PSYC 2021 Midterm 1 Notes PDF

PSYC 2021: Midterm 1 Notes Intro to Social Psychology What is Social Psychology ​ Social Psychology: a scientific study of how peoples thoughts, feelings and actions are influenced by the real or imagined presence of other people -​ E.g. when someone tailgates you we get influe...

PSYC 2021: Midterm 1 Notes Intro to Social Psychology What is Social Psychology ​ Social Psychology: a scientific study of how peoples thoughts, feelings and actions are influenced by the real or imagined presence of other people -​ E.g. when someone tailgates you we get influenced by their behaviour (slow down or speed up more) ​ Social psychology studies the effect of personal & situational influence on ABC triad, especially focuses on power of situation (e.g. what would my mom think of this) ​ ABC triad -​ Affect: feelings about oneself and others -​ Behavior: helping others, hurting others, praying, playing -​ Cognition: about oneself, others & social world ​ Phenomenon of social influence (we are all influenced by other people) ​ Social influence extends beyond behaviour (includes thoughts, feelings and acts) ​ Social influence takes on many other forms than persuasion, we are often influenced by the presence of others, and even without there physical presence ​ Uses scientific method: Testing assumptions, guesses and ideas about social behaviour empirically/systematically rather than relying on wisdom/philosopher insight (issue with common sense is critics often disagree with one another and it is difficult to know who is correct → “opposites attract” true or not true?) Social Psychology vs Sociology ​ Both interested in situational and societal influences on behaviour. -​ level of analysis. -​ Individual in social situations. -​ societal factors ​ Social Psychology: Looks at individuals and psychological processes that affect their behaviour in social situations (focuses on individual) -​ E.g. question: why people hurt others, social psychologist: does frustration lead to aggression? -​ Aims to find universal truth about human behaviour but also uses cross cultural research to see if they apply in different cultures ​ Sociology: Focuses on society as a whole, studying things like social class, institutions, and large-scale patterns (focuses on society/group structure/big picture) -​ E.g. why murder rate is higher in USA than Canada Social Psychology vs Personality Psychology ​ Share emphasis on individuals & reasons for their behavior. ​ Personality Psychology: Studies the characteristics that make individuals unique and different from one another -​ focus on individual differences → the aspects of people’s personalities that make them different from other people  -​ E.g. explaining why the people in the Solar Temple cult ended their own lives and those of their children → conformist type, weak willed, psychotic ​ Social Psychology: Studies the psychological process people have in common with one another that explains their social behaviour -​ Believe personality psych ignores a critical part of the story: the powerful role played by the social influence -​ Although it is conceivable that all these people were psychotic it is highly improbable ​ All of us are capable of being shy in some situations and outgoing in others so the much more interesting question is: what factors are different in the two citations to make such an impact on the person's behaviour The Power of the Situation ​ Religious picture, riot, concert picture (We may think we never act like this but there truly is the power and strong impact of situations on our behaviour) ​ E.g. experiment: group of students at uni who were considered cooperative or competitive. Told half the participants the game was called “wall street game” and the other half “community game” -​ When it was called wall street, only one third of the people responded cooperatively whereas when it was community game 2 thirds responded cooperatively -​ The name of the game conveyed strong social norms about what type of behaviour was appropriate in the situation ​ Fundamental attribution error: the tendency to explain people’s behaviour in terms of personality traits to underestimate the power of the situation -​ When we underestimate the power of social influence we experience a feeling of false security (e.g. when trying to explain why people do bizarre things its comforting to write the victims as flawed human beings… which helps us believe such thing could never happen to ys) -​ server is impatient and you conclude they are a nasty person… but what if someone told you that their car broke down on the way to work -​ Concern → when we blame victims (sexual assault cases) Power of Social Interpretation ​ Behaviorism: Focuses on how reinforcement shapes behavior. ○​ E.g. Dogs come when called because they associate it with positive reinforcement (food). ​ Gestalt Psychology: Emphasizes perception over objective reality. ○​ E.g. People mentally "fill in gaps" when shapes are incomplete. ​ Construals: How people interpret and perceive social situations. ○​ E.g. A slap on the back may be seen as friendly or intrusive depending on who does it.  ​ Kurt Lewin (Father of Experimental Social Psychology): Applied Gestalt principles to social perception. -​ Person sitting in a room comfortably absolutely sure ceiling cannot fall…What will better predict his behavior? -​ his belief OR objective assessment of an engineer about the chances of ceiling falling → even if the roof is not safe… if the person believes the room is fine and he is comfortable he is going to behave determined to the belief -​ E.g. jury decisions → no matter how powerful evidence may be, the final verdict is dependent on how each member perceives the evidence -​ ○​ E.g. If Maria kisses Shawn, understanding his reaction depends on how he interprets it, not just the kiss itself. ​ Naive Realism: Believing one’s view is the absolute truth. ○​ E.g. Israelis and Palestinians judged peace proposals more favorably when labeled as their own, even when identical (Ross experiment). Where Construals Come from: Basic Human Motives ​ Two primary motives shape construals 1.​ Need for self esteem: wanting to feel good about yourself 2.​ Need for accuracy ​ Sometimes these motives pull us in the same direction sometimes they can conflict leading to → distortion strategies to protect self esteem ​ E.g. Justifying past behavior in arguments—each friend tells a version favoring themselves. ​ E.g. Someone using their "Dr." title often to justify extra schooling Social Cognition Approach ​ Social cognition: how people think about themselves and the social world; how people select, interpret, remember and use social information to make judgements and decisions ​ Which breakfast cereal is better for you Lucky charmers or quaker simply? Most would answer quaker but if you actually look at the ingredients it is not always as it seems Social Psychology and Social Problems ​ Reasons to study the causes of social behaviour -​ Reduction of hostility and prejudice -​ Increase altruism and generosity  -​ Pro-environmental behaviours -​ Education of safe sex -​ Link between violence in the media and violent behaviour -​ Negotiation strategies for conflict between groups -​ Passion, liking and love Social Cognition ​ How we think about the social world ​ How people select, interpret, remember, and use social information to make judgments and decisions. ​ Two ways information is processed -​ Automatic -​ Controlled Automatic ​ unconscious, unintentional, involuntary and effortless -​ Image of T.V remote: word remote just came to mind -​ We brush our teeth on automatic pilot -​ A lot of our days are spent automatic thinking ​ Automatic thinking relies on schemas ​ Schemas: mental structures for organizing & storing social information, influence how we notice, think about and remember information (schemas are like files in the brain) -​ (e.g. what comes to mind when someone says “dog”... don’t have to think mammal with 4 legs… instead you have this information about dog filed up in your mind so you do not need to consciously think because you schema will tell you automatically) -​ Culture teaches us schemas, driving is effortful thinking until it becomes a schema -​ Knowing a chair is a chair -​ E.g. when we meet someone new we categorize them “engineering student” -​ E.g. when walking into a fast food restaurant we have never visited, we already know not to wait to be seated with a menu (because of past experiences) -​ E.g. knowledge about other people and social roles (what a librarian is like) -​ Experiment told some students michael was a salesperson and other students he was an actor. When they were asked to describe him, researchers found that when he was considered a sales person he was seen in pushy description (speaking loudly, monopolizing convos) whereas when an actor he was described as “life of the party” “not afraid of spotlight” -​ In another study John was seen as either lawyer or construction worker, and when asked to generate examples of aggressive behaviours he may perform, when he was considered lawyer (argue), when construction (punch and fight)  ​ Harold Kelley Study -​ Students in different sections of economics class were told that guest lecturer would be filling in that day. Kelley was interested in how different classes reacted to different instructors with a brief note