Social Psychology ­ study of how other people influence our thoughts, feelings, and actions and how we influence other people

  • Attribution­ principles used to judge the causes of events, and our own and others’ behavior­ why others behave in a particular way o Attribution theory­ area of psychology concerned with when and how people as

“why” questions

  • Dispositional attribution/Internal­ we decide that the cause of a person’s behavior is something about him/her

 Disposition, personality, attitudes, or characteristics

  • Situational attribution/External­ we decide that the cause of a person’s behavior was something about the situation

 How you attribute behavior  is great impact on how we think of them

o Errors of attribution­ tend to make dispositional

 Fundamental attribution error­ misjudging the causes of others’ behavior because of overestimating internal personal factors and underestimating external situational influences

 The role of perceptual salience­how obvious something is

  • Person is more obvious than the situation
  • Need more interactions to justify behavior

Self­serving Bias­ taking credit for our successes and externalizing our failures

 Motivated by a desire to maintain self­esteem and look good to others

 Prejudice and discrimination

  • Discrimination­ refers to negative actions toward the groups that are the targets of prejudice­ based solely on members of that group
  • Prejudice­ an attitude, usually negative, toward the members of some group based solely on their membership in that group o Do not have individual opinion­ just on group as a whole o 2 implications:
    • Prejudices act as a type of schema­ process information differently

 People tend to ignore information that is inconsistent with schemas

 Overtime, prejudice is strengthened

  • Prejudices can be implicit­ can be triggered by simple exposure to a group

 Effect behavior without conscious awareness

  • Sources of Prejudice
    • Prejudices and stereotypes save cognitive effort

 Allport­ stereotyping is “law of least effort”

  • Evolutionary psychologists have suggested that animals have a strong tendency to feel more favorably toward genetically similar others and to express fear and loathing toward genetically dissimilar organisms, even if they never did anything to harm them.

 Easily/quickly identify individuals in families to share resources

  • Social learning view­ prejudice is acquired through direct observations of others, and through the internalization of social norms

Socialization­ process by which children learn the conventional rules of their surroundings­ clear, pre­existing rules everybody lives by

  • Mechanisms:
  • Children may imitate the prejudices of adults and friends
  • Children may be positively reinforced for using derogatory racial humor
  • They may simply learn to associate particular minority groups with poverty, crime, dirtiness, and other negative characteristics
  • Realistic conflict­ prejudice sometimes stems from direct competition between various social groups over scarce and valued resources and is maintained because it offers significant economic and political advantages for the group in charge

 1963­ MLK Jr. VS Bull Connor­ Birmingham, AL

  • High pressure water hose/dogs on kids
  • According to Realistic conflict, Bull Connor’s reaction to Civil Rights movement was not wholly irrational but was wholly immoral
  • Displaced aggression­ certain groups become scapegoats

 Target particular groups

  • Reducing Prejudice

Cooperation and Super­ordinate Goals

Muzafer Sherif’s Robber’s Cave Experiment­ summer camp in Mid­West

  • 1st phase­ dividing boys randomly into 2 groups and then bringing them to the camp in 2 separate groups o Rattlers­ tough boys o Eagles­ All American boys
  • 2nd phase­ to test the idea that conflict over resources leads to prejudice, Sherif introduced material conflict by creating a tournament o Increased stereotyping, name­calling, overt hostility o Each boys rated his own group and others on 6 traits:
    • Brave
    • Tough
    • Friendly
    • Sneaky
    • Smart aleck
    • Stinker
  • 3rd phase­ designed to show that friction could be reduced. Simple contact could reduce hostility, groups brought together 7 times.
  • Superordinate goals­ goals that neither group could achieve alone but that they could achieve working together
  • Less name calling, more favorable ratings, went home together
  • Contact Hypothesis­ bring groups together

 1954­ US Supreme Court ordered an end to segregated schools

  • widespread excitement among social psychologists­ hoped desegregation would be beginning of end of prejudice
  • Desegregation often led to tension and turmoil in schools
  • 6 conditions must be met to reduce Prejudice

Remove the conflict

Create mutual interdependence­ rely on each other to reach goals

Equal status­ same for both groups within situation

Informal contact­ natural, not forced

Typicality­ both see other as being composed of typical member of that group in general

Social Norms­ outside of interactions, all groups are equal

  • Closest to meet criteria­ Military and Athletic teams
  • Recategorization­ shifts in the boundaries between an individual’s ingroup and some out­group

 Driving/Pedestrian EX

Common In­group identity model­ if individuals in different groups view themselves as members of a single social entity, positive interactions between them will increase in inter­group bias will be reduced

  • Socialization­ see decrease in blatant prejudices

 Older, more prejudice people are dying off

 Higher levels of education

Dissociation Model­ people feel guilty when they become aware of the difference between the stereotypes they learned early in life and the tolerance they learned later

  • Usually seen around college level

 Social Influences  : Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience

  • Conforming­ acting a certain way because other people are acting in that way; Not told or asked to act that way (Emo EX) o Social Norms­ the rules that a group uses for appropriate and inappropriate values, beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors
    • Implicit­ internally (urinal EX)
    • Explicit­ written, spoke (10 commandments, legal sys) o Asch’s Conformity Study­ you and 7 confederate participants
    • Visual judgments­ which lines match
    • On some occasions, other subject unanimously chose wrong line
    • Results: ~ 1/3 went along with clearly wrong majority o Why do we conform?
    • Normative Social Influence­ social influences based on an individual’s desire to be liked or accepted by other people­go along with majority

 Evolution­ work/stay in groups to survive

  • Informational conformity­ using other persons’ responses as guidelines for your own behavior
  • Reference groups­ those people we want to conform to because we like and admire them and want to be like them

 Younger Sibling and Advertising EX

  • Negative Referent Power (Raven)­ occurs when we want to separate ourselves from a disliked or unappealing person or group

 Change behavior so we are not mistaken for being part of a specific group

  • Compliance­ form of social influence involving direct request from one person to another o Basic form of influence
    • Sometimes we comply with requires seeming for no reason at all
      • Copier Study EX
      • May be to avoid confrontation or general politeness
      • Ellen Langer­ “mindlessness”­ compliance without reflection
    • Obedience­ following direct commands, usually from an authority figure
      • Stanley Milgram’s Obedience to Authority Study
        • Focused on conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience (response to holocaust)
        • Milgram sent questionnaire asking psychologists what percentage would go to

450 volts? ~ 1­2 % (sadists)

 65% went to 450 volts with none stopping before 300 volts  Ethics­ is it okay to put people through that?

 ~90 % said they were glad to do the experiment

 None accepted Milgram’s offer for counseling