Social Interaction #3

Front 1

Prejudice

Back 1

i. Attitude, usually negative, about an entire category of people

Front 2

Stereotype

Back 2

Negative generalization about a group of people

Front 3

dual-attitude

Back 3

when explicit and implicit attitudes differ

Front 4

Word, Zanna, Cooper

Back 4

Black people doing worse in job interview because the interviewers treated them coldly.

Front 5

social dominance orientation

Back 5

motivation to elevate one's group over others

Front 6

Authoritarian personality

Back 6

favors loyalty to authority and intolerance of low status groups

Front 7

Ethnocentrism

Back 7

Favoring one's group over others

Front 8

Cognitive Misers

Back 8

People organize things into categories to more easily sort things out

Front 9

Stereotype Threat

Back 9

When someone has a negative stereotype and they are worried they are going to be judged on that characteristic.

Front 10

What makes a particular attitude/generalization a stereotype?

Back 10

Inaccurate, overgeneralized, persistent

Front 11

Just World Phenomenon

Back 11

Believe the world is just and people get what they deserve

Front 12

What are personal qualities that lead to people to being prejudiced?

Back 12

See themselves as ambitious and others as lazy.

Little education

Unequal status leads to inequality

Authoritarian Personalities:

Insecurity, intolerance for weakness, preference for punishment

Front 13

How are dual attitudes demonstrated in research concerning prejudice?

Back 13

Implicit Association Test

Although explicit attitudes may change drastically over the years, implicit attitudes are formed at young ages and are difficult to change.

Front 14

How have racism and sexism changed over the past 50 years?

Back 14

Blatant prejudice and discrimination has almost disappeared.

Front 15

Is racism disappearing or increasing? Give examples of both.

Back 15

Disappearing:

Integrated schools/public facilities, fewer people endorse blatant discrimination.

Increasing:

7000 hate crimes in 2006
6% still would not vote for a black presidential canidate

Front 16

What are benevolent forms of prejudice?

Back 16

Gender:

Males-''man up''
Females-''superior moral sensibility''

Front 17

Hostile forms of prejudice

Back 17

''Men are heartless''

''Women will put men on a leash''

Front 18

Socialization routes to prejudice

Back 18

People on top want to stay on top.

Childrens' attitudes are learned from their mother

Religion

Conformity

Tradition

Front 19

Cognitive routes to prejudice

Back 19

CATEGORIZATION

-people are cognitive misers
-exaggerate differences between groups and exaggerate similarities within groups

DISTINCTIVENESS

-Distinct members of groups stand out (either come to REPRESENT group or VIOLATE expectations)

ATTRIBUTION

-Fundamental Attribution Error

-Group Serving Bias
---promote own group over others

-Just-World Phenomenon
----World is just and people get what they deserve

-Blame the victim

Front 20

Realistic Group conflict theory

Back 20

prejudice arises from competition between groups for scarce resources

Front 21

Social Identity Theory

Back 21

We categorize

We identify

We compare

Front 22

Terror Management Theory

Back 22

people are aware of their future deaths and to protect from these thoughts they promote their social identity

(Asking people to think about 9/11 attacks in order to raise support for anti-terror campaign)

Front 23

Own Race Bias

Back 23

tendency for people to more accurately recognize faces of their own race

Front 24

Correll, Park, Judd, & Wittenbrink

Back 24

Videogame where people had guns. Linked blacks to danger.

Front 25

Payne

Back 25

Study showed people a quick image of a black person with a gun or tool and did the same with whites. People much more likely to think the tool was a gun when showed the black person.

Front 26

Shih, Pittinsky and Ambady

Back 26

Asking Asian females about their gender identity before taking a math test, scores plunged. But when asked about Asian identity their scores were higher.

Front 27

Aggression

Back 27

physical or verbal behavior intended to hurt someone

Front 28

hostile aggression

Back 28

intended to injure

Front 29

instrumental aggression

Back 29

help obtain resources, thought applied

Front 30

Desensitization

Back 30

repeated exposure to aggression leads to less distress towards own and other's agression

Front 31

social scripts

Back 31

cultural expectations of appropriate behaviors in given situations

Front 32

What are the biological and chemical sources of aggression?

Back 32

We have an instinct to be aggressive

Alcohol

Testostorone

Low serotonin

Front 33

What part of the brain is responsible for aggression?

Back 33

Amygdala, prefrontal cortex

Front 34

What are some of the social sources of aggression?

Back 34

The family

Experiencing success with aggression (bullies)

Culture (violent media)

Front 35

Frustration-Aggression Theory

Back 35

unjusitified frustration leads to anger plus aggression cues and that leads to aggression

Front 36

Social learning theory

Back 36

rewards for aggression

Front 37

Situational contributors to aggressive behavior

Back 37

Pain
Heat
Attack
Overcrowding

Front 38

How arousal contributes to aggressive behavior

Back 38

arousal feeds emotion and it depends on how the person interprets those feelings.

