Social Notes PDF

[Self-evaluation](#self-evaluation) [Self-regulation](#_Self-regulation) [Cultural self](#cultural-self) [Cognitive dissonance](#cognitive-dissonance) [Social attributions](#social-attributions) [Physiological factors on emotion](#physiological-factors-on-emotions) [Cognitive factors on emotion](#cognitive-factors-on-emotions) [Prejudice and Discrimination 1](#prejudice-and-discrimination-1) [Prejudice and Discrimination 2](#prejudice-and-discrimination-pt-2) [Conformity](#conformity) [Obedience](#obedience) [Aggression](#aggression) [Helping behaviour](#helping-behaviour) [Social psych and health](#social-psychology-and-health) [Improving health behaviours](#improving-health-behaviour) Self-evaluation --------------- Self-evaluation is a fundamental process in social psychology, referring to the way individuals assess their own abilities, traits, and behaviours in relation to internal standards or external feedback. This process plays a critical role in shaping self-concept, self-esteem, and interpersonal behaviour. Below is an outline of key ideas and studies related to self-evaluation in social psychology. ***Self-concept*** = an individual's perception of themselves, shaped by personal beliefs, social roles and experiences ***Self-schema*** = represents people's beliefs and feelings about themselves, in general and particular situations, which are stored in our memory Experiment of self-rating on independent or dependent and importance (Markus, 1977) - Hypothesised that if self-schemas exist, then a person who has a self-schema in a particular domain such as extroversion, will process info in that domain more quickly and retrieve evidence that is consistent with the schema - Participants considered themselves as either 'schematic' who rate themselves as the most extreme ends of the independence scale, and 'aschematic' who rate themselves moderately on the independence scale - Schematic participants judged schema-relevant info as true or false more quickly than aschematic participants - Schematic participants were able to generate more behaviours schema-relevant traits - Schematic participants were more likely to refute feedback that contradicts their self-schema ***Trait self-esteem*** = enduring level of self-regard across time, stable ***Culture self-esteem*** = emphasis on promoting self-esteem vs improving the self, can have consequences for how people respond to failures and setbacks Motives driving self esteem Self enhancement motives - Self-serving construal's - Positive bias toward the self: individuals tend to view themselves in overly favourable terms, emphasising their strengths and downplaying weakness - For example : Better than average effect (Dunning et al., 1989) = finding that most people think they're above average on various personality traits and ability dimensions Self-affirmation - Self-affirmation theory = idea that people can maintain an overall sense of self-worth after being exposed to psychologically threatening info by affirming a valued aspect of themselves unrelated to the threat - Maintain a sense of self-worth by affirming themselves in an unrelated domain to the one that was threatened - Taylor et al., 2003 - Participants who were more likely to hold positive illusions about themselves (high self-enhancers) and participants who were less likely to hold positive illusions about themselves (low self-enhancers) faced several stress-inducing tasks - High self-enhancers coped better with the stress, less stress hormone produced and less cardiovascular arousal Self-verification theory (Swann, 1983) - Self-verification theory = individuals seek feedback that confirms their self-concept even if its negative, to maintain consistency and predictability in self-view - Our reflected self-appraisals influence our behaviours and how others actually end up seeing us, like an echo chamber or self-fulfilling prophecy - People with negative self-view spend more time studying negative rather than positive feedback about themselves and prefer to interact with others who are likely to provide negative rather than positive feedback [Social comparison ] Social comparison theory (Festinger, 1954) - People evaluate their own abilities and opinions by comparing themselves to others - DOWNWARD SOCIAL COMPARISON = comparing oneself to someone worse, which can boost self-esteem - UPWARD SOCIAL COMPARISON = comparing oneself to someone better to inspire improvement but also lower self-esteem - Social comparisons are influenced by similarity, comparing themselves to those similar in relevant dimensions (eg skills, status, background) because comparison with dissimilar others may not provide meaningful insights [Morse and Gergen (1970)] = Mr clean and Mr dirty - Participants, while waiting for a job interview, were exposed to - A 'Mr clean' : a well-dressed and confident individual - A 'Mr dirty' : a dishevelled, less confident individual - Participants compared themselves to other person and found that the presence of Mr clean led to decreased self-esteem (upward comparison), whereas Mr dirty led to increased self-esteem (downward comparison) [Campbell et al., 1986] - Found that closeness of the comparison target (friend or stranger) had an impact on relationship satisfaction - Comparing romantic relationship to a friends led to lower satisfaction, likely due to upward social comparison (feeling one's own relationship is worse in comparison) - Comparing romantic relationship to stranger led to higher satisfaction, supporting the idea of downward social comparison (feeling one's own relationship is better than that of a stranger) - Therefore, distant comparisons promote feelings of contentment and positive self-esteem [Buckingham 2001 ] - Looked at absolute vs relative performance pf 59 females participating in a 'driving safety' study - Objective feedback : you have a 20% chance of causing an automobile accident - Following this feedback, manipulation of the comparison information was done 1. Less than average group : average risk of a women of your age is 30% 2. Riskier than average group : the average risk for a woman your age is 10% - Then asked if they want to see how others in your group scored - If the feedback is self-enhancing (you're less than average) then there is no need to hear additional comparisons, downwards comparing - If the feedback is self-deflating (you're riskier than average) you are more likely to want to see how others did [Lockwood and Konda (1997) ] - When compared to someone better than you (someone comes in to give a talk about their success to a university cohort), it can improve self-evaluation if the domain they are superior in is relevant and attainable (can be inspiring) - Also, important about proximity to the person as well, if its first-year students its inspiring as they think 'this can be me' and have time to make it attainable - However, if the speech is given to 4^th^ years, its deflating as graduation is too close and not enough time to match their trajectory Tessar and Smith, 1980 - Participants came to the lab with a friend and take part in 'verbal skills task' described as either being a valid test of verbal acuity used in graduate entre exams or just a password game - Round 1 = you always rank 3^rd^ (last), receiving clues from a stranger - Round 2 = you give clues to your friend/the stranger - For round 2, you get to choose to give clues that are either easy or hard - When you care more about the task i.e. the graduate entre exam condition, you sabotage your friend and give the harder clues as they scored higher than you in the previous round - If you don't care about the game i.e. it's just the password game, you give easy clues to help your friend []{#_Self-regulation.anchor} Self-regulation --------------- Most of the time were in the 'behavioural activation system' which is the approach state, confident that there is no threats in the environment When expectations aren't met, something threatening in the environment, we restrain our behaviour to avoid negative outcomes 'behavioural inhibition system' Behavioural activation system - Approach positive outcomes (non-punishment and reward) - Activate motivational impulses (disinhibited behaviour) - Happiness and anger (increasing dopamine/pleasure) Behavioural inhibition system - Avoiding negative outcomes (punishment and non-reward) - Inhibit motivational impulses (retrained behaviour) - Fear, sadness, disgust (decreasing cortisol/stress) Nietzsche, 1887 = genealogy of morals 1. Knightly aristocrats (approach) - Approach orientated, projecting themselves onto the environment - Pursue rewards and choose to express their impulses rather than inhibit them - Guided by an internal standard that are called 'ideals' - Maxims are about understanding yourself so that you can be better at controlling others - Mainly about pursuing joy and feeling happy, although anguished when they fail at something 2. Priestly aristocrats (avoidance) - Avoid threats, understanding the environment so you can control yourself, building mental models, safety and retreat - Choose to repress their impulses in order to be good members of society - Guided by an external obligation - Sense of calm, but feel stressed when they fail E.Higgins = regulatory focus - More about emotions as you're doing things because it's your instinct 1. Approach / promotion - Attain positive outcomes - Express internal standards (ideals) - Actual self = ideal self which is cheerful - If actual self doesn't match ideal self, then there is dejection 2. Avoidance / prevention - Avoid negative outcomes - Conform to external obligations, things people expect from you - Actual self = ought self which is quiescent and calm - If actual self doesn't match ought self, then there is agitation Self-discrepancy theory = people hold beliefs about not only what they actually like but what they would ideally like to be and what they think they ought to be - When people regulate their behaviour with ideal-self standards they have promotion focus (focus on attainting positive outcomes) - When people regulate their behaviour with ought-self standards they have a prevention focus (avoiding negative outcomes) Shah and Higgins, 2001 - Participants provided with definitions of 'ideal' and 'ought' selves i.e. the kind of person you ideally would to be to be vs the kind of person you ought to be - Then asked to produce a list of attributes of ideal vs ought - Asked to make quick judgements on how much you would like to possess the attributes produced and to what extent you already possess them - Faster reaction times meant the more accessible they are and the more committed you are to the attribute - 'promotion' accessibility is correlated with 'cheerfulness-dejection' availability - 'prevention' accessibility us correlated with 'quiescence-agitation' accessibility - Faster accessibility of your trait self-guide leads to faster accessibility of those associated emotions ![](media/image2.png) - If you're in a prevention mindset, performance test retest is improved for ability to assess words with quiescence/agitation - If you're in the promotion mindset, performance test retest is improved for ability to access cheerfulness/dejection Marshmallow paradigm - Preschool children are left alone in a room with a tempting marshmallow - Given one of two options: each the single marshmallow right now (smaller reward) or wait 15 minutes and have two marshmallows (larger reward) - Some children managed their self-control by shifting how they construe the temptation they felt, viewing the