Lecture Summaries SCC 2.pdf

Lecture 1 - Definition: how are a person´s feelings/thoughts/behaviours influenced by the (imagined) presence of others - Neighbouring systems o Environmental psychology, W/O psychology, consumer psychology, economic psychology, cognitive psychology, developme...

Lecture 1 - Definition: how are a person´s feelings/thoughts/behaviours influenced by the (imagined) presence of others - Neighbouring systems o Environmental psychology, W/O psychology, consumer psychology, economic psychology, cognitive psychology, developmental psychology, clinical psychology o Others: sociology, social anthropology, political sciences, economy, linguistics (social), educational science - Broader theoretical perspectives reflected in social psychology theorizing  Behaviourism: explaining social behaviour in terms of costs and benefits  Neuroscience/biochemicals: people as biological entities (behaviour has neuro and biochemical correlates)  Evolutionary social psychology: explaining social behaviour in terms of being adaptive for survival  Personality and personal differences :  Group processes/the collective: affecting the individual and their social perception and behaviour - Biopsychology as a science… o It builds on data o Ethical guidelines - What do social psychologists do?  Lab/ field/quasi-experiments  Survey and qualitative studies ➔ To test and modify these, we need to improve the understanding of societal issues  - Early precursors: völkerpsychologie (studying the collective mind), later “study of the group mind” and even later: understanding individual behaviour in the context of intergroup relations - Beginning rooted in Europe, during and after WW1 american psychology became more impactful o After WW2 USA helped rebuild European social psychology - In 1960 EU psychology was more concerned with an independent profile (intergroup relations and groups) - Definition of culture: different aspects of our living environment and our behaviour o Patterns in social behaviour o Our habits + traditions o Social norms + rules o The way our society is organized - Cross-cultural psychology: differences between cultures - Cultural psychology: influence of culture on social psychological processes Lecture 2 - Social cognition o Cognitive processes/ structures that influence/ are influenced by our social behaviour o How we process social information - A short history of social cognition o 1955/60s end of behaviourism -> cognitive revolution (the, not very useful, computer metaphor was used)  o 1st: attributions, dissonance o After 1970s : social cognition o 1980s: cognitive miser ▪ We are lazy, we prefer cognitive shortcuts ▪ Very negative shortcuts o 1990s: motivated tactician ▪ People have mental strategies ▪ The choice is based on personal goals, motives and needs - Forming impressions 1. Visible features 2. Interpreting non-verbal behaviour 3. We search for explanations of other people’s behaviour or what they’ve said - Person perception o 1st impressions happen quickly, and often were unaware o Configural model ▪ Based on certain central traits (facial aspects,..) ▪ Impression of a person as a whole: gestalt o Based on implicit theories about personality ▪ We have ideas about characteristics that fit together Once we know 1 thing about the other, we assume lots of other aspects as well o underlies stereotypical thinking# - aschs central traits o warm vs cold o hardworking vs lazy - when encountering a social object… o schema + social categorization  ▪ becomes quickly activated ▪ makes knowledge salient ▪ influences how we think/feel/behave o heuristics ▪ decision rules ▪ applied when not thinking systematically - schemes o can be: scripts, person schema, role schema, self-schema, group- schema o a cognitive structure representing knowledge about a concept or a type of stimulus o why? ▪ Organization ▪ very functional ▪ form of shared social knowledge (i.e. dating script) - social categorization o tendency to categorize things or people based on shared characteristics o vital adaptation (makes the world more predictable, controllable,…) o negative consequence: stereotyping ▪ line determining experiment (accentuation principle) - how social categorization and schemas work o associative network: activating one concept makes related concepts more accessible as well o automatic process ▪ important: we learn these cues from our surroundings (social cues) - heuristics o representativeness heuristic ▪ likelihood + chance ▪ base rate fallacy o theyre simple decision rules o usually functional o availability heuristic o anchoring and adjustment heuristic - social encoding o cognitive processes are influenced by context and situation o salience ▪ standing out in relation to other stimuli ▪ influences perception, thinking, memory and behaviour o vividness ▪ intrinsic property of a stimulus that makes it stand out and grab attention emotionally, provoking,… o accessibility ▪ ease of recall ability o priming - attribution o were seeking causes for others’ behaviour ▪ …and try to predict it o Can be internal and external ▪ Often discounted) - Correspondence-inference theory o Intention -> behavior -> consequence o We infer intentions from consequences  o Consequences correspond with intentions - Non-common