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;
71 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
- 3rd side (hint)
|
person pereception
|
the process of forming impressions of others
|
Chapter 15
|
|
|
stereotypes
|
widely held beliefs that people have certain characteristics because of their membership in a particular group. e.g. gender, ethnic, occupational, etc.
|
Chapter 15
|
|
|
illusory correlation
|
occurs when people estimate that they have encountered more confirmations of an association between social traits than they have actually seen. e.g. "ive never met an honest lawyer"
|
Chapter 15
|
|
|
ingroup/ outgroup
|
a group that belongs to and identifies with
|
Chapter 15
|
|
|
Attributions
|
inferences that people draw about the causes of events, others' behavior, and their own behavior e.g. you conclude that you failed to plan ahead because you're a procrastinator.
|
Chapter 15
|
|
|
Why do we make attributions?
|
We have a strong need to understand their experiences. They want to make sense out of their own behavior, others' actions, and the events in their lives.
|
Chapter 15
|
|
|
Internal attributions
|
ascribe causes of behavior to personal dispositions, traits, abilities, and feelings.
|
Chapter 15
|
|
|
External attributions
|
ascribe causes of behavior to situational demands and environmental constraints.
|
Chapter 15
|
|
|
Fritz Heider's theory
|
Attribution theory
|
Chapter 15
|
|
|
Weiner's model
|
things
|
Chapter 15
|
|
|
What is Social psychology?
|
The field of psych pertaining to how we think about other people, interact in relationships and groups, and are influenced by others
Scientific study of how people’s thoughts, feelings, and behavior are impacted by the actual, imagined, or implied presence of others The study of social situations, with special attention to how we view and affect others |
Powerpoint: Social Psychology
|
|
|
Social Influence
|
the effect the words, actions, or the mere presence of others have on our thoughts, feeling and behaviors
|
Powerpoint: Social Psychology
|
|
|
Conformity-
|
type of social influence. changing one’s behavior due to the real or imagined influence/presence of others
|
Powerpoint: Social Psychology
|
|
|
Obedience-
|
changing one’s behavior due to an order from an authority figure
|
Powerpoint: Social Psychology
|
|
|
PUBLIC COMPLIANCE-
|
changing our behavior to match others’ without necessarily believing in what we are doing or saying
|
Powerpoint: Social Psychology
|
|
|
Social Norms
|
implicit or explicit rules that a group has for the acceptable behaviors, values, and beliefs of its members
|
Powerpoint: Social Psychology
|
|
|
3 conditions under which social norms exert the greatest influence
|
Conditions are uncertain
Source is similar to us Concerned about relationship with the source |
Powerpoint: Social Psychology
|
|
|
Asch line studies (1951, 1956)
|
How will people react in an unambiguous situation, where the group is clearly wrong?
|
Powerpoint: Social Psychology
|
|
|
Social Impact Theory
|
When will people change their behavior because of normative social influence?
|
d
|
|
|
Strength (Social Impact Theory)
|
how important is the group to you?
|
|
|
|
Immediacy (Social Impact Theory)
|
how close is the group to you in space and time during the attempt to influence you?
|
|
|
|
Number (Social Impact Theory)
|
how many people are in the group?
Adding additional group members Unanimity- creates the strongest pressure to change your behavior |
|
|
|
Obedience-
|
a change in behavior due to an order from an authority figure
|
|
|
|
Milgram's Shock Study
|
Obedience is not as much dependent upon personality as situational pressures
|
|
|
|
Normative Social Influence
|
Zimbardo’s explanation of the stunning transformations
-Social Roles: widely shared expectations about how people in certain positions are supposed to behave -Attributed behavior to the compelling power of situational factors |
|
|
|
Implicit personality theory
|
People assume that certain aspects or traits go together
-- halo effect: we assume people we like have good characteristics, even if we haven't seen them. |
|
|
|
self-concept bias
|
what we consider important in ourselves is often what we consider important in others
|
|
|
|
primacy effects
|
People are influenced more by info they receive early in an interaction than by info that appears later
We will even re-interpret new information so that it fits our earlier impression of people |
|
|
|
Origins of Prejudice
|
Socialization
We are not born with stereotypes, but we grow to imitate those who we respect—parents, peers, media Realistic Group Conflict Theory When groups are forced to compete for scarce resources (e.g., good jobs, nice homes, college educations), they threaten each other in a very negative manner ‘Our group is better than yours’ becomes justification for greater access to these positive resources Personal and social identity effects |
|
|
|
Attraction: why does proximity increase attraction?
