Reading...
Play button
Play button
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;
39 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
- 3rd side (hint)
|
Milgram experiment
|
-People led to believe they were administering increasing amounts of shock to subjects
|
Importance of context - normal people acted in 'monstrous' ways due to influence of authority etc.
|
|
|
Latane/Darley experiment
|
Mimicked famous murder - people led to think there was attack on someone, either with others present or alone
|
Importance of context - figure (subject) is constant while ground (alone or in group) determines behavior
-also diffusion of responsibility |
|
|
Asch line test
|
People have to judge which line is longer as group, w/ confedierates indicating shorter line is longer
|
importance of context- people doubted themselves before the group
|
|
|
Child custody experiment
|
Two descriptions of parents: one neutral, one enriched (more detailed + and -)
Question presented as who will lose custody of child or who will keep custody of child |
importance of framing effects
enriched parent chosen in both cases - positive traits attended to when framed as keeping child, negative traits attended to when framed as losing child |
|
|
Doctors priority experiment
|
Two patients with different traits, 400 doctors rate priority for operation
Condition 1: Patients A and B Condition 2: Patient A, B and C (C is virtually identical to B) |
Importance: seemingly useless information can change meaning
Condition 1: A gets 38% Condition 2: A gets 58% (out of all 3) |
|
|
Sherif: Autokinetic effect experiment
|
Autokinetic effect: illusion that light moves in dark room
Group settles on distance moved and is gradually replaced |
Importance: subjectivity in perception
Group settles on distance despite no motion at all (it is an illusion), even when replaced |
|
|
New look studies (2)
|
1: Line drawing, told what it was, draw later
2. Memorize size of discs w/ +,-,0 and reproduce later |
Importance: subjectivity in perception
1. People draw what they were told lines represented 2. + and - discs thought to be larger than 0 |
|
|
Princeton-Dartmouth football study
|
Footage of violent Princeton-Dartmouth football game shown to P and D students, count transgressions/ team
|
Importance: evaluate information with values and judgments, participants actually saw different games
|
|
|
Quote study
|
List of quotes, some identical, attributed to different authors (ex revolution quote, Lenin or Jefferson)
|
IImportance: halo effect
Ratings of identical quotes dependent on author |
|
|
Warm/Cold experiment
|
List of neutral traits including either warm or cold
|
Importance: central vs.peripheral traits, warm/cold is central, affects peripheral
single word changed person percieved |
|
|
Hinkley and Andersen
|
-Subjects listed +/- significant others and described them
-Led to believe person in next room had characteristics of + or - S.O -Asked to describe self |
Self descriptions shifted towards S.O. that was primed (+ or -)
|
|
|
Aron et al - Inclusion of others in self
|
-Series of venn diagrams of overlap, which represents your relationship
-me/not me IAT |
Reaction times slower if self and partner do not share the trait
Importance: when thinking of self, we also consider close others. Discrepancy causes slowing down |
|
|
Photocopier study
|
Subjects told to make copies, interrupted by confederate
Condition: 5 or 20 copies? Condition: "because I'm in a rush" vs. "because I have to make copies" (copies) |
- Little difference in who allowed w/ five copies
- Significant difference w/ 20 copies Significance: Mindlessness -automatic process at 5, accepts placebic response -controlled processing at 20, notices placebic response |
|
|
Greenwald et. al subliminal tapes
|
-Subjects listened to tapes on one of two subjects, some were mislabeled
-measure difference in ability and self confidence |
- no difference in ability, either way
- difference in self confidence according to labelled cause |
|
|
Nisbett & Watson stocking study
|
-4 identical stockings, pick which one is the best
|
One on right chosen dispropotionately, litany of reasons given
Significance: who knows what actually goes on in their own mind? |
|
|
Cohen videotape study
|
-Subjects shown tape of woman eating dinner
-told either librarian or waitress -what do they attend to? |
Subjects attended to things relevant to the supposed job
significance: processing information according to schemas |
|
|
Lewicki rude experimenter study
|
-Subjects interact with rude experimenter
-have to hand in paper to one of two receptionists, one resembles rude experimenter in hairstyle/dress etc. -Which one do they choose? |
-20% chose one looking like rude experimenter
significance: one exemplar can shift a category perception |
|
|
Gabrielcik/Fazio letter frequency
|
"Do more words contain T or S?"
half of subjects subliminally primed w/ T words |
primed subjects responded with T more
sig: availability heuristic |
|
|
Bornstein & D'Agostino agreeing with confederates
|
-interaction with two confederates in discussion, who do you agree with more?