marshmallow as less appealing in order to help them stop eating it Power and social hierarchy Power = ability to control one's own outcomes and those of others Social hierarchy = arrangement of individuals in terms of their rank or power, relative to the power of other group members Gaining power 1. Virtue = this pathway is where individuals do things that are good for the group, which in turn will cause group members to recognise these contributions and give the individual more power - Courage, humanity, justice, temperance 2. Vice = dark triad, we gain and keep power thanks to actions that give us dominance over other such as through force, fraud, manipulation, strategic violence and the weakening of people around us - Machiavellianism (manipulativeness, deception etc), narcissism (entitlement, superiority), psychopathy (lack of empathy, aggressiveness) Brinker et al, 2018 = watched videos of speeches from US elections and coded verbal and non-verbal signs of virtue and vice - Found that senators who showed evidence for virtue in their speeches were more often able to convince other senators to sign up to bills they were promoting Galinsky et al., 2006 = induced people to feel relatively powerful or powerless by having them recall memories where someone had control over your vs you over someone else. Then perform a perspective taking task where they draw the letter E on someone opposite you - When feeling more powerful, participants were less likely to draw the E so that the other person could see it - i.e. power diminished capacity to consider the perspective of others Cultural self ------------- Interdependence - self is construed as connected to others and defined by duties, roles and shared preferences and traits - **encourages an outward focus on social situations** - Self is unbound, flexible and contingent on context - Most key aspects of self are defined by relationships - Internal attributions are less salient relative to binding attributes - Less clear and rigid delineation between ingroup and outgroup, world can see in but there are blurry boundaries - Self is constructed as a distinct, autonomous entity separate from others and defined by distinct traits and preferences - **Promotes an inward focus on the self** - No overlap between self and others, self is bounded and stable, consistent across contexts with common attributes - Internal attributes are most salient to you - Clear delineation between ingroup and outgroup, more open to ingroup but a harder edge to outgroup American vs Chinese housing - Typical American house has open yards and windows into the house. Metaphor for a more open world. Inside, spaces are divided, more privacy from parents to children etc, individualised spaces - Typical Chinese house is surrounded by high walls and gates to shield the home from direct exposure from glances, metaphor for a more closed off and private world. Inside, privacy hardly exists, parents and children often coexisting in the same room etc - Asked Canadian and Asian students to tell stories about different situations in which they were the centre of attention - Canadians were more likely to reproduce a scene from their own point of view - Asians were more likely to reproduce the scene as an observer might i.e. 3^rd^ person perspective Independent cultures foster higher levels of self-esteem than interdependent cultures - Japanese people are encouraged to engage in 'assisted' self-criticism more often than American - Americans are more praised for their achievements than Japanese people are +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | Analytic Cultures (WEST) | Holistic Cultures (EAST) | +===================================+===================================+ | Self | Self | | | | | - Bounded attributes | - Overlapping relationships | | independent from others | interdependent with others | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | Attention | Attention | | | | | - Identify focal 'objects' | - Attend to entire 'field' | | | | | - Distinguish from surrounding | - Objects 'bound' to field | | 'field' | | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | Cognition | Cognition | | | | | - Rules and categories | - Relationships and family | | | resemblance | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ Analytic vs Holistic - Field vs object - Japanese students had better memory for things in the background as well as for stagnant objects - Both groups better at recalling moving objects as well as foreground elements Objects distinct bs bond to field - Give picture of focal object on a background, then asked to recognise same focal object in a different background - Japanese much less adapt at recognising animals in different background as objects are more bound to the field i.e. belong in certain backgrounds - Both cultures less adapt at recognising animals in different settings 1. Japanese and American participants saw pictures of a focal figure displaying a facial expression that was either the same as the people in the background or different - Japanese and American recognition was equal when the facial expression and background faces were the same - American where better at seeing the focal figures emotions when the background faces were different as they were able to almost ignore the background - Japanese found it harder to ignore the faces in the background 2. Masuda and Nisbett, 2006 = change blindness - Japanese noticed more background element changes than American - Americans noticed more focal changes 3. Norenzayan et al., 2002 - Participants had to classify a drawing of a sunflower as being more similar to two different categories of other drawn sunflowers - Analytic rule = single feature of flowers that distinguish group 1 and group 2 such as the stem - Holistic rule = multiple features of the flower distinguish group 1 and group 2 such as the petals and leaves ![](media/image5.png)when making classification judgements, all cultural groups predominantly use the analytical rule when making similarity judgements, Euro Americans use the analytic rule whilst Asian American and East Asian use the holistic rule Cognitive dissonance -------------------- Festinger = people are troubled by inconsistency among their thoughts, sentiments and actions and they will expend psychological energy to restore consistency - When decisions are harder, higher levels of dissonance felt, rationalise decision - Knox and Inkster 1968 - Placing bets at horse tracks, more likely to concentrate on positive features of the horse chosen to bet on, downplaying any negatives, which gives them greater confidence in the choice they make Festinger and Carlsmith, 1959 - Participants asked to perform a very boring and repetitive task - After completing the task, participants were asked to tell another person who was supposedly the next participant that the task was actually very fun - Some participants were paid \$1 (small price) or \$20 (larger prize) - Those paid \$20 felt less dissonance as they had a good external reason to lie and could justify the lie with the payment - Those paid only \$1 couldn't come up with a strong external reason for lying therefore experience mental discomfort. To resolve this feeling, they changed their attitude and convinced themselves that the task was actually more enjoyable than they initially thought Bem (1967) = reran the original Festinger and Carlsmith study but added an observer condition - 'observers' listened to a description of the boring task and learned what a participant got (\$1 to \$20) - Participants inferred that the other person liked the task more in the \$1 condition - Observers were not 'aroused' therefore dissonance is not necessary - Observers didn't alter attitudes : 'they mist have enjoyed the task' - Post decision dissonance = picking between two choices, you want to believe you made the right decision by convincing yourself you didn't want the other choice anyway, change attitude Brehm, 1959 = Free choice paradigm - Women rate 8 household items in terms of desirability before being told they can choose two random items - Then asked if they would like to come back to the store and re-rate the same items - Unchosen items re-ranked much lower when not chosen, even when previously rated quite high Effort justification dissonance = tendency to reduce dissonance by justifying time, effort or money devoted to something that turned out to be unpleasant or disappointing - The things we work and suffer towards must be valuable - Aronson and Miller, 1959 - Female participant joined a group discussing 'sexual' behaviour - One condition is that they go straight into the group discussion - The other condition is that they go through an embarrassment test - 'Mild effort condition' = read words out lour that are related to sex but not obscene - 'High effort condition' = read out loud explicit words and vivid descriptions of sexual activity - All participants then listened to the pre-recorded tape on sex life of vertebrates which was very boring - When rating the quality of the discussion, those who went through the high effort condition rated it more highly than others Ikea affect - Some participants assembled Ikea boxes and Lego sets - Then indicated how much they would pay for : their own product they built, a prebuilt product or someone else's product they built - Self-build was always rated highest as you put effort and time into it, feel dissonance so have to see it as a valuable item - They then rated how much subjective pain and emotional attachment they felt when paying for a mug in either cash or credit card - People rated paying in cash as more painful, estimated the minimum price on the mug as higher in cash Forbidden fruit (Aronson and Mills, 1963) Researcher showed nursery school children a set of 5 toys and asked them how much they liked each one of them. Researcher then said he had to leave the room and that the children were free to play with any of the toys EXCEPT the child's SECOND FAVOURITE toy - Condition 1 : children told they were not to play with the forbidden toy because the experimenter would be 'annoyed' (mild threat condition) - Condition 2 : children were told that if they played with the forbidden toy the researcher would be 'very angry and would have to go home with all the toys and never come back' (severe threat condition) When the researcher was gone, children were covertly observed. NONE played with the forbidden toy - Those who received the SEVERE threat justified not playing with the toy with the severity of the threat - Those in the MILD threat condition had no such justification therefore produced dissonance, devaluing the toy and convincing themselves it wasn't that great of a toy anyway, viewing the toy as less favourable Misattribution of arousal (Zanna and Cooper, 1974) - Create 3 different pill expectations : tense, none or relax - While waiting for a second 'unrelated study' the participants are asked to write an essay in which they make a strong case for banning free speech - High choice condition : 'please do this essay, but its up to you' - Low choice : 'you are assigned to do this essay' - Then measure attitude to banning free speech - Results : in the low choice condition, dissonance effect is present. With the arousal drug we killed the dissonance effect, as participants has an excuse : misattribution - Therefore, we can infer that dissonance is motivated by arousal Cooper, Zanna and Taves, 1978 - Administer pills with different modes of arousal : amphetamine (increases arousal), none, tranquilizer (decrease