Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
74 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What is the main evidence that the need for relationships have an evolutionary basis? If the need to belong is truly a need, it should be _______; what evidence of this is there? |
Universal features (caregiving between all mothers and children/flirting between all young people/affection between all romantic partners/etc) Satiable Just like drinking/eating satiates thirst hunger; people satiate need to belong with ~6 close relationships with friends |
|
|
What evidence was given by Harlow for the need to belong? What evidence is there for need to belong in people? |
Monkey experiment where monkeys preferred fake mothers who gave comfort > one who gave who food Married people fair better in numerous ways compared to unmarried people |
|
|
What are the two types of fundamentally different relationships that come up in different contexts and are governed by different norms? |
Communal relationship - People feel a responsibility for one another and give/receive according to the need (long term) Exchange relationship - People feel little responsibility for one another and giving/receiving are decided by concerns about equity and reciprocity (short term) |
|
|
What is social exchange theory based on? What three things are people's standards that influence their evaluation of the rewards and costs in their relationships based on? |
The idea how people feel about a relationships depends on their assessment of its costs and benefits Comparison level - What people think they deserve/expect from a relationship Comparison level for alternatives - Thoughts of what one could get out of a different relationship Equity theory - people are motivated to pursue fairness (benefits to both people) in relationships |
|
|
What is the basic idea in attachment theory? What are the three attachment styles? What are the two dimensions? Low on both = ? |
Early attachments with parents/caregivers shape relationships for a person's whole life Secure Avoidant - low trust Anxious-ambivalent - worried people aren't close enough (partner doesn't love me) Anxiety (fear of rejection/abandonment); avoidance (comfortability with intimacy) |
|
|
Do people use the same attachment style in all relationships? Do the styles they use with certain people stay stable? |
No, use different ones with different people No, they change sometimes too |
|
|
How does proximity affect relationships? Why does proximity lead to more liking? Why does the mere exposure effect work? |
Closer functional distance (layout of building to encourage/discourage contact between people) = closer relationship Mere exposure effect - repeated exposure = liking stimulus more Easier to perceive/cognitively process the stimuli Classical conditioning |
|
|
What are three pieces of evidence that similarity leads to more attraction? Is the theory of complementarity (opposites attract) true? |
Engaged couples have high similarity in core personality characteristics More similar 'strangers' are in questionnaire = more attraction No; only holds true when those features go together (dependent/nurturing), not when they don't go together (hard worker/lazy) |
|
|
Why is physical attractiveness a powerful determinant of interpersonal attractiveness? Four caveats? |
Immediate/gut reaction/easy to see Unattractive people report others calling them attractive; vice versa People find those they like more attractive Happy couples perceive each other as attractive Physical attractiveness isn't stable |
|
|
What are other benefits attractive people get? What is the halo effect? Is it accurate? |
Essays graded better; men aid injured females more; $2,000 more in salary for 1 point more (out of five points) on a scale; jurors give breaks to attractive defendants Belief that attractive people have positive qualities beyond their physical appearance Sort of, gives a self-fulfilling prophecy |
|
|
Is attractiveness more important for men or women? Does everyone rate someone the same? What do people find attractive? |
Women Sort of, Asians/blacks/whites share the same opinions of Asian/black/white faces they find attractive; babies like more attractive faces Reproductive fitness - made up of: Averageness of the face (except for unique things like coloured eyes) Bilateral symmetry |
|
|
What is the evolutionary reason why women are more invested in offspring? What does this cause What does this cause men to do? |
Invest more into it Causes women to be more selective in choosing a mate Have more intrasex competition for intersex attraction |
|
|
What do men look for in choosing a mate? What do women look for in choosing a mate? What evidence is this perspective given for females is not accurate? |
Youth - smooth skin/lustrous hair/full lips/waist much narrower than hips Material resources or characteristics associated with acquiring them (strength/industriousness/social status) in order to help while the women is pregnant/raising child Societies w/gender equality show less of those ^ trends due to less power differences |
|
|
What evidence is there against the evolutionary perspective given for females? What's the strongest evidence for the evolutionary perspective? |
Societies w/gender equality show less of those ^ trends due to less power differences During ovulation, females like: smell of men's shirts who had more facial bilateral symmetry, men with more masculine qualities (jawline/lower voice/confidence/assertiveness/competitive tactics of self-presentation) |
|
|
What are the three types of love? |
Companionate = family/friends - trust/share activities and interests/like to be around Compassionate = mother/child - communal relationship/responding to needs Romantic = passionate love |
|
|
What is an aspect of romantic love that was found in a speed-dating study? The increasing amount of time romantic partners spend together prompts what second element to the relationship? This causes what? |
When someone loves just one person, feelings are reciprocated; not reciprocated when they love multiple people Intimacy - partners include each other's perspectives/experiences/characteristics more into their own self concept |
|
|
What are the four ways the investment model of commitment explain why some romantic partners remain committed, and others don't? What are the two ways commitment promote relationship longevity? |
Says there are three determinants to making partners more committed to each other: Relationship satisfaction (cost:rewards) Few alternative partner Investments in the relationship (+ correlated) Encourages good behaviours (ex. forgiveness) and self-sacrifice (moving for other partner) |
|
|
What are three predictors of dissatisfaction and divorce? Explain "the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse" How accurate is this 15-minute conversation? How does construal affect relationships? |
Neuroticism; low SES; young people (bad at long-term commitment, bad at choosing right person) Four most harmful behaviours to relationships: Criticism; defensiveness; stonewalling; contempt 93% accuracy in predicting who would get divorced 14 years later |
|
|
How does construal affect relationships? What are three ways healthy relationships strengthen their bond? |
Good relationships see good things as stable/global/unspecific; and negative things as unstable/specific Capitalizing on the good events in their lives Being playful Looking on the bright side by seeing positive attributes |
|
|
What are the three general perspectives on why stereotypes/prejudice/discrimination occur? |
Economic perspective - competing interests setting groups apart from one another Motivational perspective - psychological needs leading to intergroup conflict Cognitive perspective - cognitive processes that automatically categorize items |
|
|
What's the definition of stereotype? What does prejudice refer to? What is discrimination? |
Belief certain attributes are characteristic of members of a particular group A negative attitude/affective response toward a group and its individual members Unfair behaviour towards people, based on their membership in a certain group |
|
|
What is modern racism? What is benevolent racism/sexism Is it good or bad, explain? |
Prejudice (attitude) directed at racial groups that exists alongside the rejection of explicitly racist beliefs Being racist/sexist/etc through positive stereotyping Bad --> resistant to change as the stereotype holder sees it as positive; stereotype holder only acts positively if the person fits their idealized image |
|
|
What's the purpose of the implicit association test (IAT)? How does it work? What's another implicit measure? |
Reveals nonconscious attitudes toward different stimuli (particularly groups of people) Comparing reaction times when outgroup pictures and positive items are in the same response category vs outgroup pictures and negative items Priming with a member of a group right before the participants must identify different words - speed response times to negative words, delayed response times to positive words reveal negative prejudice |
|
|
One version of the economic perspective has been called realistic group conflict theory? What is this? Realistic group conflict theory says _____________ and conflict/prejudice/discrimination develops because of group conflict How do superordinate goals affect groups? |
Theory that group conflict/prejudice/discrimination are likely to arise over competition between groups for limited resources Ethnocentrism - other group vilified, own group glorified Causes them to work together despite not liking one another |
|
|
What two things did the Robbers Cave experiment show?
|
Two friendly group of boys could become enemies when placed in groups competing for limited resources Superordinate goals can evaporate hostility |
|
|
What's the minimal group paradigm? What are the results? |
Experimental paradigm where researchers make groups based on random criteria then see how the members of these 'minimal groups' are inclined to behave toward each other People try and maximize the relative gain for members of their ingroup than maximize absolute gain for everyone |
|
|
What theory explains ingroup favoritism even when the outgroup is nearly identical? What three things are done in conjunction with social identity theory? |
