Class Notes (837,550)
Canada (510,314)
Psychology (7,785)
PSYB10H3 (544)

social psychology.docx

19 Pages
Unlock Document

E- Page Gould

Lecture 12 – Emotion A brief psychological and physiological response to an event that is felt subjectively and prepares person for action Moods are NOT emotions, sentiments are NOT emotions (“I feel this way towards…”), personality traits are NOT emotions, arousal (sleepiness) not strictly an emotion, moods are diffuse, don’t need to have an eliciting cause, don’t need to have a target, moods may not call for an action, persist over time Any emotion lasting over 4 minutes is not an emotion Heuristic : fast processing (short cuts) we make decisions based on it (see snake  run) Classes of Emotions (6 Basic Emotions): Fear, Anger, Disgust, Sadness, Happiness, Surprise Complex Emotion: blends of basic emotions Positive Emotion: gratitude (most studied), contentment, amusement, desire, love (contested) Self Conscious: pride, shame (you are target), guilt (someone is target), embarrassment Currogator Supercilli: Negative (Sad/Angry) Orbicularis Oculi: how genuine a smile is Zygomaticus: Postive (Smiling) Levator Labii: Disgust Measuring Emotions: electromyography (EMG): captures subtle facial movement, best used for situations where facial movement is not visually detectable, obtrusive measurement technique Facial Action Coding System: codes overt facial expressions, numbers all facial muscle actions, classifies as emotions as patterns of muscle actions that occur together Emotions in Peripheral Nervous System: sympathetic + parasympathetic nervous system (e.g. heart rate, skin conductance, finger temperature) Central Nervous System: limbic system, amygdale (fear + anger), hippocampus (laughter), every other emotion  frontal cortex Physiological profiles and locations help us understand arousal, intensity and possible shortcuts Emotions cannot be identified by examining physiological states James Lange Theory of Emotion: specific bodily response tells us what emotion we are feeling; bodily response is specific Event  Specific response  Subjective emotion Lie detector tests don’t work; not admissible in court Cognitive Appraisals: meaning of event affects our emotional response to it (e.g. getting punched  he meant it  anger vs. getting punched  he meant it as a joke  amusement) Two Factor Theory of Emotion 1) Physiological arousal is generalized, not specific 2) We apply label to the arousal based on cognitive appraisal Event  General Arousal  Appraisal  Emotion – says emotions are an illusion of appraisal LECTURE 13 - Morality Functionality of emotion based reasoning: reduces complexity, rapid decision making Experiment: How happy are you with your life? ** Mention of sunny/ non sunny day ** (External Attribution) Happy  Feel Satisfied Unhappy  Feel Dissatisfied Moral violation elicit specific emotion: Disgust, Anger, Contempt Disgust: elicited by violations of divinity, purity, cleanliness Anger: elicited by violations of autonomy, personal harm, individual rights Contempt: elicited by violation of community hierarchy Social Intuitionist Model: 2 steps to moral reasoning: 1) Make Judgment based on emotional reaction 2) Try to come up with acceptable justification for that reaction Logical Morality: cognition still has a say, neural correlates of moral reasoning Dual Process Theory of Moral Judgment: 2 types of reasoning processes: Emotional Process (Crying baby dilemma) Utilitarian Process (Logical Process)  heightened activity in dorsolateral prefrontal cortext (dPFC) When Does Rationality Win Out? When both utilitarian and emotional arguments are strong, there is conflict. Heightened activity in Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC) People who choose utilitarian arguments (activation in dPFC > ACC) Lecture 14 – Initial Attraction Why we like other people: Proximity (propinquity effect): more we see and interact with other people, the more likely we are to become their friends) key factor Familiarity: mere exposure: more exposure you get to neutral object, more you like it – does not apply if object has negative qualities MIT Westgate Apartment: friendships among MIT married couples doormats Next door: 41% 2 doors apart: 22% Opposite hallway: 10% Apartments 1 & 5 had more friends from 2 ndfloor Mere Exposure to your face: we tend to prefer our mirror image over photograph image, friends prefer photograph image People we don’t like: enemies also proximate: 63% of most liked lived close 73% of most disliked lived close Similarity or Complementarity? Complementarity: “opposites attract” Similarity: “birds of a feather flock together” Research supports that similarity promotes liking Similarity predicted friendship formation, demographics, attitudes, values, personality traits and communication style Tend to expect that similar people will like us Similarity provides subtle validation of our views and opinions (gives us “social proof”) Self concept validation Dislike dissimilar people Reciprocal Liking: we like people better who like us, pick up subtle cues: eye contact, leaning in, attentive listening, mimicry Less true for people with low self esteem, negative self concept Flirting: attention getting: see each other, take out territory, give information Recognition: eye contact & voice tone Touching: first touch Keeping the non verbal synchrony Attactiveness: Beliefs + Myths of Beauty Symmetry, averageness, babyfacedness, cultural