arousal) - While waiting for a second 'unrelated study' : write an essay in which you make a strong case for pardoning Richard Nixon - High choice : please do, but its up to you - Low choice : you are assigned to write this essay - Then measure attitudes towards Richard Nixon - With no tranquilizer, we get a dissonance effect - With amphetamine we get an increased dissonance effect - However, the tranquilizer condition kills the dissonance effect the dissonance effect Free choice Linder et al., 1967 - College students offered either \$4 or \$20 to write an essay in favour of a state law banning communists speaking on college campus - Condition 1: participants were free to agree or decline to write the essay - Condition 2 : not choice - No dissonance effect among participants who had no choice - Those paid \$20 later expressed attitudes more in favour of the ban (presumably because writing the essay was associated with larger reward) - Those in the \$4 changed their attitudes more Rats and starlings appear to demonstrate effort justification dissonance reduction meaning they prefer food they worked harder for (Lawrance and Festinger, 1962) Monkeys engage in post decisional dissonance reduction just like human children (Egan et al., 2007) where they derogate the favoured food they couldn't chose Unconscious dissonance reduction Liberman et al., 2001 - Normal participants and individuals who has anterograde amnesia - Participants showed 15 different art prints and asked to rank them based on which ones they liked the most - After ranking, asked to choose between two prints that they ranked similarly, being able to keep one of the prints - After choosing, they were given a new set of prints, with the key question being if participants would change their ratings of the prints Results : normal participants changed their rankings of the prints after making a choice, rating the print they rejected less favourably, typical dissonance effect Amnesic participants couldn't engage in this reduction process as they had no memory of their previous ratings even though they experienced the same feeling of dissonance, suggesting that memory plays a part in dissonance: without the ability to remember prior preferences its much harder to change attitudes and justify choices Replicated this study with cognitive load - participants under cognitive load (state amnesia): low load where participants hear tones but ignore them, high load where participants hear tones and gave to count them - low load : able to reduce dissonance by changing attitudes towards rejected print as in original study - high load : experienced less dissonance reduction, cognitive resources required to make the decision and later justify it were depleted by the secondary task so couldn't adjust attitude Balcetis and Dunning, 2007 = embarrassment and dissonance - participants asked to perform a task that would make them feel somewhat embarrassed (walk 111m on campus wearing a costume) - high choice condition: can choose another task, but help us out - low choice condition : you've been assigned this task - control : no suit - participants had to estimate the distance they walked Social Attributions ------------------- Internal attributions = disposition, the kind of person we 'tend to be' across contexts - mood colours cognition, underlies primary factor in making fast judgment in situations Physiological Factors on Emotions --------------------------------- Emotion = brief responses to challenges or opportunities that we appraise as important to our goal - prioritize which events you attend to in the environment - influence how much weight you assign them - arise in response to specific events, typically involving people in our immediate social environment Appraisals = interpretation an individual gives to a situation that gives rise to the experience of the emotion What is emotion? = born with innate suite of emotions, you feel these emotions by perceiving a stimulus, triggers a circuit in your brain that causes a bodily response which causes you to behave a certain way, heightened arousal Key physiological factors 1. brain structures - the amygdala processes emotional stimuli, especially fear and threat-related emotions - the prefrontal cortex regulates emotional responses, enabling control over impulsive reactions - Ledoux (1996) : demonstrated the role of the amygdala in fear conditioning, showing how physiological responses to threats are mediated by the brain 2. hormones - cortisol = released during stress, chronic elevations affects emotional regulation - oxytocin = associated with bonding and trust, prompting positive emotions in social interactions - Kosfeld et al. (2005) : found that oxytocin increases trust in social exchanges, highlighting its role in positive emotional experiences 3. Facial feedback - Facial muscle activity can influence emotional experiences - Smiling or frowning triggers physiological feedback that can enhance or dampen emotional states - Martin et al., (1998) : people who held a pen in their teeth (forcing a smile) rated cartoons as funnier than when they held the pen with their lips (inducing a pout), supporting the idea that physiological feedback influences emotions Darwin's Hypothesis Proposed the idea that the expression of human evolution we observe today derive from actions that proved useful in our evolutionary past Key ideas : 1. Emotions are universal = All humans have the same 3-40 facial muscles to communicate emotions - Ekman and Friesen - Took 3000 pictures of people as they expressed the 6 emotions - Then presented these pictures to people in different countries, who achieved an accuracy of +70%, providing evidence that the emotions are indeed universal \*However, people critiqued the study, seeing a fundamental flaw, that all the participants had been exposed to western media, meaning that they might have learned how to identify these emotions through exposure. To overcome this Ekman set out to prove this theory by finding a culture that has never been reached by Western media \* - Ekman : - Cultures never exposed to the West or Western media, like the Fore people from Papa New Guinea, can accurately identify expressions of the 6 innate emotions shown by westerners - Fore adults were shown photos of 3 different expressions alongside a story that matched one of the emotions, achieving an accuracy of +70% - Fore children were asked to choose between 2 pictures alongside the stories and achieved an accuracy of +80% - Also videotaped the posed expressions of the Fore that matched the stories, presenting them to American college students who achieved an accuracy of above-chance for each emotion EXCEPT FEAR 2. Emotional expression among the blind - Studies of pride and shame are universal expressed by those born without eyesight - Matsumoto (2008) - Analysed the expressions of emotions of sighted and blind athletes from 37 countries just after they have lost or won a judo competition - After victory both sighted and blind athletes expressed pride by smiling, tilting their heads back and expanding their chests - After losing, both groups of athletes lowered their heads and slumped their shoulders Willaims James (1884) = emotion is the perception of physiological change 1. Emotions follow physiological responses - Emotions are not the cause of physiological changes but rather the result of them - We feel emotions because we perceive bodily changes that occur in response to an event ' We feel sorry because we cry, angry because we strike, afraid because we tremble' Stimulus physiological response emotion - The bodily changes he refers to are both internal (visceral : heart rate, breathing patterns, etc) and external (muscle contractions in face and body) - Cartons rated funnier when watched with a smile is on the face than watched with a pout (martin et al., 1998) - 'Lock and key' analogy : our minds are pre-programmed to respond to certain stimuli and the body responds as needed Critique -- Cannons (1927) - Focused on the VISCERAL aspects of James' theory - The same visceral changes occur in very different emotional states and in non-emotional states - The Viscera are relatively insensitive structures, motor neurones are quick milliseconds whereas the viscera system is in seconds so its slower, slow process of diffusion in the system - Visceral changes are too slow to be a source of emotional feeling, have many emotions that come to us instantly so couldn't be projected by a purely visceral system as its too slow Maranon 1924 study = injected participants with adrenaline, heightened arousal by driving up the visceral system - Found that 1/3 of them reported any emotional response/reaction - Some reported a 'pseudo-emotion' such as '"I feel as if I were afraid', some necessary components activate but not a genuine emotion therefore James's theory is not completely right by contains some truth Schachter's two factor theory This theory emphasises the interaction between physiological arousal and cognitive interpretation in the experience of emotion. It suggests that emotions are not purely biological or cognitive but a combination of both - **Physiological arousal :** refers to the body's physical response to a stimulus (eg increased heart rate, sweating, muscle tension) - **Cognitive labelling** : this involves interpreting and assigning meaning to the physiological, arousal based on the context Stimulus physiological arousal cognitive interpretation emotion - The theory suggests that physiological arousal is ambiguous and can be attributed to different emotions depending on how the person interprets the situation - For example, a racing heart could mean excitement or fear, depending on the context of the situation Schater and Singer (1962) Participants were injected with epinephrine (adrenaline) which causes physiological arousal such as increased heart rate - Divided into 4 groups - **Informed** : told the effects of the injection eg you may feel your heart racing - **Misinformed** : given false information about the effects - **Ignorant** : told nothing about the effects - **Placebo** : received a saline injection without effects - Participants were then placed in either a happy or angry social situation (confederate acted nicely/in high spirits or irritated) - Participants who were **misinformed** or **ignorant** of the true cause of their arousal were more likely to adopt the emotion of the confederate (happy or angry) - Participants who were **informed** were less influenced by the confederate, as they attributed their physiological arousal to the injection, not the social situation - Therefore, emotions result from the combination of physiological arousal and a cognitive label influenced by the situation... Cognitive Factors on emotions ----------------------------- Cognitive factors play a crucial role in shaping emotions, as they influence how individuals perceive, interpret and respond to their environment. Emotions are not purely physiological: they often arise from the way we think about events, people or situations. These cognitive processes included appraisal, memory, attention and attributions which all interact with emotions Appraisal Theory (Lazarus, 1991) Appraisal = refers to how individuals evaluate a situation or stimulus to determine its significance for their well-being - Basic claim of all appraisal theories is that emotion is based on an appraisal of the meaning and significance of an event - **Primary appraisal** = evaluating whether an event is positive, negative or neutral - **secondary appraisal** = assessing