Social Cognition in Mass Communication

Imagine that you are walking down the street and meet a stranger. The passerby asks you for help: he says he has lost his wallet and needs money to get home. Your reaction largely depends on your perception of this person: who is he? Why did he find himself in such a situation? How will he dispose o...

Imagine that you are walking down the street and meet a stranger. The passerby asks you for help: he says he has lost his wallet and needs money to get home. Your reaction largely depends on your perception of this person: who is he? Why did he find himself in such a situation? How will he dispose of the money given to him? The psychological process that happens when you answer these questions is called social cognition. Social cognition is the process of forming a person\'s perception of himself, people around him and events around him. Reflecting on ourselves, analyzing our successes and failures, listening to the feedback of people around us, we form self-concept. By observing other people, we create an \"image of the other\". This process can proceed in different ways. In some cases, it happens quickly and imperceptibly; in other cases, we consider different information, compare it with each other and only then draw conclusions. The process of social cognition takes place in any communication. We form perceptions and attitudes towards a partner we meet face-to-face, see on TV or hear on the radio, or communicate with in social networks. However, classical and modern mass communication provide participants with different opportunities. With magazines, radio and television, we observe famous people; with the Internet, we observe others and talk about ourselves. In this chapter we will talk about the formation of self-concept and the \"image of the other\" in modern and classical mass communication. Most of the chapter will be devoted to social cognition in social media. However, where possible, we will discuss the contribution of magazines and television. First, we will look at the process of self-concept formation (social comparison). Then we will analyze how people create their image in the eyes of others (self-disclosure and self-presentation). Finally, we will discuss the perception of other social network users. 6.1. Social comparison in mass communication Self-concept is a person\'s impression of himself/herself, including cognitive (traits that a person attributes to himself/herself) and emotional and evaluative (positive/negative self-esteem) components. It is formed lifetime on the basis of our experiences. On the one hand, we observe our behavior and attribute to ourselves the corresponding psychological features. For example, having entered a prestigious university on our own, we conclude that we are highly intelligent (or lucky). On the other hand, we observe the people around us and compare ourselves to them. For example, the same test score can be an indicator of high or low intelligence, a source of positive or negative self-esteem, depending on how other people did on the test. When we get a high score but other people do even better on the test, our success has a less positive effect on our self-image and self-esteem than when we rank first in the group. Comparing oneself to others is called social comparison. This process is universal: it occurs in people of different genders and ages, living in different countries. It allows people to attribute different characteristics to themselves and evaluate themselves in different areas, ranging from appearance to pro-social or aggressive behavior. People use three strategies during social comparison: 1\) A top-down comparison is a comparison to someone who is less successful in a certain area than the person making the comparison; 2\) An upward comparison is a comparison to someone who is more successful in a certain area than the person making the comparison; 3\) A peer comparison is a comparison with a person whose level of achievement is approximately equal to that of the person making the comparison. Social comparison can have different effects. In some cases, it increases self-esteem and causes positive emotions. In other cases, it lowers self-esteem, increases tension, causes negative emotions and reduces life satisfaction. This means that the result of social comparison is influenced by additional conditions. First, the effects of social comparison depend on the motivation behind it. Social network users who have high self-esteem derive greater psychological benefits from social comparison in networks if they strive to become better. In contrast, users who have low self-esteem achieve a better outcome if they seek to improve their self-image in the eyes of others at any cost. Thus, people with low self-esteem use social comparison for compensation, while people with high self-esteem use it for self-development. Second, the consequences of social comparison depend on its positivity. The more a person feels that he/she is inferior to other users (less happy, etc.), the more negative emotions he/she experiences and the less satisfied with his/her life. This happens because comparisons made in favor of others cause self-blame, which in turn has a negative effect on psychological well-being. Third, the result of social comparison depends on the user\'s social media behavior strategy. Some researchers distinguish active and passive strategy. In the first case, a person writes his or her own posts, uploads his or her own materials, and in the second case - just observes others. People who apply passive strategy are more envious of other users, have lower self-esteem and experience more negative emotions than people who apply active strategy. The most famous effect of social comparison, which was discovered in mass communication, is the negative influence of very thin (for women) or muscular (for men) models on the psychological state of the audience. Watching such characters changes a person\'s idea of an ideal body, lowers his or her self-esteem, reduces satisfaction with his or her body, causes negative emotions and prompts lifestyle changes (excessive sports activities, severe food restrictions, frequent plastic surgeries). The main psychological mechanism of this effect is social comparison, during which a person compares himself with very thin or muscular models. He does not take into account that being too thin or having very large muscles can cause health problems. He or she thinks that a very lean or muscular body conforms to a culturally accepted ideal and is admired by others. However, there are conditions that weaken or strengthen this effect. First, messages with skinny models have a greater impact on people who identify with the model. They also have a greater impact on those who have low self-esteem, self-esteem built on external grounds, and a self-image in which appearance plays an important role. Finally, a situation that either reduces the audience\'s attention, refocuses it on other features, or makes them think about the message has a great impact. The impact of messages with skinny or muscular models is reduced when people watch it under cognitive load, compare themselves to the model on parameters other than appearance (e.g. intelligence) or receive negative information about the model (indicating that she is too small/below average weight). 