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;
95 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Pashler and Shanks replication findings |
worked on replicating studies like the elderly ones and didn't work |
|
|
Cesario's findings with embodied cognition |
the subjects didn't realize what they were doing was because of how they were feeling- embodied cognition (think the loneliness and warm shower study)- he was unable to replicate, found no relationship between bathing and loneliness |
|
|
Latham's study- priming with picture of woman winning race |
priming- people who saw picture of woman before brainstorming performed better; call center ppl did better when had image of call center workers, then woman winning race, then no photo and were too busy to notice it |
|
|
Zimbardo's explanation for the Abu Ghraib |
the balance of power is so unequal that they tend to be brutal places if there aren't strict regulations- situation corrupts person |
|
|
social psych vs. sociology |
sociology is the study of people in aggregate. social psychologists study people in aggregate too but bring an interest in the individual behavior to the study of aggregates |
|
|
social psych. vs personality psych |
personality psych emphasizes individual differences in behavior rather than the social situation. Personality would see how people react across different situations and what that says about them vs examining the general situation |
|
|
social psych vs cog psych |
the study of how people perceive, think about and remember aspects about the world. they differ in the topics they study- social: social behavior and perceptions of others, cognitive: categorization processes or memory |
|
|
fundamental attribution error |
the failure to recognize the importance of situational influences on behavior and the corresponding tendency to overemphasize the importance of dispositions on behavior (angry person, say a bitch instead of thinking why they are angry) |
|
|
channel factors |
situational circumstances that appear unimportant on the surface but than can have great consequences for behavior- having someone plan time/route to get vaccine |
|
|
schema |
a knowledge structure consisting of any organized body of stored info- behavior at mcdonalds vs. 4-star restaurant |
|
|
automatic vs. controlled processing |
automatic: non-conscious, based on emotional factors controlled: conscious, systematic think of the airport example- these two processes can result in different attitudes in the same person towards members of different outgroups |
|
|
theory of mind |
the understanding that other people have beliefs and desires |
|
|
naturalistic fallacy |
the claim that the way things are is the way they should be (biology is destiny) |
|
|
what two factors determine statistical significance? |
the size of the difference between groups in an experiment and the number of cases the finding is based on |
|
|
effect size |
the size of the difference between the two groups |
|
|
reliability |
the degree to which the particular way researchers measure a given variable is likely to yield consistent results |
|
|
validity |
the correlation between some measure and some outcome the measure is supposed to predict |
|
|
major themes for the class |
1.) humans are active but imperfect processors of info 2.) most social processing is automatic/unconscious 3.) the proximate cause of behavior is largely situational 4.) construal matters- how interpret what is happening to you impacts your behavior 5.) person X situation interactions are key |
|
|
data-torturing practices |
1.) p-hacking: want alpha less than .05, people round down or exclude data to make it work 2.) arbitrary stop rules- stop collecting data when it works 3.) selection of variables- only report the one that works |
|
|
ways to assess people's attitudes |
Likert scale, response latency, implicit attitude measure |
|
|
LaPiere's Chinese people study |
suggested that attitudes don't predict behavior very well |
|
|
contaminating effect of introspection |
the contaminating effect of introspection limited to those times when the true source of our attitude is hard to pin down |
|
|
self perception theory |
the theory that people come to know their own attitudes by looking at their behavior and the context in which it occurred and inferring what their attitudes might be- no arousal is invovled |
|
|
system justification theory |
the theory that people are motivated to see the existing sociopolitical system as desirable, fair, legitimate. extolling the virtues of the prevailing system is easier at reducing dissonance than bringing about change- ex: low income people may be poor, but they are happier- these stereotypes give ideological support to the status quo, making more people accepting of gender roles and the broader sociocultural status quo |
|
|
four functions of attitudes |
the adjustments function, the ego-defensive function, the expressive function and the knowledge function |
|
|
elaboration likelihood model (ELM) |
a model of persuasion maintaining that there are two different routes to persuasion- central and peripheral |
|
|
when is central processing more likely |
when people are thinking carefully about the message, when it's relevant, people are motivated, it has personal consequences, when have cognitive resources and time to process message in depth, when knowledgable about topic, call to action for after |
|
|
when is peripheral processing more likely |
when ppl are in a distracted environment, when have reduced motivation |
|
|
source characteristics |
who delivers the persuasive message- attractive sources effective, credible sources good, confident sources good |
|
|
