psyu3333-hd-comprehensive-lecture-and-tutorial-notes.pdf

1 PSYU3333 Social Interaction in the Modern World Contents Week 1 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………….…… 2 Lecture: Intro ……….……….…………….……………………………..………….……….……….………..….. 2 Week 2 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………….…… 3 Lecture: Social Cognition …..….…..……………..………………..………….………....

1 PSYU3333 Social Interaction in the Modern World Contents Week 1 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………….…… 2 Lecture: Intro ……….……….…………….……………………………..………….……….……….………..….. 2 Week 2 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………….…… 3 Lecture: Social Cognition …..….…..……………..………………..………….……….……….………..….. 3 Week 3 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………......….…… 9 Lecture: Social Perception I – Self & Others……….……….………………………….….…..…….... 9 Tutorial: Op-Ed Part I ……..………….……….……………………..………………..………………….…… 12 Week 4 ..……………………………………………………………………………………………………..……….………. 14 Lecture: Social Perception II – Self Cont’d & Attitudes ………..…………….………….….….. 14 The Self ……….……….…………….……….…………….……….…………….………..……………. 14 Attitudes ……….……….…………….……….…………….……….…………….……….…………… 18 Week 5 ……………..…………………………………………………………………………………….…………………… 20 Lecture: Attitudes and Influence …………..………….…….………….……………………..…………. 20 Attitudes and Behaviours ……….……….…………….……….…………….……….…………. 20 Persuasion (Others Influence) ……….……….…………….……….…………….……….…… 23 Tutorial: Op-Ed Part II ……….……….…………….……….…………….……….…………….……….…… 25 Week 6 ………..…………………………………..……………………………………………………………………..…… 26 Lecture: Identity and Interaction I ………………………….………………………………………..…… 26 Groups ……….……….…………….……….…………….……….…………….……….……….……… 26 Stigma ……….……….…………….……….…………….……….…………….……….…………….... 29 Stereotypes, Prejudice, Discrimination ……….……….…………….……….……………. 31 Week 7 …..……………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………….. 31 Lecture: Identity and Interaction II ……………………………….…..……….………..………….…… 31 Week 8 …..………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 35 Lecture: Language and Social Interaction ………………………………..……….……...………….. 35 Social Information in Speech Perception ……….……….…………….……….…………. 37 Week 9 …..……………...…………………………………………………………………………………………….…….. 38 Lecture: Organisational Change ……….……….…………….……….…………….……….…………… 38 Tutorial: Explicit and Implicit Bias ……….……….…………….……….…………….……….………… 41 Week 10 ….……….…………….……….…….……….…………….……….…….……….…………….……….…….. 41 Lecture: Identity and Interaction III – Challenge and Change ……………………………….. 41 Tutorial: Attitudes or Stereotyping ….…………….……….…………….……….…………….………. 44 Week 11 …….……….…………….……….………….……….…………….……….….……….…………….…………. 45 Lecture: Human Machine Interaction I – Virtual Embodiment ………………………………. 45 Tutorial: Disability …………………………………………………………………….………………………….. 50 Week 12 …….……….…………….……….………….……….…………….……….….……….…………….………… 52 Lecture: Dynamical Systems in Psychological Science ……………………………….…………. 52 2 Week One Lecture: Intro What is social psychology? - Gordon Alport’s definition: the scientific study of how an individual’s thoughts, feelings, and actions are affected by the actual, imagined, or symbolically represented presence of other people - We don’t need to be present to be social - We rely on others (real or imagined) to make sense of the world - Different to personality psychology The social psychological approach - Empirically based – science based - Exploring phenomena for ‘objective’ understanding - Experimental, Qualitative and Quantitative - Addresses everyday things “knew it all along” e.g. love, hate, conformity, etc. o Birds of a feather flock together vs opposites attract § Core values should be same but can be different otherwise o Social psychology aims to address which one is actually true more often than not and more accurate The ABC’s Social psychology merges all of these: - A: Affect – feelings, emotions - B: Behaviour – actions (and interactions) o the way we approach situations e.g. solve a problem o sometimes determined or ambiguous (lack of action) - C: Cognition – thoughts, attitudes o injected all areas of psychology e.g. CBT o amazing for understanding and changing behaviour Who influences us? - Others do not need to be present to influence our own experience - Real people and events o e.g. boss, tutor, friends, family - Imagined people or events o e.g. trying on bikini in a change room and picturing yourself in public, practicing giving a speech and imagining a crowd - Implied or symbolically represented Social animal: how we are affected - Social influence: we act upon the world, but the environment also influences us - The effect(s) that the words, actions, or ‘presence’ of others has on our own thoughts, feelings and behaviour - It is our subjective experience of situations that matters o Construal’s: Individual perceptions and interpretations of the world or events around us 3 how we perceive, think about and potentially distort our social environment § e.g. one person sees another as excited and the other angry o To understand how people construe social situations, we have to understand people’s basic motives for perceiving and distorting the social world. § Hearts: The need to maintain positive self-regard & belong – feeling connected § Minds: The need to be accurate and know the world – what is truth § How is social psychology different? Example: studying prejudice - Sociology: track how American prejudice toward Japanese has changed since WWII - Clinical: test various therapies - Personality: develop a questionnaire to identify men who are very high or low in a degree of prejudice - Cognitive: manipulate exposure to a member of some category of people and measure the thoughts and concepts that are automatically activated - Social: manipulate various kinds of contact between individuals of different groups and examine the effect of these manipulations on the degree of prejudice shown Week Two Lecture: Social Cognition Central social motives (BUCST) Shape our construal’s, thoughts, emotions, behaviour, relationships… - Belonging: our desire for stable, meaningful connections with others o the more isolated we feel, the greater impact on our experiences - Understanding Others and Predicting Accurately: to navigate the world safely and in a way that optimizes our relationships o threats to our motives are scary but if we can understand the consequences we can more easily move on and adapt - Control: the autonomy and competence to direct our own actions and make things happen – knowing what you expect o animals with little control tend to suffer the most psychological and physiological stress - Self-enhancement: feel self-worth (you matter), have social status in community (you’re valued), and have positive reputations – want lives to matter - Trust: cannot survive without trusting other people and that the world is safe Social cognition - The way in which people think about themselves and the social world - How we select, interpret, remember, and use social information to make judgments and decisions o Automatic thinking: unconscious/involuntary, stimulus-driven § e.g. driving the same route o Controlled thinking: conscious/explicit, slower, sequential, internally driven § e.g. first learning to drive 4 - We process so many tiny bits of information but everything comes together to make sense We often don’t have all the information we need to make decisions People as everyday theorist - We rely on schemas (inferred knowledge structures) o The framework of how we move through the world - Organize knowledge around: o Themes, Topics - Contain basic knowledge and impressions of o Others, Ourselves, Social roles, Events - Why do we have them? o Free-up valuable cognitive resources o Reduce Ambiguity when there’s no script on how to behave - Where do they come from? o Culture matters e.g. how woman should behave Cognitive effects of schemas - Guide Attention o e.g. Confirmation Bias: we notice, remember, and accept information that confirms what we already believe, and tend to ignore, forget, and reject information that disconfirms what we believe o Filters Information - Are Reconstructive (i.e., memory, inference and interpretation) o e.g. Completing a figure without all of the lines connecting or mandala effects (thinking something was said when it wasn’t) o Fill in blanks with information consistent with our schemas Determining which schemas are applied - Accessibility: extent to which schemas are likely to be used o Chronic due to past experiences (everyday occurrences) o Temporary due to relevant goal or recent experience (priming/conditioning) § e.g. people primed with negative words had a much lower impression of people compared to people primed with positive words Heuristics (Automatic processing) - Mental shortcuts that guide problem solving and decision making - How a person figures out a problem - Highly useful, however, does not guarantee accuracy and can be misleading, or result in errors of judgment - When do we use them? Automatic processing o when we don’t have time to think carefully about an issue o when we are so overloaded with information that it becomes impossible to process the information fully o when the issues at stake are not very important to us o when we lack the required knowledge for making a reasoned decision o when we let our emotions and wishful thinking get in the way. 5 Common heuristic categories - Representativeness: classify according to how similar or typical something is o If you thought Alex was administration/secretary, you used description of a person instead of numbers - Availability: classify according to ease with which something comes to mind o How salient and automatic (priming can impact this) - Anchoring & Adjustment: use a number value and adjust from that value e.g. someone’s married they must be 30 but they look really young, maybe 25? - Affect: our feelings can shape our evaluations of people or ideas Issues of Heuristics Degree to which we are engaged with the issue at hand or distracted by something - False-consensus effect: overestimate the extent to which we share opions/beliefs o just because someone is the same race as you, doesn’t mean they’ll have the same opinion/values - Base-rate Fallacy (misbelief): the idea that when you know information you can make a good judgement o Lottery (1 in 200 mil doesn’t stop us from buying) o Influenced by availability & representativeness (anchoring & adjustment) - Overconfidence (accuracy) - Counterfactual Thinking o “If only…” o 2nd place always feels worse than 3rd because they were so close to 1st - CBT: allows you to process information in a way to avoid negative thinking Controlled social cognition - Conscious, intentional, voluntary, effortful (time, energy, resources) - Trying to understand something and make the correct judgement - Mental control and thought suppression o the more we try NOT TO think about something, are tired, or stressed, the more likely those thoughts will intrude (ironic processes) o e.g. for the next 20sec don’t think about a white bear. You instantly think of a white bear Casual Attribution: what are the causes of behaviour? - Attribution: process through which people seek to identify the causes of others’ (and one’s own) behaviour and to gain knowledge of their stable traits and dispositions o Inferring from what we observe: § What people are like § What motivates them o Attributions influence how we treat others o Determines HOW we respond - Trying to make sense of the outcome – what are the consequences - Example: why did the chicken cross the road o Accuracy approach: to get to the other side § external motive: maybe for food, water, farm, etc. 6 - o It’s just a dumb chicken § internal: something inherent about the chicken If we make an external attribution to why someone’s agree you’re more likely to forgive (e.g. “they’re just angry cause they’ve had a bad day”) vs. internal (e.g. “they’re a terrible person”) Theoretical perspectives Heider (1958) - People are naïve scientists: we like cause and effect - Two types of attributions: o Internal (personal/dispositional) – behaviour explained by internal characteristics such as ability, personality, mood, or effort (dumb chicken) o External (situational) – behaviour explained factors external to the individual such as luck, other people, or circumstances (chicken hungery) Jones & Harris (1967) - Correspondence Inference Theory: can we predict behaviour - Does a person’s personality/action match their behaviour? o Look for internal or external justification - Use various characteristics (factors relating to internal/external behaviours) to do this including: o Choice in Behaving: someone has a choice of choosing action A or B o Social desirability: do they want to look good or is it really who they are? o Non-common effects Kelly (1970’s) - People are also naïve scientists, but… - We utilize 3 Types of Information o Consensus: how other people behave toward the same stimulus o Distinctiveness: how the actor responds to other stimuli o Consistency: frequency of the behaviour between the same actor & the same stimulus Kelly: Example (won’t be asked to solve in exam) You go to Prof. X’s office hours, and she is extremely helpful to you. Why? - Consensus: How do other professors treat you in office hours? - Distinctiveness: How does Prof. X treat other students in office hours? - Consistency: Does Prof. X treat you the same way when you go to her office hours other times? - Internal Attribution: Likely when o Low in Consensus: most other professors are nasty o Low in Distinctiveness: treats everyone differently o High in Consistency: always treats you the same - External Attribution: Likely when o High in Consensus o High in Distinctiveness o High in Consistency 7 Criticisms - Doesn’t work well for circumstance attributions - Covariation does not mean causality (more correlational) - Participants are given “pre-packaged” info which they might not seek or use in everyday situations - Evidence suggests people are poor at assessing covariation between events (Alloy & Tabachnik, 1984) - It may appear that the covariation principle was used, but the processing used may be completely different (e.g. Nisbett & Ross, 1980) - Requires multiple observations over time- which is not always possible to do Attribution: