• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

Card Range To Study



Play button


Play button




Click to flip

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;

215 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
what determines what we find "attractive"?
things that help get genes into next generation (health and fertility, neurophysiological efficiency, ability to provide resources, capacity for cooperative relationships)
how does assessment of physical attractiveness vary?
interrater agreement, cross-cultural and historical agreement

IS variation in physical adornments and ideal body weight
attractive color
red (ref to swellings?)
men body preferences for women
in cultures with scarce resources heavier women are preferred (and there has been some change over time to prefer thinner women)

study: dhall, asked about money
what traits do men prefer in faces for women?
baby-facedness (indication of affection/care for children?), symmetry (indication of good development), averageness (normal development)
why do we rate people as more attractive when "small"?
we have template of ideal face in mind (with more information we deviate from ideal)
smells and attraction
women prefer masculine faces when ovulating (and symmetrical faces' odors)
masculine faces on men
immunocompetence, preferred when odds of conception are high because the sex is for the GENES (only occurs with fertilization)
feminine faces on men
investment behavior, this is the general preference, the sex is for the affiliative bond (which can occur with just sex...don't need fertilization)
romantic chemistry and mhc genes
preference for individuals with different MHC genes...more diversity (correlates to relationship satisfaction)

only for women in response to men

study (related): women have more orgasms with rich men
physical attractiveness stereotype (biases)
attractive seen as "good" (although not as likely to be a good parent, intelligent)

study: varieties of human physique, height bias (for men), male with obese versus nonobese females, chidlren!, handicap in movie, phone conversation
why do people like displays of embarrassment and restitution behavior in others (ie grocery store study)?
restorative behavior, it is negative to be singled out (even for a good thing) because it puts you on think social ice (arrogance)
biology of oxytocin
mammalian hormone and neurotransmitter associated with maternal behavior and pair-bonding, released during birth and breastfeeding (F) and organsm and cuddling (F and M)
how does oxytocin affect bonding behavior ie in voles?
prairie vole (monogamous, both parents care), montone vole (promiscuous, female care)...differences in oxytocin!

take out ovaries of prairies and show no preference for familiar males, inject with oxytocin and then prefer whichever male present
oxytocin and trust in humans (study)
the "trust game" more trusting with oxytocin (but only SOCIAL trust...not risk ie doesn't work with a formula)
vasopressin gene and pair-bonding in humans
similar to oxytocin, neuropeptide, men with certain polymorphisms exhibit more bonding-related qualities and behaviors
how is relationship success determined?
not about love but emotional expectations (when unexpected, positive or negative...when expected, nothing)--similar to dopamine
how to maintain positive emotion
roller-coaster relationship (but there are costs to this), "relationship work", creative unexpeted facilitation
Gottman's Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
criticism (general, unhelpful), defensiveness (denial), stonewalling (shut-down), ***contempt (thinking that you are better)

study: predicting from video and coding whether couple will stay together
cognitive interdependence (after self-disclosure process)
formation of "group mind" greater than sum of individual minds, develops as partners lean others' areas of expertise and become dependent for knowledge

study: real and impromptu couples memorizing (remember more when there was not an assigned category of expetrtise)
How do we go about perceiving apparent behavior (minds)?
objects (where they have been, causal past) and agents (where they are going (goal future)
4 types of perception of causality
launching (apparent causation), no causation, self-motion, equifinality (goal-directedness)

even in infants infer intentions (look longer at "strange" ball)
role of amygdala in mind perception
directs people towards emotional stimuli

study: subject with damage doesn't describe things in social terms (text analyzed for different kinds of words--affect/social vs motion)
mechanical versus biological (ie point line walker) motion

...and part of brain involved
we can distinguish, get info about individual and their mind

different brain regions for attributing emotion and personality based on movement (seen via dysfunctional imaging)--R somatosensory cortex (feeling bodily sensations) damaged disrupts emotional recognition, L frontal operculum disrupts personality attribution

also, there is a double dissociation (each type of brain damage impairs one thing)
adaptiveness of anthropomorphism
we err on the side of seeing agents because the cost of not knowing that something else is there can be high but it's not a big deal in other direction...religious ideas!

study: we view certain entities in certain ways based on experience and agency dimensions
Heider's Attribution Theory
Phenomenal Causality (we attribute things to either internal causes such as traits and motives or external causes such as situations and pressures)
The Fundamental Attribution Error
the tendency to overestimate the importance of durable traits in explaining behavior and underestimate the importance of situational factors (we attribute others' behavior to them, we attribute our behavior to situation)

studies: Casto essays, Good Samaritan talk, Milgram, fidgeting woman watched by subjects who are made "cognitively busy" and thus cannot self-correct evaluation