Social identity theory - person's self-concept/self-esteem comes from not only personal identity and accomplishments, but also status and accomplishments of the various groups they belong to Boosting status of ingroup to feel better about it and thus ourselves; basking in reflected glory (taking pride in accomplishments of ingroup; ie. sports); denigrating outgroups bolsters self esteem |
|
|
What evidence is there for the cognitive perspective of stereotyping being to conserve energy/simplify things? What else can cognitive stereotyping help with? |
People stereotype more when they're tired Can give more energy to other tasks simultaneously if one is stereotypical |
|
|
How do stereotypes without any validity manage to strengthen? What evidence is there of accentuation of ingroup similarity and outgroup difference? |
Hear invalid stereotype, construe information about someone in a way that confirms it, then strengthened via confirmation by biased observations People in 'minimal groups' assume their beliefs are more in line with theirs than outgroup ppl |
|
|
What is the outgroup homogeneity effect? What are two reasons this effect occurs? |
Assuming within-group similarity is much stronger for outgroups than for ingroups 1 - Less contact with outgroups than ingroup 2 - Interactions with outgroup are treated differently where their unique characteristics fall to background |
|
|
What is the illusory correlation? How does this work in social psyc? What is paired distinctiveness? What's the critique? |
Seeing events, characteristics, categories are related when they're not Negative behaviours by minorities remembered easily cause they're both uncommon Pairing of two distinct events stand out even more cause they occur together People don't link ANY two distinct things (ex. left handedness and vegetarianism) |
|
|
How do expectations affect the outgroup homogeneity effect? What did the basketball example demonstrate? |
Behaviour consistent w/stereotype attributed to disposition of group members, vs behaviour inconsistent w/stereotype attributed to situation = leads to more stereotyping People don't evaluate information even-handedly, and instead information consistent with a stereotype has more impact than information inconsistent with it |
|
|
What was shown in the interview example where black and white people were interviewed and evaluated? What is subtyping? How does concrete vs abstract construal affect how we process information? |
Self-fulfilling prophecy Explaining exceptions to a stereotype by making a subcategory of that group Low abstraction for ingroup, high for outgroup on negative things (my guy littered, yours is a litterbug); opposite for positive things |
|
|
How did Devine show that we stereotype automatically? What was found in relation to explicit and implicit behaviour, and controlled and automatic behaviour? |
Showed words for too brief a time to recognize, which automatically primed people to stereotype Explicit measures of prejudice can predict controlled behaviour (verbally not acting racist), but implicit measures can better predict automatic behaviour (body language) |
|
|
What's the main critique of the cognitive perspective? |
The effects are usually short lived. For ex. we may think of someone primarily as black/priest/Texan until they tell their vegetarian/libertarian/etc. |
|
|
What are the three effects/burdens of knowing one is in a group that is prejudiced against? |
Attributional ambiguity - don't know whether to attribute positive feedback to skill or to condescension; not knowing whether to attribute negative feedback to errors/others' prejudice Stereotype threat - Fear of confirming stereotypes others have of their group Psychological costs of concealing identity |
|
|
What are the two ways stereotype threat undermines performance? |
Leads to higher arousal which can interfere with performance on complex tasks and distract people performing the task Knowing one's group is 'suspect' in the eyes of others elicits negative thinking. Leads people to focus on avoiding failure, instead of achieving success |
|
|
Why are African-Americans most at risk for damage under the stereotype threat? What can this lead to? |
Results in poorer academic performance, which undermines confidence, which makes the person more susceptible to stereotype threat Disidentification from academic pursuits --> leaving academics totally |
|
|
What are the two ways concealment of sexual identity can negatively affect people? |
Physical toll (HIV progresses faster/cardiovascualr stress); cognitive toll (mentally taxing and draws away from being able to do other things) |
|
|
If two groups are to be brought together in order to become more harmonious, what four things must be met? |
1 - Groups must feel they have equal status 2 - Superordinate goal to promote common ingroup identity 3 - Community social norms must support intergroup contact 4 - Contact should encourage 1-1 interactions between members of different groups |
|
|
What's the definition of a group? What is the original definition of social facilitation? Now? |
Collection of individuals who have relations to one another that make them interdependent to some significant degree
Better performance in the presence of others Effect (+/-) of other's presence on performance |
|
|
What are two pieces of evidence for the original definition of social facilitation as founded by Triplett?
