PSYCH 202 Lecture 7: Introduction to Social Psychology
Introduction to Social Psychology
Some Orienting Positions of Social Psychology:
0. 0. Social Situations affect us powerfully, both through direct effects on behavior and through how
we judge others
Works in cooperation with personality psych. Social situation have deep influences upon us. Directly
how we act, indirectly how we feel about ourselves
0. 0. “Social situations” are more powerful determinants of behavior than are “individual
dispositions”
0. 0. Social Expectations create Social Reality and Internalized Individual Psychological States
1. 1. Internalize the expectations of others
0. 0. When explaining or describing the behavior of others, people tend to commit “The Fundamental
Attribution Error,” which is …
Tendency to commit a cognitive error of overemphasize the role of individual dispositions when
explaining behavior of other people. Underemphasize role of social situations. I don’t fuck up, others do.
Don’t think about what makes others do what they do
0. 0. A related concept is the Actor/Observer Difference:
0. 0. Observers (persons explaining the behavior of others) tend to commit the fundamental
attribution error
1. 1. Actors (persons explaining their own behavior) commit the error much less frequently,
commonly explaining/describing their own behavior as related to situational factors. Justifying
their own behavior
Illustration: The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
Figure:
0. 0. Step 1: Perceiver Impression Formation (Expectations are both actively formed and passively
received)
1. 1. Step 2: Perceiver Behaves Consistently with Expectations (perceiver expectations are
communicated/expressed, often nonverbally and with minimal, if any, consciousness of so-doing)
How you treat others due to expectation
2. 2. Step 3: Target’s Behavior Adjusts (Unconsciously/reactively) to Perceiver Expectation
Comes to do what was expected of them, adjust to perceivers expectation
Robert Rosenthal’s Analysis in the VideoClip on Self-Fulfilling Prophesy in IQ Scores:
0. 0. Brief Review of the experiment:
0. 0. IV: Expectations
0. 0. DV: Degree of intellectual achievement
0. 0. Results: Child who were expected to do better did
How Did Teacher Expectations Affect IQ?
0. 0. Rosenthal’s Analysis of Four Purported Causal Factors/Mechanisms
0. 0. Climate: warmer climate, nicer, nonverbal and verbal
0. 0. Input: more materiel to kids they have better expectations for
0. 0. Response Opportunity: kids get more chance to respond, call on them more, work
together to get correct answer
0. 0. Feedback: praised more, positively reinforced with right answer, more differential
feedback for wrong answer.
0. 0. Theoretical Point: Social Expectations/Beliefs influenced Teacher Behavior and relationships
which came to shape and construct real external and internal realities for students
Another Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Effect: Videotape on Welding Students
0. 0. What is the IV? Expectation of teacher of chosen
0. 0. What are the several different DV’s Discussed?
0. 0. 1) attendance
1. 1. 2) learned faster
2. 2. 3) scored higher on test
3. 3. 4) liked more
VideoClip on Prejudice: the Social Construction of Differences and the Formation and
Internalization of Biased Stereotypes
Jane Elliot’s Riceville, Iowa, 1968 3rd grade experiment: Blue eyes vs. brown eyes, blue eyes were
superior,
What is the IV? groups of eye colors
0. 0. What are some of the DV’s? depression, lashing out, acting superior/inferior
1. 1. “Social Fact” becomes objective fact
0. 0. Indicators of Differences are:
0. 0. Institutionalized
1. 1. Rules/Norms/Expectations are Formed
2. 2. Subjective Social Reality Becomes THE Reality
0. 0. In prejudice and stereotyping we see the operation of a “Confirmation Bias” wherein social
perceivers differentially attend to and then store in memory social information, as illustrated next.
Seek evidence that confirms our point of view. Pay attention to what fits your view, ignore what
doesn’t
0. 0. Prejudices grows stronger when a social perceiver encounters information in their social world
that is consistent with their prejudiced attitudes.
1. 1. WHY?
2. 2. In the face of existing attitudes/expectations/beliefs, Prejudice-consistent information is noticed,
rehearsed, and stored in increasingly elaborated (however biased) semantic networks (which include
schemas, scripts, and stereotypes) in LTM.
0. 0. Prejudice is often largely unaffected, however, when a social perceiver encounters information in
their social world that is inconsistent with prejudiced beliefs and attitudes.
1. 1. WHY?
2. 2. In the face of existing attitudes/expectations/beliefs, Prejudice-inconsistent information tends
NOT to be noticed, rehearsed, nor therefore stored in LTM. New evidence is thus subject to biased
processing.
Next slide represents “Social Identity Theory,” a model of why people may be organized in
such a way as to reveal biased processing of outgroups
Need for self-esteem, personal identity, personal achievements, self-esteem
Social identities, favoritism towards ingroups, self-esteem
Derogation of outgroups, self-esteem
The Power of Social Situations: Is Our Behavior Caused by Personal Dispositions or Social
Situations?
0. 0. The Social Psychologist’s answer leans toward the situational explanation, although it
acknowledges that individual differences contribute. Heart of the situation, not our personalities, not
our values, social circumstances themselves
1. 1.
Document Summary
Some orienting positions of social psychology: 0. Social situations affect us powerfully, both through direct effects on behavior and through how we judge others. Directly how we act, indirectly how we feel about ourselves: 0. Social situations are more powerful determinants of behavior than are individual dispositions : 0. Social expectations create social reality and internalized individual psychological states: 1, 0. When explaining or describing the behavior of others, people tend to commit the fundamental. Tendency to commit a cognitive error of overemphasize the role of individual dispositions when explaining behavior of other people. Don"t think about what makes others do what they do: 0. A related concept is the actor/observer difference: 0. Observers (persons explaining the behavior of others) tend to commit the fundamental attribution error: 1. Actors (persons explaining their own behavior) commit the error much less frequently, commonly explaining/describing their own behavior as related to situational factors.