message characteristics |
aspects of persuasive message including the quality of the evidence and explicitness of its conclusions- most persuasive: high quality, info is vivid, fear, tailored to norms/values/outlooks of group |
|
|
audience characteristics |
characteristics of those who receive a persuasive message- need for cognition (those with high need want more high-quality arguments), mood- happier easier, age- younger easier, audience size/diversity- better if more homogeneous |
|
|
self-validation hypothesis |
the idea that the likelihood of attitude change can depend not only on the direction and amount of thoughts people have in response to a persuasive message, but also on the confidence with which they hold the thoughts |
|
|
Tesser's thought polarization hypothesis |
public commitments engage us in more extensive thoughts about a particular issue, which tends to produce more extreme, entrenched attitues- rate an issue, think about it for a while, then feel stronger about it |
|
|
attitude innoculation |
small attacks on people's beliefs that engage their preexisting attitudes, prior commitments and background knowledge, enabling them to counteract a subsequent larger attack and thus resist persuasion- make arguments against smoking, make them more likely not to smoke |
|
|
cognitive response model |
what thinking about when see an ad- not what the message says but what you say to yourself when you see the message |
|
|
one vs two-sided arguments |
depends- 2 sided arguments can make it controversial/flip some people but can make you seem more objective; use 2 sided arguments when the audience is well-informed |
|
|
sleeper effect |
messages from unreliable sources exert little influence initially but over time have the potential to shift people's attitudes- only works when you hear the message then the source |
|
|
apocalypse soon research |
global warming ads- since global warming threatens your just-world beliefs, we dismiss it. positive message made the just-world believers less skeptical, more skeptical with negative message: same message has a different impact based on your worldview |
|
|
manipulation check |
a manipulation check is a measure used to determine whether or not the manipulation of the independent variable has had its intended effect on the participants |
|
|
along what dimensions are impressions usually based |
most of what we conclude about people based on their faces is decided instantaneously- judge is trustworthy or aggressive |
|
|
pluralistic ignorance |
misperception of a group norm that results from observing people who are acting at variance with their private beliefs out of a concern for the social consequences- when no one asks a question at the end of hard lecture |
|
|
self-fulfilling prophecies |
- the tendency for people to act in ways that bring about the very thing they expect to happen- tell teachers which students will succeed and they do |
|
|
framing effects- pure and spin |
overall: the influence on judgment resulting from the way information is presented, such as the order of presentation or wording pure: order of presentation- smoke while pray vs pray while smoke spin: varies the content- war dept vs defense dept |
|
|
construal level theory |
a theory about the relationship between psychological distance and abstract or concrete thinking- psychologically distant actions and events are thought about in abstract terms; action and events that are close at hand are thought about in concrete terms |
|
|
temporal framing |
we think about action and events within a particular time perspective- think of far off events in abstract, close events in concrete terms- explains why sometimes we overcommit ourselves |
|
|
confirmation bias |
the tendency to test a proposition by searching for evidence that would support it |
|
|
availability heuristic |
the process whereby judgments of frequency or probability are based on how readily pertinent instances come to mind |
|
|
Howdid researchers determine whether the availability heuristic is a result of ease of retrieval or theamount of information retrieved? |
asked people to come up with 6 or 12 instances of assertiveness- ppl who had to think of 6 examples of their failure to be assertive rated themselves as less assertive than the people with 12: it is the ease of generating examples that seems to guide people's judgments (if struggle to come up with more, harder to do so think they are less like that) |
|
|
representativeness heuristic |
The representativeness heuristic is one heuristic that we use when making judgments. In this particular example, we estimate the likelihood of an event by comparing it to an existing prototype that already exists in our minds. Our prototype is what we think is the most relevant or typical example of a particular event or object. |
|
|
how does base rate neglect relate to the representativeness heuristic? |
base-rate info concerns knowledge about relative frequency. How many members of the category are there relative to the members of all other categories? the individual in questions is more likely to be gay if the local pop includes a lot of gays. but a strong sense of representativeness sometimes leads us to ignore base-rate likelihood. |
|
|
planning fallacy |
the tendency for people to be unrealistically optimistic about how quickly they can complete a particular project, even when they are fully aware that they have often failed to complete similar projects in the time past- nearly all thoughts are about plans and scenarios for finishing the project but not with their track record on previous tasks |
|
|
school outcomes article: study 1 with open-path vs closed-path |