configuration - Causal Schemas: preconceptions or theories built up from experience about how certain kinds of causes interact to produce a specific effect o Not what will happen if I put my hand on a stove but more so asking what is heat and can I translate that knowledge to other areas - Allows one to interpret information quickly by comparing and integrating it with a schema - Discounting & Augmenting principles (overly simplified) o Discounting: more potential causes = put less weight on causes § you discount the things that push you away from the logic decision e.g. her having money doesn’t have that much of an effect on proposal as we associate proposal more with love o Augmenting: facilitative factor assigned greater weight than inhibiting behaviour § give more power to the logical decision e.g. he loves her and that’s why he’s proposing not just because she has money Can people distinguish internal and external attributions? Multidimensional approach (Weiner, 1986) - This approach takes effort, when normally we make quick judgements - Locus: what is the initial cause - internal or external? - Stability: is the cause a stable or unstable one (over time) 8 - Controllability: to what extent is future task performance under the actor’s control? o new concept introduced (having a choice) Fundamental attribution error - Correspondence Bias (FAE) (Jones & Harris, 1967) - Tendency to explain others’ actions as stemming from dispositions (internal) even in the presence of clear situational (external) causes - Tendency to overestimate the impact of dispositional factors - This error is more common or stronger in individualist cultures (Western Europe, the United States, and Australia) - This error is committed against groups, as well as individuals Dual process model of FAE (Gilbert, Pelham, & Krull, 1988) - First: Internal Attribution - Then: If we have time, energy, and motivation we will consider alternative explanations (external) - If given a cognitive load (e.g. had to listen to speech before answering questions) they were less likely to consider alternative explanations The actor/observer effect - When we’re talking about our own behaviour we almost say its situational (external) and not because of us (internal/dispositional) o Flip of the FAE o Others: dispositional o Ourselves: situational - Why? o Perceptual Salience o Actors have more information about themselves than observers do o to protect ourselves Self-serving attributes - Explanations for one’s: o Success -> internal, dispositional factors o Failure -> external, situational factors o Cognitive and motivational factors may explain this bias o This bias is stronger in individualist culture - Because of self-esteem, presentation, available info - False Consensus: overestimate commonality of our own opinions, etc. Explanations: o Self enhancement -> motivation § As it’s confirming your beliefs o Selective exposure to others -> cognitive § Guide who you spend time with 9 o Salience (importance) of own position -> cognitive Defensive attributions Explanations for behaviour that avoid feelings of vulnerability or mortality (threats) - Unrealistic Optimism o Good things more likely o Bad things less likely o Example: assumption that when you go out in the morning, you’ll return home safe at night (not in constant fear - anxiety) - Belief in Just World o Bad things happen to bad people o Good things happen to good people (we’ve earnt our rewards) o Very cultural perspective Our attributions are not as accurate as we think! We are crazy prone to bias and error!! Week 3 Lecture: Social Perception I – Self and Others The functions of the self - Organizational Function: Self-knowledge o The way we understand who we are and organize information - Emotional Function (e.g., Higgins): Self-esteem o How we maintain positive views of the self o Actual Self (think, feel, behave), Ideal Self (who you want to be), Ought Self (what you believe you should be – often dictated by society) o Prevention or promotion focus? - Executive Function: Self-regulation or control o How we plan and execute behaviour and choices - Impression Management: Self-presentation o How we present ourselves and get them to view us the way we wish to be seen – strategies to accomplish what you want e.g. wearing professional clothes in an interview The nature of the self (William James, 1842-1910) - Duality of the Self: applied relatively universally o Known (“Me”): who I am o Knower (“I”): does the knowing (active part) - Self-Concept: Sum total of an individual’s beliefs about their own attributes o “known” - Self-Awareness: thinking about the self and evaluate according to one’s own standards/values o “knower” The self-concept - Self-concept is made up of self-schemas - Self-Schema: Beliefs about oneself that guide processing of self-relevant information o They are dynamic and ever changing 10 - - o Self is dynamic and socially situated § Social context: Sense of self may shift dramatically depending on whom we are interacting with § Distinctiveness: May highlight aspects of the self that make us feel most unique in a given context Rudimentary (basic) self-concept o Some primates (chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans) and maybe elephants or dolphins o Children: Humans at 18 to 24 months via social interaction begins to emerge § Concrete, referent to characteristics like age, sex, neighborhood, and hobbies Mature self-concept o Less emphasis on physical characteristics o More emphasis on psychological states and how other people judge us Evidence that the Self is Specially Represented in the Brain? - Synaptic connections provide biological base for memory, making the sense of continuity possible for normal identity (LeDoux) - Various self-based processes can be traced to activities occurring in certain areas in the brain (Feinberg & Keenan) - Self can be transformed or destroyed by damage to the brain and nervous system e.g. personality changes from concussions Self-concept: cultural influences - Culture Concept: Psychology dominated by western cultural bias which influences people’s definition of social structure and coping strategies - What are the norms for behaviour - Ideas <–> institutions <–> interactions <–> individuals - Individualism: One’s culture values the virtues of independence, autonomy, and self-reliance o in the US you are told that ambition and winning is a good thing - Collectivism: One’s culture values the virtues of interdependence, cooperation, and social harmony o defined by your relationship with others and how they view you Cultural differences in Defining the Self - Independent view of the self o Defining oneself in terms of one’s own internal thoughts, feelings, and actions and not those of other people o Self-seen as a distinct, autonomous entity, separate from others and defined by individual traits and preferences o The squeaky wheel gets the grease – make yourself stand out - Interdependent view of the self o Defining oneself in terms of one’s relationships to other people; recognizing one’s behaviour is often determined by the thoughts, feelings, and actions of others 11 o Self-seen as connected to others, defined by social duties and shared traits and preferences o The nail that stands out gets pounded down How do you think of yourself? Things can shift and not be salient (20 statements task) - Physical Self-Descriptions: Refer to physical qualities that do not imply social interaction - Social Self-Descriptions: Refer to relationships, groups memberships, social roles, and attitudes which are socially defined and validated - Psychological Self-Descriptions: Refer to psychological traits (determined) or states (e.g. tired) and to attitudes which do not refer to particular social referents - Holistic Self-Descriptions: Refer to characteristics so comprehensive or vague that they do not distinguish one person from another - Other/Miscellaneous Self-objectification theory - Norms in society that put pressure on an individual - Example: when woman’s body image is more salient, they do worse on cognitive tasks, are less satisfied, and eat less Self-knowledge and social interaction We come to know ourselves: - Through introspection (looking inwards) - By observing our own behaviour (actions speak louder than words) - By adopting other people’s perspective - By comparing ourselves to others Introspection - Introspection: The process whereby people look inward and examine their own thoughts, feelings, and motives o Introspection can lead us astray o Most people overestimate the positives when self-assessing - People do not rely on introspection as often as we think (Csikzentmihalyi, 1982) o Reasons for feelings and behaviour can be outside conscious awareness o Not always pleasant to think about ourselves o Although, the amount of time has increased in recent years § song lyrics for use of first-person singular pronouns Self-awareness theory - When people focus their attention on themselves, they evaluate and compare their behaviour to their internal standards and values - Putting a mirror makes your own self salient – more aware of yourself - Sometimes people go far in their attempt to escape the self o Focusing on the self can be very aversive o Unhealthy behaviours used to turn off “internal spotlight” on oneself – avoiding thinking about the negative 12 - However, self-focus is not always damaging or aversive Expectation for discrepancy reduction o Low: withdraw from self-awareness e.g. distract self o High: match behaviours to standards Affective Forecasting & Durability Bias - Affective forecasting: we have difficulty in predicting responses to future emotional events (not good at judging why we feel the way we do) - Durability bias: we tend to overestimate strength and duration of our emotional reactions o For negative events, we do not fully appreciate our psychological coping mechanisms § We focus only on the emotional impact of a single event, overlooking the effects of other life experiences. - Many mental processes outside of awareness o Overlook reasons that are difficult to verbalize o In many cases, people are wrong about what predicts mood o Dating & partners; Preferences - Causal Theories: theories about the causes of one’s own feelings and behaviours; often we learn such theories from our culture e.g. you’re sad because … - Problem o Schemas and theories are not always correct. Can lead to incorrect judgments about the causes of our actions § We take in the exact same words differently o Consequence: Reasons-Generated Attitude Change § Attitude change resulting from thinking about the reasons for one’s attitudes; people assume their attitudes match the reasons that are plausible and easy to verbalise e.g. “just sad because of my period” Self-perception theory (Bem, 1972) - We look at our behaviour to tell us how we think or feel about something - When our attitudes/feelings are uncertain or ambiguous, or internal cues are difficult to interpret, we infer these states by observing our behaviour and the situation in which it occurs Tutorial: Op-Ed Part I What is an Op-Ed - Writing an opinion-based piece - Current issues related to social psychology - No in-text citations just include it in the sentence - Include a title but no title page - Aim: concisely and clearly influence public opinion, raise awareness, make a compelling and stimulate discussion of an important and timely topic - Consider who your audience is: someone who doesn’t agree with you o bring more followers to your cause o start a conversation with your community o influence the decisions affecting your life and your family and friends 13 - o who you’re publishing to e.g. the Guardian Start with what you want your reader to take away from this and work backward from there Example: https://www.smh.com.au/national/dark-emu-debate-highlights-problemswith-labels-20210615-p581b9.html Be concise, well-written and targeted to particular audience - stick to one side of the argument - identify the counterargument (1 sentence) and refute it with facts - avoid jargons - can use anecdotes (“I” statements) - 700-750 words Have a clearly defined topic and theme - topic: the person, place, issue, incident, or thing that is primary focus of the piece. the topic is usually stated in the first paragraph - theme: another level of meaning to the topic. What the big, overarching ideas of the column? What’s your point? Why is it important? The theme may appear early in the piece, or may appear later when it may also serve as a turning point into a deeper level of argument - the “ask” should be easy to pick out Have a catchy idea (or hook) - first sentence and last sentence - tell an anecdote, use quotation, tell a joke, ask a question, quote current news or events Be well researched (credible) - find at least three primary references - interviews, observations, etc. - what are you adding to the conversation that we didn’t already know and why should the audience care - … in 2008 said this, I think Be current - A current event e.g. holiday, politics, etc. - A big issue e.g. racism, sexism, etc. o In what ways have they changed o How is it important in your country? - Choose a narrow issue e.g. how does sexism in western cultures affect woman in IT Have a strong voice - Don’t patronise the reader and their opinions - Be controversial but don’t be outrageous - Be descriptive, write about your own experiences (senses), tell a joke, ask your reader a question 14 Have a strong ending - Answer what you put forth in the opening statement - Logically flow from the body - Most memorable: have a statement which is a revelation to your reader or have a call to action (ask your reader to do something e.g. do this survey) o a closed ending not open ending: the piece needs to be resolved, a hard conclusion Week 4 Lecture: Social Perception II – Self Cont’d & Attitudes The Self Self-Perception & Emotions - Facial feedback hypothesis: changes in facial expression can trigger corresponding changes in the subjective experience of emotion (temporary) o e.g. can feel a bit better when you smile o but the face is not necessary to the subjective experience of emotion - Stanley Schachter (1964): Two-Factor Theory of Emotion o Experience of emotion is similar to other types of self-perception o We infer our emotions by observing