Erin's Social Psych Test 1

Front 1

What is Social Psychology

Back 1

Scientific study of the interactions b/w real or perceived social world and our thought, behaviors and emotions

Front 2

How do human values impact Social Psychology?

Back 2

What topics are chosen to be studied, types of people who are more likely to be psychologists, researchers blinded by own cultural assumptions, making value judgements (defining the good life, the terms used for labeling)

Front 3

Hindsight Bias

Back 3

Tendency to exaggerate (after learning an outcome) one's ability to have foreseen how something would turn out.

Front 4

Correlational v. Experimental research (correlational)

Back 4

Studying naturally occurring relationships among variables, surveys, etx (pros: can learn about relationships that are otherwise unable to be studied; cons: cannot claim causation, people infer causation)

Front 5

Correlational v. Experimental (Experimental)

Back 5

Manipulate one and watch the effect

Pros: lots of control, can claim causation

Cons: difficult to examine multiple variables at one time, some variables cannot/ethically should not be manipulated.

Front 6

Random Assignment

Back 6

Which group each person is put in (each person has an equal chance of being selected- tells if the results are valid - different from random selection/sampling which is how you get your participants before the experiment starts - tells how widely you can generalize the results.

Front 7

Mundane realism

Back 7

Degree to which an experiment is superficially similar to every day situations (not neccissary)

Front 8

Experimental realism

Back 8

Degree to which an experiment absorbs/involves its participants

Front 9

Demand Characteristics

Back 9

Cues in an experiment that tell the participant what behavior is expected

Front 10

What ethical issues are involved in research?

Back 10

Deception, informed concent, debriefing, protect participants from harm, treat information about participants confidentially.

Front 11

Self- Schemas

Back 11

How we define ourselves.... if we think we are overweight, smart, etc is affects how we perceive and evaluate others and ourselves.

Front 12

Self-reference effect

Back 12

Tendency to remember stuff better when it relates to yourself

Front 13

Self-esteem

Back 13

a person's overall self-evaluation or sense of self-worth

Front 14

How reliable is self-knowledge?

Back 14

its "curiously flawed" WE don't know why we do what we do, unconsious processes differ from consious explainations of it, we tend to mispredict our emotions, etc (ie - planning fallacy - underestimate how long things will take, immune neglect - underestimate how fast we can recover from bad things.)

Front 15

Cultural differences in self-representations--- interdependent v. independent

Back 15

Western cultures emphasize individualsim, being self-reliant ,etc. Cultures in Asia, Africa, and South American = collectivism, encourage interdepedency. This can change over time - in asia younger generations are more individualistic.

Front 16

Self-efficacy

Back 16

A sense that one is competent and effective (a sharpshooter in the military might feel high self-efficacy and low self-esteem.)

Front 17

Locus of control

Back 17

The extent to which people perceive outcomes as internally controlable by their own efforts or as externally controled by chance/outside forces.

Front 18

Learned helplessness

Back 18

Sense of hopelessness and resignation learned when they perceive no control over repeated bad events.

Front 19

Self-serving bias

Back 19

We take credit for success but blame others/situation for failures.

Front 20

Unrealistic optimism

Back 20

believing ourselves immune to misfortune - we do not take sensible precautions "that won't happen to me"

Front 21

False consensus

Back 21

Overestimate the commonality of opinions - we think everyone thinks like we do.

Front 22

False Uniqueness

Back 22

We tend to see our talents and moral behaviors as unusual - and underestimate commonalities of abilities.

Front 23

Adaptive v. maladaptive

Back 23

self-serving tendencies = adaptive: help us have better self-esteem/increased motivation/hope. Maladaptive = take greater risks, hostile to criticism, resistance to change/ wont improve, imterpersonal conflicts.

Front 24

Self-presentational strategies

Back 24

behaving in a way to create a favorable impression

Front 25

False Modesty

Back 25

true humility is self-forgetfulness - not denying things you do well

Front 26

Self-handicapping

Back 26

Protecting one's self-image with behaviors that create a handy excuse for failure

Front 27

Self-monitoring

Back 27

How well you adjust your performance to create the desired impression in social situations

Front 28

Low v high self-monitors

Back 28

Low: behavior determined by internal factors such as their own attitudes or beliefs (integrity but dogmatic/rigid)

High: behavior more determined by the situation, "social chamelions," Appropriate to the situation but 2 faced/fake.

Front 29

Basking in reflected glory/"Berging"

Back 29

Pix with celebs, my child is an honor's role student,etc

Front 30

Attributions

Back 30

Cognitive processes aimed at understanding the causes behind other's behavior - makes life more predictable

Front 31

Priming

Back 31

Awakening certain associations - our actions are often affected by unconscious processing - people read words about old age and then walked slower toward the elevator.

Front 32

Overconfidence Phenomenon

Back 32

tendency to be more confident than correct - overestimate the accuracy of one's beliefs

Front 33

Confirmation bias

Back 33

tendency to search for information that confirms one's preconceptions

Front 34

Heuristics

Back 34

Mental shortcuts - enable quick judgments

Front 35

Representative Heuristic

Back 35

Tendency to presume that someone or something belongs to a particular group resembling a typical member

Front 36

Availability heuristic

Back 36

things that come to mind easily are seen as more commonplace.

Front 37

Illusory Correlation

Back 37

Perception of a relationship where none exists, or perception of a stronger relationship than actually exists (ie people see random events as confirming their beliefs)

Front 38

Illusions of control

Back 38

believing uncontrolable events are more controllable than they are (ie keeps gamblers playing)

Front 39

regression toward the mean

Back 39

After we score really well our next test will be worse, if we do bad the next score will be better - extreme scores move toward the middle.

