Class Notes (834,265)
Canada (508,451)
Psychology (3,518)
PSY220H1 (190)
Lecture

Jan 16th.docx

11 Pages
63 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSY220H1
Professor
Jason Plaks
Semester
Winter

Description
Jan 16 , 2012 Beliefs Other People Feelings Behaviour (& their thoughts, Attitudes feelings, attitudes, Emotions behaviours) Social psychology: A foothold in abstract theory & concrete practice - Not like chemistry or physics: We traffic in probabilities, likelihood, and correlations, rather than absolute laws. - Despite the enormous variability of human behaviour, it is possible to extract some basic patterns of human behaviour. - Intuitions must be tested against empirical data - Sometimes two opposing clichs maybe equally intuitive (Ex. scenario of the cigar factorysocial facilitation) Social Facilitation: The strengthening of dominant responses owing to the presence of others I. Triplett (1897): Got 40 children to wind up fishing reels, sometimes alone, sometimes side-by-side with others. - Results: with othersfaster II. Zajonc: Enhancing Strengthens easy Arousal dominant behaviour Others' (increased responses heart-rate, OR presence sweating (responses palms, etc.) most Impairing practiced) difficult behaviour - On a well-learned task, the dominant response is the correct response. On a poorly-learned task, the dominant response is likely to be incorrect Presence of others: - The effect of other people increases with their number - Being in a crowdintensifies positive/negative reactions When sit together, friendly people are liked even more and unfriendly people are disliked even more) III. Cottrell: Evaluation Apprehension - Social phenomenon but potential evaluation from others is necessary for the presence of others to effect performancerisk of failure - Experiment: pronunciation of nonsense syllables and well learned easy to pronounce syllables (blindfolded observers) Mere presence did not boost well-practiced responses Enhancement of responses is strongest when people think they are being evaluated - Shmitt: Typing names backwards 1. Subject typing individually 2. Subject typing in a room with another person who is wearing headphones and blindfolded 3. Subject typing in a room with another person who is not wearing headphones and not blindfolded The performance of the subject is effected by scenarios 2 & 3mere presence effects performance IV. Baron: Distraction Conflict - Not a social phenomenon and mere presence is not relevant - Conflict (attention to others vs. attention to task)arousal - It is about distraction of any kindthe presence of the other person must be inherently distracting (the person must commit acts that distracts the subject) Social Loafing: the tendency for people to exert less effort when they pool their efforts toward a common goal than when they are individually accountable - Ringelmann: Rope pulling When efforts are pooled (assembly lines, juries, orchestras), and the performance of any one individual is difficult or impossible for observers to determineThe whole is less than the sum of the parts. Poor coordination? - Ingham: Blindfolded individuals and made them think others were pulling with them Pulled 18% harder when they knew they were pulling along than when they believed there were 2-5 people also pulling - Latan: blindfold six people, have them put on headphones (blasted with the sound of shouting/clapping) & told subject either that they were alone or that they were part of a team, but their teammates were all in separate rooms (control) (There actually were no teammates) asked them to shout/clap & made them believe others were doing the same (dependent variable: dB level) 1/3 less noise when believe 5 others were also shouting or clapping 100% (alone)80% (1 other)74%(5 other)S But did not view selves as loafing - Williams: all agree loafing occurs, but none admits to do it - Explanations: a) Non-motivated explanation: groups less coordinated (more interference nothing to do with individual effort) b) Motivated explanation: people try less hard in groups - Factors that reduces loafing: 1. Identifiability: to the extent that each individuals contribution is difficult to measuremore social loafing2. Importance of task: does it directly effects ones outcome 3. Own efforts necessary for successful outcome: effort not going to make a differencemore loafing 4. Threat of punishment for poor performance 5. Small group: division of task 6. Group cohesiveness: when members are friends or identified with their group rather than strangers (expectation to interact with others again) 7. When the task is challenging, appealing, or involving 8. Social comparison (ex. workout with a buddy and wants to out-do him) 9. Believe teammates are lousy and incompetent - Karau & Williams: Collective Effort Model Effort is fatiguing, but success is desiredseek to optimize the ratio between their input and the groups output (i.e. people not entirely lazy and not entirely concerned with top performance seek optimal balance) Being observedincreased exposure to evaluationsocial facilitation Lost in a crowndecreased evaluation concernssocial loafing Deindividuation: loss of self-awareness and evaluation apprehension; occurs in group situations that foster anonymity and draw attention away from the individual 1. Group size: large groups renders individuals unidentifiable - Zimbardo: purchased two 10-year-old cars and left them with hoods up and license plates removed The o
More Less

Related notes for PSY220H1

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