our behaviour § Experience physiological arousal § Seek an appropriate explanation for it Schachter and Singer - Epinephrine-informed group: did not become angry when exposed to angry confederate as had alternate explanation for their arousal (the drug) - Epinephrine-ignorant group: became euphoric and joined confederate in playing games - Implications: emotions are somewhat arbitrary and they depend on our explanations for arousal Misattribution of Arousal - The process whereby people make mistaken inferences about what is causing them to feel the way they do - Bridge example: o Men went on suspension bridge and felt arousal toward a woman and called her for a date o the same woman approached men after they had crossed the bridge and had rested, relatively few called her for a date. Knowing Ourselves (self-knowledge) by Adopting Other People’s Views - The imagination of our appearance to the other person - The imagination of his judgment of that appearance - Some sort of self-feeling, such as pride or mortification - The character and weight of that other, in whose mind we see ourselves, makes all the differences with our feeling Social comparison theory (Festinger, 1954) 15 - The idea that we learn about our own abilities and attitudes by comparing ourselves to other people Other people are vital sources of information to ourselves Downward social comparison: comparing ourselves with those less well off o To feel better about self o Looking down on someone else to make yourself feel better Upward social comparison: comparing ourselves with those better off o To improve self, achieve goals (aspiring, learning) o Looking up to someone who is better Lateral social comparison: similar others e.g. other Uni students at mq o Mixed reasons (accuracy and self-preservation) Major and Colleagues: paradoxical contentment with women vs men’s pay - although being paid less than men for the same job, women are just as satisfied with their pay and job - woman working for the same amount of time as men willingly paid themselves less - when given the same money, woman worked more than men - lateral comparisons act as a buffer: woman are fine with it because they’re not thinking about what men are getting paid for the job on an everyday basis o not as salient o wouldn’t be the case if they were making upward comparisons Self-control: the executive function - Making choices about present and plans for the future - Control about inhibiting impulses, regulation is identifying causes and reducing the intensity and frequency of these impulses - Control Theory of Self-Regulation (TOTE) o Test, Operate, Test, Exit o Cognitive feedback loop: how are we comparing to some standard (public vs private standard) o Related to self-awareness: are you improving? o e.g. compare yourself to standard (test), start training more frequently (operate), compare to standard (test), feel good (exit) - Self-Regulatory Resource Model o Views self-control as a limited resource § Like a muscle that gets tired with frequent use § Rebounds in strength with practice (e.g. rebound when diet) o Model focuses on increasing self-control/resilience § Practice exerting self-control (e.g. intermittent fasting) § Set behavioural intentions § 3 days, 3 weeks, 3 months, 3 years (try get to each stage) Ego depletion - State where previous acts of self-control drains ability to control future behaviour - For instance, participants who controlled behaviour by eating healthy radishes instead of delicious cookies gave up faster when they had to solve a puzzle later o so much energy on diet that they gave up elsewhere 16 Self-esteem (a need, a drive) - A sense of self-worth helps us navigate the shitty stuff that comes with our goals - We rely a lot on our relationships and connections - Sociometer theory (Leary and Baumeister) o People are inherently social animals o The desire for self-esteem is driven by a more primitive need to connect with others - Terror management theory (Greenberg, Solomon, and Pyszczynski) o Humans are biologically programmed for life and self-preservation o We are conscious of—and terrified by—the inevitability of our own death - People with positive self-images tend to be happy, healthy, and successful - Negative self-images tend to be more depressed, pessimistic about the future, and prone to failure - Global: how do you generally feel - Situational (state/contingent self-esteem): appearance, performance, achievement, spirituality/ideologies Self-evaluation maintenance - Self-concept threatened by another person’s behaviour - Level of threat determined by: o Closeness of other o Relevance of behaviour - If not relevant and relationship close, then “bask in the reflected glory” (BIRGing) o e.g. wearing your jersey after your footy team wins - If relevant and relationship close, then feel bad and want to reduce self-threat o To protect our self-esteem, we will “cut off reflected failure” (“CORF”) by distancing ourselves from others who fail or are of low status - Example: someone close to you does better than you in the same degree and gets into a better uni (threat) and it hurts o You either: cut off ties with them or revaluate what important to you (CORF) Dangers of high self-esteem - People with high self-esteem may be more sensitive to threats, insults, and challenges (aggressive, highly sensitive) - Not the same as narcissism - Inflated self-esteem can be counterproductive o Many psychopaths, murders, rapists, and violent gang member have very high self-esteem o High self-esteem may allow individuals to be satisfied with the self despite poor life outcomes Illusions about the self - We don’t walk around thinking we’re going to die every day even though the odds are probably high - Positive illusions and mental health 17 - - o Research suggests that most well-adjusted people may have slightly unrealistic views about themselves Benefits of positive illusions o Elevate positive mood and reduce negative mood o Foster social bonds by making people more outgoing o Promote pursuit of and persistence at goals Costs of positive illusions o Positive illusions may be detrimental if overestimation of abilities leads to poor performance Impression management (self-presentation and protection of self-esteem) We do it when? - When we are in the public eye the spotlight effect: believe social spotlight shines more brightly on you than it really does) - When we are high in public self-consciousness (the tendency to have a chronic awareness of oneself as being in the public eye) - When observers can influence whether we obtain our goals - When we think observers have impressions of us that differ from the ones we want to project (e.g. showing your boss you can do it) - When we are high in self-monitoring (the tendency to be chronically concerned with one’s public image and adjust one’s actions to fit the needs of the situation) o people who adapt very quickly to the situation and people around them o but we start not to trust them when they start to change too much (you feel manipulated) Ingratiation - Trying to make ourselves likable to another person, often of higher status - Ingratiation strategies: make ourselves