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;
123 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Goal of behaviorism |
a functional analysis that maps out exactly how behavior is a function of the environmental stimulus |
|
|
3 fundamental ideas of behaviorism |
empiricism, associationism, and hedonism |
|
|
empricism |
the idea that all knowledge comes from experience |
|
|
associationism |
the claim that any two things, including ideas, become mentally associated as one if they are repeatedly experienced close together in time |
|
|
hedonism |
Provides an answer for why people do what they do (motivation). Claims that people learn for two reasons: to seek pleasure or to avoid pain. |
|
|
operant conditioning |
behaviors associated with good consequences (reinforcement) are repeated; behaviors associated with bad consequences (punishment) are abandoned. |
|
|
(operant conditioning) reinforcement |
positive: adds something desirable to the actor negative: removes something undesirable from the action |
|
|
(operant conditioning) punishment |
positive: adds something undesirable to the actor negative: removes something desirable from the actor |
|
|
how to punish (5 things) |
availability of alternatives, behavioral and situational specificity, timing and consistency, conditioning secondary punishing stimuli, avoiding mixed messages |
|
|
classical conditioning |
environmental cue (conditioned stimulus) becomes associated with the presence of a unconditioned stimulus and elicits a conditioned response |
|
|
habituation (and desensitization) |
repeated exposure to a stimulus reduces response desensitization is not more reaction to a stimlus through repeated exposure to it |
|
|
Skinners technique of operant conditioning |
emphasizes environment over heredity, automatic actions over free will |
|
|
primary reinforcers act on primary drives |
food, water, sex, personal comfort |
|
|
secondary reinforcers act on secondary drives |
money, praise, power |
|
|
downfall of reinforcement |
it can increase the frequency of any behavior, regardless of its real connection with the consequences that follow |
|
|
punishment |
an aversive consequence that follows an act in order to stop it and prevent its repetition |
|
|
Goals of punishment |
start some behaviors, maintain some behaviors, prevent some behaviors |
|
|
shortcomings of behaviorism |
it ignores motivation, though, and cognition., its mostly based on research on animals, it ignores the social dimensions of learning, it treats the organism as essentially passive |
|
|
reactionary perspective (trial and error personality development) |
constantly update the self in accordance to the consequence of our actions |
|
|
Bems self perception theory (absolute personality consistency) |
attitudes correspond and therefore are shaped by our previous actions (i did this, so i must believe that...) |
|
|
social learning theory |
people are not passively interacting with environments, there are dynamic relationships between the self and the social situations, learn from others' actions, avoid making their mistakes, capitalize on learning from their rewards, prioritize actions, evaluate risk vs. reward, forgo immediate pleasure gains for future reinforcement (delay of gratification |
|
|
Dollard and Millers Social Learning Theory (slides explanation) |
Habitat hierachy, develop 'habitats' for which behaviors are more or less likely to become activated in a situation (potentiation), learning rearranges habits, learning makes it less likely, but does not eliminate the possibility that a person will display previously learning behaviors in the future., drive-reduction theory, behavior is potentiation by an appetitive drive (primary or secondary) to satisfy a need, once a drive is satiated (zero need), people ususally recalibrate goals and therefore activate new needs, get bored and habituated, hedonic treatmill and coasting., Frustration-aggression hypothesis, frustration builds from blocked goals, promoting aggression, generally the more desirable the goal, the more frustrated one feels not being able to attain it., approach-avoidance conflict, tendencies to approach or avoid a goal that is both attractive and dreaded (e.g. a bungee jump) may change over time. both tendencies increase as the goal gets closer, but the avoidance gradient is steeper than the approach gradient. |
|
|
Julian Rotters social learning theory |
concerns decision making and the role of expectancies. She uses the expected value theory, which assumes that behavioral decisions are determined not just by the presence or size of reinforcement, but also by beliefs about the likely results of behaviors., with this theory, even if a reinforcement is attractive, you are not likely to pursue it if your chances of success seem slim., (conversely, even something not particularly desirable might motivate behavior if the chances of getting it are good enough) |
