SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY UNIT 14 SelfServing Bias Fundamental Attribution
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY UNIT 14
Self-Serving Bias Fundamental Attribution Error Attribution (explain others behavior) Just-World Hypothesis Unit 14: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Stereotypes Primacy Effect Schema We are here Social Cognition Cognitive Dissonance Attitude: Formation and change (Persuasion) Foot in the Door Routes to Persuasion Individualistic vs. Collectivistic Culture Social Behavior deindividuation, the self-fulfilling prophecy, bystander effect social facilitation Conformity Impact of Others on the Person Attraction In-Group/Out. Group Treatment of group members Compliance Impact of Others on the Group Polarization Group Think
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY �The scientific study of the ways in which the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of one individual are influenced by the real, imagined, or inferred behavior or characteristics of other people �Major Topics: How you think about people How you explain their behavior
SOCIAL THINKING
Self-Serving Bias Fundamental Attribution Error Attribution (explain others behavior) Just-World Hypothesis Unit 14: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Stereotypes Primacy Effect Schema We are here Social Cognition Cognitive Dissonance Attitude: Formation and change (Persuasion) Foot in the Door Routes to Persuasion Individualistic vs. Collectivistic Culture Social Behavior deindividuation, the self-fulfilling prophecy, bystander effect social facilitation Conformity Impact of Others on the Person Attraction In-Group/Out. Group Treatment of group members Compliance Impact of Others on the Group Polarization Group Think
ATTRIBUTION: WHY DID HE DO THAT? �Attribution Theory: tries to explain how people make judgments about the causes of other people’s behavior �Three criteria used to judge behavior Distinctiveness: Is this how the person treats everyone or are you different? Consistency: Has the person always treated you this way or is this different? Consensus: Do other people do this same thing or is this really different?
Attribution: Why did he do that? �Bob walks past you without saying hi. Distinctiveness: Your explanation as to why Bob did this will be different if he does this to everyone in the hall or just you Consistency: Your explanation as to why Bob did this will be different if he always says hi to you or if you don’t really know each other. Consensus: Whether you’re in New York City vs. a college of 600 will change how you explain Bob’s behavior.
BIASES IN ATTRIBUTION � Fundamental attribution error: when explaining the behavior of others this is the tendency to overemphasize personal causes underemphasize situational causes � Actor-Observer Bias: This is the opposite used by us when we explain our own behavior. We overemphasize situational causes and downplay personality.
BIASES IN ATTRIBUTION � Defensive attribution Self-Serving Bias: Tendency to attribute our successes to our own efforts and our failures to external factors Just-world hypothesis: Assumption bad things happen to bad people and good things happen to good people � Attribution across cultures varies dramatically
Dispositional attribution = behavior is linked to the individual • Situational attribution =behavior is linked to a situation •
EFFECTS OF ATTRIBUTION How we explain someone’s behavior affects how we react to it.
DISPOSITIONAL (internal) or SITUATIONAL (external)? � � They won only because the best athletes on the Central State’s teams were out with injuries – talk about good fortune. ▪ External (situational) ▪ Internal (dispositional) They won because they have some of the best talent in the country. Anybody could win this region; the competition is so far below average in comparison to the rest of the country. They won because they put in a great deal of effort and practice.