What evidence is there against the original definition of social facilitation? |
Same effects found when the others weren't doing the same thing, but instead just watching Same effects was also found in other animals (dogs eating faster in presence of one another) Doing worse on arithmetic problems/memory tasks/maze learning Animals doing worse Worse at refuting philosophical arguments |
|
|
What was Zajonc's theory on all the divergent findings on social facilitation? What were the three components of Zajonc's theory? |
Social facilitation helps performance on simple/well-learned tasks; hinders it on difficult/novel tasks 1 - Mere presence of others increases arousal (other people are dynamic/unpredictable = must be alert) 2 - Arousal = dominant response 3 - Dominant response = good for simple/well-learned tasks, bad for difficult/novel tasks |
|
|
How did Zajonc prove his theory? What were the results? What did the light serve as? |
Had cockroaches run either a simple maze or a complex maze, and either with or without another cockroach, with light shone on them The presence of another cockroach improved performance on the simple maze, but worsened it on the complex maze Dominant response to run away from it |
|
|
What happened when Zajonc's test included an observer cockroach? How did Zajonc's theory work on pool players? |
Facilitated performance on simple maze but inhibited performance on complex maze Good players performed better when observed, poor players did even worse as those are their dominant responses |
|
|
What is an argument against Zajonc's theory? What evidence is there for this? |
It is evaluation apprehension (concern about their appearance/evaluation from others) and not just observation Performing alone = not much dominance response Performing w/evaluative audience = more dominant responses than performing alone Performing w/ blindfolded audience = no dominant response. |
|
|
What is an argument against Zajonc's experiment itself? What was Markus' solution? What were the results? What was the implication of Markus' experiment? |
Not truly testing someone 'alone' Had people 'wait for other participants' and get changed while they do that - in reality this was the part being tested Presence condition (even if other person is turned away, stronger effect when person attentively watched) = faster changing own clothes; slower changing into lab clothes Further supported Zajonc that it's just mere presence |
|
|
Some social psychologists are it isn't the mere presence of another person that gives off effects, but something that always accompanies the awareness of the mere presence of another. What is this theory called and what does it allude to? What is social loafing? |
Distraction-conflict theory - Being aware of another person's presence creates conflict between paying attention to the person and paying attention to the task; this attentional conflict is arousing and produces social facilitation effects Putting in less effort in a group task because nobody can monitor the individual efforts |
|
|
Why are group decisions usually no better than those made by individuals? What is groupthink? How does a strong leader enable groupthink, what's the issue with this? What two things can cause self-censorship of ideas/opinions in a group? |
Arriving at the best decision may be important for the group, but not for the individual people Critical scrutiny that should be devoted to the issues at hand is subverted by social pressures to reach a consensus Groups ignore/reject alternative views, which is the whole point of group decision making Strong leaders, drive to find consensus |
|
|
What are three ways groupthink can be prevented?
Despite Japanese cultures being more driven toward harmony, they avoid groupthink -- how? |
Leader avoids making their preferences known Having new people enter the group to give fresh eyes/stop rash actions Have a person in the group who is the devil's advocate People have individual encounters before the actual meeting, thus the actual meeting just serves as a rubber stamp of approval |
|
|
What is risky shift? How do we know this wasn't just the group trying to look bold/courageous? What is group polarization? |
The tendency for groups to make riskier decisions that individuals would Participants asked to make individual decisions were influenced by their group decision Tendency for group decisions to be more extreme than those made by individuals; whatever way the group as a whole is leaning, group discussion makes it lean further |
|
|
What are two reasons why group polarization occurs? |
Persuasive arguments - expose average members to new arguments by other group members --> arguments are in favor of the position the average person was already inclined to take --> group polarization Social comparison - people choose the option that is more farther out on the correct side (yea go get a new job!, don't risk your savings!) = everyone does this = everyone polarizes more |
|
|
Why do groups on average behave more risky than conservative? Why would people value risk taking? |
Value risk taking Capitalistic society? Biological make up (ancestors were all risky to come here)? Maybe, as US participants are riskier than others |
|
|
What are three characteristics that lead someone to become a leader? Leaders eventually develop power, what is power? |
Expertise (knowledge and skill), social skills (function smoother), rewards (generosity) all lead to leadership as they benefit the group Ability to control one's own, and others', outcomes; freedom to act |
|
|
Power is associated with what three kinds of social rank? |
1 - Status - result of evaluation of attributes that make differences in respect/prominence (w/out status = dictator/corrupt politician) 2 - Authority - power from institutionalized roles (w/out authority = informal social group) 3 - Dominance - behaviour with the goal of acquiring/demonstrating power (w/out dominance = leadership via goodwill) |
|
|
What does the approach/inhibition theory say about high-power individuals? |
They're more likely to go after goals and make quick judgments, whereas low-power people constrain behaviour and pay attention to people |
|
|
What is a core element of the approach/inhibition theory of power? Why do high power people act this way (first one) |
High power people are less careful and systematic in their assessment of others (stereotyping; males being less accurate than females in judging expressive behaviour) leading to less empathy and acknowledging other's views Vigilant/narrow focus associated with reduced power diminishes a person's ability to think flexibly and creatively |