about instructor before he arrived -​ One note described him as cold, other warm -​ After 20 minutes, students rated impressions of hi, people used schema to fill in blanks, those where he was described as warm gave him higher ratings Advantages vs Disadvantages of Automatic Processing/schemas Advantages ​ Efficiency: schema relevant information processes more quickly ​ Organize and understand the world, fills in gaps in knowledge ​ Allows continuity by relating new experiences to past (new situation and being like “i am not sure what to do here” think of past experiences) ​ Particularly helpful in ambiguous situations Disadvantages ​ Generalization ​ Only notice consistent information ​ stereotypical characteristics of various ethnic and gender groups rated quicker than non-stereotypical -​ Not thinking of women firefighter, man changing diaper, police wearing hijab ​ Resistant to change ​ Dismiss inconsistent information (either dismiss or create sub categories) -​ Exception = sub-category -​ Schema of men as aggressive -​ Meet a very polite, caring man ​ sub-category -​ Middle aged men are polite -​ Men from Montreal are polite -​ Men in university are polite Memory & Schema ​ Encoding: encoding memory ​ Access & recall: people access schema limited information and more likely to recall information consistent with their information ​ Misremember: embellish, add or remove information based on our schemas ​ Cognitive Reconstruction, hindsight and reactions to victims and perpetrators ​ Two groups of students read identical stories about John and Barbara but ending for groups was different (one group read John raped barbra and other group read john proposed to barba) ​ Rape consistent  -​ 52 Item memory test -​ Barbara met many men at parties Jack liked to drink. Barbara wore sexy clothing when she saw Jack. Jack had a violent temper. Barbara wore lots of makeup. Jack and Barbara often went out drinking after work ​ Proposal consistent -​ Jack gave Barbara a dozen roses Barbara wanted a family very much Jack was very religious Barbara and Jack dined by candlelight Jack was very well mannered Jack wanted Barbara to meet his parents Jack gave Barbara a ring Jack loved children ​ False alarms: incorrectly identifying distractors as true ​ (these things were not actually mentioned in the story but due to peoples schemas they were falsely introduced and people believed them) ​ Memories can be altered, embellished according to schemas ​ Eye-witness testimony? Selection of Schemas (which schemas are applied) ​ Accessibility: the extent to which schemas and concepts are at the forefront of people’s minds and therefore, likely to be used when making judgements about the social world -​ E.g. on bus and the man beside you mutters to himself, staring at people, rubbing his face. How would you make sense of this behaviour? There are several schemas you could use (alcoholism, mental illness etc) -​ The schema that comes to mind can be affected accessibility ​ Three reasons that schemas can be accessible: 1.​ Past experience -​ E.g. history of alcoholism in your family, traits that describe an alcoholic are likely to be accessible to you, increasing the likelihood that these traits will come to mind -​ Evidence that people who are targets of prejudice and discrimination are more likely to interpret ambiguous situations as discriminatory because those schemas are accessible to them -​ In one study black and white canadian participants read scenarios describing ambiguous interpersonal situations - being served, work treatment- the person in the scenario (server in restaurant/boss) was described as ether the same race as the participant or different. And black canadians were much more likely to attribute the ambiguous e behaviours of racial discrimination when the other was white versus when the person was white and boss/server was black 2.​ Related to a current goal -​ E.g. concept of mental illness may not be chronically accessible but if you are studying for a test in your abnormal psychology class and need  to learn about different kinds of mental disorders, this concept might be temporarily accessible (goal to learn about mental illness) 3.​ Recent experiences -​ A particular schema/trait is not always accessible but happens to be primed by something people have been thinking about or doing before encountering an event ​ Priming: the process by which recent experiences increase the accessibility of a schema, trait or concept -​ E.g. suppose you were reading a book about patients in a mental hospital, given this is at the front of your mind, you would assume strange man on bus behaviour is due to mental illness Experiment: ​ Participants memorized words while identifying colors. ​ Then, they read about "Donald" and formed an impression. ​ Results: -​ Positive words → Donald seemed likable. -​ Negative words → Donald seemed reckless. -​ Irrelevant words (e.g., neat) → No effect. ​ Conclusion: Thoughts must be accessible and relevant to act as primes. ​ Bargh (1996) → participants unscramble words, three groups given different words, after having them unscramble they were told to walk to experimenter who purposely ignored participants… how many people would interrupt expeirmenter in first 10 mins… -​ Rude Condition: they/her/bother/see/usually -​ Polite Condition: they/her/respect/see/usually. -​ Neutral Condition: they/her/send/see/usually -​ 60% of the rude group -​ 40% of the neutral group -​ 20% of the polite group ​ Therefore, people were influenced differently by different sets of word because the words activated different schemas ​ Priming is a good example of automatic thinking because it occurs quickly, unintentionally and unconsciously ​ Priming participants with legal concepts lead to more competitiveness, perceptions of others are untrustworthy and greater self interest than those presented with neutral words Subliminal Priming: registration of stimulus at unconscious level ​ Affect, cognition, and awareness: Affective priming with optimal and suboptimal stimulus exposures -​ 27 milliseconds exposure to happy or sad faces  -​ Evaluate neutral objects like Chinese ideograph -​ Found that people exposed to happy faces rated such chinese stimuli more positively versus those exposed to sad faces rated them more negatively (below conscious awareness their schemas were still activated) ​ If you hear “bed” schema for bed has became activated so words like mattress is placed closely therefore can be activated quick Self Fulfilling Prophecy ​ When expectations about someone lead to behaviors that confirm those expectations. ​ Pygmalion Effect -​ ​ Research (Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968): Teachers were told certain students were likely to "bloom" (randomly assigned). These "bloomers" showed greater academic improvement by the end of the year due to teachers' warmer emotional climate, more difficult material, better feedback, and more opportunities to respond. ​ Implication: Once a schema is formed, it can be resistant to change (e.g., teachers' beliefs about gender in math). Teachers may reinforce their own biases without realizing it. ​ Example: Teachers held lower expectations for Indigenous students, which influenced their placement and performance, confirming the teacher's biases. ​ E.g. researchers randomly assigned university students to read their horoscope that was either optimistic or negative. It turns out that those who read the positive horoscope did significantly better on tests of creativity and cognitive skills than those hor ead negative horoscope ​ We know it wasn’t ude to the actual power of astrology because people did not get real horoscopes (they were randomly assigned) ​ This is a classic case of self fulfilling prophecy because it was peoples beliefs that made it come true ​ Types of Automatic Thinking ​ Embodied Cognition: Physical/bodily sensations can activate mental schemas. ​ Research: ○​ In one experiment participants who sat in a room that had just been sprayed with windex vs a room with no scnet… people were more trusting of a stranger and more willing to donate time and money compared to those in the no scent room ○​ Holding hot coffee made people perceive others as friendlier than those holding cold coffee.  ○​ Sitting on stable furniture led people to view marriages as more stable, while unstable furniture led to more pessimistic views. ○​ Social isolation led to perceiving room temperature as colder and preferring warm foods. ​ Heuristics: Mental shortcuts used to make quick decisions. ​ Two Types: 1.​ Availability Heuristic: People base judgments on how easily examples come to mind. ​ Research: People remembered more famous names from a list, even though there were fewer famous names. -​ E.g. “should I speed? Of the memory that your friend got a ticket 6 months ago you may refrain from speeding -​ E.g. idea that plane crashes are a main cause of death more than smoking 2.