Class Notes (834,819)
Canada (508,737)
Psychology (5,208)
PSYCH 1X03 (1,058)
Joe Kim (989)
Lecture

Influence Others Video Lecture Psych 1X03
Premium

7 Pages
51 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSYCH 1X03
Professor
Joe Kim
Semester
Fall

Description
Video Lecture Psych 1X03 Influence Others Influence of Others I Introduction  Common sense does not always equal research findings Presence of Others  Eg/ Norman Triplett, 1898 – cyclists bike faster when in a group race, rather than when racing against a clock individually  Triplett hypothesized that there mere presence of others was an important variable in the performance of the actor  Social Facilitation – the increased performance that occurs in the presence of co-actors or an audience o Co-Actor – another individual performing the same task o Audience – a group of people watching an individual perform a task  Co-Actor + Audience = Improved Performance, No Effect or Enhanced Performance  Zajonc’s Resolution – 1965, Robert Zajonc o Presence of others increases arousal to improve performance on simple tasks and decrease performance on complex tasks o Eg/ If you’re well prepared for a presentation, you will likely do well under pressure; however, if you are under prepared, the pressure will cause you anxiety that will cause you to under perform Social Learning Theory  Social Learning Theory – you learn appropriate behaviours be modeling and imitating the behaviours of others o When applied to social behaviours, can be differentiated from basic conditioning because the behaviours you learn from others do not always require explicit reinforcement to develop o Popularized by Albert Bandura, 1970s  The Bobo Doll Experiment o Inflatable doll with a weight at the bottom that picks the doll back up once it tips over o Children (age 3-6) were placed in a room with a Bobo doll o Adults would model behaviour – aggressive or passive o Child would be brought to another room after observing adult model  Children who viewed the aggressive model were more aggressive with the Bobo Doll; punching, yelling and attacking the doll  Aggressive behaviour was spontaneous with no explicit reinforcement or encouragement  Finding ran against the pure behaviorist ideas that suggest that learning of a behaviour would only occur with explicit reinforcement  Children still attached the real person with kicks, punched and toy hammers Conformity  Autokinetic Effect o Muzafer Sherif, 1930, o Subject in a pitch black room, looking at a small dot of light at the front of the room o Light seems to move sporadically for a few seconds and subject has to observe how much it moves o Subjects gave a report that the light moves a mean of 5 cm o The light doesn’t actually move, your eyes scan the scene of a dot of light against a uniform dark background, so subject mistakes the movement of the image on their retina as actual motion of the light o Later put into the same room with 2 others; who report that the light moves a mean of 15 and 20 cm o Over several days of testing, your responses slowly converge  Norm Formation   Normative Function – the role of others in setting standards for our conduct based on a fear of rejection o Evident in fashion trends and popular culture Video Lecture Psych 1X03 o Asch’s Stimuli  Solomon Asch  Subjects were seated in a room with a group of other individuals and told they were going to complete a rather simple experiment  They would see one sample line and three comparison lines, and they would have to identify which of the comparison lines matched the standard  Group of 7 participants; one is a real subject, six are confederates of the experiment  Subject is always sixth to respond – most of the confederated responding first  At first everything proceeds as expected – all subjects agree on rather obvious line judgments  As the experiment progresses, slowly the confederated start agreeing on clearly incorrect answers  By the time it reaches the subjects response, it is clear that the popular answer is wrong  37% of all responses conformed to a clearly incorrect answer  75% of subjects conformed to an incorrect answer at least once  Comparative Function – the role of other in providing information about an ambiguous situation o Eg/ Fire Drill – real fire or just a drill? o Deutsch and Gerard, 1955, Experiment  Each subject was seated in a separate cubicle where they could neither see nor hear the other subjects  They would see one sample line and three comparison lines, and they would have to identify which of the comparison lines matched the standard  A light would flash to indicate the other subjects responses  Normative Function not in effect because there is no reason for the subject to feel ostracized for choosing a different answer  Subjects still went alongwith the wrong answers  Conformed primarily on trials where the correct answer was less clear – subject doubted own perceptions Group Dynamics  The Risky Shift o 1961, James Stoner o Asked subjects to read a set of hypothetical situations and make risk assessments – individually then in groups o Found that group decisions were on average riskier than the mean decision of the individual before group discussion for some examples  Eg/ Helen is a book writer; if she writes this next book, it has the potential to earn her a lot of money if it’s a success, but if it’s a flop it will cause her a large amount of wasted time without pay  groups were riskier  Eg/ Roger is a father with two children and has little money and is considering selling his life insurance policy groups were less risky  Group Polarization – group decision making strengthens the original inclination of the individual group members o Can move the group decision either in the risky or cautious direction o Supported by experiments which demonstrate that group decision making seems to enhance national pride, negative racial and financial attitudes and decision-making in juries  Groupthink - a group decision making environment that occurs when group cohesiveness becomes so strong it overrides realistic appraisals of reality and alternative opinions o Irving Janis coined the term groupthink o ”Mob mentality” o Groups falling victim to groupthink  Often believe that they are unquestionably right and all other groups are wrong  Fail to critically test, analyze and evaluate the ideas of the group o Group decisions tend to be rationalized and pressure to conform is high Video Lecture Psych 1X03 o Individuals in these groups often censor dissenting opinions and those who disagree are rejected from the group o Groups tend to overestimate their might and right o Recommendations for preventing groupthink  Be Impartial – group leader should never endorse any particular position from the outset  Encourage Critical Evaluation – allow group members to disagree  Devils Advocate – present counter arguments  Subdivide the Group – different groups coming to different conclusions then discuss differences  Provide a Second Chance – air any lingering doubts The Bystander Effect  Kitty Genovese, 1960s –murdered outside her apartment in New York after being stabbed repeatedly and left for dead by her assailant in an attack that lasted 30 minutes o Appalling not only because of the crime but also because there were 38 witnesses from the apartment windows who did nothing o Witnesses did nothing to help her for fear of their own safety o Witnesses didn’t call for help, because they saw others looking out at the rime scene and assumed someone else had called the police  Experiments to examine a groups response to an emergency o An individual must decide  Whether the situation is an emergency  Whether the situation required them to personally respond o If answer is yes to both – likely to respond o If answer is no to either – likely not to respond  Collective Ignorance – when each individual in a group see nobody responding in a given situation, they conclude that the situation is not an emergency o Latane and Darley Experiment 1  Subjects were asked to complete a short questionnaire either alone or in a rom with others  At one point, smoke would begin to seep into the room  Individuals were more likely to report the smoke than people in groups  As the number of people in the room increased, the likelihood that any one subject would report the smoke decreased  Diffusion of Responsibility – in deciding whether we have to act, we determine that someone else in the group is more qualified o Latane and Darley Experiment 2  Subject was asked to participate in a group discussion with each individual in a different room, communicating with the others over an intercom  Only was person was a subject in the experiment; others were prerecorded tapes  In different conditions, a subject was lead to believe there were different numbers of participants joining him in the discussion  At one point, the subject would hear someone calling over the intercom for help in the grips of a seizure  More rapid responses came from subjects who thought that nobody else was on the intercom  As the number of others believed to be listening increased, the probability that the subject would take action decreased  Getting Help o Choose an individual and give them responsibility  “You in the green shirt, this is an emergency, you need to go call an ambulance” o Seeing someone else helping increases the probability that you will help in later situation  Experiment 1 – confederate of the experiment parked car on the side of the road with the hood up, indicating that help was needed – number of passing drivers that stopped to offer help was recorded Video Lecture Psych 1X03  Experiment 2 – disabled car getting help parked some distance before the confederate – when exposed to this helping model, the proportion of passing cars that stopped to help the confederate was higher  Social Loafing –individuals seem to be less motivated when working in a group than when working alone o Alan Ingham, 1975  Devised a task where participants were brought into the lab, blind folded and told they were going to be playing a game of tug of war with a group  Individuals pulled 18% less when they thought they were pulling as a group as compared to pulling alone o Latane, Williams and Harkins  Pa
More Less

Related notes for PSYCH 1X03

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit