are just below the level of conscious perception. These messages are designed to influence behavior without the viewer being aware of it -​ Is it effective? -​ While it can influence short-term attitudes or actions, it is not powerful enough to make people do things against their will or drastically change their behavior -​ Implicit Association Test (IAT) -​ What are the goals of the IAT? To measure attitudes we don’t necessarily know we have (implicit attitudes), it avoids problems with self-report -​ Controversy: What do the creators believe that IAT measures? What do its critics think it measures? -​ Creators say that IAT assesses personal beliefs related to subtle behaviors, it predicts behavior like non-verbal, spontaneous behavior. It also subtle behavior in interracial interaction -​ Critics say that iy assesses cultural knowledge, not personal beliefs. It doesnt predict behavior. -​ Chapter 13 (Self-Justification) Definitions of Prejudice -​ Prejudice: is the negative attitude towards a group of people based on category membership. -​ Privilege; A special advantage, immunity, permission, right, or benefit granted to or enjoyed by an individual, class, or caste. -​ Oppression: how a certain group is being kept down by unjust use of force, authority, or societal norms. -​ ABCs -​ Affective Component: Tends to be a strong emotional component to prejudice. People have strong emotional reactions to hearing goo thing about a group they dislike and bad things about a group they like. It is difficult to change someone’s mind because the more emotional they are the less logical they get.  -​ Behavioral Component: Is discrimination, which unjustified negative or harmful action towards a member of a group solely because of their membership in that group. -​ Allport’s 5 levels- 1.Verbal prejudice 2. Avoidance 3. Exclusion 4. Physical attack 5. Extermination -​ Institutionalized discrimination: most overr forms of institutionalized discrimination are illegal in the U.S,. Discrimination still exists in more subtle forms. -​ Shoot/ don’t shoot task Experiment: A peron would view another person either holding a gun or another object they would have to react I think fast with the correct decisions being shoot the armed person and dont shoot the unarmed person and the error would be to not shoot the armed person and shoot the unarmed person. -​ Cognitice Component: Is stereotypes which is a generlization about a group of people in which certain traits are assigned to virtually all members of the group, regardless of actual variation among members. Not all stereotypes are negative. -​ Hostile sexism: is the belief that women are inferiorn to men and the endorsement of negative stereotypes -​ Benevolent sexism: is that women are idealized as being better than men for stereotypically female qualities, like being caring and cooking Sources of Prejudice -​ Social identity Theory -​ In group bias: prefer members of in group -​ Out group homogeneity: perceive out-group members as all the sam e -​ Illusory correlations: Assume characteristics are represntative of all out-group members -​ Minimal group paradigm Experiment: one of the experiment was the teacher that separated the inferior students because they had brown eyes and the blue eye students as better. Finding was that the prejudice arises when groups are meningles -​ Realistic Conflict Theory -​ Realistic Conflict Theory: limited resources lead to conflict between gorups and result in increased prejudice. -​ Robber’s Cave experiment: 22 boys from ages 11-12 were divided into two groups at a summer camp in Robbers Cave State Park, Oklahoma. The groups were unaware of each others existence and spent time bonding and establishing their own identities and social norms. When the group were  eventually introduced to each other,they competed in activities which lead to intense rivalry and hostility. To reduce the conflict the researchers introduced cooperative tasks requiring both groups to work together towards a common goal, like fixing a broken water supply. Reducing of Prejudice -​ Is prejudice still an issue? Not much has change in actual prejudice just the expression of it -​ Social threat: The anxiety experienced by member of a group that their behavior may confirm a cultural stereotype -​ What ir required for successful stereotype suppression? It is based on attitudes, paying more attention to information consistent with attitudes. Logic is not effecting at changing affect, can’t make ourselves eliminate stereotyped cognition. Socially desirable not to admit prejudice, suppression is tough. -​ Stereotype Rebound: Suppressing stereotypical thoughts can cause more stereotypical thoughts that not trying to suppress. -​ Contact hypothesis: more contact= less prejudice. But must have mutual interdependence, a common goal, equal, status, informal, one-on-one contact, contacts with several members of outgroup, social norms of equality -​