Asian cultures make Error less...
Theory of Mind
actors see the situation, observer sees the actor's disposition

study: observers from many perspectives
Theory of Mind and False Belief
Sally/Ann study...children around age 3-4 pass this test

different brain regions for Sally/Ann and for photograph of apple on tree (therefore we seem to have a network specialized for thinking about minds)

also chimps and food (worked in competitive but not cooperative situation)
neurodevelopmental disorder in which core problem is a disruption in the system responsible for mentalizing

Williams Syndrome is a sort of mirror image (mentally impaired but hypersocial)
characteristics of attraction
similarity, propinquity (mere exposure!), physical attractiveness, reciprocal liking
attachment styles
secure, avoidant, anxious/ambivalent/resistant
two perspectives on self
Knower/Known and I/me
animals and development of self-awareness
most animals think mirror image is other, are we biased towards "visual" animals?
self-recognition and social interaction (abnormal conditions of development...)
study: chimps reared in social isolation don't recognize self, mirror self-misidentification
symbolic interactionist theory of self
we need conceptions of self so that we can model other people (self gives attention to other which allows self to take on a role)
self awareness in infants and adolescents
seems to be 16-18 mo. adolescents are ego-centric and feel like they're performing...
self as second-order evaluator
person has hierarchy of desires (ie desires about own desires...otherwise you are a wanton), personhood/identity is a cognitive achievement of the organization of one's desires into a coherent system (the formation of values), gives us integrity over time

this takes time to develop! figure out which "wants" are the ones to keep
values can be deep but subjective
free will
free because you want to want it (first and second order in line)
subjective self awareness
attention from self as subject and toward other objects, equivalent to "knower" and "I", created by tasks and distractions, comes with the flow (losing yourself)
objective self awareness
attention to self as object, equivalent to "known" and "me", created by self-focusing stimuli, increase salience of discrepancy between real self and self-standard
positive discrepancy
self>standard, feel good and approach OSA
negative discrepancy
self<standard, feel bad and avoid OSA

(if avoidance is blocked then attempt to reduce discrepancy)

study: mirror placements, escaping self, fault, attitudes toward punishment (spreading effect)
behavior influence of being self-conscious
become more like ideal self

study: awareness of self-bias, dictator game with eyes and anagrams, grad students, swimsuit/sweater, black/white stereotypes
how does arousal affect OSA?
mere physiological arousal puts attention on oneself

study: running etc
criticism of arousal-affects-OSA (and response)
criticism: this is just embarrassment

but when tested slow and fast running, no diff in self-focus...not about heart rate...

new experiment did not involve embarrassment (hill) and found diff in self focus!
concepts related to transcending the self
buddhism (the illusory self), philosopher Hume (the "bundle" theory), C.S. Lewis (humility is not about false beliefs but about not focusing on self)
what kinds of people are more susceptible to contagious yawning?
those who are more empathetic and who do better on theory of mind tasks
continental orientations as implications of coughograms
cultural innovations spread, the larger the pool of connected people the more innovations, spread along path of similar climates along which they can travel
The Great American Interchange
N species wiped out S because grew up in bigger group with more competition and thus more successful
The Chameleon Effect (unconscious mimicry and facilitation of liking)
participant mirrors what confederate does (posture/movements) and it is found to facilitate smoothness of interactions and increase liking between partners

study: pen dropped
Bases of Social Power
reward (offers), coercive (threats), referent (point to someone else), expert (knowledge), legitmate (ie gov)
direct pressure studies
party over policy, ballot initiatives in certain locations
types of influence tactics
indirect, gradual, exchange-oriented, sequential, inveiglement, social
what is the best way to exert influence?

study: eating soda crackers
foot-in-the-door technique
small request first then large (Bem's Self Perception Theory)

study: sign, various sizes of survey question requests
low ball procedure
commitment then cost (a kind of foot-in-door request)...give the good part first and then more likely to comply with the bad part
descriptive norm versus injunctive norm
what people tend to do versus what you should do regardless (descriptive norm is more powerful even when WRONG)

study: reducing energy, utilities bill
ideomotor action
basis of hypnosis, just thinking about it makes you do it
established effects of hypnosis
experience of involuntariness, pain control, mental control (ironic effects), memory retrieval reduction
hypnosis effect on pain as seen in brain regions
no effect on somatosensory cortex (the sense of pain) but reduces activity in anterior cingulate cortex (affect of pain region)

still sensitive to changes in intensity but don't care
the placebo effect
study: analgesic cream, brain regions sensitive to pain are less active!
evolutionary perspective on hypnosis
meta-awareness (thinking about own mind) may be relatively recent development and main design of brain is for unconscious
the ***early*** years of social evolution
stable molecules to replicating molecules to cells to eukaryotes to multicellular organisms