likeable o Expressing liking for others o Create similarity o Make ourselves physically attractive o Project modesty Appearing likeable - Duchenne (when happy) smile: eyes mouth and cheek are creating the smile Appearing competent - Self-promotional strategies: appearing competent o Stage performances o Claim competence o Make excuses or claim obstacles - Self-handicapping: the behaviour of withdrawing effort or creating obstacles to one’s future successes o so, if we succeed, we did it in spite of the obstacle o but if we fail, it was because of the situation (external attribution) o Behavioural: reduce likelihood of success so can blame potential failure on obstacles rather than ability 18 - o Reported: devise ready-made excuses in case they fail Competence motivation: they want to gain mastery because interesting and challenging or they desire to be seen as competent Shyness: shy people are less likely to promote their competence boldly and focus on preventing unfavourable public images Convery status and power - Status and power-enhancing strategies: o Display the artefacts of status and power o Conspicuous consumption o Associate with people of status and power o Communicate dominance with nonverbal expression - We respect people when they use their power and status not just for their own desires but when they use it for something beyond themselves - Authority helps organise a disorganised situation - Automatically assumes hierarchies Cultural and IM - Culturally Universal: desire to manage image we present - Cultural Differences: kinds of images we want to present e.g. “Saving face” is important in many Eastern cultures Self-evaluation (hearts and minds) - Threats to Self-Esteem spur people to enhance and protect self-image - Self-esteem can be stable or fluctuate dramatically - Need for positive self-esteem varies in collectivistic and individualistic cultures - Self-verification theory: we are motivated for accurate views of the self (don’t want these views to fluctuate) - Verifying information: look to others to see if what we believe of ourselves is true - Hearts and minds battle: you do poorly on a test, who do you compare yourself to? o If threatened – hearts compare self to friend who did poorly o Minds meets with professor to understand why did poorly Attitudes What’s an attitude? - Evaluation of a person, place, object, event, idea, or behaviour - Attitudes may be implicit or explicit - They’re temporary constructions Components - Affective: emotions or feelings toward (doesn’t always have to be a strong feeling) - Behavioural: actions or observable behaviours that results from - Cognitive: knowledge, thoughts, beliefs about 19 - Ambivalence: mixture of high positive and negative reaction e.g. dove body wash ½ price but hate the smell Functions - Utilitarian o Know our likes and dislikes o Alert us to potential rewards, costs, or threats in the situation - Value-expressive o Attitudes help us express cherished beliefs and values (identity) o Guide identification with reference groups that reinforce those values - Ego-defensive o Attitudes may allow us to maintain cherished beliefs about ourselves and our world o Attitudes also allow us to defend those beliefs when they are threatened - Knowledge o Attitudes help us organise information o Know what we want to pay attention to, remember, and recall Where do attitudes come from? - Genetic origins: twin studies show twins often have similar attitudes o Indirect function of our genes: temperament, personality - Social experiences: though all attitudes have ABC components, any given attitude can be based more on one type of experience (environment) than another o Exposure to attitude objects o Rewards and punishments o Attitudes that our parents, friends, and enemies express o The social and cultural context Affective - Based more on feelings and values than on their beliefs about the nature of an attitude object - Sometimes we simply like something, regardless of relevant facts - Are NOT a result of: o Examining facts or rational examination o Not governed by logic - Often result from (emotion): o Values o Sensory or Aesthetic Reactions o Conditioning - A lot of affectively based attitudes are tied to stimulus response relationships (i.e. operant/classical) Behavioural - Based on observations of how one behaves toward an attitude object - Sometimes people do not know how they feel until they see how they behave - Self-Perception Revisited (Bem) – two-factor theory of emotion: people infer their attitudes from their behaviour only under certain conditions: 20 o When initial attitude is weak or ambiguous o When no other plausible explanation for behaviour Week 5 Lecture: Attitudes and Influence Attitudes and Behaviours Explicit vs. Implicit Attitudes - Explicit: Attitudes that we consciously endorse and can easily report - Implicit: Attitudes that are involuntary, uncontrollable, and at times unconscious o e.g. racism: through culture, you can take on information that forms implicit attitudes – unconsciously engaging in racist behaviours o lack of exposure o starts young o where bias can come from Measuring attitudes - Self-report (normally explicit) o Attitude scale o Bogus pipeline - Covert (indirect) o Videotape o Facial electromyograph (EMG) o Brain imaging - Implicit Association Test (IAT) or GNAT o Categorise pictures and words based on stereotypes o How long does it take you to pair e.g., white with bad? Attitudes are poor predictors of behaviour - Role of culture: relatively low correlation between attitudes and behaviour - LaPiere (1930) meta-analyses: people are willing to present a negative attitude, but their behaviour doesn’t correlate o General attitudes may not match specific targets (i.e., they would ask about broad attitudes but measure specific behaviours) - Spontaneous Behaviour: Highly accessible attitudes - Deliberate Behaviour: Theory of Planned Behaviour (the specific – not general – attitude toward the behaviour is important) o Intention, specific attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control o When these areas are lacking, that’s when we see a weakening of the correlation between attitudes and behaviours 21 Behaviours can be good predictors of attitudes Strong link but not necessarily a predictive link - Consistency Principle: people will change their attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, and actions to make them consistent with one another - Balance Theory: people try to maintain a balance between their thoughts, feelings, and sentiments o inconsistencies between ABCs create an unpleasant mental state (cognitive dissonance) that motivates mental efforts to resolve them Cognitive dissonance - Discomfort that people feel when two cognitions (beliefs, attitudes) conflict, or when they behave in ways that are inconsistent with their conception of themselves - Example: you want to help the environment, but you’re broke so can’t afford and electric car and use e10 fuel - Initiation: dissonance begins with and action or decision that conflicts with and important aspect of the self - Amplification: more dissonance arises when the action or decision