PSYO 1012 Lecture 13: Crown Behaviour...

43 views7 pages
16 Feb 2016
of 7
Thursday, February 11, 2016
Crown Behaviour Attraction and Love Prosocial
Behaviour Prejudice
Crowd Behaviour
-Are sports fans barbarians? Do people behave differently in crowds the alone? What
factors make crowds of normal people do abnormal things?
-these are questions we should ask when considering crowd behaviour
-deindividuation: this is the loss of individuality that leads to disinhibited (abnormal)
anonymity is a key factor
-this is shown through a study done by Meyers and Spencer in 2004
-subjects were told to administer shocks to a helpless woman, they were more likely to
give more shocks if they are disguised
-also in a study, children were told to steal candy, which they were more likely to do if
anonymous as well as in groups
-in an analysis of suicides by jumping my Mann in 1981, crowds were more likely to
encourage suicide victims if it was dark outside
Social Loafing
-social loafing is a word to describe cases when efforts are pooled and as a result,
individuals slack of
-this was first studied using the rope-pull task (Meyers and Spencer 2004)
-by adding more people to the rope to pull, there was not any addition of weight being
able to be pulled
-for example, alone pull = 63kg, 3 people pull ~ 189kg but really = 158kg (16% less), 8
people pull ~ 504kg but really = 247kg (51% less)
-social loafing is most likely to occur in these 6 instances:
Thursday, February 11, 2016
1. Individuals believe that their effort is not being monitored (no one is watching,
don't have to work)
2. Task is not important (why should I really care…?)
3. Group is not valued
4. Task is simple and individual effort is redundant
5. Individuals are fatigues
6. Individuals are all male
Forming Close Relationships
-there are three features which promote the development of friendships and romantic
-this is partially due to the mere exposure effect…repeated exposure to a
stimulus increases our liking for it
Repeated unplanned interactions
A setting encouraging people to let their guard down and coined in each
Attractiveness and Attraction
most people think of the heuristic “what is beautiful is good”
this is used instinctively when judging other people
Similarity and Attraction
-similarity generally leads to interpersonal attraction
-interdisciplinary literature, spanning over 100 years shows this
-romantic partners and friends tend to be more similar than expected by chance:
Thursday, February 11, 2016
socioeconomic status
physical appearance
not necessarily attitudes
Similarity Attracts: Seating Preferences
-Mackinnon et al. (2011) carried out a study
-saw that we actually tend to like people that look like us (this can be seen as the
result of a cue for kinship)
-Study 1 and 2: people sit closer to others if they are the same race, have similar hair
colour or are both wearing glasses
-Study 3: people sit closer to a confederate when they look more physically similar to
that confederate
Matching Effect
-overall, people end up in a romantic relationships with people of similar physical
attractiveness more often than chance
-this may not be a deliberate choice
-Shaw et al. (20110 found that everyone prefers physically attractive partners, it’s just
that the more attractive people can afford to be more picky
-it is said that the matching occurs because we end up with the most attractive person
that will say yes
How to Define Attractiveness?
-Many raters score the attractiveness of faces while looking for inter-rater reliability
-inter-rater reliability: