PSC 152 Lecture Notes - Lecture 4: Pancreatic Cancer, Confirmation Bias, Craps
14 views5 pages
Motivation & Social Cognition
● The “New Look”
○ Bruner: 1940s - 1950s
■ Perception is more than read out of environment by the senses
● There is more to perception than just bottom - up processing of
stimulus
■ “Top - down” influences - motives, goals, & desires
● Ex: drawing a coin vs. a coin-shaped disc
● The coin drawings were always bigger than the disc drawings
● Distortion corresponded to value, not actual size
○ The amount of change corresponds to the amount of value
the object has
● Distortion greater among poorer participants
● Goals affecting cognitive processes
○ Directional goals - desire for specific outcome or judgment
■ Ex: motive to feel positive about the self
■ Ex: motivation to feel connected with others
■ Ex: motivation to have a sense of predictability and control over our
environment
○ Accuracy goals - desire to form accurate judgment
■ Want judgments that align close w/ reality
○ Closure goals - desire to form judgment quickly
● Motivated skepticism (this is under directional goals)
○ We tend to be more skeptical, critical, and doubtful of things that go against our
desires and personal beliefs
■ similar confirmation bias
○ Ditto & Lopez ( 1992)
■ Particular enzyme deficiency may leave one susceptible to pancreatic
cancer
■ Testing new method for detecting enzyme deficiency
■ Lick paper strip - test should take between 10 sec & 1 min to complete
(i.e. to see if color reaction happens)
■ 2 conditions
● Color change = enzyme deficiency
● Color change = no enzyme deficiency
○
■ Tested how long the participants waited before submitting their test strip
■ Those told that the color change means the do NOT have a deficiency
waited about 30 seconds longer to submit their test strip
■ This shows that people are waiting around to see if they will get the
desired result
■ People seem to alter the threshold they set for accepting data as being
valid
● They alter their threshold based on their motivations
■ Shows that people seem to be skeptical or critical of data if it goes
against our desires
● Self- serving representations what is a “good leader” or a “good student” or what does it
mean to be a “good son/daughter”?
● A “good son/daughter” is whatever ONESELF is
○ Dependable vs. thoughtful
○ Dutiful vs. loving
○ Obedient vs. caring
○ Participants stated that the traits that describe themselves align with traits related
to a “good son/daughter”
○ Our motivation to see ourself in a positive light leads us to infuse our
representations of valued roles and traits w/ our own characteristics
● Self - illusions
○ Unrealistically positive views of self
○ Belief that one’s flaws are common, but one’s strengths are unique
○ Exaggerated beliefs of personal control (“magical thinking”)
● Better - than - average effect
○ 88% of drivers put themselves in top 50% for safety
○ 89% of high school seniors rated themselves as “above average” on the ability to
get along w/ others
○ 68% of professors rated themselves in top 25% on teaching ability
○ Why?
■ More biased evaluation of own skills than of others’ skills; find ourselves
superior by comparison