​ Representativeness Heuristic: People classify based on how similar something is to a typical case. ​ Research: Participants ignored base rate information (e.g., more truck drivers than professors) and focused on stereotypical cues → glasses. -​ French speaking canadian, we automatically assume they are from quebec -​ Which outcome is more likely? HTHTHTHT or HHHHHHHH → we think the first one but in reality both -​ BRI and children example -​ -​ The older you gey the more you are able to use representativeness than BRI Cultural Differences in Social Cognition ​ Cultural Determinants of Schemas: Culture shapes the content of our schemas. ​ Research (Miyamoto et al., 2006): People primed with Japanese city scenes focused more on background changes (holistic thinking), while those primed with American city scenes focused on main objects (analytic thinking). ​ Example: Different cultural views on tipping (Japan vs. USA) reflect differing schemas about social norms.  ​ Analytic vs. Holistic Thinking: Westerners tend to focus on objects, while East Asians consider the context. -​ Picture of carrot, bunny, dog (which item doesn’t belong? People who say dog doesn't belong are using holistic thinking which looks at the relationship between bunny eating carrots… people who think carrot doesn't belong are analytical thinking which looks at objects and their properties (both mammal animals) -​ Japanese students more likely to report the plants, frogs whereas American students reported fish Controlled Social Cognition: high effort thinking ​ Controlled thinking: Conscious, intentional thinking that requires mental energy. -​ Can be turned on and off -​ Can only think about one thing at a time -​ 5 elements: awareness, intention, control, effort, efficiency? ​ Free Will and Thinking: Belief in exerting more conscious control over events then you really are -​ unconscious desire can lead to a conscious thought (you see commercial for ice cream and 10 mins later crave ice cream) -​ Zhong et al., (2008) desire for hot foods (it was actually stemming from them feeling lonely leading them to the conscious thought of wanting hot food) -​ One group of participants read evidence that obesity is genetically caused, another group read it is social factors. Participants in the control condition that read an arcticle that was not related to obesity ate significantly more cookies than those who read that lifestyle factors are the cause ​ Belief in free will: People who believe they have free will engage in more prosocial behaviors and are less likely to cheat. Counterfactual Reasoning ​ Counterfactual thinking: Imagining alternative outcomes to past events. -​ Research scenario which a man attempted to walk to safety after his plane crashed, those who were told that the man perished 0.4 km from the nearest town gave greater compensation to the family than did those who were told he died 120 km from the nearest town ​ Types: 1.​ Upward Counterfactuals: Imagining better outcomes (e.g., silver medalists feel worse than bronze medalists). 2.​ Downward Counterfactuals: Imagining worse outcomes (e.g., feeling relieved after a minor car accident). ​ Utility: Upward thinking can motivate improvement, while downward thinking enhances emotional well-being. Improving Human Thinking ​ Overconfidence Bias: People tend to overestimate the accuracy of their judgments.  ​ Strategies for Improvement: ○​ Consider alternative viewpoints. ○​ Learn statistical and methodological principles to improve reasoning. Social Perception: the study of how we form impressions of other people and make inferences about them -​ Initial judgments less than 100 milliseconds Non-verbal Communication: the way people communication, internationally or unintentionally, without words (“i’m angry” → narrowing your eyes) ​ Important source of information about people = nonverbal behavior. -​ facial expression -​ tone of voice -​ gestures -​ body position -​ the use of touch -​ eye gaze ​ Federal leaders debate -​ Body language: trudeau has eye contact and shoulders broad -​ Trump Handshake -​ Trudeau was the first to disengage -​ Trying to express dominance ​ Non verbal communication plays a role in 1.​ Communicating personality traits 2.​ Eliciting empathy -​ Mirror neurons: respond when we perform an action and we see someone else perform the same action (seeing someone cry fires neurons just as if we were crying ourselves) -​ Women are especially likely to mimic others smiles Facial Expressions of Emotion ​ Most important non-verbal communication ​ Darwin's universality hypothesis -​ Primary emotions conveyed by the face -​ encoded and decoded in the same way across humans -​ He believed it was species-specific not culture-specific. -​ All of us have innate ability to express emotions and decode others emotions ​ Supporting Evidence: ​ Matsumoto study: believes expressions are apart of our DNA  ​ Optic Needs Hypothesis: these facial expression have biological value: testing acuity of eyes and emotions, when they were fearful they were able to enhance vision, whereas when they were discussed they were more sensitive and narrow eyes focus to things (paying attention to contamination what could be harmful for food)… the way you feel filters the way you see Ekman & Friesen (1971, 1972) study – Fore tribe of New Guinea. Ekman (supports darwin) ​ People in tribe asked to match stories with picture “ The enemy approaches ” – They are Angry “ Friends have come ” – They are Happy “ A child has died ” – They are Sad ​ They were able to do it successfully both americans to the tribe and the tribe to the americans ​ successfully matched facial expressions with corresponding emotions in stories, supporting universality Critiques & Cultural Variability: ​ One issue is that are facial expressions really perceived the same way across cultures? ​ Ekman et al. (1975): Found variations in accuracy rates for emotions across cultures: ○​ Happiness: ~82% recognition across cultures ○​ Fear: Only 54% in Argentina & New Guinea ○​ Disgust: Only 44% in New Guinea ​ Russell et al. (1993): Showed six basic emotions plus contempt in Japan, Greece, and Canada. ○​ Happiness was widely recognized. ○​ Only 14% of Japanese participants could name fear. ○​ Contempt was not identified in any country. ​ Cultural Differences: -​ In experiment of group picture if the central person was smiling americans rated it as happy even if the other people were not smiling whereas with japanese it was only seen as happy if the group members were smiling as well (also showed that the japanese spent more time looking at the characters in the background) ​ Contextual information -​ When neutral face was next to happy face most perceived it as sad… when neutral face was actually put next to sad face the neutral face was seen as happy (context can chain interpretation) -​ Carol and Russel → She has been rear ended on way to important meeting -​ When participants were shown fearful face participants observed it as anger cuz they knew she was rear ended (context matters) -​ Athlete running who is angry → interpreted as determination -​ Facial expressions can be misread because of the context Why is Decoding Facial Expressions Difficult  ​ Accuracy can be decreased due to 1.​ Affect blends: a facial expression in which ne part of the face registers one emotion while another part of the face registers a different emotion (e.g. anger and disgust) 2.​ Display rules: culturally determined rules about which emotional expressions are appropriate to show -​ anger/powerful emotions display for men (because it is not aligned with some display rules for women) -​ Strong emotions particularly negative emotions display discouraged collectivist cultures (cover up negative emotions with smiles japan/china) 3.​ Gender differences -​ Positive and negative emotions women better -​ Attachment promotion hypothesis (women who code decode emotions better produced children with secure attachment and better immune system) Facial feedback hypothesis: the feedback from our facial muscles are used by our brain to interpret what we are feeling ​ Ex. of different ways to hold pencil with mouth (teeth happiness) with nose (anger) those who used teeth reported happiness and nose reported less happiness (because the brain interpreted the facial expression) ​ Davis et al The effects of botox injections on emotional experience -​ ability of facial expression is imapcted whereas filler does not, those with botox were less able to decode emotions in others versus those with derma fillers (because they were unable to mmic the faces of those they were decoding) ​ Carbon 2020 (wearing face masks strongly confuses counterparts in reading emotions) Non-Verbal Behaviours: Cultural Differences ​ Many non-verbal behaviours specific to culture 1.​ Eye contact and gaze (some see it as confidence and respect whereas others see it as disrespect) 2.​ Personal space and touch (north americans value personal space whereas Japan does not) 3.​ Hand and head gestured -​ In some countries anyone can hold hands, even good friends whereas in north america it is more so a symbol of romance -​ Nodding head “no” in greece and bulgaria (opposite no and yes of north america) 4.​ The “ok” sign -​ North america means ok, in japan money, in france 0 5.​ Thumbs up  -​ North america = ok, japan = boyfriend 6.​ Hand-purse -​ Italy = what are you trying to say 7.