effects o Have to do with the number of potential reasons available for a. particular choice  Starting from a complete set of information - Kelleys covariation theory o 3 types of information to decide whether an event was caused by internal or external factors ▪ Consensus How do others behave? ▪ Consistency How does the actor usually behave in this situation? ▪ Distinctiveness How does the actor behave in other situations? - Discounting principle o The presence of a certain cause renders other possible less relevant - Augmenting principle o The assumption that a possible cause must be the case because an inhibitory factor is present (cycling uphill) - Self-serving bias o Positive outcomes attributed to internal factors o Negative outcomes attributed to external factors - Ultimate attribution bias o Attributing bad outgroup and good ingroup behaviours to internal factors o Attributing good outgroup behaviour and bad ingroup behaviour to external factors Lecture 3 - What is an attitude? o Allpport: state of readiness o More recently: general evaluation (positive or negative) - Structure + function of attitudes o One-component attitude model ▪ Affect towards an object o Two-component attitude model ▪ Mental readiness ▪ Guides evaluation o Three-component attitude model ▪ 1. Affective component ▪ 2. Behavioural component ▪ Cognitive component ➔ What is cause? What is effect? - Structure of attitudes o One-valence dimension ▪ Continuum from positive to negative o Attitudinal ambivalence ▪ Positive and negative dimensions are independent and therefore both possible - Function of attitudes o Knowledge, instrumentality, ego-defense, value, expressiveness o Attitudes make evaluations of objects faster and easier ▪ Energy saving devices o Utilitarian function ▪ Useful because of object appraisal  Orientation for maximizing rewards and minimizing punishment - Forming attitudes o Cognitive component ▪ Processing of available facts (i.e. selecting a university based on provided information) o Affective component ▪ Direct experiences influence how we feel Mere exposure effect Evaluative conditioning Observing others in our social environment o Behavioural component ▪ Taking ones own behaviour as positive evaluation - Measurement of attitudes o Attitude scales (likert scale, semantic differential scale,…) o Physiological measures (affective component, indirect measure of attitudes) o Overt behaviour (measures behavioural component) o Covert (implicit) attitudes (IAT) - How well do attitudes predict behaviour? o R=.15 o Famous la pierre study didn’t show a connection o Likelihood examples of certain behavior: ▪ 1. Political party + voting ▪ 2. Use of contraceptives + having children ▪ 3. Actual blood donation + donating blood ▪ 4. Minorities + prejudiced behavior ➔ The domain matters!  o Accessibility of attitude also matters - Models about attitude-behavior link o Theory of reasoned action → o Theory of planned behavior ▪ This can be seen in steps with a timeline Lecture 4 - Attitude change has been investigated since 1930s - Persuasion (Yale approach) o WHO / source ▪ Expertise ▪ Trustworthiness ▪ Likeability ▪ Status ▪ Race o WHAT / message ▪ Order of arguments ▪ 1 vs 2 sided arguments ▪ Explicit vs implicit ▪ Repetition  ▪ Affective quality o TO WHOM / audience ▪ Persuasibility ▪ Initial position If strong prior beliefs (positive or negative), attitude change/persuasion is harder Optimal : fence-sitters ▪ Intelligence ▪ Self-esteem People with very low OR very high self esteem are harder to convince ▪ Personality Need for cognition (high: generating pro´s + con´s, unlikely to fall for shallow persuasion attempts) Need for closure (reduction of ambiguity) ➔ The variables interact ➔ The predictive value is limited ➔ The mood is important - Dual processing o Automatic thinking ▪ Occurs without intention/effort/awareness o Controlled thinking ▪ Intentional, effortful, consciously, voluntarily o Elabortation likelihood model (ELM) ▪ Central route ▪ Peripheral route o Heuristic-systematic model (HSM) ▪ Systematic processing  ▪ Heuristic processing - Cognitive dissonance (Festinger) o Affect, behavior and cognitions aren’t always congruent ➔ Induced compliance (via money for example) ➔ Effortful justification o This leads to attitude change when people assume their behavior was voluntary - Tactics for enhancing compliance o Foot-in-the-door-technique ▪ Lots of small requests ▪ As the other person has already turned down some requests, they feel bad and agree after a couple of requests o Door-in-the-face-technique ▪ First large request, second request more reasonable o Low-balling-technique ▪ Hidden cost after the “target” has committed (car purchase example) - Resistance to persuasion o Reactance ▪ Persuasion is too obvious o Forewarning o Inoculation ▪ Wakened attack/attempt first ➔ Strong and accessible attitudes are more resistant to persuasion Lecture 5 - Middle age : no clear idea of individual identity o Social ranks/memberships/birthplaces were important - Psychodynamic self (Freud) o Id o Ego o Super-ego - The self in Early childhood is easily influenced by parents - Later, peers become more important o Groups influence our self-image - Objectivism (?) o Realizing youre an object in the world - Proto-imperative (give me that) = pointing (toddlers, babies) - Proto-declarative (look here!) = pointing (older toddlers) - Symbolic interactionism o James: I look in the mirror and see myself ▪ I= subject ▪ Myself= object/social construct o Mead: the self arises from interactions with other people through symbols o Shrauger&Schoenemann: people see themselves as they think others see them o Individual vs. collective self ▪ Individual vs. shared/group/collective identity o You integrate other people or groups into your self-concept o Theory of objective self-awareness ▪ Awareness of self as an object  Private self= thoughts, feelings,… Public self= how others see you (public image) o Self-discrepancy theory ▪ 3 schemas 1. Actual self 2. Ideal self (how we would like to be) 3. Ought self (how we think we should be like) o Ideal self and ought self are desired ▪ Self regulation= avoid discrepancy.- o Self-perception-theory ▪ We observe our behaviour, make internal attributions about the causes for our behavior and from that, we construct our own self-concept o Social-comparison-theory ▪ We learn about ourselves through comparison We use similar people as reference points Upward comparison vs. downward comparison  o Social-identity-theory ▪ Multiple identities (personal and social) ▪ Multiple “selfs” (individual, relational, collective) - Self motives and impression management o Motives influencing self-knowledge ▪ Self-assessment: gain information about oneself ▪ Self-verification: confirm our self-concept ➔ we like to find out the truth but also verify and confirm our self-concept, may it be positive OR negative ▪ self-enhancement: we like to see ourselves in a positive light better than average effect self-esteem pursuit o self-enhancement triad ▪ people usually: 1. Overestimate good points, 2. Overestimate their control over events, 3. Are unrealistically optimistic o dunning-Kruger-effect ▪ people with limited competence in a particular domain overestimate their abilities. o Threats to our self-concept are: failures, inconsistencies and stressors o Self-presentation and impression management ▪ Different roles for different audiences Strategic purposes: manipulating others´ perceptions Expressive purposes: socially validating our self- concept - Cultural differences in self and identity  o Different conceptualizations in different cultures ▪ Independent self: self-concept determined by differences from others ▪ Interdependent self: self-concept determined by relationships with others o Bicultural identity: frame-switching through situations Lecture 6 - What is a social norm? o Arbitrary regularities o Implicit or explicit - What are the functions of social norms? o Regulate behavior and relations o Predict and coordinate - Social influence: process of influencing attitudes or behavior by real or implied presence of others o Effects of presence of others (leaders and groups) o Social pressure and norms - Social norms differ between groups o Tight vs loose cultures o Ecology and history ▪ Population density (hard to coordinate if large population) ▪ Security of resources ▪ Territorial conflict ▪ Environmental threat - Compliance  o Change of public behaviours o Based on power (Mosovici: control of others peoples´behavior through domination) ▪ Contrasted power and influence: if you have one of those 2, you don’t need the other one (either or) o Reference groups (for yourself, positive or negative) vs. membership groups (where you belong to) - Conformity o Deep seated, private and enduring change in behavior and attitudes because of group influence o Contrasts with compliance ▪ Its public and superficial o Processes of conformity ▪ Informational influence: wish for accurate judgement ▪ Normative influence: need for approval and inclusion Susceptible for social pressure o What about group belongingness and norms? ▪ Social identity theory Theory of group membership and intergroup relations based on self-categorization, social comparison and the construction of a shared self-definition in terms of ingroups-defining properties ▪ Self-categorization theory o Distinction between information and norms are problematic (ingroup information= mormative, group norms= information) o Referent informational influence ▪ People conform because they find belonging to the group important for their identity  ▪ People are attached to the group norms, not to the people that belong to the group ▪ You conform because you believe in the norms - Experimets o On conformity: Sherif ▪ Autokinetic effect (sth. Stationary seems to be moving) Showed that norms persevere, there are subsequent isolated judgements o On conformity: Asch ▪ Criticized sherif, said in his experiment conformity happened because of ambiguous stimulus ▪ Wanted to make the stimulus obvious ▪ Line length experiment Optimal conformity group size: 4-5 people 36% always follow, 75% follow sometimes o Factors associated with conformity ▪ Group size ▪ Unanimity ▪ Sex-stereotypical items ▪ Cultures Collectivistic cultures show more conformity ▪ Individual factors Low self-esteem Low status Low IQ o On obedience: Milgram  ▪ Said the task of aschs experiment was too trivial ▪ Wanted a task with important consequences for non- conformity ▪ Found Better obedience than predicted initially