one's ability to cope with the event - appraisal is central to emotion - emotions arise from a person's evaluation (appraisal) of a situation, rather than the situation itself - the same event can elicit different emotions in different individuals based on their appraisals - emotion as a process - viewed emotions as a dynamic process involving a constant interaction between the person and their environment - emotions change as appraisals are updated with new information - core relational themes - Lazarus identified specific patterns of appraisal associated with distinct emotions - Anger : an appraisal of a demeaning offense against oneself - Fear : an appraisal of imminent danger - Happiness : an appraisal of progress toward a goal 1. Event/stimulus - Something happens in the environment 2. Primary appraisal - The individual evaluates the significance of the event (positive, negative, neutral) 3. Secondary appraisal - The individual assess their coping resources and options 4. Emotion - The combination of appraisals determines the emotional response 5. Coping - The individual engages in behaviours or strategies to manage their emotion or situation (eg problem solving avoidance) Strengths - Focus on individual differences = explains why people experience different emotions in response to the same event - Dynamic framework = understands that emotions are fluid and can change as appraisals are updated - Integration of cognition and emotion = offers a comprehensive understanding of emotion Weakness - Difficulty measuring appraisals = subjective and not always accessible to conscious awareness making them challenging to study empirically - Neglect of physiological aspects = downplays the role of physiological responses, which also influence emotions - Cultural differences = appraisal processes may differ across cultures and the theory may not account for all cultural nuances in emotional experiences Studies supporting Lazarus' theory Speisman et al., 1964 Participants were shown a film that depicted adolescents undergoing a circumcision ritual. Different voiceovers were used to manipulate the viewers appraisal of the films emotional content - **Trauma narrative** : focused on the pain and danger of the surgery - **Denial narrative** : minimized the harm, suggest that the operation was an occasion for joy rather than pain - **Intellectualisation narrative** : provided a detached, scientific explanation encouraging the viewers to adopt an anthropological perspective - **Findings** : participants emotional response varied depending on the narrative, supporting the idea that appraisal shapes emotions Folkman and Lazarus (1990) - Investigated stress and coping in college students during exams - Found that the way the students appraised the stressor (the exam) as either a challenge or as a threat, influenced their emotional and behavioural responses Moreland and Zajonc (1979) Seminal piece of research examining how mere exposure effects influence emotional responses and the interplay of cognitive factors in this process - Participants were exposed to stimuli (nonsense words, Chinese ideographs, or unfamiliar faces) multiple times - The frequency of exposure to each stimulus varied - Participants were asked to rate their liking for each stimulus and whether they recognise it (if they were aware of the previous exposure) - There was increased liking with repeated exposure - Stimuli that was presented more frequently were rated more favourably, even when participants could not consciously recognise the stimuli as having been seen before - Role of cognitive factors - The increased positive affect occurring even when participants were unaware of the repeated exposures - This finding suggests that the mere exposure effect operates at a subconscious level, independent of explicit memory or conscious cognitive processing - Emotional primacy - Argued that affective reactions can occur prior to and independent of cognition. In other words, people can 'feel' before they 'think' about a stimulus........ Prejudice and Discrimination 1 ------------------------------ **Stereotype** = cognitive schemas or generalised beliefs about members of a particular group. These beliefs can be positive or negative or neutral and they simplify social perception by categorizing people based on group characteristics - Overgeneralization of characteristics of members in a group, ignoring individual differences - Stereotypes can operate automatically, influencing perceptions and judgements without conscious awareness - Stereotypes reduce cognitive load required to process complex social information **Prejudice** = a negative attitude or feeling toward an individual based on their membership in a particular group - Cognitive component : stereotypes or beliefs about a group - Affective component : emotional response toward a group - Behavioural component: inclination to act in a discriminatory way, though prejudice does not always lead to an action Process of prejudice - Social categorisation : people naturally group others into categories to simplify the complex social environment - Outgroup homogeneity effect : the tendency to perceive members of an outgroup as more similar to each other than members of ones ingroup - Ingroup favouritism vs outgroup bias : people favour members of their own group to enhance self-esteem and a sense of belonging whereas negative attitudes towards outgroups can also help strengthen the distinctiveness of the ingroup - Robbers cave experiment demonstrated how competition between two groups of boys led to hostility and prejudice. Cooperation towards shred goals reduced this prejudice as they all become ingroup Cognitive roots - Categorisation - Our brains naturally categorise information to simplify the vast amounts of stimuli we encounter. This includes sorting people into groups based on observable traits such as race, gender or age. However, this can lead to overgeneralisations as individuals are judged based on group characteristics rather than personal attributes - Stereotyping - Stereotypes are cognitive shortcuts about groups of people. They are generalised beliefs that help us male quick judgements but are often inaccurate or incomplete. They can lead to bias expectations and behaviours, reinforcing prejudice. - Attribution errors - People tend to attribute other behaviours to internal characteristics rather than external circumstances such as situational factors. This fundamental attribution error can result in blaming individuals or groups for their circumstances - Confirmation bias - People tend to seek out, remember and interpret information that confirms their existing beliefs while ignoring contradictor evidence. This reinforces stereotypes and prejudices by filtering out information that challenges them. Snyder and Swann, 1978 demonstrated that individuals ask biased questions and interpret responses in ways that confirm their pre-existing beliefs Cognitive bias for stereotypes: Hamilton and Gifford 1979 - Participants were told about the behaviours of two fictitious groups, group A (the majority group) and group B (the minority group) - Participants were presented with 39 statements describing positive or negative behaviours performed by members of the two groups - Group A: associated with 26 statements, 18 positive and 8 negatives - Group B: associated with 13 statements, 9 positive and 4 negatives - The proportion of positive to negative behaviours was identical for both groups - Importantly, group b was the minority group, so participants were exposed to fewer statements about it overall - Participants were asked to recall the behaviours and evaluate the two groups in terms of their positive and negative traits - Found that - Participants overestimated the frequency of negative behaviours in group b, the minority group. Despite the actual proportions of behaviours being the same, group b was rated more negatively than group a - The negative behaviours of group b were more salient because they were both: statistically infrequent (due to the smaller size of b) and negative (standing out more than positive behaviours) - This led to cognitive distortion where people associated the minority group disproportionately with negative traits - Travelled around the US with a Chinese couple, visiting hotels, motels and restaurants, which at the time had a lot of anti-Asian prejudice and expected to encounter significant discrimination - At each establishment, he observed whether they were denied service or treated poorly due to the couple's ethnicity - In nearly all cases, the Chinese couple was treated courteously and provided service. They were only denied service at one establishment out of 251 - Behaviour vs attitude: despite being served in 250 establishments, 92% of the establishments responded in the follow-up survey that they would refuse service to Chinese people - Significant gap between the behaviour observed during the visits (low levels of discrimination) and the attitudes expressed in the survey (high levels of prejudice) - Challenged the assumption that attitudes directly determine actions, hypothesising instead that situational factors such as face to face interactions and social norms may have reduced discriminatory behaviour during the visits Good prejudice (contextually beneficial) 1. Prejudice as a survival mechanism - Biases can help avoid exposure to risky situations. Cosmides and Toby (1992) explored how evolutionary mechanisms shape quick threat assessments, explaining how prejudice might arise from adaptive behaviours to avoid danger 2. Prejudice based on positive stereotypes - For example, assuming Asian students are good at math, these stereotypes might result in favourable treatment or experiences. Ray et al., (2004) found that positive stereotypes, like viewing certain groups as competent or hardworking, can influence judgements positively though still perpetuate bias 3. Cultural prejudice supporting group cohesion - Favouring ones own cultural over another unfamiliar one can help preserve cultural identity and strengthen ingroup solidarity. Turner (1979) developed the social identity theory, showing how in group favouritism promotes cohesion Harmful prejudice 1. Racial prejudice in policing - Leads to systemic inequalities, mistrust and psychological harm. Eberhardt et al., (2004) examined how implicit racism affects polices split decisions, showing black individuals are more likely to be perceived as threatening 2. Prejudice in education - Teachers having lower expectations for students from disadvantaged backgrounds can lead to self-fulfilling prophecies due to lowered confidence and resources. Stereotypes and the conservation of cognitive resources 1. Macrae et al., 1994: stereotypes and cognitive load - Participants were given info about a fictional individual, along with stereotypical labels (eg doctor or artist) or no labels - While processing this information, participants were asked to complete an unrelated secondary task (dual-task condition) - Participants with access to stereotypes performed better on the secondary task because the labels simplified their processing of the individuals' traits - Stereotypes reduced the cognitive load by providing a pre-existing framework to interpret the information 2. Bettenhausen 1990: time of day and stereotyping - Participants were asked to evaluate a case of potential misconduct involving a person described with stereotype-consistent or inconsistent information - The evaluations were conducted either in the morning or evening, depending