Front 39

how groups influence aggression

Back 39

Aggression is higher/more likely in groups

Front 40

Badura's bobo doll

Back 40

Kids exposed to adults beating a bobo doll were more likely to do the same type of thing after observing the aggressive behavior.

Front 41

Bushman

Back 41

People exposed to violent movie clips and and given the opportunity to retaliate against an opponent who irritated them.

Front 42

Meier & Hinsz

Back 42

Hot sauce, people more likely to be aggressive in groups than individually

Front 43

Need to belong

Back 43

Everyone has this, motivation to bond with others

Front 44

Passion

Back 44

State of intense longing for union with another

Front 45

Intimacy

Back 45

Feeling of a close association with another

Front 46

Commitment

Back 46

Being bond emotionally or intellectually to another

Front 47

Equity

Back 47

the perception what one person contributes to a relationship is equal to what they receive

Front 48

The three needs that everyone tries to balance

Back 48

Autonomy

Need to belong

Competence

Front 49

how does proximity influence liking relationships

Back 49

Physical closeness, interaction is important

Front 50

what is the mere-exposure effect

Back 50

the tendency for novel stimuli to be liked more or rated more positively after the rater has been repeatedly exposed to them.

If you are familiar with someone you are more likely to be fond of them.

Front 51

how does physical attraction relate to liking

Back 51

Attractive people

date more, win more elections,

Front 52

what is the physical attractiveness stereotype

Back 52

people avoid ugly people and are more likely to want to interact with attractive people

Front 53

Does physical attractiveness predicted liking, does liking predict physical attractiveness

Back 53

Yes and yes

Front 54

What is the matching phenomenon

Back 54

People have a tendency to choose partners who are similar in attractiveness and other traits

Front 55

Is attractiveness stable (does attractiveness at one time predict attractiveness at another time)

Back 55

Attractiveness is not stable

Front 56

how does similarity relate to how well people like one another?

Back 56

Similarity is more important than attractiveness

Front 57

How does dissimilarity relate to liking?

Back 57

Dissimilarity equals disliking

Front 58

What is romantic love?
Fatuous love?
Compassionate Love?
Consummate Love?

Back 58

Passion + intimacy
Passion + commitment
Intimacy + commitment
Passion + Intimacy + Commitment

Front 59

What is the two factor theory of emotion and how does that relate to feelings of love?

Back 59

Arousal X its label = emotion

Front 60

Cultural Differences in love relationships

Back 60

Similar concepts of romance, difference in how relationships proceed. (arranged marriages, non arranged marriages)

Front 61

Sex differences in perceptions of love

Back 61

Males fall in love quicker, fall out of love more slowly.

Females more emotionally involved in relationship

Front 62

Four types of attachment

Back 62

secure
preoccupied
dismissive
fearful

Front 63

Self-disclosure

Back 63

revealing intimate feelings to others

Front 64

Sternberg

Back 64

Came up with the different types of love (the triangle figure)

Front 65

Altruism

Back 65

opposite of selfishness

Front 66

Bystander effect

Back 66

Person is less likely to help if there are other people around

Front 67

Diffusion of responsibility

Back 67

a group of people, each individual does not take responsibility for their actions or inactions

Front 68

Social Responsibility

Back 68

regardless of any reward, it is your responsibility to help a person if you see they are in need

Front 69

Empathy

Back 69

Feeling what another feels

Front 70

Egoism

Back 70

looking out for yourself

Front 71

Pluralistic Ignorance

Back 71

False impression of what others are thinking or feeling

Front 72

Evolutionary reasons for why people help

Back 72

helping others increases our chances of surviving

Front 73

Social-Exchange theory (what social reasons do people have for helping),

Back 73

Minimizes personal cost, maximizes personal benefits

Front 74

Social Norms for helping others

Back 74

Reciprocity
Social responsibility
kin selection

Front 75

How is empathy related to helping

Back 75

When empathy is high we are motivated to respond

Front 76

Kitty Genovese story as it relates to reasons for not helping (I don't necessarily need specifics like specifically how long it took people to get to her)

Back 76

People didnt help but the by stander effect took over

Front 77

List and describe the four steps that lead to helping

Back 77

Notice
interpretation
assume responsibility
identify appropriate action

Front 78

Religion as a predictor of helping

Back 78

Little to no differences depending on religion

Front 79

Gender differences in who gives and gets help

Back 79

Males help in dangerous situations and when women need help

Front 80

Darley & Latane

Back 80

People given seizures, people who witnessed did not help when others were around

Front 81

Darley & Batson

Back 81

Good samaritan study, people in a hurry were less likely to help