in his experiment 65% dlivered elektro shocks until the end ▪ People seem to have a predisposition to obey without thinking - Obedience o Situational determinants ▪ Entrapment: authority figure lures you into commiting a crime ▪ Escalation of commitment I.e. through foot-in-the-door o Negative impact: ▪ If the victim is physically or visually close ▪ 2 disobedient peers o Positive impact: ▪ If authority figure is physically or visually close ▪ 2 obedient peers ▪ Authority legitimacy o Personality factors and situational factors ▪ Authoritarianism (to what extent is obedience important?) ▪ Empathy (how important is hurting others/ the well-being of others) - Influence of minorities o Thesis (set of values) -> antithesis (revolution) -> synthesis (after revolution)  o There needs to be a struggle to change things o Social influence: minorities yielding towards the majority o Conformity bias: social psychologists see minorities as always conforming to majorities o Legitimate power is more important than pure power!! o Minority dissent can change the majority ➔ Conversion theory: The majority question themselves because they encounter counter-arguments ➔ Differential influence (bottom-up influence) Majority influences minority= publicly Minority influences majority= privately o Numerical minority vs. power minorities Lecture 7 - Definition group: 2+ people who share a common definition of themselves and behave accordingly to this definition - Cohesiveness  o The property of a group that binds its people to be group members (binds them to another, to the group as a whole… gives the group a sense of solidarity) o Entiativity and attachement to the group is determined by how tight the members feel to one another - Entiativity o How “group-like” the group is (coherence, distinctiveness and unity) ➔ Distinguishes group from a random assortment of people - Types of groups: o Intimacy groups (family + friends) o Task groups (work, hobby,…) o Social categories (race, gender,…) o Loose associations (waiting at the same bus stop, living in the same city,…) ▪ Not considered a group by some scientists (they say it’s a collection of unrelated individuals) - Social-psychological views on groups o Individualistic view : group processes=interpersonal processes o Collectivist view: group processes=unique properties of peoples feelings/thoughts/behaviour as group members - Group structures o Roles: what you are ▪ Vary between different activities within the group (boss/trainer/mom) ▪ Interrelates to members for greater good of group ▪ Roles can be… ….informal/implicit  …formal/explicit …task focused …socioemotional focused o Status: how you are evaluated ▪ Roles differ in status ▪ Consensual evaluation of your prestige as a role in the group or prestige of a whole group ▪ How to get high status? Expectation states theory o Status-related expectancies can lead to self- fulfilling prophecies Specific status characteristics (personal attributes relevant to group task) Diffuse status characteristics (personal attributes that aren’t directly relevant for task in group, but are overall valued in society, for example wealth) - Marginality and deviance o Group consists of central, prototypical members which have many attributes that characterize the group (representatives) and… o …marginal, non-prototypical members which have few attributes that characterize the group - Reactions to deviance in groups o Black sheep effect: deviate in-group members are disliked more than deviate outgroup members  ▪ Moderating effects: Strength of deviance (for example: rape vs. swearing) Direction of deviance (pope vs atheist, for example) Status of ingroup deviant (trump vs normal citizen, for example) - How do groups develop? 1. Forming stage: orientation and familiarization 2. Storming stage: conflict, group members know each other well enough to start working through disagreements about what to do and achieve 3. Norming stage: post-conflict consensus, cohesion, common identity and shared purpose 4. Performing stage: group works smoothly as unit, shared norms and goals, strong morale and a good atmosphere 5. Adjourning stage: group dissolves because the members loose interest or have completed their goals - Group effects on individual performance o Mere presence of others (passive and unresponsive audience, only physically present) o Social facilitation vs. social inhibition  ▪ Drive theory of social facilitation o Evaluation apprehension model ▪ Presence of others anticipates evaluation and causes arousal Task difficulty as moderator variable o Distraction-conflict theory of social facilitation ▪ Physical presence of others is distracting (coughing, breathing loudly, etc.) Attention conflict: attending to task or audience? o Another theory: different tasks need attention, which is shared with the presence of other tasks and therefore the attention Is decreased - Types of group tasks o Ringelmann effect: individual effort DEcreases, as group size INcreases ▪ Due to: coordination loss and motivation loss (trittbrettfahrer) o Social loafing: reduction of own effort when working on a collective task where outputs are pooled o Free-riding: gaining benefits from being member of a group while avoiding costly obligations of this membership and have