|
We like those we are close to both physically and functionally
Why does proximity work? It increases familiarity Often linked to similarity It makes others more available Cognitive consistency It's easier to be around others who we like, therefore we feel a need to get along with people we see often |
|
|
|
Attraction: why does familiarity increase attraction?
|
Simply seeing a person more frequently can increase our liking of that person
This only works if our initial reaction is either neutral or positive Seeing a negative stimulus repeatedly simply makes us not like it even more Why does familiarity work? Repeated exposure increases recognition We assume that familiar others are similar to ourselves |
|
|
|
Attraction: why does similarity increase attraction?
|
Matching Principle
The tendency to choose similar partners Friends Social class, educational level, and religious backgrounds Romantic partners Age, social class, ethnicity, and religion Why does the similarity effect occur? Similar others are easier and more pleasant to be around Expectancy-value Theory Maybe we deliberately select people for their similarity to us The reward for dating someone similar to us is high…but so is the probability that they will like us |
|
|
|
What does being physically attractive mean?
|
Beauty is in the eye (and nose, and tongue, and immune system) of the beholder… somewhat
Walster et. al. study Used a computer service to match people for blind dates (but they were really randomly assigned) Physical attractiveness was the only significant predictor of liking Halo effect of beauty Attractive people are judged more favorably on other traits than are less attractive people Pretty people are assumed to have better: Social skills Intellectual competence Greater integrity and concern for others Is it true? Certainly not for intelligence or integrity but sort of for social skills |
|
|
|
what is aggression associated with?
|
Aggression is associated with
Low levels of serotonin High levels of testosterone Activation of the amygdala can lead to aggressive behaviors (though it still depends on situational factors) |
|
|
|
gender differences in aggression?
|
Men use more physical, direct forms of aggression
Men’s aggression is more likely to do physical harm, and thus gets more attention Girls and women use more indirect forms of aggression (e.g., spreading rumors). Provocation: The great equalizer? Men are more likely to attack physically when unprovoked than women What happens when people are irritated, frustrated, or threatened by another person? Bettencourt & Miller (1996) Conducted a meta-analysis of gender differences in aggression Found that when provocation is involved, the typical gender difference in physical aggression is reduced or eliminated |
|
|
|
"Violence sells!" true or false?
|
. “Violence sells!”
False. TV violence significantly decreases memory for commercial messages Bushman, 1998 19% of viewers will be less likely to remember an ad if it is embedded in a violent or sexually explicit show |
|
|
|
Eros and Thanatos
|
Inhibited sexuality & inhibited aggression (Freudian)
|
|
|
|
Id
|
Functions on ‘pleasure principle’
Immediate gratification of needs to reduce tension & discomfort regardless of consequences |
|
|
|
Concious
|
acute awareness
|
|
|
|
preconcious
|
Just under awareness; easily known
|
|
|
|
unconcious
|
well below awareness; difficult to know. very influential
|
|
|
|
Superego
|
Functions on ‘idealistic principle’
Our moral guide/conscience Influenced by internalizing our parents’ values & the voice of society Works against the Id by inflicting guilt |
|
|
|
ego
|
Functions on ‘reality principle’
Serves to balance the demands the Id and the Superego Assesses what is realistically possible in satisfying the Id and/or Superego (i.e., what society will deem acceptable) Ego uses defense mechanisms to protect itself |
|
|
|
Freud understanding of personality
|
Personality is result of the battle for control (conflict and compromise) between id, ego & superego
intrapsychic conflict--> anxiety--> reliance on defence mechanisms |
|
|
|
Defense mechanisms:
Denial |
denying the anxiety outright
|
|
|
|
repression
|
Blocking out/prevention of anxiety – forcing anxiety back into unconscious
|
|
|
|
Rationalization
|
Creating false reasons or explanations for anxiety in the form of a shortcoming
|
|
|
|
Projection
|
Seeing in others unacceptable feelings that reside in one’s own unconscious
|
|
|
|
Displacement
|
Acting out your anxiety on an innocent party
Scapegoating |
|
|
|
Reaction formation
|
Reversing the nature of the anxiety so that it feels like its opposite nature
