Social Psych Midterm Ii

Front 1

Fundamental Attribution Error

Back 1

We tend to attribute actions done by others to aspects of their personalities whereas we attribute personal actions to our situation

Front 2

Duke Experiement, Castro Debate

Back 2

Asked students to either give a debate in favor or against castro. People listening believed that the speaker truly believed the point they were arguing, even if they were told the side was assigned.

Front 3

Ross Experiment- jeopardy

Back 3

Randomly assigned a questioner who made questions, answerers, and an audience. The audience always thought the questioners were smarter than the answerers, but the questioner did not think that was the case.

Front 4

Depressive Realism

Back 4

Depressed people have a more accurate view of the world, and a less inflated self-view. Do not make as many self-serving attributions.

Front 5

Depressed explanitory style

Back 5

Depressed people will attribute failures to causes that are internal (all their fault), stable (will not go away), and global (will affect everything they do).

Front 6

Self presentation theory

Back 6

we are motivated to present ourselves in a positive light in the eyes of others.

Front 7

Storms- Video Tape Experiment

Back 7

Visual orientation has a powerful influence on the attributions of actors and observers about the causes of actor’s behavior

Actors who didn’t see the video or saw the same orientation attributed behavior to situational factors while observers attributed it to traits rather than situation.
Actors who saw video of themselves became less situational while observers who saw the video of the other nonmatched participant became more situational

Front 8

Entity Theory of Intelligence

Back 8

Intelligence is a fixed trait, cannot be developed

Front 9

Incremental Theory of Intelligence

Back 9

Intelligence is malleable and can potentially be increased if cultivated.

Front 10

Dweck views of praising

Back 10

If kids are praised for intelligence, they will choose the less challenging task in order to look smart

If kids are praised for effort, will choose the challenging task to learn a lot.

Front 11

Correlation between wealth and happiness

Back 11

In poor countries there is a correlation between wealth and happiness, but not really the case in rich countries with income over $10,000.

Front 12

Adaptation level phenomenon

Back 12

we judge our experiences relative to the neutral level defined by our past experiences. We will adjust to an increase in wealth and will not be made happy by it.

Front 13

Social Comparison

Back 13

he judge our happiness in relation to others, especially those within the same group. Being worse off than others makes us sad. We usually compare ourselves to others above our current level.

Front 14

Social Facilitation Effect

Back 14

The presence of other people increases our speed and ability to perform tasks we are comfortable doing.

The effect of others increases with the size of the crowd.

Front 15

Why are we aroused by the presence of others?

Back 15

1. evaluation apprehension
2. distractions
3. mere pressure

Front 16

Self-serving bias

Back 16

We tend to view our own actions and contributions favorably.

People attribute successes to personal doings and failures to external factors.

Front 17

False consensus effect

Back 17

On matters of opinion, we overestimate the extent to which other people will agree with our views

Front 18

False uniqueness effect

Back 18

On matters of ability, we tend to see our own traits as rare.

Front 19

Self-efficacy

Back 19

The ability to see oneself as competent and effective

Front 20

Locus of control

Back 20

Do you see yourself as an actor that changes the world or a subject that the world acts upon

Front 21

Casual Accounts homelessness

Back 21

people give reasons to make their behavior and situation understandable (commonsense attributions)
i.e. down on my luck

Front 22

Trouble Resolution- Intrinsic Remedy

Back 22

One person tries to get the other to change behavior. Sometimes works.

Front 23

Social Hierarchy in Middle School

Back 23

1. High Group (popular)
a. Leaders
b.Second tier-close to the top because best friends with leader or through own power
c. followers- accept leaders actions

2. Wanna-bes (want to be in popular crowd)
3. Middle Group (smaller independent circles, better friends)
4. low ranks (usually alone, social isolates)

Front 24

Identity Hierarchy in Middle School

Back 24

1. Popular group, leaders and 2nd tier have the most positive self identities. Think they're a gift to the world. Followers insecure.
2. Middle Group, 2nd most positive self identities
3. Wanna-bes, low self esteem
4. Social isolates- lowest self esteem

Front 25

Instrumental Aggression

Back 25

- physical or verbal behavior intended to cause harm for the purpose of some end

Front 26

Hostile Aggression

Back 26

- physical or verbal behavior intended to cause harm done in an emotional staet

Front 27

Frustration-aggression theory

Back 27

Snything that blocks our attaining goal can lead to frustration when:
-Motivation is high
-We expected gratification
-The blocking is complete

Front 28

social learning theory

Back 28

It is possible to learn aggression by observing it and noting its consequences

Front 29

Environmental factors that influence aggression

Back 29

heat
pain
if you've been attacked
crowding

Front 30

Bushman- catharsis

Back 30

Punching a bag and ruminating on a past insult leads to increased aggression, not catharsis

Front 31

Cognitive neoassociation theory

Back 31

Influences produced by disagreeable occurrences routinely encourages various thoughts, expressive motor reactions, memories and physiological reactions linked with both fight and flight trends. These relations augment basic feelings of anger in the fight response or feelings of fear in the flight response.

Front 32

Cognitive Dissonance

Back 32

People feel bad when their actions are out of line with who they think they are.

Front 33

Difference between guilt and shame

Back 33

Guilt implies regret for a specific immoral act

Shame implies a personality flaw about you as a whole

Front 34

Social Cognition

Back 34

How the brain stores information about social norms

Front 35

Attribution Theory

Back 35

a motivational theory looking at how the average person constructs the meaning of an event based on his /her motives to find a cause and his/her knowledge of the environment.

1. Actor v. Situation (internal v external).
2. Stable v. Unstable (is this always the way you would do an action? Or is this a one-time thing)
3. Global v Specific (does this say something about you or a person?)