|
|
Julian Rotters expectancy definition |
an expectancy for a behavior is a persons belief, or subjective probability about how likely it seems that the behavior will attain its goal. the expectancy is your belief about whether an action will pay off. if you think a belief will bring success, you will try.. (if you think it wont work, you wont try it) |
|
|
Difference between rotters theory and classic behaviorism |
classic view focusses on actual rewards and punishments, while Rotters social learning theory focuses on beliefs about reward and punishment |
|
|
Rotters 2 types of expectancies |
specific and generalized specific: the belief that a certain behavior, at a certain time and place, will lead to a specific outcome (contextualized)/ generalized: general beliefs about whether anything you do is likely to make a difference (decontextualized) aka locus of control |
|
|
people with internal locus of control |
those with high generalized expectancies and thus tend to think that what they do affects what happens to them |
|
|
people with external locus of control |
have low generalized expectancies and tend to think that what they do will not make much difference |
|
|
Internal LOC |
perceived agency of self on environment |
|
|
External LOC |
environment overpowers self associated with depression and helplessness |
|
|
Rotters concepts lead to |
theories about and measurements of individual differences |
|
|
Banduras theory |
gives less emphasis to stable differences between people (generally ignores them). |
|
|
Where did Bandura go beyond Rotter? (since Banduras theory builds on Rotters) |
his emphasis on the social nature of learning and the ways people interact with the situations in their lives. |
|
|
Rotters expectancies are Banduras |
efficacy expectations |
|
|
Banduras SLT |
Reciprocal Determinism, environment shapes people, but people also shape their environments., Working self-concept, self in constantly under construction, shaped by knowledge of self in and across contexts, and actively integrating/updating with new information as one goes along living their everyday lives. Triad of: Behavioral factors, environmental factors, and personal factors |
|
|
Rotters notion of expectancy |
that if you do something, you will attain your goal |
|
|
Banduras efficacy (notion of expectancy) |
is the perceived probability that you can do something in the first place. |
|
|
Banduras self efficacy |
beliefs (or disbeliefs) about ones ability to succeed at goals with an environment belief about the self, about what the person is capable of doing. |
|
|
self-concept |
affects your efficacy expectations in various domains. |
|
|
Walter Mischels Cognitive Affective personality system |
focuses on intrapersonal variability in responses and behaviors |
|
|
If... Then personality contingencies |
takes into account learning, feeling, thinking, and self-regulation., more sensitive to the way people change their behavior across situations |
|
|
Problems with trait based personality approaches (Big 5) |
they are poor predictors of non aggregate situations., (two equaly neurotic people will display very different reactions and behaviors) |
|
|
Two major limitations of the learning approaches to personality |
it is not clear that the effects of behavioral therapies on phobias, addictions, and other problems are generalizable and long lasting., these theories still tend to underappreciate the degree to which the characteristic ways people think can cause them to respond differently to the same situation. |
|
|
Biggest problem |
pragmatically, is how to build a science around a diverse set of interactive factors. |
|
|
Baddelys model of working memory |
the central executive is like Freuds personality executive (called ego)., fluid system is changing., memories are fixed (crystalized) unless we bring them back in which they are subject to change., crystalized memories are more about learning |
|
|
Activation in working memory |
stimuli in WM activate connections with related stimuli, based on experience |
|
|
Reverse process: |
emotion produces accessible cogntions |
|
|
chronic accessibility |
tendencies to see the world more positively or negatively.,
process of cognition producing emotion, how you feel depends on how you appraise situations, worry engages anxiety |
|
|
people with positive and negative temperments |
have different sets of chronically accessible ideas, leading to different views of the world and different behavior |
|
|
rejection sensitivity |
anxious attachment and rejection fulfillment |
|
|
Reverse process |
emotions produces accessible cognitions |
|
|
top down self esteem |
when we evaluate ourselves by how we feel |
|
|
example of class of legos |
we've changed the way we react to them, we have positive feelings towards the movies and lego land and then associate those feelings with lego company. that marketing changed the affective reaction |