o Is seen as freely chosen o Cannot be justified as due to strong rewards or threat o Cannot be withdrawn o Produces negative consequences - Motivation: dissonance is experienced as unpleasant arousal - Reduction: dissonance is reduced through change designed to remove the unpleasant arousal o Change our behaviour “I don’t need to be on a diet” o Justify our behaviour “I hardly ate any ice cream” o Justify our behaviour by adding new cognitions “but chocolate is nutritious” o Rationalising decisions (before or after) “I had no choice it was her bday” How do attitudes change? - Often due to social influence (attitudes are social phenomena) - Aside from dissonance, can be influenced by others as well o Communication (e.g., a speech or television ad) advocating a particular side of an issue - Yale Attitude Change Approach: “Who said what to whom” o Who: the source of the communication o What: the nature of the communication o Whom: the nature of the audience “Who”: source characteristics - Attractiveness & Likability o Attractive spokespeople are more persuasive, even for topics completely unrelated to attractiveness o Effects of attractiveness are through the peripheral route: attractive people are rated more favourably, and those favourable feelings become associated with the message - Credibility 22 o People who are knowledgeable and trustworthy are more persuasive o But non-credible sources can change attitudes through the sleeper effect The sleeper effect - Giving time to process what you’ve said can increase/decrease the effect later - A delayed increase in the persuasive impact of a non-credible source - Discounting cue hypothesis: people immediately discount the arguments made by non-credible communicators, but over time, they dissociate what was said from who said it “What”: message characteristics - If someone is too persuasive, we’ll be turned off: we don’t want to feel manipulated - High quality messages: what are the benefits for you o when conclusions are explicit and directly refute opposing views o for people who find the message personally relevant o when source argues against personal self-interest (2-sided) - Vivid information o Vivid information can be more persuasive than statistical facts o Identifiable victim effect: Tendency to be more influenced by information about one specific individual than about large amounts of people o Fear-based persuasion: Most effective when combined with instructions on how to avoid negative outcomes - In debate: do you want to be the first or last thing they remember o Primacy effect (Immediate decision) e.g., right before an event occurs o Recency effect (Delayed decision) e.g., after the fact “Whom”: receiver characteristics - Personality: Need for cognition o People high in need for cognition are more persuaded by central route messages than by peripheral route messages - Mood: Messages more persuasive when they match mood of the receiver o Optimistic messages work best on happy people - Age: Younger people are more persuadable than older people (18 – 25) o Older people may have strong and long-held attitudes - Attention: Distracted more persuadable - Intelligence: lower more persuadable - Self-esteem: moderate most persuadable (vs low [unoptimistic] or high) Elaboration likelihood model Central Route (Systematic) 23 - people elaborate on a persuasive communication when people have both ability and motivation to listen carefully more focused on the source message more effective when it’s personally relevant to us and feel responsibility Peripheral Route (Heuristic) - people do not elaborate on arguments in a persuasive communication - instead swayed by peripheral or surface cues - more focused on the audience - when unable to pay close attention - influenced by attitudes and schemas - fight fire with fire: if your audience is emotionally attached to a topic, you’re not going to fight it with facts – appeal to their emotion Resisting persuasive messages - Attitude Inoculation: making people immune to attempts to change their attitudes by initially exposing them to small doses of the arguments against their position o lay down the seeds and let them grow - Product Placement: advertisers increasingly place messages about their products in shows (incorporate their product into the script) - Know cause: resistance to peer pressure in adolescence o peer pressure operates on values and emotions; liking and acceptance by peer group (not based in logical arguments) o attitude inoculation that focuses on inoculating against emotional appeals by introducing small doses of logic Persuasion (Others’ Influence) Social influence - Yielding to influence: conformity -> compliance -> obedience - Resisting influence: independence -> assertiveness -> defiance Being influences - Conformity (softest): change perceptions, opinions, or behavior in ways that are consistent with social or group norms (with or without explicit pressure from others) - Compliance (semi): following the request of another person, regardless of that person ’s status - Obedience (extreme): compliance that occurs in response to an authority figure or someone who is higher in social power than oneself Conformity - Automatic 24 - Mimicking others: ideomotor action o The chameleon effect: facilitating rapport and social interaction Informational social influence (Sherif – minds approach) - Conformity based on the desire to be accurate o use other people as information o conform because other people are seen as correct or as having more information - Informational social influence more likely when o Situational Ambiguity: Situation is ambiguous or difficult o Others seen as experts: We feel low in knowledge or competence about the topic o Crisis Situations - Private Acceptance o Conforming to other people’s behaviour out of a genuine belief that what they are doing or saying is right o Informational social influence often results in private acceptance! - Public Compliance o Conforming to other people’s behaviour publicly without necessarily believing in what we are doing or saying Normative social influence (hearts approach) - Conformity based on the desire to be liked or socially accepted - Line judgment study: on average 75% conformed to others saying wrong answer - Normative social influence most likely when o Commitment to group o Group size: bigger group = more pressure o Group unanimity: more conformity when group is unanimous (fully agrees) § BUT if they have at least one ally who doesn’t agree, then conformity dramatically decreases o Expertise and status: high status or expert group members have more social influence - Other factors o Gender (binary): women conform more on stereotypically male tasks, while men conform more on more stereotypically female tasks § e.g. women need to show power in STEM o Culture: higher rates of conformity in interdependent cultures § more concerned about fitting into social context o Anonymity: less susceptible to NSI o Explanations for behaviour: conform less when we understand the reasons for others’ behaviours o Asserting beliefs against the majority = seen as less able (often rejected) § but can also be agents of change (dissent: sparks innovation) o Minority influence: dissenters produce change in a group § but don’t play “devil’s advocate” (reinforces majority’s position) o Majority influence: greater influence on factual questions 25 Compliance - Agreeing to the request of another person regardless of that person’ s status - First identify the norm (schema) that is operating the situation - Injunctive norms: perceptions of what behaviours are approved or disapproved of by others (how should they behave) - Descriptive norms: perceptions of how people actually behave in given situations, regardless of judgement by others - Norm of reciprocity dictates that we treat others as they have treated us o leads us to feel obligated to repay others for acts of kindness - Large to small: asking for something big when you’re actually willing to take something smaller o Door-in-the-face: scaling down e.g., “give us $100 a month.” “no” “ok how about $5 a day” “yes” o That's-not-all: begins with inflated request then discounts it e.g., “I’ll throw in a case and screen protector” - Small to large o Foot-in-the-door: start small then ask for bigger request o Lowballing: getting agreement and then revealing hidden costs Obedience - Universally valued social norm - Without obedience there would be chaos - We are socialized to obey (perceived) legitimate authority figures o Internalize social norm of obedience o Obey even if authority figure isn’t present e.g., traffic lights Milgram’s study of Obedience - Participant thought they were administering shocks, but confederate faked reactions - On average, these groups estimated they would quit at 135-volts - Not a single person said they would go to the 450-volt level. - Everyone went up to at least 300 volts (when confederate began pounding on wall) - Results: o Baseline male and females exhibited almost full obedience Modern day adaptation of Milgram - Participants were ordered to cause psychological harm (harass a job applicant taking a test during a job interview) - When the applicant pleaded with the participant to stop: o In control group, no one persisted o In experimental group, 92% exhibited complete obedience despite seeing the task as unfair and distasteful Tutorial: Op Ed II Paragraphs - Tell a story, in first person: make it interesting - Can give examples from non-primary sources e.g. quotes from SM 26 - The end call: make it accessible for your target audience e.g. sign petition online, or go vote in your area Don’t want to hear about the clinical issues of your topic (e.g. increased depression, poor well-being) focus on it being a SOCIAL issue Draft framework 1. Title: stand alone and interesting, related to the lead 2. Hook/lead (1 sentence) a. Lead can leave the reader hanging, and then first paragraph explains what you mean 3. Opinion statement (1-3 sentences): say what the op-ed is actually about 4. Supporting paragraphs: argument or refutation style (don’t mix them together) a. Put together primary sources with integrated anecdotal evidence 5. Counterarguments point 6. Conclusion and call to action a. if you asked a question in the lead, answer it in the conclusion. If you told a story in the lead, can tell another part of it in the conclusion Extra notes - Don’t outline what your paper is going to be about in the intro. Don’t need a topic sentences and concluding statement at the end of each supporting paragraph - Can ask the reader, would you be ok with someone coming into your house and stealing your children away from you if you’re writing to mums? - Only lead and op-ed is included in word count Week 6 Lecture: Identity and Interaction I Groups Identity and interaction - Focus shift to how memberships in (or out of) groups plays a part in our interactions with the world around us (they shift over time) - To discuss identity and Intergroup processes we must better understand: o Personal vs. Social identity o Groups (and group processes) o Social Roles (as members of groups) e.g. son vs manager What is a group? - A set of individuals who have direct interaction with each other over a period of time and share a common fate, identity, or set of goals o as compared to collectives, people engaging in a common activity but having little direct interaction with each other - A set of individuals who joint membership in a social category based on shared attributes (sex, gender, race/ethnicity, religion, etc.) What do groups offer? - Fundamental & Evolutionary advantages: Survival, Safety, Security 27 - Social Support: Connection and the Need to Belong Social Identity: Individual identity (i.e., social comparisons) distinct from others Meaningful Information: about future outcomes; Resolve ambiguity Goal Achievement: Much of what we hope to produce and accomplish can be done only through collective action Establishment of social norms: the values, passive/active, etc. Key features of groups Social Norms - Rules of conduct for members o Norms for behaviour - How tolerant groups are to violations of norms can be, itself, a kind of norm o Example: you cheat on your boyfriend – one group takes you back but another might unfriend you Social Roles - Shared expectations in a group about how particular people are supposed to behave in that group o Expectations for expressing/inhibiting behaviour - Potential costs: If enmeshed in a role, individual identities and personalities can get lost (Stanford Prison Study – Deindividuation) o As personal identity and internal controls are submerged, social identity emerges and conformity to the group increases (more sheep like) o Being a dissenter Cohesiveness - Qualities of a group that bind members together and promote liking between members (i.e. what brings and keeps people together) o Associated with better performance when task requires close cooperation; Associated with poorer performance when good relationships are the aim o Facilitates action e.g. black lives matter movement - The more cohesive a group is, the more its members are likely to: o Stay in the group o Take part in group activities o Try to recruit new like-minded members Ingroups vs Outgroups - Individuals enhance self-esteem by identifying with specific social groups o Self-esteem is enhanced only if the individual sees these groups as superior to other groups - Exaggerate the differences between our ingroups and other outgroups - Help to form and reinforce stereotypes - Ingroup Bias: The tendency to favour members of one’s own group and give them special preference over people who belong to other groups o Heterogeneity: Tend to see members of ingroup as unique, distinct, from one another 28 - Outgroup Homogeneity Effect: Perceive outgroup members as more similar, nondistinct than they are (generalisation) Influence within groups (not tested on this) Social Facilitation – heightened state - Looking at if groups help us or hinder us in achieving our own goals? - Results: presence of others enhances performance on easy tasks, impairs performance on difficult tasks - Presence of others facilitates the dominant response, not necessarily the task itself - Universal—human activities and among other animals, even insects Social Loafing – r