Social Psychology Lecture 2 PDF

Social Perception II: Attitude Change Stereotypes, Prejudice, & Discrimination Lecture 2  Learning Outcomes At the end of this lecture you will be able to: ▪ compare the Theory of Reasoned Action and the Theory of Planned Behaviour as explanations for whe...

Social Perception II: Attitude Change Stereotypes, Prejudice, & Discrimination Lecture 2  Learning Outcomes At the end of this lecture you will be able to: ▪ compare the Theory of Reasoned Action and the Theory of Planned Behaviour as explanations for when attitudes predict behaviours ▪ discuss how cognitive dissonance relates to attitude shifts, and describe explanations for these shifts ▪ explain how models of persuasive communications (such as the Elaboration Likelihood Model) shift recipients’ attitudes and/or behaviours ▪ define the interrelated constructs of stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination ▪ identify origins of stereotypes and causes of prejudice  Outline ▪ Attitude change Do attitudes predict behaviour? o Implicit vs. explicit attitudes o Theory of Reasoned Action & Theory of Planned Behaviour Cognitive dissonance Persuasive communications o Elaboration Likelihood Model ▪ Stereotypes, prejudice, & discrimination Definitions​ Causes  Predicting Behaviour ▪ Implicit attitudes predict: spontaneous, non-verbal behaviour behaviour under time-pressure  Predicting Deliberate Behaviour ▪ Explicit attitudes ▪ Theory of reasoned action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1974) ▪ Theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1989; Ajzen & Fishbein, 2005)  Theory of Reasoned Action Attitudes toward behaviour Subjective Behavioural norms Behaviour intention  Theory of Planned Behaviour Attitudes toward behaviour Subjective Behavioural norms Behaviour intention Perceived behavioural control  Changing Attitudes ▪ Cognitive dissonance: (Festinger, 1957) State of tension one experiences after making a decision, taking an action, or being exposed to information that is contrary to one’s prior beliefs, feelings, values ▪ Incongruent cognitions ▪ Motivated to reduce tension Change behaviour Change opinion Add new consonant cognitions  Cognitive Dissonance Change behaviour Actions inconsistent Experience Change with self dissonance opinion image Add new cognitions  Take part in boring task Asked to tell next participant task was exciting Paid $1 Paid $20 How interesting did you think the task was? Cognitive Dissonance cont’d. Participant ratings Control $1 $20 How interesting? Scientific importance *Festinger & Carlsmith (1959) Cognitive Dissonance cont’d. *Festinger & Carlsmith (1959) Cognitive Dissonance cont’d. *Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)  Cognitive Dissonance? ▪ Cognitive dissonance studies show that attitudes shift to be consistent with expressed opinions ▪ Two explanations for attitude shift: 1. Motivational Reduce tension of holding two opposing beliefs (dissonance reduction) 2. Purely cognitive Observe own behaviour (self-perception theory)  Cultural Differences ▪ If inconsistencies in behaviour reflect: Traits o Peoplefrom Western cultures should be threatened and motivated to reduce dissonance Situations o Peoplefrom Eastern cultures should not be threatened and not motivated to reduce dissonance  Changing Attitudes cont’d. ▪ Cognitive dissonance ▪ Persuasive communications: Deliberate efforts to change attitudes Communicated messages advocating a particular side of an issue, with the intention to change attitudes or behaviours of the recipients  Elaboration Likelihood Model Communication Central route Peripheral route Compelling Yes Motivated No Peripheral arguments? and able to cues? process? Yes Yes Strong, Weak, lasting temporary change change  ELM cont’d. ▪ Petty & Cacioppo (1981); Petty et al. (2005) ▪ Central route Think carefully about message Pay attention to quality of arguments ▪ Peripheral route Think superficially Emotional appeals  Emotion and Attitude Change ▪ Emotion-arousing communications With or without other information ▪ Emotion as heuristic Misattribution of emotion  Definitions ▪ Stereotypes: Characteristics ascribed to a group Beliefs about a group ▪ Prejudice: Positive or negative evaluation of a group Includes an affective component ▪ Discrimination: Unjustified negative or harmful treatment and behaviour toward a group  Tripartite Model of Prejudice ▪ Three parts of prejudice Prejudice Affective Behavioural Discrimination Target Attitude of prejudice object Stereotypes Cognitive  Origins of Stereotypes ▪ Social categorisation Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) Categorise people into “us” and “them” groups We are lazy (“cognitive misers”) ▪ Sociocultural learning Stereotypes are transmitted through culture and society Knowledge of stereotypes is acquired at a young age  Causes of Prejudice ▪ Social categorisation Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) Categorise people into “us” and “them” groups We are lazy (“cognitive misers”) Overestimate differences between groups ▪ Sociocultural learning Associated with group norms ▪ Competition Competition over scarce resources leads to intergroup hostility and conflict  Causes of Prejudice cont’d. ▪ In-group bias See own group as superior, more desirable o Even in minimal-groups paradigm ▪ Out-group homogeneity Perceived similarities among out-group members o “They all look the same to me” o “They are all alike”  Subtle Forms of Prejudice ▪ Subtle racism “Modern” racism o Acting unprejudiced but maintaining a prejudiced attitude ▪ Benevolent sexism Stereotypical but “positive” views of women o e.g., "Women are weak, and need to be protected"  Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination ▪ Contact hypothesis: Prejudice is based on ignorance Contact with other groups will help to inform groups o This will reduce prejudice  Next lecture Social Influence I