Social Psychology Exam 4 (Final Exam)

Front 1

Altruism

Back 1

The desire to help another person even if it involves a cost to the helper

Front 2

Aggression

Back 2

Intentional behavior aimed at causing physical harm or psychological pain to another person; Doesn't matter if behavior results in harm, only that the intention was to harm

Front 3

Altrusitic Personality

Back 3

The qualities that cause an individual to help others in a wide variety of situations

Front 4

Bystander Effect

Back 4

The finding that the greater the number of bystanders who witness an emergency, the less likely any one of them is to help

Front 5

Diffusion of Responsibility

Back 5

The phenomenon wherein each bystander's sense of responsibility to help decreases as the number of witnesses increases

Front 6

Discriminaton

Back 6

Unjustified negative or harmful action toward a member of a group solely because of his or her membership in that group

Front 7

Frustration-Aggression Theory

Back 7

The theory that frustration--the perception that you are being prevented from attaining a goal--increases the probability of an aggressive response

Frustration is likely to result in aggression when: 1. The goal is close or 2. Frustration is unexpected

Front 8

In-Group

Back 8

The group with which an individual identifies as a member

Front 9

In-Group Bias

Back 9

The tendency to favor members of one's own group and give them special preference over people who belong to other groups; the group can be temporary and trivial as well as significant

Front 10

Out-Group

Back 10

Any group with which an individual does not identify

Front 11

Out-Group Homogeneity

Back 11

The perception that individuals in the out-group are more similar to each other (homogenous) than they really are, as well as more similar than members of the in-group are; We notice fewer differences in out-groups than in in-groups

Front 12

Social Exchange Theory

Back 12

The theory that people's feelings about a relationship depend on their perceptions of its rewards and costs, the kind of relationship they deserve, and their chances for having a better relationship with someone else; Assumes there is no true altruistic behavior, people will only help when the benefits outweigh the costs

Front 13

Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis

Back 13

The idea that when we feel empathy for a person, we will attempt to help that person for purely altruistic reasons, regardless of what we have to gain

Front 14

Empathy

Back 14

The ability to put oneself in the shoes of another person and to experience events and emotions the way that person experiences them

Front 15

Weapons Effect

Back 15

The increase in aggression that can occur because of the mere presence of a gun or other weapon

Front 16

Stereotype

Back 16

A generalization about a group of people in which certain traits are assigned to virtually all members of the group, regardless of actual variation among the members

Front 17

Stereotype Threat

Back 17

The apprehension experienced by members of a group that their behavior might confirm a cultural stereotype

Front 18

Prejudice

Back 18

A hostile or negative attitude toward people in a distinguishable group based solely on their membership in that group; it contains cognitive, emotional, and behavioral components

Front 19

Prosocial Behavior

Back 19

Any act performed with the goal of benefitting another person

Front 20

Evolutionary Perspective

Back 20

Explanation of WHY we help; helping others increases the likelihood of passing on our genes; genes promoting helpful behavior have been selected for via natural selection

Kin Selection: helping genetic relative increases chances of genes being passed on

Group Selection: Natural selection working at the group level; groups that help each other are more likely to survive than non-helpful groups

Front 21

Gender Difference in Helping

Back 21

* Men help more in "heroic" situations
* Women provide more social support to others and are more likely to do volunteer work

Front 22

Effect of Age on Helping

Back 22

* Older people are generally more likely to help than younger people (more likely to donate money and time; more likely to help a stranger)

* Seems to be influenced by focus on time

-Life is short = more helping

-Life is long = less helping

Front 23

Effect of Religiosity on Helping

Back 23

*People who regularly attend church:

-Help more when they have time to think about their behaviors

-NOT more (or less) likely to help in the heat of the moment

Front 24

Effect of Mood and Helping

Back 24

Good Mood and Helping

1. Good moods make us look on the bright side of life.

2. Good moods increase self-awareness.

3. Helping others helps to prolong our good mood.

Bad Mood and Helping

1. People help in order to get out of a bad mood.

2. Provides support for Social Exchange Theory (People are helping others with the hopes of getting something in return--feeling better).

3. Guilty-feeling people and sad people are more likely to help

Front 25

5-Step Model of Helping

Back 25

1. Notice the event: People in a hurry are less likely to help

2. Interpret the event as an emergency: Situations are often ambiguous; We often look to others for clues of what to do (Looking to others might not be helpful)

3. Assume Responsibility: Diffusion of Responsibility, Bystander Effects

4. Know How to Help

5. Decide to Help: If the costs are too high, you probably won't help

Front 26

Illusion of Transparency

Back 26

We overestimate our ability to "see" people's feelings

In an emergency, other people might not look concerned. Therefore, we assume there's nothing to be concerned about.

Smoke Filled Room

Front 27

Effect of Being in a Hurry and Helping

Back 27

People in a hurry are less likely to help because they:

1. Are less likely to notice the victim

2. Are less likely to appraise the victim as being in need

3. Are in conflict

Front 28

How to Increase Helping

Back 28

Single out an individual in a group. Rather than asking everyone for help, focus on one person and say "I need you to help".

Front 29

Gender Differences in Aggression

Back 29

*Males are more aggressive than females

*However, males are more overtly aggressive and women are more covertly aggressive (spreading rumors, talking behind a person back, etc.)