6.2 Self-disclosure in social networks Self-disclosure is the disclosure of personal information about oneself in communication with others. In the course of this process, a person describes his/her thoughts and feelings, tells about the events that occurred in his/her life. Self-disclosure can be described according to several parameters: depth (intimacy of information), breadth (amount of information), valence (positivity/negativity of information), authenticity (accuracy of reflection of a person\'s characteristics), publicity (addressed to all or a limited number of users), and focus (to a specific person or group of people). For a long time, researchers have assumed that the degree of self-disclosure depends on the form of communication: people tell more about themselves in online communication than in face-to-face communication. These differences have been attributed to the relative safety of online communication and the participants\' desire to compensate for the lack of nonverbal indicators. However, a recent meta-analysis refuted these assumptions. It showed that face-to-face people tell more about themselves than online. Factors of self-disclosure. However, there are several factors that influence the degree of self-disclosure in online communication. First, the differences between face-to-face and online communication are stronger on the depth dimension than on the breadth dimension of self-disclosure. In other words, people who communicate face-to-face tell more intimate things about themselves than participants in online communication. Second, online communication can take different forms. At first, users communicated with each other in writing. However, by the coincidence of time, they had the opportunity to see and hear each other. Face-to-face communication is more different from text-based online communication than from other forms of computer-mediated communication. In other words, people show stronger self-disclosure in face-to-face communication than in online communication where participants cannot see or hear each other. Third, the degree of self-disclosure depends on the social network. For example, according to the opinion of Belgian adolescents in the in-depth interview, both Snapchat and Snapchat are more suitable for expressing positive emotions. In contrast, Twitter and Messenger can be used to express both positive and negative emotional states. These differences are related to the norms of communication that have developed on the platforms. Fourth, the relatively stable psychological characteristics of the participants play an important role. Research shows that these characteristics are related to the breadth and depth of self-disclosure. In general, people who have less difficulty communicating face-to-face reveal more in online conversations. For example, the higher users\' levels of extraversion, the more they discuss topics such as love, dating, and secrets. The lower users\' anxiety, the more often they update their social media statuses. However, people who have difficulty communicating face-to-face value online communication more. For example, people with high levels of social anxiety perceive online communication as more comfortable for themselves and are more self-disclosed in it than in interpersonal communication. At the same time, the duration and frequency of online communication are positively related to self-disclosure in users with higher levels of social anxiety. In addition, psychological traits are related to the positivity of self-disclosure. For example, the higher the energy and friendliness, the more often users post messages describing positive emotions and events. The lower the emotional stability and the higher the feeling of loneliness, the more often they tell about their negative emotions and unpleasant events of their life. Finally, psychological characteristics are related to the authenticity of self-disclosure. For example, a recent meta-analysis of user research found that the lower a person\'s levels of emotional stability and self-esteem and the higher their levels of narcissism and social anxiety, the less honestly they present themselves on a social network, the more they try to present themselves in a favorable light. Implications of self-disclosure. Self-disclosure in online communication benefits people: it allows them to build relationships with other users. The more people self-disclose in online communication, the more social support they receive, the more sympathy they show for each other, the more often they find friends online, the more intimacy they feel with their online friends. However, some researchers believe that self-disclosure is of great benefit to people who have difficulty in offline communication. Positive relationships with other users improve people\'s psychological well-being. For example, a recent American study found that the broader, deeper, more positive and honest the self-disclosure of young people, the more social support they received from other users. The greater this support, the higher the young people\'s self-esteem. Thus, by talking about themselves, people can increase their psychological well-being. 6.3 Self-presentation in social networks Self-presentation is a process in which a person takes specific actions to form a certain perception of themselves to others. For example, a social media user posts photos from his birthday to show how sociable or popular he is among his peers. Talks about how he or she was hired for a new job to demonstrate his or her success. Posts messages addressed to a romantic partner to emphasize that they are in a close relationship. Self-presentation is closely related to self-disclosure. Self-disclosure is a general term that refers to the disclosure of any information about oneself. At the same time, self-presentation is a particular type of self-disclosure in which a person reports only information that fits a pre-selected image. While in the study of self-disclosure, researchers emphasize the frequency and consequences of self-disclosure, in the study of self-presentation, more attention is paid to the means of self-description. Factors of self-presentation. A vivid example of a \"platform\" where self-presentation takes place is social networks. Users of social networks have great opportunities to construct a certain image of themselves in the eyes of others: photos with their image, posts, comments, search for friends, creation of groups, etc. However, the individual ways and strategies of selecting information that people use in self-presentation depend on individual (personality traits, self-concept) and social (cultural context) factors. Personality traits. Self-presentation on social media is related to narcissism. A recent meta-analysis found that social media users with high levels of narcissism are more likely to update their statuses, post photos, and comment on other participants\' posts. They are also more positive about posting \"selfies,\" more engaged in this activity, and more likely to post profile pictures of themselves that emphasize their external attractiveness and psychological personality. In addition, people with high levels of narcissism are more likely to want others to