...coming together and deriving benefit from mutual cooperation
elements of evolution
heritable variation and selection
faulty evolutionary ideologies
naturalistic fallacy (that natural equals good) and social darwinism (social inequality justified because inevitable)
sexual selection (more specifically than natural selection)
selection for traits that help one mate, but otherwise confer no survival advantage

sucessful individuals must survive to sexual maturity and reproduce, survival traits are attractive but traits that help one reproduce don't necessarily help one survive
runaway sexual selection (ie peacock tail)
males survive better, females catch on (mating advantage), this carries selection beyond the survival advantage

process in equilibrium when mating advantage is outweighed by survival
ostentatious dispalys and handicapping
might be signals of health if can't be otherwise verified, a trait that signals good genes will be selected for even if the trait itself has no survival value (trait must be costly to be a credible signal)
sexual dimorphism
males and females have diff phenotypes for diff reproductive ends (not physical but behavioral)
parental investment
cost to the individual of producing surviving offspring (males just send DNA, females DNA and resources)
which is choosier sex?
sex with greater parental investment engages in (choice) ntersexual selection, sex with lesser engages in (competition) intrasexual selection)

a reproductive strategy that yields increased reproductive success by involving both male and female in continued parental investment (long term strategy)
humans long term versus short term strategies
in humans sex differences in standards for short term mates still reflect female preference for long term strategy
structural powerlessness hypothesis
another explanation for strategy differences, women in all cultures are denied access to power and resources and one way to get them is by marrying man with resources (but Buss' data doesn't show this)
sex differences in jealousy
females more distressed by mate falling in love, males more distressed by mate having sex
sex differences in aggression and self-protection
females tend to place high value on their own protection. there own life enhanced their reproductive success because infant survival depends more on maternal than paternal car/defense (indirect rather than direct aggression)
The Prisoners' Dilemma
assuming both players are selfish, cooperation is collectively rational but individually irrational (altruism, internal versus coercion, external)
what is the use of a more general multiperson model of the PD
solutions to problems of social life in general (like overpopulation) that need moral solutions or coersive solutions
kin selection
favors genes of individuals who promote the survival of other individuals who also carry their genes (1/2 for siblings), actually selfish from genes' perspective, evidence in humans
females are "supersisters" sharing 75% of their genes with each other
reciprocal altruism
individuals can be conditionally altruistic toward each other if they have mechanisms for keeping track of who is likely to return the favor
evidence that we may be adapted for cheater-detection?
study: turning over cards to see if rule has been violated (easier with drinking context, the social version, even when controlled for various other things)

but also works for "precautionary" context
neurological evidence related to cheater detector
the emotion and social cognition area is the medial orbiotofrontal cortex...when damaged, do worse only on social contract violation (not the precautionary)

this enables cooperation
"tit for tat"
cooperates on first move nad does whatever opponent does on subsequent moves

discovered to be the simple winning strategy for PD (the essence of reciprocal altruism)
how did "tit for tat" evolve?
evolutionary tournament (agent based on models of social evolution), when strategy is successful leaves more offspring like it.

when few TFT--ALLC evolves to ALLD, when decent number (which is?) of TFT ALLC evolves to TFT eventually

pure cooperation connot evolve from pure defection but TFT can...need something to get cooperation going...
Social Brain (and other) hypotheses about why brain is so expensive
by-product of getting big overall (no, just proportionally)

better diet for mothers led to surplus for offspring led to bigger brains (doesn't really explain much)

need for brain to find fruit or have larger ranger (maybe?)

need more brain to manage complex social relationships
disproving of "need brain for fruit/range" hypothesis
neocortex:brain ratio of various primates not found to be correlated to amount of fruit in diet/range