influence Myth: “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder” – raters agree about who is + who is not attractive Myth: “Never judge a book by its cover” – attractive children and adults judged more positively even by those who know/don’t know them Myth: “Beauty is only skin deep” – attractive children and adults exhibit more positive behaviors and traits Effects of Physical Attractiveness Physically attractive individuals have an edge when it comes to relationships Certain physical features are reliably associated with judgment of attractiveness We especially respond to “baby faces” and symmetry of facial features Babyfacedness: large eyes, rounder face + nose Outcomes: more persuasive, more trustworthy, evoke liking and caregiving behavior Why are features important? Good Health  facial symmetry Sexual Maturity  cheekbones Dominance  square jaws (androgens) only found in Canada & U.S Composite faces rated more attractive than individuals (mathematically averaged faces) Composites of people rated highly attractive are more attractive than composites of all attractive levels Attractiveness & Liking: seems to be hard wired Babies stare at “attractive” faces longer Fair amount of cross cultural consistency in attractiveness judgment But attractiveness is illusive: cultural and historical standards of beauty shift Media images of beauty convey current trends Why Does Beauty Promote Attraction? “Beautiful is good schema” Beauty creates a “halo effect” – occurs most for social competence, more sociable, popular, extraverted, more sexual, happy, friendly, kernel of truth here… Physically attractiveness is socially important for men as well as for women Matching Hypothesis: we seek partners that are of similar attractiveness to us and are more satisfied with these partners Couples of similar attractiveness were more likely to continue dating after a blind date, less likely to break up Misattribution of Arousal Arousal is misattributed as attraction when an attractive social object is present Scarcity If potential mates are not plentiful, we may shift our standards of attractiveness Attractiveness ratings of opposite sex targets increased as the evening progresses Holds even when statistically controlling for intake of alcohol – girls more attractive during “closing” time If we are told we cannot have something, we tend to desire that thing even more, “Romeo & Juliet” effect Lecture 15 – Close Relationships Evolutionary Fitness: potential to pass on your genes/successfully procreate, ability to survive mating years, ability to maximize the number of offspring that survive to their mating years Reproductive Investment of Each Sex – the “investment” of time, resources and risk involved in having each child, typically varies between sexes, the sex which bears the most reproductive costs is “choosier” Sexual Choosiness – choosy sex bears the most reproductive costs, usually female but not always (seahorse), sex with least reproductive costs should want more partners, will be in competition for mates more often, displays greater physical variation (peacock) Polygamy – several members of one sex mating with one individual of other sex Polygyny – several females, one male (90% of mammals) Polyandry – several males with one female Sexual Dimorphism – pronounced difference in the size or bodily structures of the two sexes, seen in polygamous animals Monogamy – reproductive partnership based on a more or less permanent tie between partners Biological Basis of Monogamy – co occurrence of oxytocin and dopamine in Nucleus Accumbens Dopamine – reward neurotransmitters Oxytocin – “attachment” hormone that is also a neuropeptide – allows milk to come out Monogamous Animals - oxytocin and dopamine receptors share nucleus accumbens - activation of one activates the other – love is addiction - all 5% of monogamous animals share this anatomical feature Polygamous Animals - no oxytocin receptors in nucleus accumbens Homosexuality – reproduce partnership - wide display across animal kingdom - usually associated with disproportionate number of male and female mating adults - usually finds abandoned children and raise it Polygamous Humans: Evidence - sexual dimorphism, great physical variation, 85% of traditional cultures allow some kind of polygamy Monogamous Humans? - co occurrence of oxytocin and dopamine in human brain - great physical variation among both sexes - 98.9% of men and 99.2% of women report having to settle with one life partner in the end - sexual fidelity not a characteristic of monogamy Shades of Grey - evidence that human sexual behavior changes over lifespan - young adulthood: mating tends toward polygamy - mid 20 and onwards: mating tends toward monogamy – somehow argued this is a superior strategy Human Mate Selection - evolutionary approaches to mate selection - assume all behavior is the product of reproductive fitness - women have higher reproductive investment - women should desire mates with resources - men should desire youth + attractiveness more Experiment – Are Sex Differences All In The Head? - men rated physical attractiveness as more important - women rated earning prospects as more important Need To Belong – Harlow’s Monkeys - belonging is a basic human motivation - sociometer theory - human survival tactics requires several people (eg. Building shelters, hunting game) - human children are helpless for several years - compared to