​ Personal space -​ canada and usa ,ost people like to have an area of open space whereas in other cultures strangers will stand right next to each other to the point of touching ​ Emblems (cultural): nonverbal gestures that have well-understood definitions within a given culture; they usually have direct verbal translations, such as the “okay” sign -​ They are not universal -​ When the prime minister gave protestors the finger, this was greatly understood by Canadians, however other countries were somewhat able to identify it too most likely from North American exposure. However, in parts of europe one would do the cupped hand under chin to convey the same message -​ Ordering 3 drinks from bar, all used signal numbers however, germans started with thumb whereas north americans started with index finger ​ Overall, nonverbal behaviour offers bits of data that we can use to cobntruct our overall impression of others The Email Dilemma: communicating without nonverbal cues ​ There is a dilemma of email/text communication: words go out but there are no verbal cues to given them additional meaning (humour, sarcasm and sadness are stripped away and words stand alone open to misinterpretation) ​ Study which students were given topics to communicate (dorm life, dating) that were matched to one of four emotions (sarcasm, sadness, anger, seriousness) their job was to construct a statement on the topic that successfully conveyed the associated emotion. They communicated in one of three ways (face to face, to another person but using their voice only, through email) either to a stranger or close friend -​ Recipients were significantly less likely to get the emotional meaning if the message was communicated through email (friends did no better than complete strangers) ​ The greater confidence in communication the less likely their friend correctly interpreted ​ First Impressions ​ Initial judgements based on facial expressions take less than 100 milliseconds (we use our observations as a starting point then our schemas fill it from there) -​ Tendency to form impressions on facial impressions around 3 years of age ​ Beard=trustworthy, baby face=naïve, warm, submissive ​ Experiment able to predict how much power one had just from headshot, and it did align with how much they made at law firm  ​ Thin Slices of Behavior: -​ brief video or auditory clips 1 second to 5 minutes, sampled from longer streams of behavior -​ raters are able to make better than chance accuracy judgments about the person being shown or heard. (Ambady & Rosenthal, 1990) -​ If a couple would make it or not -​ Study found that after brief glances at photographs of men and womens faces, people were able to judge their sexual orientation at above chance levels of accuracy, same with social class -​ Another study looked at Canadian political candidates on the dimensions of powerfulness and warmth and their first impression ratings correlated with the election results, the more powerful the more likely to win ​ Western culture assumes that “what is beautiful is good” -​ Study showed people photos of attractive and unattractive individuals, more positive qualities (kind, considerate) were attributed to the attractive individuals and were also predicted to have more success in life ​ People also associate the posture of looking upward to the right with positive attributes (pride, oriented) Implicit Personality Theories ​ Implicit Personality Theory: a type of schema people use to group various kinds of personality traits together; for example, many people believe that if someone is kind, they will be generous a well ​ Fill in the blanks with schemas of what traits go together -​ Beautiful = sincere, considerate, successful -​ High self esteem = intelligent, conscientious, emotionally stable -​ shy= unintelligent -​ Obesity? = lazy, poor -​ In one study half the participants read about Alex who listed all good traits but in one version said she was high in self esteem and in the other said she was low in self esteem. Those who read she was low in self esteem rather lower in positive transits (low in emotional stability) even when a video was shown of her behaving in a warm extraverted manner -​ As well, if someone is shy they are likely also assumed to be less intelligent. And if someone is low in self esteem they are less liking and seen to ahve less future success ​ Research found that university students relied on implicit personality theories to determine whether they should use condoms in sexual situations (if people knew their partner and liked them, they assumed they couldn’t possess AIDS. And if they didn’t know their partner they relied on superficial characteristics such as the persons age, how they dressed and if they were from a large or small city Culture and Implicit Personality Theories  ​ Western culture: artistic IPT → creative, unreliable ​ Chinese Culture: shi hu IPT family oriented, socially skilled ​ IPTs influenced by language ( Hoffman et al., 1986) -​ English monolinguals: read in English, embellished artistic character not Shi gu -​ English- Chinese bilinguals-English: read in English, embellished artistic character not Shi gu -​ English- Chinese bilinguals-Chinese: read in Chinese: embellished Shi gu character not artistic Causal Attributions ​ Attribution theory: how we explain cause for own behaviors and behaviors observed in others. (e.g. he said something mean because he’s so stressed at work this week) ​ Heider (1958; father of attribution theory) when we are making judgments we make two types: -​ Internal (personal characteristics) → in terms of who they are, someone being aggressive? → they are very angry and an aggressive person -​ External (situational factors) → someone rear ended their car, they are hungry, failed their test ​ Attributions & marriages -​ Those in happy marriages tend to explain good behaviour and internal characteristics and in negative situations, my partner yelled at me but they are very stressed out -​ Whereas those in unhappy stressful marriages… positive behaviour = external (they brought flowers? They must just be trying to make up to me), negative behaviour = internal (they are rude) The Covariation Model Covariation Model: We collect data on multiple variables and behaviors in the past to categorize other peoples’ behavior as external or internal. ​ Consensus: information about the extent to which other people behave the same way as the actor does toward the same stimulus ​ Distinctiveness: the extent to which one particular actor behaves in the same way to different stimuli ​ Consistency: the extent to which the behaviour between one actor and one stimulus is the same across time and circumstances ​ Internal attribution: consensus and distinctiveness of the act are low but consistency is high (boss is a mean person) ​ External attribution: if consensus, distinctiveness and consistency are all high (assuming hannah is triggering the response) ​ Finally, when consistency is low we cannot make a clear internal or external attribution so we resort to a special kind of external ro situational attribution that  assumes something unusual is going on in these circumstances (the boss just received very upsetting news and lost his temper with the first person he saw) ​ Research findings: 1. Heavier reliance on consistency & distinctiveness than on consensus. 2. Information on all three, may not be available. ​ Criticism: Model assumes people think systematically & logically ​ Automatically, you ask the attribiutional question about the boss: why is he yelling at hannah - is it something about the boss as a person, the siotuation, hannahs behaviour, something else? The Fundamental Attribution Error ​ Fundamental attribution error: the tendency to overestimate the extent to which people’s behaviour is due to personality traits and to underestimate the role of situational factors -​ (people do what they do because of the kind of people they are, not because of the situation they are in ​ Study examples: -​ A study asked university students to read an essay written by a fellow student on a controversial topic (Fidel Castro) -​ After the students had to guess how the author of the essay really felt about Castro -​ In one condition the researchers told the students the author had free choice on their position in the other condition students learned the author had been assigned to the position yet the participants still assumed thay the author really believed what he wrote even tho he did not get to choose his position (overlooking the role of situation) -​ In one experiment participants received a positive assessment from a attractive person, but the participant was told that the pearson had to say positive things however, the participants believe it is truly real and not because of the situational factors Consequence of the Fundamental Attribution Error ​ Victim blaming -​ When people decide that victims could have exercised control over a situation but didn't -​ Seeing overweight people as they are seen as responsible for being fat ​ Perceptual Salience: information that is the focus of people’s attention; people tend to overestimate the causal role of perceptually salient information (point of focus usually on person and not situation) -​ E.g. person received an F on their midterm but we don't know that and just see her current angry behaviour -​ We cant see the entire situation so we ignore its importance and we assume that the person themselves cause their behaviour -​ In one study two male students engaged in a “get acquainted” conversation (following a script) six participants sat in assigned seats surrounding two  conversations and when they were asked who out of the two actors led the conversation they said whoever one was in their best view, participants with equal viewing said they both led the conversation -​ In another study 21 courtroom, judges and police were presented a videotape of a suspect confessing to a crime. Three camera perspectives (suspect only, detective only or equally as focused) when they asked how voluntary the confession was -​ Videotape that focused on just suspect was rated higher voluntariness than the other two The Two Step Process of Making Attributions 1.