on participants natural circadian rhythm (morning person vs night person) - Participants relied more on stereotypes during their 'off-peak' times - When cognitive resources are depleted (eg due to fatigue) people are more likely to rely on stereotypes **Abstract construal** = involve thinking about the broader, high-level essence or meaning of an object or event, focusing on the 'why' aspects. Occurs when thinking about events that are distant in time, space or social context as well as when in scenarios that require strategic, long-term planning or moral reasoning - For example : thinking about exercising as a way to stay healthy or improve well being **Concrete construal** = thinking about the specific, low-level detail or features of an object or event, focusing on the 'how' aspects. Occurs when dealing with events that are close in time, space or social context as well as in situations requiring immediate action or attention to detail - For example: thinking about exercise as running on a treadmill for 30 minutes **Construal level theory** , Trope and Liberman 2003 = explains how psychological distance influences the level of abstraction in our mental construal's. psychological distance refers to how far something is form us in terms of : 1. Temporal distance = events in the distant future are construed abstractly, while imminent events are construed concretely 2. Spatial distance = thing happening far away are thought of more abstractly than things happening nearby 3. Social distance = interactions while people who are socially distant eg strangers lead to abstract thinking while close relationships involve concrete thinking 4. Hypothetical distance = highly unlikely scenarios are represented abstractly whereas likely scenarios are construed concretely **Aspect** **Abstract Construal** **Concrete Construal** ---------------------- ----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- **Exercise** \"Improving my health.\" \"Jogging 3 miles tomorrow morning.\" **Education** \"Gaining knowledge and preparing for life.\" \"Reading a chapter for my math test.\" **Charity Donation** \"Making the world a better place.\" \"Donating \$20 to the food bank near me.\" **Future Goals** \"Achieving career success.\" \"Completing the next task on my project.\" **Discrimination** = behaviour that treats individuals unfairly or unequally based on their group membership. The behavioural expression of prejudice Kunda and Williams (1993) = more likely to be used when information about individual is ambiguous or inadequate - Participants read about a housewife/construction worker - Low aggressive behaviour "....spanked son for trudging mud on the carpet' - Aggressive behaviour 'decked a neighbour that taunted them' - Ambiguous behaviour 'hit someone who annoyed them' - Differences in aggression levels were in the ambiguous condition; participants went for stereotype and rated construction worker to be more aggressive - In low and high condition, reflects the message given, for both housewife and construction worker there was little difference Prejudice and discrimination pt 2 --------------------------------- Elaboration likelihood model / dual process models of social cognition (Petty and Cacioppo, 1986) A dual process theory that explains how people are persuaded and how they process persuasive messages. The model identifies two primary routes of persuasion: the central route and the peripheral route. Each route reflects different levels of cognitive effort and engagement with the persuasive message 1. Central route = persuasion occurs through careful and thoughtful consideration of the context and logic of the message - High motivation and ability to process information - Involves scrutiny of arguments and evidence - Leads to lasting attitude change if the arguments are strong - If arguments are strong, attitudes are more likely to change and remain stable over time - If arguments are weak, counterarguments may form, and persuasion fails 2. Peripheral route = persuasion occurs through superficial cues and heuristics rather than the content of the message itself - Low motivation or ability to process information - Relies on cues like source attractiveness, credibility or emotional appeal - Leads to temporary attitude change that is susceptible to change or decay - Attitudes are more transient and less resistant to counterarguments Factors influencing the route of persuasion 1. Motivation - Higher motivation (eg personal relevance of the issue) encourages central route processing - Lower motivation (eg disinterest in the topic) leads to reliance on peripheral cues 2. Ability - Greater ability to process information (eg knowledge to the topic, absence of distractions) supports central route processing - limited ability (eg complex information, cognitive overload) shifts focus to the peripheral route 3. message characteristics - logical, well-structured arguments are more effective for central processing - emotional appeals, visual or endorsements are more influential in peripheral processing Defluer and Westie 1958 : relationship between explicit attitudes and behaviour, focusing on racial prejudice - participants were white college students in the US - researchers used explicit self-report measures to assess participants attitudes toward black individuals - participants expressed agreement or disagreement with statements reflecting their level of racial prejudice or tolerance - the participants behaviours were assessed by examining their willingness to accept a black individual as a roommate in a hypothetical scenario - the researchers compared participants self-reported attitudes with their expressed willingness to engage in racially tolerant behaviour - found that many participants expressed positive attitudes toward racial equality in the explicit measures, revealing a disconnect between explicit attitudes and actual behaviour Implicit association test (IAT) - congruent and incongruent trials, testing association between thoughts and feelings rather than behavioural tendencies - proved new insights in stereotypes and prejudice - congruent trials for example are white faces + positive words whereas the incongruent trials are black faces + positive words. The assumption is that people may be quicker when associating white faces with positive words and slower when associating black faces with positive words reflecting an implicit bias favouring white individuals Conformity ---------- Conformity = conscious act, change of behaviour by means of the presence of other people, perceive what the norm is from other people, their behaviour and how we should respond Conformity is higher on the 'peripheral route' or persuasion (Petty et al, 1981) - Participants listened to message advocating 'senior comprehensive examination' under two conditions and two source expertise conditions - University considering introducing these exams next year (high involvement) - University considering introducing these exams next decade (low involvement) - Message had been produced by either a local high school class (low expertise in the given topic) - Message had been produced by higher education (high expertise in the given topic) - Also, strong or weak arguments - Results found that - In the low involvement condition, source expertise (but not argument quality) affected attitude - In the high involvement condition, argument quality (but not source expertise) affected attitude When we have a low involvement condition we use the peripheral route, leading to more conformity. When we have a high involvement condition we use more central route, people are motivated to take the quality of argument into account and conformity is reduced Nonconscious conformity and automatic mimicry Concepts that describe how individuals unintentionally align their behaviours, attitudes or mannerisms with those of others. These processes often occur outside of conscious awareness and are key mechanisms in fostering social connection and group harmony **Nonconscious conformity** = refers to the unintentional adoption of the behaviours, attitudes, or norms of others in a group or social context without deliberate effort or awareness - Social norms = automatically adjusting their behaviour to align with group norms even when they are not explicitly instructed to do so - Priming = exposure to certain stimuli or behaviours can unconsciously influence actions, for example seeing others act in a cooperative way may prime an individual to also act in a cooperative way - Implicit learning = unconsciously pick up on social cues or patterns of behaviour and incorporate them into their own actions, especially in new or uncertain situations Automatic mimicry = also known as the chameleon effect if the unconscious imitation of another person's gestures, postures, expressions, speech patterns or other behaviours during social interactions - Chartrand and Bergh 1999 - Participants interacted with a confederate who either rubbed their face or shook their foot during the interaction - Participants were more likely to unconsciously mimic the behaviour of the confederate - Mimicry is said to be linked to empathy and helps build rapport. By mirroring other actions, individuals can foster a sense of connection and mutual understanding - Also seen as an evolutionary process that promotes social bonding and cooperation in groups - People who are mimicked engage in more prosocial behaviour afterward **Normative conformity** = the influence of others that leads individuals to conform in order to gain acceptance, approval or avoid disapproval and rejection **Informational conformity** = individuals conform to other behaviours or judgements in ambiguous situations because they believe others have more accurate information Sherifs study on informational conformity (1939) = autokinetic effect experiment where a visual illusion of a stationary point of light in a dark room appears to move because there is no visual reference point - Individual judgements - Participants were asked to estimate the distance the light moved while alone - Estimated varied widely among participants reflecting personal perceptions - Participants were then placed in groups of 2 or 3 and asked to make their estimates aloud - Over repeated trails, their estimated began to converge toward a common value, forming a group norm - When participants were later asked to give their estimates individually again, they often stuck to the group-established norm even though they were no longer in the group setting - In the group setting, individuals estimates of the light's movement shifted and converged demonstrating the formation of a shared standard - Once formed the group norm persisted even when individuals made their judgements alone indicating a lasting effect of group influence - In ambiguous situations, individuals will look to others for guidance assuming that others have better or more accurate information, leading to private acceptance of the groups judgment as opposed to mere public compliance Achs 1951 conformity experiment - Groups of 7-9 individuals but only one participant the rest were confederates - Participants were shown a series of line comparison tasks, where a target line was presented alongside three comparison lines, and the participants were asked to identify which comparison line matched the target line in length - In the first few trails, all confederates gave the correct answer to establish credibility - Then in subsequent trails the confederates unanimously gave incorrect answers - 37% of participants conformed to the group's incorrect answers at least once, over 75% of participants conformed at least once during the experiment - In the absence of group pressure, participants made errors less than 1% of the time, showing the task was objectively simple - During post experiment interviews, participants reported conforming due to desires to avoid standing out or being ridiculed (normative conformity) and doubted their own judgement when faced with unanimous opposition (informational conformity) **Aspect** **Normative Conformity (Asch)** **Informational Conformity (Sherif)** -------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ **Motivation** Desire to fit in and avoid rejection. Desire to be correct in uncertain situations. **Task Ambiguity** Unambiguous task (clear right or wrong answer). Ambiguous task (unclear or no right answer). **Result** Public compliance without necessarily private acceptance. Private acceptance of group judgment. **Example** Agreeing with a group's incorrect answer in Asch's study. Looking to others for guidance during Sherif's experiment. Critical analysis - Validity of a consensus opinion increases only if it comes from independent sources, becomes more unlikely after 3-4 individuals as it seems suspicious and would have to thin that the other people have had some kind of secrete discussion - Level of embarrassment is diminished with numbers, high levels of embarrassment felt at 2-4 people, but lower levels felt with 12-14 Torrance 1955 : gave aeroplane crews task of reasoning - If the correct answer was offered by the pilot, 91% of the crew reported that answer - If correct answer was offered by the navigator, 80% reported that answer - If correct answer was offered by the gunner, 63% reported that answer - Pilot has the highest statis hence a high percentage of reporting, relative influences vary according to status of the people especially in a small group, if they have status then their answer will be taken as the groups answer Hove and risen, 2009 : synchronised movements and social bonding - Participants were asked to sit opposite an experimenter who tapped rhythmically on a surface. Participants were instructed to tap along with the experimenter under two conditions 1. In sync = tapping in time with the experimenter 2. Out of sync = tapping out of time with the experimenter - Synchrony and liking : participants who tapped in synchrony with the experimenter reported liking the experimenter more compared to participants who tapped out of sync - The researchers hypothesised that the act of synchrony fosters a sense of connection, mutual understanding and shared experience, which enhances positive feelings toward the other person - Study shows that the interpersonal synchrony, even in simple motor activities like tapping, can promote social bonding Factors affecting conformity 1. Group size = more likely to conform to a bigger room, however the effect of group size levels off pretty quickly. The more people who express a particular opinion the more likely that this opinion has merit as a source of info but only to a certain point, the more people there are the less likely that their opinions are independent 2. Group unanimity = conformity drops when true participant had an ally, one other member of the group deviated from the majority as an ally weakened both informational social influence and normative social influence 3. Anonymity = eliminates normative social influence and therefore should substantially reduce conformity: when nobody else is aware of your judgment there is no fear of the group's disapproval 4. Expertise and status = often assume those with high status are experts. Status in contrast mainly affects normative social influence: high status individuals can do more to hurt social standing than the lower-status individuals can 5. Tight and loose cultures = 'tight' cultures have strong norms regarding how people behave and don't readily tolerate departure from those norms. 'loose' cultures have weak norms and members tolerate more deviance Obedience --------- Obedience = agreeing to the explicit request of someone with authority over us **Foot-in-door technique** - A compliance approach that involves making an initial small request that is easy to agree to and the person is likely to comply because the request is reasonable and non-threatening - A subsequent larger request is made which was the real goal. Compliance with the second request is more likely because the person feels a need to maintain consistency with their prior behaviour Freedman and Fraser (1996) - Homeowners were first asked to place a small sticker in their window supporting safe driving - Later they were asked to allow a large, unattractive billboard promoting safe driving to be placed on their lawn - Results showed that those who agreed to the small sticker were significantly more likely to agree to the larger request than those who were only asked about the billboard **Door-in-the-face technique** - Persuasion technique that involves making a large request that is deliberately excessive or demanding which is designed to be refused - A smaller, more reasonable request is presented after the initial refusal and appears modest and fair in comparison, increasing the likelihood of compliance Cialdini et al (1975) - Participants were first asked if they would be willing to volunteer two hours per week for two years to counsel juvenile delinquents. As expected, most refused - They were then asked if they would volunteer for a one-time commitment to chaperone juvenile delinquents on a two-hour trip to the zoo - Results showed that participants were significantly more likely to agree to the second request after refusing the first large one than if they were only asked about the smaller request Dissonance is an example of obedience (Festinger and Carlsmith, 1959) We experience dissonance whenever we are made aware of acting in a way that is inconsistent with our attitudes. To reduce dissonance, we must bring attitudes in line with our actions. Compliance technique would be to bring actions into line with attitudes when actions lie in the future - College students were recruited to perform a boring, repetitive task, such as turning pegs on a board for an extended period - After completing the task, participants were asked to lie to another person (a confederate) and say the task was enjoyable and interesting. This was presented as helping the experimenter with recruiting future participants - Some participants were paid \$1 for lying, others were paid \$20 for lying - After lying, participants rated how enjoyable they genuinely found the task - \$1 condition: rated the task as significantly more enjoyable than those in the other groups. This is because cognitive dissonance arose because they lied for insufficient justification. To resolve this, they changed their attitude to align with their behaviour and convinced themselves the task was enjoyable - \$20 condition : did not feel dissonance as the larger payment provided sufficient external justification for lying, so there was no dissonance to resolve Norm based compliance People conform to requests or behaviours based on their perception of social norms. Social norms are the unwritten rules or expectations that govern behaviour in a particular group, culture or society. Compliance occurs when individuals align their behaviour with these norms, often driven by the desire to fit in, avoid social disapproval or gain social approval. ![](media/image7.png)Schultz et al., 2007 : energy conservation - Participants received feedback on their energy consumption compared to the average consumption in their neighbourhood. There were two groups - **Descriptive norm group** : households were informed whether their energy usage was above or below the neighbourhood average - **descriptive and injunctive norm group** : in addition to the above feedback, households received injunctive normative messages, - a smiley face for below average energy use (approval) - a frowny face for above average energy use (disapproval) - households using above-average energy reduced their consumption after receiving feedback - households using below-average energy increased their consumption experiencing a boomerang effect -- they saw that they were already conserving more than their neighbours and felt less pressure to maintain their conservation energy - **descriptive norms** = effective in reducing overconsumption but can inadvertently lead to increased consumption among those who already conserve energy - **injunctive norms** = adding an evaluative component (approval/disapproval) helps guide behaviour more effectively and prevents unintended consequences by reinforcing desired actions Miller 1993 : discrepancy between private attitudes and public norms about alcohol use at Princeton - Asked undergrads how comfortable they felt about campus drinking habits as well as how comfortable with liking they thought both their friends and the average undergrad were - Undergrads believe drinking alcohol is more popular among their peers than it really is - Because of this belief, they censor their own reservations about drinking, thus furthering the illusion that alcohol is so popular Norm of reciprocity When someone does something for us, we usually feel compelled to do something in return, people are expected to provide benefits for those who have provided benefits for them - A norm dictating that people should provide benefits for those who have provided benefits for them - By failing to respond favourably, the person would violate a powerful social norm and run the risk of being viewed negatively - Participants were brought into a lab under the guise of taking part in a study on art appreciation - Each participant was paired with a confederate who behaved in one of two ways - Reciprocity condition = the confederate brought the participant a soft drink as an unsolicited favour during a break - No favour condition = the confederate didn't provide any favour - After the break, the confederate asked the participant to buy raffle tickets to support a fundraiser, which was the real test of compliance - Participants in the reciprocity condition were significantly more likely to buy raffle tickets from the confederate than those in the no favour condition - The number of tickets purchased was greater in the reciprocity condition, regardless of whether the participant liked the confederate - Participants liking of the confederate influenced ticket purchases in the no favour condition - In the reciprocity condition, the favours impact overrode personal feelings toward the confederate, demonstrating the powerful obligation created by the norm of reciprocity Seizing or creating the right mood (positive ) - Positive moods and increase rates of compliance - Our mood colours how we interpret events - More likely to view requests for favours as less intrusive and less threatening when we are in a good mood, we feel more inclusive and more lenient in a good way - People want to maintain a positive mood, so they agree more easily as it feels good to say yes - Positive mood makes people feel expansive and charitable so they're more likely to agree to reasonable requests Seizing or creating the right mood (negative) - Guilt - Social psychologist have demonstrated a strong positive association between guilt and compliance - May feel more obligated to help someone if we feel guilt - Negative state relief hypothesis = the idea that people engage in certain actions, such as agreeing to a request, to relieve their negative feelings and feel better about themselves - In a study, watching an adorable lab rat gets 'accidently' jolted with an intense shock led participants to donate more money to charity Mailgram's study - The participant was assigned the role of the **teacher**. - A confederate (an actor) was assigned the role of the **learner**. - An experimenter, dressed in a lab coat, acted as the authority figure. The teacher and learner were in separate rooms. The teacher was instructed to administer electric shocks to the learner each time they gave an incorrect answer on a word-pairing task. - The shocks increased in intensity with each incorrect answer, from **15 volts (slight shock)** to **450 volts (marked as "XXX," a potentially lethal level)**. - The learner (a confederate) did not actually receive shocks but acted as though they were in pain, expressing discomfort, begging for the experiment to stop, and eventually falling silent as the voltage increased. - \"Please continue.