Fundamental Attribution Error – underestimating situational influences when evaluating the behavior of someone else. He swerved into my lane because he is a jerk. � Actor-observer bias – attributing others’ behaviors to disposition but your own behaviors (even the same behaviors) to situational factors. Example: He swerved into my lane because he is a jerk, but I swerved into the next lane because I was trying to avoid an animal in the road. � Self-serving bias – crediting your own successes to disposition, but attributing your own failures to situation. Example: I won the game because I’m talented. I failed the test because the questions were unfair. �
ATTRIBUTING BEHAVIOR TO PERSONS OR SITUATIONS: THE EFFECTS OF ATTRIBUTION �Personal relationships �Political relationships �Job relationships
Self-Serving Bias Fundamental Attribution Error Unit 14: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Cognitive Dissonance Schema We are here Attribution (explain others behavior) Just-World Hypothesis Stereotypes Primacy Effect Social Cognition Attitude: Formation and change (Persuasion) Foot in the Door Routes to Persuasion Individualistic vs. Collectivistic Culture Social Behavior deindividuation, the self-fulfilling prophecy, bystander effect social facilitation Conformity Impact of Others on the Person Attraction In-Group/Out. Group Treatment of group members Compliance Impact of Others on the Group Polarization Group Think
ATTITUDES �The Nature of Attitudes Relatively stable ▪ Beliefs – facts and general knowledge ▪ Feelings – love, hate, like, dislike ▪ Behaviors – inclination to approach, avoid, buy
ROUTES A MESSAGE CAN TAKE TO PERSUADE YOU � Central Route to Persuasion when the attitude of the audience, or individual, is changed as a result of thoughtful consideration of the message. � Peripheral Route to Persuasion occurs when positive or negative cues (such as images, sounds, or language) are associated with the object of the message. An advertisement featuring a song that the audience member likes, or a person whom the audience member sees as appealing might cause a person to have positive feelings toward the brand, without that person ever thinking deeply about the message.
ATTITUDES CAN AFFECT ACTIONS Our attitudes predict our behaviors imperfectly because other factors, including the external situation, also influence behavior. Democratic leaders supported Bush’s attack on Iraq under public pressure. However, they had their private reservations.
ATTITUDES AND ACTIONS: ACTIONS AFFECT ATTITUDES �The Foot-in-the-Door Phenomenon “start small and build” �People come to believe in the idea they have supported �Actions feed attitudes which feed actions �Easier to change attitudes than actions
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE THEORY � Occurs whenever a person has two contradictory cognitions or beliefs at the same time. They are dissonant, each one implies the opposite of the other. � The less coerced and more responsible we feel for an action the more dissonance. The more dissonance the more likely we are to change our attitude � It creates an unpleasant cognitive tension and the person tries to resolve in the following ways:
RESOLUTION OF COGNITIVE DISSONANCE Sometimes changing your attitude is the easiest way to solve this. 1. Example: I am a loyal friend, but yesterday I gossiped about my friend Chris…Well, I can’t change my action…but I don’t want to change my view of myself, so my attitude about Chris must be wrong. He really is more of an acquaintance than a friend. Increase the number of thoughts that back one side 2. It was awesome gossip Reduce the importance of one or both of the sides 3. The person I gossiped with won’t really tell that many people.
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE THEORY � Cognitive dissonance theory states that we are motivated to reduce this uncomfortable feeling by changing our beliefs to match our actions. � The dissonance (uncomfortable feeling) is less if we feel that we were forced to perform the action. Thus, the larger the pressure used to elicit the overt behavior, the smaller the tendency to change opinion.
EXAMPLES OF COGNITIVE DISSONANCE � Foot-in-the-door phenomenon – the tendency for people who agree to a small request to comply later with a larger one (examples, “please drive carefully”, Korean War, People’s Temple, training torturers, cheating)
ATTITUDES AND ACTIONS: ACTIONS AFFECT ATTITUDES �Role-Playing Affects Attitudes Role Stanford study Abu Ghraib prison
�Role playing - subjects who play a role often begin to “become” the role (Zimbardo’s prison study) �Power of role conformity!
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Self-Serving Bias Fundamental Attribution Error Unit 14: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Attribution (explain others behavior) Just-World Hypothesis Stereotypes Primacy Effect Social Cognition Cognitive Dissonance Schema Attitude: Formation and change (Persuasion) Foot in the Door Routes to Persuasion Individualistic vs. Collectivistic Culture Social Behavior deindividuation, the self-fulfilling prophecy, bystander effect social facilitation We are here Conformity Impact of Others on the Person Attraction In-Group/Out. Group Treatment of group members Compliance Impact of Others on the Group Polarization Group Think
CONFORMITY AND OBEDIENCE �Chameleon empathy effect
Fundamental Attribution Error Self-Serving Bias Unit 14: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Attribution (explain others behavior) Just-World Hypothesis Stereotypes Primacy Effect Social Cognition Cognitive Dissonance Schema Attitude: Formation and change (Persuasion) Foot in the Door Routes to Persuasion Individualistic vs. Collectivistic Culture Social Behavior deindividuation, the self-fulfilling prophecy, bystander effect social facilitation We are here Conformity Impact of Others on the Person Attraction In-Group/Out. Group Treatment of group members Compliance Impact of Others on the Group Polarization Group Think
CONFORMITY Conformity: A change in one’s behavior due to the real or imagined influence of other people. �Unlike obedience, conformity does not require commands or coercion by an authority.
CONFORMITY AND OBEDIENCE: GROUP PRESSURE AND CONFORMITY �Solomon Asch study https: //www. youtube. com/watch? v=Ny. DDy. T 1 l. Dh. A
Normative Social Influence Conformity and Social Approval: The Asch Line Judgment Studies Asch tested whether people would conform in situations in which the group’s judgments were obviously incorrect. Participants in the Asch line study showed a high level of conformity, given how obvious it was that the group was wrong in its judgments.
CONFORMITY AND OBEDIENCE SOLOMON ASCH STUDY
ASCH STUDIES OF CONFORMITY �What was the role of… Public versus private conformity? Unanimity of the group? Normative influence? (don’t want to look silly)
PRIVATE vs PUBLIC CONFORMITY �Private conformity: change of beliefs that occurs when a person privately accepts the position taken by others. �Public conformity: superficial change in overt behavior, without a corresponding change of opinion, produced by real or imagined group pressure. �Asch studies demonstrate PUBLIC conformity
NORMATIVE SOCIAL INFLUENCE �Normative influence: Conformity occurs when a person fears the negative consequences of appearing deviant. �If they write answers privately, conformity drops markedly.
UNANIMOUS GROUP �When the group’s position is unanimous, conformity is greater. �If one person dissents (an ally), conformity drops.
NORMATIVE SOCIAL INFLUENCE When Will People Conform to Normative Social Influence? Asch’s research show that conformity does not increase much after group size reaches 4 or 5 other people.
CONFORMITY AND OBEDIENCE: GROUP PRESSURE AND CONFORMITY �Conditions That Strengthen Conformity One is made to feel incompetent or insecure Group has at least three people Group is unanimous One admires the group’s status One has made no prior commitment Others in group observe one’s behavior One’s culture strongly encourages respect for social standards
CONFORMITY AND OBEDIENCE: GROUP PRESSURE AND CONFORMITY �Reasons for Conforming Normative social influence Informational social influence
WHO IS MOST LIKELY TO CONFORM? �Adolescents �Women are slightly more likely than men, but the difference is very small and depends on the specific type of situation. �Cultures valuing interpersonal harmony (e. g. , some cultures in Asia, Africa, and South America) �People with low self-esteem are more likely to conform than those with high selfesteem.
Self-Serving Bias Fundamental Attribution Error Unit 14: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Attribution (explain others behavior) Just-World Hypothesis Stereotypes Primacy Effect Social Cognition Cognitive Dissonance Schema Attitude: Formation and change (Persuasion) Foot in the Door Routes to Persuasion Individualistic vs. Collectivistic Culture Social Behavior deindividuation, the self-fulfilling prophecy, bystander effect social facilitation Conformity Impact of We are Others on here the Person Attraction In-Group/Out. Group Treatment of group members Compliance Impact of Others on the Group Polarization Group Think
CONFORMITY AND OBEDIENCE: OBEDIENCE �Obedience Milgram’s studies obedience ▪ Procedure ▪ Results ▪ Ethics ▪ Follow up studies on
MILGRAM OBEDIENCE STUDY “Teacher” is the subject in the experiment who administers the “shocks”. “Learner” is the confederate that received the shocks (when out of sight, the learner was a tape recording) “Authority” is the person administering the experiment; says “please go on”.