​ Internal attribution is made (Individualistic cultures end here) 2.​ Adjust this attribution by considering the situation, may be skipped (collectivist cultures make it to the second step) ​ Cultural Differences -​ People who live in collectivist cultures are much less prone to making the fundamental attribution error whereas in individualistic cultures tends to -​ One study was based on Hindus living in India and Americans living in the United States were asked to think of examples of positive and negative behavuiurs -​ American participants preferred and were more likely to say the cause of others behaviours were because of who they are rather than situational context -​ In contrast, Hindu participants explained financial cheating as he is unemployed -​ Individualist cultures are capable of coming up with situational explanations but only if they are motivated to think more deeply -​ In another study white university students were first taught the difference between situational and dispositional attributions and participants in the situational attribution training condition were shown pictures of black men, walking with sentences describing negative stereotypic behaviours (e.g. arrived at work an hour late) and then a situational explanation popped up on the screen and they were asked to choose the situational factor. Then these same participants were put in an unrelated study and were less likely to associate black faces with negative stereotypes compared to those who were not trained Actor/Observer Bias ​ the tendency to see other people's behaviour as dispositionally caused, while focusing more on the role of situational factors when explaining ones own behaviour -​ E.g. those who literally survived the holocaust were more likely to put forward situational reasoning whereas jews who were safe from it were more likely to put internal reasoning (persistence) ​ Cultural Differences → American and Korean participants  -​ Self: both groups situational attributions -​ Other: mainly by Korean (collectivist) Self Serving Attributions ​ When people's self esteem is threatened make self serving attributions ​ Successes - attributed to internal factors (i worked hard, i am smart) ​ Failures - attributed to external/situational factors (test was hard, bad prof) ​ It was found that in sports 80% of attributions for wins were internal and losses were attributed to external factors ​ Study found that students working on a group project had very good memories when asked to recall their contributions the project however, poor memory when asked about other group members contributions ​ Another group of camper participants were given a survey asking compared to average camper please indicate how likely your visit will affect conditions (garbage, disturbing wildlife) but the campers believed their behaviour was less likely to impact than the average camper ​ Culture and the self serving bias -​ Studies show self serving bias is strongest in the united states and other western countries (canada, australia) -​ On the other hand asian cultures display low levels of self serving bias (value of modesty and harmony) and contribute failure to internal cause Defensive Attributions ​ Defensive Attributions: explanations for behavior to avoid feelings of vulnerability and morality ​ Unrealistic optimism: we feel the chances that good things will happen to me is higher than others and bad things is less likely to happen to me than others (because we don’t want to feel threatened) -​ E.g. driving in bad weather, chances of me ending up in an accident is very little compared to my neighbour -​ Chances of me winning lottery are higher than for others ​ Belief in a Just world: bad things happen to bad people/people who make stupid mistake, therefore, will not happen to me -​ In one study, after hearing about an attack on an innocent person, people were more likely to derogate the victim's character and distance themselves from tje victim -​ Also the thought that if a bad thing happens it was for a reason and good things are coming (basketball and hockey players believing that ref calls will balance out in the long run) -​ Another way we convince ourselves is that there is a higer power in control -​ One study participants were primed with words such as radom and chance they reported higher beliefs in God and other supernatural sources wehn primed with negative words (poorly)  ​ E.g. students were asked to write an essay about their post grad plans and other students were asked to write about their current university courses/activites -​ Later all students saw a video of a young woman named sarah who recently got an STD. -​ In the “innocent victim” version of the video, Sarah said they sued condom but it broke -​ In the not innocent version Sarah admitted to not using a condom -​ Who was most likely to blame Sarah even when portrayed as an innocent victim? Students who were asked to focus on their long term goals -​ Another study shows that people are so motivated to maintain the belief that the world is just a place that they engage in irrational thinking -​ Participants were told that a man named david was injured hit by a car, -​ Those in immoral condition were also told that David was having an affair -​ Participants in moral condition were told David was planning a family vacation -​ Those who were told he was having an affair were more likely to believe the accident occured because he was having an affair and deserved to be in an accident -​ Other studies show that female victims were blamed more than the male perpetuator when she was described as flirtatious, battered wives as responsible for abusive husband behaviour ​ Consequences of Just World Beliefs -​ Victim blaming -​ I am not vulnerable -​ World is not random, higher power is in charge (if something bad happen… its for a reason) -​ Good things will also happen -​ Effort and good work pays off ​ Function/purpose -​ Maintain motivation and plan ahead Bias Blind Spot: Tendency to see oneself as less biased than other people, or to be able to identify more cognitive biases in other than in oneself The Self Self ​ Self-concept: knowledge about who we are → overall set of beleiefes that people have about their personal attributes (Known/Me) ​ Self-awareness: the act of thinking about ourselves (Knower/ I)  -​ The two combine to make coherent identity ​ A psychological structure or process that is involved in attending to, thinking about, evaluating and regulating the individual ​ William James (1890) Social Self Self develops within the interpersonal, socio-cultural context -​ He sees it as very social (would we need name on island alone) Self recognition ​ Rouge test -​ Red dot put on kids forehead, at first they will touch the mirror (absence sense of self) as they develop they will touch their own forehead (gaining sense of self) ​ Are humans unique -​ Do animals have the ability to recognize themselves? The Content of the Self: Self Schemas ​ Self Schema: knowledge about the self (e.g., attitudes, preferences, traits) that influences what people notice, think about, and remember about themselves. -​ What we like, what we don't like, i like to read, personality traits (Me part) -​ E.g. sarah plays a lot of sports and athleticism is an important part of her self schema she is likely to remember the volleyball game more than the movie where as Kate who loves to act will remember the movie more than the volleyball game ​ Our schemas can also bias memory processes -​ Desire to see ourselves in a positive light can influence which of our past actions we are most likely to remember -​ In one study participants were told that introversion is associated with success whereas others were told that extraversion is associated with success. Those who were led to believe introversion was associated with success were more likely to remember introverted behaviours they had performed and vice versa -​ Another study found that when participants are asked to remember times behaved as extraverts or that extraversion is superior we incorporate this trait into our self concept and same if we are asked or believe introversion Self Concept Clarity ​ Self concept clarity: the extent to which knowledge about the self is stable and clearly and consistently defined ​ Risks of low self concept clarity: -​ increased neuroticism -​ decreased self-esteem -​ increased rumination (fixation/involuntary negative form of self focus) -​ Materialistic (believe happiness is achieved externally) ​ Associated with life satisfaction (this relation is stronger for those from individualistic cultures)  ​ Celebrity worship, materialism & compulsive buying were all correlated with low self-concept clarity (Reeves et al., 2012) -​ Empty self theory: self became disconnected with community, leading to feeling of emptiness (so they try to fill this with celebrity worship and materialism) -​ Absorption addiction model: when people have a low sense of self fulfilment they want to regain fulfilment and find fulfilment