|
|
capacity as an individual difference variable |
feelings prioritize goals (interupt cognitive processing) in the service of goal focus., thus, not only do feelings influence the kinds of associates found in working memory, they also influence the ways in which that information is attended |
|
|
limitations in working memory processing |
limited ability to attend to a lot of information, need to maintain important information, suppress unimportant information (distractors such as worries) |
|
|
Working memory and action-deliberation |
attentional focus changes as a function of mood quality |
|
|
motivational intensity |
intense states (excitement, anger, anxiety) induces local processing., (high approach or high avoidance goal states, zero in on goals like a racehorse with blinders)., less intense states (calm, sadness) induces global processing., (low approach or low avoidance goal states) |
|
|
When does the cognitive scope change? |
narrows when immediate goals are salient (action orientation) and broadens following goal success or failure (deliberation orientation) |
|
|
In the navon letter task example in class (about global-local processing) |
people who are in an excited mood are able to notice the letters inside the letters., those who are calm or less intense are more likely to see the u |
|
|
what does factor analysis research do? |
focusses on one factor that has an emotionality variable., tries to figure out what factors go together., like if one factor is high on one tests it will also be high on another (i.e. depression and stress) |
|
|
results from chris' study |
mood had no effect on their working memory ability, but huge differences with personality. , moods had no influence over scores, however if you place peoples emotions (sad and calm) you will have different effects (negative emotion people do bad when they are anxious and do well when they are sad) |
|
|
Dual processing accounts: thinking broadly involves 2 systems |
rely heavily on system 1 (fast) intuition, affect, cognitive associations, schemas/scripts/stereotypes, heuristics & biases typically use system 2 (slow) when system 1 is insufficient reasoning, logic, calculations |
|
|
what do system 1 and 2 prioritize? |
system 1 prioritizes actions, whereas system 2 prioritizes deliberations |
|
|
differences in judgement in system 1 and 2 |
when we are reliant on system 1 processing, we assume how people act is because of their personality. if we use our system 2 we are more considerate and can consider what was going on in their life during that time, or why their behavior is modified, they are doing these things because of a certain situation. |
|
|
cognitive experiential self-theory |
seeks to explain unconscious processing the seemingly irrational, emotion-driven sectors of the mind. |
|
|
Two self systems in CEST |
rational system and the experiential system |
|
|
rational system (cold process) |
includes language, logic, and systematized, factual knowledge. it resembles Freuds conception of secondary process thinking... want to go more with reason, they have emotions, however they dont use those in order to determine their cognitions controlled, deliberate, logical, systematic, need for cognition |
|
|
experiential system (hot process) |
evolutionary older, tied closely to emotion, and assumed to be the way other animals think, resembles Freuds conception of primary process thinking go more with your gut, use your emotions more automatic, intuitive, affective (emotional), need for affect |
|
|
what do individual differences arise from (CEST) |
greater reliance on one of the two systems |
|
|
ideographic goals |
goals that are unique to the persons who pursue them., prioritize current concerns, be them big or small., they are hierarchical and flexible, priorities are reprioritized to fit immediate goals |
|
|
personal strivings (ideographic goal) |
long term goals that can organize broad areas of a persons life. (ex: areas of self-worth contingencies)., striving to be smart (academic self worth) versus strivings to be cool (interpersonal self-worth)., strivings potentially feel (or are) contradictory, causing troubles |
|
|
nomothetic goals |
goals that apply to everyone |
|
|
McClellands Big Three... motivations that drive human behaivor |
need for achievement, need for affiliation (or intamacy), need for power., similarities with self-determination theory |
|
|
entity theory |
where people believe that personal qualities such as intelligence and ability are unchangeable., level of achievement is fixed |
|
|
incremental theory |
believe that intelligence and ability can change with time and experience., level of achievment is flexible, dependent on opportunity and effort, mastery is a choice, their goals involve proving their competence as well as increasing it. |
|
|
Affect circumplex |