*It's easier to see overt and immediate aggression and more difficult to see covert and delayed aggression

*The differences are small because of different ways of expressing anger

Front 30

Temperature and Aggression

Back 30

1. The more uncomfortable people are, the more likely they'll act aggressively (Feelings of hostility increased as people got really hot or cold)

2. The colder it is, the less likely people are to go outside (interact with other people)

Front 31

Alcohol and Aggression

Back 31

*Many studies have linked alcohol and aggression

*Almost 1/2 of people arrested for violent crimes (murder, assault) were drunk at the time

*Experimental studies reveal the same thing; People legally drunk respond more violently to provocations

Front 32

Population Density and Aggression

Back 32

Aggression increases as population density increases

Front 33

Importance of Provocation and Aggression

Back 33

*Aggression often results after being provoked

*Many factors don't directly cause aggression

*They lower the threshold for aggressive behavior

Front 34

How Does Alcohol Increase Aggression?

Back 34

Alcohol increases likelihood of aggressive behavior because:

1. Alcohol decreases inhibitions

*Harder for people to stop themselves for doing/saying things

2. Alcohol influences how we process social information.

*Intoxicated people are more egocentric*Intoxicated people miss "obvious" factors influencing behavior

*Intoxicated people more likely to interpret accidents as intentional acts

Alcohol increases likelihood of viewing action as a provocation

Front 35

Social Learning Theory

Back 35

We learn social behavior (ex. aggression) by observing others and imitating them

Developed by Albert Bandura

Front 36

Aggression and iolent Media (TV and Video Games)

Back 36

TV and Movies:

*Watching violent TV/Movies is associated with increases in aggressive thoughts and behavior

*Correlation between watching violent TV an aggressive behavior (Watching violent TV during adolescence correlates with violent acts in adulthood)

*Watching violent TV caused an increased likelihood of aggression

Violent Video Games:

*Playing violent video games is positively correlated with aggressive behavior and delinquency

*Violent video games have a significant effect on aggression

Front 37

Who is Affected Most by Violent Media?

Back 37

*People who are predisposed to acting aggressively

*When later in aggression-provoking situations

*For children and adolescents vs. adults

Front 38

How Does Violent Media Increase Aggression?

Back 38

1. Imitation and Learning: Desire to be like the people on TV, Get ideas on how to behave aggressively, Bobo doll experiment and Social Learning Theory

2. Priming: Aggressive ideas more likely to come to mind after watching violent TV, Donald (priming reckless vs. confident)

3. Desensitization and Dehumanizing: Repeated exposure to violence decreases sensitivity to future events, After violent TV/Games--less likely to help a stranger, more likely to dehumanize out group, increased tolerance of pain

4. Aggression Increases Later Aggression: People more aggressive after football season, after watching hockey games, after venting aggression towards another person

Front 39

How to Reduce Aggressive Behavior

Back 39

1. Stop watching violent TV and movies

-TV appears to be less impactful than video games

2. Stop playing violent video games

-Possible difference between realistic and fantasy violence

3. Social Learning Theory is not specific to aggression

-People can learn to be helpful and respectful by watching others

-Playing prosocial video games increased prosocial behavior

Front 40

Causes of Stereotypes and Prejudice

Back 40

*Learning and imitation

-Kids learn prejudice from parents

-Social Learning theory

-If kids are very prejudiced, kids less likely to be similar

*In-group bias

*Out-group homogeneity

*Social categorization

Front 41

Social Categorization

Back 41

*Schemas

*Useful when trying to predict other's behavior/interests

*Helpful to reduce ambiguity

*We do this automatically

*Can cause problems because people over-generalize

Front 42

2-step Theory of Prejudice Expression

Back 42

1. Activation of known stereotype (automatic)

-Not necessarily believed

2. Ignore or refute stereotype (controlled)

-If people don't engage in controlled process, the stereotype influences thoughts/behaviors

-No controlled process if distracted, don't care, or don't know stereotype was activated

Front 43

Justification-Suppression Model

Back 43

*Prejudice is expressed when there's justification

-If people can justify prejudice, they won't suppress it

*People can suppress prejudice, but are choosing not to because it is "justified"

Front 44

Contact Hypothesis

Back 44

Increased contact with out-group members will decrease prejudice (But only when certain conditions are met)

Front 45

6 Necessary Conditions for Contact to Reduce Prejudice

Back 45

1. Mutual interdependence: Both groups "need" each other to succeed

2. A common goal: A goal that unites rather than divides

3. Equal Status: Members of each group have equal status

4. Informal, Interpersonal Contact: Members of each group must be able to interact in informal ways.

5. Multiple Contacts: Members must interact with multiple members, not just one.

6. Social Norms of Equality: If norms promote prejudice, prejudice will continue.

Front 46

Causes of Stereotype Threat

Back 46

*Fear of conforming to the stereotype

*If worrying about performance, not able to focus on the test

-Reduced working memory capacity

Front 47

How to Reduce Stereotype Threat

Back 47

*Knowledge of stereotype threat

*Self affirmations

*Identify with many groups

Front 48

Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination

Back 48

*Antiprejudice messages: You can choose to do the right thing

*The contact hypothesis