CONFORMITY AND OBEDIENCE: OBEDIENCE
MILGRAM OBEDIENCE STUDY Factors that increase obedience: 1. Physical proximity of authority figure. 2. Perceived legitimacy of authority figure. 3. Distance or depersonalization of victim (learner). 4. Lack of a model for defiance.
MILGRAM OBEDIENCE STUDY Factors that did NOT affect obedience: 1. Age 2. Profession 3. Gender 4. Mention by “learner” of a “slight heart condition”.
CONFORMITY AND OBEDIENCE: LESSONS FROM THE CONFORMITY AND OBEDIENCE STUDIES �Ordinary people being corrupted by an evil situation
Self-Serving Bias Fundamental Attribution Error Unit 14: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Attribution (explain others behavior) Just-World Hypothesis Stereotypes Primacy Effect Social Cognition Cognitive Dissonance Schema Attitude: Formation and change (Persuasion) Foot in the Door Routes to Persuasion Individualistic vs. are Collectivistic. We Culture here deindividuation, the self-fulfilling prophecy, bystander effect social facilitation Conformity Impact of Others on the Person Social Behavior Attraction In-Group/Out. Group Treatment of group members Compliance Impact of Others on the Group Polarization Group Think
GROUP INFLUENCE: INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR IN THE PRESENCE OF OTHERS Social facilitation: Refers to improved performance on tasks in the presence of others. Triplett (1898) noticed cyclists’ race times were faster when they competed against others than when they just raced against the clock.
GROUP INFLUENCE: INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR IN THE PRESENCE OF OTHERS �Social Facilitation Task difficulty ▪ Home vs. Away Crowding effects ▪ Comedians and Actors ▪ Practical lesson
GROUP INFLUENCE: INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR IN THE PRESENCE OF OTHERS Social Loafing: The tendency of an individual in a group to exert less effort toward attaining a common goal than when tested individually.
GROUP INFLUENCE: INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR IN THE PRESENCE OF OTHERS �Social Loafing - Reasons why? ▪ Less accountability ▪ Tug of war ▪ Clapping/Shouting experiments ▪ View themselves as dispensable ▪ Group projects in school ▪ Free-rider effect ▪ Diffusion of responsibility ▪ Sucker effect
GROUP INFLUENCE: INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR IN THE PRESENCE OF OTHERS Deindividuation: The loss of self-awareness and self-restraint in group situations that foster arousal and anonymity. Mob behavior
Self-Serving Bias Fundamental Attribution Error Unit 14: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Attribution (explain others behavior) Just-World Hypothesis Stereotypes Primacy Effect Social Cognition Cognitive Dissonance Schema Attitude: Formation and change (Persuasion) Foot in the Door Routes to Persuasion Individualistic vs. Collectivistic Culture Social Behavior deindividuation, the self-fulfilling prophecy, bystander effect social facilitation Conformity Impact of Others on the Person Attraction In-Group/Out. Group We are Treatment of group members Compliance Impact of Others on the Group Polarization here Group Think
GROUP POLARIZATION Group Polarization: tendency to shift toward more extreme positions after group discussion Risky Neutral Cautious
GROUP INFLUENCE: EFFECTS OF GROUP INTERACTION �Group Polarization Internet terrorist organizations ▪ “us vs. them”
GROUP INFLUENCE: EFFECTS OF GROUP INTERACTION Groupthink: a mode of thinking that occurs when the desire for harmony in a decision-making group overrides the realistic appraisal of alternatives. � Watergate cover-up � Bay of Pigs � Iraq WMD � Marshall Plan � Cuban Missile Crisis