Exaggerated love for someone you unconsciously hate |
|
|
|
Sublimation
|
Channeling anxiety into socially-acceptable activities
Focusing sexual energy into art, music, etc. |
|
|
|
Periods of development
|
-Sexual/pleasure/libidinal gratification focus
-Implications for adult personality -Fixation |
|
|
|
Oral psychosexual stage
|
(Birth to 1½ yrs)
Gratification is centered around the mouth (e.g., breast-feeding, sucking, biting) |
|
|
|
Anal psychosexual stage
|
(1½ to 3 yrs)
Gratification is centered around the pleasure of defecation; toilet-training is issue for resolution and development |
|
|
|
Phallic psychosexual stage
|
(3 to 6)
Gratification manifests itself through masturbation; resolution for development lies in identification w/ same-sex parent Oedipus Complex Boys have unconscious jealous love for mother and desire to kill the father; fear of castration by father leads to resolution with acceptance of/identification with father and internalization of father’s values Strong superego results in this resolution Electra Complex Girls discover that they do not have a penis and desire one (“penis envy”); they direct their anger toward the mother for not providing a penis; jealous of mother for having father Gradual realization that these desires are self-defeating; identification with mother results |
|
|
|
Latency psychosexual stage
|
(6 to puberty)
Sexual urges are repressed and transformed into socially acceptable activities, such as schoolwork and peer activities |
|
|
|
Genital psychosexual stage
|
(puberty – adulthood)
Successful resolution and development into a mature sexual relationship |
|
|
|
Other psychodynamic theoriests
|
Carl Jung: Analytical Psychology
Personal and collective unconscious Archetypes Alfred Adler: Individual Psychology Striving for superiority Compensation |
|
|
|
Evaluating psychodynamic perspectives: pros and cons
|
Pros
The unconscious The role of internal conflict The importance of early childhood experiences The use of defense mechanisms Cons Poor testability Inadequate empirical base Sexist views |
|
|
|
How to test personality: Projective Tests
|
Ask about meaningless, ambiguous stimuli
Theory behind it that we will give an answer consistent with the inner workings of our minds Rorschach Inkblots Best used to measure how people process information Creativity, coping resources, emotional processing, relationships with others, thought disorders, psychoses |
|
|
|
How to test personality: theamatic apperception test (TAT cards)
|
Black & white pictures of people in vague/ambiguous situations
Asked to make up a dramatic story about the picture Best used to learn the motivation behind people’s behavior Believed that person will identify with one of the characters on each card In their stories, people are thought to express their own circumstances, needs, environmental demands, emotions, and perceptions of reality |
|
|
|
Allport's trait theory
|
Trait
Relatively enduring, consistent personality characteristics - inferred from behavior 3 types of traits Cardinal traits Affect every area of the individual’s life Mother Theresa – altruistic Central traits Influence many aspects of our lives, but not quite as pervasive Someone you think of as “kind” or “funny” Secondary traits Affect narrower aspects of our lives Preference for cowboy hats or always wearing perfume |
|
|
|
Trait theory: 5-factor model of Personality
|
Where we fall on 5 different dimensions determines personality type
Dimensions OCEAN!!!! Openness to experience Curiosity, flexibility, imagination, artistic sensibility Conscientiousness Discipline, organization, dependable Extraversion Outgoing, upbeat, friendly, assertive, gregarious Agreeableness Sympathetic, trusting, cooperative, straightforward Neuroticsm Anxious, hostile, self-conscious |
|
|
|
Behavioral perspectives: bandura
|
Self Efficacy
Take his ideas of observational learning and add cognition Knowing we can actually perform behaviors successfully, in the way we wish to behave, leads to self-praise |
|
|
|
Behavioral perspectives: Mischel
|
Situational specificity
Our behavior is mostly a function of a given situation, not of stable, internal traits Interactionism: both traits and situations interact to produce behavior, thoughts Bandura’s reciprocal determinism: behavior also influences traits and situations – all 3 factors influence each other |
|
|
|
Evaluating Behavioral perspectives
|
Pros
Based on rigorous research Insights into effects of learning and environmental factors Cons Over-dependence on animal research Fragmented view of personality Dehumanizing views |
|
|
|
k
|
k
|
k
|
|
|
k
|
k
|
|
|
|
k
|
k
|
|
|
|
k
|
k
|
k
|
|
|
k
|
k
|
k
|
