Study Guides (238,073)
United States (119,662)
CAS PS 261 (72)
All (39)

COMPLETE- Social Psych Exam 2 Study Guide.pdf

17 Pages
Unlock Document

Boston University
Psychological & Brain Sciences
CAS PS 261

Exam  2  Study  Guide     Chapter  7-­‐  Attitudes  and  Attitude  Change     The  Nature  and  Origin  of  A ttitudes   •  Attitude-­‐  evaluation  of  people,  objects  and  ideas.  Three  components  (ABC)   • Affect-­‐  emotional  reaction   • Behavior-­‐  actions  one  takes   • Cognition-­‐  beliefs  about  tar get      •  Functions  of  attitudes   • Predict     • Self-­‐identities   A.  Where  Do  Attitudes  Come  From?   •  Genes -­‐  evidence  from  separated  identical  twins’  rearing  and  similarity  in  their  attitudes.   • Influenced  by  temperament  and  personality.   •  Social  component  plays  a  larg e  part.     •  Although  all  attitudes  have  the  three  components,  any  given  attitude  can  be  based  more  on  one   component  than  another.   1.  Cognitively  Based  Attitudes   •  Based  primarily  on  people’s  beliefs  about  properties  of  the  attitude  object.   • “Attitude  appraisal”-­‐  how  much  punishment  or  reward  will  the  object  provide?   2.  Affectively  Based  Attitudes   •  Based  on :   • Feelings  and  values -­‐  voting  for  a  political  candidate.   • Sensory  reaction -­‐  liking  the  taste  of  chocolate.     • Classical  conditioning -­‐  smell  grandma’s  cooking   and  remember  her  love.        •  Not  based  on  objective  appraisals.          •  Function:  validate  one’s  basic  value  system.      •  Classical  Conditioning                               3.  Behaviorally  Based  Attitudes   •  Based  on  self -­‐perception à  don’t  know  how  to  feel  so  we  observe  ou r  behavior.     •  Conditions   • Initial  attitude  is  weak  or  ambiguous.   • No  other  possible  explanations  for  behavior.     B.  Explicit  Versus  Implicit  Attitudes   •  Explicit -­‐  consciously  endorse  and  easily  report.     •  Implicit-­‐  involuntary,  uncontrollable  and  unconscious.     •  Example-­‐  explicitly  you  encourage  end  to  segregation  but  when  you  are  around  black  people  some   negative  stereotypes  come  up.     C.  How  Do  Attitudes  Change?   •  Attitudes  may  be  very  changeable;  changes  are  frequently  due  to  social  influence.   D.  Changing  Attitudes  by  Changing  Behavior:  Cognitive  Dissonance  Theory  Revisited   •  Attitudes  may  change  due  to  the  cognitive  dissonance.   • Example-­‐  persuade  a  smoker  to  give  anti -­‐smoking  speech  and  make  it  hard  for  them  to  find   external  justifications  for  giving  it.   Let  them  find  internal  justification  and  get  them  to  reduce   dissonance  by  believing  what  they  are  saying.   •  Counter-­‐attitudinal  advocacy-­‐  process  by  which  people  persuaded  to  publicly  state  an  opinion  that   runs  counter  to  their  internal  attitude  or  behavior.     E.  Persuasive  Communications  and  Attitude  Change   •  Yale  Attitude  Change  Approach  (YACA) -­‐  who  said  what  to  whom.  Addresses   • Who-­‐  source  of  communication.   o Expertise/popularity   o Likeability   o Identification     o Normal  decay  vs.  sleeper  effect   § Normal  decay-­‐  audience  initially  aroused  by  persuasion  but  then  it  decays.   § Sleeper   effect-­‐   audience   presented   with   discount ing   cue   (low-­‐credibility   source)   and   then   persuasive   message.   Over   time,   the   persuasion   will   increase.     • Example-­‐  political  ad  bashing  a  candidate  and  at  th e  end  see  the  “paid   for”  disclaimer.  In  the  election,  people  likely  to  vote  for  the  “paid   for”  guy.     • What-­‐  message.   