Psych 2210 Final Part One

Front 1

Group

Back 1

Two or more people who interact and are interdependent in the sense that their needs and goals cause them to influence each other.
Important source of information:
• Help us resolve ambiguity in the social world
– Important aspect of identity:
• Help us define who we are
• Help us feel distinct from other groups
– Establishment of social norms

Front 2

***-for-tat strategy

Back 2

A means for encouraging cooperation by at first acting cooperative but then always responding the way your opponent did (cooperatively or competitively) on the previous trial

Front 3

Integrative solution

Back 3

A solution to conflict whereby parties make trade-offs on issues according to their different interests; each side concedes the most on issues that are unimportant to it but important to the other side.

Front 4

Negotiation

Back 4

A form of communication between opposing sides in a conflict in which offers and counteroffers are made and a solution occurs only when both parties agree.

Front 5

Social dilemma

Back 5

A conflict in which the most beneficial action for an individual will, if chosen by most people, have harmful effects on everyone

Front 6

Relationship-oriented leader

Back 6

A leader who is concerned primarily with workers’ feelings and relationships

are most
effective
– Moderate-control work situations
• Fairly smooth
• But some attention to poor relationships and
hurt feelings is needed

Front 7

Task-oriented leader

Back 7

A leader concerned more with getting the job done than with workers’ feelings and relationships

most effective
– High-control work situations
• Leader-subordinate relationships are
excellent
• The work is structured and well-defined
– Low-control work situations
• Leader-subordinate relationships are poor
• The work needing to be done is not clearly
defined

Front 8

Contingency theory of leadership

Back 8

The idea that leadership effectiveness depends both on how task-oriented or relationship-oriented the leader is and on the amount of control and influence the leader has over the group.

Front 9

Social roles

Back 9

Shared expectations in a group about how particular people are supposed to behave

If enmeshed in a role, individual identities and personalities can get lost.

Front 10

Zimbardo

Back 10

Study where they built a mock prison in the basement of the psychology department at Standford and paid students to play the role of guard or prisoner. Study had to end early because the students were taking their roles to the extreme.

Believed that social roles can be so powerful that they overwhelm our personal identities to the point that we become the role we are playing.

Front 11

Abu Ghraib

Back 11

Beginning in 2004, human rights violations in the form of physical, psychological, and sexual abuse, including torture, reports of rape, sodomy, and homicide of prisoners held in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq came to public attention

Front 12

Paek, Nelson, & Vilela, 2011

Back 12

Examined television commercials that were broadcast in seven countries and coded the gender of the prominent characters ( the ones who were in the foreground demonstrating or commenting on the product being advertised).
Widely varied by country.
much more likely to be male than female in Brazil, whereas in the Us and South Korea, there was much less of a gender difference, although South Korea was the only country in which women were more likely than men to be the prominent character.

Front 13

Mager & Helgeson, 2011

Back 13

Analyzed advertisements that appeared in U.S. magazines from 1950 to 2000 and coded the percentage of ads in each year that showed women in a subordinate role versus being in a subordinate role (such as showing deference to someone or receiving guidance from another person)

women far more likely, but surprisingly both have increased over time

Front 14

Group cohesiveness

Back 14

Qualities of a group that bind members together and promote liking between members.

Front 15

Zajonc, Heingartner, & Herman, 1969

Back 15

Study about cockroaches in a maze with other cockroaches watching and trying to avoid the light.

1. The presence of others increases
physiological arousal
• I.e., our bodies become more energized
2. When such arousal exists:
– It is easier to do something that is simple.
– It is harder to do something complex or
learn something new.

Front 16

Social facilitation

Back 16

The tendency for people to do better on simple tasks, and worse on complex tasks, when they are in the presence of others and their individual performance can be evaluated.

If task is simple, well-learned
– The mere presence of others improves
performance

When working on a more difficult task
– Opposite results
• A task can take longer to solve when others
are present than when performing alone.
• People and animals do worse in the
presence of others when the task is difficult.

1. Other people cause us to become
particularly alert and vigilant.
2. Other people make us apprehensive about
how we’re being evaluated.
3. Other people distract us from the task at
hand.

Front 17

Social loafing

Back 17

The tendency for people to do worse on simple tasks but better on complex tasks when they are in the presence of others and their individual performance cannot be
evaluated.

more likely among men.

Front 18

Deindividuation

Back 18

The loosening of normal constraints on behavior when people cannot be differentiated (such as when they are in a
crowd), leading to an increase in impulsive and deviant acts.

reduces the likelihood that any individual will be singled out and blamed and becoming deindividuated increases the extent to which people obey the group’s norms.

Front 19

Process loss

Back 19

Any aspect of group interaction that inhibits good problem solving.

Front 20

Transactive memory

Back 20

The combined memory of two people that is more efficient than the memory of either individual.

Front 21

Groupthink

Back 21

A kind of thinking in which maintaining group cohesiveness and solidarity is more important than considering the facts in a realistic manner.

Front 22

Janis & Mann, 1977

Back 22

Groupthink is most likely to occur when
group is:
– Highly cohesive
– Isolated from contrary opinions
– Ruled by a directive leader who makes his
or her wishes known

Front 23

Group polarization

Back 23

The tendency for groups to make decisions that are more extreme than the initial inclinations of its members.

1. Persuasive arguments interpretation
– Individuals bring to the group a set of arguments, some of which other individuals have not considered.
2. Social comparison interpretation
– When people discuss an issue in a group, they first explore how everyone else feels.

Front 24

Great person theory

Back 24

The idea that certain key personality traits make a person a good leader, regardless of the situation.

Front 25

Transactional leaders

Back 25

Leaders who set clear, short-term goals and reward people who meet them.

Front 26

Transformational leaders

Back 26

Leaders who inspire followers to focus on common, long-term goals.