those who are isolated from others, people with strong social networks are happier, healthier, greater life satisfaction Social Isolation - long term isolation is a form of official torture/punishment in every society - social ostracism/rejection is an unofficial way to enforce social rules in every society - effects observed in primates as well Harlow’s Rheus Monkeys -experiment performed in response to Freud’s Cupboard Theory of Caregiver Love, that love of primary caregiver is the result of providing the child with basic needs, terror of caregiver loss is based on possibility of going unfed - Harlow theorized that caregivers were more than food depositors - Cloth mother, exploration high when cloth mother present, low exploration when cloth mother not present What If Monkey Socially Isolated.. - socially isolated for 3 months, still provided with regular good and contact comfort “room temp” - dramatic disturbances after 3 months - incompetent (often abusive) parenting - huddling alone, rocking, self motivation Monkey Therapy: negative impact of isolation could be reduced - introduce isolated monkeys to “therapist” monkey - therapy monkey: non isolated, same age rhesus monkey - after 2 weeks, isolated monkey will play with therapist monkey - after 6 months, isolated monkey seems mostly recovered - remained more easily stressed than “normal” monkey Infant Attachment Theory describes how infants become emotionally distressed at loss of caregiver; emotionally attached to caregivers Functional Purpose of Attachment: comforts fearful child, builds expectations for future relationships, provides “secure” base for exploration: preset in non humans as well Imprinting: form of attachment bond which occurs shortly after birth/hatching among many species - must occur within “sensitive” period - animals show distress when imprinted object has been removed Attachment Among Humans - infants enter world predisposed to seek direct contact with primary caregiver - motivated by: infants find social interaction intrinsically rewarding - instinctive fear of the unknown Adult Attachment - adult romantic relationships function like caregiver/child attachment relationships - prefer proximity, with distress upon separation - turn to partner for support when stressed - derive security from partner enabling exploration of and engagement with rest of world Secure Attachment Style: 56% - experience of love, trust, friendship, positive emotion - view of self/relationships: believe in enduring love, others are trustworthy, self is likable - memories of caregivers: dependably responsible and caring Anxious-Ambivalent Attachment Style: 19% - experience of love: preoccupying, almost painfully exciting struggle to merge with someone else - view of self/relationships: fall in love easily, frequently have difficulty finding true love, self doubts - memories of positive and negative with caregivers Avoidant Attachment Style: - experience of love: fear of closeness, lack of trust, view of self/relationships: doubtful of existence or durability of romantic love, don’t need love partner to feel happy, self as independent, self reliant - memories of caregivers: cold and rejecting Global vs. Specific Attachment - global: generalized attachment theory, how you typically approach attachment relationships - specific: distinct attachment to each attachment figure - eg. An avoidant person can be securely attached to best friend - almost everyone has a specific attachment representing each style ABC’s of Close Relationships: A: affect, theories of love, positive illusions B: behavior, equity theory, co operative dilemmas in close relationships C: cognition, self expansion theory, interdependence theory Friendship: platonic interpersonal closeness - cultural variation in friendship: Ghana vs. US - enemyship: strong bond of animosity, distrust and goal - Ghana has more enemies - romantic: interpersonal closeness for which is a sexual reproductive goal Self Expansion Theory: the experience of closeness is an associative overlap of our self concept with our concept of a close other - AKA inclusion of others in self - information about close others are closely associated with self related information - cognitive component of closeness - longer reaction times when making “me/not me” judgment of spouse’s characteristics - make more situational attributions for self and other others, but dispositional attribution for non close others - fundamental attribution error only applies to non close others Interdependence Theory – “Investment Model” - commitment, mental state characterized by a pluralistic collective, representation of the self in relationships 3 components of commitment: - satisfaction, product of perceived awards, costs and comparison level, quality of alternatives - resource investment - commitment = (high satisfaction) + (low quality of alternatives)+(high resource investment) - when commitment is high: more spontaneous use of pleural pronouns - Rusbult (1983) method: measure satisfaction, quality of alternatives and resources in dating couples at time, contact them 7 months later to ask about relationship Companionate Love - feelings of intimacy and affection we feel when we care deeply for a person, but without sexual arousal or passion - can exist between lovers and friends, valued in all cultures Passionate Love - feelings of intense longing for a person usually accompanied by physiological arousal – valued in 144 of 167 cultures Positive Illusion in Close Relationships: “idealization” of close others, seeing them as more positive than they see themselves Equity Theory - close relationships are interactions in which partners exchange goods and services - relationship satisfaction predicted by equity - however, relationship quality is predicted by the way you evaluate equity Two Equity Orientations: partner tends to mould to the view you see them as Exchange Orientation - interaction between relationships partners are governed by equity concerns - tit for tat strategy (balance) - typically observed among new acquaintances Communal Orientation - partner gives in response to their partner’s needs, regardless of whether they are paid back - typically observed with high quality close relationships Co-operative Dilemmas in Close Relationships: What To Do When One Partner Behaves Destructively? - attributions for partner’s behavior - better to make positive (non dispositional) attributions - transformation of motivation in long term relationships What Couples Do Well? - sense of equity good income, same level of education, grew up in 2 parent homes, married after age 20, similar age, dated for a long time, but did not live together, sex often, arguments rarely Novel Experiences - sharing new experiences together, exploration of environment with partners as “secure base” Why Relationships Fail: - low equity in relationship - lack of positive illusions (particularly negative illusions) - low interdependence - boredom – lack of exploration/novel activities Top Causes of Conflict: Sex, Money, Kids - marital satisfaction dives with first child - slowly returns to pre child levels by empty nest “4 Horsement of the Apocalypse” 1. Criticism (listing personal flaws, attacking) 2. Defensivness (Denying, Excusing) 3. Contempt (Rolling eyes, sarcasm) 4. Stonewalling (non response to communicative attempts – worst) Friendships: people typically use “passive strategies” to end relationship – avoidance/withdrawl Romantic Relationship - typically use “direct strategies” direct confrontation Neurochemical Basis of Social Rejection - neurological experience of physical pain: Anterior Angulate Cortex (ACC) - associated with distress signal during physical pain - right ventral prefrontal cortex (rvPFC): associated with regulation and inhibition of felt pain If social pain is physically painful: interrupting the experience of pain should dull the hurt of rejection Tylenol participants reported less hurt feelings on days when they experienced social rejection or exclusion than placebo Tylenol participants reported less physical pain Interpersonal Rejection Sensitivity - sustained vigilance for rejection cues + emotionally charged, “hot” reaction when rejection is perceived - perceive rejection in ambiguously rejecting situations - respond intensely to perceived rejection - just as common in men and women The Sauce Study - pepsicin – chemical in hot food - female (heterosexual) goes into lab thinking she’s supposed to meet a guy and reads Alex’s profile - Alex hates spicy food, researcher tells the girl he didn’t want to interact with her - Control group: Alex didn’t show up - Tobasco sauce  make drink for Alex  people who’s been rejected gave 77mL sauce - Control group gave less retaliation, aggressive response Lecture 17 – Culture - an ever changing, constructive stimulus which shapes the way individuals perceive and contribute to the world 1. Dynamic 2. Influenced by members of the culture 3. Influences members of the culture Nationality: country you were born in Ethnicity: cultural heritage (Canadian) Identification: shared identity of group members Meaning System: symbols, language, experiences Metaphysics: beliefs about the world, universe and existence Culture Comparative - Universalist approach to cultural psychology that assumes basic psychological processes are fundamental to all humans - most common approach in cultural psychology - Think between – culture variation is comparable to within culture variation Cross Cultural - relativist approach to cultural psychology that assumes that human behavior is essentially cultural - psychological processes are defined by the cultural context in which they occur - focus on within-culture variation - usually only discuss between cultures difference qualitively Typical Methods: Culture – comparative psychologists 1. Identify a construct (eg. Individualism) that might vary by culture 2. Test the construct in more than one culture Cross cultural 1. Choose a culture 2. Study and identify psychological processes of people in that culture (heuristics, persuasion) Individualist Cultures - emphasize personal achievement, even at the expense of others - great emphasis on competition (Canada, Western Europe) Collectivist Culture (more valued) - emphasize social roles and collective responsibilities, even at the expense of the individual - greater emphasis on co-operation eg. China, Korea, Latin America Political Climate – political structure greatly constrains behavior and cultural expression - sometimes government change can extinguish a culture Religious Beliefs: dominant religious beliefs characterize a culture’s moral reasoning and motivations - religion al
More Less

Related notes for PSYB10H3

Log In


Join OneClass

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

Sign up

Join to view


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.