Class Notes (807,938)
Canada (492,936)
Psychology (7,612)
PSYC11H3 (38)
Sisi Tran (10)

Relative Deprivation - Lec 04.docx

4 Pages
Unlock Document

University of Toronto Scarborough
Sisi Tran

Monday September 30 Lec. 04  There were three groups: high resource condition, moderate resource condition, and low resource condition.  The low resource condition realized and were upset  The high resource condition didn’t realize bcs they were so focused on their own product RELATIVE DEPRIVATION - def on slide - when looking at other people, you might look at them and feel its unfair. Feel relatively deprived. - Vs. absolute deprivation – really in need of something in order to survive. Deprived biologically - This will have consequences for outcomes Brown vs Board - idea of segregate white and black people. But the schools will be equal. But they were not equal. Took it down and integrated the two schools - in 1970s, people were realtively well integrated. - In in 1980’s, racial divides. Seen the consequences - Coaches mainly, not even there to teach in black and Hispanic schools. - Are they in fact equal? No they are not! - Predominantly white schools: on slide. Teachers wants to work there, many of the students are literate, less family conflicts etc, the other is more difficult environment to teach in What about In Canada? - facts on slide - so there is a discrepancy Discrepancies in Resources - this is not an individual one to one basis, it is systemetic. It is not necessarily one to one. Some schools have more and will affect your lineage etc, if ur not well educated, your children will not be etc. Relative Deprivation - iits not a one to one issues and will perpetuate until as a people we step in - comparisons are easily made bcs theres a wall that easily divides them. See the picture. On each condo/apartment balcony, there is a hot tub which is equilvant to any of those shacks. - Seeing the huge divide has serious consequences for people. - not necessarily show less self-esteem. You know that you are just as worthy as the next person. More anger bcs know have anger and therefore have more poorer health which affects health disease and death. Our Study - a craft project may not have as much importance but lets say its just a resume, don’t look at the difficulties went through. - This is consistent with other literature – hypo 1 - Hypo 2 – you wont internalize to say its not my fault. Our Data - 3 diff conditions, 30 ppl divided into these 3 conditions. So 10 ppl per condition. - Happiness: all three grps felt the same. - For anger and hostility, the means are lower. Hostility, a little bump. Theres more variability around hostility dimension vs moderate ppl, theres very little variability. Lower self esteem for the moderate group. - F test u compare bw all three grps simultaneously - Theres a diff in 3 grps for self esteem and hostility. - Self : esteem – low vs high see a marginally sig diff. if had a bigger sample size, might have been bigger. - Hostility we know but what about self esteem? Wasn’t expected as this. Looking at the lower grp and thinking had more but didn’t do as well. Most studies who theres no diff in self esteem, some show a heightened sense of self esteem, have less but im a strong person and still capable. The low grp is showing high self esteem. As a result of fewere resources they feel proud of what they do despite limitations. So feeling more hostile but more self esteem. Experimental DESGIN - because we are trying to infer caustality, trying to infer based on resources. Ie, with less resources bcs hostile. Manipulate resources and affects results. But ppl can say hostile that’s why less res but her study shows one direction. - In one sense, they are not the gold standard bcs reduces external vailidity in order to achieve internal validity. - Bcs more contrived, lose the internal validity. If its so specific of a manipulation, then cant generalize to whole society and if that’s the case, it cant result in generalizing to whole society. - But if lost control, and still get big effects, that is great! - many ppl focused on caustality. U need to see there is a correlation before u can worry about the effect of the correlation. - Temporal, have to manipulate first , then the outcome should come after. - 3. Theres no plausible alternative…. 3. No Plausible - there are many threats to this. - One can be history threats: grp of ppl can affect history together. Ex 9/11. So these things affect you as a social group so that history threat can influence the way u react to study. Maturation : in some cases you become more capable Te
More Less

Related notes for PSYC11H3

Log In


Don't have an account?

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.