Social/multicultural Psych

Front 1

HEIDER

Back 1

Originator of attribution theories.

Dispositional (internal) vs Situational (external)

Front 2

Attributions are (def)?

Back 2

...causal explications WE generate to explain bhvr.

Front 3

HEIDER

Back 3

Originator of attribution theories.

Dispositional (internal) vs Situational (external)

Front 4

KELLY

1.
When ppl make attributions, they consider 3 things, which are:

2.
Internal attribution is made if:
External attribution is made if:

Back 4

1.
Consistency
(p. act same way over time?)

Distinctiveness
(unique to situation?)

Consensus
(others act similarly?)

2.
Internal: HIGH consistency; LOW consensus.
External: HIGH on ALL three!

Front 5

WEINER

Back 5

Added 2nd dim to Heider's Attribution theory, that of

STABILITY

(unstable-internal = no skills yet, lack of effort, etc.;
unstable-ext = back luck!)
(stable-internal = lack ability, IQ; stable-ext = poor economy)

Front 6

DEPRESSION = (3 things)

(research based on what cog. theory?)

Back 6

SIG:

Stable; Internal; Global

(research on Learned Helplessness!)

Front 7

Attributions are (def)?

Back 7

...causal explications WE generate to explain bhvr.

Front 8

Fundamental Attribution Bias

(About who? Internal or External or both?)

Back 8

about OTHERS

(INTERNAL)

Front 9

SELF-SERVING Attribution Bias

(About who? Internal or External or both?)

Back 9

about SELF

(EXTERNAL, if fail; INTERNAL, if succeed)

*motivation = SELF-ESTEEM!!!

Front 10

ACTOR- OBSERVER attribution Bias

(About who? Internal or External or both?)

Back 10

about BOTH self and others!

(You? = SITUATIONAL; Others? = INTERNAL)

Front 11

HEURISTICS (3)

Back 11

(Rules of thumb; simplify thinking)

AVAILABILITY = How easily you can recall it.

REPRESENTATIVE = Typical ex of a particular category.

SIMULATION = Mental-image.

Front 12

Kelly's PERSONAL CONSTRUCT THEORY

Back 12

1. Perceive world through our expectations.

2. Expectations based on past experiences.

Front 13

WEINER

Back 13

Added a 2nd dim to Kelly's theory:

STABILITY:

Unstable-Internal / External:
(no degree yet, lack of effort; bad luck)
Stable-Internal / External:
(lacks ability/IQ; poor economy)

Front 14

***
Reseach (Abrason & Alloy) on Learned Helplessness shows:

Depression = (3)

Back 14

INTERNAL

STABLE

GLOBAL

Front 15

***
~ 3 Attribution Biases ~

Fundimental:

Self-Serving:

Actor-Observer:

Back 15

Fundimental:
About OTHERS-Internal
(Not situational).

Self-Serving:
About SELF
(if success, then internal; if fail, then extn.).
Motivation is to keep self-esteem!

Actor-Observer:
About SELF & OTHERS
(self = ext.; others = internal)

Front 16

~ HEURISTICS ~

Availability H:

Respresentative H:

Simulation H:

Back 16

~Rules of thumb; Simplify thinking.~

Availability H:
How easily you can RECALL it.
(fear death by guns, not heart disease)

Respresentative H:
Make Judgements, a TYPICAL ex of this or that.
(Rape: assume vic is white, perp is male)

Simulation H:
Ability to make a MENTAL-IMAGE
(Docs who imagined AIDS from Pts)

Front 17

*
Kelly's PERSONAL CONTRUCT THEORY

Back 17

1. Perceive the world based on our EXPECTATIONS.

2. These expectations are based on past EXPERIENCES.

(Ok, how is this different than Cog-bhvrl learning?)

Front 18

What is the relationship between thoughts/feelings and corresponding Bx?

Back 18

Weak (+) relationship.

( .15 )

Situational constraint may explain this discrepency (not wanting to make a scene, etc.)

Front 19

~ CONSISTENCY THEORIES ~
(4)

Balance:
Symmetry:
Congruency:
Cognitive Dissonance:

Back 19

Balance:
If imbalance, ppl move towards changing feelings.

Symmetry: (Bond)
Stronger the bond, the more intense imballance experience, and thus greater motivation to change.

Congruency:
WHAT will be changed? You favor the object you ALREADY have the MOST AFFINITY for!

Cognitive Dissonance:
Change your Attitude to match your Bx!
(Fucked up, I know)

Front 20

***
~ Cognitive Dissonance ~

Results in 1 of 4 circumstances:

Post-decisional; Effort Justification
Insufficient Justification; Insufficient Deterrence

Who's theory?

Back 20

~Changing your attitude to match your Bx.~
FESINGER

Post-decisional:
Btwn 2 (+) choices - will emph the (+) aspects.

Effort Justification;
When high effort w/ low reward - will emph (+) aspects.

Insufficient Justification:
Undesirable Bx for small reward - will emph (+) aspects.

Insufficient Deterrence:
When you DON'T do a Bx b/c of small reinforcement - will emph (--)!!!

Front 21

***
Difference btwn

SELF-PERCEPTION THEORY

and

Cognitive Dissonance

Back 21

With Self-Perception theory, no cognitive dissonance is required!

***
Ppl infer their attitudes and emotions by observing their own Bx.

(I did it, so I must believe in it)

Festinger/Carlsmith argue subjects simply observed their own Bx and made assumptions off of that and not an emo' cog dis reaction.

Front 22

***

What is the

OVERJUSTIFICATION Hypothesis?

Back 22

***
Ppl lose interest in previously desireable Bx/activities after performing them for
TOO MUCH Justification.

(If work pays so well, then it must not be fun!)

Front 23

Regarding Cognitive Dissonance vs Self-Perception,

Research, overall...

(example)

Back 23

...supports both theories!

(When current Bx is in the same direction as past Bx, then Self-Perception theory.

When there's a DISCREPENCY btwn current and past Bx, then Cognitive Dissonance theory applies.)

Front 24

3 theories of Self-Concept:

Self-Verification:

Behavioral Confirmation:

Self-Enhancement:

Back 24

Self-Verification:
Ppl are motivated to confirm their self-concepts, even if it's negetive!
*(most reserach support of the 3)*

Behavioral Confirmation:
Confirm what other's expect from you!
(think children; "the blonde" socal roles)

Self-Enhancement:
Motivated to think (+) of yourself AND Bx so that OTHERS think so too!
(Hawthorn-like effect?)