pay attention to them, to try to become popular, more likely to believe that they get more responses from other users, and more likely to be annoyed when someone does not respond to their status update. Probably because of this, they are more likely to engage in normative and non-normative behaviors that result in more evidence of social approval (\"likes\") on their page. Implications of self-presentation. Social networks give users the opportunity to emphasize some characteristics and hide others. Many people take advantage of this opportunity and engage in selective positive self-presentation. They emphasize their socially desirable features and hide socially undesirable ones. This strategy is paying off. On the one hand, positive self-presentation influences the evaluations of others. For example, people give higher ratings to a user who posts about their successes and describes themselves using positive terms. On the other hand, positive self-presentation allows a person to gain self-confidence. For example, people who review their social networking profile in a study subsequently give themselves higher ratings than people who do other activities. Interestingly, the psychological benefits of self-presentation depend on a person\'s initial attitudes toward themselves and others. For example, selective self-presentation is positively related to online life satisfaction in people who have low self-esteem and high social trust. In other words, positive self-presentation has a greater impact on users who lack self-confidence but trust the people around them. 6.4 Perception of the partner in Internet communication Based on the information that users post on social networks, we form an impression of them. Looking through personal pages, we attribute psychological traits to strangers, feel sympathy or antipathy towards them. We make these conclusions based on fragmentary information about the partner. First, people tell in social networks only what, from their point of view, is worthy of attention, and omit the rest (often important for impression formation) information. Second, this information is limited to verbal texts and photos of individual episodes. Now we will see how people deal with these limitations. Perception of physical attractiveness. Social media users often post pictures of themselves in different situations. These images can be used to judge the appearance of the page owners. External attractiveness is an important parameter that influences the perception of a person. In general, people express a greater desire to befriend and enter into romantic relationships with outwardly attractive than with outwardly unattractive users. This factor plays a particularly large role on dating sites. Attribution of personality traits. To determine how accurately social network users perceive each other, psychologists compare the psychological traits that page owners attribute to themselves and the characteristics that other people attribute to them. The more these assessments match, the more accurate a user\'s perception is considered to be. (Of course, psychologists realize that a person\'s self-description can be inaccurate, but this is not taken into account). The most commonly examined is the accuracy of attributing traits that fall within the big five. A recent meta-analysis of studies showed that people are fairly accurate in identifying all five traits from information on a user\'s personal page. However, energy, openness to experience, friendliness, and conscientiousness are more accurately recognized than emotional stability. In addition, separate studies have shown that people recognize energy, emotional stability, and friendliness better than conscientiousness and openness to experience from an avatar. People focus on photos, posts, and comments when forming a perception of a partner. For example, posts and comments are used to recognize all of the Big Five traits, and the content of photos is used to attribute energy, friendliness, and conscientiousness. In addition, graphic representations of emotions and correctness of written language are used to assess friendliness, conscientiousness, and openness. At the same time, some indicators allow observers to draw more accurate conclusions than others. For example, people more accurately assess the extraversion of social network users if they focus on the number of friends, publications and specified contacts; openness to experience - if they take into account the number of groups the user is a member of and photos, etc. However, the results of different studies vary from one study to another. Further research in this area is needed to identify more precise patterns. User sympathy. Sympathy (or attraction) is a general positive attitude towards a person. Most often the term means that one person likes another person. The higher the sympathy, the more we are willing to communicate with that person, the more friendly and cooperative our interactions will be. Psychological studies have shown that liking an online communication partner occurs under certain conditions. Let\'s look at some examples. Social presence. Users who feel a sense of social presence react to others as living people and form close relationships with them. In particular, the stronger the sense of social presence, the more Internet users sympathize with their partners. The sense of social presence increases with the presence of an avatar or the ability to see the partner. This is probably why people are more likely to respond to and empathize with a user who has an avatar. Perception of similarity. People sympathize more with those who appear similar to them. For example, the more similarity a person sees between themselves and a potential romantic partner, the more they sympathize with the partner, the more willing they are to communicate with them in the future. The influence of similarity increases in a situation that is distressing. For example, after being reminded of a death, people express greater sympathy and are more likely to engage in romantic relationships with members of their group who seem more similar to themselves Degree of self-disclosure. User sympathy is related to the authenticity, depth, and publicity of self-disclosure. First, people respond more positively to self-disclosures that seem more honest to them. For example, they are more willing to engage in a friendship or romantic relationship with a user who is captured in spontaneous rather than staged photos. Second, people feel more sympathy for the user who makes superficial self-disclosure - telling less intimate things about themselves. This happens because they believe that superficial self-disclosure is more appropriate than deep self-disclosure in online communication. However, some research suggests that deep self-disclosure generates more sympathy for a user who seems similar, but less sympathy for a user who seems dissimilar. Third, people have more sympathy for a user who reports his or her experiences privately (sending messages to close friends) rather than publicly (sending messages to all users). This occurs because people believe that a user who communicates his or her experiences publicly is more likely to want to make a certain impression on others than a user who communicates privately.