Front 36

Role of Culture with the Fundamental Attribution error

Back 36

Cultures that are less individualistic have much smaller, or nonexistiant, fundamental attribution errors. Western cultures tend to emphasize individual identity and responsibility.

Front 37

Social Comparison Theory- Festinger

Back 37

Social comparison is at best a secondary source of information. People should seek out more objective sources of information. Although, if we cant reach definitive conclusions with objective information, we use social comparison to gain more information.

Front 38

Response to Social Comparison Theory- Miller and Wood

Back 38

Found that social comparison was important, but social comparison is NOT a secondary source. People would choose social comparison over objective information. So much in life has to do with where we stand compared to rest of class.

Front 39

Durgin: Mr. Clean/ Mr. Dirty

Back 39

Set up interviews where students were applying for summer job. They were seated alone in room and had them fill out forms. One of the forms was a standard measure of self- esteem. Half way through application, they have another applicant come in. In one variation, he came in wearing a nice suit and carrying an attche case. He is completely organized. In the Mr Dirty condition, he has torn pants, looked high, had not shaved, puts cheap sex novel on the table. Can compare first half of questionaire to second half. Self esteem goes up when in room with Mr. Dirty. Self esteem goes down in room with Mr. Clean

Front 40

Envy v. Resentment Proper

Back 40

Envy involves upward social comparison over an issue that is of personal importance.

Resentment Proper implies a sort of objective injustice that is taking place.

Front 41

Malicious envy v. non-malicious envy

Back 41

malicious: you want to take away something from another person

non-malicious: you just kind of feel bummed out for not having something

Front 42

Shaudenfreud

Back 42

a wave of enjoyment you get from seeing the misfortunes of another that you are envious of.

Front 43

Durability Bias

Back 43

People tend to overestimate their feelings, and the length of time that they will feel a certain thing. This is a fairly reliable assumption that people's reactions to significant life events (changes in thier life status) will be stronger than expected. All kinds of situations where people think reactions will last longer than anticipated.

Front 44

Region-B paradox

Back 44

For seriously unpleasant events, the durability of emotion is actually less than it is for mildly unpleasant events. This is because we have a sort of psychological immune system.

Front 45

looking-glass self

Back 45

We use other reactions to us as a sort of mirror that reflects upon ourselves (Cooley).

Front 46

Envy v. Jealousy

Back 46

1: Envy involves feeling lack of something you want; jealousy involves fear of losing something you have
2: Envy about things, jealousy generally about relationship
3: Envy requires 2 people, jealousy requires 3 (person who is jealous, person being stolen away, rival)

Front 47

suspicious jealousy

Back 47

you suspect that you are being replaced but you arn't really sure

Front 48

fait accompli

Back 48

the sinking awful feeling of knowing you're being replaced

Front 49

Formative Attention Theory

Back 49

The way people treat you and pay attention to you give you a sense of self. It is painful to lose these people because you lose a sense of who you are.

Front 50

The Working Consensus

Back 50

the socially agreed upon definition of the situation at hand

Front 51

Quasi-moral rights

Back 51

there is, in a dramatic situation, a performer and an audience. We treat people’s identities as something that they are morally entitled to, and are morally bound to uphold this identity.

Front 52

Idealization

Back 52

actions that are necessary because of appearances more than because of reality

Front 53

3 Resources for working consensus

Back 53

1. Front
2. Regions
3. Teams

Front 54

Migram Subway Experiment

Back 54

Grad students had to go on subway and ask "excuse me may I have your seat." Especially awkward when the train is not full. Most of the time people will give you their seat. Most of the time people are off guard and just do it.

Other side of experiement, what does it feel like to be the experimenter. Virtually everyone finds it to be incredibly stressful. Even when people got the seat, they felt they had to look really sick or tired to justify taking the seat. 2 students did not feel this way. One was a sociopath/mass murderer. The other was a woman who later went on to be a star in the pornography industry.

Front 55

Remedial Interchanges

Back 55

The negotiation process that people go through when some kind of offense occurs, and what it means for peoples social identity.

1. Challenge
2. Offering
3. Acceptance
4. Thanks

Front 56

Reframing (RI)

Back 56

you try and make it look like what happened really happened was actually something else.

Denying responsibility

Front 57

Someone else did it (RI)

Back 57

Pretend like it wasn't you.

Denying responsibility

Front 58

excuses (RI)

Back 58

saying that you had no choice to do otherwise. For example, if he stepped on my foot, he could say that he tripped and could not help himself

Denying responsibility

Front 59

Justification (RI)

Back 59

take responsibility but claim that it was actually a good thing to do given the situation.

Accepting responsibility

Front 60

mitigation (RI)

Back 60

you did something that was wrong, you take responsibility, but you say that there were mitigating circumstances that make it less bad than it otherwise would be
i.e. I was drunk

Accepting responsibility

Front 61

apology (RI)

Back 61

you admit what you did in totality, and you admit it was wrong, but you feel bad. Essentially it is drawing a line between past and future.

Accepting responsibilty

Front 62

dramaturgic approach

Back 62

In dramaturgical sociology it is argued that human actions are dependent upon time, place, and audience. In other words, to Goffman, the self is a sense of who one is, a dramatic effect emerging from the immediate scene being presented.

Front 63

Self-complexity (Linville)

Back 63

People with the simplist self concepts had the strongest emotions. This is because when something goes wrong is seems like a larger part of your life if you have a simple self concept. People with lower self complexity will go to student health more often then those who do not.

Front 64

Adler and Adler Basketball

Back 64

Studied bball team. They started the season with a fairly complex sense, but over the season they became more and more defined by their role as a b-ball players.