...was correlation with group size and length of juvinile period (about learning time)

evidence also that bigger brains~more FRIENDS (not just general group) humans around 150
multilevel selection (group level)
an individuals genes can spread also with between group competition (cooperators can outcompete individualists if they stick together)

also seen early at cellular level

study: chickens, did better if bred based on group success
cultural evolution
"meme" and "memetics"--a unit of cultural evolution and the study of the evolution of ideas

humans are wired for this (ie religion)
self-fulfilling prophecy
we are using it as organizing metaphor for various things...the tendency for people to act in ways that elicit confirmation of a belief that they hold
expectancy effects examples
witch hunts, al gore, "blooming" students
the cycle of self-fulfilling prophecy
perceiver expectation, perceiver behavior, target behavior, observations by perceiver/target/orther...and around
behavioral confirmations examples
men on phone with women, hockey roster, noise weapons, "testing" hypothesis led to confirmatory bias
self-perception effects examples
scar leading to less friendly person, test performance (cognitive acessibility of stereotype)
Unconcious Causation of Others' Actions
Clever Hans discovered by Oscar Pfungst, Facilitated Communication
Facilitated Communication
a manual procedure for helping impaired people communicate...debunked!

how was it working...study: told to muscle read but got most questions right because it was really their own answers ("communicator" was not hearing anything). yet attributed most to contributers!
sheer closeness of contact with potential targets of attraction, major determinant (amplifier) of attraction
three reasons for the power of propinquity
availability (of contact for the chance to know and like), anticipation of interaction in future (so put best foot forward), mere exposure effect
another major determinant of attraction

study: enaged couples, bogus stranger paradigm shows the people like individuals who resemble them
four reasons for the power of similarity
validate beliefs and values, facilitates smooth interactions, expect them to like us, have qualities we like
physical attractiveness
another major determinant of attraction, benefit from halo effect (believed to have many positive qualities that go beyond their physical appearance)
how young does attractiveness matter?
infancy and childhood (halo effect again)...both to and from
gender differences between effect of physical attractiveness
affects women more
three reasons for the power of phyiscal attractiveness
immediacy, effect on prestige, biology plays a role
reproductive fitness
our biology prompts attraction to features that signifiy the capacity to perpetuate genes in future generations if mate

includes vitality, fertility, and likely reproductive success
intrasex competition
competition among gender (males...parental investment is less so can't be choosy)
intersex attraction
competition for opposite gender attention (males for females...loud and gaudy)
evolutionary psychology and human preferences
different parental investment leads to different numbers of sexual partners as well as male preferences for youth and beauty and female preferences for commitment and resources
strongest support for an evolutionary approach to attractiveness
women increase their preferences for attractive or at least symmetrical men during the *ovulatory* phase of menstrual cycle
reward and attraction
theory that we tend to like those who provide us with greatest rewards
social exchange
theory that people pursue those interactions that provide the most favorable differences between rewards and costs
What do feral children demonstrate?
the biological need to belong (negative consequences of absence of relationships
relational selves
beliefs, feelings, and expectations that derive from their relationships with particular other people, when one is activated the person is seen in the light of the relevant relationship self

in this way relationships shape the sense of self and how social events are remembered and explained
attachment theory
in early development children rely on their parents for a sense of security...

secure attachment--comfortable with intimicy and wish to be close to others when stressed

avoidant attachment--insecure in relationships and distance themselves from others

anxious attachement--insecure in relationships but respond by compulsivley seeking out and worrying about closeness with others

stable over lifespan and affect relationship satisfaction
Fiske's Relationship Models Theory (4 kinds of relational styles)
communal sharing (family, receive what you need and give what you have)

authority ranking (corporations and tribes, power flows from head to lower and resources are distributed as head desires)

equality matching (friendships, reciprocity and sameness)

market pricing (comparies with commision, benefits in proportion to inputs)

different cultures use all styles but to different degrees and in different situations
What is power based on?
status, authority, dominance relations
approach/inhibition theory of power
elevated power makes people look at things in more simplistic fashion and act in the social world in more disinhibited ways
causes of divorce
marrying young, criticism, defensiveness, stonewalling, and contempt
causes of happy romantic relations
commitment (function of rewards in relationship), alternatives, investments, positive illusions about partners, novel but arousing activities
self-concept and what determines it
the sense of self, originates in part from biologically based dispositions inherited from parents as well as from birth order. also shaped by social context.
birth order sense of self
first borns are more assertive and achievemetn oriented, later borns are more open to experiences and cooperative
social comparison
self shaped by social context and thus people learn about their own abilities, attitudes, and personal traits
distinctiveness hypothesis
people in western cultures define themselves according to uniqueness in social context
self-concept and culture
self is shaped by independent vs. interdependent cultures
self-concept and gender
women generally emphasize relationships with others, men generally emphasize uniqueness
forms of self-knowledge
can take the form of beliefs, images, memories, and stories we tell about our lives
what does self-knowledge do?
helps guide construal of social information (through memories and self-schemas) typically reinforcing preexisitng beliefs about self
self-knowledge and standards
embodies cultural and moral standards, motiviates appropriate behavior
self-discrepancy theory
investigates how people compare their actual selves to both their ideal and ought selves
self-knowledge in independent versus interdependent cultures
independent--use self-knowledge to judge others, tend to have unrealistically positive beliefs about themselves, illusion of control, and unrealistic optimism...enhances sense of well-being

interdependent--use knowledge of other people as standards for social judgement, less evidence of self illusions
trait self esteem and state self esteem
trait--stable part of identity

state--changes according to different contextual factors
what does the motivation to have elevated self-esteem guide?
becuase it will allow the formation of friendships that allow one to engage in favorable social comparisons and esteem enhancing pride taken in the friend's success
which cultures value self-esteem more?
western cultures
what are the perils of high self esteem
antisocial behavior resulting from marcissistic levels of self esteem
self-presentation theory
self as a dramatic performer in the public realm, need to create and maintain favorable public imrpession ("face")
ensures behavior fits demands of social context
self-handicapping behaviors
people protect their public self by engaging in self-defeating behaviors that can explain away possible failure
on-record versus off-record communication
direct versus indirect/subtle

shaped by face concerns and self-presentation
public self conciousness
awareness of what other people think about us
private self-consciousness
awareness of our interior lives (thoughts, feeligns, sensations)
three types of social influence
conformity (change in response to often implicit pressure), compliance (going along with explicit requests), obedience (commands of an authority...can ignore for now)
three sources of conformity
ideomotor action (mindless/automatic), informational social influence (see others' actions as info about what is best to do), normative social infleunce (out of concern for social consequences)
characteristics affecting conformity pressure
group size (larger up to about four people)

unanimity (just need one dissenter to change)


culture/gender (interdependent conform more, women conform more...mostly in domains of less knowledge)


satisfying explanations of others' judgments
minority influence
can be substantial, especially when it is a consistent minority
two ways to elicit compliance
reason-based techniques and emotion-based techniques
reason-based approaches to compliance
invoking the norm of reciprocity (and related, door in the face) or the foot in the door step by step process
emotion-based approaches to compliance
good mood (will increase compliance due to mood maintenance) or sometimes can work with negative state relief to reduce guilt/sadness
attempts to influence backfire

aided by practice, ally, awareness of techniques, delay
explanatory style
for the cause of events, important for behavior (ie pessimistic--attribute good outcomes to external, unstable, local causes and bad outcomes to internal, stable, and global causes...bad)
discounting and augmentation principles
we make an attribution based on a single observation after witnessing a single instance of behavior

discounting--situational constraints could have caused behavior, discount person's disposition

augmentation--if there were strong forces that would typically inhibit the behavior we augment its implications and assume disposition to be particularly powerful
covariation principle
when we have made multiple observations of a behavior we have more information about the person/situation/other people's behavior
when do we attribute behavior to person (after multiple observations)
person engages in behavior across many situations, other people tend not to engage in behavior
when do we attribute behavior to situation (after multiple observations)
person engages in behavior only in a particular situation and most people in that situation also engage in the behavior
counterfactual thoughts
we often perform mental simulations, adding or subtracting elements about the person or the situation and using these simulations to guide our attributed outcomes
when is joy or pain in response to an event amplified?
when it is easy to see how things might have turned about differently
self-serving attributions
we sometimes make irrational attributions about the cause of events so as to flatter ourselves
fundamental attribution error (aka correspondence bias)
tendency to attribute behavior to real or imagined dispositions of the person and to neglect influential aspects of the situation confronting the person
just world hypothesis
we like to think that people get what they deserve (a reason for the fundamental attribution error)
fundamental attribution error and salient aspects
people and their behavior are more salient than situations...causing fundamental attribution
the step-wise process of the fundamental attribution error
1) people are automatically characterized in terms consistent with their behavior
2) characterization is only later adjusted to take account of the impact of prevailing situational forces
actor-observer differences
actors tend to attribute behavior to situations (more so than observers) this is because actors usually see the situations they confront better
fundamental attribution error and cultural differences
interdependent people are less likely to make this error because they tend to pay attention to context

(can prime in bicultural people)
the idea that opposites attract
procedure whereby an investigator makes sure that any extraneous variable that might influence is distributed equally
equity theory
people are motivated to pursue fairness in which rewards and costs are shared equally among individuals
functional distance
an architectural layout's propensity to encourage contact between certain people and discourage it between other
sociometric survey
attempt to measure the interpersonal relationships in a group of people
ability to control one's own outcomes and those of others, and the freedom to act

related to status, authority, and dominance
status, authority, dominance
status (outcome of an evaluation of attributes that produces differences in respect to prominence)

authority (derives from institutionalized roles or arrangements)

dominance (behavior that has the acquisition or demonstration of power as its goal)
another way to divide relationships: communal and exchange
communal (tends to be based on long-term bonds in which individuals feel responsibility)

exchange (tends to be based on short-term bonds in which individuals do not feel responsibility)
experience-sampling studies
beepers...randomly signal for information about moment
interaction dynamics approach
approach to study of the behaviors and conversations of couples (focus on negative and positive beahviors)
interpersonal relationships
attachments in which bonds of family or friendship or love or respect or hierarchy tie together two or more individuals over an extended period of time
investment model of interpersonal relationships
helps us understand how we might remain committed and happy in romantic relationships (rewards, alternatives, investments lead to commitment and to pro-social behavior and to satisfaction)
self-expansion account of relationships
people enter into and remain in close relationships to expand the self by including resources, perspectives, experiences and characteristics of the other as part of their own self-concept
social dominance orientation
the desire to see one's own group dominate other groups--more strongly endorsed by individuals associated with more powerful groups
strange situation
for classification of attachment pattens, how infants respond to separations and reunions with their caregivers
transactive memory
knowledge that people in relationships have about their partner's encoding, storage, and retrieval of information
triangular theory of love
three major components of love are intimacy, passion, and commitment which can be combined in different ways
working models of relationships
children form attachments to parents and thus form ideas about another's availability, warmth, and ability to provide security
actual self
the self we truly believe ourselves
ideal self
the self that embodies the wishes and aspirations we and other people maintain about ourselves
collective self
social categories to which we belong
contingencies of self-worth
self-esteem is contingent on--that is, rises and falls with--successes and failures in domains upton which a person has based his or her self-worth
siblings develop into quite different people so that they can peacefully occupy different niches within the family environment
Five-Factor Model (Big Five)
five traits (openness, conscientiousness, extra version, agreeableness, and neuroticism) that lie at the core of our self definitions
heritability and twins
to determine degree to which traits are determined by genes, do twin studies
identity cues
customary quirks that signal to other important facets of our identity, and by implication how we are to be treated and construed by others
impression management
attempting to control the beliefs that others have of us
ought self
the self that is concerned with duties, obligations, and external demands we feel we are compelled to honor
prevention focus
a sensitivity to negative outcomes often motivated by desire to live up to ought self and avoid guilt/anxiety from failing to live up to sense of what we ought to do
promotion focus
a focus on positive outcomes, approach-related behavior, and cheerful emotions that help us live up to our ideals and aspirations
self-evaluation maintenance model
in order to view ourselves in favorable light and do so through reflection (flatter ourselves by association with others' accomplishments) and social comparison (strategically noting how our own performance compares favorable to others esp in a domain relevant to self-concept)
self-image bias
tendency to judge others' personalities according to their similarity or dissimilarity to our own personality
presenting who we actually are, or who we would like others to believe we are
self-reference effect
the tendency to elaborate upon and recall information that is integrated into our self-knowledge
knowledge-based summaries of our feelings and actions and how we understand others' views about the self
self-verification theory
we strive for stable, accurate beliefs about the self because such beliefs give us a sense of coherence
social beliefs
the roles, duties,and obligations we assume in groups
social comparison theory
we make use of other people to define ourselves
sociometer hypothesis
self-esteem is an internal, subjective index or marker of the extent to which we are included or excluded by others
consistent ways that people think, feel, and act across classes of situations
autokinetic illusion
the tendency of a stationary point of light in the dark to appear to move
internalization vs public compliance
private acceptance versus agreeing with someone or advancing a position in public but continuing to believe something else in private
reciprocal confessions technique
another name for door-in-the-face
social influence
ways people affect one another
that's not all technique
uses norm of reciprocity, add on...
attribution theory
deals with how people assign causes to the events around them and the effects that these attributions have

attribution=process by which people explain both their own behavior and that of other people
what most people would do in a given situation
what an individuals does in a given situation on differenet occasions
what an individual does in different situations
false-consensus effect
people tend to think that their behavior is relatively common
self-serving bias
people are inclined to attribute failure and other bad events to external circumstances but to attribute success and other good events to themselves