difference valences in emotion and arousal., emotion states go thru a categorization process and label them by what others have felt during that time |
|
|
alexithymia |
no emotional intelligence at all. (usually autistic) |
|
|
final remarks for personality |
personality isnt about traits, its about process. what we do and how its going to change. our actions change from one context to the next in most cases |
|
|
self-concept |
that attitudes we have are going to be meaningful. attitudes matter because they influence our behaviors as well., what we know and what we believe about ourselves |
|
|
self perception theory |
look back on our behaviors and who we were |
|
|
integrative self-concepts |
mixture of positive and negative beliefs across selves
|
|
|
compartmentalized self-concepts |
seperate positive and negative beliefs based on evaluation of self-in-situation., high contingencies of self-worth |
|
|
problems of upward social comparisons |
it can make us feel like crap when we are around people who are better than us |
|
|
looking glass self |
evaluate the self based on how we imagine others see us., appraisal from others are important, self presentation |
|
|
spotlight effect |
overestimate attention paid to us, self monitoring |
|
|
independent self |
self-worth based on autonomy, individualisitic idelogy, western culture, value the lone world |
|
|
interdependent self |
self worth based on relationship with group, collectivist ideology, value the wolf pack |
|
|
development of self esteem norms |
social norms are really important in developing them, traits valued by culture drives self-presentational concerns, self esteem is based on personal or social identity |
|
|
self esteem and feelings, bottom-up |
reasons for high SE lead to positive feelings about self., "i am successful and capable, which makes me feel good about self" ...most popular |
|
|
self esteem and feelings, top-down |
positive feelings make accessible the reasons for high SE accessible., "I feel good about myself right now, which leads me to believe i am capable and will be successful" |
|
|
are explicit and implicit self esteem interchangeable? |
absolutely not |
|
|
When prediciting the future self... |
they will be more successfull, higher self-esteem and positive mood, future self will be a better self |
|
|
planning fallacy (in regards to future self) |
"success wont be that tough", underestimate time and effort of future tasks, f"uture self has more motivation and self control"., goes along with how in the future we think we are going to be much more like our ideal self in the future, and we do need this belief but we also need this level of responsibility into becoming that person |
|
|
Construal level |
See future events broadly (high construal), which becomes complicated by the details (low construal) as events become nearer., we see the future in more broad terms, you dont really think about the minot details, the things we thought we would enjoy we see there is more work involved than we first though. |
|
|
what can unrealistic optimism be a prescription for? |
poor outcomes when optimism overshadows behavioral promotion and prevention, high contrual goals must be met with low construal behaviors |
|
|
how important is hope? |
really important for emotions, problem is if we start to lose sight of the possibility that things are going to get better, depression becomes problematic, especially true for suicide., hope is an important emotion that goes along with these biases that your life is going to get better. |
|
|
self-verification |
says that people do not always loook blindly for self-flattering information, its the tendency to look for information that is consistent with ones self concept., (this is true of negative self beliefs as well as positives)., |
|
|
what can inconsistencies between others and personal beliefs about the self cause? |
dissonance, to some degree self-threatening |
|
|
according to Bill Swann (self verification) |
we look for information that is consistent with the verifying information that other people use. people may have beliefs about us that arent real (too positive, and dont actually represent you). Swann would suggest that we are going to have negative reactions to those inconsistencies., people suffer when they dont add up to what they feel like people think of them or treat them. if someone starts to treat them in a way that shows them as positive (as someone who is suffering from depression), they will have a difficult time with. thats what self verification is telling us! |
|
|
so what kind of expectations should we have with our future self? |
positive, but realistic expectations., failure is possible, the self-control to overcome external and internal obstacles |
|
|
advantage of negative thinking |
defensive pessimism: self doubt motivates preparation, functional neuroticism |
|
|
disadvantages of negative thinking |