|
|
What is another core element of the approach/inhibition theory of power? What's are examples of how high power people can be less constrained/more inappropriate? High power is associated with overly directive/impulsive/aggressive/unethical behaviour as well as being more critical of others for the same behaviour. BUT! What is a positive of power? |
High power people are less constrained and more inappropriate -- opposite of low power people who inhibit speech/clam up/withdraw during group interaction More antisocial behaviour/being impolite/hate crimes/rape Power disinhibits (good people act better, bad people act worse) |
|
|
What is deindividuation? How does Zimbardo explain crowd-induced impulsive behaviour (that feels liberating due to a usually very controlled life) from deindividuation? |
Less sense of individual identity and lower self-regulation when in a large group Deindividuization = less self-observation, self-evaluation, less concern of how others evaluate us => less aware of self, more focused on others and immediate environment = more responsive to behavioural cues - deindividuiazed state = lower threshold for actions that would usually be inhibited |
|
|
What are three pieces of evidence for Zimbardo's explanation? |
Suicide baiting - high anonymity in large groups at night Warfare - masks/war paint leads to higher aggressiveness Halloween mayhem - anonymous kids behaved worse than non-anonymous (regardless of in groups or not) |
|
|
What is individuation? What does self-awareness theory say about people? |
Enhanced feeling of individual identity, comes from focusing attention on the self, which generally makes people more careful/deliberate/act according to their sense of propriety and values When people focus their attention inward, they become concerned with self-evaluation and how their current behaviour conforms to their internal standards and values |
|
|
Evidence that people are prone to high levels of self-consciousness comes from research on the spotlight effect, what is this? |
People thinking other people are paying attention to them (their appearance/behaviour) more than they really are |
|
|
What is altruism? What are three reasons Batson says people demonstrate altruistic behaviour? |
Unselfish behaviour that benefits others without regard to consequences for oneself 1 - Social reward (praise/attention/etc) 2 - Personal distress (reduces own distress) 3 - Empathic concern (identifying w/someone in need and helping them) |
|
|
How do physiological effects affect empathic concern? What is volunteerism? |
People's eyebrows pull in and up, concerned gaze, and lowered HR = more likely to help (opposite response = less likely to help) Helping someone regularly without expectation of compensation (empathic concern can lead to it) |
|
|
Why does the bystander effect occur? How can it be reduced/what can make people help more? People are most likely to help when harm to the victim is clear, and the need is unambiguous, but what's the most powerful determinant in helping? |
Diffusion of responsibility - assuming others who are present will help Friends being present/primed Whether it may be costly to help ( = less likely) |
|
|
What two things affect helping in ambiguous circumstances? How can pluralistic ignorance be reduced? What are the two best ways of improving chances of receiving help? |
Seeing the entire situation unfold = ^ helping Pluralistic ignorance when seeing noone else responding to the situation Seeing others' initial, unguarded reactions to interpret the incident as a true emergency Make the need for help very clear Select a specific person to help |
|
|
Are people more likely to be altruistic in rural communities or urban? If someone is raised in a rural setting but is in an urban setting now, are they more likely to help? |
Rural (differences in 5,000 intervals up to 50,000 where it stays same) Nope |
|
|
What are four explanations why people help less in urban settings? |
1 - Stimulus overload --> too many inputs = shut down a bit & less likely to be altruistic 2 - Diversity hypothesis --> people are less likely to be like you in urban setting, so you help less 3 - More people nearby --> diffusion of responsibility 4 - People's actions are more likely to be seen by people who know them in rural setting |
|
|
Do rich people or poor people give more to charity, why? Why don't upper class people give as much? Can upper class people be more empathetic/prosocial? |
Poor give more % of their income -- their scarcity of resources = ^empathetic, and build stronger relationships to adapt to more unpredictable/taxing/threatening environments Have more abundant resources/opportunities, making them more independent Yes, when made to feel compassionate, they respond similarly to lower-class people |
|
|
What did Ara's experiment show in relation to giving? What are the effects of objects/drawings that may appear to look like faces watching people? |
Priming religious or secular treatments of ethics lead to much more giving Give more |
|
|
What are two evolutionary explanations for altruism? |
Kin selection - behaviours that increase chances of survival for genetic relatives in order of relation (siblings > cousins > relatives) Reciprocal altruism - helping others with the expectation they'll return it in the future |
|
|
What is the prisoner's dilemma? |
Situation involving payoffs to 2 people, who decide whether to cooperate or defect. In the end, trust and cooperation lead to higher joint payoffs than mistrust and defection |
|
|
What is reputation? Two types? What's the main way we find out about someone's reputation? What does this result in at a group level? |
Collective beliefs/evaluations/impressions people hold about someone in a social network Cooperators; defectors Gossiping More cooperation at a group level compared to groups that do not gossip, as gossip forces people to act properly |
|
|
What is the tit-for-tat strategy? What are five reasons it works? |
Strategy in prisoner's dilemma where the player's first move is cooperative; then the player mimics the other person (either cooperative/competitive) 1 - Cooperative - encourages mutually supportive action toward a common goal 2 - Not envious - don't need to use competitive behaviour 3 - Not exploitable - isn't blindly prosocial; if you defect, it defects right back 4 - Forgiving - it will cooperate at the first cooperative action, even if previous were not 5 - Easy to read - easy for others to see |