others carry them - Group decision making o Brainstorming ▪ Pro´s: Uninhibited ideas Enhances group creativity Better ideas together than alone ▪ Con´s:  Concern about making a good impression Social loafing + free-rifing Production matching (not sticking out by doing too much) Production blocking (through turn taking and waiting for ones turn) - Groupthink o Motivation to rather have an unanonimous agreement rather than coming to a qualitative decision o Antecedents of groupthibnk ▪ Groupthink occurs under pressure due to external threat and complex tasks ▪ Characteristics of a group that is susceptible to groupthink: Excessive cohesiveness Ideological homogeneity Isolation from external information + influence Lacing impartial leadership + proper procedural norms in group - Group polarization o Groups tend to be more extreme than their individual members in their atitudes ▪ regardless if positive or negative attitudes, but ALWAYS towards the already favored direction o not necessarily a risky shift (tendency for groups to favor risky rather than cautious decisions) o Koudenburg and colleagues have found: o If societies norms about ethnic minorities are negative…  ▪ Group discussion about thnic minorities -> group polarization, in direction of members pre-existing views ▪ Individual thinking -> no polarization o Social identity theory explains group polarization as a regular conformity phenomenon, as people in discussion groups tend to converge on what “we” think and away from what “others” think - Leadership o Leader vs boss ▪ Leader: Coaching employees Influence becazse of goodwill Motivate through enthusiasm Directing behavior by asking “we” ▪ Boss: Driving employees Influence because of authority Motivate through fear Directing behaviour through commanding “I” o Glass ceiling effect ▪ Invisible barrier for women + other minority members that keeps them from reaching top leadership positions ▪ Why? Role congruity thory Mainly applied to the gender gap in leadership  Stereotypes of women or minorities are inconsistent with schemas of effective leadership Women and other minorities are evaluated as poor leaders o Glass cliff effect ▪ Tendency for women rather than men to be appointed to precarious leadership positions ▪ Associated with high probability of failure and criticism ▪ Meta analysis has found underrepresented, racial, ethnic and gender groups to be: More likely than majority members to be appointed during crises Evaluated as mor suited for such positions o Intergroup leader = lead group + compete with other groups Lecture 8 - Attitude towards a social group o 3-component-attitude-model ▪ 1. Cognitive (beliefs) ▪ 2. Affective (emotions, mostly negative) ▪ 3. Conative (intentions to behave) - We try to keep our peronal beliefs (prejudices) - Discrimination is moderately related to… o Stereotypes: r=0.16 o Prejudice: r=0.26-0.32 - People are increasingly less blatant with discrimination o Subtle prejudice is still VERY present ▪ This goes for all ages, sexes, etc. !  - Right-wing upsurge in populasim (trump,…) - Critical race perspective: how race and power are shaped by and shape socio-economic and legal systems and institutions o WEIRD bias - Negative treatment seems individual but stems from group membership (“cant trust others”) o Behavioural subtle discrimination forms: ▪ Less eye contact ▪ Interpersonal distance ▪ Anxious behavior - Interactions between white and black people in the US: whites show less friendly non-verbal behavior towards black people - Targets of prejudice o Minorities with low power based on: ▪ Race ▪ Sex ▪ Age ▪ Physical and mental health - Discrimination can seem positive o Ambiguous behavior (holding the door open,…) o Benevolent sexism: “women need to be cherished, they are soo fragile…”  ➔ Confirms dominant position of men - Effect of exposure to benevolent sexism o Differential effect of exposure to benevolent and hostile sexism on engaging in collective action (by Becker and Wright) o After reading sexism statements….. ➔ Women are way more affected by hostile sexism than by benevolent sexism - Bosson: precarious manhood belief o Regarding this, men experience higher levels of social anxiety and stronger motivation to ptove their gender status via risky or aggressive behavior  ▪ Precarious manhood belief correlates positively with sexism towards males and females - Mechanisms of prejudice o Instinctive fear of the unfamiliar o Learned prejudice ▪ Preferences before factual knowledge ▪ Transmissions of parental prejudices - Frustration-aggression-hypothesis o Frustration leads to aggression and agfression always comes from frustration o Prejudice as common group interaction to frustrated group goals ▪ Displace aggression on weaker groups Scapegoats for actual source of frustration o Critique for this theory: 1. Cant explain all forms of prejudice, 2. See book, there are further adjusted frustration aggression explanations, 3. Reduces the phenomenon too much - Personality explanation of prejudice o Prejudice as abnormal behavior  o Result of individual differences o The observation that some people are more prejudiced than others o Role of social processes, like socialization - The authoritarian personality (most prejudiced personality) o Originates in childhood ▪ Autocratic, punitive parenting style o Predisposes individuals to be prejudiced ▪ Ethnocentrism + intolerance ▪ Pessimistic, cynical view of human nature ▪ Conservative attitudes ▪ Suspicious of democracy o Critique for this theory: cannot explain sudden changes in prejudice - Right-wing-authoritarianism o 3 attitude components: 1. Conventionalism (adherence to conventions, i.e.: it has always been like that and we´ll continue to do it like that) 2. Authoritarian submission to authorities 3. Authoritarian aggression towards deviants ➔ Legitimizes + maintains status quo - Pratto and Sidanius: social-dominance-orientation o Ideology that legitimizes ingroup-serving hierarchy and domination ▪ Originally: want own group to be superior/dominant ▪ Now: more general preference for unequal relations between groups ▪ Reject egalitarian ideologies  ▪ Accept myths that legitimize hierarch/discrimination/prejudice ▪ High social-dominance-orientation people may support affirmative actions to appease less powerful groups and protect the hierarchy Lecture 9 - What is intergroup behavior? Reading the chapter is recommended o Anything that involves interaction between 1+ represantatives of 2+ social groups o Perception, cognition and behavior are influenced by our knowledge that we are part of a group - Realistic conflict theory - Example intergroup competition for limited resources: Robbers cave experiment o Prejudice + discrimination arose because of competition for limited resources and real intergroup conflict o The boys didn’t have authoritarian or dogmatic personalities, they were perfectly average  o The less frustrated group (winners) usually expressed greater intergrou aggression (ego-defensive) o Simple contact between group members didn’t resolve the tension, a superordinate goal was needed for this ▪ Still, ingroup preference persisted o Findings: o Problems with the generalizability of the results: ▪ What if there are negative attitudes already before the competition? ▪ Intergroup competition lasted until cooperation phase ▪ Discriminates minial groups - Minimal group paradigm (Tjafel) o Conditions required for discrimination between groups o Random criteria for making groups (flipping coins,…) o Group heads vs group tails ▪ Allocation of resources/points to ingroup vs. outgroup ➔ Ingroup-preference (trotz random criteria) o Positive distinctiveness in favor of ingroup at cost of profit o Conclusions ▪ Discrimination is an attempt to make a “positive” difference between groups (positive distinctiveness) ▪ Categorization is sufficient to establish discrimination Discrimination is expected - Social identity theory o Social categorization may be the only necessary precondition for forming a group and engaging in intergroup behavior…….provided people identify with the category o What defines certain social identities? ▪ Shared norms + goals ▪ Prototypical behaviour + traits - Self-categorization theory (Turner)  We seek positive distinctiveness as individuals and groups - What, if we´re involuntarily members of a group? -> - Intergroup emotion theory (Mackie&Smith, 2002) o Reaction to situation/interest of the group, not the individual o Guilt of colonial past o Football fans o Prejudices are not only positive-negative, they can also take on forms of different group emotions ▪ i.e. Anger/contempt/fear/gloating… - role of power/ status o limitations: ▪ only explains favouring ingroup ▪ predicts behavior of low status groups ▪ social identity + status permeability + stability are all subjective perceptions - social cognition and intergroup behavior o accentuation effect (categorizes) ▪ similarities and dissimilarities of people within a group/category (based on stereotypes) are overestimated o homogeneity effect (outgroup vs. ingroup) ▪ outgroup members are seen as “all the same”, while ingroup members are sooo multifaceted and different from each other  o illusory correlation ▪ cognitive exaggeration of the correlation of two events, just because they happened at the same time (I eat an olive and Germany scores a goal so I assume that eating an olive leads to Germany scoring) - optimal distinctiveness theory (brewer) o the default way of processing information about others as members of categories o desire to achieve an optimal balance between similarities within social groups and differences between social groups o results in an optimal distinctive identity - improving intergroup relations o propaganda and education o intergroup contact ▪ groups are kept apart for various reasons (historical, geographical,…) ▪ different sources of anxiety towards outgroups realistic threat: threats to in-group wellbeing symbolic threat: perceived difference is between the values and worldview of an ingroup and outgroup intergroup anxiety: expecting interaction between groups to be negative negative stereotypes ▪ contact hypothesis (Allport) contact fosters intergroup relations o 4 conditions for success: 1. Prolonged and cooperative 2. Official and within-institutional support  3. Groups of equal social status 4. Common goals Meta-analysis has shown robust effects and that the conditions help but are not essential Lecture 10 - “Aggressive behaviour: behaviour directed towards the goal of harming or injuring another living