-Half primed with face of one confederate |
primed subjects agreed with that confederate more
sig: mere exposure and fluency |
|
|
Carroll's election study
|
Imagine one of three candidates winning or not asked to imagine anything
Who will win the election? |
subjects significantly more likely to select candidate imagined
sig: fluency |
|
|
Bargh and Pratto chronic dimensions
|
-assessed chronic dimensions
-stroop test w/ words as chronic dimensions |
strong interference in stroop test w/ chronic dimension words
|
|
|
Rosenberg Likeability
|
self esteem correlates w/ likability, but only for those with likability as an important dimension
|
BONUS
|
|
|
Crocker self worth
|
-take survey every time they get a letter from grad school
-high vs. low academic contingency |
high contingency took bigger hit w/ rejection
|
|
|
McFarland/Ross social accuracy study
|
-subjects take social IQ test, given high or low feedback arbitrarily
- attribute performance to test being invalid or being dumb |
external attribution, lower hit on self esteem
|
|
|
Baldwin/Holmes self-evaluative procedures study
|
-subjects given tough task and fail
-mean/old invigilator vs. young/kind invigilator -how do they attribute failure? |
-mean guy: behavioral
-nice guy: situational sig: social construction of self-evaluation procedures |
|
|
Simpson attachment style/stress study
|
-subjects are couples, told they will take part in stressful activity
-secure/avoidant/ambivalent subjects |
-secure: more scared, more comfort sought
-avoidant: more scared, less comfort sought -ambivalent: unclear results |
|
|
Mikulincer's Lexical attachment
|
lexical decision task w/ intimacy. security, control
think of partner betraying trust + LD with talk, worry, escape |
secure: faster on intimacy, talk
anxious: faster on security, worry avoidant: faster on control. escape |
|
|
Interpreting non verbal cues study
|
-Subjects shown rehearsed and spontaneous narratives with actors, tell which is which
- Conditions: just audio, just video, audio + video |
Both = 80% > audio = video
sig: nonsemantic information of body language is more natural (searching for words etc.) |
|
|
Libet causality study
|
-measure brain response and movement of finger
|
response happened after finger
sig: does action cause feeling of intentionality? |
|
|
Moskowitz preconscious effects
|
-ask about time they were unfair (trigger egalitarianism)
-detect vertical moving words, horizontal moving words are related to egalitarianism |
slower to detect words when egalitarian horizontal words are there
sig: spontaneous goals in totally unrelated context |
|
|
Simpson clustering study
|
Info about Dave, Tom and John
- information presented in relation to person, or in relation to categories such as hometown, hobbies etc. -test recall |
recall much better around clusters
sig: descriptor categories > persons for recall. Clustering allows us to predict how people will act, more relevant |
|
|
Carlston John study
|
-read behaviors about John, implying two clear traits
-after 1 week, recall inferences and behaviors |
-very accurate at recalling inferences + confident
-relevant behaviors remembered as well sig: organization of a person node |
|
|
Lawyer/Engineer study
|
-given a sample, told 70% engineers and 30% lawyers
-How likely is this person a lawyer? with description or without |
*w/o description: reflected base rate
*w/ description: based on information (neutral) ignored base rate sig: representativeness heuristic |
|
|
suggestibility test study
|
-subjects tested for being schematic on independence
-given bogus high result on suggestibility test |
-high schematic for independence denied accuracy of test
-low schematic thought it was accurate |
|
|
Winter/Uleman STI sentences
|
-Developed sentences that implied traits
-Used those traits as cues -If they worked, STI was made -What about cognitive load? |
|
|
|
Carlston and Skoworski photos and traits
|
-memorize photos with trait implying or neutral sentence
-Which are remembered better? |
|
|
|
Chen and Bargh lever study
|
-LDT with positive and negative words, lever
-Move away in one part, move towards in another -Faster to push away for negative, pull towards for negative |
|
|
|
Forster prime lever study
|
-primed w/ either promotion or prevention focus
-do task by pushing or pulling lever -measure level of force, higher for prevention/pushing and promotion/pulling |
|
|
|
Donald study
|
-repeat words/colors after delay, either reckless or adventurous
-ambiguous passage, what is it described as? -assimilation |
|