Front 40

Self-fulfilling beliefs

Back 40

a belief that leads to its own fulfillment (ie - teacher expectations and student performance)

Front 41

Behavioral confirmation

Back 41

type of self-fulfilling prophecy where people's social expectations lead them to behave in ways that cause others to confirm their expectations (ie the guys calling attractive v. unattractive women)

Front 42

Foot in the door

Back 42

Tendency for people who have first agreed to a small request to comply later with a larger request

Front 43

Classical conditioning (influences attitudes)

Back 43

Pavlov's dog, Food/sick = food aversion - repeated pairing

Front 44

Operant conditioning

Back 44

Rewards & Punishments - bad at golf = dislike golf

Front 45

Modeling

Back 45

Learn by watching others - kids express opinions of parents

Front 46

Direct experience

Back 46

Stronger, more resistant to change - bad experiences with the church

Front 47

2 routes to persuation

Back 47

Central route - based on logic/pros/cons, leads to more resistant/ predictive change.

Peripheral Route - based on surface characteristics -famous people present the message, funny, etc. - Which is most effective depends on our motivation or ability to pay attention to the facts

Front 48

Cognitive Dissonance theory

Back 48

Motivational process that occurs when behavior is inconsistent with attitudes - Festinger - response to those who said the end of the world was coming.

Front 49

Ways to fix dissonance

Back 49

1. Change attitude in line of behavior (decide being healthy is over rated) 2. change cognition about behavior (justify) 3. acquire new information (sugar is actually good for you) 4. Minimize importance of the inconsitency (oh... but I still excercize alot), 5 Change behavior in line with attitude (start eating healthy)

Front 50

Self-perception Theory

Back 50

We infer our own attitudes by examining our own behavior different perspective for the same phenomenon (ie pencil test - does frowning make you sad or do you frown because you are sad?)

Front 51

When is fear persuasive?

Back 51

If they provide in info on how to reduce that fear

Front 52

3 elements of persuasion

Back 52

WHO (famous/attractive person convey message), WHAT (is the message important? WHOM? (intended audience?)

Front 53

Credibility v. attractiveness

Back 53

Credibility: Power fades after first month, if we learn about a source after initially liking the message - high credibility strengthens our confidence

Attractiveness: Works best on matters of subject preference

Front 54

1 v 2 sided arguments

Back 54

1 sided: works better for those who already agreed

2 sided: works better for those who disagreed/are aware of opposing arguments.

Front 55

Sex v gender

Back 55

Sex: biological status (XX v XY)

Gender: Social, cultural and psychological aspects that pertain to the traits, norms, stereotypes and roles considered typical for those the society has designated as female/male.

Front 56

Cultural perspective of gender

Back 56

Childhood socialization (toys/clothes,etc), social roles - women = more nuturing b/c their roles require them to practice that attribute more.

Front 57

Interactionist

Back 57

Both biology and cultural

Front 58

Evolutionary/biological

Back 58

Evolutionary: gender differences must be adaptive psychological traits - passed on just like physical traits - criticism = non-falsifiable - seems like more conjecture

Biological -focus on genetics/hormonal differences - women biologically sustain life - so they can't take it.

Front 59

Hindsight critisism of Evolutionary Psychology

Back 59

Could have gone the other way - just proving what we already know.

Front 60

What is the importance of levels of explanation?

Back 60

One topic can be looked at/understood on many different levels. (ie: theology, philosophy, sociology, psychology, biology chemistry...) If we only view from one level we miss depth of understanding.

Front 61

Naturalistic Fallacy

Back 61

The belief that the way things are is the way things should be. (ie: church in US v. Church in Australia)

Front 62

Fundamental attribution error (FAE)

Back 62

Tendency to attribute others actions to the person's personality/personal traits rather than their situation (they are a bad driver) cA

Front 63

Actor-observer bias

Back 63

As the "actor" we are familiar with our own situational circumstances and thus overestimate the role of our situation and underestimate our personality trait's role in why we do what we do.

Front 64

Jones/Davis Correspondent inference theory

Back 64

Infer more traits for unusual behavior than normal behavior; inferences are spontaneous

Front 65

Kelly's convariation model

Back 65

Why did they fall asleep? Concensus, Consistency, Distinctivness.

Front 66

Components of Attitudes

Back 66

ABC's - Tripartide - Affect (emotional state), Behavior, Cognition (the way we think)

Front 67

Research about Attitudes and behavior

Back 67

Wicker (1969) conducted studies showing that attitudes and behaviors were not matching up. Valdesolo & DeSteno (2007, 2008) describe “moral hypocrisy” in situations where people need to choose between morality and greed (subjects said they were moral but typically chose the greedy option).

Front 68

When do attitudes predict behavior?

Back 68

Social/other influences are minimal, Specificity of attitude, Component consistency (the ABC's agree), Attitude strength, accessibility,

Front 69

Behavior determines attitudes

Back 69

Self-presentation: impression management

Self-justification: cognitive dissonance

Front 70

Low-ball technique

Back 70

when you use the foot in the door phenomenon for your own benefit.. get someone to do something big by first having them do something small.

Front 71

ELM / Elaboration Likelihood Model

Back 71

2 routes to persuasion: Central and Peripheral

Front 72

differences b/w male and female

Back 72

independence v connectedness (women = relationships, men = tasks), social dominance (more assertive - taught to be), aggression (true for violence but not verbal, 10x likely for serious acts of violence) , sexuality (men = more casual, seek and initiate, take more risks. Women = more conservative)