being who is motivated to avoid such treatment” – Baron, 1977 o Its an evaluative term - 3 comppnents: 1. Harm 2. Intention to harm 3. norm deviation ➔ #2 and #3 are subject to interpretation ▪ Actor vs. victim point of view ▪ Harmful act as action or REaction? ▪ Situational context important - Theories on aggression o Biological explanations (circular argumentation-> not falsifiable!) ▪ Aggression as instinct that is functional for survival (ethological perspective) ▪ Urge to aggress is innate, its expression is conditional on specific environmental stimuli (releasers) ▪ Evolutionary social psychology: aggression can be adaptive and provide social and economic advantages (defending/acquiring resources) o Bio-social theories  ▪ State of arousal necessary for aggressive behavior to occur ▪ Frustration-aggression hypothesis (Dollard et al., 1939) ▪ Excitation transfer model of aggression (Zillmann, 1979) Persons repertoire for learned aggressive behaviour Arousal from another source (like the Gym) Interpretation of this arousal potentially feeds into subsequent aggressive behaviour - Aggression as learned behaviour o Via reward + punishment o Via modeling (social learning theory) o Aggression affected by violent movies + videogames ➔ This learning effects also works in reverse! (helping, for example) - Catharsis (venting) o Acting out is assumed to reduce future aggression - Combination of all theories: - Prosocial behavior o Similarities to aggression: ▪ Perspective specific differences + interpretations  Same behaviour can be seen as helpful or belitteling or even harmful - What is so specific about prosocial behaviour? o In first instance: difficult to explain with traditional theories on human behavior o Focus on the good in people (positive psychology) ▪ This reaserch was mostly motivated by the question: why do people NOT help?? - What is “prosocial behavior” ? o Contributing to physical or psychological well-being of someone else ▪ This includes altruism, helping, friendship,… - What is “altruism” ? o Helping without the intention to have a personal gain - What is “helping” ? o Behavior intended to benefit others - Why do people help? o Evolutionary advantage: helping kins - Bystander calculus model 1. Physiological arousal as empathic response to seeing somebody in distress 2. Labeling the arousal (fear, anger, love,…) 3. Calculating costs of helping vs. not helping (determined by situational factors and the closeness between victim and potential helper) - Empathy: I feel what you feel (affect, emotion,…) - Perspective taking: I can understand, why you act like this (cognition) - Empathy-alturism-hypothesis (as probability chart) - Why do we help people? o As learned behavior ▪ Via reinforcer (children learn best through this) ▪ Via modeling o Altruism/reciprocity beliefs, norms o Maintain/reinforce/gain power o Create favorable impression o Protect/enhance groups´ reputation - Why do we NOT help people o Bystander effect ▪ Bystander apathy due to… Responsibility diffusion Fear of social embarrassment Other peoples´ behaviour suggests, the situation isn’t serious o Cognitive model → - Does group membership matter for helping behavior? o Yes, a lot! o Common ingroup identity may lead to… ▪ …ingroup bias in helping - communicative aspects of help o being able to help ▪ competence ▪ control over valuable sources (skills, knowledge, tangible resources) ▪ superiority o being dependent on help ▪ incompetence - different types of help o dependency oriented help ▪ provides a full solution to the problem at hand ▪ reflects the helpers´view, that the needy cant help themselves ▪ reinforces the differential status of the grups o autonomy oriented help ▪ instrumental for the less powerful group to improve its position and become independent - help and cross-cultural differences o bystander effect more pronounced in big cities o which community characteristics are related to helping strangers? (across cultures) ▪ strength of economy poorer cities are more likely to help! ▪ Individualism/collectivism: NO effect Lecture 11 - What is communication? : transferring meaningful information from one person to another - Aspects of language o System ▪ Utterance ▪ Locution words placed in sequence (e.g. “it is hot in this room”) ▪ Illocution words placed in sequence and the context in which this is done (”it is hot in this room”; criticism of the institution for not providing cooled rooms,...) o Functions - Language, thought and cognition o linguistic relativity: view that language determines thought and therefore people who speak different languages see the world in different ways o essentialism: pervasive tendency to consider behavior to reflect underlying and immutable, often innate, properties of people or the groups they belong to - Communication aspects of language - What is said? Paralanguage (all the non-linguistic accompaniments of speech; volume, stress, pitch, speed, tone of voice, pauses, throat clearing, grunts and sights ) ▪ Disrupted flow (long pauses) leads to a decrease in positive emotions and feelings of rejection ▪ Even happened when participants were unaware of the silence How is it said? Paralanguage + speech style (the way in which something is said (e.g. accent, language), rather than the content