depressive realism: that depressed individuals make more realistic inferences than do non-depressed individuals., see the world more accurately, have more control., can also be a disadvantage because that power of control over your emotions can lead to negative emotions |
|
|
false consensus |
negative characteristics are shared by people. when we have negative characteristics we assume we all share those characteristics., unlike with happy characteristics, those are more personal., its like a defense mechanism |
|
|
false consensus effect |
people overestimate the commonality others with similar negative qualities and their unsuccessful behaviors |
|
|
false uniqueness effect |
people underestimate the commonality of others with similar positive qualities and their successful behaviors |
|
|
self-handicapping |
fear of failure leads to behaviors that serve to excuse goal failure |
|
|
self-presentation concerns |
generally, want others to think we are great, but also dont to disappoint them,., living up to the imagined expectations of others is challenging |
|
|
What classifies a disorder as abnormal? |
disorders that are statical deviations from average levels (e.g. traits): outliers EXTREME (emotions, cognitions, behaviors) |
|
|
Awareness and personality disorders |
in personality disorders, people are often unaware of the problem (ego-syntonic), despite social side effects., People with extreme emotional issues typically realize and are overwhelmed by symptoms (ego-dystonic) |
|
|
Clusters of personality disorders |
Cluster A: Distorted thinking Cluster B: implusive/erratic emotion and behavior Cluster C: anxiety mechanims |
|
|
Cluster A: Distorted thinking |
schizotypal, schizoid; paranoid |
|
|
Schizophrenia Lite |
disjointed thoughs/speech (word salad)., delusional/fantastical thinking (e.g. telpathy; superstitious; perceptual abnormalities (like belief of an extra limb))., paranoia., extreme emotionality (intense or flat affect)., strange actions/appearance., social impediments (fail to form close relationships; social anxiety) |
|
|
Schizoid |
extreme social disinterest/social numbness., interactions with others provide no joy (not even via sexual contact)., lack social emotion (e.g. empathy)., live solitary lives (e.g. hermits) Difference from avoidance, they dont have any response to social reactions, they dont get any satisfaction from relationships, they arent scared of rejections they are just indifferent about social interactions |
|
|
Paranoid |
High suspiciousness of others, see others as personal/relational threats, attend to cues they interpret to be confirmation of their suspicious beliefs., can come off as coal and calculating OR angry and stubborn |
|
|
Cluster B: Implusive/erratic emotion & behavior |
histrionic; narcissims, antisocial, borderline |
|
|
Histrionic (Halle) |
dramatic self-presentation (e.g. sexually seductive)., desires attention, extreme extraversion, constant need for updated social approval (i.e. always needs more)., exaggerated reactions to situations., extreme emotional contagion, adopt and adhere to attitudes to fit situational context, extreme capriciousness (complusive) |
|
|
Narcissism |
entitled, "vulnerable" narcissisnts: more dangerous because when folks arent following their beliefs they are likley to become aggressive., inflated sense of self, seek self-verifying information, do not take kindly to dissention (i.e. when other do not see them as all that awesome), demand special treatment, disparage others and their accomplishments/abilities., their world, others are just lucky enough to live in it with them |
|
|
antisocial |
lack moral compass, disloayl, maniupulative, deceitful, lack empathy, relationally maniuplative without emotional recoil, lack worry or concern, undeterred by potential risk (low or no avoidance motivation) like the super villan of disorders. they can use other emotions and not feel remorse at all, extremely maniupulative, sometimes shocked with how much they can get away with, they lack the emotions that keep us prosocial |
|
|
Borderline |
poorly established identify, emotions behaviors, attitudes fluctuate extremely, disconnect from reality, lack emotional control, prone to self-destructive acts, chronic dissatisfaction, unstable relational attachements |
|
|
Cluster C: Anxiety Mechanisms |
dependent, avoidant, obsessive-complusive |
|
|
Dependent |
extreme submissiveness, need other to control their lives, fear personal agency, simultaneous resentful of those they let control them |
|
|
avoidant |
avoid situations that may provide rejection or feelings of failure (extreme social sensitivity), constrict social world so that no one can get close to them, manage to avoid social rejection, but still crave relational closeness., they want relationships but they are too scared |
|
|
Personality disorders in context |
they are not necessarily socially destructive or socially incompatible |