\" - \"The experiment requires that you continue.\" - \"You have no other choice; you must go on.\" **Obedience Rates**: - **65%** of participants continued to the maximum voltage level of 450 volts. - All participants administered shocks up to at least 300 volts. - Many showed signs of extreme stress, such as sweating, trembling, and nervous laughter, but still continued to obey the experimenter. - A minority of participants (about 35%) stopped before administering the highest voltage, demonstrating personal resistance to authority. Elements that kept the participants going - Blocked by the authority - Everyone called the experimenters attention to the learners suffering in an implicit plea to stop the proceedings - Participants had trouble halting the proceedings partly because the experimenter wasn't playing by the normal rules of social life. Participants offered reasons for stopping the experimenters, but they ignored it - People tend to not act decisively when they lack a solid grasp of the events happening - Without reliable norms of appropriate behaviour, people may lack the confidence necessary to take decisive action to stop such atrocities - Feelings of responsibility for one's actions is transferred to other people - The experimenter stated that he was responsible for everything that happened in the name of science, therefore the participants could reduce feelings of distress because the experimenter provided over for their actions - Responsibility was somehow transferred to the victim : 'well the leaner volunteered for this' - Stepwise involvement meant that people got caught on a 'slippery slope' - Each increment of only 15 volts so each one seems like a small step, until it gets to the extreme Aggression ---------- **Aggression** = an intentional behaviour aimed at causing either physical or psychological pain **Hostile aggression** = refers to behaviour motivated by feelings of anger and hostility, where the primary aim is to harm another person either physically or psychologically **Instrumental aggression** = refers to behaviour that is intended to harm another person in the service of motives other than pure hostility, for example to gain status, to attract attention or advance political and ideological causes Neural and chemical influences - The amygdala is associated with aggressive behaviour - When activated, animals aggress - In humans, amygdala is activated by the presentation of threatening faces and perceiving anger in others Phelps et al 2002 = amygdala activity and prejudice Looked into the relationship between amygdala activation and implicit racial bias. The study used neuroimaging techniques to explore how the brain responds to racial outgroup faces and how these responses relate to implicit attitudes and behaviours. - Participants were white individuals shown images of black and white faces - While undergoing fMRI, participants viewed faces of black and white individuals, measuring the amygdala activation - Implicit racial bias was assessed using the IAT - Explicit racial bias was also measures through self-reports - Faces of unfamiliar black and white individuals were presented briefly to participants in the scanner - Both implicit and explicit bias measurers were used to correlate with brain activation - Amygdala activation was significantly higher when participants viewed black faces compared to white faces, interpreted as reflecting the brains response to perceived social or emotional significance (eg fear, threat) associated with racial outgroups - Higher amygdala activation to black faces correlated with higher levels if implicit racial bias suggesting implicit bias operates outside conscious awareness - There was no significant correlation between amygdala activation and explicit (self-reported) racial bias suggesting a dissociation between unconscious biases and conscious attitudes, reflecting the influence of social desirability on self-reports Gender and aggression Boys are more aggressive than girls by age 2 and as they develop are more likely to be deviant in classrooms, to be bullies on the playground and to fight and engage in delinquent behaviour. As adults' men are more likely than women to assault each other, murder and rape, accounting for more than 89-90% of these forms of extreme aggression Women are more likely to gossip, form alliances and practise exclusion and social rejection to hurt others (Dodge and Schwartz, 1997) **Precarious manhood** is the idea that a man's gender identity which significantly involves strength and toughness, may be lost under various conditions and that such a loss can trigger aggressive behaviour. Link between precarious manhood and violence against gay people, men whose manhood has been threatened express more distant from gay people and greater aggression towards them (Bosson and Vandello, 2011) Dabbs et al., (1987) = Higher testosterone levels among prisoners convicted of violent vs non-violent crimes and found that among non-violent criminals, higher testosterone individuals served longer times before parole. Prisoners with higher testosterone levels were perceived as tougher by other prisoners Alcohol and aggression 1. Biological mechanisms - Neurochemical effects : alcohol affects neurotransmitters such as GABA and dopamine, which can alter emotional regulation and impulsivity - Reduced prefrontal cortex activity : alcohol impairs functioning in the prefrontal cortex, the brain area responsible for decision-making, self-control and inhibition, resulting in poorer judgment and reduced ability to control aggressive impulses - Increased amygdala activation : alcohol heightens activity in the amygdala which is involved in emotional responses like fear and angry making individuals more reactive to perceived threats 2. Psychological effects - Disinhibition : alcohol reduces self-control making people more likely to act on aggressive urges they would otherwise suppress - Myopia theory : alcohol narrows attention, focusing individuals on immediate cues while ignoring long-term consequences or mitigating factors - Expectancy theory : cultural and personal beliefs about alcohol can influence behaviour. If people expect alcohol to make them aggressive, they may act more aggressively when drinking 3. Situational and social factors - Provocation : alcohol can amplify aggressive responses to provocations, such as insults or threats, due to heightened emotional reactivity - Environmental context : crowded or noisy environments, such as bars, can exacerbate aggression in intoxicated individuals - Group dynamic : alcohol may increase aggression in group settings where there is peer pressure or a culture of confrontation Graham et al., 2006 = assessed intoxication and aggression at bars/clubs. Level of intoxication of the crowd and mean level of intoxication at the bar level significantly predicted frequency/severity of aggression Begue et al., 2009 = 'think-drink' effect and the expectations of effects of alcohol. Gave participants non-alcoholic/modest/high alcoholic levels as well as manipulated participants expectations of alcohol in drink (none/low/high) by convincing them they had alcohol when they hadn't. Then measured the amount of hot sauce in a drink the participants allocated to confederates in taste test. Those in the high expectancy condition allocated more hot sauce, thought they consumed more alcohol and acted more aggressively Aggressiveness across cultures Cohen and Nisbett, 1994 and the 'culture of honour' The study aimed to examine whether people from honour cultures (primarily in the southern and western US) are more likely to respond aggressively to insults than people from non-honour cultures (like northern US) - Male college students from northern and southern states in the US were recruited and asked to walk down a narrow alleyway to complete a task - While walking, a confederate deliberately bumped into the participants and insulted him. Emotional, cortisol and behavioural responses were measured - Participants from southern states were significantly more likely to display anger rather than amusement in response to the insult. Northerners were less emotionally reactive and often dismissed the insult - Southerners showed greater increase in cortisol and testosterone after being insulted, whereas northerners exhibited relatively stable levels of these hormones - Southerners were more likely to engage in dominant, confrontational behaviour such as walking more closely to the second confederate signalling an aggressive stance. Northerners were less likely to engage in such behaviours This study supports the idea that a culture of honour exists in the southern US, where maintaining one's reputation and responding to insults with aggression is culturally normative. In non-honour cultures, insults are often downplayed or ignored, and individuals are less likely to view them as threats to their personal or family honour Cohen et al., 1996 : game of chicken Participants leaves after what they think the experiment is done. Then confederate walks in a straight line towards the participant to see what point the participant gets out of the way, the smaller the distance the more aggressive When there is no insult, southerners peel away sooner before northerners When there was an insult, southerners peel away a lot later one, retaliating to the insult by trying to assert dominance Situational causes of aggression **Frustration aggression theory** = belief that you are prevented from goal increases likelihood of aggression - The closer you are to the goal, the greater the aggression - Harris 1974 had confederates cut into queues, moving into either 2^nd^ or 12^th^ place in the queue. More aggression was shown by the person who had been 2^nd^ in line i.e. closer to the goal - Kruglanski et al., 2023 looked at the effects of frustration which are particularly strong when the frustration is subjectively demeaning and suggests to the person a loss of their significance (hence, of personal worth and dignity) **Social learning** - Aggression can be learned by observing others, especially in environments where aggression is normalised or rewarded - Banduras Bobo Doll experiment 1961 showed that children exposed to aggressive models were more likely to act aggressively **Hot weather** - Larrick et al., 2011 found that as the weather gets hotter, major league baseball pitchers are more likely to hit batters with a pitch. This is especially true when the pitchers' teammates have been hit by the opposing pitcher earlier in the game. As temperature increases, the probability of a batter being hit