o Schema  activation   o Expectation   o Vividness   o Argument  quality   o Two-­‐sided  argument  more  effective.       • Whom-­‐  audience   o Distracted  audience  will  be  mor e  persuaded.   o Low  intelligence  more  persuadable.   o Moderate  self -­‐esteem  vs.  low  or  high   o 18-­‐25  year  olds  more  susceptible  to  attitude  change.     1.  The  Central  and  Peripheral  Routes  to  Persuasion   •   Elaboration   likelihood   model-­‐   when   people   will   be   more   influenced   by   content   vs.   superficial   characteristics  of  a  message.   •  Central  route  to  persuasion -­‐  listen  carefully  and  think  about  arguments.     • Condition-­‐  motivation  and  ability  to   do  it.     • Result-­‐  attitude  change  that  is  long -­‐lasting  and  resistant.        •  Peripheral  route  to  persuasion-­‐  swayed  by  peripheral  cues  or  surface  characteristics  (eg -­‐  person).   • Result-­‐  attitude  change  that  is  temporary  and  susceptible.     2.  The  Motivation  to  Pay  Attention  to  the  Arguments   •  The  personal  relevance  of  a  message  influences  motivation;  thus,  when  a  message  is  relevant,  the   amount  of  persuasion  depends  on  argument  quality.   •  People’s  motivation  to  listen  carefully  to  message  content  may  also  depend  on  their  level  of  need  for   cognition,  the  extent  to  which  they  seek  out  and  think  abou t  information  in  their  social  worlds.   3.  The  Ability  to  Pay  Attention  to  the  Arguments   •  People’s  ability  to  attend  to  message  content  may  be  influenced  by  outside  distracters  or  by  the   complexity  of  the  message.   4.  How  to  Achieve  Long-­‐Lasting  Attitude  Change   •  Attitude  change  will  be  more  long-­‐lasting  if  it  occurs  through  the  central  route;  thus  develop  strong   arguments  and  get  people  to  think  about  them  by  making  the  issue  personally  relevant.   F.  Emotion  and  Attitude  Change   •  In  order  to  get  people  to  use  the  central  processing  route,  you  need  to  get  their  attention.  This  can   by  done  by  playing  to  their  emotions.   1. Fear-­‐arousing  communications-­‐  persuasive  messages  that  attempt  to  change  people’s  attitudes   by  arousing  their  fears.  Most  effective  when:   • Induce  a  moderate  amount  of  fear .   • If  people  believe  that  listening  to  the  message  will  provide  them  with  actions  they  can  take   to  reduce  this  fear.     • Fail  if  fear  is  too  strong  or  weak -­‐  will  not  think  rationally  and  deny  the  relevance.        •  Reactance  Theory-­‐  if  freedom  of  an  action  threatened  an  unpleasant  feeling  created  (reactance).      •  Motivate  a  person  to  perform  that  behavior  showing  free  will  has  not  been  compromised.     2.  Emotion  as  a  Heuristic   •  Heuristic-­‐systematic  model  of  persuasion-­‐  there  are  two  ways  in  which  persuasive  communications   can  cause  attitude  change:   • People  either  systematically  process  the  merits  of  the  arguments.   • Or  use  heuristics-­‐  mental  shortcuts.  Example:  peripheral  route  to  persuasion.     •  Emotions  and  moods  themselves  can  be  used  as  a  heuristic.  Ask:  “how  do  I  feel  about  it?”   • Feel  goodà  +  attitude   • Feel  badà  -­‐  attitude      •  May  misattribute  feelings  caused  by  one  source  to  another.   Example:  make  purchase  after  positive   event.     3.  Emotion  and  Different  Types  of  Attitudes   •  If  an  attitude  is  cognitively  based,  try  to  change  it  with  rational  arguments;  if  it  is  affectively  based,   try  to  change  it  with  emotional  appeals.   4.  Culture  and  Different  Types  of  Attitudes   •  In  general,  advertisements  work  best  if  they  are  tailored  to  the  kind  of  attitude  they  are  trying  to   change.     Resisting  Persuasive  Messages     A.  Attitude  Inoculation   •  One  way  to  bolster  people  against  persuasion  attempts  is  to  have  them  consider  the  arguments  for   and  against  their  attitude  before  somebody  attacks  it.   •  Attitude  inoculation-­‐  exposing  people  to  a  small  dose  of  the  argument  aga inst  their  position;  this   induced   them   to   counter   argue   and   provides   a   “vaccination”   that   helps   people   ward   off   later,   stronger  influence  attempts.   B.  Being  Alert  to  Product  Placement   •  Companies  pay  the  makers  of  a  TV  show  to  incorporate  their  product  into  the  script,  which  is  called   product   placement.   Several   studies   have   found   that   warning   people   about   an   upcoming   product   placement  makes  them  less  susceptible  to  that  persuasive  attempt.   C.  Resisting  Peer  Pressure   •  Several  programs  have  tried  to  prevent  smoking  in  adolescents  by  exposing  them  to  mild  versions  of   attempts   to   get   them   to   smoke   and   hav ing   them   role   play   counteracting   these   pressures.   These   programs  appear  successful  in  reducing  teen  smoking.   D.  When  Persuasion  Attempts  Boomerang:  Reactance  Theory   •  It  is  important  not  to  use  too  heavy  a  hand  when  t rying  to  immunize  people  against  assaults  on  their   attitudes.  If  you  administer  too  strong  a  prohibition,  the  prohibition  may  boomerang  and   lead  to  an   increase  in  the  prohibited  activity.       When  Will  Attitudes  Predict  Behavior?   A.  Predicting  Deliberative  Behaviors   •   Theory   of   planned   behavior -­‐   the   best   predictors   of   these   behaviors   are   the   person’s   spec ific   attitudes,  his  or  her  subjective  norms,  and  their  perceived  behavioral  control.                     Chapter  8-­‐  Conformity     Conformity:  When  And  Why   •  Conformity-­‐  change  in  behavior  due  to  the  real  or  imagined  influence  of  others.   Informational  Social  Influence:  The  Need  To  Know  What’s  “Right”   •  In  many  situations,  we  are  uncertain  how  to  think  or  to  act.     •  Look  at  others’  behavior  to  know  what  to  do .     •  Informational  social  influence-­‐  occurs  when  we  conform  because  we  see  other  people  as  a  source  of   information  and  believe  it  to  be  more  correct  than  o ur  own.     •  Sherif  (1936)  Experiment   • Autokinetic  effect-­‐  participants  estimate  how  much  a  light  15  feet  away  moved.   • People  vary  in  how  much  motion  they  perceive  (ambiguous  situation).   • When   people   were   put   in  groups  to  make  their  estimates,  over  several  trials  the  differing   estimates  of  the  peop le  converged.     • Private  acceptance-­‐  conforming  out  of  genuine  belief  that  what  others  do  or  say  is  right.     • Public  compliance-­‐  conforming  publicly  without  necessarily  believing  in  what  others  do  or  say   is  right.     A.  The  Importance  of  Being  Accurate   •   Eyewitness  task -­‐   degree  to  which  conformity  occurs  when  picking  perpetrators  depends  on   importance  of  the  task.     •  If  they  got  $20,  they  were  correct  when  responding  alone.     •  However,  if  in  a  group  they  sought  information  f rom  the  confederates  more,  regardless  of  accuracy.     B.  When  Informational  Conformity  Backfires     •   Radio   broadcast   of   alien   invasion   play   led   to   contagion -­‐   emotions   or   behaviors   spread   rapidly   through  a  crowd.     •  Mass  psychogenic  illness-­‐  the  occurrence,  in  a  group  of  people,  of  similar  physical  symptoms   with  no  known  physical  cause.   C.  When  Will  People  Conform  to  Informational  Social  Influence?   1.  When  the  Situation   Is  Ambiguous.   •  Ambiguity  is  the  most  crucial  variable  in  determining  whether  people  use  each  other  as  a  source  of   information.   2.  When  the  Situation   Is  a  Crisis   •  Crisis  situations  leave  us  limited  time  to  act,  which  may  make  us  scared  and  panicky.  If  we  turn  to   others  who  are  also  panicked  for  information,  our  own  panic  and  irrationality  may  be  intensified.   3.  When  Other  People  Are  Experts.   •  The  more  expertise  or  knowledge  someone  has,  the  more  people  will  turn  to  them  as  a  guide  in  an   ambiguous  situation.  Unfortunately  experts  are  not  always  reliable  sources  of  information.     Normative  Social  Influence:  The  Need  To  Be  Accepted   •   Normative  social  influence-­‐   conformity   in  order  to  be  liked  and  accepted   by  others.  Normative   conformity  often  results  in  public  compliance  without  private  acceptance.   A.  Conformity  and  Social  Approva l:  The  Asch  Line  Judgment  Studies   •  Asch  (1951,  1956)  three  lines  study  with  seven  confederates .   •  In  a  variation  of  the  study,  subjects  wrote  their  answers  on  paper  rather  than  saying  them  aloud;  in   this  variation,  conformity  dropped  dramatically.  This  demonstrates  the  power  of  social  disapproval  in   the  original  study  in  shaping  a  person’s  behavior.   •  Conformity  increases  as  the  size  of  the  group  increases.     B.  The  Consequences  of  Resisting  Normative  Social  Influence   •   What  happens  when  people  manage  to  resist  normative  group  influence?  Other  group   members   start  paying  attention  to  the  deviant  and  trying  to  convince  him  or  her  to  conform;  if  s/he  doesn’t,   eventually  the  deviant  will  be  rejected.   C.  Normative  Social  Influence  in  Everyday  Life   •  Fashions  and  fads  represent  innocuous  examples  of  normative  conformity.   1.  Social  Influence  and  Women’s  Body  Image   •   A   more   pernicious   example   of   social   influence   is   women’s   attempts   to   conform   to   cu ltural   definitions  of  an  attractive  body,  where  the  curre nt  fashion  is  to  be  extremely  thin.   •  54  different  cultures’  perception  of  the  ideal  female  body:  most  like  heavy  ones,  while  some  like   slender  ones.   •   What   is  attractive  has   changed  many  times  over  the  past  100  years,  as  an  analysis  of  models  in   women’s  magazines  indicates.     •  Women   learn  what   standard  is  appropriate  through   informational  social  influence,  but  normative   social  influence  helps  explain  their  attempts  to  create  the  desired  body  through  dieting  and  eating   disorders.   D.  When  Will  People  Conform  to  Normative  Social  Influence?   •  Social  Impact  Theory -­‐  conforming  to  normative  pressures  depends  on:   • Strength  (personal  relevance)   à  increase     • Immediacy  (physical  proximity)    à  increase     • Number  of  Peopleà  decrease  with  increasing  numbers.     1.  When  the  Group  Size  is  Three  or  More-­‐  conformity  does  not  increase  much  after  the  group  size  is  4  or   5  people.     2. When  the  Group  is  Important -­‐  pressure  stronger  when  coming  from  people  whose  relationship  we   love,  respect  or  cherish.     • Why?-­‐  fear  of  loss  of  that  relationship.     • Consequence-­‐  important  decision  bent  on  pleasing  others.     3.  When  One  Has  No  Allies  in  the  Group   •  A  variation  of  Asch’s  experiment  demonstrated  the   importance  of  group  unan imity:  when  only  one   other  person  gave  the  right  answer,  the  level  of  conforming  to  the  group  dropped  to  only  6%  (from   32%).  