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;
70 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Steps of the scientific method |
1. state the problem 2. formulate a hypothesis 3. Design a study 4. Collect data 5. Evaluate data 6. Communicate results |
|
|
Experimental |
controls procedure, manipulates IV, RANDOM assignment, cause and effect |
|
|
Non-experimental |
correlation, less control, no random assignment, no cause and effect |
|
|
Quasi-experimental |
manipulates IV but NO random assignment (specific to one gender, race, not representative of the entire population) |
|
|
Between subject design |
participants exposed to one level of the IV (carry over effect) |
|
|
Within subject designs |
participants exposed to all levels of IV (statistical power and control) |
|
|
Mixed designs |
between subject for one IV, within subject for the other IV |
|
|
Main effect |
(variable) 1IV, effect of a single variable, ignores other variables |
|
|
Interaction |
2+ variables, effect of more than one variable acting on DV |
|
|
Internal Validity |
confidence IV caused change in DV (variables can be mixed) |
|
|
External validity |
findings generalize |
|
|
Stimulus sampling |
many stimuli to make sure the difference is in the category, not the stimuli |
|
|
Experimental realism |
important, determines validity |
|
|
correlation coefficient (r) |
1= strong + 0 = no -1= strong - +/1 .1 = small +/- .3= medium +/- .5= large |
|
|
reliability |
consistent results |
|
|
validity |
measure purpose of study |
|
|
cronbach |
measures internal consistency |
|
|
convergent validity |
measure is highly correlated with similar measure |
|
|
face validity |
non-statistical measure of validity, appears to measure what its supposed to measure |
|
|
ABC triad of social psych |
Affect, Behavior, Cognition |
|
|
modular minds |
evolutionary psych, brain module, areas with specific function control certain behavior |
|
|
culture |
information based system that includes shared beliefs, ideas and common ways of doing things |
|
|
Terror management theory and culture |
culture distracts/ buffers humans conscious fear of death/ existential anxiety, gives humans meaning |
|
|
collectivism |
interdependence, includes others in definition of self (Asia/ africa) |
|
|
Individualism |
independence from others (western cultures) |
|
|
Who came up with collectivism vs. individualism (cross cultural psychology)? |
Markos and Kitayama |
|
|
Cross cultural psychology |
culture acts on person, person= transmission of culture via nonverbal behavior |
|
|
Nature shapes culture |
basic needs influence what is important in culture (food, water, shelter) |
|
|
Culture shapes nature |
morality, laws/ self control against impulses |
|
|
Self concept/ constant |
OCEAN (openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism) |
|
|
Social identity salience |
what characteristic you identify with more, context and working self concept have influence |
|
|
independent self construal |
what makes you unique? |
|
|
Interdependent self construal |
What connects you to a group? |
|
|
Extended self |
other people are included in the self, makes us feel better when compared to someone better |
|
|
Upward social comparison |
compare to people better than you |
|
|
downward social comparison |
compare to people worse off than you |
|
|
Self esteem maintenance model |
-Tesser 1. performance 2. relevance 3. Closeness |
|
|
TMT and self esteem |
self esteem help us feel significant and deny our existential anxiety |
|
|
Sociometer theory |
self esteem measure social acceptability -warning mechanism when fundamental need for acceptance is not met |
|
|
Sociometer hypothesis warning mechanism |
monitor (non conscious), inform (conscious) and motivate (action) |
|
|
False uniqueness effect |
over-estimation of control over good/ unique qualities or situations |
|
|
Self-serving bias |
claim credit for success, not failure |
|
|
public self |
image of self portrayed to others |
|
|
self handicapping |
surprise others with success by risking failure on purpose |
|
|
Self presentation |
looks/ dress = identity |
|
|
Self monitoring |
High: care what others think, change to satisfy them Low: always self (personal/ private) no matter situation |
|
|
Face inversion effect |
recognition decreases for faces (not objects) when inverted |
|
|
face composite effect |
difficulty to identify a person when the top/ bottom are composed of other people |
|
|
Invariant person knowledge |
can be derived about other social agents, is stable across contexts (always constant) ex: attractiveness, identity, personality |
|
|
Variant person knowledge |
can be derived about other social agents that CAN vary across situations |
|
|
Trait inferences |
based on appearance (agree between people) trustworthiness based on face after 100ms |
|
|
eyes |
more white in humans to see better, sensitive to direct gaze (staring= threat, eye contact= arousal), others eyes attracts our attention, accurate in identifying where people are looking |
|
|
joint attention |
2 individuals are attending to the same objects based on one individual using the attention cues of the second individual |
|
|
Spatial cueing |
indicating a position in retinal spaces where a visual target may appear |
|
|
central cues |
presented at center of screen, requires central processing |
|
|
peripheral cues |
presented peripheral to fixation, indicated position without interpretation |
|
|
gaze cueing paradigm |
measures reaction time 1. detection 2. localization 3. Identification/ categorization |
|
|
Charles Darwin (1872) |
cross-species universality of 40 different emotional expression (love) |
|
|
Paul Ekman (1967) |
papua new guinea, correctly identify universal face expression -Facial action coding system in 1978 |
|
|
encoding |
expressing behavior |
|
|
decoding |
naming expression |
|
|
Facial Action coding system (1978) |
-Ekman and Friesen -codes for facial muscle movement with typical expressions |
|
|
Elfenbein and Ambady (2002) |
meta-analysis cross cultural emotional identification: 58% happiness (79%) contempt (43%) easier in group all emotion identification above chance |
|
|
Semin and Manstead (1982) |
field study: knocks over supermarket display no embarrassment: disliked by observers embarrassed: forgiven by observers |
|
|
Connomsense view |
stimulus> emotion/ experience> physiology |
|
|
James-Lange Theory |
physiology comes before emotional experience -emotions in body more than mind -embodies cognition, mental state depends on bodily experience ex: facial feedback hypothesis |
|
|
Appraisal Theory/ Schachter-Singer |
construct emotion based on situation/ thoughts ex: someone cuts you off rxn: anger (jerk!) or compassion (he's hurried) |
|
|
Bridge study |
-appraisal theory -woman gives phone #, low stable bridge, no arousal -high unstable bridge= emotion, unexplainable |
|
|
Schachter and Singer's 2 Factory theory of emotion |
patient given epinephrine -those who know what is is have no emotion to stimulus -those who do not know have emotion to stimulus, unexplainable |
|
|
Cannon-Bard theory |
emotion and physiology happen simultaneously -rxn to james-lange theory -thalamus fires in 2 directions |