increases - Anderson 1989 examined crime rates of US cities during 1980 and found that days with a temperature exceeded 90 degrees Fahrenheit was a stronger predictor of elevated violent crime rates but not non-violent crime rates. Violent crimes like murder and rape are more likely to occur during the hot summer seasons than during the other three seasons - Temperature increases aggression due to increased physiological discomfort and can increase arousal, feeling frustrated when its hot **Media violence** - Social learning theory is that we can learn to be aggressive by observing others and imitating them - Bandura 1963. Kids see adults play with toys, either aggressive or not. When the kids play, they imitate the model for both verbal and physical aggression. By the time were teens we've seen thousands of murders and other acts of violence. The more violence people watch on TV as kids the more violence they exhibit as teens and adults - Anderson et al., 2010. Participants viewed films and then have an opportunity to act in an aggressive fashion such as administering a shock to a confederate acting in a confrontational way. Exposure to media violence made people act more aggressive **Video games and aggression** - 43 undergraduates randomly assigned to play one of two games: mortal combat in which players choose a character and attempt to kill others - Others play an online golf tournament in which people just play 18 holes of golf - All participants played several rounds of their game against a confederate - When participants lost, the confederate punished them with an unpleasant loud burst of white noise - When participants won, they returned the favour, punishing the confederate with white noise - Participants who played mortal combat gave longer and more intense bursts of white noise - Have to think about what kind of third variable there is? Link to peer group association, deviancy training, levels of violence in the family where cruel comments and harsh punishments are daily is one of the strongest predictors of child aggression 1. Increased aggressive behaviour, such as giving more intense punishment to confederates in a study 2. Reduce prosocial behaviour 3. Increase aggressive thoughts like the world being a hostile place or that some people deserve aggression 4. Increase aggressive emotions especially anger 5. Increase blood pressure and heart rate, two physiological responses associated with aggression - Perception of the event was different, violent condition reported that the fight was less serious than in the control, different interpretations as a function of the experience they've had - Measured if participants help differed. After watching a violent film, time to help was longer/took them more time to help out **Social rejection and aggression** Social rejection, whether in the form of being excluded, bullied or shamed online can lead people to react in different ways. Sometimes people actually turn to prosocial behaviours such as reaching out to friends and allies, others withdraw from society, some turn to aggression Willimas, 2007 = ball tossing paradigm where participants play a ball-tossing game with two confederates. At a predetermined time in the experiment, two confederates stop throwing the ball to the participant and throw it back and forth to each other for 5 mins. Being rejected in this game triggers feelings of distress, shame and self-doubt in the participants and initiates a submissive slouched posture. Eisenberger, 2015 = participants thought they were playing a computerised version of the ball-tossing paradigm with two other people. When participants experienced the virtual rejection, fMRI images revealed activity in a region of the brain called the Dorsal Anterior Cingulate Cortex which processes physically painful stimuli. Subsequent studies have found that reliving a romantic breakup also activated this region of the brain. Evidence suggests that social rejection can trigger a threat defence system. Social rejection increases the likelihood of aggression = people who reported a chronic sense of rejection are more likely to act aggressively in their romantic relationships even restoring to physical violence (Dunn, 2002) Helping behaviour ----------------- **Altruism =** helping that benefits other but requires self-sacrifice on the part of the helper - No regard of personal consequences or potential harm, putting themselves in danger to come to the aid of others - No exception of receiving a reward, not driven by external motivations **Prosocial behaviour** = helping that benefits other, regardless of motives - A broader category of actions, but some of these actions might be altruistic **Moral foundations theory (Haidt)** Proposed the moral foundation theory where our moral judgements are shaped by deep intuitions within five 'foundations or domains, thought to be universal blueprints for morality in every culture 1. Care/harm foundation - Rooted in the evolutionary need to protect and nurture others, especially vulnerable individuals such as children or the injured - Moral virtues: Kindness, compassion and empathy - Triggered by suffering, pain or harm to others 2. fairness/cheating - Concerns ideas of justice, equality and reciprocity, stemming from the need to maintain cooperative relationships - Moral virtue : fairness, honesty and justice - Triggered by acts of cheating, inequality or free riding 3. loyalty/betrayal - Related to group cohesion and allegiance reflecting the evolutionary advantage of forming coalitions - Moral virtues : loyalty, patriotism, self-sacrifice for the group - Triggered by acts of betrayal or disloyalty 4. Authority/subversion - Focuses on respecting social hierarchies, traditions and legitimate authority figures, ensuring order and stability - Moral virtues : respect, obedience, deference - Triggered by acts of rebellion, disrespect or anarchy 5. Sanctity/degradation - Concerns the perception of purity and contamination, often tied to religious or cultural beliefs about the sacred - Moral virtues : purity, sanctity and self-control - Trigger : acts of symbols perceived as impure, degraded Perspectives on behaviour 1. Decision making model (Latane and Darley, 1970) Outlines a series of cognitive and situational steps that an individual must go through when deciding whether to help someone in need. It was developed in the context of understanding bystander intervention and the condition that influence helping behaviour - Notice the event - The individual must first recognise that something unusual or requiring attention is happening - Barriers: being preoccupied or focused on something else, **ambiguity**, crowds - Interpret the event as an emergency - The individual must determine that the situation requires intervention - Barriers: **ambiguity** of the situation, **pluralistic ignorance** when people look to others for cues and see no one reacting they then assume help is not needed - Take responsibility - The individual must feel a sense of personal responsibility to act - Barriers : **diffusion of responsibility** where in a group people assume that someone else will help, **deindividuation** were feeling anonymous in a crowd reduced personal accountability - Decide how to help - The individual must determine what form of assistance they can provide - Barriers : **lack of competence** where you feel unqualified to help such as not knowing CPR, **fear of making things worse** - Provide help - The individual must take action to help - Barriers : **audience inhibition** where people have a fear of looking foolish if the intervention isn't successful or necessary, **cost of helping** where people take into account the perceived risks, time, effort or potential harm to oneself Factors affecting decision to help 1. Situational factors - Prescence of others = the more bystanders present the less likely any one person is to help - Time pressure = people in a hurry are less likely to notice or interpret emergencies - Location = helping is more likely in less populated areas or familiar environments 2. Personal factors - Empathy = high empathy increases the likelihood of helping - Mood = positive moods often enhance helping behaviour while negative moods can have mixed effects - Skills = people with relevant training are more likely to assist 3. Characteristics of the victim - Perceived need = clearer signals of distress elicit more help - Similarity = people are more likely to help those they perceive as similar to themselves - Deservingness = victims perceived as responsible for their situation eg drunk, may receive less help 2. Learning perspective The learning perspective of helping behaviour emphasises that prosocial behaviour, such as helping others, is learned through experience and interaction with the environment. This approach draws on principles from behaviourism, social learning theory, and cognitive learning theory to explain how individuals develop helping behaviours over time 1. Operant conditioning - Helping behaviour can be shaped through reinforcement and punishment - Positive reinforcement : receiving praise, rewards, or recognition for helping increases the likelihood of repeating such behaviour - Negative reinforcement : helping to avoid negative consequences such as guilt can also reinforce the behaviour - Mills et al, 1989 - Children asked to shared toys, when children were rewarded with dispositional praise like 'you're nice' it had more of a pronounced long-term effect on prosocial behaviour compared to general praise like 'doing that was nice' - Punishment : negative outcomes like criticism for intervening correctly can decrease the likelihood of helping in the future 2. Social learning theory (bandura) - Helping behaviour is learned by observing and imitating others particularly role models - Modelling : people, especially children, learn prosocial behaviour by observing others perform acts of kindness or helping - Bryan and Test, 1967 - When you're driving and see (or not see) a driver helping someone with a flat tire. Less than a mile later, you pass someone with a flat tire. Participants were more likely to help If you're observed another's helping behaviour - Vicarious reinforcement : observing someone else being rewarded for helping can motivate individuals to act similarly 3. Classical conditioning - Associations between helping behaviour and positive emotions can encourage prosocial behaviour - If helping is repeatedly paired with feelings of happiness, individuals may develop a conditioned response to help others in similar situations 4. Cognitive learning - Beyond external rewards, individuals may develop an internal sense of satisfaction or moral obligation from helping - Reflecting on the positive impact of helping reinforces the behaviour internally - Toi and Batson (1982) ![](media/image9.png)Participants listened to a story about a fellow student, carol, who had been in an accident and needed help catching up on classwork. Then manipulated empathy levels (either focused on carols feelings (high empathy) or the technical aspect of her situation (low empathy)) as well as the cost of not helping (carol was either in the same class (high cost) or a different class (low cost)). Found that high empathy significantly increased the likelihood of helping, regardless of the cost. In low empathy conditions, participants were more likely to help only when the cost of not helping was high Exchange perspective - Look to maximise rewards and minimise costs Helping is reward

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue