Class Notes (838,386)
Canada (510,872)
Psychology (7,812)
PSYB10H3 (544)
Lecture 2

Lecture 2 Self and self-regulation.docx

14 Pages
116 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSYB10H3
Professor
Elizabeth Page- Gould
Semester
Fall

Description
PSYB10 Sept. 16, 2013 THE SELF AND SELF-REGULATION Research and Statistical Methods Scientific Method  Hypothetico-deductive method o Test philosophical ideas through observation  Five steps: o Examine past knowledge/research o Form a theory o Operationalize the theory into a hypothesis o Test hypothesis  Usually en masse – trying to generalize to all people. o Rationalize theory  Theory should not be stagnant. Not changing is a pretty bad sign. Variable types Dependent Variable = “DV”  Outcome  The variable that you want to be able to predict Independent Variable = “IV”  Predictor  The variable that you think will predict your DV  The IV must be experimentally manipulated in order to imply causation Correlational Designs Key Features:  2 DVs o We consider both variables in a correlational analysis to be “outcomes” to reflect the lack of causal conclusions that can be drawn  No experimental manipulation  Random sampling o Need to generalize any data PSYB10 Sept. 16, 2013 Examples 1. Icecream sales correlated with drowning deaths… There is no causality. There is a third variable. More icecream is sold during summer when more people are swimming. More swimming = more chances for drowning. Statistical Analysis:  Correlation Proper Interpretation:  Covariance and prediction o One predicts the other when they occur together.  No causality If you have a causal hypothesis, correlations will always support the hypothesis. Quasi-Experimental Key Features:  A defined IV (predictor) and DV (outcome)  No experimental manipulation o The IV is a “known group” – natural groups that exist in the world o e.g., sex, ethnicity, nationality  Comparison/Control Group o This is where the experimental part comes in. Sort of.  Stratified random sampling: you need an equal amount of people in each of the known groups (ex. If you‟re studying ethnicities, you need to have an equal amount of each ethnicity in an area) Examples Theory of Mind (ability to recognise that other people have distinct minds from us) with 2 age groups. – 3 year-olds and five year-olds.  3: Thinks that everyone has the same knowledge that they do.  5: Is able to realise that other people have different knowledge and ideas than them. Statistical Analysis  t-test PSYB10 Sept. 16, 2013 Proper Interpretation  Covariance and Prediction  Discuss differences, but no causality Experimental Designs Key Features:  Manipulated IV(s)  Random assignment to condition  Comparison/Control group Examples The effects of chemical substances on social processing. How does MDMA (Ecstasy) affect a person‟s social attitude? The commonly reported effective is that users feel more emphatic.  Study showed that this belief is not true. However, they were systematically worse at detecting anger in a person‟s expression.  This might explain the empathy because, if you don‟t receive negative cues, you feel more positive and connected to other people. Statistical Analysis:  t-test, regression, ANOVA, Bayesian methods Proper Interpretation:  IV causes DV The Self Def.: An individual consciousness of one‟s own identity  Feelings, observations, and thoughts Self-awareness: Awareness of the Self as an entity that is distinct from others and the environment  Tested with the Mark Test (AKA “Rouge Test”) – you already know what this is. o Children develop self-awareness around a year and a half. PSYB10 Sept. 16, 2013 Levels of Self Minimal Self: Conscious experience of the Self as distinct from the environment  Occurs by double stimulation: if we touch ourselves, we can feel what our body feels like and also how it feels to be touched. o Everything else is single stimulation. We only know what we‟re touching feels like. Objectified Self: Cognitive capacity to serve as the object of one‟s own (or others‟) attention Symbolic (Narrative) Self): Ability to form an abstract mental representation of oneself through language  This may be inherently human Inherently Social We come to know about ourselves by watching others and realising our similarities/differences. The Self-Concept Def.: Your concept of who you are  Everything you know about yourself  Includes qualities, identities, roles, etc The Self-Schema Def.: Cognitive representation of the Self-Concept  The concepts/words in your semantic network that are associated with your sense of Self  Guides processing of self-related information Measuring the Self-Concept Twenty Statements Test (TST)  I am _________  Divided between personality descriptors and social roles PSYB10 Sept. 16, 2013 Self-Complexity Def.: The depth and complexity of your Self-Concept  Operationalized as the number of distinct aspects used to define the Self- Concept Measuring the Self-Schema Implicit Personality Test  Reaction time measures.  Priming the person with the concept of „me‟. The traits that are closer to a person‟s concept will be more quickly responded, whereas those that are further from the concept will take longer to be responded to. Global vs. Contextualised Self. Global Self-concept Contextualized Self-concept  Buffers negative feelings after failure Working self-concept subset of your Self-Concept that is presently accessible What goes in the working self-concept?  Recently primed aspects of Self  Contextually distinctive aspects  “Central” aspects of Self o Those traits will always be a part of the identity Self-Concept Centrality Some aspects of the Self-Concept are more personally important to you than others “Central” aspects are chronically accessible in the semantic network How is it measured? Bullseye test: fill in circle with traits that are important to the person. Those that are more important are those in the middle. Self-Concept Centrality Self-Evaluative Maintenance PSYB10 Sept. 16, 2013 If someone close to you outperforms you in a particular domain, then:  You will be threatened if the domain is central to your Self-Concept  You will be proud if the domain is not central to your Self-Concept If domain is central to the Self-Concept:  Distance Self from relationship  Distance Self from task domain If domain is not central to Self-Concept:  Vicarious self-esteem boost  Magnitude of self-esteem boost proportional to closeness of relationship Self-handicapping Def.: Strategy to buffer the self from an anticipated failure or embarrassment by undermining one‟s own performance Example: Shepperd & Arkin (1989) Took students and gave them a test. They were assigned to one of two conditions: one group was told the test was predictive of the future (diagnostic) while the other group was told that the test didn‟t really matter (Invalid). They were also given the option of listening to one of five types of music – except all the CDs had the same music on them. They were only different by some stickers that had been put on them – these stickers supposedly indicated the level of success that the music was supposed to help.  Students in the Invalid group were more likely to choose the music that would help the performance.  Students in the Diagnostic group were more likely to choose the music that wouldn‟t help their performance. o This way, if they screwed up, they could blame it on the music. Self-Verification Def.: The need to seek confirmation of one‟s Self-concept  Motivated by desire to be understood  Holds true even if Self-concept is negative o … but only for traits that are central to the Self-Concept PSYB10 Sept. 16, 2013 Example: Giesler, Josephs, & Swann (1996) Background: Depression involves negative view of self, world, and future, and these negative views are chronically accessible Participants write a test that is then supposedly analyzed by two students. The person is then told that they can only meet one of the two students – one student analyzed that the participant is awesome while another said the person is awful.  Depressed people chose the student that would give them a negative analysis. This way it‟s a type of self-verification. Multiple Selves Do we have just one view of the Self?  No How many Selves in the Self?  Hazel Markus o Independent & Interdependent Selves o Possible Selves  Tory Higgins o Self-Discrepancy Theory Independent and Interdependent Selves Independent Self: View of Self as distinct from others  This is the one that psychologists usually talk about Interdependent Self: Self as inherently linked with others  Includes other people in one‟s view of self  Our roles in the world is inherently linked with other people Possible Selves Def.: Type of self-knowledge that pertains to how we think about our potential and our future  Ideal selves we want to become  Neutral selves we could become  Selves we are afraid of becoming o Probably more true/complex than the Self-discrepancy theory (see below) PSYB10 Sept. 16, 2013 Self-Discrepancy Theory
More Less

Related notes for PSYB10H3

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