mind-set mattered: open path students predicted they would get better grades and had higher planned effort. no main effect of gender was found for aspired grades or planned effort. GenderXcondition, girls planned effort was significant for open path but not for boys |
|
|
school outcomes: study 2- open path vs control |
an open-path mind set improves planned effort when students are not already behind academically |
|
|
Whatare the psychological effects/correlates of seeing yourself as “self-made”? |
less generous and public spirited, make the lucky less likely to support the conditions that made their own success possible, like high-quality public education. people who reflect on their good fortune are more willing to contribute to the common good (donate to charity) |
|
|
hindsight bias |
the tendency to think that, after the fact, an event that was predictable even when it wasn't |
|
|
results of the gratitude diary study |
diaries with things that made you grateful, irritated or whatever. grateful ones had less severe aches and pains, better sleep, greater happiness/alertness, more outgoing and compassionate, less likely to feel lonely and isolated, reduced anxiety and diminished aggressive impulses |
|
|
4 core processes of social cognition and how they relate to impression formation |
1.) attention- what you pay attention to changes your impression 2.) interpretation- everyone thinks that the media is biased against them. even if they are looking at the same thing 3.) social comparison/judgment- influenced by the environment (think of rating attractiveness after 4 pretty vs 4 ugly faces) 4.) memory |
|
|
gosling's dorm room research |
friend rates on big 5 scale, stranger visits room friends better at extraversion and agreeableness- stranger better at conscientiousness, emotional stability, openness to experience |
|
|
kahneman's response to blink approach to thinking/impression formation |
quick only works when you are an expert because you have more information that helps you make a better impression |
|
|
self fulfilling prophecies and when they are most likely to occur |
predictions that directly or indirectly cause itself to become true by the very terms of the prophecy itself due to positive feedback between belief and behavior. more likely when there is a power differential and the target of expectations differs |
|
|
how to overcome cognitive shortcuts and Hilda study |
motivation- you have to want to. consider alternative possibilities- devil's advocate. need cognitive resources. Hilda- if not motivated, didn't matter if they were busy remembering the number. if they were motivated, they did worse when busy- not enough to be motivated, need to be able to think/access cognitive resources |
|
|
classical conditioning and attitudes |
pairing- have to form an opinion on someone- hot room ppl liked him less.- attitudes not often rationally formed/can be created by pairing of unconscious stimuli |
|
|
operant conditioning and attitudes |
reinforcement- attitudes are not always formed by experience |
|
|
what attitudes are heritable |
strongest ones- better predict behavior, are more consistent/resistant to change bc commitment (more certain they are correct) and embeddedness |
|
|
strong attitudes vs. weak attitudes and commitment and embeddedness |
strong attitudes better predict behavior, are more consistent/resistant to change because commitment (more certain they are correct) and embeddedness- connected to other things you like/are loyal to so less likely to change. more likely to dislike ppl with opposing views |
|
|
how knowledge (direct vs indirect) affects attitude-behavior consistency |
direct- more consistent (if meet someone, will have stronger opinion of them) indirect- ???? |
|
|
personal relevance and attitude-behavior consistency |
more likely to match if relevant to you- drinking age example |
|
|
accessibility and attitude-behavior consistency |
ideas that are more accessible/relevant will come to mind more when you are deciding on your actions (recently listen to lecture on global warming, pay more attention shortly after) |
|
|
cognitive dissonance |
when attitudes and behavior don't line up |
|
|
individual differences in preferences for consistency |
extroverts care less, ppl open to experience care less, introverts care more, only ppl with high preference for consistency show foot-in-door effect |
|
|
how to study cognitive dissonacne |
monkey study- free-choice paradigm effort justification induced compliance- money for CTECs |
|
|
two types of attributions |
attributions- inferences about events/behavior 1.) internal (ability, attitude, mood, effort) 2.) external (other people, task, situation, luck) |
|
|
self-serving bias- evidence for it and when is it likely |
attribute success to self, failures to others- correlated with high self-esteem, maintain high opinion of self BUT see it more when explaining to someone else, self-presentation feature |
|
|
actor/observer bias |
actors attribute behavior to situation (external), observers attribute behavior to internal (late to class bc long walk vs. not punctual) |
|
|
correspondence bias |
assume behavior corresponds with disposition - make fast, easy dispositional inferences even when behavior is highly constrained by the situation (student assigned to opinion but still think it is their opinion) |
|
|
fundamental attribution error and why it is so likely |
is the tendency for people to place an undue emphasis on internal characteristics of the agent (character or intention), rather than external factors, in explaining another person's behavior in a given situation (think yourself vs. Kim K class example). it is likely because situational factors are hard to see (see cheating and not that they were sick for 2 weeks), we are cognitive misers- brain takes shortcuts, language- we have more ways to talk about personality than situation, and we are often correct |
|
|
chronic dispositionalism and why it is so easy when explaining the extreme or troublesome behaviors of others |
happens most when explaining extreme or troublesome behaviors- easier to attribute to their disposition. when see bad, attribute responsibility to damaged "others", blaming others for bad acts absolves us from considering situational influences- instead of changing policy, say bad person |
|
|
bad apples or sour pickles metaphor and how applies to Columbine |
instead of targeting the few bad apples, we should target the condition- vinegar. instead of trying to understand what was wrong with them and identify the bad guys, we should look at the broader causal networks and try to fix them (bullying at the school) |
|
|
Describe Peterson and Seligman’s research on explanatory style. Whattype of explanatory style seems to be problematic? What types of life outcomes does this stylepredict? |
They looked to see if explanatory style (stable/unstable,internal/external and global/specific) aligned correlated with life factors. Internal/stable/globalcauses is considered pessimistic- andis related to a variety of undesirable life outcomes such as lower grades thanoptimists. The optimistic tendency to make external, unstable and specificattributions had longer and healthier lives. |
|
|
gender differences in attributional style |
boys are more likely to attribute failures to lack of effort and girls are more likely to attribute failures to lack of ability |
|
|
covariation principle |
the idea that behavior should be attributed to potential causes that occur along with the observed behavior |
|
|
consensus & the covariation principle |
consensus refers to what most people would do in a given situation. Does everyone behave the same way in that situation or just a few? is you friend one of a few who likes her stats class or do most like it? all else being equal, the more an individual's reaction is shared by others (when consensus is high), the less it says about that individual and the more it says about the situation. |
|
|
distinctiveness & the covariation principle |
distinctiveness refers to what an individual does in different situations. Is a particular behavior unique to a specific situation, or does it occur in many situations? Does your friend seem to like all math classes or just the stats class? the more someone's reaction is confined to a particular situation (when distinctiveness is high), the less it says about that individual and the more it says about the specific situation. |
|
|
consistency and the covariation principle |
consistency refers to what an individual does in a given situation on different occasions. is the behavior the same now as in the past, or does it vary? does your friend have favorable things to say about today's class only, or has she raved about the course all semester? the more an individual's reaction varies across occasions (when consistency is low), the harder it is to make a definite attribution either to the person or to the situation. the effect is likely due to some less predictable combination of circumstances. |
|
|
discounting principle |
the idea that people should assign reduced weight to a particular cause of behavior if other plausible causes might have produced it |
|
|
augmentation principle |
the idea that people should assign greater weight to a particular cause of behavior if other causes are present that normally would produce a different outcome- stick to story despite torture |
|
|
counterfactual thoughts |
thoughts of what might have, could have, or should have happened if only something had occurred differently |
|
|
emotional amplification |
an increase in the emotional reaction to an evert that is proportional to how easy it is to imgine the event not happening- switch plane/medal examples |
|
|
just world hypothesis and how relates to attribution theory |
the belief that people get what they deserve in life- victims of rape are often viewed as responsible for their rape |
|
|
evidence that the FAE error varies across cultures |
more widespread and pronounced for Westerners than Easterners |
|
|
evidence for self-serving bias |
think of the sports examples, explaining how fair an exam is based off of how you did, teacher takes credit if student does well and blames student if not |
|
|
types of unconscious processing |
ideomotor effects: when you are talking to someone, they will mirror your body movements effects on judgments- when ppl surrounded by green, less violent than when surrounded by red |
|
|
how do members of individualistic societies think about themselves and others? |
conception of self as distinct from others, with attributes that are constant; insistence on ability to act on one's own; need for individual distinctiveness; preference for egalitarianism and achieve status based on accomplishments' conviction that rules governing behavior should apply to everyone |
|
|
how do members of interdependent societies think about themselves and others? |
conception of the self as inextricably linked to others, with attributes depending on the situation; preference for collective action; desire for harmonious relations within group; acceptance of hierarchy and ascribed status based on age, group membership and other attributes; preference for rules that take context and particular relationships into account |
|
|
what does it take to make a study a true experiment? |
an independent and dependent variable and random selection/assignment, control condition |