by absorbing compulsive buying, materialism and celebrities Cultural Differences in Defining the Self ​ Independent View of the Self: defining oneself in terms of one’s own internal thoughts, feelings, and actions, and not in terms of the thoughts, feelings, and actions of other people (western culture) ​ Independent Self construal -​ Circles do not overlap -​ Solid boundary -​ Xs not shared -​ boundary between ingroup and outgroup dotted ​ Interdependent View of the Self: defining oneself in terms of one;s relationships to other people; recognizing that one’s behaviour is often determined by the thoughts, feelings, and actions of others (Asian/non-Western cultures) ​ Interdependent Self construal -​ Circles overlap -​ dotted boundary (flexible, can change from one situation to another, dependent on situations in roles → sense of self changes based on who you are with -​ Xs shared -​ Solid boundary between outgroup and ingroup (difficult for in group members to fall out of group and for outgroup to make their way into in group, sense of self is driven by close interpersonal relations) ​ When americans rate themselves and their mothers different areas of brains light up but collectivist cultures the same area lights up when thinking of self and loved ones Gender Differences in Defining the Self ​ Women → relational interdependence: they focus more on their close relationships, such as how they feel about their romantic partner, friend or child (“I am a sister, a good friend”) ​ Men → collective interdependence: define themselves in terms of social groups, such as sports teams to which they belong (“I am honest, carefree, determined..”) ​ E.g. when women asked to describe positive/negative event in life women tend to mention relationship events (engagement, death of family member) whereas men are  more likely to talk about events involving larger groups (time their sports team won or lost important game) ​ Women are found to hold a more rational view of self but only in individualist cultures (in collectivist cultures → genders equal tendency to have a relational view of the self that emphasizes interdependence Four Dimensions of Independent, Interdependent self construal ​ Collectivism: I don't sacrifice self interest for my group (yes on this would be a lower score on collectivism) ​ Agency: I think it is desirable for the members of my group to have the same opinions (yes answer would be low agency) ​ Assertiveness: I assert my opposition when I disagree strongly with the members of my group (yes would be high on assertiveness) ​ Relatedness: I often do what I feel like doing without paying attention to others' feelings (yes would be a low score on relatedness) Results ​ Eastern: higher on collectivism & relatedness ​ Western: agency & assertiveness ​ Women higher on relational dimension Self Knowledge ​ Introspection: the process whereby people look inward and examine their own thoughts, feelings and motives -​ Only 8% of thoughts about self -​ When people do introspect the reasons for their feelings and behaviour can be hidden from conscious awareness ​ Self Awareness Theory: when people focus their attention on themselves, they evaluate and compare their behaviour to their internal standards and values -​ We become self conscious in the sense that we become objective, judgemental observers of ourselves, seeing ourselves as an outside observer would -​ E.g. you feel that you should quit smoking, one day catch an image of yourself in a store window smoking a cigarette. How did you feel? Seeing your reflection will highlight the disparity between your behaviour and your internal standards -​ If you can change your internal guidelines (quit smoking) you will do so, if you can’t change behaviour then being in the state of self-awareness if uncomfortable because you are confronted with disagreeable feedback about yourself/dissatisfaction about oneself -​ Therefore, if we are congruent = good ​ Discrepancy -​ Positive: encourages self-regulation -​ Negative: escape, avoid source of self awareness -​ E.g. Positive escape: religious experiences, spirituality, flow  -​ E,g, Negative escape: alcohol, binge eating, suicide -​ People are less likely to eat fatty foods infront of a mirror ​ Study example: researchers told some participants they had some poorly on a task that reflected their level of intelligence and others were told they had done well. And participants who were given failure feedback would be highly motivated to escape self-awareness and therefore most likely to pay attention to a video that was on in the room ​ Therefore, self awareness can have negative or positive effects Cultural Differences in Self Awareness ​ Eastern Cultures: outside perspective of the self, viewing themselves through eyes of other people. ​ Western cultures insider perspective of the self, focusing on private experiences without considering how others see them. (whereas collectivist cultures see themselves from an outside perspective/audience 3rd person) -​ Mirrors in the head (Heine et al., 2008) -​ Canadian and Japanese students -​ Writing exam with mirror in room (mirror didnt have impact on japanese cheating behaviour because they always have a mirror in their head whereas for the canadians it did impact them and make them more self aware and reduce cheating) ​ Collectivist cultures may be in a chronic state of self awareness because they are more likely to be seeing themselves through the eyes of other people -​ Study found that americans who rated themselves with a mirror present were more dissatisfied with themselves (reported a larger “gap” or discrepancy between their actual and ideal selves) than when there was no mirror present -​ Whereas for japanese participants, dissatisfaction with self did not differ depending on whether a mirror was present ​ Perspective Taking and culture ​ Chinese and american pairs ​ One member was director and other was partner, they stood on opposite sides of the cabinet filled with objects, the director couldnt see everything cuz some of his was covered whereas the player could see everything, if the partner had high perspective taking they wouldn;t choose the ones that were blocked off for the director ​ Findings: -​ Chinese participants more tuned to their partner's perspective than American participants. -​ Americans often completely failed to take the perspective of their partner, whereas Chinese almost never did. -​ Cultural dimension of interdependence focus attention on the other, causing Chinese to be better perspective takers than Americans.  -​ Although members of both cultures are able to distinguish between their perspective and another person's perspective, interdependent culture promotes the effective use of this ability to interpret other people's actions Judging why we Feel the Way we Do: Telling more than we Can know ​ People make mistakes when talking about themselves, tend to explain behaviour and feelings which do not really match what happened ​ “Telling more than we know” tendency to explain more about one’s feelings and behavior than one actually knows. ​ Casual theories: “mondays make me sad” ​ Researchers went to mall with table that had stockings layed out, people who bought them researchers asked why you bought them, always had reason, stockings were moved throughout, the one that was on the right tended to be bought, we always have reason and make up reason (causal theories) ​ Car buying scenarios -​ Male participants -​ Gave details about car and then ask them to make a choice of which car they will buy, of all the pictures there was one with a model dressed sexy with the car (changed for car brand for each participant), participants were then asked “which car will you buy”, most of them opted for the car with the model but they never outwardly said that… they only talked about facts of the car ​ In one study students were asked to keep journal of their moods every day for five weeks, and note things that might affect mood (weather, sleep) -​ Students estimated how much their mood was related to these other variables and most people were wrong about what predicted their mood ​ In another study students asked to track mood for 70 days and after recalling what their moods had been. Participants “remembered” more positive moods on weekends and “bluer mondays” than they actually experienced. Women also reported being in worse moods during their pre menstrual/ menstrual phase than was the case Self-Perception Theory: when we are uncertain how we feel about something, we turn to our behavior for answers -​ “I always get coffee from tims, i like tims” -​ We use this in ambiguous situations -​ Suppose that a friend asks you how much you like classical music (you hesitate because you never listened to classical music when you were growing up, but lately you have found yourself listening to symphonies on the radio every now and then) “wellm i don't know… i guess i like some kinds of classical music… just yesterday i listened to some while i was driving to work” in this response you use the source of self knowledge and observation of your own behaviour ​ Free choice -​ Making this out of free will, it is important they are the ones making the choice  -​ If you always got tims cuz your partner likes it, it will not help you draw a true conclusion Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Motivation ​ Intrinsic: the