GROUPTHINK � Groupthink- syndrome of bad decision-making
CULTURAL INFLUENCE �Culture: behaviors, ideas, values and traditions shared by a group of people and are transmitted from one generation to the next
CULTURAL INFLUENCE: VARIATIONS ACROSS CULTURES �Norm: understood rule for accepted and expected behavior Personal space Pace of life
CULTURAL INFLUENCE: VARIATION OVER TIME �Changes over the generations
THE POWER OF INDIVIDUALS The power of social influence is enormous, but so is the power of the individual. Non-violent fasts and appeals by Gandhi led to the independence of India from the British. Gandhi
THE POWER OF INDIVIDUALS �Social control (Power of the situation) vs personal control (Power of the individual) Abu Ghraib Communism Christianity Rosa Parks Inventions �Minority influence – only takes one voice to break conformity
SOCIAL RELATIONS
Self-Serving Bias Fundamental Attribution Error Unit 14: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Attribution (explain others behavior) Just-World Hypothesis Stereotypes Primacy Effect Social Cognition Cognitive Dissonance Schema Attitude: Formation and change (Persuasion) Foot in the Door We are Routes to here Persuasion Individualistic vs. Collectivistic Culture Social Behavior deindividuation, the self-fulfilling prophecy, bystander effect social facilitation Conformity Impact of Others on the Person Attraction In-Group/Out. Group Treatment of group members Compliance Impact of Others on the Group Polarization Group Think
STEREOTYPES �A set of characteristics believed to be shared by all members of a social category It is usually unfair Most often applied to sex, race, occupation, physical appearance, place of residence, membership in a group or organization Can become the basis for self-fulfilling prophecies
PREJUDICE Simply called “prejudgment, ” a prejudice is an unjustifiable (usually negative) attitude toward a group and its members. Prejudice is often directed towards different cultural, ethnic, or gender groups. Components of Prejudice 1. Beliefs (stereotypes) 2. Emotions (hostility, envy, fear) 3. Predisposition to act (discrimination)
REIGN OF PREJUDICE Prejudice works at the conscious and [more at] the unconscious level. Therefore, prejudice is more like a knee-jerk response than a conscious decision.
HOW PREJUDICED ARE PEOPLE? Over the duration of time many prejudices against interracial marriage, gender, homosexuality, and minorities have decreased.
RACIAL & GENDER PREJUDICE Americans today express much less racial and gender prejudice, but prejudices still exist.
IMPLICIT PREJUDICE TEST �http: //implicit. harvard. edu
RACE Nine out of ten white respondents were slow when responding to words like “peace” or “paradise” when they saw a black individual’s photo compared to a white individual’s photo (Hugenberg & Bodenhausen, 2003).
SOCIAL INEQUALITY Prejudice develops when people have money, power, and prestige, and others do not. Social inequality increases prejudice.
SOCIAL DIVISIONS Ingroup: People with whom one shares a common identity. Outgroup: Those perceived as different from one’s ingroup. Ingroup Bias: The tendency to favor one’s own group.
EMOTIONAL ROOTS OF PREJUDICE Prejudice provides an outlet for anger [emotion] by providing someone to blame. After 9/11 many people lashed out against innocent Muslim Americans.
COGNITIVE ROOTS OF PREJUDICE One way we simplify our world is to categorize. We categorize people into groups by stereotyping them.
COGNITIVE ROOTS OF PREJUDICE In vivid cases such as the 9/11 attacks, terrorists can feed stereotypes or prejudices (terrorism). Most terrorists are non-Muslims.
PREJUDICE: COGNITIVE ROOTS OF PREJUDICE � Categorization Outgroup homogeneity Other-race effect/Own race-bias ▪ Apparent as early as 3 -9 months of age � Vivid cases (9/11) � Just-world phenomenon Hindsight bias
AGGRESSION �Aggression: any physical or verbal behavior intended to hurt or destroy done reactively out of hostility or proactively as a calculated means to an end
AGGRESSION: THE BIOLOGY OF AGGRESSION � Genetic Influences Twin studies � Neural Influences Amygdala activity ↑ Frontal Lobe activity ↓ � Biochemical Influences Influence of alcohol Higher levels of testosterone Lower levels of serotonin Saliva studies
PSYCHOLOGY OF AGGRESSION Factors that influence aggressive behavior: 1. 2. 3. 4. dealing with aversive events learning aggression is rewarding observing models of aggression acquiring social scripts
AGGRESSION: PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL-CULTURAL FACTORS IN AGGRESSION 1. Aversive events �Frustration-aggression principle Frustration creates anger, which may generate aggression ▪ People who are frustrated in their goals may turn their anger away from the proper target toward another, less powerful target. (Scapegoat) Fight or flight reaction Aversive stimuli (physical pain, personal insults, foul odors, hot temperatures, cigarette smoke)
AGGRESSION: PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL-CULTURAL FACTORS IN AGGRESSION 2. Learning aggression is rewarding Social cultural factors Ostracism (Rejection-induced aggression) Parent-training programs Aggression-replacement programs
AGGRESSION: PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL-CULTURAL FACTORS IN AGGRESSION 3. Observing models of aggression Rape myth Role of pornography/X-rated film study ▪ View partner as less attractive ▪ Women’s friendliness seem more sexual ▪ Sexual aggression seems less serious
AGGRESSION: PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL-CULTURAL FACTORS IN AGGRESSION 4. Acquiring social scripts Media influence/Song lyrics �Do video games teach, or release violence? Grand Theft Auto example/Mortal Kombat Catharsis hypothesis? Effect of virtual reality
BIOPSYCHOSOCIAL UNDERSTANDING OF AGGRESSION
INTERPERSONAL ATTRACTION Attraction is closely linked to 1. Proximity 2. Physical attractiveness 3. Similarity 4. Exchange 5. Intimacy
Psychology of Attraction 1. Proximity: Geographic nearness is a powerful predictor of friendship. Repeated exposure to novel stimuli increases their attraction (mere exposure effect). A rare white penguin born in a zoo was accepted after 3 weeks by other penguins just due to proximity.
PROXIMITY LEADS TO LIKING �IV: Four female confederates attended large class 0, 5, 10, or 15 times �DV: How much liked slides of confederate at end of semester �Results: The more times confederate attended the class, the more she was liked. Moreland & Beach, 1992
PROXIMITY LEADS TO LIKING
PSYCHOLOGY OF ATTRACTION 2. Physical Attractiveness: Once proximity affords contact, the next most important thing in attraction is physical appearance. Couples randomly paired at “computer dance” Assessed personality, aptitude, physical attractiveness � Results: Only physical attractiveness predicted liking and wanting to see the person again. (True for men and women. ) � �
IS ATTRACTIVENESS OBJECTIVE? Arguments for Objective Standard � High consensus across countries, race/ethnicities Agree on attractiveness of faces and body types (F: hourglass; M: v-shaped) � Particular features are associated with attractiveness F: large eyes, prominent cheekbones, small nose, wide smile M: broad jaw, large eyes, prominent cheekbones, wide smile � Babies look longer at faces rated as attractive by adults. (less likely to be affected by cultural standards)
IS ATTRACTIVENESS SUBJECTIVE? Arguments for Subjective Standard �Cross-cultural differences in ways to look beautiful Face painting, plastic surgery, scarring, piercings, etc. Variations in preference for female body size
Subjective? � Standards of beauty within a culture change over time Marilyn Monroe versus Angelina Jolie
ATTRACTIVENESS STANDARDS �Probably both universal and variable components of attractiveness �Overall, physical attractiveness predicts more positive evaluations (true in childhood and later in life)
EVEN “BABY” FEATURES SEEM TO ENHANCE ATTRACTIVENESS IN WOMEN. “Baby” features = large head, large forehead, low set eyes, nose, and mouth, large, round eyes, small nose, round cheeks, small chin
AVERAGE SIZED FEATURES
Source: www. beautycheck. de
Source: www. beautycheck. de
Which do you prefer? Source: www. beautycheck. de
PSYCHOLOGY OF ATTRACTION 3. Similarity: Similar views among individuals causes the bond of attraction to strengthen. Finding others who agree with us strengthens our convictions and boosts our self-esteem Opposites don’t attract – they don’t even meet Complementary Traits – you complete me
PSYCHOLOGY OF ATTRACTION 4. Exchange: The give and take of a relationship. � Social Exchange theory explains how we feel about a relationship with another person as depending on our perceptions of: The balance between what we put into the relationship and what we get out of it. The kind of relationship we deserve. Contrast Effect – seeing something ‘better’ makes us temporarily devalue what we’ve got
PSYCHOLOGY OF ATTRACTION 5. Intimacy: closeness and trust achieved through communication � Must be mutual � Can’t be too much too soon Reward theory of attraction: we will like those whose behavior is rewarding to us and we will continue relationships that offer more rewards than costs to us.
ATTRACTION: THE PSYCHOLOGY OF ATTRACTION � Proximity Mere exposure effect “In me I trust” Online matchmaking and Speed Dating � Physical attractiveness First impressions Frequency of dating/Feelings of popularity/Others initial impressions of their personalities. � Similarity breeds content Reward theory of attraction
Making Friends �Sheldon algorithm making friends
ATTRACTION What factors make a person seem attractive? 1. Proximity (mere exposure effect) class photo demo Sally Wesley Sam Maryla
QUIZ YOURSELF. WHAT ARE THEIR NAMES?
WHICH FOUR OF THESE PEOPLE DO YOU PREFER?
ATTRACTION: ROMANTIC LOVE � Love Passionate love ▪ Schactor two factor theory ▪ College men aroused by fright test ▪ Bridge test Companionate love ▪ Better to choose or have someone choose a partner for you with similar background and interests? � Equity 1. Faithfulness 2. Happy sexual relationship 3. Sharing household chores � Self-disclosure
ALTRUISM � Altruism is the unselfish behaviors or actions done for someone else. � Example: if you volunteer at a nursing home, you are helping someone else without receiving any benefits.
ALTRUISM �Altruism Kitty Genovese �Bystander Intervention Diffusion of responsibility Bystander effect
ALTRUISM The decision-making process for bystander intervention.
BYSTANDER EFFECT Tendency of any given bystander to be less likely to give aid if other bystanders are present.
ALTRUISM: THE NORMS OF HELPING �Social exchange theory: social behavior is an exchange process Seek to + benefits/ - costs �Reciprocity norm: expectation that people will help, not hurt those who have helped them �Social-responsibility norm: expectation that people will help those dependent on them (children, elderly, disabled)
CONFLICT Conflict is perceived as an incompatibility of actions, goals, or ideas. A Social Trap is a situation in which the conflicting parties, by each rationally pursuing their self-interest, become caught in mutually destructive behavior.
SOCIAL TRAPS By pursuing our selfinterest and not trusting others, we can end up losers.
CONFLICT AND PEACEMAKING: ENEMY PERCEPTIONS �Mirror-image perceptions �Self-fulfilling prophecy: belief its own fulfilment that leads to
CONFLICT AND PEACEMAKING � Contact (positive � Cooperation correlation) Superordinate goals - Eagles vs. Rattlers ▪ 9/11 ▪ Interracial cooperative learning � Communication Mediator - Win-Win orientation
PEACEMAKING Graduated & Reciprocated Initiatives in Tension-Reduction (GRIT): This is a strategy designed to decrease international tensions. One side recognizes mutual interests and initiates a small conciliatory act that opens the door for reciprocation by the other party.
- Slides: 124