This  influence  explains  how  members  of  cults  or  other  groups  can  ma intain  beliefs  that  seem   ridiculous  to  most  others.   4.  When  the  Group’s  Cu lture  is  Collectivistic-­‐  high  conformity  in  collectivist  cultures.     5.  The  Effect  of  Low  Self-­‐Esteem.   •  Some  evidence  suggests  that  people  with  low  self-­‐esteem  are  more  likely  to  conform.  The  evidence   is  not  consistent,  however,  because  there   is  low  cross-­‐situational  consistency  in  people’s  behavior.   E.  Resisting  Normative  Social  Influence   •  The  first  step  in  resisting  normative  social  influence  is  to  become  aware  that  we  are  doing  it.  The   second  step  is  to  find  an  ally  who  thinks  like  you  do.   •  Additionally,  if  you  conform  to  group  norms  most  of  the  t ime,  you  earn  idiosyncrasy  credits  that   give  you  the  right  to  deviate  occasionally  without  serious  consequences.     Using  Social  Influence  To  Promote  Beneficial  Behavior   •  Injunctive  norms-­‐  people’s  perception  of  what  behaviors  are  approved  or  disapproved  of  by   others   •   Descriptive   norms-­‐   people’s   perceptions   of   how   people   actually   behave   in   given   situations,   regardless  of  whether  the  behavior  is  approved  of  or  disapproved  of  by  others.     Obedience  To  Authority   •  Philosopher  Hannah  Arendt  (1965)  argued  that  the  atrocities  of  the  Holocaust  occurred  not  because   the  participants  were  psychopaths  but  because  they  were  ordinary  people  bowing  to  extraordinary   social  pressures.   •  Milgram  Experiment   • Teacher  and  learner  (confederate).   • Teacher  gives  progressively  higher  levels  of  shock  for  every  mistake  of  learner.     • If  learner  protests,  experimenter  insists  experiment  must  continue.     • 62%  of  participants  gave  full  450  volt  shock.     • 80%  continued  past  learner’s  announcement  that  he  had  a  heart  condition.   •  College  students,  middle-­‐class  adults,  and  professional  scientists  asked  to  estimate  beforehand  the   degree  of  obedience  estimated  that  only  1%  of  the  participants  would  go  all  the  way.   A.  The  Role  of  Normative  Social  Influence   •  Different  versions  of  experiment  showed  obedience  drops  when:   • When  other  participants  model  disobedie nce.   • Authority  figure  not  present.     • No  orders  given  to  increase  the  shocks.       B.  The  Role  of  Informational  Social  Influence   •  Other  variations  on  the  experiment  (Figure  8.9)  demonstrate  the  role  of  informational  influence  due   to  how  confusing  the  situation  was.  Significantly  less  compliance  was  demonstrated  if  (a)  the  orders  to   continue  came  from  another  “teacher”  rather  than  from  the  expe rimenter;  or  (b)  two  exper imenters   disagreed  about  whether  the  experiment  should  be  continued.   C.  Other  Reasons  Why  We  Ob ey   1.  Conforming  to  the  Wrong  Norm-­‐  mindlessness   •  Mindlessness  leads  to  initial  compliance,  and  initial  compliance  begets  subsequent  compliance.  In  the   Milgram  experiment  the  quick  pace  of  the  experiment  and  the  fact  that  the  shock  increased  in  very   small  doses  abetted  this .   2.  Self-­‐Justification   •Additionally,  dissonance  reduction  played  a  factor:  each  increase  in  shock  led  to  dissonance,  and   each  rationalization  of  this  dissonance  provided  the  basis  for  escalating  the  shock  a  bit  further.   3.  The  Loss  of  Personal  Responsibility   •  Participants  believed  that  the  experimenter  was  the  authority  figure  and  that  he  was  responsible  for   the  end  results  while  they  were  “just  following  orders.”   •  Research   by  found  that  guards  who  carried  out  capital  punishments  showed  much  more  “moral   disengagement”  from  their  jobs  than  did  guards  who  did  not  carry  out  executions.   4.  It’s  Not  About  Aggression   •  Is  a  universal  aggressive  urge  a  factor  in  obedience  to  cruel  authority?  A  variation  of  the  Milgram   experiment   gave   subjects   permission   to   choose   their   own   level   of   shock;   they   were   told   that   information  about  all  levels  was  informative  to  make  them  feel  free  to  choose  whichever  level  they   desired.  Most  participants  gave  very  mild  shocks;  only  2.5%  gave  the  highest  level.       Chapter  9-­‐  Group  Processes     What  Is  a  Group?   •  Group-­‐  three  or  more  people  who  are  interacting  with  each  other  and  are  interdependent  in  the  sense   that  to  fulfill  their  needs  and  goals,  they  must  rely  on  each  other.   A.  Why  Do  People  Join  Groups?   •  Establishing  bonds  with  other  people.     •  Providing  information   •  Help  us  define  who  we  are.   •  Help  establish  social  norms.     B.  The  Composition  and  Functions  of  Groups   •  2-­‐6  members.   •  Members  of  a  group  tend  to  be  alike  in  terms  of  age,  sex,  beliefs,  and  opinions.  Because   • People  attracted  to  similar  others.     • Groups  operate  in  ways  that  encourage  similarity  among  members.     1.  Social  Norms-­‐  specify  how  all  group  members  should  act.     •  Groups  have  social  norms  about  which  behaviors  are  acceptable,  and  the  consequences  of  violating   these  are  pressure  to  conform  and  ultimately  rejection.   2.  Social  Roles-­‐  specify  how  people  who  occupy  certain  positions  are  supposed  to  behave.       •  Roles-­‐  shared  expectations  in  a  group  about  how  particular  people  are  supposed  to  behave  and  they   help  facilitate  social  interaction.   •  Cost:  people  can  lose  their  personal  identities  and  act  in  ways  inconsistent  with  their  beliefs.     •  Zimbardo  Stanford  Prison  Experiment   • Not  bad  people,  but  environment  of  prison  that  corrupts  individuals.     3.  Group  Cohesiveness   •  Group  cohesiveness-­‐  qualities  of  a  group  that  bind  members  together  and  promote  liking  between   group  members.   •  The  more  cohesive  a  group  is,  the  more  its  members  are  likely  to  stay  in  the  group,  participate  in  group   activities,  and  recruit  new  members.   •  Cohesiveness,  however,  can  sometimes  interfere  with  task  performance.     Group  And  Individuals'  Behavior   A. Social  Facilitation:  when  the  presence  of  others  energizes  us   •  Social  facilitation-­‐  tendency  for  people  to  do  better  on  simple  tasks  and  worse  on  complex  ones  in  the   presence  of  others  when  their  individual  performance  can  be  evaluated.   •  The  mere  presence  of  others  improves  performance  on  simple,  well -­‐learned  tasks.  For  example,  Triplett   (1898),  in  one  of  the  first  social  psychology  experim ents,  showed  that  children  wound  up  a  fishing  reel   more  quickly  when  in  the  presence  of  others  than  alone.   1.  Simple  versus  Difficult  Tasks   •  Many  other  studies  show  that  simple  tasks  are  performed  more  quickly  in  the  presence  of  others  but   complex  tasks  are  performed  more  slowly.   2.  Arousal  and  Dominant  Response   •  Zajonc  developed  a  theory  of  social  facilitation  to  explain  the  mere  presence  effect:  he  hypothesized   that   the   presence   of   others   incre
More Less

Related notes for CAS PS 261

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.