desire to engage in an activity because we enjoy it or find it interesting, not because of external rewards or pressures ​ Extrinsic: the desire to engage in an activity because of external rewards or pressures, not because we enjoy the task or find it interesting ​ Research found that intrinsic motivation was positively correlated with persistence among competitive swimmers, intrinsic motivation has been linked with higher grades ​ Intrinsic motivation beneficial, extrinsic associated with depression -​ Relationship issues (intrinsic → challenges, extrinsic → hassles) -​ Internally motivated makes it easier to work toward that goal ​ Overjustification Effect: the case whereby people view their behaviour as caused by compelling extrinsic reasons, making them underestimate the extent to which their behaviour was caused by intrinsic reasons (parents pay you to motivate you to play piano) ​ Task Contingent Rewards: rewards that are given for performing a task regardless of how well the task is done ​ Performance-contingent Rewards: rewards that are based on how well we perform a task (grades) → this type of reward is less likely to decrease interest in a task and may even increase interest because it conveys the message that you are good at it Knowing Ourselves Through Other People ​ Looking-glass Self: the idea that we see ourselves through the eyes of other people and incorporate their views into our self-concept ​ Self knowledge comes from important people in our life -​ Grad students asked to evaluate their research ideas, half primed with happy prof half with disapproving prof, they used this to make decision -​ Imagine older person in family vs college friend and then hear about story about women cosmopolitan sexual, less enjoyable if primed with thinking of older person in family ​ Social Comparison Theory: we learn about our own abilities and attitudes by comparing ourselves with other people -​ Comparing our plates with others to judge if we are overeating -​ When: no objective standard to use as a measure -​ Whom: similar others on the relevant dimension Self Control ​ The ability to subdue immediate desires to achieve long term goals ​ What doesnt work for self control:  -​ Thought suppression → trying to push thoughts out of our minds -​ It also doesn’t work well to simply focus on the long term goal and how important it is to us ​ Instead: -​ implementation intentions: peoples specific plans about where, when and how they will fulfil a goal and avoid temptation -​ Arrange environments to avoid temptation -​ Well rested (energy needed) -​ In one experiment people instructed to suppress a thought (don't think about a white bear) were worse at trying to regulate their emotions on a second task (try not to laugh) compared to people who did not have to suppress their thoughts (because first task used up resource people use to control behaviours) ​ Executive function -​ Cognitive depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? (Baumiester et al., 1998) -​ Chocolate cookies group (told they can eat cookies while they wait) -​ Radish group (told cant eat cookies when they eat, only radish) -​ Performance on an unsolvable puzzle (how long are they going to persist on this task) ​ Which group do you think gave up quicker? -​ Radish group, because cookie group did not have to exercise self control earlier ​ Had depleted executive self control Self Esteem: How we Evaluate Ourselves ​ Downward Social Comparison: the process whereby we compare ourselves with people who are worse than we are in a particular trait or ability (self protective/enhancing strategy) -​ Comparing to co workers, comparing food, comparing cancer patients, older people comparing regrets ​ We might be able to boost our self esteem when comparing current performance to our previous performance ​ If we think we might fall into the other person's fate it can actually make us feel bad ​ Upward Social Comparison: the process whereby we compare ourselves with people who are better than we are in a particular trait or ability -​ In the workplace employees are more frequently engaging in upward social comparison (better performance/salary) the lower their job satisfaction and commitment -​ Social media is a main place of upward social comparison ​ Study where they talk about this superstar achieving student and ask students to compare to best version of themselves usually makes them feel bad but comparing it to their average day self makes them feel motivated  ​ For romantic relationships its different because we don’t tend to feel threatened by their successes (e.g. partner gets raise we can be happy) ​ If you succeed and someone else doesn't you will think situationally (deserving wise, grade, did you study harder?) ​ Relationship comparison (comparing our relationships with others) -​ Upward -​ Downward -​ If we believe we can also achieve then we feel happy/inspirational whereas if we don’t it can make us distressed Social Comparison and Culture ​ Collectivist culture are more concerned with avoiding failure than with achieving success, whereas the opposite is true is true in individualist cultures ​ Collectivist cultures seek self improvement to a greater extent than individualist cultures ​ European-Canadians more motivated by positive (successful) role models than were Asian-Canadians (Lockwood et al., 2005). ​ Asian-Canadians more motivated by negative (unsuccessful) role models than were Self Esteem (social acceptance) ​ Purpose of self esteem -​ Humans have a fundamental need to maintain relationships with others, evolutionary because survival would have been increased when belonging to a social group ​ Sociometer theory: self esteem as in how much the group is accepting/rejecting us (if we feel we are being rejected we get lower) ​ Self fulfilling prophecy → people who have high self esteem believe they are liked by the group leading them to act in a warmer manner to the group which will actually make them more liked ​ In one study people with high and low self esteem filled out a questionnaire describing themselves. People who were low in self esteem were willing to join the group only when they received feedback that the group had seen their questionnaire and perceived them as having socially valued traits. Whereas, people high in self esteem were willing to join the group regardless of feedback ​ High esteem people are willing/eager to engage in social interactions because they see themselves in terms of qualities that are valued by other people ​ In another study they asked participants how secure they felt in their relationships with others. Participants in a self affirmation condition were asked to write about the value that was more important to them. Participants in control were asked to describe a value that was not important to them. Self affirmation increased feelings of security for those who doubt their value as social partners Self Evaluation: Biased or Accurate? ​ Self enhancement: Unrealistic positive views about ourselves -​ Associated with self-esteem & life satisfaction -​ False uniqueness effect: believing others share their weaknesses but they have qualities that make them better ​ Cultural differences: Western phenomenon; Asian cultures tend to hold a negative view of themselves → self-effacement. Self Evaluation: Accurate ​ Self- verification theory; we want to verify ourself concept under certain conditions -​ Confirmation of self concept -​ Tell me the truth, even if it hurts? -​ Consistency: we do want consistency (if we know we are bad at math and a friend says no you are not, that will upset us because we know the truth) -​ Congruency: we don’t want people to see that what they believe isn’t true, trigger anxiety that they will once find out so we rather the truth (teacher saying wow you did so good you are such a good math student) ​ Need for truth? -​ Dimension -​ Relationship -​ If your romantic partner is evaluating you on your looks you would want the self enhancing version, whereas from friends you want the truth ​ When -​ Certainty -​ Consequences -​ Malleability → if you can change/improve then you would want the truth, if trait is fixed and you cant change then you want positive./enhancing feedback ​ Therefore, need for self enhancement but truth is dependent on different factors (consistency, congruence, dimension, relationship) The Nature and Origin of Attitudes ​ Attitudes: evaluations of people, objects or ideas -​ Valence (evaluation) → Positive, negative, ambivalence/mixed feelings -​ Intensity (where does our commitment lie with these attitudes (weak/strong) -​ E.g. people experience ambivalence/mixed feelings about feminists (capital punishment, abortion), indigenous peoples, asian immigrants ​ An attitude is made up of three components 1.​ Affective: emotional reactions toward the attitude object (another person or a social issue) 2.​ Cognitive: thoughts and beliefs about the attitude object  3.​ Behavioural: actions or observable behaviour toward the attitude object ​ Example: attitude on gun control -​ Cognitive component (beliefs, ideas) → “gun owners end up shooting themselves more than others” -​ Affective component (emotions, feelings) → “guns make me sick” -​ Behavioural component (predisposition to act) → “ i vote for gun control advocates whenever possible” Where do Attitudes Come From? ​ Affectively Based Attitude: attitude based primarily one people’s emotions and feelings about the attitude object -​ E.g. Falling in love with someone despite knowing that the person has a history of being untrustworthy ​ Which attitudes are likely to be affectively based? → topics suggested not to be discussed at a dinner party -​ Politics, sex, religion (people tend to vote with their hearts than their minds) ​ One study had two different messages on posters for donations on cancer research -​ Value expressive condition → ended with help others live, whereas, non-value condition → “protect your future” -​ Participants in (help others live) there was a positive correlation between altruistic values and favourable attitudes toward donating to cancer. In contrast, (protect your future), there was no relation to altruistic values and attitudes toward donating ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Affective based attitudes can also result from sensory reaction (liking the taste of chocolate despite calories, liking a pattern) ​ Affectively based attitudes have three things in common 1.​ Do not result from rational examination of the issues 2.​ Not governed by logic 3.​ Often linked to people's values, so efforts to change them challenge those values ​ Cognitively Based Attitude: primarily based on a person’s beliefs about the properties of an attitude object -​ Focused on relevant faces (how many litres of gas per 100 km) ​ Behaviour Based Attitude: based on observations of how one ebhaves toward an attitude object -​ Aligned with self perception theory -​ E.g. asking a friend how much they enjoy exercising, “i guess i like it because i always seem to be going to the gym” Explicit vs Implicit Attitudes  ​ Explicit Attitudes: Consciously endorsed and easily reported. ​ Implicit Attitudes: Involuntary, uncontrollable, and sometimes unconscious. -​ Example: Sam, a white university student, consciously believes in racial equality (explicit attitude), but due to growing up around negative stereotypes, he unconsciously reacts with discomfort (implicit attitude) when around Indigenous people. -​ Implicit attitudes are more rooted in childhood, while explicit attitudes stem from recent experiences. Implicit Association Test (IAT) ​ Measures implicit biases by having participants categorize words or pictures quickly. ​ Example: Mothers with explicitly positive attitudes toward parenting exhibited more positive and fewer negative parenting behaviors. ​ People can have conflicting explicit and implicit attitudes on the same topic. ​ Implicit and explicit attitudes may correlate when emotions are involved but not necessarily when cognition is engaged. Critiques of the IAT ​ Schimmack (2021): Challenges the validity of the IAT as a measure of implicit biases. ​ Amygdala activation in response to outgroup faces might reflect novelty bias rather than negative bias. ​ Raises the ethical question: Should we judge people based on unconscious biases or on deliberate, thoughtful behaviors? Explicit & Implicit Self-Esteem (Schroderabe et al., 2007) ​ Discrepant self-esteem: Mismatch between explicit and implicit self-esteem, linked to psychological and physical health issues. ○​ Fragile self-esteem: High explicit, low implicit (linked to narcissism). ○​ Damaged self-esteem: Low explicit, high implicit. ​ Consequences of discrepant self-esteem: ○​ More anger suppression. ○​ Increased depressive attributional styles. ○​ Higher nervousness. ○​ More days of impaired health. Are Implicit Self-Esteem Measures Valid? (Falk et al., 2014) ​ No, they may not reliably assess individual or cultural differences. Impact of Explicit & Implicit Self-Esteem ​ People with low explicit but high implicit self-esteem experience mood swings:  ○​ Feel a boost in self-esteem with positive feedback (e.g., good grades). ○​ Experience a sharper decline with negative feedback. When Do Attitudes Predict Behavior? ​ The relationship between attitudes and behavior is not simple. In one study, a researcher traveled across the U.S. with a Chinese couple during a time of high prejudice against Asians. Despite a generally welcoming reception from 251 establishments, when the researcher later inquired whether they would serve a Chinese visitor, over 90% of establishments said no. This showed that attitudes did not always align with actual behavior. For example, people say they need to combat climate change but refuse to pay into initiatives. Predicting Spontaneous Behaviors ​ Highly accessible attitudes are more likely to predict spontaneous behavior. For instance, a person’s attitude toward homeless people may be influenced more by first-hand experience (e.g., volunteering at a homeless shelter) than by second-hand experience (e.g., watching the news). Predicting Deliberate Behaviors: The Theory of Planned Behavior The best predictors of planned behaviors are: 1.​ Attitudes toward the behavior. -​ Specific Attitudes: More specific attitudes are better predictors of behavior. For example, a study found that women’s specific attitudes toward using birth control within the next two years predicted actual behavior more effectively than general attitudes toward birth control. 2.​ Subjective norms (beliefs about others' opinions) -​ Beliefs about how others view the behavior. For example, if Simmi dislikes heavy metal but her best friend, Taylor, really wants her to go to a heavy metal concert, Simmi is more likely to go because of the influence of subjective norms.. 3.​ Perceived behavioral control (belief in ability to perform behavior). When people have time to plan, the best predictor of their behavior is their intention, shaped by the above three factors. -​ Refers to how easy or difficult individuals perceive a behavior to be. For example, people may not stick to an exercise routine if they think it’s too difficult. But, they may be more likely to buy milk on their way home because they believe it’s easy to remember. Cultural Differences: In individualist cultures, personal attitudes (e.g., smoking) predict intentions, but subjective norms influence behavior more in collectivist cultures. The Theory of Planned Behavior: Applications ​ Health Behaviors: A study of swimmers’ intention to complete training was best predicted by positive attitudes, social support, and belief in their ability to succeed. ​ Condom Use: Despite having positive attitudes toward using condoms, people often fail to use them due to perceived behavioral control (e.g., discomfort in buying condoms or discussing them with a partner). How Do Attitudes Change? Persuasive Communication: Persuasive communication advocates a particular side of an issue, such as speeches or advertisements, and can influence people’s attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. Yale Attitude Change Approach: The effectiveness of persuasive communication depends on three factors: 1.​ Who: The source (attractiveness, likeability, credibility, expertise, trustworthiness). A credible source is more persuasive, but over time, the source may be forgotten (sleeper effect). 2.​ What: The message itself (reason versus emotion, one-sided versus two-sided arguments, and order effects like primacy and recency). 3.​ Whom: The audience (mood, distraction, intelligence, self-esteem, and need for cognition). For audiences that need high levels of cognition, strong arguments are more persuasive. Elaboration Likelihood Model: This theory explains that persuasive communications can change attitudes through two routes: 1.​ Central Route: When people are motivated and able to pay attention to arguments and logic. 2.​ Peripheral Route: When people are distracted or uninterested and are influenced by surface characteristics (e.g., speaker credibility, message length). Fear and Attitude Change: Fear-arousing communications are persuasive if they generate moderate fear and provide specific instructions on how to change behavior. -​ For example, a study found that smokers who watched a graphic film about lung cancer and read a pamphlet on quitting smoked less than those who only watched the film or read the pamphlet. However, fear communications may fail if they are overwhelming and cause defensive reactions. Humor can reduce distress in people who find fear messages threatening. Advertising and Attitude Change: Advertisements tend to increase sales. The third-person effect suggests that people believe others are influenced by media messages, but not themselves. The type of ad depends on the basis of the attitude:  ​ Cognitively-based attitudes work best with rational arguments and personal relevance. ​ Affectively-based attitudes work best with emotional appeals. Cultural Differences in Advertising: People from individualist cultures are more persuaded by ads stressing independence (e.g., "shoes for you"), while people from collectivist cultures are more persuaded by ads stressing interdependence (e.g., "shoes for your family"). The same pattern is seen in ads for products like digital cameras. Subliminal Advertising: Subliminal messages are words or images not consciously perceived but claimed to influence attitudes and behaviors. Studies on subliminal ads (e.g., flashing "drink coca-cola" during a movie) showed mixed results, with some claiming increased sales, though studies have not supported a strong influence on behavior. For example, one study of self-help subliminal messages found no effect on memory or self-esteem. ​