Social Psychology Week 5 - SC - PDF

Week 5: Social Cognition FOUNDATIONS IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY What you should know from last week: Understand how we interpret non-verbal behaviour ◦ Facial Expressions ◦ Physical proximity/contact Understand attribution theory and fundamental attribution error ◦ Theory of Correspondent Inference ◦ Th...

Week 5: Social Cognition FOUNDATIONS IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY What you should know from last week: Understand how we interpret non-verbal behaviour ◦ Facial Expressions ◦ Physical proximity/contact Understand attribution theory and fundamental attribution error ◦ Theory of Correspondent Inference ◦ Theory of Causal Attributions ◦ Weiner’s Attribution Theory What is Social Cognition? What is Cognition? Latin noun cognitio: ‘examination’, ‘learning’, ‘knowledge’ A collection of mental processes such as memory, thinking and reasoning, but not emotions. It is roughly synonymous with “intelligence” What is Social Cognition? “Cognitive “Social cognitions processes & involve thoughts structures that about others and influence & are thoughts about the influenced by self in relationship social behavior” to others.” Norris et al., 2007 Hogg & Vaughan, 2010, “How we interpret, analyze, remember and use info about Study of how we the social world’ process social Baron et al, 2014 information using a combination of logic and intuition How Do We Think? Dual Processing: We Use Both Intuition and Logic Dual processing: ability to process information using intuition and logic Intuition: ability to know something quickly and automatically Logic: ability to use reason, think systematically, and consider evidence Mental lives are constant trade-off between intuition and logic Our Two Thinking Systems Interact: Cognitive load: amount of processing we can handle at one time Cognitive load shifting: smoothly shift back and forth between intuition and logic 6 How Do We Think? Dual Processing: We Use Both Intuition and Logic 7 The Controlled Thinker Rodin’s famous sculpture The Thinker mimics controlled thinking, where people sit down and consider something slowly and deliberately. This is distinct from when we engage in automatic thinking, which is nonconscious, unintentional, involuntary, and effortless. Automatic Thinking Refers to thinking that is nonconscious, unintentional, involuntary, and effortless Helps people size up a new social situation quickly and accurately – Example: Telling the difference between a classroom and a party without thinking about it – Example: sensing when the atmosphere in a crowd is happy or when other start to get annoyed Relates new situations to past experiences Social Brain Hypothesis Brain size three times larger than chimps Social Brain Hypothesis: Brain size increased to manage complex social world Tracking large social groups Navigating social norms Energy Trade-off Hypothesis: Humans have less muscle mass to make up for costliness of larger brain Head size and birth risk – human infants are much more vulnerable as they are born relatively underdeveloped to account for head size Species brain size correlates with social group size Social Brain Hypothesis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9lc-LZ_7dg Social Brain Hypothesis Limited cognitive resources We have finite cognitive resources We can only attend to so much and for so long We can only memorize so much and for so long We can only perceive so much and within limits We live in an extremely complex (social) environment This places severe demands on these resources Demand  Stress  Reduced performance So, we have developed strategies to reduce this load Heuristics Schemas Stereotypes Heuristics Heuristics Simple rules of thumb/mental shortcuts to help make decisions/judgements/calculations ◦ Decrease cognitive load/effort ◦ Allow rapid decision to be made (almost like cognitive shortcuts) ◦ Often useful for when there is a lack of information, or the correct answer is not clear ◦ But not always accurate Cognitive misers (Taylor, 1981) Humans are very “cheap” with their cognitive resources Prioritise use of heuristics for social cognition Heuristics Types of heuristics ◦ Representativeness heuristic ◦ Availability heuristic ◦ Anchoring and adjustment ◦ Status Quo heuristic Representativeness https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEho_4ejkNw Representativeness Representativeness heuristic ◦ “Suppose that you have just met your next-door neighbor for the first time. While chatting with her, you notice that she is dressed conservatively, is neat in her personal habits, has a very large library in her home, and seems to be very gentle and a little shy. Later you realize that she never mentioned what she does for a living. Is she a business manager, a physician, a waitress, an artist, a dancer, or a librarian?” Representativeness ◦The representativeness heuristic proposes that the more an individual resembles a given group, the more likely he/she belongs to that group More common in individualistic cultures (Choi et al., 2003) Similarity to group is more relevant than base rate of occurrence Implications for discrimination https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXH5CD3O7Oc Tom W. Study (Kahneman and Tversky, 1973) Tom W is intelligent, uncreative, neat, dull, introverted and fond of sci-fi Is he more likely to be studying in computer science, humanities and education, law, or medicine? Base rate group were asked to rate how many students would study in each area Similarity group were asked to rate which area Tom W studied in Poor overlap between groups – 95% of people in the Similarity group said Tom W would be more likely to study computer science over