of what is said) o ▪ Linguistic category model Abstract language is associated with essentialism o Essentialism= tendency to consider behaviour to represent underlying, innate properties of people - Non-verbal communication and display rules o May happen through: gaze, facial expressions,… o How to tell the difference between an honest facial expression and a faked one? ▪ Duchenne smile o Face masks inhibited emotion recognition + perceived closeness o A lot of agreement regarding emotional facial expressions across cultures - Kinesics: linguistics of body communication (i.e. body posture) - Functions of non-verbal behaviour o Facilitate goal attainment o Establishing dominance + control  ▪ i.e. sitting higher o regulate interactions o expressing intimacy - display rules for emotions o situational differences o cultural differences o status differences o gender differences o keeping distance (public bench example) ▪ culture may predict where you´ll sit and how you´d react if someone sat too close, for example - computer mediated communications o seems to be less suited for social regulation due to: ▪ limited options to display non-verbal communication ▪ different verbal content than for face-to-face interactions o text-based communication restricts depth and nuance o face-to-face: differences of opinions are socially regulated ▪ more ambiguous ▪ direct responses o online messages are less ambiguous and less responsive ▪ less flow, shared cognition and solidarity ➔ still, many social-psychological processes are online observable i.e.: positive correlation between online and street protest o no strong evidence for “digital dualism” ▪ people generally tend to behave similarly online and face to face!  - Speech accommodation theory: modification of speech style to the context (e.g. listener, situation) of a face-to-face interindividual conversation - culture o no single definition o refers to different aspects of our environment + behaviour o “ a social system that is characterized by the shared meanings that are attributed to people and events by its members” o The book´s definition: ▪ A set of cognitions and practices ▪ Characterizes a specific social group ▪ Distinguishes the social group from others o What is “a specific social group” ? ▪ Social collective of various sizes (family, organizations,…) o Read: “the multicultural challenge” part from the book! - Has social psychology neglected culture? o Culture bound: theory + data conditioned ba a specific cultural background o culture blind: theory + data untested outside host culture - culture, cognition + behaviour ultimate attribution error: tendency to attribute bad outgroup and good ingroup behavior internally, and to attribute good outgroup and bad ingroup behavior externally fundamental attribution error: bias in attributing another’s behavior more to internal than to situational causes correspondence bias: a general attribution bias in which people have an inflated tendency to see behavior as reflecting (corresponding to) stable underlying personality attributes entiativity: the property of a group that makes it seem like a coherent, distinct and unitary entity - Cross cultural psychology o A lot of WEIRD people (makes it hard to generalize findings) o The field is ca 30 years old o Etic-emic differences - Comparing cultures o More violence in southern US o Culture of honor (by males) ▪ Male violence = proper approach to threats to social rep./economic position ▪ Found in south US, some mediterranean countries, middle east and arab countries ▪ Terrible social consequences Violence, mosogyny, acid attacs, honour killing ▪ Emerged and maintained in harsh environments (low resources, initially?)  Cooperation + loyalty necessary for survival Absence of relianle institutions and effective authorities o Machismo : code in which challenges, abuse and even differences of opinion must be met with fists or other weapons (Middle East, Arab countries, Southern US, Latin American families) - Dimensions for comparing cultures: 1. power distance: the degree to which unequal power in institutions and practices is accepted, or, alternatively, egalitarianism is endorsed (e.g. can employees freely express disagreement with their manager?) 2. uncertainty avoidance: planning for stability in dealing with life’s uncertainties (e.g. believing that company rules should never be broken) 3. masculinity-femininity: valuing attributes that are either typically masculine (e.g. achieving, gaining material success) or typically feminine (e.g. promoting interpersonal harmony, caring) 4. individualism-collectivism: whether one’s identity is determined by personal choices or by the collective (e.g. having the freedom to adapt your approach to the job) o East vs. west show great differences ▪ East: more individual + hierarchical ▪ West: more individual + egalitarian ▪ Asian: more collectivist + hierarchical  o Hoffstede´s cultural dimensions - Acculturation o Cultural diversity as a potential problem ▪ Ethnic prejudice and discrimination ▪ Feelings of national and cultural identity threat Conservatism Populist nationalism Xenophobia o Cultural diversity as a benefit ▪ Broadening world view ▪ Increase creativity ▪ Reduce prejudice o Migrants dilemma ▪ 4 routes to acculturation