humanities, while individuals in the Base group said more people study humanities Tom is 34 years old. He is intelligent but rather unimaginative, and he collects old jazz records. In school, he was strong in mathematics but weak in social sciences and humanities. Which statement is more probable: 1. Tom is an accountant that plays the trumpet for a hobby 2. Tom plays the trumpet professionally, for a living Representativeness Neither statement is more probable in an absolute sense 1% of people are professional trumpet players 20% of people are accountants 5% of people hobby trumpet players Probability of being an account and hobby trumpet player: 1% Description of Tom makes him seem more like an accountant  The Prototype theory (Rosch & Mervis 1975) Our use of the representativeness heuristic is predicted by many theories on concept formation, in particular, prototype theory: ◦ A prototype (central description) is the best example of a category ◦ Can be concrete example (e.g. apple best example of fruit), ◦ or a generalised abstract collection of attributes (e.g. typical fruit should have seeds, skin, be sweet, round etc) In making sense of our world, we often categorise new people or objects by comparing them to stored prototypes ◦ This reduces the amount of information we need to store and process ◦ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC5EulXKLPk Lecture 3 MODELLING COGNITIVE SYSTEMS 24 Question If prototypes exist in the brain what is their physical instantiation? Obviously not pieces of paper Neither are structures shaped like the prototype Computationalism argues that stereotypes are coded in patterns of neurons being fired, supported by neural structures. Similar to how the processor in this computer encodes and decodes images from the computers hard disk. Availability Heuristic Certain information or events more "available" or easily retrievable in our minds.  People tend to judge occurrences as being more frequent if they can remember many such occurrences easily ◦ “If I can remember X Availability happening so many times, it must have happened a lot.” Heuristic ◦ This often is not accurate ◦ Biases in memory encoding and retrieval (some occurrences more memorable than others) ◦ “Many peoples intuition is that murders must result in more deaths than heart disease.” ◦ Also dependent upon vividness & emotional impact Example ◦Are you safer driving a big SUV/jeep or a smaller car? ◦Easier to remember scenes of smaller cars being crushed by larger vehicles (movies etc.) as they are more dramatic ◦Therefore may conclude that SUVs are safer ◦Yet this does not match the data (Gladwell, 2005) Drivers of the availability heuristic News coverage: Child abduction has become less common since the 1990s, but media coverage has focused in on it increasingly since the 1990s. Recency effect: Recent events are fresher in our minds, and therefore more available. Do more people die in wars today than in the past? Proportionally far less, decreasing over time. Are people getting poorer? An average of 138,000 people have escaped extreme poverty every day for the past 25 years (Pinker, 2018)* Self-Judgment and the Availability Heuristic Participants were asked to remember either six or twelve examples of their own past assertive behaviors (Schwarz, Bless, Strack, et al., 1991). ◦People who were asked for six: ◦ Found it easy to think of this many examples ◦ Rated themselves as relatively assertive ◦People who were asked for twelve: ◦ Found it difficult to think of this many examples ◦ Rated themselves as relatively unassertive Availability and Assertiveness People often base their judgments on availability, or how easily they can bring information to mind. (Based on Schwarz, Bless, Strack, et al., 1991) Personality Tests and the Availability Heuristic We tend to perceive personality tests as uncannily accurate, known as the “Barnum effect.” Why does this happen? – Availability heuristic: statements are so vague that everyone can find a past behavior similar to the feedback. Examples of availability heuristic? Steven Pinker: Is the world getting better or worse? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCm9Ng0bbEQ&t Anchoring & Adjustment Heuristic People tend to deal with uncertainty by using something we know as an anchor point and then making adjustments to it. ◦ Example: Starting prices for houses ◦ Starting price gives an anchor to allow for negotiation. ◦ Sellers usually set the starting price higher than the price they would accept ◦ Allows buyers to feel they are getting a good deal at the reduced price Anchoring and Adjustment ◦ Englich, Mussweiler & Strack (2006) ◦ Study of the influence of randomly anchor points for criminal sentences ◦ Judges were influenced and guided by the randomly assigned anchor point provided to them ◦ If anchor was a longer sentence, the judge imposed a longer sentence ◦ Irrespective of the severity of the crime ◦ Irrespective of the proposed source of the anchor (journalist or prosecutor) Anchoring and Adjustment Example of anchoring heuristic Yousaf et al. (2020) highlighted anchoring risk from doctors in relation to COVID-19. Many patients presented with symptoms that could be attributed to COVID-19, but also masked or overshadowed other potentially serious conditions. Status Quo Heuristic Status Quo Heuristic People tend to believe that the status quo (i.e. what is common/regular/universal) is the way things should be ◦ “What is, is Good” ◦ Explains resistance to societal change ◦ Eidelman, Pattershall & Crandall (2010) ◦ Gave two groups the same chocolate to taste ◦ If participants were told it was a well- established, long-running chocolate bar on the market since 1937, they were more likely to say that it tasted good ◦ If told that the chocolate was a new bar launched more recently, they reported it as not tasting as good  Status Quo Heuristic Heuristic mocked in Voltaire’s novel “Candide” Pangloss, who stubbornly maintains that they live in "the best of all possible worlds," despite overwhelming evidence of suffering and injustice. Pangloss’s adherence to this optimistic worldview represents a form of status quo bias, where he refuses to acknowledge that change or alternative perspectives could lead to better outcomes. He clings to the idea that everything is as it should be, despite the tragic events that unfold around him. Voltaire, 1694 – The protagonist, Candide, shifts away from 1778 this perspective and becomes more open to Enlightenment change and adaptation. Thinker Schemas Mental frameworks that help to organise social information and that guide our actions and the processing of information relevant to that context ◦ Guides action, expectations, perception, attention ◦ E.g. attending a gig or a lecture Acquired through experiences ◦ Rules of behaviour, regular occurrences, context-specific factors Schemas Schemas help to interpret our social world ◦ Reducing ambiguity ◦ Averting misunderstanding & Guiding behaviour ◦ Preventing cognitive overload Social Information Processing Schema influence social thought through 3 processes ◦ Attention ◦ What information we notice and focus on ◦ Schemas act as a filter ◦ Direct our attention to consistent information ◦ Encoding ◦ Translation of info to memory ◦ Tend to encode consistent information ◦ However, extremely inconsistent info can also be stored ◦ Retrieval ◦ Recovery of memorised information ◦ More consistent info remembered, but can recall inconsistent info too What “activates” schemas? We develop a large array of schemas through experience ◦ What governs the activation of a specific schema? ◦ Priming ◦ The process by which the possible activation of a schema is heightened due to a contextual cue or previous experience ◦ E.g. fights at MMA screening ◦ Schema for aggressive behaviour was activated due to exposure to violent acts ◦ Results in subsequent actions being guided by this framework/mindset ◦ Unpriming ◦ The process by which the possible activation of a schema is diminished due to a contextual cue or previous experience Priming Classic experiment (Higgins, Rholes, & Jones, 1977). ◦Participants were asked to identify different colors while at the same time memorizing a list of words. ◦Some were given positive words (e.g. adventurous), and some were given negative words (e.g. reckless). ◦Then they read about a man named Donald, whose actions could be interpreted as positive or negative. ◦The words memorized affected their views. Figure 3.2: Priming and Accessibility As the graph shows, those who had memorized the negative words formed a much more negative impression of Donald than did those who had memorized the positive words. Schemas Schemas, when activated, facilitate ◦ Top down processing ◦ Concept driven or theory driven processing ◦ Preconceptions & prior knowledge ◦ Schema – then experience ◦ The inverse is: ◦ Bottom-up processing ◦ Data-driven processing ◦ Impression formed from direct perception of information in environment ◦ Experience – then schema Schema persistence As schemas influence of attention, encoding and retrieval, they essentially distort our conscious experience More attention to consistent Schemas are resistant information & resist or disregard inconsistent information to change If inconsistent information, review past evidence supporting the schema Strong perseverance effect Schemas are well- Remain unchanged in the face of contradictory evidence established and Self-fulfilling resistant to change Influence behaviour in a way that reinforces the schema Schema persistence Loftus and Palmer (1974)  Since schema are selective – they bias our perception Types of biases: Biases Cognitive confirmatory bias See what you expect Illusory correlation Hindsight bias https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=30mvxjcfCGI  Bargh, Chen & Burrows (1996) ◦ Activated schema for rudeness or politeness through priming How ◦ Asked participants to unscramble sentences containing words schemas related to rudeness (bold, rude, impolitely) or politeness (cordially, patiently, courteous) impact ◦ Also control condition perception ◦ After completing task, participants were asked to report to experimenter ◦ When they approached the experimenter, he was engaged in conversation with an accomplice ◦ Experimenter ignores participant ◦ People in the rude condition were more likely to interrupt ◦ People in the polite condition waited politely ◦ Participants primed to activate “elderly” schema took longer to walk down the hallway after completing the experiment  Bargh, Chen & Burrows (1996) ◦ Activated schema for rudeness or politeness through priming How ◦ Asked participants to unscramble sentences containing words schemas related to rudeness (bold, rude, impolitely) or politeness (cordially, patiently, courteous) impact ◦ Also control condition perception ◦ After completing task, participants were asked to report to experimenter ◦ When they approached the experimenter, he was engaged in conversation with an accomplice ◦ Experimenter ignores participant ◦ People in the rude condition were more likely to interrupt ◦ People in the polite condition waited politely ◦ Participants primed to activate “elderly” schema took longer to walk down the hallway after completing the experiment What you should know How to define social cognition How mental structures facilitate social thinking Schemas, scripts, and stereotypes Heuristic including status quo, anchoring, availability, repetitiveness How priming affects schemas